Does it throw well?

Should throw well, but only at short range--depending on one's arm strength. The ballistics won't be great, but the weight of the gun should compensate somewhat for that.

Which brings up the question as to whether a lightweight gun thrown faster is better than a heavier gun thrown more slowly.

Hung it on the coathook ????????????? Then, I assume, sat down. The handgun is now beyond his reach, effectively putting it out of his control. Retention.........nah.... no worry, nothing has ever been stolen or any crimes committed in a public restroom.

Which reminds me of something I read on some forum. Superman stands stoically letting bullets bounce of of his chest, and then ducks when a bad guy throws an empty gun at him.

GOOD MEMORY!!!

That's because it was probably a gun like this:

You bring up a fine point well worth endless debate I am going to take the position that a lighter gun, thrown faster, will be more effective for stopping an attack than a heavier gun thrown slower.

I suppose this should fall into the Free Fire Forum, but discussion of effectiveness of weights of guns to throw is certainly Stupid Stuff. Still, I wonder how ballistically effective my Glock would be as opposed to my 686 6 inch barrel or my Beretta Neos. Would the Neos throw better without the red dot on it?

Someone else will have to do the math. I work for the government and have no brain whatsoever.

OD...having seen your Neos, I think it is safe to say that it will be tumbling as it leaves your hand, making it somewhat less accurate and effective. Your Glock should fly true without incident. The 686 likely has an internal lock that prevents throwing.

The Neos would be more aerodynamic. You would probably get a nice boomerang-type effect.