site banner
PaperclipPerfector  3d ago (text post)   3036 thread views

Small-Scale Question Sunday for July 19, 2026

Do you have a dumb question that you're kind of embarrassed to ask in the main thread? Is there something you're just not sure about?

This is your opportunity to ask questions. No question too simple or too silly.

Culture war topics are accepted, and proposals for a better intro post are appreciated.

3
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

In pockets: Knife (Leek), wallet, phone, keys.

On belt: G19

I don't bother with much else, unless it's specifically a political protest.

A Glock guy, huh? The concealed carry guys I know either carry a Sig or an M&P (and you can probably guess the specific model of those guns). When I start concealed carrying, it'll be the CZ P10-C. Despite its cheapness, it seems to be one of the more reliable guns I have, and I can shoot it decently.

I tried the S&W M&P Shield 9mm at first, but I hated it. Racking the slide and loading the magazines was so hard, and there were too many buttons I didn't know how to use.

So I got a hammerless S&W Bodyguard 38 Special next. Much better! It's so simple; there isn't even a safety! The single button is for unlocking the cylinder, and then you just push a rod to remove the rounds.

Most people look at me weird for carrying a revolver in the age of semi-autos, but it's just right for me. Besides, revolvers have a noble history; American police officers were using them well into the 80s (as seen in Lethal Weapon) and Korean cops still use them (as seen in Squid Game).

Another of my acquaintances carries a double-action only revolver. His arguments for them make sense to me. It's pretty fun too shoot, too. I prefer autoloaders, of course. They're cheaper and hold more shots and the manual of arms are pretty familiar to me by now, and I wouldn't be surprised if certain autoloaders were actually more reliable than most revolvers. But if I carried a revolver, I think I'd want something with a little better accuracy than the snub-nose he's got. It kind of goes all over the paper, no matter who's shooting it.

I carried a Smith Airweight for a decade, so I know why you're carrying a revolver. Does it have to be the Bodyguard?

Out of curiosity, exactly how many rounds have you fired in that gun?

There's guns I like a lot better than Glocks, subjectively. But in terms of the whole package, aftermarket, reliability etc. the glocks are just too ubiquitous. It's cheaper and easier to run multiple guns in multiple holsters with various magazines etc. Plus they're dead simple to work on, and I shoot them as well as anything on the duty market. Do like Walthers and Caniks, even M&Ps aren't that bad.

I shoot my Frankenglock (Grit Grips frame with OEM internals, Brownells Complete G19 slide) pretty well, even though it had quite a few problems at first. Maybe it just had to be broken in, maybe it needs some more oil, maybe it didn't like Winchester white box. I think I need to put a lot more rounds into it to be comfortable with it. I don't really like the trigger, but everything else about it is nice, I seem to shoot it better than most other guns somehow.

I'm probably going to make another gun-related thread in the Wellness Wednesday thread. I had a power outage last night and it made me contemplate my power outage readiness, or lack thereof.

Glock triggers are among the worst factory pulls in that class, and the stock shoe is pretty bad. But they do smooth out well at high round counts and the shoe is easily replaced. Learning the Glock trigger was much easier than full double-action-only snubby triggers. When people shoot my battered old carry gun, they think the trigger is great for a Glock, but it's just a shoe and fifty-two thousand rounds. Most expensive trigger job in history.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats