Security six snub value question

well for me I think the laser would be better for me to react, I wouldn't have to worry about where to aim, where the red dot is the bullet should go....lol.

The guy told me lasers are for being lazy, I told him at my age I'm entitled to be lazy.....lol
 
Lasers work both ways. You identify him ..... he sees where you're at.

No lasers for me. Only practice, practice, practice.

But many people use them, rely on them and have great success. Everybodys gotta do what works best for themselves.
 
hittman said:
Lasers work both ways. You identify him ..... he sees where you're at.

No lasers for me. Only practice, practice, practice.

But many people use them, rely on them and have great success. Everybodys gotta do what works best for themselves.


Yeah I see what you mean, but there's 2 kinds of lasesr, one you have to switch on first then shoot ( which like you said he can see where you at), and the other which is the one I'm getting, laser turns on as you press the trigger a bit, so your already aimed at target, just follow through with squeezing the trigger.
 
I would personally keep the gun as it will only appreciate in value. Your revolver appears to be in great shape, and I would certainly like to have it. Do you have children or grandchildren? If yes, I would imagine anyone of them would love to have it some day.

If you have the funds available, I would suggest buying the Ruger 9 pistol and keep your 357 revolver. Practice with the 38 Special standard velocity cartridges until you become comfortable with it. You can also select low-recoil 357 magnum rounds that are easy to shoot for better stopping power. I now regret selling & trading some of my guns in my earlier years, and I hope you don't repeat my mistakes. Best regards!
 
I just bought a SS Speed Six a couple of months ago for $400 to complement the blue Speed Six I paid $80 for in 1973! Speed Six's do keep their value and are highly prized by some.

If you are going to use the laser, practice much more without the laser. Lasers are great but I have seen lasers fail because of batteries, switches and unknown reasons when they are being used. If the laser is on, great, if it fails you better have a good sight picture with the iron sights.
 
Rugar Fan said:
I would personally keep the gun as it will only appreciate in value. Your revolver appears to be in great shape, and I would certainly like to have it. Do you have children or grandchildren? If yes, I would imagine anyone of them would love to have it some day.

If you have the funds available, I would suggest buying the Ruger 9 pistol and keep your 357 revolver. Practice with the 38 Special standard velocity cartridges until you become comfortable with it. You can also select low-recoil 357 magnum rounds that are easy to shoot for better stopping power. I now regret selling & trading some of my guns in my earlier years, and I hope you don't repeat my mistakes. Best regards!

I don't have any kids and I don't have extra funds to buy the 9mm and keep the Security six. I actually was only going to sell the gun and be done with it, but my hubby doesn't want me without any protection here when he's at work.
 
swede4198 said:
I just bought a SS Speed Six a couple of months ago for $400 to complement the blue Speed Six I paid $80 for in 1973! Speed Six's do keep their value and are highly prized by some.

If you are going to use the laser, practice much more without the laser. Lasers are great but I have seen lasers fail because of batteries, switches and unknown reasons when they are being used. If the laser is on, great, if it fails you better have a good sight picture with the iron sights.

That's what I was thinking practice with it using the laser and without.
 
debgram said:
Oh the cop also said that if you shoot someone and they died just keep shooting at the walls or something, just to unload the gun and it makes it look like you were in a panic and was trully scared, makes a better case for you.
Corollary to that is the implication that you will testify of your fright and panic. If you were not frightened or panicked, that would be lying. In most places, lying to the police is a crime for which you could be prosecuted. That would be the LEAST severe crime you would be committing if you take that story to it fullest extent.

Bad idea to purposely manipulate (or fabricate) evidence at a crime scene.

Lost Sheep
 
I would be scared but I don't think I would be shooting at my walls and door. It's bad enough I would have to have the blood removed from the carpet or where ever it went, plus have my door and walls repaired and painted, that's money I don't have to dish out.
 
Deb,
Honestly, all the macho stuff from the cops aside, I hope you never have to personally face the situation.

Have you ever shot a revolver or pistol inside a room at night without hearing protection on? It will get your attention. The flash and muzzle blast are significant. Most likely, your own fear and instincts would take over. Either you will become totally paralyzed by the fear and shut down, or you'll just start shooting "at" whomever is the threat. You may hit him, you may not. If you hit him, he may die, he may not.

Unless the guy is totally whacked out on some controlled substance, even if you miss, the blast and flash are most likely going to cause his colon to evacuate its contents into his pants as he's running the other direction. Even if he was intent on hurting you, he does not want the next shot to be your lucky one.

The key here is to stop the threat. If the guy defecates his britches and runs away, you have ended the threat. If you hit him and he ends up on the ground, you've ended the threat. If you hit him and he dies from the wound, you have ended the threat.

Unless you are one cold hearted killer (and from your notes so far, I don't think that is the case), if he is on the ground wounded, I seriously doubt if you could walk up and put a finishing shot in his head. Your humanity would kick in and you'll be calling the police and asking to have an ambulance come to help the guy (even though he probably doesn't deserve it). It is the human reaction of a civilized person.

You would have to be a pretty cold and calculating person to not call for help and then start emptying your gun in the walls to make it look like you were scared. The fact of the matter is you would be scared and probably suffer from the same colon evacuation as he did.

I've never had to shoot anyone (or even shoot at anyone). It is easy to sit here at a keyboard and sound all macho saying "what I would do". Truth is, I have never been faced with the possibility of having to pull the trigger while my muzzle is pointed at another human.

I think I'd be pretty scared. I think if I wounded him, I'd probably call for help immediately. At the end of the day, I'd rather he live (maybe for several years in jail) than have the knowledge I took a man's life. However, if he did not survive the encounter, I would have the knowledge that I did what I had to do to end the threat to myself or my family. However, once the threat is over, I have no further desire to cause that person any more harm.

If I read between the lines of your posts so far, I don't think you really want to kill or injure anyone. All yo want to do is be able to protect yourself and your family should it ever come to that.

Just my .02 worth. Others may differ.
 
When I used to shoot my gun I never used ear protection but that was outdoors and it was loud.

From what I'm understanding what the cop told me, if the intruder survives, he can sue you for shooting him, but what I don't understand how that can be if he is someone I don't know and did not invite into my house and has no right to be in my house.
 
debgram said:
When I used to shoot my gun I never used ear protection but that was outdoors and it was loud.

From what I'm understanding what the cop told me, if the intruder survives, he can sue you for shooting him, but what I don't understand how that can be if he is someone I don't know and did not invite into my house and has no right to be in my house.

What someone told you, whether or not he/she is a "cop" should always be taken with a grain of salt. Read your state law on the subject of self defense. Many states have statutes that cover this very issue very carefully. The crux of the matter being, if you are defending yourself in accordance with the law, then you are held harmless from any prosecution or civil liability for the shooting. I have no idea what the law is in your state; that just happens to be the law in my home state and where I live now.

In my experience most police officers are not lawyers. They are just people trained and commissioned to keep the peace. And like everybody else they have opinions.
 
You need to seek legal advice from a REAL LAWYER. Not from a cop. The lawyer will be right there with you in the courtroom, trying to help you. The cop will be praying that he/she does not get subpeona to testifie that he/she gave you bad advice.

He/she will get nothing for giving bad advice, only learn that he/she was wrong. YOU will be the person suffering from your actions.
 
I will have to look into that. I hear what all of you are saying. I will also check the laws on self defense too.
 
debgram said:
I will have to look into that. I hear what all of you are saying. I will also check the laws on self defense too.

Here's a good place to start; published in 2008. There are a couple of links in the story that you might consider reading. One of which is the bill itself:

http://www.buckeyefirearms.org/node/5602
 
thanks going to look at that now


aw here's one thing that the cop told me wrong


The bill also bars criminals from suing in civil court for injuries suffered in the act of committing crimes.

The bill also prevents a person from filing a civil lawsuit because of something that occurred while the person was committing a crime. For example, a burglar can't sue if he breaks his neck after running out of your house and slipping on the front porch.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top