The Best Revolver Ever Made? Colt’s Python–Review

Hello. My name is David, and I’m in love with a snake. I used to be ophidiophobic, but I’ve begun a steady program of exposure therapy. I now spend a lot of time with a Python, and it has opened my eyes. I guess it should come as no surprise, as Most of the gun-loving-free-world has a soft spot for Colt’s snakes. These badass guns were built in staggering numbers from 1955 until 2005. There are many who believe that the Colt Python is the single best revolver ever to be produced. In a world with a lot of revolvers, many of which are exceptionally well made guns, that is a bold claim. But it hardly stops there. As some of those Python backers also believe that revolvers are vastly superior to automatics, the Python begins to look like to pinnacle of immense handgun pyramid.

Specs

This Python, which was made in 1968, has a 6″ barrel. They were made with short barrels (as short as 2.5″) and with longer 8″ barrels, and several in between. The 6″ gun is substantial. The full length barrel lug adds weight to an already heavy design. I’d have to break out a scale to weigh this thing, but to hell with that. It is 3 pounds, easy. This gun was made in the era that appreciated big-block engines and curves on women. There were none of these models that look like tall boys, or hybrid cars. And they weren’t shy about using American steel in guns–there’s more steel in a Python than there is in a 2015 Ford F-150.  The grip (this one is not original to the gun) is huge. The fat flair at the end of the one-piece design forces your hand up on the grip.
The trigger on this one breaks like some of those anemic fashion models, right at 8 pounds in double action mode, and just north of 3 pounds in single action. If poets still wrote romantic ballads, we’d be awash in odes to the Python’s trigger. It is that good. In single action, there is no creep. No take up. No over travel.

The sights are completely adjustable.

The Pythons were originally made in Royal Blue, like this one, and in nickel plated versions. The nickel version was later replaced by stainless steel. The longer barreled guns had full length vent ribs on top, and the sights (both front and rear) are adjustable.
Make no mistake–the Python is a beast. With six rounds of .357, the capacity is on par with most of the competition. The 6″ barrel produces muzzle velocities in the 1,150 FPS range with 158 grain Federal Hydra-Shok JHPs. That’s on the slow end of the .357s, as the bullet weighs more. Basic .38s will leave the barrel anywhere from the high 800s to the low 1000s. That’s not bad, but I’d never carry anything in the Python that wasn’t capable of taking down a moose, so I’m sticking with the .357s.
With the stunning effectiveness of the Python, and the exquisite aesthetics, why can’t you pop into your local FFL and buy a Python?

Most six-guns only hold six. Go figure.

No longer in production

This section is going to be filled with some conjecture. I’d be willing to bet that most of it is 100% accurate. But Colt won’t comment, and I think there’s a good reason for that, too. So I’ll stop being vague and get to it.
1. Revolvers used to be popular. The Python, in fact, was carried by a lot of law enforcement agencies. These were standard issue firearms up into the 1990’s. And they were incredibly reliable, accurate, and iconic–everything you’d want from a sidearm except the capacity. So out they went. And as the public’s preference for pistols grew, sales slumped. Bye-bye snakes.
2. These aren’t inexpensive guns. When a lot of other guns are being made of plastic, the snakes start to look like resource hogs. The tooling was antiquated and old fashioned, the materials were pricy, and the market for the guns was not-so-slowly drying up.
So the expensive guns for which there was a shrinking market started were pulled from production. Clearly, we see now, the market hadn’t dried up. Not completely. And the guns are selling for insane prices. I’m going to jump in here with my consumer bias and say that the prices for used Pythons are insane. $3,000? And that’s for a shooter in good condition. You can find a better price, occasionally, and you can take out a second mortgage for one that’s new-in-box, and unturned.
Side note: I got schooled in revolver valuation recently, and I’d like to pass on this nugget. “Unfired” is easy enough to fake. I can take a gun in reasonably good condition and spruce it up so it looks new. “Unturned” means that the cylinder shows no marks from rotation. This is a better way to evaluate the wear on a revolver. A truly pristine, unturned, unfired Python will fetch a very high price–so high that it is worth the risk for some to attempt to pass off fakes. Caveat emptor.

Six inches of solid steel. These things had to be expensive to produce, even in 1955.

3. New Snakes? So let’s entertain a third option for Colt’s decision to pull the Python. They may have seen the downward slope of the supply/demand curve. What to do? Continue to flood the market with expensive pistols? Hell no. Cut supply. Immediately. Let the demand build. Watch what happens on the secondary market and figure out where your price-point should be. Judge that delicate balancing point between supply and demand that will allow you to charge a premium for a product produced in limited numbers. Colt may be sitting on the snakes, biding their time, waiting–somewhat snakelike–for the right time to strike.
As guns are a popular topic of conversation here at GunsAmerica, we’ve had numerous conversations around the virtual water-cooler about Colt. More than Colt would like, I think. But we all love the snakes, and can’t see why Colt doesn’t jump on the new-found popularity of the revolver. Retro revolvers.

I jacked up the focus on this photo, but the clean hole is still visible behind the gun. That’s six from 25 yards, double action.

Shooting Snakes

You should take what I say about economics with a grain of salt. I’ve got a Ph.D., but it isn’t in economics. And this is a review, so I’m much more interested in how this thing shoots. I’m not one to put away shiny collectables. I’ve got a seven year old boy, so I can’t use a python as a coffee table set-about. If I can’t shoot it, it doesn’t stick around long.
This one, though, shoots straight. It shoots better than any revolver I’ve ever owned or shot. You’ll see what I mean when you look at the target pics. I’m not that good with a revolver, but this one made me feel like I could be a rockstar. And I did better with it in double action than I did in single action, defeating my own long-held belief that single action is superior. I used to take a constant ribbing from Bob Lawman, a revolver expert, about my half-assed revolver technique. He swore I would shoot better if I just learned how to shoot a double action. Well Bob, I get it. The trigger on this Python is smooth, light, and easy to stage. I can rock the hammer back with the trigger and hold it all day long.
In single action, I kept dropping the trigger a bit unexpectedly. The pull is light enough that I’d drop at least one round early. But the double action pull was gratifying and has inflated my ego.

Same gun, same drill, different shooter. He didn’t have the double-action touch.

But I can get all six inside the trigger guard. Not that I’m bragging or anything, but I can shoot this gun.

Reliability

It is a revolver. What could possibly go wrong? According to the wisdom of the internet, the Pythons are prone to timing issues as their round counts escalate. Maybe so. The cylinder locks up tight to the forcing cone on this one, and I had no issues with the timing. That said, I would estimate the round count on this one to be very low. The timing works fine.
If a Python were to get out-of-time, the cylinder would lock up with the forcing cone–but not perfectly. This allows gas to escape. It can even shave off bits of lead. I’ve fired revolvers and had to perform basic first aid after. But that’s tremendously unlikely on a gun as well built as this. A more likely scenario is that you’d sacrifice a bit of accuracy and see more soot on the cylinder.

Teaser: How will the Python stand up to my 686? That’s coming next week.

Final thoughts?

This is my first Python. And I love it. Every time I look at it, I see the 1970s. I’ve seen a few episodes of The Walking Dead, but I’m not a zombie obsessed. I have a hard time suspending my disbelief long enough to believe anyone (let alone roaming the countryside in world where ammo is no longer being manufactured) would carry anything other than a 9mm. But if I had Hollywood’s unending supply lines and an steady stream of slightly lethargic targets that wouldn’t shoot back, I’d carry a Python, too. Hell, I’d carry two. With a double action trigger like this, I’d be dual-wielding like a maniac.
In the real world, though, I’m faced with a dilemma. While there is a limited supply of Pythons, Colt’s competitors continue to push their own, completely capable .357 revolvers. I have a hard time carrying a gun this precious when there are less expensive guns that work (I almost said just-as-well). If I were ever to use this in a defensive situation (where it would no-doubt be confiscated), or if it were stolen, I’d feel the loss. I’d have a huge Python shaped hole in my revolver-loving-soul. Would it not be better to carry a Smith 686, or a Ruger? Not that I wouldn’t pine at their loss, but I might not pine as much.
I think the only thing to do is put it to the test. Head to head. Gun vs. Gun. The Python vs. The Smith & Wesson 686. How will the the snake stand up to the Smith? Stay tuned.

The back of the one-piece grips.

No matter what you think about revolvers, you have to admit that the Python is a handsome gun.

The long hammer spur makes cocking the gun easy.

The cylinder opens when this latch is slid back.

The plunger tucks neatly into the barrel lug. Apologies for the dust on the gun. That blue shows every spec of dust!

The rear sight is simple and effective.

The Python bears the Colt stamp.

An aside. When I was typing up this review, I invented a new word that I think we should add to the lexicon. Pythong. Is there a better word for a G-string that grips you too tight? Not that I’d know from experience. Dammit. Just keep digging this hole deeper.

The Marines Get GLOCKs!

The Marine Corps has officially approved the usage of GLOCKs! Well, that is at least for some marines.
The Marine Corps Times reported that the GLOCK 19 was added to the list of authorized “Individual Weapons, Optics, Modular Attachments and Modifications for FY15 Annual Rifle and Pistol Training” but its use is only reserved for personnel assigned to Marine Corps Forces Special Operations Command.
Obviously, this raises several questions: What took the Corps so long to embrace the king of polymer pistols? Are all generations of the G19 approved or just the latest?
Unfortunately, the Marine Corps has not explained the timeliness of the decision nor discussed the matter beyond what it included in a force-wide message issued in mid-February.
“It is unclear why the pistols were only now approved for MARSOC,” wrote the Marine Corps Times. “Marine Corps officials could not immediately address questions from MCT.”
With the G19 added to the list, MARSOC will now have to select a holster.
“Standard holsters for this item are pending source selection,” the force-wide message states. “Command approved holsters are authorized for this item until source selection is complete.”
For more on this story, check out the Marine Corps Times.

The Best Tactical Sight for Under $50

Recently, I had a chance to look at the Leapers UTG Gen 4 Red/Green Dot Sight. A friend at the range recently purchased a used Smith & Wesson Performance Center .44 Magnum Hunter revolver and the sight was mounted on it. A sub $50 sight on a $1250 magnum? This was a test I had to experience. After all, if the UTG sight could survive the abuse from a .44 mag., imagine how safe it would be atop an AR-15.

Leapers UTG 1×30 Tactical Dot Sight

Key Features

• Quick-aim electronic dot sight with red and green dual illumination
• 38mm tube
• Emerald lens coating for maximum brightness and clarity
• Coin-adjustable windage and elevation knobs with 1/2 MOA per click increments
• Allen wrench required to unlock adjustment feature
• 4.0 MOA Dot
• Adjustable brightness settings
• Unlimited eye relief
• Includes Weaver mounting deck
• Flip-open lens caps

The first thing you are likely to notice when looking through the optic is the intensity of the dot and the clarity of the glass—impressive for an optic in this price range.

The sight body has an integral Weaver rail mount. The cross bolts are both full diameter and are spaced to match standard Picatinny rails. The front and rear lens caps are interchangeable. They are spring loaded and open easily with a slight push.
The clamp bar is also spring loaded. This allows it to remain open when installing the sight, which makes mounting a breeze.  The thumbscrews are also staked to avoid unscrewing them and dropping or losing small parts. This is a great feature and worthy of note for those who would consider an extra sight or two for the shelf or SHTF kit.
Once the aluminum turret covers are removed, you’ll notice the adjustment knobs feature setscrews. The setscrew allows you to lock the turret at your desired zero. This is ideal for guns with enhanced recoil, but also an awesome feature for a truck gun that may be banged around or for someone depending on a constant zero in a bug-out situation.
The shooter can set the illuminated dot to either red or green. UTG has designed the unit with five different illumination intensities for each color. The adjustment has appropriate markings to indicate the settings.
One look and you will notice that the dot is rather bright, even for old eyes. We were standing in the shade under a canopy, but in the bright sun, the variable settings came into play. However, I would image the norm would be to leave the unit on its lowest setting for general use—a smart design for maximum battery efficiency.
The UTG Gen 4 red/green dot sight runs on two CR2032 batteries. The battery is common and cheap, making it ideal for the regular shooter or prepper. The cover is easily removed with a coin and features a rubber O-ring to seal the compartment from the elements.
The first thing you are likely to notice when looking through the optic is the intensity of the dot and the clarity of the glass—impressive for an optic in this price range.
At the range, zeroing the sight was a standard task without any surprises. The sight proved intuitive and at reasonable distances, putting the dot on the target with proper trigger manipulation scored acceptable combat hits (center of man) with ease. For target shooting or a hunting scenario, more care would be necessary to center the dot in the sight and to avoid parallax issues. This provides accuracy at longer ranges and Close Quarters Battle (CQB) accuracy when necessary.
The dot is 4 MOA. This is likely a bit bigger than you may be used to in an optic. For precision target shooting this may be an issue. Having used concentric circles for aiming in target archery for years, I adjusted easily.
For the new shooter or anyone demanding quality on a shoestring budget, UTG’s Gen 4 red/green dot sight is unbeatable. Either way, for $34.97 it is such a great deal that everyone should have at least one for backup or just to keep on the shelf for those times when you a need a scope quick.

Specifications

 Magnification: 1.00X
Tube Diameter: 38mm
Objective Diameter: 30mm
Field of View @ 100 yards: 16.5 feet
Eye Relief: Flexible
Exit Pupil: 25.0mm
Click Adjustment @100 yards: 0.5-inch
Length: 95mm
Weight: 7.4 ounces
Batteries: Two CR2032 3V

Obama to Outlaw .223 Ammunition (M855) Through Executive Action

It is doubtful that anyone reading this article will truly be surprised that Obama and his cronies in key government posts are trying to once again de facto suppress our Second Amendment rights. They were not able to make it happen through the legislature, but Obama has his phone and his pen. Currently, it seems the President is using both to target gun owners, specifically owners of AR-15s. If you can’t outlaw the guns, get rid of the ammunition.
The AR-15 platform, also commonly referred to as the Modern Sporting Rifle (MSR), has dominated the civilian market. I am not sure of the numbers, but it certainly runs in the millions. The logic flows like this. After any major war or conflict, the service rifle of the day becomes popular among the civilian market. With well over a decade of conflict in the Middle East, it logically flows that a civilian version of the rifle service members were trained with and relied on would become popular. It happened with the M1, M14, Winchester Model 70, Remington 700, 1911 and the list goes on both in eras spanning before and after this list.

.223 NATO Lake City M855 FMJ 62 Grain Steel Penetrator Ammo

The popularity of the AR-15/MSR is the reason it is a target of the Obama administration. The latest assault on the Second Amendment came after the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) unexpectedly announced on Friday the 13th that it intends to ban commonplace M855 ball ammunition as “armor piercing ammunition.” Instead of going through the legislative process as intended, President Obama is using his executive authority to once again impose gun control measures.

Three Major 2A Assaults in 2015 Already

Obama is a lame duck with nothing to lose. He will never run for office again and does not care about public opinion—at least not the public opinion of gun owners. We are not even two months into the year, and we have already seen three major assaults on the Second Amendment through executive action. The first came when the activities that constitute “manufacturing” firearms were changed. Next, was the flip-flopping decision of the BATFE regarding firing a shouldered pistol.
The most serious, or at least far reaching, is of course the BATFE’s “Framework for Determining Whether Certain Projectiles are ‘Primarily Intended for Sporting Purposes’ Within the Meaning of 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(17)(c).” The new proposed regulation would eliminate the M855’s exemption to the armor piercing ammunition prohibition and make future exemptions nearly impossible.

The Backstory

Federal law imposed in 1986 prohibits the manufacture, importation, and sale by licensed manufacturers or importers, but not possession, of “a projectile or projectile core which may be used in a handgun and which is constructed entirely… from one or a combination of tungsten alloys, steel, iron, brass, bronze, beryllium copper or depleted uranium.”
We now have AR pistols, which of course are capable of shooting M855—i.e. handguns. On the face, this would seem to run afoul of the law… unless you actually dissect the bullet. The core is not made of any of the materials listed. The M855 uses a lead core with a steel tip, therefore, it is not, nor was it ever “armor piercing.” Not to be bothered by pesky facts or the letter of the law, the BATFE declared the M855 as armor piercing anyway, but granted it an exemption as a projectile “primarily intended to be used for sporting purposes.”

How Will this Affect You?

Perhaps Obama’s phone has made the BATFE “reconsider” its position. Going forward, the BATFE will only grant the sporting exemption in two categories of projectile:

Category I: .22 Caliber Projectiles

A .22 caliber projectile that otherwise would be classified as armor piercing ammunition under 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(17)(B) will be considered to be “primarily intended to be used for sporting purposes” under section 921(a)(17)(C) if the projectile weighs 40 grains or less AND is loaded into a rimfire cartridge.

Category II: All Other Caliber Projectiles

Except as provided in Category I (.22 caliber rimfire), projectiles that otherwise would be classified as armor piercing ammunition will be presumed to be “primarily intended to be used for sporting purposes” under section 921(a)(17)(C) if the projectile is loaded into a cartridge for which the only handgun that is readily available in the ordinary channels of commercial trade is a single shot handgun. ATF nevertheless retains the discretion to deny any application for a “sporting purposes” exemption if substantial evidence exists that the ammunition is not primarily intended for such purposes.

With his phone and pen, will Obama cause the next ammo crunch?

In essence, you can have AP rounds for a rimfire .22 or a wildcat cartridge in which the only handgun commonly available or used is a single shot handgun—what a joke!

Two Chances to do Something About it

The NRA-ILA and others are of course on the case and looking for ways to stop this latest assault. The BATFE is accepting comments until March 16, 2015 on this absurd attempt to restrict ammunition for the most popular rifle in America in an attempt to trample our Second Amendment rights once again. Early next week, we should have a follow up article with more in depth details as well as information regarding how you can submit comments and make your voice heard. For now, share this information with your friends and let’s start marshaling our pro 2A forces.
There is a lesson to be learned and this is your wakeup call. In the mid ‘90s when the Assault Weapons Ban was enacted, the prices of ARs skyrocketed. The same was true when the Obama administration banned Russian imports last year. The prices shot through the roof overnight. Who knows whether or not the BATFE will be successful or whether we are able to muster enough public support to thwart it efforts. Until then, I think I will stock up on some M855 while supplies are plentiful and the prices are good.

the BATFE of its plan to ban M855 ammunition—one of the most popular low cost options for AR-15s.

Last week, the Internet was abuzz after the announcement by the BATFE of its plan to ban M855 ammunition—one of the most popular low cost options for AR-15s.

The 2016 elections may prove a tipping point—for or against the Second Amendment.

Show the Administration that we have pens and phones as well!

Contact the BATFE via email at APAComments@atf.gov and express your opposition to the BATFE proposal to ban common rifle ammunition used by millions of gun owners. Remember to proofread your comment and ensure it is concise. Alternatively, you can use the suggested text I used or some of the bullet points from the NRA-ILA. Simply, copy and paste the following letter into the email address provided.

Re:  Ammunition Ban, M855 AP—Oppose
To Whom it may Concern:
I am writing to register my opposition to the proposed ammunition reclassification of the popular M855 ammunition.
Commonly accepted and used for 30 years, no significant abuses of M855 .223/5.56mm ammunition has been documented that warrants such action. There is no evidence of an increased risk today than there was nearly 30 years ago when the “Sporting Purposes Exemption” was enacted.
Recently, competing special interests have been attempting to prohibit or reduce lawful citizens access to firearms and ammunition through a series of legislation and actions that have all soundly been defeated through the legislative process, courts and the will of the majority.
Based upon my personal experience, the elimination of the “Sporting Purposes” exemption will not enhance public safety and does not serve the interests of the Law Enforcement Officers Protection Act (LEOPA).
If you have any questions or require anything additional, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,

You can also print out a copy, add your John Hancock (signature) and deliver it via fax to (202) 648-9741. Many computer programs will allow you to scan the document and fax it electronically if you do not have a dedicated fax machine.
Of course if you want to go old school, you can send your opposition via the U.S. Mail to:

Denise Brown
Mailstop 6N-602, Office of Regulatory Affairs, Enforcement Programs and Services, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives
99 New York Avenue, NE
Washington, DC 20226
ATTN: AP Ammo Comments

Pressure needs to be applied from all directions and elections are just around the corner. Don’t forget to contact your U.S. Senators and Members of Congress. Encourage them to oppose the BATFE’s proposed action to ban M855 ammunition and other rifle cartridges that are overwhelmingly used by law-abiding Americans for self-defense, sport shooting and other legitimate purposes. Use the “Write Your Lawmakers” feature on the NRA-ILA’s website or call the Congressional Switchboard at (202) 225-3121.

A few more points you may wish to include offered by the NRA-ILA:

• M855 ammunition should not be categorized as “armor piercing” in the first place, given that lead is the primary material beneath its copper jacket.
• BATFE’s framework does not clarify the “sporting purposes” exemption; it simply interprets it into irrelevance.
• The framework overturns nearly 30 years of settled law and the good faith expectations of gun owners and industry members.
• The framework is totally at odds with the intent of the law to ensure that restrictions on armor piercing handgun ammunition do not unduly restrict common rifle ammunition, most of which is capable of penetrating police body armor when used in a rifle as intended.
• BATFE incorrectly insists that it is required to establish an “objective” standard based on handgun design, yet it fails even to do that with the very broad “discretion” it retains to deny the exemption to projectiles that meet its “objective” test.
• The framework will suppress the development of non-lead rifle projectiles that offer increased performance for hunters, decreased lead exposure, and solutions for hunters in states that restrict the use of lead in hunting.
• The framework will likewise deter handgun development, as new designs could trigger bans.
• Coupled with increasing attempts to ban lead projectiles, the framework could drastically reduce the availability of lawful ammunition for sporting and other legitimate purposes.
• M855 ammunition in AR pistols is not a common threat faced by law enforcement officers.

 The .45 ACP Glock 21 Gen 4 Defender Scott_PP_Article_2-13-15 Scott W. Wagner | February 13, 2015 | 25 Comments inShare Recently, a Lieutenant at my police department was interested in downsizing from the Gen 4 Glock 21 he had been carrying on duty for several months, having supersized previously from his smaller .40 caliber Glock 23. While he liked the fact that the Gen 4 Glock 21 held 13 rounds of potent .45 ACP ammo in each magazine, he missed the somewhat lighter weight, controllability, and more compact dimensions of his old G23. I happened to have a Glock 32 in .357 SIG caliber that I’d carried on the SWAT team available. Having less recoil but more power than the .40 in terms of kinetic energy, he decided to trade after giving it a test drive. I ended up with the like-new “hardly ever been driven” G21 as a result. The G21 is a large handgun. The Gen 4 model comes with a somewhat smaller frame than the original version and includes two backstraps that can be added onto the existing frame to increase the grip girth to medium and large sizes. For my medium-sized hands, the out-of-the-box small size worked well enough, but it required the addition of an extended slide release to really make it fully functional for me. My G21 came equipped with factory three-dot night sights, which makes for a precise sight picture under daylight conditions, and of course assists with finding the sights for the first shot fired in a string in dark conditions. The G21 weighs in heavier than other full-sized Glocks at 29.3 ounces, but is still relatively lightweight for a .45. By way of comparison, the average full-sized 1911 weights in at 36 ounces, which gives the 1911 nearly a half pound more recoil-absorbing weight. I had in my possession some Winchester T-Series standard velocity JHP load. Even though this is a standard pressure round, it is still quite stout, with a distinctly higher muzzle velocity than standard .45 ACP ball ammo. Using a 230-grain JHP bullet, the published ballistics claim a muzzle velocity of 935 fps, with a muzzle energy of 446 foot-pounds. After my experience shooting the G21, I would advise new shooters to avoid +P ammo (or other loads in this power range). I began the test at a distance of 30 feet using a standard handgun qualification silhouette target. The Winchester T-Series ammo was attention getting, but not painful to shoot by any stretch. However, the larger-than-standard Glock grip circumference made the G21 harder for me to hold onto. I needed a firmer than standard grip (at least for me) for control and tight groups. My first six-shot group strung out a bit to the left, following the torque of the pistol. By tightening my grip, I was able to shrink my second six-shot string at 30 feet down considerably, keeping those six rounds within the 8-inch center circle. I moved back to 100 yards. Taking what I thought was a firm enough two-handed grip, I launched six rounds downrange from a standing position. I had five in the left side of the target, all within the silhouette, and one entirely off the paper. Not bad, but I wanted to see if more concentration would center the groups up. I tightened up and launched seven rounds downrange. I was rewarded by finding all seven rounds in the silhouette, with two in the aforementioned center ring, four centered in the body cavity, and one round at the lower left inside corner of the silhouette. I was much more pleased with the second string. Utilizing my new Glock as a carry or home-defense gun would require one little adjustment—different carry ammo. The Sig Elite 200-grain JHP .45 launches that lighter weight bullet at a more sedate 918 fps with a muzzle energy of 374 foot pounds. The Sig Elite ammo gave excellent performance in modeling clay, but with more controllability. The Glock 21 turned in great performance at the range. Just hold it firmly and watch what you feed it. Next week I will talk about carrying it concealed. Sources: Glock: us.glock.com Winchester Ammunition: www.winchester.com Sig Elite Ammunition: www.sigsauer.com

A Word About Warning Shots

inShare  Firing a warning shot is one of the worst ideas ever put forth in the area of self-defense training. You are personally responsible for every projectile that leaves your firearm. If you fire a warning shot blindly into the air, you have no idea where that round is going to impact. What if it hits an innocent person? How will you explain to a prosecutor that you were in imminent danger if you didn’t feel the need to fire at your attacker?
Don’t fire warning shots. If you feel like you should give a verbal warning, fine, do that. But do not be firing shots unless they are well aimed at someone you have clearly identified as an immediate threat.


Warning shots put bullets in places you don’t want them to go. If you’re going to fire a round, fire AT the imminent deadly threat, and keep firing until that threat stops. Don’t shoot anywhere else.
Don’t. As in don’t fire warning shots. Ever. Shoot at your attacker and keep shooting until the threat stops.