To the cyclist who has never owned or even thought of owning a handgun for protection on the trail or tour, the selection of an appropriate handgun can be daunting. There are many aspects to consider. Price? Weight? Caliber? Revolver vs. Autoloader? Color? (Yes, color can be an important aspect of a carry “piece”.) You can see why once the very personal decision is made to accept responsibility for your own safety, a whole new myriad of questions must be weighed and waded through to make an appropriate selection. I’ll briefly touch on each of the aspects I’ve mentioned above to start the discussion, then I’ll reveal what my personal choice is and why.
Price? Much like buying a bicycle, price can many times indicate quality. You’ll want to spend as much as you can afford to get the features you wish. Something “too cheap to be true” probably isn’t and might not be reliable or may even be dangerous. Plan to spend in the neighborhood of $300 to even think of a reliable, entry-level purchase.
Weight? This is a double-edged sword. Heaviness reduces “kick” when shot, but being heavy means that it’s HEAVY. We spend a lot of money to buy light bikes. We should probably lean in the same direction when selecting a carry piece. A heavy burden is more likely to be left at home where’s it’s no use on the trail, or in the glove-box of a car which is unwise storage for a number of reasons which I won’t go into right now. I opt for lightness.
Caliber? Discussions about caliber will no doubt become a large part of this tread. In short, for personal protection, it is generally recommended that at least a .380 Auto or equivalent be the bare minimum. Some say use at least a 9mm Luger cartridge, minimum. In a revolver, a .38 would be the least I’d recommend. Once again, this is a very personal decision. A well-known expert in the field of personal protections says that the first rule of gun-fighting is “bring a gun”…rule two is “bring ENOUGH gun”. For what it’s worth, I use as much “punch” as I can comfortably control.
Revolver vs. Autoloader? First off, it irritates me to no end when the liberal media reports on a gun related crime and always seems to mention that an “automatic handgun” (an “auto”) was used. To the uneducated, an “automatic handgun” would imply that you squeeze the trigger once and the result is a steady stream of bullets being fired like a machine gun until empty. This is incorrect as I will explain shortly. I personally feel that this sort of reporting is irresponsible and lathers up the gun control types into an uneducated fervor. But I digress.
Let me describe first what a revolver is and then compare that to an autoloader. Remember, I’m writing this to an audience which may have no firearm experience whatsoever. A revolver is easily identified because it looks like, well, a cowboy gun. It’s what you see in “Hawaii Five-O” reruns. The cartridges (ammunition) are held in a rotating cylinder. Typically a revolver holds anywhere from five to eight cartridges. In most modern revolvers, when the trigger is squeezed once, the cylinder rotates to have a fresh cartridge line up with the barrel, then the cartridge is fired. That’s it. Nothing else happens. One squeeze, one shot. Squeeze again and the process repeats until the ammo is used up.
An autoloader, on the other hand, looks like what James Bond uses, or what you might see in a WW II or Vietnam movie. It stores it’s cartridges in the handle, or “grip”. An autoloader may hold from as little as five to as many as fifteen cartridges (or more) depending on the style and caliber. In most modern autoloaders, when the trigger is squeezed once, a cartridge is fired then a fresh cartridge is automatically loaded, waiting for the next trigger squeeze. That’s it. Nothing else happens. One squeeze, one shot. Squeeze again and the process repeats until the ammo is used up. Notice how “Auto” means auto-load, not auto-fire? Do you feel duped by the media? Once again, I digress.
Historically, revolvers have been considered more reliable and take less maintenance than autoloaders. Modern autoloaders, however, have a great track record of reliability when kept only marginally clean. I am not saying it’s good idea to let any carry piece become dirty, but most quality autoloaders, if not equally reliable as revolvers, are probably close. I’m sure these aspects will be covered as the thread develops.
Color? Color can play an important role to the cyclist wishing to keep a concealed carry piece actually concealed. Our eyes are drawn to light whether that be from a television, a campfire, or even reflected from a stainless steel or nickel plated firearm. I’m one who truly appreciates firearms: historically, mechanically, artistically, and so on. I am especially fond of the brightness and crispness of stainless steel. But if the strategy is concealment, then darker colors are the way to go. A darker piece tends to visually disappear into the recesses and shadows of a handlebar bag or pocket, whereas a bright piece will visually tend to call attention to itself.
My Choice? After months of evaluation and contemplation, for my standard cycling carry piece I chose a Smith & Wesson model 340PD revolver. From the S&W website: “Smith & Wesson combined a Scandium alloy frame with a Titanium cylinder to build the strongest and lightest weight .357 Magnum revolver made. The result...maximum power in a small, lightweight, easy-to-carry package. Scandium alloy is used for small, medium and large frame revolvers. Smith & Wesson's lightest and strongest revolvers deliver dependable power every time.”
