The Power of One

I don't know about you, but I am monumentally tired of talking about gloom and doom and terror on every side.  Let's talk about something more entertaining:  the Tactical Single-Shot.  It sounds as silly as Rambo's tactical compound bow, which might be a subject for another time. 

Why would anyone choose a single-shot firearm?  Are there inherent advantages to a single-shot?  Obviously the speed and convenience of a follow-up shot is a disadvantage.  Does anything compensate for that deficiency?

A single-shot is often used by beginning shooters primarily as a safety consideration.  A loaded single-shot is no more safe than a loaded semi-auto — that is, with a round chambered.  The difference is that the beginner is in less danger of inadvertently chambering a round.  The shooter cannot simply cycle the action but must consciously and manually place the cartridge into the chamber. 

One alleged advantage that I used to hear — back in the olden days of the 1950s and 1960s, was that the single-shot is more accurate.  This is mostly mythology based somewhat on the relative hunting accuracy of a tubular magazine lever-action repeaters versus the heavy, stiff falling block and rolling block actions of the late blackpowder cartridge era.  Barrel harmonics are kind of mysterious to most of us.  I could get the point of impact to change on one rifle I had based on how tightly I pulled the sling.  Could heavy bullets in a full, under-barrel tube attached by a metal band near the muzzle possibly have an effect on the vibration of the barrel?  It seems reasonable to think that the movement of the barrel might be slightly altered as rounds are removed from the magazine, shot by shot.  I don't think there is much difference in accuracy for most of us between a modern bolt-action with a box magazine and a modern bolt-action single-shot, though benchrest rifles do tend to be the latter.

Inherent mechanical accuracy aside, then, some will say that a single-shot forces the shooter to be better, or at least more careful.  I suppose that might be true for some.  Personally, I have never noticed a difference in hunting.  I was always taught to make the first shot count anyway, while blazing away and wasting expensive ammunition was frowned upon if not outright ridiculed.  I rarely take a second shot unless I have wounded an animal.  On deer I can recall one time where I made a clean miss on my first shot and fired again.  Another time, I made a poor decision in shooting the first time and had to quickly fire two more rounds to bring the deer to a humane end.  Other than that, I am pretty much a "one shot, deer" person, not because I am any better than a mediocre shot but because I generally keep the range short and don't take chances.  The deer I wounded was going away from me at an acute angle, and I never should have pulled the trigger.  That was forty years ago, and I haven't made the same mistake since. 

By what I have said so far it might be assumed that I am not a big single-shot fan, but that would be a wrong assumption.  I love single-shots whether shotguns, rifles, or handguns.  I like the simplicity and versatility of break-opens like the Thompson-Center and the H&R that allow a convenient change of calibers and barrel configurations.  I like the ease of cleaning and maintenance.  I appreciate the beauty and romance of rifles like the Ruger No. 1 and Winchester High Walls and Low Walls.  I enjoy the challenge of the single-shot while relishing its utter reliability.  Almost nothing can go wrong with a one-holer.  It's like an outhouse.  What could be simpler?  Even an inexpensive break-open like the H&R is virtually indestructible. 

Now just as apparent as the attraction of the single barrel is the fact that there is no magazine.  Does that mean that the prudent person, looking to defend hearth and home — as opposed to hunting, should avoid single-shots and stick with rapid-firing repeaters?  That depends.

As I have said before, the most critical weapon for home defense is a centerfire handgun.  This should not be a Contender but a revolver or autoloader.  This is your weapon of choice when caught by surprise or when you are least expecting trouble.  It is the one you should always have close at hand — preferably attached to your person whenever legally and physically possible.  Higher capacity, rapidity of firing, and speed of reloading are important considerations in close-range, hostile social situations. 

The same it true with regard to shotguns and rifles to be used for home defense.  You might be able to get by with a break-open single-barrel shotgun, as long as it has an ejector, but a double would be much better and a higher-capacity pump or semi-auto better still.  For rifles, short, maneuverable autoloading, pump, or lever-action carbines are probably the best choices, although a bolt-action like the classic British Enfield would certainly do in a pinch. 

But that does not mean the single-shot has nothing to contribute.  I have an H&R Handi-Rifle in .223 that is indeed handy.  Not only is it convenient to throw in the truck, it is safe and accurate and makes a fine little ranch rifle when dealing with varmints and pests.  Note, too, that it is chambered for quite a ubiquitous round.  It would make a great back up for someone with an AR-type weapon, for example, in the same chambering.  Similarly, an inexpensive single-shot chambered for the .44 or .357 magnum would be a good companion weapon for anyone with a revolver of the same caliber.

Being able to quickly change barrels and chamberings allows the prudent shooter to adjust to changing circumstances, such as ammunition availability.  Mechanical things break.  Accidents happen.  Having a cheap way to keep shooting, even if it is only one bullet at a time, is a wise thing to consider. 

Versatility, redundancy, simplicity, reliability, convenience, safety, size, and, yes, even romance are all reasons to consider adding a single-shot — or two, to the rack.