I should ask Breda to post the same question. She gets better foot traffic and people love her. Unlike me, who lives on the blog equivalent of a dead-end dirt road with a washed out bridge slowing traffic, and people throw garbage at me to drive me away. (note to person who threw the pork chop bones: THANKS! There was still a bit of meat on a few of those! Maybe someone DOES love me.)
But Comments wasn’t my only input. I asked around the secret cabal of target shooters at work, and some of the Romero guys I could talk to had opinions.
So, the vote had a ratio of 3 to 1 against getting rid of a gun to get another. Despite my desire to get rid of one ammo type in the inventory (.380) and add another on (.40) as part of at least standing pat on my ammo-inventory philosophy. The best argument was this: In 15 years are you going to wish you still had the Colt, or in 5 years are you going to look at the Sig and say “Gee, I wish I had bought this 3 months sooner…”
The 1903 Colt pistol is still more practical than the Springfield 03 rifle, and I’d never dream of getting rid of that. For both sentimental and historical reasons. And it doesn’t fit in with the simplified ammo inventory philosophy.
And I was enamored with the 1903 less than a YEAR ago. I should give it a chance to grow on me. The reasons I got it are just as valued to me now. It’s still a great gun, designed by Browning, and would be the gun to grab now, if I had CCW, and was leaving the house in a wardrobe that prevented other options. In other words, a few times a year, tops. And in that role it would be just fine. If I MUST sell it, I should let it appreciate in value, at any rate.
[update: So now, thanks to Breda the consensus is in. Overwhelmingly so. Keep the Colt, even if impractical. And, Earl? I live in Maryland. They only give regular people a CCW here if you have powder burns to show the cop because some miscreant missed you that first time.]