best attribue of a 1911

[guzzijohn]

A couple of thoughts. The 1911 is over 100 years old so the uneducated think it is an "old" gun that is less threatening. It looks kind of plain in several ways so it's looks don't stand out like some more modern autos. It "only holds" seven rounds (never mind that they are big effective ones). Lets just keep this all a secret so it stays under the radar. The last time I recall a 1911 being featured in a modern movie was in Gran Torino. In that movie it was used by an old guy, so hence, less threatening and underexposed.
GuzziJohn

[SharonAnne]

at 51 years since the US Air Force accepted the AR15 (Armalite Rifle 15) as the M16, the current civilian AR15 is new? or young?

[williamlayton]

Depends---what platform you are discussing doesn't it?
Blessings

[SharonAnne]

Just the AR15, by whatever manufacturer.

[hillbill]

lol, you guys like to argue. i like that. regardless of the attributes of the 1911.show me any other auto pistol that has the following the 1911 has? and being a 100 yrs old?
 
in fact show me any other gun that has the following the 1911 does. has been copied as much. has been written about as much or shot as much?
 
the colt peacemaker mite come close.

[mcwoodduck]

lol, you guys like to argue. i like that. regardless of the attributes of the 1911.show me any other auto pistol that has the following the 1911 has? and being a 100 yrs old?
 
in fact show me any other gun that has the following the 1911 does. has been copied as much. has been written about as much or shot as much?
 
the colt peacemaker mite come close.

The Mauser rifles.  1891 to today still in constant production and every major power copied it at one point and every major sporting company had taken something from it.  Just to argue 

[SharonAnne]

I disagree.  or agree. Whichever will get people going 

[SHOOTALL]

lol, you guys like to argue. i like that. regardless of the attributes of the 1911.show me any other auto pistol that has the following the 1911 has? and being a 100 yrs old? In more countries around the world the Browning High Power has served more countries military maybe more than 30 countries and still serving.
 
in fact show me any other gun that has the following the 1911 does. has been copied as much. has been written about as much or shot as much? The Browning has been copied alot also , The CZ line of pistols is a up graded copy in reality.
 
the colt peacemaker mite come close. In America

[animal]

It's lighter to carry than a cop.

[dakotashooter2]

Being 100 years old wouldn't the 1911 theoretically meet the criteria for "antique"?
I'm assuming that the 7 rnd mag limit adopted by NY is based on the 1911 (single stack) as it is really the only full size gun that doesn't have a standard capacity of at least 10 rnds.
Banning the 1911 would be like banning baseball.

[mcwoodduck]

Being 100 years old wouldn't the 1911 theoretically meet the criteria for "antique"?
I'm assuming that the 7 rnd mag limit adopted by NY is based on the 1911 (single stack) as it is really the only full size gun that doesn't have a standard capacity of at least 10 rnds.
Banning the 1911 would be like banning baseball.

If they bann anything morethan a 7 rounds mag in NY do you think that the gun companies will be bold enough to not send anything more than that to the police departments of the state, clearly if we can not have them they can not have them.

[Mike in Virginia]

woodduck, no, no, no.  I'm against gun control as much as anyone, except I see the need for police and military to have way more firepower than civilians.  That won't set well with some here, but such an issue could be taken to extremes.  I would surely like to legally own a fully automatic rifle, but I've got no business with rocket launchers or missles or tanks or a fighter jet.  As much as we despise government control, somethings are better left to them. 

[mcwoodduck]

woodduck, no, no, no.  I'm against gun control as much as anyone, except I see the need for police and military to have way more firepower than civilians.  That won't set well with some here, but such an issue could be taken to extremes.  I would surely like to legally own a fully automatic rifle, but I've got no business with rocket launchers or missles or tanks or a fighter jet.  As much as we despise government control, somethings are better left to them.

My point is why, if we see that about the same percentage of police are corrupt as the general population and are willing to commit crimes that we arm them with waht we can not have?  Clearly police do not need Rocketlaunchers, machine guns, full auto rifles, or military aircraft. 
my point is if the 99% of the population is law abiding why should we be punnished for what the 1% do? 
I am for the police but I find it odd that they are exempt from laws that we have to follow like the hands free cell phones or speeding on the freeways and rolling stop signs.  I think the police should be an example and not above the law. 
I was watching a Sheriff's deputy shooting a full auto M4 and he was spraying the whole hillside trying to hit  a 20 inch gong at 100 yards. 

[SHOOTALL]

Mike I ask - Do you and others realize that WE THE PEOPLE (WTP) are the last say in our govt ? Lets see WTP can vote out the president, vote out the congress and find not guilty with the courts . That said WTP can if need be go to arms aginst any govt. that goes aginst our consitution. So how does one justify WTP being less armed than police or any other organization sponcered by Govt. ?
 The consitution is not about making the job of law enforcement easier but the rights of citizens and their obligation as a citizen more secure. In times with less crime it was easy for citizens to allow LEO's to carve out a good job but today maybe it would be better to re arm citizens and give them the power to protect their homes , states and country .

[Spirithawk]

In the Report of the Subcommittee on the Constitution of the  Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate, 97th Congress, Second Session  (February 1982), a bipartisan subcommittee (consisting  of 3 Republicans and 2 Democrats) of the United States Senate investigated the Second Amendment  and reported its findings. The report stated:

The conclusion is thus inescapable that the history, concept, and wording of  the second amendment to the Constitution of the United States, as well as its  interpretation by every major commentator and court in the first half century  after its ratification, indicates that what is protected is an individual right  of a private citizen to own and carry firearms in a peaceful manner.
 
Notice it says," and carry." ?

[SharonAnne]

own and carry/keep and bear.   same thing

[williamlayton]

I am searching for a way to disagree with SA----just wait---there has got to be a way.
Blessings

[zero]

This thread is entertaining 

Back to OT, i would say the complete reliability in function and feed. Never had a feed problem or failure to eject from my R1S, no matter what i ran through it, HPs, LFNs FMJs at any load. Only problems have been my fault

I'm against any gun control law on principal alone.

However, as much as I would sure love to own full autos and RPGs(make shooting cans more fun) I also know from my own experience this past year there are waaay too many crazy people out there with just as much legal access to weaponry as I have. But I don't think guns are the problem, I firmly believe all of these psychos are attributable to our society's complete inability to recognize mental illness and the like. And actually try to help the people instead of just giving them something and forgetting about it.

But what about the people that show no signs until it's too late? Well...that one i haven't figured out yet

[Spirithawk]

own and carry/keep and bear.   same thing

Yep. My point though is that the 2nd Amendment should be our carry permit itself and that we shouldn't have to interpret what it means as it's pretty dang clear in what they, and all those before them, decided.

[dakotashooter2]

woodduck, no, no, no.  I'm against gun control as much as anyone, except I see the need for police and military to have way more firepower than civilians.  That won't set well with some here, but such an issue could be taken to extremes.  I would surely like to legally own a fully automatic rifle, but I've got no business with rocket launchers or missles or tanks or a fighter jet.  As much as we despise government control, somethings are better left to them.

Sadly large cap mags have only resulted in a large percentage of police offices joining the "spray and pray "crowd.  Not good on the crowded streets. Give them 10 rounders and more training time.

[SharonAnne]

I can drive 10 miles north and see a privatlely owned Mig 17. Fully operational, minus guns

Why should the police have more firepower than civilians? It is only those who have no regard for the law that the police need worry about and being outlaws they will not obey any law. look what making cocaine illegal has done to stop its' importation.

The Second Amendment meant that the average citizen be armed exactly like any individual soldier in a standing army. You need to read the debates and letters regarding the meaning of the Second Amendment.

Why should I, an honest tax paying citizen not have what a soldier has? Unless the Government goes rouge and completely violates the Constitution the Government has nothing to fear from me. When the Government acts in such a heinous manner it is our right and duty to take up arms against it. Too many people do not understand our Constitution.

[Dixie Dude]

Best attribute of the 1911.  Well:
 
1) I like the parts interchangeability like the AR-15 family.
2) One can buy parts kits for 22LR, 460 Rowland, 38 super.  I think even 9mm. 
3) 3 different safeties, half cock, thumb, and the base of the thumb.  Makes it harder for small kids to fire. 
4) The slide covers the barrel, not like the Beretta which can get gummed up, or so say the guys who come back from Iraq. 
5) Spare parts are everywhere. 

[SHOOTALL]

I can drive 10 miles north and see a privatlely owned Mig 17. Fully operational, minus guns that's like a Z28 with a 6 banger in it . 

Why should the police have more firepower than civilians? It is only those who have no regard for the law that the police need worry about and being outlaws they will not obey any law. look what making cocaine illegal has done to stop its' importation.

The Second Amendment meant that the average citizen be armed exactly like any individual soldier in a standing army. You need to read the debates and letters regarding the meaning of the Second Amendment.

Why should I, an honest tax paying citizen not have what a soldier has? Unless the Government goes rouge and completely violates the Constitution the Government has nothing to fear from me. When the Government acts in such a heinous manner it is our right and duty to take up arms against it. Too many people do not understand our Constitution.

[Mike in Virginia]

Maybe I was a trooper too long.  But every day I worked, I hoped I had more firepower than the bad guys.  I'm sort of prejudice in that regard.  We need police and military.  If we didn't have agencies that could overcome any and all civilian criminal activity, we would be in a sad place.  I believe police and military should be totally exempt from weapon restrictions than civilians must live with.  In truth, they are.   If the public had access to fully automatic weapons (as police and military has), how would the rule of law be enforced?  It seems that some gun control advocates want it all.  That can't happen.  What would that do to your own protection from criminal elements?  Who would help you when you dialed 911?  If responding police encountered the same firepower that they had, how might that come out? 
We have Second Amendment rights, so far.  You can be armed.  You can protect yourself.  But you can't have gas grenades, you can't have fully automatic rifles, you can't have attack helicopters, you can't have a nuclear submarine.  You just can't.  Those weapons are rightfully reserved for the very people that keep you safe.   
Sometimes I think this forum is made up of people who are so anti-government that someone ought to fix it.  Your gun rights are in danger, for sure.  But that dosen't mean you should expect more than any citizen has ever had.  Keep illegal weapons in your home or bunker at your own risk.  Sawed off shotguns, fully automatic rifles, bombs, exposives, missle launchers, are all illegal.  You can't name a time in U.S. history when you could legally own such stuff.  You want more than you can have.  You want as much as the military has.  Good grief.  Get a grip.  You can't have it.  Thank God you can't have it.  If you could go out and buy such weapons, so might the weirdos. 
I want those who believe they should or can have the same firepower of the military and police to go to bed tonight knowing that you cannot, that it will never happen for you, that you are nothing more than a civilian.  Be proud that you are an American citizen who obeys the law and who is entitled to the protection provided to you by police and military.  If you can't do that, then you are a potential  outlaw and a wannabe Rambo.  Get real.  Wake up.  Understand that what you have as an American is more than any other nation has.   

[williamlayton]

Where were the military and police at ANY shooting you want to mention.
MIV---the police only serve as a bcak-up, and, they are way back when it counts. Who in the world do you think the military and police are if they  are not just simple citizens.
Blessings

[mcwoodduck]

Maybe I was a trooper too long.  But every day I worked, I hoped I had more firepower than the bad guys.  I'm sort of prejudice in that regard.  We need police and military.  If we didn't have agencies that could overcome any and all civilian criminal activity, we would be in a sad place.  I believe police and military should be totally exempt from weapon restrictions than civilians must live with.  In truth, they are.   If the public had access to fully automatic weapons (as police and military has), how would the rule of law be enforced?  It seems that some gun control advocates want it all.  That can't happen.  What would that do to your own protection from criminal elements?  Who would help you when you dialed 911?  If responding police encountered the same firepower that they had, how might that come out? 
We have Second Amendment rights, so far.  You can be armed.  You can protect yourself.  But you can't have gas grenades, you can't have fully automatic rifles, you can't have attack helicopters, you can't have a nuclear submarine.  You just can't.  Those weapons are rightfully reserved for the very people that keep you safe.   
Sometimes I think this forum is made up of people who are so anti-government that someone ought to fix it.  Your gun rights are in danger, for sure.  But that dosen't mean you should expect more than any citizen has ever had.  Keep illegal weapons in your home or bunker at your own risk.  Sawed off shotguns, fully automatic rifles, bombs, exposives, missle launchers, are all illegal.  You can't name a time in U.S. history when you could legally own such stuff.  You want more than you can have.  You want as much as the military has.  Good grief.  Get a grip.  You can't have it.  Thank God you can't have it.  If you could go out and buy such weapons, so might the weirdos. 
I want those who believe they should or can have the same firepower of the military and police to go to bed tonight knowing that you cannot, that it will never happen for you, that you are nothing more than a civilian.  Be proud that you are an American citizen who obeys the law and who is entitled to the protection provided to you by police and military.  If you can't do that, then you are a potential  outlaw and a wannabe Rambo.  Get real.  Wake up.  Understand that what you have as an American is more than any other nation has.   

Mike,
There are a few things wrong with the thinking.
1) why do police need full auto weapons, even in the Hollywood shoot out Civilian AR's were used to stop them. 
2) having police with Sub machine guns or Assault rifles on the streets gives the feeling of a Bannana republic or soviet eastern europe.
3) if the police are exempt from the some of the laws then do laws mean anything? 
why can a police officer talk on his cell phone to his wife or girlfriend but I can nto use mine in the car for work?  Why can police cruise at 90+ miles an hour on the motorcycles and not get tickets, why do police give each other a pass on small infractions?
4) The jobs of the Police and the Army have two very different rolls.  The army is there to kill our enemies and break their weapons of war.  The police are there to up hold the laws and arrest the wrong doers. 
If you are thinking that it is us vs them and the citizens are the them then maybe you should never have been a police officer. 

[jhm]

     This may bother some LEOs or X LEOs, but we were alot safer when the local police officer carried a 38 special revolver and all of us so called regular people had some kind of gun tucked in our waistband or back pocket,  I am 66 yrs. old and was raised in Detroit which is one of the most deadliest cities today, however I can remember when you could walk the streets at night and never worry abt. being bothered by gangs or the cops,  I moved here in 1980 and our small town had 1 marshall we had no red lights and everyone had a gun in their vehicl or on the person no crime nothing to worry abt. no one carried a ring of keys we left them in the tractors, pick-ups etc. you could go into town on Tue. to buy or sell a load of cattle all the pick-up had guns in the windows and keys in the ignitions, If it was good enough for the leo then, what happened??   People got to thinking they were above the law so the LEO says I need a better weapon to protect themselves, dont they think that we also need better weapons to protect ourselves?  NO they dont as we are not up to their standard in some of their eyes, now this isnt coming from some old man who is just rambling as I had a Son in law in law enforcement and also was in the pawn business, many a story I was told or over heard of some of the things they could do and get away with it because they were LEOs, I have loaned them more money on their items than I would anyone else just to help them out so I guess we were both using one another, again their are alot of LEOs out there that dont think of themselves as US and us as THEM, but there are alot more of them that do think that way.  Any time I hear one of them say anything in that content I loose any respect for them,  you LEOs or X LEOS outhere give that some thought the next time you think you need to be better armed than the regular citizen who pays your salary.  Jim

[SHOOTALL]

We can argure hardware all we want but the problem is the public - some were willing to call on police to handle everything which caused police to gain more power and to a point control. Always it was we are expected to do a job and we need the power and latitude to do it. Now it has gotten to a point citizens are pushed around in many cases with no regard to their rights. The new CC and stand your ground laws might be an oppertunity to take back some of the power .
 Second the concept that citizens should no longer help the police has hurt relations and it also needs to change.

[Mikey]

regretably, far too many cops think of themselves as some sort of a paramilitary force, which they simply are not and do not even come close to.  A true paramilitary force simply would not act like the cops do these days, thugs who are so far above the level of the average citizen as to disdain them as lesser humans who need protection.  I think hitler thought the same thing.  And I agree that citizens are being pushed around without regard to their rights and there is nothing more enlightening than listening to the coffee shop conversations between cops as to what they think of us.  What they do not like is someone who disagrees with them and calls them out on their own stupidity. 
 
Actually, in a city of 200,000 with a police force of 200 or so, any skilled and determined 5-6 man team could easily shut them right down and have them calling for assistance from country and state agencies.  Cops think they are at the top of the food chain right now but with a couple of smackdowns they are back where they belong, serving the people not guarding them or ushering them along. 

[Mikey]

dakotashooter:  no no no, don't give the cops any more firepower.  Geez man, look what they did nin nyc when two cops shot that one shooter - what was it, 9 or 11 wounded as collateral damage that bloomberg says was acceptable.  No, you do not want cops to have any more firepower than they already have.  No no no no no.