Semi-Autos or Revolvers for In-Car Defense

[Crash]

I've read that it's not a good idea to use semi-autos for defending oneself in a car. Supposedly, if you're driving, and you have to shoot at an attacker outside the driver's side window, the empty shells could bounce off the inside of the windshield and come back and hit you in the head. This might not be too big a deal because in a stressful situation such as this you might not even notice it. But, I wear glasses and if one of those hot shells bounced back and got lodged between the lenses and my eyes, it could be a VERY big deal. So, it sounds like revolvers are the way to go for in-car defense. Opinions?

Thanks in advance,

Crash

[doncb]

I would think that the potential for a case coming back and hitting you would be pretty small. Not saying it couldn't happen...
A more serious and very real consideration with a revolver though is the gas / flame and burning powder blowing out between the cylinder and barrel. If you're shooting at someone through the drivers window, imagine where you would be holding the gun and where that gas, etc would be going. Unless you have a gas seal revolver there's no getting around it.

[ghostrider]

If I'm forced to shoot while in a car, I'll be less concerned with the brass than:
(a) hitting the target
(b) my hearing

[bmwrdr]

I would think that the potential for a case coming back and hitting you would be pretty small. Not saying it couldn't happen...
A more serious and very real consideration with a revolver though is the gas / flame and burning powder blowing out between the cylinder and barrel. If you're shooting at someone through the drivers window, imagine where you would be holding the gun and where that gas, etc would be going. Unless you have a gas seal revolver there's no getting around it.

That was my first thought too. I can imagine a short barrel semi would be most practical if one gets into such a situation. Other than that I'd think the gas pedal would be the best choice if the situation allows for it.
The second important point would be a quick access to a gun while driving.

[bmwrdr]

If I'm forced to shoot while in a car, I'll be less concerned with the brass than:
(a) hitting the target
(b) my hearing

a) hard to achive holding a gun sideways.
b) subsonic loads can reduce the damage to the humans eardrums.

[Crash]

I would think that the potential for a case coming back and hitting you would be pretty small. Not saying it couldn't happen...
A more serious and very real consideration with a revolver though is the gas / flame and burning powder blowing out between the cylinder and barrel. If you're shooting at someone through the drivers window, imagine where you would be holding the gun and where that gas, etc would be going. Unless you have a gas seal revolver there's no getting around it.

doncb,

Very good point. And I might be forced to hold the gun in a position that would direct some of the blast right at me, i.e., if the attacker is reaching through the window. Also, since the windshield angles downward away from the driver, it might be more likely that the shell would be deflected downward. My concern with being hit by an ejected shell comes from being hit with them from an AK-47 I was firing. I was standing at the right end of the firing line and there was a wall about 5 feet to my right. It took only a few rounds to convince me to move somewhere else.

Thanks for the info.

Crash

[JSThane]

No matter what you're shooting, you'll half-blow your eardrums firing in such a confined space. I rather doubt you'd be aware of brass bouncing off your teeth at that point, much less the top of your head.

I like a revolver for car-carry, for the simple reason that, should I find need to deafen myself, I'll probably be hands-on wrestling with an opponent in a -very- tight space, with a significant amount of adrenaline going, and a whole obstacle course of steering wheel, pedals, seat belts, etc., to distract me and/or trip me up. After all, if he's outside the car, and I'm in it, I have a much larger weapon AND a means of escape via my vehicle. If I'm shooting, my attacker's probably in the car with me.

A double-action revolver, -to me-, offers two advantages in such a situation.
A) There is essentially one control to worry about. There's no safety to remember to click off, no magazine release for Mr. Critter to hit if we're wrestling for the gun, no possibility of limp-wristing the revolver, etc. To me, that's a pretty good trade-off for only having six shots.
B) If I'm in such a close-quarters fight for my life, there's a very real potential for either having to shoot with the muzzle pressed hard against the target, and/or my attacker grabbing the barrel. A semi-auto, due to the disconnector, can be taken out of battery fairly easily, and rendered inert. Yes, yanking backwards on the grip returns it to battery and allows it to fire, but that assumes that I have not only the room to do so (see confined quarters wrestling), but also that I'll have the presence of mind to do so, instead of hammering uselessly on a dead trigger over and over again (which is a very real possibility; see the Ferguson shooting, where the cop did exactly that while fighting his attacker inside his car).

I'm not that concerned about the cylinder gap flash, as if I'm in a position where I'm fighting for my life inside my car, flash-burns will be the least of my problems.

Your mileage may vary, and probably will. This is simply the thought-thread I have for what rides in my vehicle, vs what rides on my hip.

[Crash]

I would think that the potential for a case coming back and hitting you would be pretty small. Not saying it couldn't happen...
A more serious and very real consideration with a revolver though is the gas / flame and burning powder blowing out between the cylinder and barrel. If you're shooting at someone through the drivers window, imagine where you would be holding the gun and where that gas, etc would be going. Unless you have a gas seal revolver there's no getting around it.

That was my first thought too. I can imagine a short barrel semi would be most practical if one gets into such a situation. Other than that I'd think the gas pedal would be the best choice if the situation allows for it.
The second important point would be a quick access to a gun while driving.

bmwrdr,

My EDC is a S&W Shield, so I've got the "short barrel semi" aspect covered. And, you're absolutely right--if the situation allows for it, hit the gas--"the best way to win a gun fight is to avoid it." And, if I have to use my pickup as a weapon, I suspect that a 5000 lb vehicle even at just 20 mph has a lot of kinetic energy...and definitely a lot of momentum! Thanks for your input.

Crash

[Crash]

[quote="JSThane"]No matter what you're shooting, you'll half-blow your eardrums firing in such a confined space. I rather doubt you'd be aware of brass bouncing off your teeth at that point, much less the top of your head.

I like a revolver for car-carry, for the simple reason that, should I find need to deafen myself, I'll probably be hands-on wrestling with an opponent in a -very- tight space, with a significant amount of adrenaline going, and a whole obstacle course of steering wheel, pedals, seat belts, etc., to distract me and/or trip me up. After all, if he's outside the car, and I'm in it, I have a much larger weapon AND a means of escape via my vehicle. If I'm shooting, my attacker's probably in the car with me.

A double-action revolver, -to me-, offers two advantages in such a situation.
A) There is essentially one control to worry about. There's no safety to remember to click off, no magazine release for Mr. Critter to hit if we're wrestling for the gun, no possibility of limp-wristing the revolver, etc. To me, that's a pretty good trade-off for only having six shots.
B) If I'm in such a close-quarters fight for my life, there's a very real potential for either having to shoot with the muzzle pressed hard against the target, and/or my attacker grabbing the barrel. A semi-auto, due to the disconnector, can be taken out of battery fairly easily, and rendered inert. Yes, yanking backwards on the grip returns it to battery and allows it to fire, but that assumes that I have not only the room to do so (see confined quarters wrestling), but also that I'll have the presence of mind to do so, instead of hammering uselessly on a dead trigger over and over again (which is a very real possibility; see the Ferguson shooting, where the cop did exactly that while fighting his attacker inside his car).

JSThane,

You've covered the possibilites very well--thanks. I'm sure I'll have more serious concerns than flash burns and hearing loss if I'm wrestling with an attacker for my gun. And although I've had a number of both semi-autos and revolvers, there's always a little voice in head asking when the semi is going to fail to feed or fail to eject. Based on your input, I'll probably make a revolver my car gun. Thanks for your help.

Crash

[b322da]

Crash,

A good question, to which I have devoted a lot of time and thought. I own numerous SA and revolver handguns, and after considering the issue for some time, and after carrying various makes and mods as a car gun, I have decided to purchase a new firearm solely as my car gun. I do not suggest that it would be right for you or anyone else. To save some typing I copy the following from another earlier thread, with slight adjustments, just to report what I concluded.

"I have just acquired a new handgun, which doubles as an old man car gun and carry gun -- A Bond Arms derringer (Made In Texas), along with a fine fitted holster which rides on the belt outside the WB, and the Bond lies parallel to the belt. For a righty like me I have yet to decide whether as a car gun it is handier on the right, or cross-draw on the left. I tend toward the latter. Different, but an impressive piece of workmanship in stainless steel. Two barrels, one atop the other, mine being one a .410 buckshot, the other .45LC, both loaded with ammo specifically intended for self-defense." http://www.bondarms.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

As we said when I was in the service, "different ships, different long splices."

Jim

[threoh8]

Same discussion they had in the Great War about aircrew pistols. One "answer" was this:



WIthout a brass catcher (not something I'd want to carry), the brass is going to bounce around. That's among the least of your worries. Before the brass bounces, the bullet it once held has likely arrived. Its effect is more important.

Pistol selection for arm-wrestling distance is a whole 'nother matter.

[winters]

I keep a glock 17 with 17 round mag and a spare 33 round mag in both my cars simple because I like the bullet capacity. Some people like revolvers some like semiautos. The capacity thing has nothing to do with being a bad shot either. And im not going to be shooting through a glass window. If you have a piece of unbroken glass between you and the other person I see that as an opportunity to get away.

[karder]

I don't think it much matters. If you are in a situation serious enough that you need to shoot and kill someone through your car window, brass bouncing around or gas burns are going to be pretty low on your list of problems at that point.

[ammoboy2]

It was mentioned above the disadvantage of a semiauto in a clinch due to getting it out of battery (due to being pressed against opponent) and unable to fire. The revolver has a similar issue, if the opponent has a grip on the cylinder which prevents rotation of the cylinder not allowing it to fire. I really see no intrinsic advantage, use what you like, both work.