Mail Call

Ridiculous Letters

After reading my last copy of American Handgunner, I just had to write and express my views on what I consider ridiculous letters that some of your readers write. I am 71-years-old and have never written to any magazine. This probably will not get printed in your "Speak Out" column, but here goes anyway.

I am writing in response to the brief letter where R.A. Peene makes the statement that .45s are great for driving nails. I am a Retired Special Agent who used to work Chicago, Indianapolis, Gary and other tough towns. I have been in more than one gunfight and have been shot twice, however, I am still walking around.

I carried a gun mast of my life and I always carried a .45 and owe my life to that fact. I was at one time a registered NRA, Master bullseye pistol shooter. I could go on and elaborate more on this, but I think you get the point. I have never come out second best in a gunfight.

When I read Peene's statement I wondered how many gunfights he has been involved in where he faced a .45 with his .357.

To put it bluntly, Peene doesn't know what the hell he's talking about.

Fred D. Justice

Rocky Ford, Colo.

Hackathorn Was Right

With all due respect to John Treaster, who wrote in the Nov/Dec "Speak Out" that the Glock 19 was more reliable than the Beretta M92, he was wrong.

Ken Hackathorn was simply pointing out what extensive research by civilian, military and law enforcement agencies have already confirmed. If you want the most reliable semiauto handgun, you get a Beretta M92.

Before Treaster or anyone else labels me as just another M92 fan, let me state that I carry a 1911 Colt Commander that will be 30 years old in the year 2000. I have never owned a Beretta M92.

Glocks are excellent choices and probably the best choice for Treaster since he has had practically no problems.

I do, however, know what research on handgun reliability has discovered. Hackathorn was right.

Jay Merkley

College Station, Texas

Strike Two

I have always disliked the Glock as a tactical weapon because it has no second strike capability. It is not a true "double-action." I have to agree with Ken Hackathorn on the reliability of the Beretta, and it does have a second strike capability, and a real safety.

Neither pistol is as effective or reliable as the new 1911s, however.

Lamar Johnson

Portland, Ore.

Happy With Taurus

I recently had a problem with a Taurus revolver I had purchased. I sent a letter inquiring how to go about getting the problem resolved.

About one week later, to my surprise, Carlos Murgel, president of Taurus International called me at home. This gentleman was a pleasure to converse with. I found him intelligent, witty and concerned about his company's product. He set up the return of my gun and assured me of my complete satisfaction upon its return. True to his word, my gun was returned functioning perfectly.

I was more pleased that a man of his position would take time to correct problems, and see that his customers are satisfied with their purchases. My thanks again to Mr. Murgel.

Norman Kenneway

Lake Worth, Fla.

Unhappy With Beretta

I would like to respond to the letter by Richard Zeller, discussing Beretta's failure to stand behind their products. I had a similar finding. In my case, I special-ordered a Beretta side-by-side shotgun in Europe. After importing it, I found the barrels were not regulated. The left barrel shot high and to the left.

I contacted Beretta USA, and they had me ship it to them. They charged me $35, but shipped it back untouched. I then wrote to Beretta in Italy. They wrote and asked me what type of ammunition I used. I wrote back and told them. That was the last communication I received. Repeated follow-up communication attempts have been ignored. Like Zeller, I will no longer purchase anything of Beretta manufacture.

David Price

Las Cruces, N.M.

Slobbering M9

I've checked and rechecked the "Industry Insider" column and didn't see any mention of American Handgunner being bought out by Beretta, so I hope you guys enjoy the shiny new Berettas that I assume were given to all of the American Handgunner staff. Three pages of slobbering over the M9? Give me a break!

Maximum458@aol.com

We Meant Pansies

In the item "Cogito Ergo Sum" of the "Industry Insider (Sept/Oct '99) issue, Cameron Hopkins uses the word "pussies" to describe "Americans... by and large." In the context of the article, his point is well taken, however, his language is not.

Referring to spineless people as female genitalia whose only purpose is to satisfy the banal desires of more aggressive members of the society may be a good analogy, but it is also very crass. The same point could be made without vulgarity.

This is not a question of political correctness, but rather common courtesy. It is of interest that this appears in the same issue in which you address a similar faux paus in the use of the word "squaw."

Come on guys, yours is one of the best gun magazines out there, if not the best. One of the reasons I read American Handgunner is the high standard the magazine adheres to. This magazine appears to be the product of the efforts of a very professional group of people. Language such as this falls below the bar of such a publication.