|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
Tested: Walther CCP M2 Pistol
Submitted by:
David Williamson
Website: http://libertyparkpress.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Walther created the modern, semi-automatic, concealed handgun market with the introduction of its model PP (Polizeipistole) in 1929, followed one year later by the classic PPK. In 2014, the company updated the concept with the introduction of its “Concealed Carry Pistol” or CCP. The result falls in size right between the smallest of single-stacks and the mid-size double-stack 9 mm Lugers, making it well-suited for inside-the-waistband or shoulder-holster carry. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(8/28/2019)
|
I'm sure it's a superb gun, but personally, the farthest I'm willing to go aesthetically is the Glock.
All these beveled slides and superfluous forward cocking grooves, to me at least, are OOGLY.
Gimme a pistol that looks at least grudgingly similar to a 1911.
I make an emphatic exception for the Beretta 92 series.
Lemme tell ya, out-of-the-box that gun shoots RIGHT where you point it, points naturally viz grip-to-barrel angle, and the double/single action trigger is pretty damn good. The single action is crisp and perfect.
TEE |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.' The right of the whole people, old and young, men, women and boys, and not militia only, to keep and bear arms of every description, and not such merely as are used by the militia, shall not be infringed, curtailed, or broken in upon, in the smallest degree; and all this for the important end to be attained: the rearing up and qualifying a well-regulated militia, so vitally necessary to the security of a free State. Our opinion is that any law, State or Federal, is repugnant to the Constitution, and void, which contravenes this right. [Nunn vs. State, 1 Ga. (1 Kel.) 243, at 251 (1846)] |
|
|
