Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!wuarchive!udel!haven.umd.edu!mimsy!peora.sdc.ccur.com
From: joel@peora.sdc.ccur.com (Joel Upchurch)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: S&W 6906
Message-ID: <34770@mimsy.umd.edu>
Date: 22 May 91 16:38:37 GMT
Sender: magnum@mimsy.umd.edu
Organization: Upchurch Computer Consulting, Orlando FL
Lines: 27
Approved: gun-control@cs.umd.edu


I own a S&W 6906 and I think it is an excellent pistol. It has
been very reliable and accurate. I don't remember having a jam
with it since I broke it in and I can fire groups as tight as I
can with my Taurus PT99, which has a barrel nearly 1.5 inches
longer. It is also easy to clean. I don't think the ambidextrous
safety is a big deal because I don't think it is practical to carry
it with the safety on. I practiced trying to draw it with the safety
on and I wouldn't want to count on being able the draw it and flip
the safety off and fire it quickly. Flipping off the safety takes quite
a bit more effort and the motion isn't as natural as a 1911 style
safety. The 6906 or any other S&W 3rd generation pistol should be
quite safe to carry with the safety off. Putting the safety on when
it isn't actually on your person is a pretty good idea, but so is
leaving the chamber empty. At least I think so. A cab driver in Miami
is still alive today, because the 6906 the robber tried to shoot him
with, was stolen from a glove compartment earlier and still had the
safety on. The cab driver put several .45 caliber holes in the bad
guy while the bad guy was still trying to get the gun to fire.

If I was buying a pistol today, I would take a good look at the new
double action only version of the 6906 (6946?). The absense of the
safety/decocker would reduce the thickness of the pistol of the pistol
quite a bit.
-- 
Joel Upchurch/Upchurch Computer Consulting/718 Galsworthy/Orlando, FL 32809
joel@peora.ccur.com {uiucuxc,hoptoad,petsd,ucf-cs}!peora!joel (407) 859-0982