# Are giant "hand cannon" revolvers practical guns or macho novelties? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 6, 2006, 2:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-giant-hand-cannon-revolvers-practical-guns-or-macho-novelties/355667 "2006-05-06T14:04:34Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 2\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![BF](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/b5ac83/32.png) [@BF](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BF)\ **Post date:** [May 8, 2006, 10:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-giant-hand-cannon-revolvers-practical-guns-or-macho-novelties/355667/101 "2006-05-08T22:04:24Z")
Referring to the OP, the creation of the S&W 500 follows (late) on the heels of the .44 Magnum, following on the heels of the .357 Magnum, all originally created as **HUNTING** handguns for large North American game such as Caribou, Elk, Moose, mountain Lion, Bighorn Sheep and smaller bears. The .454 Casull, .475 Linebaugh, and also Ruger .460 were competitors offering’s in the sport of \*\*HUNTING \*\* handguns. My father has taken numerous mule deer, white tail deer and boar using a .44 Magnum Super Blackhawk, which has an effective range of 100 yards. The newer calibers have now taken that effective range to 200 yards. In addition to the **HUNTING** uses of these calibers, many are offered in “Pilot” or “Tracker” barrel lengths (shorter) for easy carry and use against large predators such as Kodiak, Grizzly, Brown or Polar bears. ---
**Author:** ![ExTank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/35a633/32.png) [@ExTank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ExTank)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2006, 1:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-giant-hand-cannon-revolvers-practical-guns-or-macho-novelties/355667/102 "2006-05-09T01:16:46Z")
> [@T\_SQUARE](#): > > The 500 is not, and never has been marketed for home defense. It is for hunting. Have you ever seen a Kodiak bear? It wouldn’t even be too practicle just for goofing around at the range, since I think bullets sell for around 3 bucks a pop. > > That being said, I would pay $3 to see what that monster could do to a watermelon. Just about the same thing a .45 can do to a watermelon, but easier on your wallet. 🙂 > [@Der Trihs](#): > > For the cops and military, not necessarily for everyone. Does everyone need an RPG ? Since RPGs are illegal, and since no one credible is advocating universal RPG ownership in the USA, that’s a bit of a non-starter. > [@Der Trihs](#): > > First, as pointed out earlier, Britain did it. Different country, different culture. Lets compare apples to apples, hmm? > [@Der Trihs](#): > > Second, where do you think criminals get their guns ? From homes, that’s where. It’s rather easier than stealing them from the Marines. Cite? And gun stores are a lot easier to steal from than the Marines, too. > [@Der Trihs](#): > > Third, you’re at least as likely to kill you and your own by accident, probably more so. Again, cite? If it’s Kellerman, he has been _so_ thoroughly debunked, at-large and on this board, yet this butt-nugget of “fact” just won’t die, 'cause uninformed (or disingenuous) people like you keep clinging to it. > [@Der Trihs](#): > > Fourth, the criminal will likely win any such confrontation, since he’ll shoot you first, or from behind. Why do you think the cops are so careful around someone they think might be armed ? And once again, I’ll ask for a cite? Even criminals know the difference between armed robbery and murder, and the difference in likely sentences, and, more immediately, the amount of heat the latter will bring down. Not every criminal is Hannibal Lecter, willing to eat your face and wear your skin for the loose change in your pocket. Even the dimmest criminal has some rudimentary notion of risk-vs.-reward, and their own sense of how far they are willing to go to get what they want. > [@Der Trihs](#): > > And if he’d been murderously violent, he’d have shot first; criminals do that sort of thing. Better if he had no access to guns; you can outrun a guy with a knife, but not a bullet. Can you really? What if he can run faster than you? What if you can’t run 'cause of bad knees? With a firearm as an equalizer, the potential victim at least has a chance. > [@Der Trihs](#): > > For you, or the people whom you might accidentally shoot by accident if you get startled ? Walking around with the gun pointed level and ready to shoot sounds like a good way to shoot your wife/daughter/husband/son when they get up in the middle of the night to go to the bathroom. As a gun-owner for over 32 years, I’ve never accidentally shot anyone in my household over a midnight run to the toilet. Or fridge. Or for coming home late. Idiots keep trotting out this bullshit without the least bit of credible evidence that it’s any kind of danger at all (unless they happen to believe in Kellerman’s fallacious “43 times” fabrication") > [@Kimstu](#): > > 1. Hunting > 2. Sport shooting > 3. Self-defense > 4. Hobbyist collecting > 5. Just plain liking the dirty old things. > [@Least Original User Name Ever](#): > > Can we combine 1 and 2? > > In that matter, what about 4 and 5? > > Any pro gun person want to comment on any subtleties? Numer 2 is along the lines of competitive target shooting: Skeet and Trap, Cowboy Action Shooting, and Defensive Shooting (IPSC and IDPA). Number 4 is a more of a discriminating collector, looking for certain pieces of some intrinsic or (more often) historic value. Whereas number 5 is my uncle Rich; he buys anything and everything he can afford to lay his hands on, often for no other reason than it struck a momentary fancy. He often resells (or trades) to various members of his gun club or VFW post. **Generally:** the large caliber handgun has been and is being used as an effective hunting tool in North America for the better part of a century, now. Is it what _everyone_ buys one for? Dunno. I don’t know everyone that’s bought one. Theories abound, from debunked pseudo-Freudian/proto-Feminist psychobabble, to terrorists shooting down airplanes, to people who like to own novel machinery. And anyone who thinks the .500 S&W is an effective elephant gun had better not pack one on a safari, 'cause after the first shot, your dumb ass is gonna be primordial primate goo stuck between one pissed off elephant’s toes. More likely, though, is that either your guide will boot you from the safari (for being an idiot), or your fellow hunters will shoot you themselves, 'less you gross stupidity get them killed. As a backup weapon on safari, I’d imagine it’d do just fine. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-giant-hand-cannon-revolvers-practical-guns-or-macho-novelties/355667.md?page=5)