# First Gun/EDC/PD purchase.



## rterrhalt (Jan 7, 2017)

Hey there, folks. Sorry in advance, but for the sake of providing (what I think to be) relevant info, this is gonna be long.

As the title said, I kind of have a lot wrapped up in this first decision. At the risk of boring you all to death, I'd like to give you some background so you know where I'm coming from.

I have been terrified of guns for most of my life. I had a bad experience around one when I was younger, and my folks all but convinced me they were evil.

As I got older, I figured that the best way to get rid of this fear would be to learn about them. Knowledge is power, power mitigates fear. So i go to the internet and accrue a modest knowledge of some guns over the years.

Flash forward to today. I'm going on 22 (perhaps a bit young for guns still, but that's for another time), and have a much better idea of how the world works compared to the kid version of me. I live in Arizona, near the border. If anyone bothers to find Bisbee on a map, I'm near there. Should get an idea of just how close I am.

Suffice it to say there have been more than a few incidents near my home that have pushed me to consider buying a firearm. So I went back to my research.

Now to the meat of it all: This will be the first gun I ever purchase. I intend for it to be an everyday carry (EDC) weapon, a personal defense (PD) weapon, and I want it to be rather easy to conceal. Before anyone gets concerned, I have already requested my fingerprint kit for the concealed carry lisence and will be retaking a gun safety course (for the third time) along side it.

I am pretty sure I want a revolver. My research has led me to believe that they are a good choice not just for people who are completely new to guns, but who want a good personal defense weapon. Less parts when field stripping, less maintenance, easier to clean, don't have to keep sights calibrated as often as with a semi auto, don't have to worry about a safety, the list goes on.

However, of all the things scaring me about guns, recoil is by far the most significant. I don't want the thing flying out of my hands and hurting anyone other than who or whatever i may need to defend myself against. 

This desire for reduced/better managed recoil led me to the firearm i was considering purchasing, the Chiappa Rhino. I plan to see if I can test-fire one before I purchase as I am told it operates much differently from standard revolvers, but it still seems a safe choice.

As this will be for personal defense, my choice was migrating towards the 2", snubnosed variation. But as I looked closer I noticed a new problem I had never considered: what caliber should it fire?

As can be seen in the chart on their website along with other gun specs (site wouldn't let me post a link. Sorry!), they offer the firearm in a variety of calibers. The specific ones available are .357mag/.38 special, .40S&W, 9x19, 9x21, and a package that seems to have 2 cylinders for both .357mag/.38 and 9mm.

My main question is concerning the caliber. Which should I consider? Which will work best for the purpose of self defense/everyday carry?

But beyond that, I realize I'm a pilgrim in foreign lands. I only have knowledge from numbers and paper. No experience. So my seconday question is more opinion-based. Am I going the wrong direction for my intentions? Should I be looking at completely different types of guns or calibers? 

If you took the time to read this far, first, thank you. Second, any and all input will do me good. Please let me know if I'm on the right track, or I need to look into something else.


----------



## Bisley (Aug 24, 2008)

If you can't go to a range and get some fundamental instruction and test a few handguns, I would recommend buying either a Ruger GP-100 or a Smith & Wesson of about the same size in .357 magnum. This will allow you to start out with .38 Special ammo that will have a very moderate recoil, and move up to the man-stopping .357 ammo at some later time. Above all, buy a good set of earmuffs and use glasses of some sort. Recoil is mostly myth, except in large magnums. The noise and shock wave give the perception of a huge explosion that makes inexperienced shooters flinch and cringe and never hit where they aim. If you watch videos of people shooting powerful pistols, you will discover that when a proper grip is used, recoil is no big deal.

Mainly, get your feet wet and start shooting, once you have mastered some basic safety. An experienced shooter can have you hitting tin cans in a few hours, by helping you to desensitize yourself to recoil, grip the gun well, and press the trigger straight back with a good follow-through. There is no one perfect gun for everything, but a 4" revolver or a mid-sized semi-auto is a good starting place. Practice, practice, practice.


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

Firstly, welcome aboard. We’re pleased to have you with us. And a nice first post. Now if I may I’ll start with dispelling a few myths.

Twenty-two is by no means too young to start a life of being with the gun, although I also began this voyage at 22 myself (I’ll be 71 this month). I’ve been mentoring a teenage boy who lives across the street for several years now. It does appear that you’re beginning things correctly; i.e., you’re taking the time and making the effort as much as you can, under your circumstances, to learn about firearms before jumping in and buying one. I did the same thing.

I wouldn't rule out a semi-auto pistol. I would keep my options completely open on the choice of a handgun for self-defense. Both types have their advantages and disadvantages. Revolvers are inherently safe and virtually fool proof; especially the ones of high quality. But that's pretty much also true with semi-autos. The primary advantages of semi-autos are capacity, rapid reloading, and generally better accuracy. The increased accuracy comes from the fact that the gun doesn't have a tendency of moving much between shots which makes recovery of target acquisition better.

And some semi's are easier to clean than revolvers (Glock comes to mind). As for more frequent sight calibration, I have never heard of this nor have I done it. All of my carry semi's have fixed sights and once they are on center, that's it. They don't get touched. As for worrying about a safety, the most popular semi's don't have externally settable safeties, so that's a non-issue. One of my carry semi's does have a settable safety but when carried, it is always in the off position.

Revolvers are wonderful guns and a quality revolver will serve you well. I would go with what Bisley wrote in his response and pick one of the revolvers he suggested. They have a proven track record and are reliable to a fault. Should you pick a semi-auto, the choices are huge. Just pick quality... of course, that holds with whichever one you choose.

Good luck in your quest and do keep us informed.


----------



## rustygun (Apr 8, 2013)

I would encourage you to find a range where you can shoot different types of guns and get some instruction.


----------



## tony pasley (May 6, 2006)

Safety FIRST find basic hand gun course and take it. Ask a local Law Enforcement about learning, rural areas they will often teach you themselves. Revolvers take much less time to learn than semi-automatics. A good .357 mag. with 4" barrel is about the best general purpose handgun. As was said before you can shoot .38 spl. to practice with little recoil and work your was up to full loads. Internet can give you some good info. but it can also give you very bad info. Learn the state and local laws concerning firearms and self-defense. The journey you are starting on will be a life long learning experience enjoy and good luck.


----------



## pblanc (Mar 3, 2015)

Going from a fear of guns to every day carry of a handgun is a rather enormous leap. Sort of like a person who has always been terrified of the water enlisting to become a Navy SEAL. I think you need to have some in between. There is only so much you can learn from reading, researching the internet, or listening to gun owners, either on this forum or elsewhere. You might research what is the greatest pair of shoes in the world, but if they turn out not to fit you, they are of no use whatsoever.

As has been said, try to get some hands-on experience before you decide on what type of handgun, chambered in what caliber, is best for you. You simply don't have any real basis to make a decision as yet. SouthernBoy has pointed out a number of misstatements in your post. For example, that there are plenty of auto-loader pistols that do not have an external safety, and that revolvers are easier to clean. Most modern auto-loaders are quite easy to field strip, and after you have done so, you have only a barrel to clean and mop out. With a revolver you have not only the barrel, but five or six (or more) chambers in the cylinder to clean. As for sights, be aware that different handguns are going to have a different sight picture and may require a very different "hold" in order to be able to hit what you want to hit. That sight picture will vary with range. Different calibers will have different trajectories and even different projectile weights in the same caliber (the number of "bullet grains"), might alter the sight picture a bit. This does not matter a whole lot at the typical range a handgun is shot in a self-defense situation, which is typically under 15 yards and sometimes very close. And relatively few handguns intended for self-defense have adjustable sights. Basically, you will learn the sight picture required for your gun with your ammunition at the ranges you are most likely to need it for self-defense, and adjust the "hold" as necessary.

Revolvers are typically not the most easily concealed weapons due to the thickness of the cylinder. Auto-loaders are certainly more prone to "user error" than are revolvers. These include things like not properly seating the magazine, not remembering to chamber a round, or worse, not remembering that a round is chambered, not remembering to take the safety off if the pistol has one, or not remembering to decock a DA/SA pistol before re-holstering. Moreover, auto-loaders can be less tolerant of different ammunition than revolvers. Some hollow points will not feed reliably in some pistols, and some under-powered loads may fail to cycle the slide with sufficient energy to reliably eject a spent cartridge and chamber a new one. Having said that, there are many modern auto-loading pistols that have an excellent reliability record. But if you choose an auto-loader you will need to spend some time training yourself how to deal with failures to feed, stovepipe jams, double-feeds, etc.

As for recoil management, this is something that can confound any new shooter. This is an area where some hands-on instruction or supervision can be really helpful. A knowledgeable instructor or mentor can help you out with the fundamentals of grip, stance, sight alignment, and most importantly trigger control. If you can borrow a .22 caliber pistol or revolver or even an air pistol, it might help you work out the mechanics of the trigger pull in a handgun that does not have a very loud report or much recoil. The most common pistol calibers for self-defense are .380 auto, 9 mm Luger, .40 S&W, and .45 ACP although there are quite a few others. The most common revolver calibers for self-defense are 38 Special and 357 Magnum. These calibers have very different recoil characteristics and these characteristics vary greatly with the size and weight of the weapon. In general IME the easiest to shoot apart from .22 long rifle are 9mm Luger and 38 Special. Some people like .380 auto but many pistols chambered in this caliber are quite small with stiff recoil springs that can make them unpleasant to shoot.

I have been shooting for many years, and regularly shoot all of the above calibers (except .380 auto) and a few other handgun calibers as well, and I can tell you that I am not particularly fond of shooting a whole bunch of 357 Magnum even out of my full-sized Ruger GP100 revolver. Shot out of a compact, easily concealed revolver, 357 Magnum can be quite punishing. Remember that even though you are unlikely to need to fire many shots in a self-defense scenario, you need to be able to shoot whatever handgun you choose enough to gain and maintain proficiency with it.

So try to find some folks locally who can give you the opportunity to try out some different handguns of different sizes, chambered in different calibers before you decide on anything. Check out local ranges that might have instruction available and a variety of rental handguns to try out. If you have not already done so, research the different handgun trigger mechanisms that exist: striker-action, hammer-fired single action only (SA), double action only (DAO), or traditional double action (DA/SA). The majority of revolvers used for self-defense are double action which means that they can be shot DA without cocking the hammer through a long, relatively heavy trigger pull, or SA with the hammer cocked with a much lighter, shorter trigger pull. Realize that in a self-defense scenario, such a pistol will almost certainly need to be shot double action so you will need to be sure you can master that longer, heavier pull. DA/SA auto-loader pistols automatically cock the hammer after the first long, heavy DA pull so that all subsequent shots are SA, but with those you still need to master that longer, heavier DA first pull as well as the transition from the DA to SA pull.

Make sure you have good eye and ear protection before you go shooting. Consider a pair of electronic ear muffs. If you have an instructor or mentor along coaching you, these will allow you to hear their instructions while still deadening the gun's report. I have a couple pairs of these and they have been excellent:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B001T7QJ9O/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o02_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1


----------



## TAPnRACK (Jan 30, 2013)

Lot of good advice so far, but I'll throw my 2 cents in anyway since this is a discussion forum.

Finding a holster for a Chiappa Rhino will be difficult, so consider that when choosing a handgun. I honestly find semiautomatic pistols to be easier to shoot well, clean and find accessories/parts for than revolvers. Most have safety options so that levels out the playing field... and the higher capacity of a semi-auto makes them a great choice for carry or home defense. So many models to choose from and many carry options due to holster variety of popular semi-autos. 

Sights can easily be changed or upgraded on most semi-auto pistols as well... and there is no need for adjusting or maintenence on sights as long as you're not dropping or throwing your gun. 

Did I mention cleaning almost any semi-auto pistol is easier and less time consuming than scrubbing burnt powder off a cylinder and frame of a revolver. I rarely shoot my beloved stainless Ruger GP 100 Talo WC because it's such a pain in the @$$ to clean. It's a show piece now. 

Anyway... as a newer shooters that will be taking classes and learning from instructors, I suggest the semi-auto pistol... very few people go to training classes using a revolver since round count is high (300 rds average) and constantly stopping to reload will frustrate you. I have some experience in these matters and whole heartedly believe in compact or full size semi-auto pistols for beginners over learning on a snubby revolver or full size revolver. Both are reliable and you can always get a revolver down the road to scratch that itch (like I did). 

Lots of Internet advice says a snubby is the best beginner pistol and the best choice for females... I couldn't disagree more and have found this NOT to be the case while training hundreds of new and advanced shooters.

As to which semi-auto... that is a discussion all it's own... and there are as many threads on the topic as opinions, lol. 

Pick what feels good to you and buy the best you can afford is my quick advice on the matter.


Good luck in your journey and keep asking questions.


----------



## desertman (Aug 29, 2013)

Sounds like you're on the right track taking those courses and applying for a concealed weapons permit. Which as you know is not required in Arizona. You'll learn a lot from those courses and of different types of handguns. Unless they are fired in single action where you have to first cock the hammer, revolvers tend to have longer heavier trigger pulls when fired in double action. Making them more difficult to shoot accurately. I've never fired or owned a Chiappa Rhino so I can't help there. From what I know they might be too large for concealment. Especially in the summer. In which case you may want to look at semi auto's. 

For someone who's new to handguns and at one time was terrified of them a 9mm semi auto would be a good caliber and handgun to start off with. Semi auto's in this caliber come in all shapes and sizes giving you a wide variety to choose from. It's up to you to pick one that you feel is just right for the purposes you've described. But whatever you do buy one from a reputable manufacturer. Sig, Glock, S&W, Ruger, Beretta etc. Stay away from Taurus. There have been too many complaints about them when compared to other manufacturers.


----------



## pblanc (Mar 3, 2015)

I tend to agree with TAPnRack, although many will disagree, some rather vehemently. In my experience, most new handgun shooters learn to put shots on target more quickly with an auto-loading pistol than a double action, or double action only revolver.

The very easiest auto-loader to shoot well may be a single action pistol such as the model 1911 "Colt 45". These pistols have a consistent trigger pull that tends to be very crisp and predictable. But I personally don't feel they are the best choice for the new shooter interested in self-defense, especially EDC. In order to be effective in that role, they need to be carried with a round chambered, the hammer cocked, and the safety lever locked. Using them quickly and effectively requires absolute mastery of the thumb safety.

Double action revolvers, or double action only hammer-fired revolvers and pistols can be excellent and safe choices for the new shooter, but they require mastery of that long, and usually heavier trigger pull. Keeping the sights aligned without disturbing the sight alignment is hard enough with a shorter, lighter trigger pull. It is harder still with a longer heavier pull. I see lots of people with double action revolvers who never shoot them in double action. They always cock the hammer. That type of training is completely useless if such a handgun is going to be used for self-defense.

Striker-action pistols like Glocks (there are many other choices in this category these days) have a consistent trigger pull that is typically shorter and lighter than the DA pull of a revolver or DA/SA pistol. They also typically lack external safeties, although there are exceptions. These characteristics make them relatively easy for new shooters to learn on. Some feel that the lighter, shorter trigger pull and lack of a safety make them less safe for the relatively less-experienced shooter to carry, but many disagree. Ultimately, you need to decide what is best and safest to use.

Remember that the majority of us in civilian life will probably not be required to fire our handguns in self-defense. But there is some risk of a negligent discharge every time you handle and carry your gun. So you do want a gun that you feel you can use quickly and accurately, but you also need to be confident that you will not accidentally shoot yourself or someone else with it.


----------



## Craigh (Jul 29, 2016)

Everyone here has given you good advice, so I'll just toss in some of my own. One thing is you've taken basic safety courses and have signed up for more. Good, but I'd also sign up for a basic defense or shooting course once you have your first handgun. It should teach you the three fundamentals like grip, trigger control and sight picture, in that order. You're then going to practice those to a fault at home and the range. At home will be with a double (make the triple) checked empty gun and still only pointing that empty gun in a safe direction. 

As others have said, felt recoil in a handgun is usually caused by the noise and surprise. Think how you jump if someone yells Boo as you're walking down a dim hallway. You jump. Natural reaction. Consider Newton's Laws of equal and opposite reaction. Your felt recoil against a somewhat heavy gun and your arm can be no greater than that little lead bullet going the other direction multiplied by it's speed. It's just not much, to be honest and once you get used to it, it's just about nothing. It's the sound, mostly, even through ear protection. When I fire a really hot load in an indoor range, I can feel the concussion and vibration in my knees, but the push or recoil isn't beans. As we said, start with 38 Special in a not too small handgun.

I also agree with others, and would not suggest the Rhino. Nobody helping you will have ever used one or will be used to it's unique, to say the least, grip style. I've shot one and will admit, I'd have a hard time getting used to its double action trigger pull. It's not bad, just different. Same with the grip. It doesn't provide less recoil, just a different recoil impulse. You can't cheat physics (equal and opposite reaction) just because you're firing from the bottom of the cylinder rather than the top. I'm not sure how well they hold their value, but I believe they'd be hard to sell whereas with Smith and Wesson or even Ruger, you can't really lose much if you decide later to change your choice. If you turn out like most of us, you'll end up with a plethora of guns eventually and treasure a Smith and Wesson to the end of your days. Also, trying to find grips, holsters and other accessories will be much harder with a Chiappa Rhino not to mention they are down right homely. ;-)

I'd probably suggest starting off with a Smith and Wesson Model 66 with a 4.24 inch barrel to learn with, shooting 38 Special. Being a K Frame model, it's smaller than most 357 Magnums. I understand that barrel is longer than you might consider for carry, but I promise, as a gun to learn with, you don't want a snub nose model by any way shape or means. Period. Moreover, a 4 inch barreled revolver with a good holster is not hard to conceal. Once you're coming close to mastering all this, you might consider the revolver as your home defensive gun and invest in something like an S&W M&P 9mm Shield for EDC. That's my EDC and can attest to its benefits. I just wouldn't suggest one to learn with. I also would not consider a revolver chambered for a semi-auto cartridge like 9mm, 40 S&W or 45 ACP. If you want to know why, I can give a long winded answer because I'd have to explain a lot up front, like head space, rimmed, etc. My carry gun, off and on, for many years was the blue version of this stainless Model 66. It was the Model 19, one of the most popular handguns ever made, carried by law enforcement and civilians alike. I don't think you can go wrong with it.


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

rustygun said:


> I would encourage you to find a range where you can shoot different types of guns and get some instruction.


Good advice!
Don't make your final choice until you've tried several different guns, while being supervised and instructed in "painless" shooting technique.



TAPnRACK said:


> ...Lots of Internet advice says a snubby is the best beginner pistol and the best choice for females... I couldn't disagree more and have found this NOT to be the case while training hundreds of new and advanced shooters...


Exactly!
Small and short-barrel pistols are experts' tools. They are very hard to control, and making accurate hits with them is extremely difficult. They recoil in uncomfortable ways, while you are limited by how few of your fingers fit on them to hold them.
Beginners should never try to use a small pistol, either to learn with or for self defense. It would be a self-defeating exercise.



pblanc said:


> ...The very easiest auto-loader to shoot well may be a single action pistol such as the model 1911 "Colt 45". These pistols have a consistent trigger pull that tends to be very crisp and predictable.


I strongly agree.
The 1911 is an excellent beginner's pistol for the reasons stated; and also because, if it's a full-size, full-weight 1911, its recoil is very mild (compared to other effective self-defense weapons).
Also, its safety mechanism is helpful in teaching gun safety and the related, necessary, safety-assuring thought processes.



pblanc said:


> ...But I personally don't feel they [the 1911s] are the best choice for the new shooter interested in self-defense, especially EDC. In order to be effective in that role, they need to be carried with a round chambered, the hammer cocked, and the safety lever locked. Using them quickly and effectively requires absolute mastery of the thumb safety...


This is also true.
I have changed my own thinking in this matter somewhat, and I now suggest that a beginner may best be served by a no-safety, double-action-only (DAO) pistol with a light trigger-pull "weight."
The guns which come immediately to mind include the Glock, the Springfield, the S&W, and maybe also the Ruger American. The bad part of these alternatives is that they are all relatively lightweight, and therefore do not help a beginner to learn recoil control. Quite the opposite, actually.
(Also, avoid all Taurus guns. While some of them are very good values, the Taurus factory has terrible quality control, so the chance of being sold a "lemon" is quite high.)


----------



## pblanc (Mar 3, 2015)

Steve M1911A1 said:


> I have changed my own thinking in this matter somewhat, and I now suggest that a beginner may best be served by a no-safety, double-action-only (DAO) pistol with a light trigger-pull "weight."
> The guns which come immediately to mind include the Glock, the Springfield, the S&W, and maybe also the Ruger American. The bad part of these alternatives is that they are all relatively lightweight, and therefore do not help a beginner to learn recoil control. Quite the opposite, actually.
> (Also, avoid all Taurus guns. While some of them are very good values, the Taurus factory has terrible quality control, so the chance of being sold a "lemon" is quite high.)


Although many striker-action pistols call themselves "DAO" and have been categorized as such by the BATF, the trigger action on most of them is very unlike that of a double action only hammer-fired pistol or a double action revolver. The trigger pull on most "DAO" striker-fires is considerable shorter and often much lighter, which can make them easier to shoot, but possibly more prone to accidental or premature discharge.

An exception, and a striker-action pistol that might be worth taking a look at down the road is the Kahr. The trigger pull on Kahrs is much more akin to that of a DAO hammer-fired handgun. It is relatively long but quite smooth (usually) and has a pull weight that is intermediate between many striker-action pistols and that of a DAO hammer-fired gun. Kahr has some easily concealed models that are still pretty easy to shoot when chambered in 9mm Luger, and if you should decide that you want an external safety, Kahr has some MA compliant models that have them.


----------



## Cait43 (Apr 4, 2013)

rterrhalt said:


> This desire for reduced/better managed recoil led me to the firearm i was considering purchasing, the Chiappa Rhino. I plan to see if I can test-fire one before I purchase as I am told it operates much differently from standard revolvers, but it still seems a safe choice.


Welcome to the forum.........

I have a Rhino -- It has a 3lb single action and a 10 lb double action trigger pull.. Should loosen up a bit after putting some rounds through it. It is concealable but as mentioned hard to find a holster for them except the 5 and 6 inch models. Gripping is a tad different that most revolvers but its less felt recoil/flip offsets the different grip style. Basically you need to keep your thumbs facing down.


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

rterrhalt said:


> ...i was considering purchasing, the Chiappa Rhino...I am told it operates much differently from standard revolvers...


The major problems with using revolvers for self defense are:
1. Small "magazine" capacity (as others have already noted), and
2. Relative mechanical complexity, and the possibility of "getting out of whack" after extensive use in practice shooting. (You are going to practice, aren't you?)

A further problem is then added by the Chiappa Rhino mechanism: It is more complex than any other revolver, and less accessible than the others as well.

Generally speaking, one should not purchase the first iteration of any new technology, since it will have "bugs" which will need to be worked out of it. The Chiappa Rhino has almost no "track record" to speak of.
Further, it may require a much modified shooting technique, with which the general run of instructors may be unfamiliar.
Finally, Chiappa is not known for its high-quality firearms. Most of their products are cheaply-made copies of popular guns. The Rhino _may_ break that mold; but then again, you're going to buy something to which you will be trusting your life and well-being.

I strongly suggest sticking with tried-and-proven, widely used and well understood mechanisms.
A beginner probably should not bet on unknown quantities.


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

pblanc said:


> Although many striker-action pistols call themselves "DAO" and have been categorized as such by the BATF, the trigger action on most of them is very unlike that of a double action only hammer-fired pistol or a double action revolver. The trigger pull on most "DAO" striker-fires is considerable shorter and often much lighter, which can make them easier to shoot, but possibly more prone to accidental or premature discharge.
> 
> An exception, and a striker-action pistol that might be worth taking a look at down the road is the Kahr. The trigger pull on Kahrs is much more akin to that of a DAO hammer-fired handgun. It is relatively long but quite smooth (usually) and has a pull weight that is intermediate between many striker-action pistols and that of a DAO hammer-fired gun. Kahr has some easily concealed models that are still pretty easy to shoot when chambered in 9mm Luger, and if you should decide that you want an external safety, Kahr has some MA compliant models that have them.


Trigger action designations always refer to the tasks the trigger performs. Nothing else comes into the picture. For example, I'll pick three DAO designs to explain this.

Glock. The Glock two stage trigger is classed by Glock and the AFT as a DAO trigger and in truth, it is. The trigger performs two tasks. 1) It completes the cocking of the striker prior to releasing it. 2) It releases the trigger to fire a cartridge. It can only do these two things. Granted it also disables the striker safety block while doing this but that action is not considered in describing the two primary actions of its trigger.

Kahr. Just like the Glock, the Kahr design completes the cocking of the striker as its first action, then releases that striger to fire a round. The difference between the Kahr and the Glock trigger is that with the Kahr, you do not distinctly feel the two stages because it feels much like the trigger action of a double action revolver. Incidentally, the Kahr trigger has a shorter travel than does the Glock trigger.

Kel-Tec P11. The classic Kel-Tec design's primary difference between it and striker fired pistols is the fact that Kel-Tec pistols make use of a hammer fired system. This offers one major departure from striker fired pistols in that the Kel-Tec has second strike capability. But it is still a true DAO pistol.

There are some hybrids of a sort in all of this with the most visible and highly popular one being the Smith and Wesson M&P series pistols. These pistols, though classed as DAO triggers are really of a SAO design. The trigger may feel like it is a two stage trigger but in fact, it is not. This is because the striker is held in a fully cocked position so all that the trigger on the M&P pistol does is to rotate the seesaw-designed sear to release the striker. However to call it a SAO design would infringe upon pistols such as the 1911's so I presume that is why it is "officially" classed as a DAO. But in truth, it is not.

Hope this helps.


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

Steve M1911A1 said:


> Further, it may require a much modified shooting technique, with which the general run of instructors may be unfamiliar.


This one factor could be disastrous in an "active shooter"* event. There is strong credence in commonality in such situations. Suppose something bad starts to go down and you don't have your gun with you (like last week's situation in the Ft. Lauderdale airport) and you suddenly find yourself going for a downed officer's sidearm with the perp(s) within your shooting frame. Unfamiliarity with that handgun could prove fatal. Incidences where a citizen had to use a downed LEO's sidearm to return fire or subdue a BG have happened.

* Personally I am not very fond of the term, "active shooter". But I will use it anyway to define a specific type of attack.


----------



## Bisley (Aug 24, 2008)

The OP stated that he wants a revolver, which makes sense for a beginner who has no mentor to help him. Rather than confuse him with stuff he might not yet be 'sophisticated' enough (yet) to fully appreciate, I think it may be better to help him accomplish his first hurdle - buying a gun and teaching himself not to fear it, and operating it in a safe and useful manner.

He didn't specify what training assets he has access to, so I'm just assuming that he is going to buy a handgun and go out into the desert and learn to shoot it. Lots of folks have learned this way, and a sensible person can learn to be safe and shoot pretty well with a few Internet tips and videos. If that isn't the case, and he can get some competent instruction, I'm all for a host of other options.


----------



## rterrhalt (Jan 7, 2017)

Jeez... well, this just got harder. Alright, let me go through one thing at a time here:

So after looking at all of this, it sounds like the Rhino probably won't be a good choice as a first gun due to weird firing mechanics/internals. And manufacturer reputation.

Secondly, someone was asking towards the training assets I had access to, and the answer is little to nothing. I was considering calling the local police department to see if they could help, but as it stands i don't have any friends/family who own or regularly use firearms. I'm on my own.

It's looking to be an even field on opinions between a semi-auto and a wheel gun, but it looks like most of you seem to be saying that a revolver is still a good idea as a starting point due to the relative simplicity.

And as to caliber, that still seems kind of up in the air. I was looking at more stuff, and i heard that .357 magnum is generally highly desired as a self defense round due to how it transfers energy to the target, how the bullet expands, and the fact that it shouldn't overpenetrate and put someone in danger. For those of you who had favorable words for semi-autos, what would be a comparable round for a semi-auto pistol?

And if it helps anyone else who answers, in addition to the other constraints I put on what I want this gun to do, i should mention that while this will be my first gun, i also would like it to be my last gun. I don't really want to get into guns all that much. I just want something for safety.

I know that it might be hard (if not impossible) to find a firearm that fits all the criteria I've put down, but I'd like to see what I can find. If anyone has any ideas of something that could fit the bill, i'm open to suggestions.


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

Pistol shooting is difficult to learn, and difficult to do. That's an inescapable fact. Also, it's a skill that must be maintained.
I suggest, therefore, that starting out with your eyes on a powerful cartridge, and a gun that uses it, may make your journey even more difficult.

A less-powerful cartridge will do a satisfactory self-defense job, _if you take the time and make the effort to become skilled with it_ and the gun which uses it.
The old saying is: Accuracy trumps ballistics, every time. If your shot hits the right place, it almost doesn't matter what bullet you shoot, or from what cartridge.

A heavier pistol can make a pretty-powerful cartridge much more comfortable to shoot. But a heavy pistol is hard to carry, especially all day long.
But remember that a heavier pistol makes learning to control recoil so much easier.

A single-action semi-automatic, for instance a M1911 Colt's Government Model (or one of its copies), boasts a trigger that makes learning trigger control easy.
But that gun also requires you to learn to use a separate safety lever, and is not really a good choice for daily carry by an inexperienced shooter.

In revolvers, only a double-action will be the right choice for self-protection, probably best in .38 Special (not the too-powerful .357 Magnum).
But the double-action revolver presents you with a trigger action that is extremely difficult to learn. Even with practice, you will not be an accurate shot.

You could use a milder revolver cartridge, for instance .32 Magnum, so that you aren't fighting difficult-to-control recoil.
But still you will be faced by a hard-to-learn trigger action that will make the pursuit of accuracy frustrating.

Thinking of all that, _my thoughts go to the Glock pistol, in .380 ACP_. If the Glock's grip fits your hand (and it doesn't fit everyone), you will find its trigger action fairly easy to learn to use well, and the .380 ACP cartridge will present you with an easy recoil impulse to control. The Glock is lightweight, too.
Since the .380 ACP cartridge is not very powerful, you will need to learn to be as accurate a shot (under pressure) as possible. Remember: Accuracy trumps power, every time.

(In my own old age, I have switched from carrying a very small .45 ACP semi-automatic, to a larger .380 ACP. It's because I now have trouble controlling a strong recoil impulse. However, I am confident of my ability to deliver accurate shots under pressure. All that requires is continuing practice, which I do.)

I find it difficult to believe that there are no instructors anywhere near you, or that there are no gun shops which will rent you time on various different pistols so that you can make an educated choice.
Any shop that will sell you a pistol will also be able to hook you up with someone who will give you at least basic instruction. You may even find someone who will do it for no cost (although I suggest that any instructor, even a free one, should be able to prove his or her qualifications).


----------



## TAPnRACK (Jan 30, 2013)

My advice on semi-auto pistol caliber would be a 9mm.... it is, imo, a perfect cartridge. Less recoil flip than a 40cal and less recoil than a .45 ACP... cheaper than both as well. Ballistics are close with modern ammunition... so the old school thought on "Bigger is better" is not as true as it once was thought to be.

Now, as towards makes/models? Lotta choices out there and this is where going to a gun shop and spending some time comes into play. Try several handguns and decide on a max budget you are comfortable spending... leaving money for ammo to train and self defense rounds and a holster. 

My personal recommendations that newer shooters seem to prefer and I have personal experience with are Glock 19, Kahr CW9, S&W M&P and Sig P320. Most are in the $450-550 range with the Kahr being a less expensive option at around $400. See what trigger feels like and pay attention to the sights that come on each model. Ask questions of the gun store employee and look at reviews online of various choices before going into the shop as it will make you a more informed shopper if the counter person is unfamiliar with your selections.


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

rterrhalt said:


> Jeez... well, this just got harder. Alright, let me go through one thing at a time here:
> 
> So after looking at all of this, it sounds like the Rhino probably won't be a good choice as a first gun due to weird firing mechanics/internals. And manufacturer reputation.
> 
> ...


The unfortunate thing about asking people for their opinions is the fact that those opinions are going to be heavily weighted with personal biases. This is to be expected and is largely based upon their own experiences and history, and what they would pick were they in your position. You've also added the idea that this may be y our last gun, which makes it even more important when one considers the scope of what that gun will be expected to satisfy. So with that said...

In a revolver, my choice would be the Ruger GP100 in the 4.2 inch barrel. You should know that the .357 Magnum produces a rather loud muzzle blast and does have what some would say, a rather strong felt recoil pulse. But that's the trade-off for a major, and proven, self-defense cartridge. Of course you can feed it .38 Special ammunition should that be your wont.

For the semi-auto choice, you mentioned that you wanted something in roughly the same power level of the .357 Magnum. That would put you in the 10mm category or a .40S&W loaded by some of the hot specialty companies such as Underwood, Double Tap, and Buffalo Bore. For me, I would suggest the Glock 19, Glock 23, and the Smith and Wesson M&P 9 and M&P 40. Again, these are my preferences for the purposes you mentioned. It is all I have to offer in that for me, the most important and critical factors in a defensive handgun in order of importance are...

1. Reliability. The gun must go bang when it is called upon to perform. If it fails to do this, the next two factors are moot.

2. Practical accuracy. This is the ability of the gun and the shooter combination to deliver rounds to target accurately, consistently, and confidently. If there is a problem with this, the last factor is a lost issue.

3. Power. This is the ability of the gun, caliber, and specific load to stop an attack as quickly as possible.

So in my final analysis which one of the guns I have mentioned above, were I able to have only one of them, would I choose with self-defense first in mind? The Glock 23. From what you have told us, this would be my choice. I have carried one on and off, since the mid 90's. It is an accurate gun, reliable as can be, easy to field strip and clean, only has 34 parts, and does one thing perhaps better than any other semi-auto pistol; it shoots when it is supposed to shoot.

Again, this is totally my opinion and yes, it is based upon experience and personal preferences. Hope this helps.


----------



## Craigh (Jul 29, 2016)

SouthernBoy said:


> 1. Reliability. The gun must go bang when it is called upon to perform. If it fails to do this, the next two factors are moot.
> 
> 2. Practical accuracy. This is the ability of the gun and the shooter combination to deliver rounds to target accurately, consistently, and confidently. If there is a problem with this, the last factor is a lost issue.
> 
> 3. Power. This is the ability of the gun, caliber, and specific load to stop an attack as quickly as possible.


I respect everyone's opinion on this site, some more than others, and I truly respect my friend from Virginia maybe more than a few others. However, here I disagree with his choice, given your statements. His choice is fairly good for many, though. There is one thing I think he left out of his 3 rules for defensive firearms and that is:

4. Intimidation Factor. The shock and awe an attacker might feel at the sight of you being able to protect yourself.

This can be very important, especially for many new shooters who might not be willing to train to the level enthusiasts like us are willing to. I'm not talking about a road rage incident or a political argument, but a serious life threatening situation where you are forced to draw your gun in anticipation of firing it. You shouldn't draw it unless you think you will probably need to fire it. It's not to scare people, but even so, there's a window of opportunity which can sometimes occur where the bad guy recognizes you're armed and decides to flee instead of continuing to attack. It's in the creation of that window and what the bad guy does next where intimidation can come into play. Intimidation can be a huge game changer for some people in many situations. It is another reason I'd not consider that Chiappa Rhino or a small semi-automatic. The bad guy might not instantly or instinctively see it as a firearm or may not notice or consider it as lethal to himself. With a smaller semi-auto, the bad guy may just see an elongated black thing on top of your wrist. He may not process it as a deadly weapon until it goes bang and lethally shot people can continue to attack until they run out of blood.

This is another reason I suggest, in your case, a revolver with a 4" barrel. More can be seen of it and it is more easily recognized instantly as a lethal weapon. Intimidation may not be applicable in all situations, but it will be in many. Here's a video on YouTube which graphically and safely shows what various types of weapons look like from the bad guy's view.






Remember, as my friend said, this is all one person's opinion. In this case, mine et al.


----------



## bluewave (Mar 29, 2016)

With your limited access to training, etc. you may find some good information on YouTube. There are tons of videos on all aspects of shooting. Hickok45 has some good reviews.


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

bluewave said:


> With your limited access to training, etc. you may find some good information on YouTube. There are tons of videos on all aspects of shooting. Hickok45 has some good reviews.


I very frequently peruse firearms oriented websites for a variety of reasons. And I take from them what information I can, assimilate it, digest it, and come up with what I consider some valuable data. Just did quite a bit of this last week in advance of my most recent purchase two days ago. And yes, Hickok45 was on my list of visited sites.


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

Craigh said:


> I respect everyone's opinion on this site, some more than others, and I truly respect my friend from Virginia maybe more than a few others. However, here I disagree with his choice, given your statements. His choice is fairly good for many, though.


Recall I did qualify my post as that of being a decision I would take. I am limited and have some frailty in that I have not owned most all of the quality and commonly purchased handguns; however, I have owned quite a few over they years and generally have around three dozen at any given time in my collection... until I seem to always lose them in terrible boating accidents.

It's always a bit difficult to make recommendations to someone. We try to do our best to offer some objective information but frankly, most always it is going to be subjective. That's just the nature of the beast. And really, there's nothing wrong with that because the person requesting this information probably does want to hear a variety of opinions from the responding posts. I know I would and I do. My brain can do the requisite filtering but I really do enjoy hearing what others can offer.

Oh, and thanks much for the nice vote of confidence.



Craigh said:


> There is one thing I think he left out of his 3 rules for defensive firearms and that is:
> 
> 4. Intimidation Factor. The shock and awe an attacker might feel at the sight of you being able to protect yourself.
> 
> This can be very important, especially for many new shooters who might not be willing to train to the level enthusiasts like us are willing to. I'm not talking about a road rage incident or a political argument, but a serious life threatening situation where you are forced to draw your gun in anticipation of firing it. You shouldn't draw it unless you think you will probably need to fire it. It's not to scare people, but even so, there's a window of opportunity which can sometimes occur where the bad guy recognizes you're armed and decides to flee instead of continuing to attack. It's in the creation of that window and what the bad guy does next where intimidation can come into play. Intimidation can be a huge game changer for some people in many situations. It is another reason I'd not consider that Chiappa Rhino or a small semi-automatic. The bad guy might not instantly or instinctively see it as a firearm or may not notice or consider it as lethal to himself. With a smaller semi-auto, the bad guy may just see an elongated black thing on top of your wrist. He may not process it as a deadly weapon until it goes bang and lethally shot people can continue to attack until they run out of blood.


My first inclination if I am forced to pull my sidearm is to pull the trigger as quickly as I can once I have it out and on target. If the BG(s) see my reaction, see me pulling a gun on them and decide to run, that's fine with me. That means I just won in a bad situation with no injuries and I am going to arrive home in one piece.

The only really small sidearms I have are my Kel_Tec P3AT and my Ruger LCP. Next up would be a Kahr PM9. The smallest gun in my primary and secondary carry stables is my M&P 9 Shield. In my primary stable, that would be one of my G19/23 framed Glocks.


----------



## pblanc (Mar 3, 2015)

rterrhalt said:


> Jeez... well, this just got harder. Alright, let me go through one thing at a time here:
> 
> So after looking at all of this, it sounds like the Rhino probably won't be a good choice as a first gun due to weird firing mechanics/internals. And manufacturer reputation.
> 
> ...


Are you sure you have exhausted the possibilities of finding public and private ranges within reasonable driving distance? By and large, gun owners tend to be pretty friendly folks who are willing to share their experiences and opinions, and will often let you try out their pistol or revolver if you show interest. Most privately owned indoor ranges rent a variety of different handguns.

Recoil sensitivity is one of those things that is extremely subjective. Gaining a basic level of competence with your weapon is essential regardless of how you plan to use it, but especially critical if you plan to carry it. You need to enjoy shooting whatever you choose enough to gain and maintain that level of competence. It would be unfortunate to chose a weapon or caliber based on internet research and then find that you hated shooting it because you found it too punishing.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with a revolver as a choice for a new shooter, and many recommend one, in fact. I and others believe that it is harder to master the longer, heavier double action trigger pull of a revolver than that of most auto-loaders, but it is certainly something you can master with practice.

A few words about different calibers. First, you may be aware the caliber (diameter of the projectile or "bullet") is very nearly identical for 38 Special, 357 Magnum, 9 mm Luger, and .380 auto (9 mm short). The 9 mm projectile measures .355 inch in diameter and the others measure .357 inch in diameter. There is also a caliber called 357 SIG which has a 9 mm projectile (so it is actually .355" rather then .357"). Any revolver that is chambered for 357 Magnum can also shoot 38 Special but 38 Special revolvers cannot shoot 357 Magnum. The brass case of the 357 Magnum cartridge is longer than that of the 38 Special. Forty caliber Smith and Wesson/Winchester (.40 S&W) and 10 mm auto use a 10 mm diameter projectile, and the .45 ACP caliber projectile is larger still. As a general rule, the larger, heavier projectiles will travel more slowly unless they are provided with a case that can hold more powder.

As a very general rule (and I'm sure some will disagree) if you were to rate some of the common self-defense cartridges from least powerful to most powerful the list would be something like this: .380 Auto < 38 Special < 9mm Luger < 357 Magnum. Some calibers are also available with increased powder charges called +P which give them increased muzzle velocity. I would consider 38 Special +P to be roughly equivalent to 9mm Luger in effectiveness.

But there are other considerations that determine which caliber will be most effective for self defense in your hands. No caliber will be effective if you cannot hit with it quickly and accurately. And in a self-defense scenario, you may very likely need to fire more than one shot, so the speed and accuracy of follow up shots becomes a potentially important factor. Some calibers might be poor choices if you ever needed to use them indoors, or shoot from a car, or in low-light conditions. For example, 357 Magnum is quite loud and if you had to shoot from an enclosed space, you could be deafened, at least temporarily. It also has considerable flash. The flash from a revolver comes not only out of the end of the barrel, but out of the barrel/cylinder gap sideways. The flash from a 357 Magnum shot in the dark could affect your night vision more than the other calibers.

357 Magnum did have a reputation of being an effective man-stopper back in the days when cops carried revolvers. There really isn't an auto-loader cartridge that can duplicate its terminal ballistics in all projectile weights. .40 S&W and 357 SIG can approximate it in some projectile weights and 10 mm auto comes very close. But 357 SIG and 10 mm auto are both fairly expensive to shoot and handgun choices are much more limited in these calibers.

But again, when it comes to stopping an attacker, shot placement is vastly more important than the caliber you are shooting. The FBI and many law enforcement agencies are tending to return to the 9 mm Luger cartridge from heavier calibers partly based on the fact that some of their agents and officers can shoot it more accurately.


----------



## rterrhalt (Jan 7, 2017)

Alright, i think I'm starting to understand a little better. Went back to the gun shop today and talked with the folks a bit about what I've discussed here and got some similar answers.

From what I'm seeing right now, the 4" Ruger GP100 would be a good way to go for a starting revolver. Caliber-wise, I might start with .38 special, work up to some +P loads, and then get into .357 mag.

On the semi-auto half of things, though comparable performance to the .357 mag may not be possible, 9mm should still do plenty well and might be alright to start on, .40 S&W would have more kick (and may need to be worked up to), and .45 ACP would be something I would want a heavier firearm to handle. Manufacturer-wise it seems there are a quite a few that are reliable enough to consider, with many people showing favor to Glock, S&W, and a few others. Hope I've got that all correct.

I'll check out some models of semi-autos to see if anything looks appealing, and may follow up with questions concerning a few models individually. In the meantime, if there is anything else I should know or be considering, please let me know!

Update: i heard a passing word about a firearm called the Bersa Thunder. It comes in .40 S&W for sure, and might be made in 9mm. If anyone has heard of that pistol or has one, let me know if it would be worth looking into.


----------



## Craigh (Jul 29, 2016)

SouthernBoy said:


> Recall I did qualify my post as that of being a decision I would take. I am limited and have some frailty in that I have not owned most all of the quality and commonly purchased handguns; however, I have owned quite a few over the years and generally have around three dozen at any given time in my collection...


I know you qualified it. We all do, usually, because we don't wish to step on the toes of our other friends on this forum which we might not agree with on a given subject, yet still respect. I know I feel that way. I don't personally know everyone on this forum but I do know I like pretty much every one of them, even those I might not agree with. They're what make it interesting and fun. Besides, we're all very similar in our love for shooting sports and/or firearms in general. However, I do sometimes tease the rare Glock fanboy post.

I also find myself identifying with so many here. Like myself, a lot of us are getting older and more frail. Most of us have owned quite a few handguns over the years and still have a few. Many of us have made identical choices because for our experience level and age, they are darn good choices. For example, my carry stable is very similar to yours, probably because we arrived at similar conclusions which vastly limits our short lists, also because our choices complement each other. We don't intend on owning a one size fits all gun. I think this is what makes it hard for many of us to agree with this particular OP. We all come from a mindset where we own several complementary defensive handguns and he wants the "one size fits all" choice. This makes for a fairly wide disparity in suggestions where really nobody is totally correct (certainly this includes me) and I can see correctness in everyone's suggestion. Probably frustrating for the OP, but that's the way it seems to me.



SouthernBoy said:


> My first inclination if I am forced to pull my sidearm is to pull the trigger as quickly as I can once I have it out and on target. If the BG(s) see my reaction, see me pulling a gun on them and decide to run, that's fine with me. That means I just won in a bad situation with no injuries and I am going to arrive home in one piece.


I agree with you and feel I'd react the same way. I probably would not draw until I knew I had to pull the trigger. Unfortunately, that leaves a very small window of opportunity for the BG to decide to flee, but many studies have shown this window is often not only there but can be larger for many people, especially people who are less willing to train. They often hesitate, which may not be a good thing, but it seems to occur. Many attacks are thwarted because the attacker took off to the hills; some suggest much more often than actual shootings. Many go unreported because the victim fails to report the incident, fearing he/she will get into trouble. Many don't have carry permits. Some fear retaliation from the BG or a confrontation with law enforcement. Some just want to get home and quit shaking, not wanting a hour worth of questions and a report. With all the Bumetanide I take, I might have to get somewhere to pee. 

But really, I don't have a clue. I've never been in a serious defensive confrontation on US soil in my fairly long life except once as a late teen and that diffused quickly. I barely remember it.



SouthernBoy said:


> The only really small sidearms I have are my Kel_Tec P3AT and my Ruger LCP. Next up would be a Kahr PM9. The smallest gun in my primary and secondary carry stables is my M&P 9 Shield. In my primary stable, that would be one of my G19/23 framed Glocks.


LOL. This is an example of similar choices among each other. I too own an LCP as well as the much nicer LCP II, which I highly recommend to you. I had a Kel-Tec but it was a jamomatic. I've not owned a Kahr PM9 but would certainly like to. My M&P 9 Shield is my primary EDC. I own a Glock 19 but detest it and instead use the Walther PPQ, which I love, as my nightstand weapon of choice. I also have a couple of 1911 models, both a Government size and Commander size located in secondary places around the house. There's an older LCP right now beside me on the computer tower, tucked in out of sight. All but one gets locked up when the grandkids come to visit. Most are in their teens but a common visitor is my 2 year old granddaughter. She will be a heart breaker, but for now, gets into everything. 

Some might consider me paranoid, but I've been broken into more than a few times. I've been threatened over the phone, demanding pain medication which are part of my medical regimen. Believe it or not, it's not uncommon for older folk to be harassed by thugs when they find out you take pain meds. Though I report it often enough, it's hard for LEO's to trace, so I have to remain vigilant on several fronts: good locks, security windows, lights, alarm system with hand held panic button, a dog, and firearms. I'm just not used to this after living in a rural setting most of my life.


----------



## pic (Nov 14, 2009)

Get a revolver then buy another,,,best in reliabilty and safest.


----------



## Bisley (Aug 24, 2008)

The Bersa is reputed to be a good, cheap pistol. An indoor range I used to frequent sold them by the dozens to people who were just starting out. 

I know nothing bad about them, but my opinion, for someone who intends to own only one gun, is to buy the highest quality you can afford. If you intend to go out and learn to hit targets, and then put it in your underwear drawer for the next 30 years, buy a 4" stainless steel revolver made by Ruger or S&W. If you are going to keep your practice up, the revolver is still fine, but you could also use a mid-size semi-auto made by a reputable manufacturer - there are dozens of them that make great 9mm shooters with a reputation for reliability. Personally, I like Springfied XD variants and 1911 clones, or Glocks, or S&W M&P models, CZ - the list goes on and on.


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

Craigh said:


> I know you qualified it. We all do, usually, because we don't wish to step on the toes of our other friends on this forum which we might not agree with on a given subject, yet still respect. I know I feel that way. I don't personally know everyone on this forum but I do know I like pretty much every one of them, even those I might not agree with. They're what make it interesting and fun. Besides, we're all very similar in our love for shooting sports and/or firearms in general. However, I do sometimes tease the rare Glock fanboy post.


Looking back at my post you responded to here makes it look as though I was being a bit untoward. Please know that this is most definitely not the case. You and I pretty much think alike on most everything but that wouldn't make much of a difference with me because you keep things very civil and respectful to all of the site members.

Yes we do have a large number of really good people on this site. In the past I have had a few words with a couple of them but most all are fine from where I stand. So please forgive me if I came across in a not-so-pleasant manner.



Craigh said:


> I also find myself identifying with so many here. Like myself, a lot of us are getting older and more frail. Most of us have owned quite a few handguns over the years and still have a few. Many of us have made identical choices because for our experience level and age, they are darn good choices. For example, my carry stable is very similar to yours, probably because we arrived at similar conclusions which vastly limits our short lists, also because our choices complement each other. We don't intend on owning a one size fits all gun. I think this is what makes it hard for many of us to agree with this particular OP. We all come from a mindset where we own several complementary defensive handguns and he wants the "one size fits all" choice. This makes for a fairly wide disparity in suggestions where really nobody is totally correct (certainly this includes me) and I can see correctness in everyone's suggestion. Probably frustrating for the OP, but that's the way it seems to me.


Again, bad choice of words by me. By "frailty", I meant that I have not owned a wide variety of different brands of firearms. I tend to stay more with certain manufactures which have earned a solid reputation of reliability and quality. As for me, I am far from frail. I'll be 71 in two weeks and come in at 5' 10" at 194 pounds with no beer belly and very good muscular structure. Any physical frailty would be due to my two knee replacements (one total and one partial) and my decompression/fusion surgery at L4/L5. But all of that works fantastic so I'm fine in all of that. I just need to pay more attention to my choice of words.



Craigh said:


> I agree with you and feel I'd react the same way. I probably would not draw until I knew I had to pull the trigger. Unfortunately, that leaves a very small window of opportunity for the BG to decide to flee, but many studies have shown this window is often not only there but can be larger for many people, especially people who are less willing to train. They often hesitate, which may not be a good thing, but it seems to occur. Many attacks are thwarted because the attacker took off to the hills; some suggest much more often than actual shootings. Many go unreported because the victim fails to report the incident, fearing he/she will get into trouble. Many don't have carry permits. Some fear retaliation from the BG or a confrontation with law enforcement. Some just want to get home and quit shaking, not wanting a hour worth of questions and a report. With all the Bumetanide I take, I might have to get somewhere to pee.
> 
> But really, I don't have a clue. I've never been in a serious defensive confrontation on US soil in my fairly long life except once as a late teen and that diffused quickly. I barely remember it.


Yes, good people do tend to hesitate because they can't believe this is actually happening to them and they just want it to go away. Bad people know what they want and what they're willing to do and have no compunction about doing what they need to do to get what they want and get away... or eliminate witnesses. Problem is, we don't know which types we're dealing with when bad things happen. So hesitation can and does get good people injured or killed.



Craigh said:


> LOL. This is an example of similar choices among each other. I too own an LCP as well as the much nicer LCP II, which I highly recommend to you. I had a Kel-Tec but it was a jamomatic. I've not owned a Kahr PM9 but would certainly like to. My M&P 9 Shield is my primary EDC. I own a Glock 19 but detest it and instead use the Walther PPQ, which I love, as my nightstand weapon of choice. I also have a couple of 1911 models, both a Government size and Commander size located in secondary places around the house. There's an older LCP right now beside me on the computer tower, tucked in out of sight. All but one gets locked up when the grandkids come to visit. Most are in their teens but a common visitor is my 2 year old granddaughter. She will be a heart breaker, but for now, gets into everything.
> 
> Some might consider me paranoid, but I've been broken into more than a few times. I've been threatened over the phone, demanding pain medication which are part of my medical regimen. Believe it or not, it's not uncommon for older folk to be harassed by thugs when they find out you take pain meds. Though I report it often enough, it's hard for LEO's to trace, so I have to remain vigilant on several fronts: good locks, security windows, lights, alarm system with hand held panic button, a dog, and firearms. I'm just not used to this after living in a rural setting most of my life.


Sounds like you're well covered there in your home. I have a few stashed around in nice little places. When the grandkids come over, they find other and safer homes. I really am only concerned about the two boys. One is ten and one is six. The six year old tends to like to investigate and the ten year old does some of this, too. The fourteen year old teenage girl is level headed and knows I carry and have firearms. She's quite the young lady.

Take care, my friend, and watch your six.


----------



## Craigh (Jul 29, 2016)

SouthernBoy said:


> Sounds like you're well covered there in your home. I have a few stashed around in nice little places.
> Take care, my friend, and watch your six.


I will. I think I might have come across a little overly paranoid, so I'll try to be short with the back story.

About 5-6 years ago, a rather rotund young black gal came into my office to complain about one of my team members giving her a hard time. I calmed her down and settled the matter. While she was there, she saw my time release pain meds on my desk and asked about them. They shouldn't have been there. My fault, but I explained I had severe neuropathy caused by nerve damage. She then asked me if she could have some for her back. I was not happy and told her no. I told her it was a felony and also ethically wrong.

A couple of years later after a stroke, I had to retire. She called a couple of times asking if she could come over to my home and get some pain meds for her back. She offered sex, money and barter. I don't know why she thought I'd change my mind. I told her no again and suggested she no longer call me. She cried but hung up, saying something about friends not treating friends that way, as if we were more than acquaintances.

More time goes by during which I get broken into a few times and have to harden my home. Now, some of the break ins were done by a neighbor's 19 year old son, and I caught him. He spent a year before getting out on parole and probation. I think some was this gal's friends, though because two attempts happened while he was in jail.

She shows up on my doorstep crying and telling me she has someone who demands to see me. I say no and call the Sheriffs Department. I file a report. I won't go into the rest but I've has numerous threats over the phone and several visitation attempts by unknown males wanting me to open the door and talk to them. So far, nothing violent or forcible. The last time was just a few nights ago. I was told there seemed to be an epidemic of older people being targeted, trying to scare them into giving medication. I don't know. I'm not really afraid so much as prepared. That's why I"m a bit paranoid acting.


----------



## pblanc (Mar 3, 2015)

rterrhalt said:


> Alright, i think I'm starting to understand a little better. Went back to the gun shop today and talked with the folks a bit about what I've discussed here and got some similar answers.
> 
> From what I'm seeing right now, the 4" Ruger GP100 would be a good way to go for a starting revolver. Caliber-wise, I might start with .38 special, work up to some +P loads, and then get into .357 mag.
> 
> ...


The Ruger GP 100 is an excellent and reliable double action revolver, and is very well built. I have owned one for years. Yes, a GP100 or another revolver chambered in 357 Magnum would allow you the versatility to shoot loads of a variety of powers. It would be a good range gun and a potent home defense weapon. But at the start of this thread, you mentioned that you were interested in a handgun for possible EDC. The GP100 4" is a large and relatively heavy weapon not all that easy to carry concealed. Yes, I have heard of people doing it, but it would not be the first choice of most for that purpose.

As for handgun caliber effectiveness, realize that no handgun caliber is really all that effective. Historically, more than three quarters of handgun gunshot wound victims have survived. Given those limitations, a large number of law enforcement agencies have concluded that 9 mm Luger (also called 9 mm Parabellum or 9 x 19 mm) represents the most reasonable compromise when effectiveness, capacity, and shootability are factored in, at least for a large percentage of officers and agents. Of all the calibers mentioned thus far, it is also the cheapest to shoot.

As for .40 S&W, I actually favor that caliber in a mid-sized, all-metal pistol but many people dislike its recoil characteristics which are often referred to as "sharp" or "snappy". It can be unpleasant to shoot out of small, light handguns. I would certainly recommend that you try shooting that caliber before deciding on a weapon chambered in it. I think most people can adapt to it if they choose the right weapon and maintain a firm grip, but for me it took a bit of getting used to before I became accurate with it. Many people find 45 ACP more pleasant to shoot than .40 S&W, but the recoil characteristics of either are very much weapon dependent.

You asked about the Bersa Thunder. At this time, Bersa makes many different handguns that they apply the moniker "Thunder" to. I believe they are all hammer-fired DA/SA pistols, but they come in a variety of sizes and are chambered in a variety of calibers. The original Thunder was patterned after the Walther PPK/S chambered in .380 Auto, a pistol I found surprisingly unpleasant to shoot. There is a Thunder Pro chambered in .40 S&W and a Thunder Ultra Compact in the same caliber. I have no experience with either. The Thunder Pro is a significantly larger pistol and I suspect it would handle the forty caliber round OK. The Ultra Compact is much smaller, and I suspect it would be much less pleasant to shoot.

Some believe that DA/SA pistols are excellent choices for personal defense weapons. I am one of them and own more pistols with that trigger action than any other. But I do believe that DA/SA pistols also require perhaps more training to master than any other type. Two distinctly different trigger pulls must be mastered as well as the transition between the two. DA/SA pistols also generally have either have a combination safety/decocker or a decocker which needs to be mastered (there are a few DA/SA pistols with a safety but no decocker).


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

Craigh said:


> I will. I think I might have come across a little overly paranoid, so I'll try to be short with the back story.
> 
> About 5-6 years ago, a rather rotund young black gal came into my office to complain about one of my team members giving her a hard time. I calmed her down and settled the matter. While she was there, she saw my time release pain meds on my desk and asked about them. They shouldn't have been there. My fault, but I explained I had severe neuropathy caused by nerve damage. She then asked me if she could have some for her back. I was not happy and told her no. I told her it was a felony and also ethically wrong.
> 
> ...


Years ago I worked with a man who was fond of saying, "paranoids live longer". Nothing wrong with being prudent, armed, and aware... even in your own home as well you know. Be careful.


----------



## pic (Nov 14, 2009)

Craigh said:


> I will. I think I might have come across a little overly paranoid, so I'll try to be short with the back story.
> 
> About 5-6 years ago, a rather rotund young black gal came into my office to complain about one of my team members giving her a hard time. I calmed her down and settled the matter. While she was there, she saw my time release pain meds on my desk and asked about them. They shouldn't have been there. My fault, but I explained I had severe neuropathy caused by nerve damage. She then asked me if she could have some for her back. I was not happy and told her no. I told her it was a felony and also ethically wrong.
> 
> ...


I'm sure I should be minding my own own business on this. BUT, 
Next time somebody knocks on the door, don't answer.

Be ready because they are gonna shoulder bump that door open. SOMETIMES THEY 'll leave but come right back.
Leave the deadbolts unlocked.The door should be locked Just enough to break wood on the door frame.

Be aware of the back door or other door.

Fill em full of lead.

Before anything have a moving plan, to get the hell outta there.

:smt071:smt071


----------



## rterrhalt (Jan 7, 2017)

A few days later, but I've got an update for you all:

As I said, i didn't really have access to training. While this was true before, I have since solved that problem through the tried and true method of not being a dumb loner and making a friend.

A gun shop owner directed me to an NRA instructor in my area. I just got back from my outing. The practice firearm I was given was a glock 19, and I can certainly see the appeal. This first lesson was just for getting used to firearms, and it did wonders. I wasn't shaking while holding the weapon by the end of it, and I filled a sillhouette target in the head and chest wonderfully, only missing 3 rounds of 50 fired due to pulling on the gun a little too much. I feel SO much better about firearms now.

And after having a little experience, i can definitely undrstand what you guys were saying about accuracy: a bigger/faster bullet doesn't mean squat if you can't put it in your assailant. That in mind, we'll be trying out some more weapons/cartridges so I can feel things.

I only used a 9mm, so now I'm pretty understanding of the recoil that cartridge gives. We're going out again next week where i'll be trying a .38 special/.357 mag revolver, and following that he's taking me to a shop with an indoor range where I'll be able to test out some .40S&W's and maybe some .45ACP's. He also wanted me to try out a .357 sig, with his reasoning being that if I could handle 9mm and .40S&W, .357 sig would be well within my ability to use, and while it may be more expensive, it would be much closer to the one-shot stop someone tends to desire from a defensive firearm.

So, all of that aside, i can say my mind has been changed. I am starting to lean more heavily towards a semi-auto, especially a striker fired one. I thought an external safety would be nice, but after seeing all the safety the 9mm glock provided without needing an external safety along with my newfound comfort around firearms, i think that type of pistol should serve me well. 

Thoughts?


----------



## pblanc (Mar 3, 2015)

As you no doubt no by now, the Glock 19 is a striker-fired, polymer frame pistol, and one of the most popular of the genre. If that is the type of weapon you decide to go with and you feel you shoot it well, it is certainly a fine choice. I personally don't care for Glocks because the grips are uncomfortable, and they do not point naturally for me. Also, on the Generation 3 and 4 Glock 19s the finger grooves are poorly spaced and designed for my fingers. There was a time a few decades back when Glock was about the only show in town if you wanted a polymer frame, striker-fired pistol, but now there are many alternatives if a Glock does not work for you, and some are cheaper.

I think you will find shooting 38 Special from a revolver to be fairly pleasant and similar to shooting 9mm from a pistol. Be prepared for a lot more noise and significantly more recoil with 357 Magnum, although Magnum loadings do vary in power considerably. I would certainly recommend giving .40 S&W and .45 ACP a try as well. 357 SIG is a hoot to shoot with recoil characteristics somewhat similar to that of .40 S&W. I have a SIG Sauer P229 .40 that I also have a 357 SIG barrel for, so I can shoot both calibers from the same pistol. Some people find 357 SIG easier to shoot than .40 S&W and some feel the opposite. 357 SIG is louder with more muzzle flash, and significantly more expensive to shoot, however. It is a high velocity handgun cartridge with basically the same projectile as 9mm Luger. I have yet to convince myself that it has superior terminal ballistics for self-defense compared to .40 S&W, but many people do.

As for one-shot stops, yes they do occur. Sometimes they occur because the attacker just gets scared and runs away, and sometimes the attacker gives up after getting shot once because they don't want to get shot any more. But physiological (as opposed to psychological) one-stop shots in determined attackers usually require a hit in the upper central nervous system, the heart, or the great vessels. And even hits in the central circulatory system are often not instantaneously fatal and allow an attacker enough time to shoot you, even if they are fatally wounded. So "one-shot stops" are again much more about shot placement than caliber, so far as handguns are concerned.


----------



## Bisley (Aug 24, 2008)

rterrhalt said:


> ...This first lesson was just for getting used to firearms, and it did wonders. I wasn't shaking while holding the weapon by the end of it, and I filled a sillhouette target in the head and chest wonderfully, only missing 3 rounds of 50 fired due to pulling on the gun a little too much. I feel SO much better about firearms now.


Perfect. :smt023

This is exactly where you need to be, at this point. You have overcome many of your misconceptions and are now able to be objective about the guns you are handling. You will be fine, now, because your tendency to research the things you don't understand will have a baseline for you to make more sensible judgements. Good job!


----------



## rustygun (Apr 8, 2013)

rterrhalt said:


> A few days later, but I've got an update for you all:
> 
> As I said, i didn't really have access to training. While this was true before, I have since solved that problem through the tried and true method of not being a dumb loner and making a friend.
> 
> ...


Glad to hear you were able to get some shots down range and valuable experience. Glock 19 is a very popular all around type gun. Good for EDC, big enough to shoot well and has 15 rds. of 9mm . 9mm is a fine personal defense caliber effective, cheaper to practice, and in general you can carry more rounds in the same size pistol. There are many other options in that general size range as well. S&W shields are also very popular little smaller less rounds but easier to carry. Glock 26 is also a popular option smaller than glock 19 with 10 rds. of 9mm. I always try to stick with quality brands of guns S&W, Glock, colt....

There is a better than average chance that this being your first firearm it won't be your last. Though one gun is enough I have heard of people owning more than one, or two, or three...


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

Now that you are gaining real experience, you will soon be able to make your own thoughtful choice.
You won't need recommendations from us.

Well, maybe it would still be useful to ask about our experiences finding guns that are (relatively) the most reliable and repair-free.
But still, that can wait until you have sufficient experience to actually be about to make a well-reasoned choice.


----------



## pic (Nov 14, 2009)

Learning, training, target shooting is essential, it's all good.
People carry concealed, most likely for self defense. 

If you're approached, how does someone train to shoot someone? Can you pull the f'n trigger? Is there a certain something you need? Is it in your brain , or is it in your GUT. It's not easy to kill a human. JUST WONDERING


----------



## rterrhalt (Jan 7, 2017)

If it is between me and my family or some guy i don't know who just wants to hurt us, i'm choosing us. I'll be able to pull the trigger and live with the consequences. I understand that it isn't easy to take a life. But if it is about protecting my own, that makes it infinitely easier.

That said, I've still been browsing the web for info and wanted to float a few thoughts by you folks:

I was originally looking at some of the larger cartridges (.357mag, .40s&w, .45acp, etc.) instead of the tried and true 9mm standard as I thought I would want as big/fast-moving a bullet as i could handle for a self defense purpose. But as I've looked a little deeper, maybe I should be considering the ammo I use instead?

I found out about the Underwood Xtreme Defender rounds. These ones to be exact:






There's numbers and science and crap behind it (sorry that sounds so vague) that apparnely help it to make a permanent wound cavity almost double the size of any hollowpoint round. But they are solid metal (copper) rounds.

I was worried that a normal 9mm hollowpoint might not have the gumption to do a whole lot to stop an attacker if the situation arises. And it seemed like firing a solid ball round from anything higher than a 9mm had a high chance of overpenetration, which I already mentioned I wanted to avoid.

If I ever end up in a scenario where I would have to use my firearm, I want to have pre-stacked the deck as heavily in my favor as possible. This is where things got hard, as it seemed like i would be choosing between fewer rounds per mag with more force/velocity per round or vice versa.

So all things considered, my main question is this: would the lower velocity of a 9mm round combined with the solid copper and science-y stuff of these bullets prevent overpenetration while providing maximal damage to the assailant? Because that seems like it would be the best of all worlds. Large magazine (17+1 in most full sized handguns), adequate penetration, and a large wound cavity. The only thing it would be lacking is the force required for hydrostatic shock, if that concept is true and not just a theory.


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

Lots of new and different solutions to the "quick fight stop" problem have cropped up, and some of them look pretty darn nifty.
But in the long run, the best fight-stopper ammunition still seems to be a half-jacketed or full-jacketed, solid lead bullet that is shaped to reliably expand to almost double diameter at the speed that its specific powder charge delivers it.
Hornady makes them. Federal makes them. Speer makes them. A year's subscription to _Gun Tests_ Magazine will bring the results of honest tests of many different self-defense cartridges to your attention, either in one of the year's issues or in their already-established archives.

Like new cars or new computers, wait until the new and nifty bullet technology has been around for a couple of years, before you adopt it as your own.
Most of the highly touted "miracle cures" turn out not to work reliably, but save-your-life defense absolutely has to be reliable.
Therefore, as someone wiser than I has said, "There are no miracle cures which will solve your problems for you. You still have to make quick, accurate hits."

Speaking as someone who used to carry a .45 ACP pistol 24/7/365 (for about 40 years), but now has to use a "mere" .380 ACP in order to kowtow to arthritis, quick accuracy beats ballistics, every time.
That said, I tend to suggest the standard-velocity .45 ACP cartridge loaded with a guaranteed-expanding bullet, assuming that you will practice enough to learn good recoil control and good trigger control, and also that you learn to make quick and definite presentations ("draws").
Even in a lightweight plastic gun, the standard-velocity .45 ACP, 230-grain-bullet load, running at between 850 and 900 feet-per-second (850fps-900fps), recoils with a slow "push," rather than the 9mm's quick "jab" and the .357 Magnum's twisty "whack." I found that slow "push" easy to control, once I had been taught proper technique.

Further, a large-diameter, heavy, (relatively) slow, expanding bullet will almost invariably stop within its target, thereby transferring all of its considerable energy to that target.
Other, lighter bullets, fired at greater velocity in order to still provide that same level of energy, will be more likely to pass through the target. This means that the energy actually delivered to the target will be less, as the bullet continues on through. It also means that innocent people who are behind the target may become at risk from your shot.


----------



## Bisley (Aug 24, 2008)

Find the gun you like that is reliable and accurate, in 9mm or above, and there will be factory cartridges available that will do the job, if you place the bullet correctly. Your ability to do that is what will save you or someone else, if you can do it quickly and under highly stressful conditions. After you get good at shooting bulls eyes into paper, start practicing for unusual situations, like shooting with your off hand, point shooting, low light shooting, etc. One way to simulate shooting under stress is to run or exercise to the point of nearly total exhaustion, and then try to hit a target.

All of these things are more important than ammo selection. Basically, any premium hollow point ammo will suffice in a good self defense chambering, if you put the bullet on target.


----------



## pblanc (Mar 3, 2015)

As Steve said, there have been many "miracle" loads that have come and gone over the years that have not stood the test of time. When some internet ballistics expert starts talking about and measuring the "permanent wound channel" in ballistic gelatin, it is time to stop watching and listening.

Ballistic gelatin provides a cheap, consistent method for estimating the depth to which a projectile might penetrate in uniform living soft tissue and, to a lesser extent, the reliability of expansion of hollow point projectiles. And that is it. Those cavities that you see guys measuring in the gel are of no significance whatsoever. That is because human tissue, even tissue of relatively uniform density like muscle tissue, does not behave remotely like ballistic gelatin when shot. Human tissue has collagen and elastin fibers maintaining its structure. The tough collagen fibers hold the tissue elements together, and the elastin fibers provide elasticity. So when a handgun caliber projectile penetrates human tissue, it may cause some temporary cavitation but the tissue then recoils back to its original configuration with little or no damage apart from the permanent crush channel. By and large, handgun caliber projectiles produce permanent crush channels in human tissue that are maximally as wide as the fully expanded projectile, and no wider.

I will also point out that the Underwood load tested was a 9mm +P+ load. That means it is loaded to somewhere above +P pressure. In the US the Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers' Institute (SAAMI) distributes guidelines for maximum case pressures for standard handgun caliber loads. They also issue guidelines for maximum case pressures for more powerful +P loads for some (but not all) calibers. So-called +P+ loads are loaded to pressures higher than +P loads but SAAMI does not offer guidelines for +P+ loads, so those can be just about anything the manufacturer wants. Don't assume that such a load will shoot like your standard pressure FMJ practice ammo. And it will be harder on your pistol.

A useful reference for the most common pistol caliber self-defense loads is Lucky Gunner Labs, which uses a consistent testing protocol: http://www.luckygunner.com/labs/self-defense-ammo-ballistic-tests/

Another worthwhile read is the self-defense ammunition recommendations of Dr Gary Roberts: https://www.ar15.com/ammo/project/Self_Defense_Ammo_FAQ/

There are a few manufacturers that have produced ammunition that has consistently stood the test of time and has been used by the great majority of law enforcement agencies. These include Federal HST, Speer Gold Dot, Winchester Ranger-T. Also worth considering are Remington Golden Saber and Hornady Critical Duty and Critical Defense. I would suggest sticking with one of these.

Another widely recommended strategy is to find out, if you can, what caliber and load your local and state police use and stick with that. That way, if you are ever prosecuted for shooting in self-defense you can say that you used the same ammo as that of you local law enforcement agencies so as not to be accused of using some super-lethal killer load.


----------



## Craigh (Jul 29, 2016)

For what it's worth, I prefer Speer Gold Dots over most anything else, from both my use and various sources I've paid attention to over the years. I read the FBI report and the Gold Dots seemed to meet their criteria. Another point sometimes not considered is muzzle flash. Most self defense shootings will probably be in dim light or even darkness. Some argue, me included, the bright flash of a pistol firing can totally destroy your night vision for a few minutes, sort of like a camera flash going off in your face. Some say the flash doesn't affect people or only for a half a second. Well, that's too long and the risk too great. Some of the personal defense ammunition has flash suppression powders mixed in to the propellant. Some are more effective than others. Off all the available defensive rounds I've tried, Speer Gold Dots excel in this way. Add to the fact, they consistently expand well and don't over penetrate, and that's my choice even though it's been around a long time.

Another oldie but goodie I've found is Federal's Hydroshock line. Federal has come out with the newer HST lineup, but I prefer the older Hydroshocks. Along with the Gold Dots, they share top prize for effectively low muzzle flash to go with good expansion without over penetration.

One other gets an honorable mention from me because I used them almost exclusively for indoor, in my house loads when my children were growing up. I wanted a low flash round that would not penetrate through a sheet-rock wall under any circumstances. I used the Glaser Safety Slug in 45 caliber for this purpose. They are now made by Corbon and are a bit expensive. Basically, it's a Teflon polymer hollow frangible bullet enclosing compressed bird shot. It was designed for the Air Marshal's use in the 1970's to help prevent hijacking of airlines. They wanted something with good stopping power and which wouldn't penetrate the hull or portals of an airplane. Some law enforcement organizations used them because they will not ricochet off hard surfaces, injuring or killing innocent bystanders and they are available in various defensive calibers. They got a bad rap because though they tended to stop the bad guy and were considered less lethal, they caused a very nasty but shallow wound for a surgeon to try to repair. The legal departments put an end to them for many agencies even considering the name, "Glaser Safety Slug."

https://www.corbon.com/glaser-safety-slug.html

Along with what Steve said, I prefer heavier bullets traveling a little slower. Example, my 45 rounds are 230 grn. Gold Dots and my 9mm are 124 grn +P Gold Dots, not that slow but heavier than the typical 115 grains.


----------



## tony pasley (May 6, 2006)

Glad to hear you have found live training. Good luck and enjoy your journey into the world of shooting


----------



## pic (Nov 14, 2009)

rterrhalt said:


> If it is between me and my family or some guy i don't know who just wants to hurt us, i'm choosing us. I'll be able to pull the trigger and live with the consequences. I understand that it isn't easy to take a life. But if it is about protecting my own, that makes it infinitely easier.
> 
> That said, I've still been browsing the web for info and wanted to float a few thoughts by you folks:
> 
> ...


I totally agree about protecting the family.No doubt. If it was just you , your family was safe and you unfortunatey were in a protect a "ME" situation, do you think you would have any emotions at the time ? Anger , fear , aggressiveness . 
What happened when you were in such a situation?


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

pblanc said:


> Another widely recommended strategy is to find out, if you can, what caliber and load your local and state police use and stick with that. That way, if you are ever prosecuted for shooting in self-defense you can say that you used the same ammo as that of you local law enforcement agencies so as not to be accused of using some super-lethal killer load.


This is largely going to depend upon the state in which one lives. For example, in my state the type of ammunition you use, even handloads, is not going to be an issue. In New Jersey, it will be. And do keep in mind that generally, police agencies may tend to go with the lowest bidders when making their ammo purchases.


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

Craigh said:


> For what it's worth, I prefer Speer Gold Dots over most anything else, from both my use and various sources I've paid attention to over the years. I read the FBI report and the Gold Dots seemed to meet their criteria. Another point sometimes not considered is muzzle flash. Most self defense shootings will probably be in dim light or even darkness. Some argue, me included, the bright flash of a pistol firing can totally destroy your night vision for a few minutes, sort of like a camera flash going off in your face. Some say the flash doesn't affect people or only for a half a second. Well, that's too long and the risk too great. Some of the personal defense ammunition has flash suppression powders mixed in to the propellant. Some are more effective than others. Off all the available defensive rounds I've tried, Speer Gold Dots excel in this way. Add to the fact, they consistently expand well and don't over penetrate, and that's my choice even though it's been around a long time.
> 
> *Another oldie but goodie I've found is Federal's Hydroshock line. Federal has come out with the newer HST lineup, but I prefer the older Hydroshocks. Along with the Gold Dots, they share top prize for effectively low muzzle flash to go with good expansion without over penetration.*
> 
> ...


My two preferred loads for my 9mm and my .40S&W carry guns are Federal HST's and Speer Gold Dots. For the 9mm, I use the 123gr +P and for the .40S&W, I go with the 165gr loadings (when using the Gold Dot .40S&W, I go with their hotter load, #53970).

As for the Federal Hydra Shok, there were cases where this bullet failed to expand when the factors seemed to indicate that it should have. It is a good load for the .380ACP but in 9mm and .40S&W, their HST is superior.


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

Craigh said:


> ...I used the Glaser Safety Slug in 45 caliber for this purpose...Basically, it's a Teflon polymer hollow frangible bullet enclosing compressed bird shot...Some law enforcement organizations used them because they will not ricochet off hard surfaces...They got a bad rap because though they tended to stop the bad guy and were considered less lethal, they caused a very nasty but shallow wound for a surgeon to try to repair. The legal departments put an end to them for many agencies even considering the name, "Glaser Safety Slug."
> https://www.corbon.com/glaser-safety-slug.html...


I have seen tests by competent investigators which make me feel that the Glaser Safety Slug is a poor choice for self-defense. I would neither use them nor recommend them.
On the other hand, Craig's considerable shooting experience leads me to agree with him on the special purpose to which he put them.
But you (*rterrhalt*) are not yet experienced enough to make good use of such very-special-purpose equipment.


----------



## Budd (Dec 17, 2016)

rterrhalt said:


> A few days later, but I've got an update for you all:
> 
> As I said, i didn't really have access to training. While this was true before, I have since solved that problem through the tried and true method of not being a dumb loner and making a friend.
> 
> ...


This is very good. Firearms are not for everyone. Given your history of fear of them, you are wise to get some hands on experience before getting one for self defense.

I would suggest that after you get your own weapon, spend some time practicing with it before you start carrying it on a daily basis. Safety, yours and those around you, has to be priority one. Please become proficient with your weapon before you carry it. This will involve a commitment of both time and money for practice ammo.


----------



## rterrhalt (Jan 7, 2017)

Hey folks, last update. And a universal thank you.

After trying out the revolver and quite a few other guns whilst keeping in mind my needs, I have chosen my firearm.

It is a Smith & Wesson M&P Shield, chambered in 9mm. I shot quite a few calibers and responded to the recoil of 9mm the best and recovered from it for follow-ups fastest. And the grip of the Shield was different from that of the Glock, but felt so much better. Almost perfect for my hand.

I picked up a spare mag, a holster, and a cleaning kit to make sure I've covered my bases. And I've got a few targets and some ball ammo for practice as well.

And above all, I'll be carrying as responsibly, respectfully, and safely as possible. Thank you everyone for your advice and suggestions!


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

Congrats to you! The M&P 9 Shield is an excellent choice for a concealed carry gun where you desire a little more concealment. You did well and your new sidearm should give you years of service.


----------



## Craigh (Jul 29, 2016)

Along with my friend from Virginia, I also congratulate you on your new purchase. When I got out of the Nursing Home/Rehab facility this past Summer, I knew I needed to downsize my EDC firearm because I was weak and my hands were still half numb. After testing several choices and listening to a close friend who owns one of my local gun stores, I also purchased an M&P 9mm Shield, and it was the best decision I could have made in retrospect. Normally, I'm one of those who believes the first gun ought to be larger, but in the case of that Shield, it is just comfortable, points naturally, and I find it quite soft shooting, especially in 9mm. Out of the box, I just seemed to hit as if I'd been practicing with it for a long time. I even placed 2nd in a Senior's Fun Match with our club using that pistol. Admittedly, there were only seven people competing, including a 90 year old LOL. He's pretty spry. 

One thing I did find. In my opinion the S&W M&P Shield is a bit stiff, out of the box. What I mean by that is the slide is harder to rack than some others. The take-down lever is tough to move. The slide stop lever I found to be almost impossible to work at that job. Just getting the slide to lock back with no magazine was frustrating. I almost have to use my Uplula universal loader to fully charge the magazines. Admittedly, part of that was and is me, but part is the handgun. 

The good side of this is that it gets way way better towards the end of the break-in period. It started getting better after only 50 rounds and a really good cleaning. Then after 500 rounds, all is pretty much well. I also took it entirely apart, hand polishing everything with both Flitz and red rouge jewelers polish. I paid special attention to the rails both on the slide and frame. I apply RIG grease on the rails, top and lockups on the barrel and oil where the manual tells me to. I put the empty gun in my nightstand without a mag and every night and morning for a week, I worked the slide until my hands would get tired. I don't suggest it for you, but I had a gunsmith add the Apex trigger system. I'm not sure it was really needed, but it's somewhat better. That Shield is now a real joy to use both indoor ranges and outdoor. I now use it every single day as my carry gun in an Alien Super Tuck III inside the waist band holster or a Vedders. I can't decide which I like better. I trust it with my life and at least once per week with the lives of my grandchildren when I take them out. 

My defensive load is Speer Gold Dots in 124 grn +P Short Barrel version. My practice ammo is most any 124 grn FMJ with between 1100 and 1200 fps so it will have a similar recoil impulse as the Gold Dots which are a bit expensive for practice. However, I would put a couple of boxes of whatever you decide on through the gun to make it they are reliable in that pistol. I actually put over 100 rounds of 124 grn Gold Dot +P standard barrel through mine because I'd bought a ton it it a few years ago. I don't find Speer's +P 9mm to be any hotter than most other non +P for that weight. That's why it's so easy to buy FMJ practice ammo with the same characteristics. I think the more ubiquitous 115 grain loads are not as reliable for defensive work as a slightly heavier bullet. The 124's move the slide with a little more authority without being snappy. 

Take care and make it an adventure. 

Craig


----------



## Bisley (Aug 24, 2008)

A small gun is difficult to shoot well, but if you can master it, your fundamentals will serve you well with most other handguns. I recommend extending your range as you become more proficient. Keep challenging yourself to improve your skills - don't settle for 'patterns' on a silhouette.


----------



## Budd (Dec 17, 2016)

I've never had a M&P Shield, but I have always heard good things about them. You have made a good choice. If it is new, it will need to be broken in to assure that it will perform reliably. Clean it and lube it well. Be sure to keep the grooves on the slide and frame greased. After a few hundred rounds it should be good to go.

Best of luck with your new gun!


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

My M&P 9 Shield lives in my secondary carry stable. This means that it is used for more specific occasions, such as family get togethers, weddings and funerals, and just any place where I desire a bit more concealment. It is also my primary vacation and travel gun. As such it doesn't get much in the way of lubing, just like the rest of my carry guns. I use a high quality dry lube, Hornady's One Shot, because it virtually eliminates the collection of dirty, lint, dust, and other debris that commonly occurs with oils and grease. And it is one of the best lubing products you can use.

As for break-in, shooting it is one of the best things to do during this phase. But you can also do as Craigh suggested and simply work the slide back and forth vigorously a few hundred times, or more, to help with this. I also load the magazines, in any semi-auto I buy, to their full capacity and leave them like that for a few months. During this time, I will periodically unload and then reload them again. This process helps to relax the magazine spring and makes loading up the magazines a lot easier. I am currently doing this to my new M&P 45 Shield.

For Shield holsters, I prefer the DeSantis Mini Scabbard belt holster. I have found this holster to be near perfect for the M&P 9 and 40 Shield. Not so with the M&P 45 Shield with its more aggressive stippling on its grip. After a few hours of this, it gets a might uncomfortable in the skin.

I view the M&P Shield as a close quarter defensive sidearm. I don't see it being used at distances much over twelve feet. This translates into not nearly having to worry so much about delivering tight groups at seven to ten yards. Just practice getting that gun out and into play quickly.

An excellent choice, in my opinion. Now for something a bit more, try the M&P 9c or 40c. The 40c is the softest shooting slightly less than compact pistol I have ever fired. A real gem. And it carries so darned nice in both calibers.


----------



## pblanc (Mar 3, 2015)

I personally sort of formed a dislike for M&P pistols years ago. They didn't feel comfortable in my hand, and the triggers were not very good IMO. But I have been intrigued by the M&P Shield, and although I have never shot one, I have handled a few. Trigger action seems better than my recollection of M&P triggers from the past. It is certainly an easily concealed pistol, it is attractively priced, and the Shield has been almost insanely popular for the last couple of years.

i also choose either Federal HST 124 grain JHP or Speer Gold Dot 124 grain JHP for self-defense in 9 mm Luger. In a pistol with a barrel as short as that of the Shield, I would probably go with Speer's 124 grain +P short barrel Gold Dot. Another possibility would be Hornady's 115 grain Critical Defense JHP. I would avoid Hornady 135 grain Critical Duty because some tests have shown that it does not achieve sufficient muzzle velocity in short barrel pistols to expand reliably and therefore over-penetrates. 
It is paradoxical but sometimes a slower JHP round will over-penetrate relative to a faster one, because the slower round might not expand reliably on impact.

For practice ammo, I rather like the NATO spec 124 grain FMJ ammo sold by Winchester and other makers. It is a bit hotter than standard pressure 9 mm and seems to duplicate the recoil characteristics of the most common 124 grain self-defense loads a bit better.


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

pblanc said:


> I personally sort of formed a dislike for M&P pistols years ago. They didn't feel comfortable in my hand, and the triggers were not very good IMO. But I have been intrigued by the M&P Shield, and although I have never shot one, I have handled a few. Trigger action seems better than my recollection of M&P triggers from the past. It is certainly an easily concealed pistol, it is attractively priced, and the Shield has been almost insanely popular for the last couple of years.


The M&P triggers have all undergone quite a dramatic improvement within the last two years. I bought my first M&P, the .40 caliber full size version with the 4.25" barrel, in December 2009. The trigger was gritty in its pre-travel so I did around 7,000 trigger pulls with the striker dropped. This helped quite a bit to smooth out the trigger. Then later, I installed the Apex Tactical USB and that did wonders. There were several more M&P's added to my collection and just two years ago, I bought my M&P 9c. Terrible trigger out of the box. It measured at 9.5 pounds, which is much to heavy for a carry gun for me. So in went the Apex Tactical DCAEK but I retained the OEM factory trigger spring. This brought the pull weight down to 5 1/2 pounds; much better. My newest M&P's have had really good triggers, so S&W obviously heard the complaints and did something to improve the breed.


----------



## bluewave (Mar 29, 2016)

rterrhalt said:


> A few days later, but I've got an update for you all:
> 
> As I said, I didn't really have access to training. While this was true before, I have since solved that problem through the tried and true method of not being a dumb loner and making a friend.
> 
> ...


It's great that you are getting some training and practical experience before making a decision about a pistol.

Although I've hunted with shotguns and rifles over the years, I really didn't get interested in pistols until a little over a year ago. I was 80 at the time and we didn't have a weapon I could use for home defense. So I decided to get my LTC and purchase a pistol. When I fired for qualification I used the instructors Browning 9mm which was a great shooting gun. I shot very well and really enjoyed the experience. Later I ended up purchasing a Glock 19, Glock 43, Glock 42, and a Sig P238. I also now have a S & W .38 special.

The reason I mention my experience is that I really didn't expect to be shooting routinely. I have enjoyed it so much that I now shoot about 3 times a month and shoot 300-400 rds. a month. I just wanted to point out that as you go through this experience your objectives may change. The Glock 19 is a great pistol! And 9mm is the least expensive ammo. That really helps if you should start shooting a lot, as I have.

Good luck with your decision to get some training. You are definitely on the right path!


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

SouthernBoy said:


> ...I view the M&P Shield as a close quarter defensive sidearm. I don't see it being used at distances much over twelve feet. This translates into not nearly having to worry so much about delivering tight groups at seven to ten yards. Just practice getting that gun out and into play quickly...


Sorry, but I strongly disagree with your suggestion.
If you cannot place shots accurately at, say, 15 yards when you are practicing, then when you are in a save-your-life panic you will not be able to reliably hit the BG at 12 feet.
To be able to place shots accurately in an emergency, one needs to practice a lot, and one needs to extend one's skills as much as possible while practicing.
Then, when crunch-time arrives (if it ever does), your well-practiced "muscle memory" auto-pilot will deliver the necessary accurate shots at any reasonable self-defense distance.


----------



## Craigh (Jul 29, 2016)

Steve M1911A1 said:


> Sorry, but I strongly disagree with your suggestion.
> If you cannot place shots accurately at, say, 15 yards when you are practicing, then when you are in a save-your-life panic you will not be able to reliably hit the BG at 12 feet.
> To be able to place shots accurately in an emergency, one needs to practice a lot, and one needs to extend one's skills as much as possible while practicing.
> Then, when crunch-time arrives (if it ever does), your well-practiced "muscle memory" auto-pilot will deliver the necessary accurate shots at any reasonable self-defense distance.


I also firmly agree with this, but think the magic range is 20 yards, at least for me. I want to be able to make precision shots at that range to a 4x6 note card. I agree most encounters will be very close and making a fast, accurate presentation is important, but some situations call for longer ability on a BG wearing body armor. As they trained in MST, it's not only what the enemy is likely to do, but one must also train for what he is capable of doing. In some cases, that would be an armor wearing bad guy in the mall, a restaurant or a parking garage to name a few. Further and as you stated, someone comfortable with longer range precision will also have that muscle memory when under stress for closer ranges. I practice from arms reach to 20 and 25 yards indoor and up to and past 50 yards out of doors. In fact, we have a 12 inch plate of ar500 steel hanging at 100 yards. I love when it rings. Not as often as I'd like.


----------



## pic (Nov 14, 2009)

Feet, yards ?? If I see inches I'll really be confused , lol.


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

Steve M1911A1 said:


> Sorry, but I strongly disagree with your suggestion.
> If you cannot place shots accurately at, say, 15 yards when you are practicing, then when you are in a save-your-life panic you will not be able to reliably hit the BG at 12 feet.
> To be able to place shots accurately in an emergency, one needs to practice a lot, and one needs to extend one's skills as much as possible while practicing.
> Then, when crunch-time arrives (if it ever does), your well-practiced "muscle memory" auto-pilot will deliver the necessary accurate shots at any reasonable self-defense distance.


I think you are partially correct. This is the part to which I refer...
*"...your well-practiced "muscle memory" auto-pilot will deliver the necessary accurate shots at any reasonable self-defense distance."*

The rest I am in disagreement with your assessment, except for the copious amounts of training part.


----------



## pic (Nov 14, 2009)

Craigh said:


> I also firmly agree with this, but think the magic range is 20 yards, at least for me. I want to be able to make precision shots at that range to a 4x6 note card. I agree most encounters will be very close and making a fast, accurate presentation is important, but some situations call for longer ability on a BG wearing body armor. As they trained in MST, it's not only what the enemy is likely to do, but one must also train for what he is capable of doing. In some cases, that would be an armor wearing bad guy in the mall, a restaurant or a parking garage to name a few. Further and as you stated, someone comfortable with longer range precision will also have that muscle memory when under stress for closer ranges. I practice from arms reach to 20 and 25 yards indoor and up to and past 50 yards out of doors. In fact, we have a 12 inch plate of ar500 steel hanging at 100 yards. I love when it rings. Not as often as I'd like.


z

Every Sunday we use to cut cards with 45 autos, same group of guys. Top of the line was the gold cup. There Could of been better 45's , not sure.m
I'm not to sure about the distance because it was so long ago.
It was about 20 yards maybe 25. The trajectory drops quick after a certain distance.
I use to remember, but I'm talking at least 35 years ago.
:smt1099


----------



## Bisley (Aug 24, 2008)

I was raised on the 'aim small - miss small' philosophy, so I believe that it is the correct way for a new shooter to begin. I believe that a lot of the newer instructors teach 'spray and pray' so that they can give positive feedback to poor shooters, thereby making themselves look good. I could be wrong, over-all, but I have seen some of this.

Speaking strictly for myself, I don't believe I would benefit much from modern speed training, because I still struggle with some of the handgun fundamentals after many years of sporadic practice. In my opinion, only a small percentage of new shooters will practice enough to master the fundamentals, much less a quick draw or tactical skills. It requires a good bit of dedication and a lot of time and money to have great handgun skills. Those who lack those qualities or abilities have their hands full, just learning and remembering safety and shooting fundamentals, from one range trip to the next. Dry-firing is helpful, but most folks don't even do that enough.


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

Bisley said:


> I was raised on the 'aim small - miss small' philosophy, so I believe that it is the correct way for a new shooter to begin. I believe that a lot of the newer instructors teach 'spray and pray' so that they can give positive feedback to poor shooters, thereby making themselves look good. I could be wrong, over-all, but I have seen some of this.
> 
> Speaking strictly for myself, I don't believe I would benefit much from modern speed training, because I still struggle with some of the handgun fundamentals after many years of sporadic practice. In my opinion, only a small percentage of new shooters will practice enough to master the fundamentals, much less a quick draw or tactical skills. It requires a good bit of dedication and a lot of time and money to have great handgun skills. Those who lack those qualities or abilities have their hands full, just learning and remembering safety and shooting fundamentals, from one range trip to the next. Dry-firing is helpful, but most folks don't even do that enough.


When I hit my local range, generally every two weeks, I don't just punch paper; I train. I run through a series of drills and concentrate on those which need some polish because the past time out I may have been off a little. These drills involve flipping targets at SD distances, which can range from nine feet to 21 feet but most often in the twelve to fifteen foot SD range.

After a brief warmup, I start out with my 2x2 drill. This is two shots with a two-second face time and a two-second edge time, twice. The start time, after hitting the start button is almost always two seconds before the target goes from an edge presentation to face. I do this maybe a half dozen times then do it with a reload between the first and second flips at the two-second edge time. Next up is a 2x1 drill. This is two shots with a one-second face time and a two-second edge time. I do several of these. Then on to the 2x2 drill again but this time with draw from concealment and fire. With this drill, I have two seconds to draw my gun and get two shots on target. This is pretty easy. I have done this with one shot (dry fire practice only) in 2/3rds of a second. Thankfully the range allows draw/fire exercises with live ammunition.

Sometimes I throw in the flipping targets with drawn shapes on them and fire at the shapes. And very frequently, I do triple taps on two targets to simulate two to the body and one to the head (Mozambique drill). And I also do some longer range work towards the end just to wrap things up. Also strong hand/weak hand drills get run, as well. I also like to throw in the triple 5 drill which is five shots at five yards in five seconds from a draw from concealment position. This is not hard but tends to keep you honest.

There are others but you get the picture. I am most interested in getting my gun into action quickly and getting rounds on target. I use paper plates and index cards for targets. The plates are of two sizes: seven inch with a 4 1/2 inch center and nine inch with a six inch center. Most of my work is with the seven inch plates. These targets keep it interesting and work well for me. The point is to test myself and try some different things. Oh, and I do some of the draw/fire drills with reloads when the target goes to edge for two-seconds.

It is my belief that if I am the object of an attack, it is going to come quickly. This is why I am so fixated on training to get my gun into action quickly and get rounds going to the target. Just standing there in a relaxed stance and punching holes in a traditional target has no appeal for me. The one thing that is hard to work past is if my gun 's grip gets hung up on my shirt tail, I am supposed to continue the draw. What makes this difficult is the fact that the target is only going to be in the face presentation for two seconds. However in an actual attack, you are not going to be able to start over. Once you begin your draw sequence you MUST go all the way through it. Hard to do this on a range with flipping targets so the only way to train for this is at home with dry fire exercises or outside where you can use live ammo legally (someone's land where this is safe).

'Nuff said I guess. Hope this helps.


----------



## Bisley (Aug 24, 2008)

SouthernBoy said:


> ...'Nuff said I guess. Hope this helps.


My post was not an indictment against you or any of the other serious trainers out there. I commend you for your discipline, and highly recommend that everyone else develop similar. My comment was meant as a statement of how I think things really are, for the majority of new shooters, and quite a few older ones.

I'm just saying that before a new shooter backslides into the laziness I have described, he should at least learn how to hit the target, so that each time he does make it to the range, he will strive to recover whatever amount of lost ability he has lost since the last range trip. If he does this, and nothing else, he may get the opportunity to save himself with a handgun, should he ever be subjected to a lethal attack.

What could be worse than being attacked, quickly drawing a gun, and emptying it unsuccessfully against attackers, before being killed or maimed, anyway? I'm just saying, "learn to hit where you aim," and aim for the _center_ of the center of mass.


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

Bisley said:


> My post was not an indictment against you or any of the other serious trainers out there. I commend you for your discipline, and highly recommend that everyone else develop similar. My comment was meant as a statement of how I think things really are, for the majority of new shooters, and quite a few older ones.
> 
> I'm just saying that before a new shooter backslides into the laziness I have described, he should at least learn how to hit the target, so that each time he does make it to the range, he will strive to recover whatever amount of lost ability he has lost since the last range trip. If he does this, and nothing else, he may get the opportunity to save himself with a handgun, should he ever be subjected to a lethal attack.
> 
> What could be worse than being attacked, quickly drawing a gun, and emptying it unsuccessfully against attackers, before being killed or maimed, anyway? I'm just saying, "learn to hit where you aim," and aim for the _center_ of the center of mass.


I believe you misunderstood my post. I was in no way opposing your position or challenging your post. Quite the contrary. I was only outlining the efforts I try to make when I train at the range. And I call it training, as opposed to target shooting, because I run through a series of drills.

Your post was fine and I do know that you were not suggesting or making any sort of indictment against me. I think maybe I presented my response post in a fashion that might have suggested this but if that is the case, please know that was not my intention. We're all good.


----------



## pic (Nov 14, 2009)

SouthernBoy said:


> I believe you misunderstood my post. I was in no way opposing your position or challenging your post. Quite the contrary. I was only outlining the efforts I try to make when I train at the range. And I call it training, as opposed to target shooting, because I run through a series of drills.
> 
> Your post was fine and I do know that you were not suggesting or making any sort of indictment against me. I think maybe I presented my response post in a fashion that might have suggested this but if that is the case, please know that was not my intention. We're all good.


The only very important fact you left out.

Was the great exercise you're getting while training and having fun, very nice.


----------

