I think it is obvious that we are getting this comment out of context, we do not know what he means by"wins". I have no problem with revolvers or semi's, I prefer revolvers at this time in my life, but I think that is due to getting old more than anything else.

To RJ Arena: I thought it was pretty plain what Col. Cooper meant, but the context was that in a gunfight, you are much better off with a 1911 than with any revolver.

I've never had a revolver jam on me.

Ditto's on the S&W Model 19. A double tap with the .357 is all that's required to stop a gunfight. IMHO, none better.

But the 1911 is THE autoloader!

I've got an S&W .40G and fired probably 2000 rounds and it's never jammed. My uncle has had a Colt 1911 for thirty years and says it's never jammed. The .45 is an undisputed confirmed killer. No questions about its knockdown power or lethality. Revolvers are easier to use and as G. Gordon Liddy says "if your arm is blown off you can still cock a revolver" but I prefer a fourteen round clip. I bought a Lady Smith for my wife and said "if you ever have to use it just pull the trigger." The essence of simplicity which is a very good thing when everything around you is CRAZY...

Yeah if someone breaks into my home I'm not grabbing a pistol. That Rem 1100 with buckshot will do a much better job. Plus if you can hit anything at 100 yards with your handgun you're a superhero. But for concealed carry they're the only game in town. And please don't write back and say "Dr. Ralph I shot a moose with my T/C Contender at 280 yards blah blah blah.. you must be a big fat lazy sissy boy unemployed loser whatever."

Never take a handgun to a gunfight. Keep one handy just in case one erupts.

In my store I've got a Taurus .357 snub loaded w/ +P+ hollowpoints. In my bedroom headboard resides a Springfield single stack .45 w/ sjhp. In my gun vault resides my Super Blackhawk .44 along w/ my other handguns, rifles, shotguns. A .44 mag is just WAY to much gun for personal protection. I've had jams in my autos, but that's when I screw up on reloads. IMHO never use reloads for personal defense. If you have to shoot someone, you sure as hell don't want some county prosecuter to say you were loading mankillers, or have a jam at the wrong time!

The late Col. Cooper was an old school master who's opinon I greatly respect even if I sometimes disagree. In todays age of modern firearms, one has numerous choices of highly relable and adaquetly powerful handguns at affordable prices. As for the old auto vs. revolver argument (or 9mm vs. .45 for that matter) there are better ways to wast our time. Choose a weopon that is 100% reliable, accurate enough, and carries an adaquete ammount of ammo of good quality. 1911, smith k or j-frame, glock, and springfield xd all have potential to perform these tasks. Remember that the total pakage must work together: weopon ammo, magazine (often the weak link), and holster. Long guns have many advantages but also some serious disavantages in a home deffense situation. Consider your unique situation, skill level, and phisical ability. Find what works for you and then train, train, train. One last thaught, very few god blessed people have the gun-handling skills of profesionals like Jerry Miculek and Rob Leatham so please don't make YOUR choise based on what THEY can do. Dave in St Pete, I don't know if Col. Cooper ever meet Jerry Miculek, but I'm sure he knew Bill Jordan who was about as prolific with a fighting wheel gun as any one.

I always figured that if I really needed to carry a personal defense handgun it would be a Ruger semiauto in .22LR. It's about the only thing I could reliably hit well with, but I could *reliably* hit well. If they made 'em in .22WMR it'd be ideal.

For openers, note that Cooper made this comment in 1966. For those of you who think he has slighted Jerry Miculek, I doubt Jerry was out of his teens (if he was INTO them) in 1966.

Was Cooper ignorant of the abilities of a revolver in that hands of a great shot? No. He knew great wheelgunners; Jack Weaver and Thell Reed come to mind. But by 1966 he had invented practical pistol matches and promoted them for at least a decade, and it was his experience that match winners, and those who placed highly, were almost always holding Colt 1911s when they did so. He wasn't prejudiced against revolvers; he was POSTjudiced against them. He simply could not refute what his own eyes told him match after match, year in, year out.

Note also that in 1966 the defensive revolver, military or police, was almost always a .38 Special loaded with 158 grain roundnosed lead bullets at about 800 fps, and generally reloaded from belt loops or drop pouches. Would you carry this load in your own .38 for any serious purpose?

Cooper was not an 'auto' man; he was a Colt 1911 man. He liked the P-35 but disliked 9mm hardball; he thought the double-action on the P-38 was a solution to a non-existent problem; he saw no reason to buy (cheap at the time) Spanish knockoffs of the Colt. In 1966 he didn't really like the Colt, either, until it had been given a trigger job, had the feed ramp polished, and had higher sights installed. He liked the .45 above all other calibers because in a world of non-expanding pistol bullets (1966!!!), the .45 made the biggest holes.

Mind you, Cooper was pro-revolver when it came to hunting. He was a big proponent of the .44 Magnum Smith 29. But for contest or day-in, day-out duty holster wear he was 1911 all the way.

In later years he acknowledged the CZs and the Glocks, the .40 S&W round, and the usefulness of revolvers for nightstand duty. But in 1966, with the guns and ammo of the day, HE WAS RIGHT.

Well after revisiting this blog I find my last comment, wasn't. I meant to say something about that word postjudiced. I like it. A lot. My mom always said she wasn't prejudiced, she was judging from many years of experience.