To: scottdeus12
S&W 642. You heard it here first. :)
3 posted on
02/03/2010 1:41:40 PM PST by
OKSooner
("He's quite mad, you know." - James Bond to P. Galore in "Goldfinger".)
To: OKSooner
7 posted on
02/03/2010 1:45:09 PM PST by
ButThreeLeftsDo
(Political Correctness Will Get Us All Killed)
To: OKSooner
9 posted on
02/03/2010 1:46:14 PM PST by
EdReform
(Oath Keepers - Guardians of the Republic - Honor your oath - Join us: www.oathkeepers.org)
To: OKSooner
“S&W 642. You heard it here first. :)”
Besides being bigger than the Kahr, having less capacity and slower reloading, I just dont like hammerless revolvers. People buy them for being “snaggless” but I have never snagged a snubby in thousands of pocket draws. Just keep your thumb under the hammer spur and it is impossible to snag. Why anyone would want to cripple a revolver and eliminate its most accurate mode is ridiculous IMO.
25 posted on
02/03/2010 2:01:50 PM PST by
Hacklehead
(Liberalism is the art of taking what works, breaking it, and then blaming conservatives.)
To: OKSooner
S&W 642. You heard it here first. :) Amen with a Crimson Trace grip.
Loaded with Corbon DPX 110Gr +P
with a speed loader and five more.
54 posted on
02/03/2010 5:14:23 PM PST by
Uri’el-2012
(Psalm 119:174 I long for Your salvation, YHvH, Your law is my delight.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson