# Advice about first semi-auto handgun



## Donato (Apr 15, 2009)

I am brand new to the world of handguns. I own a Winchester rifle, but I never held a handgun until yesterday. I'd appreciate some advice from anyone experienced with a semi-automatic pistol. I am looking seriously at either the Springfield Armory XD 40 or Smith & Wesson M&P 40 or Glock 23. All of these handguns received excellent reviews. Has anyone ever owned or fired one and can recommend one over the other? Or are there better first time semi-automatics to also consider, e.g., Baretta?
The gun will be used primarily for in-home self-defense and also for concealment. I will, of course, use it just for fun at the shooting range.
Thanks!


----------



## literaltrance (Dec 24, 2008)

Donato said:


> I am brand new to the world of handguns. I own a Winchester rifle, but I never held a handgun until yesterday. I'd appreciate some advice from anyone experienced with a semi-automatic pistol. I am looking seriously at either the Springfield Armory XD 40 or Smith & Wesson M&P 40 or Glock 23. All of these handguns received excellent reviews. Has anyone ever owned or fired one and can recommend one over the other? Or are there better first time semi-automatics to also consider, e.g., Baretta?
> The gun will be used primarily for in-home self-defense and also for concealment. I will, of course, use it just for fun at the shooting range.
> Thanks!


Welcome to the forum!

If this is going to be your first handgun, I recommend something in the compact size. Both XDs and M&Ps come in this size, and the Glock model 23 is a compact. This will allow you to conceal without too much trouble while retaining a lengthy-enough barrel to put shots where they count without much difficulty. In terms of these manufacturers, I've 95% sure they all stand behind their products for life if you buy new (and some even if you don't buy new, although I don't know which). They are also known for their products reliability so I wouldn't give this too much thought.

I find it interesting as a first handgun all of your choices have striker action (as opposed to hammers). There is nothing wrong with this but I was wondering if your list of candidates was given to you by someone else? I prefer hammers myself, but mostly because I learned on a 1911. This is just food for thought.

Also, as a first handgun, you may want to consider going with a 9mm or a 45 ACP. The 40S&W round, while not necessarily punishing, does have a sharp, snappy recoil and can irritate novice hands, especially in a compact-sized weapon. Comfort issues and blisters did occasionally come out whenever I shot Glocks 22 and 23 (40S&W fullsize, 40S&W compact), but I never had an issue with the Glocks 17 & 19 (9mm fullsize, 9mm compact). Recent ammunition spikes in price and lulls in availability might also lead one to choose a caliber which is cheaper and/or easier to find. It is also for this reason I think you should consider a 9mm weapon in particular.

Hope this helps!


----------



## Donato (Apr 15, 2009)

*That's great advice...*

Thanks very much for this advice. It is not something I considered before, as I wanted something with more punch than a 9mm, but you have given me good food for thought. The last thing I want is to have blisters on my fingers or hands! Can you recommend some solid quality 9mm 45 ACP semi-autos models? What about a lesser caliber, such as a 22? Could they also cause comfort issues? How about a 10mm like the Glock 20 or 29?


----------



## literaltrance (Dec 24, 2008)

Donato said:


> Thanks very much for this advice. It is not something I considered before, as I wanted something with more punch than a 9mm, but you have given me good food for thought. The last thing I want is to have blisters on my fingers or hands! Can you recommend some solid quality 9mm 45 ACP semi-autos models? What about a lesser caliber, such as a 22? Could they also cause comfort issues?


Well, I don't want to come off as bashing the 40S&W. It is a great round, it just happens to have the highest PSI of the popular handgun calibers (well, second highest, although the difference between 40S&W and 357SIG isn't a whole lot, and I'm not sure you could call 357SIG "popular"). This can lead to wear-and-tear and fatigue on your hands. But also remember, while I have experienced this myself, it was at the range...a place where many people like myself don't hesitate to go through a couple hundred rounds for practice. I seriously doubt you're going to have problems with a 40S&W during a qualification or any range time where less than 50 shots are fired.

As far as other quality manufacturers, I highly recommend CZs and FNPs. If you're willing to spend more, Sig Sauer and H&K are at the higher end of the duty pistols on the price spectrum. While they do bring some unique and impressive products to the market, one need not spend as much as their products demand in order to get a rugged and reliable weapon.

[Edit]: a 22 caliber handgun for defense isn't exactly ideal. A good rule of thumb is to carry the largest caliber you can comfortably shoot. While I wouldn't rule out a 22 cal handgun for PRACTICE purposes, I think it would be prudent to get the practical personal defense weapon first THEN maybe get a 22 down the road to hone your skills...but that's just me.


----------



## undrgrnd (Jul 10, 2008)

when I bought my first handgun it was more of an impulse buy. I started off with a taurus .40 s&w. I live the gun and it still shoots without a hiccup. that being said my next was an xd9 and I wish it had been my first. the 9mm round is perfect for home and ccw and without the punishment of the 40s&w. every model you neantioned are great guns handsdown. as far as .22 I went with a sig mosquito because I like that is has the feel of other semi autos. you should also take a look into other sigs for a first purchase. that will be my next and you can get into a sig in 9mm for around the price of all the models you listed. good luck with ur purchase and welcome to the forum.


----------



## chathcock (Feb 4, 2008)

I own a XD.45Compact for home defense and range use, I will eventually get a CCW and that is why I bought compact as I can use either a 10 or 13 round magazine in it.

To the point: I was originally looking at the XD-M.40 but decided on the .45 caliber round which they don't have in the XD-M series (yet, hopefully...). After borrowing and shooting a XD-M9mm a few times I wish I would have gotten the XD-M.40 instead as the new features are a great improvement. So don't overlook that option as it is a nicer gun in my opinion.

Also, I have a few FBI special agent/ FBI-SWAT friends who say they will never depend on anything that doesn't have a "4" in front. Take it however you want, I am not trying to start a caliber argument here.

Good luck with your search, and even if you decide on a .22lr it is better than nothing. Welcome to the forum.


----------



## PhilR. (Apr 25, 2007)

Donato said:


> I am looking seriously at either the Springfield Armory XD 40 or Smith & Wesson M&P 40 or Glock 23. All of these handguns received excellent reviews. Has anyone ever owned or fired one and can recommend one over the other?
> 
> *There is nothing inherent in the pistols themselves that would allow another person to tell you that one is better than the other. All three are accurate and reliable handguns. The difference is how well a person shoots them. The only thing that you can use to recommend one over the other is how well *you* shoot them. If you are forced to make your purchase without shooting them, then just pick the one that has features that you like.*
> 
> ...


PhilR.


----------



## PhilR. (Apr 25, 2007)

Donato said:


> The last thing I want is to have blisters on my fingers or hands!
> 
> *There is no reason to have blisters on one's hands when shooting these low-powered handgun cartridges, even after an extended range session. If blisters are happening, then either your grip is wrong, or you have the wrong grip.
> 
> My wife shoots our S&W 386 and Colt Python (both are .357 magnum) without any problems at all, even during extended range sessions where we will go through four or five hundreds rounds of 9mm, .45acp, and .357. With the great number of aftermarket grips such as the ones from Pachmayr and Hogue, and the great number of different handgun grip styles, many of which have interchangeable backstraps that allow you somewhat customize the fit, there is no excuse to have blisters.*




PhilR.


----------



## Pistolero (Mar 6, 2009)

The XD .40S&W is a stronger contender than the M&P. The backstrap safety and loaded chamber indicator are real winners and the XD ergonomics are great. Get the tactical model if it's available in you area as the longer slide makes it even more of a pleasure to shoot and barrel length is the easiest part of the weapon to hide. I once had a customer order an XD .40S&W Tactical with the compact frame. He could carry it with the short mag seated for a low-printing butt and carried the extended grip mags on his off side for higher capacity. That gun was truly amazing...


----------



## literaltrance (Dec 24, 2008)

PhilR. said:


> There is no reason to have blisters on one's hands when shooting these low-powered handgun cartridges, even after an extended range session. If blisters are happening, then either your grip is wrong, or you have the wrong grip.
> 
> My wife shoots our S&W 386 and Colt Python (both are .357 magnum) without any problems at all, even during extended range sessions where we will go through four or five hundreds rounds of 9mm, .45acp, and .357. With the great number of aftermarket grips such as the ones from Pachmayr and Hogue, and the great number of different handgun grip styles, many of which have interchangeable backstraps that allow you somewhat customize the fit, there is no excuse to have blisters.


With all due respect I'm going to have to disagree here. I'm no competition shooter but I make it to the range often enough to know that I have an acceptable grip on my handguns when I shoot. In fact, G17/G19 are the same dimensions as the G22/G23, and if I'm only experiencing blisters and soreness with the 40s, then obviously it's not the grip. Green hands, such as one who is looking for their first handgun, only increase the chances of problems in my eyes. The Hogue grip wrap might curb this, but why not get a handgun where it's a non-issue?


----------



## DevilsJohnson (Oct 21, 2007)

> I find it interesting as a first handgun all of your choices have striker action


I think a lot of new shooters lean to the modern weapons because this is what they see. You wont see 1911's in movies and the gun mags always want the newest thing on their covers it seems.

Like you say they are a good choice being they (the ones listed) are all reputable weapons. It's just that many people see newer as better and that's just that. Me personally I like a weapon with a hammer. So poly pistols are not near as plentiful. There's some Sigs and the FNP/Browning Pro pistols I guess. The FNP has the changeable back strap. That's a plus i think.

The .40 round has really been picking up steam these days from what I see in the forums. while they do have a snappier recoil than the heavier 45ACP I personally find the round a lot of fun to shoot. They are more expensive than the 9mm but if a 9mm is not your cup of tea and you just don't like the look of a 45 then the 40 might be what you need. I have a few of them and they are great for targets as well as carry. I advise new shooters if the can to try all three and get a feel for what the recoil and performance is before going out to get one (especially the 40 and 45) The recoil of a 45 is nothing like a 40. So it's a good to see first hand how they all feel. And remember. Poly frame weapons feel and act different than steel frame weapons. So a Glock or XD in .40 will not feel a lot like a Sig Sauer or maybe a 1911 chambered in that round. Just as barrel length effects felt recoil the over weight and balance if a weapon will.

as far as blisters...? I have yet to have that happen to me and I shoot a lot. Like two times a week and a couple hundred rounds at an outing. It's great to be able to shoot at home :mrgreen:

Really though. blisters from heat or friction? I might have a sore hand from shooting a lot with some big bore like a 44 Rem Mag. but I have never got then shooting something like a Glock in 9mm, 40,45, or even 357 Sig. I'm not going to say anyone has a wrong grip without seeing it first hand but that does not sound like something that should happen.


----------



## ECHOONE (Dec 10, 2008)

First go to several different gun shops,handle as many different brands and sizes as you can determine which feels the best to you. Then if possible rent the ones that felt best in all available calibers! just because u like the 40 doesn't mean you'll shoot it the best or even like it after you shoot it. Goodluck


----------



## Donato (Apr 15, 2009)

*Good advice from everyone...*

Thanks. I am so new I do not even have a permit yet! :smt083 But I have the application and will take a class this week, so it's in the works. Once I have the permit, I'll decide, especially after getting a chance to do some shooting. Will post back then. You've all been very helpful!


----------



## Oldman (Apr 16, 2009)

*Maybe*

I may be opening a can of worms here, but.......

a semi being carried for protection has several built in drawbacks.

1. A stovepipe jamb can make the gun unusable.
2. A broken or weak magazine can turn the gun into an expensive single shot pistol.
3. A poorly held semi can cause the slide to cut the hand of the shooter and distract them from the business at hand.

Sure, I have a few semi handguns but each of the above situations have cost seasoned police officers their lives. When in the hands of an inexperienced shooter, it becomes more of a factor in survival.

If I were testifying in court as to the best handgun for a new shooter, it would be a revolver. As long as it is loaded, the other factors are no longer issues.


----------



## Donato (Apr 15, 2009)

*No can of worms*



Oldman said:


> I may be opening a can of worms here, but.......
> 
> a semi being carried for protection has several built in drawbacks.
> 
> ...


My sister just bought a revolver for self-defense, a S&W M686. It fits her hand like a glove. Nice gun. What kind of revolvers would you recommend as a first shooter for a guy that can also be concealed? The 686 was a little "girlie" in my hand. Would a .357 Magnum be too large? Thanks.


----------



## Oldman (Apr 16, 2009)

*Pick one*

Any gun that feels good, is easily fired and dependable to the shooter is a good starter gun.

I have been carrying open or concealed for over 42 years and learned long ago that there is no one gun fits all.

For me, a good S&W 357 like a model 686, 66 or 19 works well but I am just as comfortable with a 1911 Colt.

Visit your local shooting range and try out the various guns available. Nothing gives advice better than experience.


----------



## PhilR. (Apr 25, 2007)

Oldman said:


> 1. A stovepipe jamb can make the gun unusable.
> 2. A broken or weak magazine can turn the gun into an expensive single shot pistol.
> 3. A poorly held semi can cause the slide to cut the hand of the shooter and distract them from the business at hand.


1. If a stovepipe happens, you can clear the case and proceed with shooting. Conversely, if a revolver jams up - and yes this happens - you will not be able to proceed with shooting as you will have to disassemble it in order to fix it.

2. That is why you use a good magazine - so you do not get jams. And too, why would anyone use a broken or weak mag to begin with? What - it's possible for a mag to break while one is using it? Why yes, just as it's possible for a revolver to break while one is using it.

3. That is why one needs to practice with their handgun and learn how to properly use it before you carry it.

Those are about the thinnest of reasons that I've ever seen to argue against the use of a semi-auto....


----------



## Oldman (Apr 16, 2009)

*Actually not a weak arguement*



PhilR. said:


> 1. If a stovepipe happens, you can clear the case and proceed with shooting. Conversely, if a revolver jams up - and yes this happens - you will not be able to proceed with shooting as you will have to disassemble it in order to fix it.
> 
> 2. That is why you use a good magazine - so you do not get jams. And too, why would anyone use a broken or weak mag to begin with? What - it's possible for a mag to break while one is using it? Why yes, just as it's possible for a revolver to break while one is using it.
> 
> ...


In over 50 years of shooting, carrying and in law enforcement, and 30+ years of testifying in firearm cases, I have never found a single case of a revolver hanging up. Study why the semi became popular with LEO. We are seeing more and more experienced police officers being killed or injured due to semi malfunction. The reality: most shooters are casual in their practice. When they need the sidearm, they are not so familar with it that they can work or disassemble it in total darkness. A jamb in a semi causes people to redirect their attention to the firearm and away from the issue at hand. There is a lot of difference in firing on the range along with all the fun than in an actual confrontation that no one should have to encounter. And yes, I have been in two actual shots fired confrontations, had the frayed nerves during and the emotional damage afterward. I know what goes on during the confrontations and the ways a person can be distracted.

That said, there is a case on record in NY where an officer never used his gun and it sat for years with the same ammo in it. When he finally needed it in a robbery, the revolver failed to work because the cylinder had seized up. I still question how he qualified to keep his post certification. It may be possible he used a different firearm.

Granted, good mags will reduce the potential for failure. They also weaken with age. The sad fact is most people will leave their mags fully loaded and on the shelf, in a drawer or where ever. Time, pressure, dust, dewpoint condensation and such takes over and after a while, the mag no longer works. People do not rotate mags.

I need to mention H.R. 45 being considered for next years Congressional review. It takes away all guns using mags, autoloaders and forbids the manufacture and sale of magazines. Take away the mags and even if you are able to keep a semi, without a mag, it is then a single shot. The political climate this year is not going to allow HR 45 to go through but read the Congressional Record and see how it is being supported by the Adimistration. The First Amendment says we can own firearms but does not say what type. Under the new Congress and White House staff, the attitude has changed and their attitude has been, "does the First Amendment allow an individual to own a bazooka or an anti aircraft gun?"

Reality also has shown the 300 million guns owners do not practice. They buy, keep and store. Less than 1% are avid shooters. I shoot often and lots but I get paid for it. I also write letters to politicians and news media as well as speaking in public simply because I am passionate about firearm ownership and the rights of Americans to own them. If even 20% of firearm owners would practice, there would be lines of people waiting at the ranges and we would see a lot more people passionate about the Right to own firearms.


----------



## DevilsJohnson (Oct 21, 2007)

I think an auto loader makes a great weapon for SD situations. But like anything that as moving parts it is important that the user takes steps to maintain it. Being a SD weapon might be called upon to save your life I would think that anyone that owns one would want to make sure all the springs and other parts are in good shape. WE clean our weapons for this reason it just seems smart to check parts and replace them. I replace a recoil spring every thousand rounds(longer depending on the type of pistol). It's good to keep an extra spring around. You can see when compared to the one in your weapon that it will start to look shorter than your new one after you get as little as 500-600 rounds. Springs like my main spring I do not change real often but I do like inspect it at least yearly to look for wear that might inhibit the weapons proper function.

Springs, firing pins and other parts that get a lot of work need to be watched for wear. The one time you need your weapon to help you in a bad situation is the wrong time to find out you have a problem in there that could have been easily taken care of with a few bucks spent on a spring or other part.


----------



## Bisley (Aug 24, 2008)

Oldman said:


> Reality also has shown the 300 million guns owners do not practice. They buy, keep and store. Less than 1% are avid shooters...
> 
> ...If even 20% of firearm owners would practice, there would be lines of people waiting at the ranges and we would see a lot more people passionate about the Right to own firearms...


Good point.

I agree that most people spend more time acquiring, polishing, tweaking, and fondling their gear than they spend learning how to operate it properly. I only make it to the range once or twice a month, myself, and most of the handgun shooters I see there are not very good. I'm not great, myself, but a little better than most of the folks I have watched.

My personal opinion is that the person who is going to buy a gun, shoot one box of ammo, and stick the gun in his ammo drawer, should just buy good .38 revolver and forget semi-autos altogether.

But, on the other hand, a person who is going to practice occasionally and do some dry-fire drills, clean and inspect his gun after firing it or at regular intervals, is fine with a semi-auto, and some people actually shoot them much better than revolvers.


----------



## Oldman (Apr 16, 2009)

*Good reply*



Bisley said:


> Good point.
> 
> I agree that most people spend more time acquiring, polishing, tweaking, and fondling their gear than they spend learning how to operate it properly. I only make it to the range once or twice a month, myself, and most of the handgun shooters I see there are not very good. I'm not great, myself, but a little better than most of the folks I have watched.
> 
> ...


It is a well known fact that the drive-by shooters do not practice. They use the same method as many in law enforcement, the simple spray and pray method. After all, they have more ammo in the gun. Many years ago, LEO across the nation went to the semi due to officers that seldom fired their sidearms feeling outgunned due to the gangs using the semis being shown by Hollywood. In short, officers traded accuracy for capacity. Officer involved shootings increased, innocent bystander injuries increased, officer injuries increased. When limited in ammo, you tend to be more careful in shot placement. Since the introduction into LE, many departments have disallowed officers shooting at moving vehicles due to potential for wayward bullets.

Past that, a single shot firearm is more accurate than a semi. The less moving parts, the more accurate the weapon. In a revolver, the projectile is moving down the barrel and nothing else is moving that would pull the shot off target. In a semi, as the projectile is travelling through the barrel, the slide is coming back, the chamber is being reloaded and all this happens in nano seconds.

As to the original poster, this is his first handgun and zero experience in shooting or being familar with handguns. The simpler the action, the better the shooter. A semi is more complex to learn than a revolver. There is also an added safety element in a revolver.


----------



## PhilR. (Apr 25, 2007)

Oldman said:


> In over 50 years of shooting, carrying and in law enforcement, and 30+ years of testifying in firearm cases, I have never found a single case of a revolver hanging up. Study why the semi became popular with LEO. We are seeing more and more experienced police officers being killed or injured due to semi malfunction. The reality: most shooters are casual in their practice. When they need the sidearm, they are not so familar with it that they can work or disassemble it in total darkness. A jamb in a semi causes people to redirect their attention to the firearm and away from the issue at hand. There is a lot of difference in firing on the range along with all the fun than in an actual confrontation that no one should have to encounter. And yes, I have been in two actual shots fired confrontations, had the frayed nerves during and the emotional damage afterward. I know what goes on during the confrontations and the ways a person can be distracted.
> 
> That said, there is a case on record in NY where an officer never used his gun and it sat for years with the same ammo in it. When he finally needed it in a robbery, the revolver failed to work because the cylinder had seized up. I still question how he qualified to keep his post certification. It may be possible he used a different firearm.
> 
> ...


Yes, lots of things you wrote, almost *none* of it due to the pistol itself. The wrong or stupid things people do with handguns are not the fault of the handgun. This may come as a shock to you, but people get killed while driving automobiles all the time. But I would not tell an adult that they shouldn't ever drive one and should take the bus instead.

As for not ever seeing a revolver malfunction - it doesn't matter what you have seen, as your experience (nor mine) does not have any bearing as to what can actually happen in real life to other people. I've never seen an elephant being born, but you know what - they do get born. And me telling everyone they don't get born because I've never seen it would be idiotic. I guess the easy way to say this is that just because you've never seen it, doesn't mean it doesn't happen.....


----------



## PhilR. (Apr 25, 2007)

DevilsJohnson said:


> I think an auto loader makes a great weapon for SD situations. But like anything that as moving parts it is important that the user takes steps to maintain it. Being a SD weapon might be called upon to save your life I would think that anyone that owns one would want to make sure all the springs and other parts are in good shape. WE clean our weapons for this reason it just seems smart to check parts and replace them. I replace a recoil spring every thousand rounds(longer depending on the type of pistol). It's good to keep an extra spring around. You can see when compared to the one in your weapon that it will start to look shorter than your new one after you get as little as 500-600 rounds. Springs like my main spring I do not change real often but I do like inspect it at least yearly to look for wear that might inhibit the weapons proper function.
> 
> Springs, firing pins and other parts that get a lot of work need to be watched for wear. The one time you need your weapon to help you in a bad situation is the wrong time to find out you have a problem in there that could have been easily taken care of with a few bucks spent on a spring or other part.


+1

All mechanical items can fail, but that's not a reason to damn any of them, including semi-autos and their magazines. Like any potentially dangerous item, it's up to the owners to learn, and do, what's right....


----------



## Oldman (Apr 16, 2009)

*You are correct*



PhilR. said:


> Yes, lots of things you wrote, almost *none* of it due to the pistol itself. The wrong or stupid things people do with handguns are not the fault of the handgun. This may come as a shock to you, but people get killed while driving automobiles all the time. But I would not tell an adult that they shouldn't ever drive one and should take the bus instead.
> 
> As for not ever seeing a revolver malfunction - it doesn't matter what you have seen, as your experience (nor mine) does not have any bearing as to what can actually happen in real life to other people. I've never seen an elephant being born, but you know what - they do get born. And me telling everyone they don't get born because I've never seen it would be idiotic. I guess the easy way to say this is that just because you've never seen it, doesn't mean it doesn't happen.....


However, I spend a lot of my times in courts across the south testifying as to the causes of injuries, wrongful actions and general firearm particulars. I have testified as expert in all levels of courts and get about 20 update sheets a week as to what is happening in the gun industry. None of the incidents I testify about were witnessed by me but I learn the facts of the cases, interview the people involved, be they criminals, police or witnesses. Generally if it happens, it is likely a repeat event due to malfunctions common with that particular incident. A person would think that after 30+ years of investigating and reconstructing firearm incidents, I would have ran across a revolver failure.

I will also admit to seeing new things each year and learning of new incidents during CLE seminars.


----------



## DevilsJohnson (Oct 21, 2007)

PhilR. said:


> +1
> 
> All mechanical items can fail, but that's not a reason to damn any of them, including semi-autos and their magazines. Like any potentially dangerous item, it's up to the owners to learn, and do, what's right....


AGREE 100%

Gun owners need to take the time needed to know how their weapon works and be able to at least be able to take it down for a proper cleaning and inspection. To not do so can and most the time will allow some malfunction to happen. It's not funny to me at all that someone can drop a bunch of money on a weapon that they are going to leave in a box or carry around with them and they wont bother to clean it thinking they have not shot it so it must be clean. Carrying a firearm is the most easy and fast way to get a weapon dirty. The I just bought it and I got a box of ammo burning a hole on my pocket never thinking that there might be globs of some thick grease or even metal filings from manufacture stuck in there and wonder why they get a FTF or worse.

It's something people buy to possibly save their lives! You would think that in itself would be reason enough to check it on a regular basis. And yes, even revolvers get nasty carrying them around and also run the risk of failure when called upon.

Bottom line any weapon when properly craved for will be as safe and reliable for a long time to come. It is just good sense to know, understand your weapon. Take care of it and it will take care of you.

I've carried auto loaders for years and years. They are as safe and reliable and any wheel gun as long as you do your part. I'll wager the people that have their weapon fail when needed did not take the steps to take care of it. I think this kind of person should not have a gun period. Handing them a revolver is just allowing them to neglect a different type of weapon. And it will also in time fail from that neglect.

AS my Dad used to say it's a poor mechanic that blames his tools.


----------



## Bisley (Aug 24, 2008)

Oldman,

You make a lot of generalized statements that you seem to want us to accept, on the basis that you are an expert. Do hostile lawyers let you get away with this when they cross-examine you?

I take minor issue with these:



Oldman said:


> It is a well known fact that the drive-by shooters do not practice. They use the same method as many in law enforcement, the simple spray and pray method.


None of them? Ever? Do cops hold their guns sideways, too? Sorry, but I am not going to assume that my assailant cannot shoot, or that he won't try to hit me with his first shot, just because his Hi-Point holds 15.



> In short, officers traded accuracy for capacity.


I'm betting that any officer who could hit a target 6 times with a S&W .38 revolver, can hit it at least six times with a Glock .40. People that take the time to learn to shoot, can shoot either, and anyone who does not practice with and properly care for the tool that may save their life, is an idiot, whether they carry a revolver or a semi-auto.



> Past that, a single shot firearm is more accurate than a semi.


This statement is not even relevant to the average handgun shooter, because most shooters do not become so proficient that they can distinguish between a gun that groups 2"and one that will only do 4". It takes practice to hit a pie plate at 25 yards, much less a bulls eye, and very few people will do it.



> The simpler the action, the better the shooter.


This _might_ be relevant, if you assume that the guy will never progress beyond the beginner stage, but this guy just asked for advice on semi-auto pistols, and you are basically telling him to forget it, and just go along with your recommendation, because you are an expert. Sure, if a person can afford multiple guns, a revolver makes a lot of sense, to start off with. But if he can only afford one, there is nothing to say he can't go ahead and buy what he wants, and just keep it tucked away somewhere until he is good enough with it.

Semi-autos are not rocket-science. Any semi-intelligent soul who decides he wants to defend himself with a handgun can read and study, dry-fire, disassemble/reassemble, and top it off with a couple hours of basic handgun instruction. He just needs to set his goal for the end he wants to achieve, and pursue it diligently and rationally, until he achieves it.

A person who buys a self-defense gun is making a major decision, and he/she has many more complicated issues to resolve than just what specific mechanics are involved in operating the weapon of choice.


----------



## Oldman (Apr 16, 2009)

*My response*



Bisley said:


> Oldman,
> 
> You make a lot of generalized statements that you seem to want us to accept, on the basis that you are an expert. Do hostile lawyers let you get away with this when they cross-examine you?
> 
> ...


Well, how often do you testify in court? How many agencies are you a consultant or advisor for? I was called out nine times so far this year for officer involved shootings. I have had interviews with gun publications, news media as well as qualifying in courts But acceptance of my qualifications by anyone other than those in the cases where I am involved is up to individuals.

Now for a lengthy reply to your concerns.

Nope, officers do not hold their guns sideways. They are trained not to do so for several reasons. Gangbangers doing drive by shootings do not practice for variousl reasons as well. One is they are often unable to do so at ranges because of legal problems such as felons in possession of a firearm, possession of a stolen firearm, etc. Many states have passed laws about shooting on unowned lands as well to prevent many gun offenses to keep people from shooting around residences, livestock, and such.

BTW: Has your area seen an increase in livestock being shot? Gangbangers were forced to shoot someone (a felony) to prove their guts but soon found they get caught and go to jail. Now they shoot livestock since it is a misdemeanor offense, usually with no jail time, even if they get caught. Their lack of practice is also a reason they often accidently shoot themselves or some fellow gang member. More than once, they have been killed or hurt by taking out a mag and then leaving a round in the chamber due to lack of experience with firearms.

As to officer's being able to hit targets, they often fail to qualify in their attempts for re certification until several tries later. Many NEVER shoot other than to qualify once a year. Are they bad officers? Not at all. They just have a job and do only as they have to so they can remain on the department but are not gun fanatics. They simply carry a gun as part of their job.

The statement about single shot weapons is revelant since it shows accuracy. Any movement, be it from a slide, flinch or distraction will effect accuracy. For maximun accuracy, the type gun will come into play as well as shooting skill.

A sad fact is most people will not practice for many reasons. We have become more busy with our lives than we should. There is seldom time to practice and there are fewer places to practice. Then there is the financial factor. Ammo can cost $30 a box and it would be easy to shoot two boxes during a practice session as well as the range cost, the expense of travel to and from the range and a lot of other costs. Money is tight for many and shooting is an expense that can be cut. Because a person buys a gun does not mean they will practice, at least regularly. I do not know you and have no beef with you at all but I will bet you washed your car more in the first three months of ownership than you did in the last year of ownership. It is the same with guns. People buy, people handle for a while and then forget about it until they need it. I took a neighbor to buy a new gun (Glock 27) five years ago. We then went to the local police range and he shot a box of shells. Since then, he has never fired it and never cleaned it. This same man is an educated professional that has the time and money to practice but does not do so and he is the typical gun owner. Not all gun owners are gun lovers.

Now for an additional comment for what ever it is worth. I think and investigations bear this out, people buy guns and then never show family members how to use them. The children want to play with the guns and do so when adult supervision is not present. Their natural curoisity about guns leads to an accidental shooting. This has also led to many communities to pass laws permitting prosecution of the adult gun owners for negligence.

Many of us grew up with guns in the residence and were accustomed to firing them as well as seeing them fired. This is no longer the way of life for most households. The guns are placed in a drawer and forgotten about until an incident happens. An example of this is my youngest daughter. She is 28 and was shooing regularly as a preteen. She last shot at about 16. She has her gun I bought her and I asked her last week where her gun is located. It is in her home, in a drawer and has been there since she moved into the house five years ago. Additionally she does not know if it is loaded or not. Her time is spent trying to get out of med school and maintaining a social life. She is a gun owner, knows how they work and grew up around guns. She is not gun responsible. Should her gun be involved in an incident, it would be her fault as an unresponsible owner.


----------



## Bisley (Aug 24, 2008)

Oldman said:


> Well, how often do you testify in court? How many agencies are you a consultant or advisor for? I was called out nine times so far this year for officer involved shootings. I have had interviews with gun publications, news media as well as qualifying in courts But acceptance of my qualifications by anyone other than those in the cases where I am involved is up to individuals.


Look, this is only the Internet. I'm perfectly content to accept that you are a brilliant expert, and if I knew you, I might be so impressed that I would wait breathlessly for your next pronouncement, before hazarding my own unworthy opinion.

But, unfortunately (for you), on an Internet discussion forum, your credentials won't win an argument for you. You have to back up what you say, logically, and sometimes you will get challenged. When that happens, you just have to get down on the level with the peons, and prove what you are saying.

I'm not trying to piss you off, and I don't really have that much of a disagreement with most of the things you have said. *I'm just saying that a person of average intelligence can be safe and accurate with a semi-auto pistol.* You keep going off on tangents from this main subject, and stating facts that I never disagreed with in the first place, as though that was the subject of the thread.

I'm old, too, and I also tend to ramble...but I at least try to stay on the topic.


----------



## Oldman (Apr 16, 2009)

Bisley said:


> I'm perfectly content to accept that you are a brilliant expert, and if I knew you, I might be so impressed that I would wait breathlessly for your next pronouncement, before hazarding my own unworthy opinion.
> 
> But, unfortunately (for you), on an Internet discussion forum, your credentials won't win an argument for you. You have to back up what you say, logically, and sometimes you will get challenged. When that happens, you just have to get down on the level with the peons, and prove what you are saying.
> 
> ...


Many of the best lawyers in the courty has tried to rile me without success. No one here will do it either.

But where did I say a person of average (or as the court says, a normal and prudent person) of intelligence would NOT be able to be safe and accurate with a semi? I often shoot semi autoloaders as do mnay of my friends.

All I said was a semi is not as accurate due to mechanics than single shot or revolvers.

For that matter, a poor barrel in a single shot will not be accurate either.
As to not knowing me, depending on what part of East TX you reside, it is possible to meet me as I work a lot in East Texas.


----------



## Bisley (Aug 24, 2008)

Oldman said:


> But where did I say a person of average (or as the court says, a normal and prudent person) of intelligence would NOT be able to be safe and accurate with a semi?


Well, you seemed to be saying that, here:



Oldman said:


> As to the original poster, this is his first handgun and zero experience in shooting or being familar with handguns. The simpler the action, the better the shooter. A semi is more complex to learn than a revolver. There is also an added safety element in a revolver.


My only point is that if the guy prefers a semi-auto, he should buy one and learn how to operate it correctly. It will take slightly longer to understand how it works, and he will have to be a little more diligent with his maintenance, than with a revolver...but it isn't that big a deal.

You seem to be assuming that he will not do this, whereas I am assuming that he will. That is the only difference we really have, here. Let the guy get what he wants.



Oldman said:


> All I said was a semi is not as accurate due to mechanics than single shot or revolvers.


And as I said before, even if that is true, it doesn't matter, because the difference between a handgun that is dead-nuts accurate, and one that is only moderately accurate, is not even apparent to the average shooter, unless he is shooting off bags.

My most accurate handguns, at 25 yards, are a Ruger GP-100 and a Dan Wesson, both with lightly loaded .357 magnums. But at 10-15 yards, shooting freehand, I shoot neither one of them any better than my full-size semi-autos. So, for all practical purposes, it does not matter.


----------



## Oldman (Apr 16, 2009)

*The fact is...*



Bisley said:


> Well, you seemed to be saying that, here:
> 
> My only point is that if the guy prefers a semi-auto, he should buy one and learn how to operate it correctly. It will take slightly longer to understand how it works, and he will have to be a little more diligent with his maintenance, than with a revolver...but it isn't that big a deal.
> 
> ...


I did not give any reference to the OP or his choice of weapons.

Since you are a man if age and wisdom, I doubt you would give a new driver a high performance vehicle for a first car to learn on and I do not think you would give a new pilot a twin engine plane for his first plane.

The same with handguns. I have found through experience you never start a new shooter out with a .44 mag. They tire of it soon. Most shooters, you likely as well, start with revolvers in small caliber and work up. It makes shooting fun and as the person progresses, so does the type and quality of their choice of weapons.

None of this suggests a person of even less than moderate intelligence would be challenged by using a semi.

BTW: Since you are from East TX, did you see where the new rookie officer in Mansfield, LA shot another officer while showing the seasoned officer what he learned at the academy?


----------



## PhilR. (Apr 25, 2007)

Oldman said:


> A person would think that after 30+ years of investigating and reconstructing firearm incidents, I would have ran across a revolver failure.


No, a person who understands concepts such as statistics, chance, etc. would not think that.

There are a few concepts that unfortunately you cannot grasp:

The incidents you have investigated do not encompass _all_ that has happened in those thirty years. In fact, I would estimate that your experiences constitute such a small amount of incidences across this country that it is a mere drop in the bucket.

One person's experience has no bearing whatsoever on what can happen in the rest of the world. IOW, one person's experience is not predictive of a possible outcome, good or bad. It would take a number of persons experiences to become statistically significant and therefore possibly predictive. Your's has no significance at all, except of course to you and those mentioned in your investigations.

Your experiences, as well as mine and everyone else's, can only do two things: it can tell what _has_ happened, and what _can_ happen (and believe me, I tell people what can and has happened all the time). It cannot tell what will _not_ happen.

If one day you decide that you want to broaden your range of knowledge and experience, you should visit an older gunsmith that has been around a while and ask them how many ways a revolver can fail. That way you can know what you are talking about, because right now, your limited experience shows that you do not.....


----------



## literaltrance (Dec 24, 2008)

In my two years of owning a Super Blackhawk I did experience one revolver failure. Soot/grime collecting on the breech face and in the cylinder chambers can cause:

1) casings to not be seated fully-forward in the cylinder.
2) case rims to rub against the breech face.

A combination of these will eventually lead to a cylinder lock. I've experienced this first hand, so I cannot jump on the "revolvers never fail" bandwagon. They can and will fail.

To put things into perspective, I've run maybe 500-750 rounds of 44 mag/44 spec out of my Ruger Super Blackhawk and experienced one failure in that time. I've run over 2k rounds through my CZ P-01, H&K P2000SK and S&W 1076; no failures. My H&K USP 45 has seen over 4k rounds and experienced two failures, but both were from the same box of CCI Blazer "Ashtray-sized" hollowpoints at around the 2k mark. I never bought them again and it has since functioned flawlessly. My newer Sig P229 has about 1k through it now, a mix of 357SIG and 40S&W, and also has zero failures.

Essentially I have four semi-autos with less failures than my revolver, all of which have seen many times the amount of ammunition run through them. In my eyes I could technically bump that number to five (the USP) but a failure is a failure, regardless of it being due to my miserly disposition and [consequently] poor choice in ammo.

I suppose now is a good time to mention I'd put about 6k through my first semi-auto, a Glock 22, or what many refer to as Glock "Perfection©" and I experienced SEVERAL failures. Most of them were from single-hand or off-hand shooting. I brought it to the attention of other shooters and they generally refered to "limp-writing" as the problem. I refer to it as "I-don't-want-to-die-because-I-have-a-broken-hand," one of a few reasons why I traded it.

Still, I believe semi-auto is the way to go. They are built with high quality standards these days. Any semi-auto of repute will RARELY fail, and I attribute this to the fact that most are relatively easy to clean. Can you say cleaning a revolver is as easy? I know my single action Ruger is a PITA, and it could be this very fact that caused the failure. I love it to death but revolvers are not perfect. No man-made contraption is.


----------



## Bisley (Aug 24, 2008)

literaltrance said:


> A combination of these will eventually lead to a cylinder lock. I've experienced this first hand, so I cannot jump on the "revolvers never fail" bandwagon. They can and will fail.


Exactly.

I have had more than one DA revolver fail, in similar fashion, after firing lead .38 Specials in a .357 magnum. As long as you continue to shoot .38's, you are fine, but the lead and grime will eventually build up enough inside the cylinder to force the longer .357 cartridge backwards, when the cylinder turns. Often, you will be able to load the .357's OK and close the cylinder, but when the cylinder turns, they slide back, restricting the ability of the cylinder to turn, or stopping it completely. And, it doesn't have to be due to not properly cleaning the cylinders, either, because I have had this happen in a single range session, starting out with a perfectly clean cylinder and forcing cone.

It's hard for me to accept that a person who has been shooting revolvers enough to be considered an expert would not have experienced this.


----------



## Oldman (Apr 16, 2009)

*Correct*



PhilR. said:


> No, a person who understands concepts such as statistics, chance, etc. would not think that.
> 
> There are a few concepts that unfortunately you cannot grasp:
> 
> ...


My experiences and work is a small percentage of things that has happened. However the cite sheets we get as being in the business are quite detailed about what is being found by the manufacturers, saw in courts and uncovered by other means. Many of the items that are found preceed a recall by the makers.


----------



## Oldman (Apr 16, 2009)

literaltrance said:


> In my two years of owning a Super Blackhawk I did experience one revolver failure. Soot/grime collecting on the breech face and in the cylinder chambers can cause:
> 
> 1) casings to not be seated fully-forward in the cylinder.
> 2) case rims to rub against the breech face.
> ...


As I understand, you are talking about having a dirty weapon or suffering from neglect problems. That is a different ballgame.

Just as a car with more features and electronics will be more prone to failure, the same with a sidearm. The more moving parts or the more complext, the more prone to failure.

I am certain that firing pins have snapped on both types of handguns. There are also other potential problems but overall, a semi will offer more problems such as the well know limp wrist problem built in by Glock that you mentioned.

My original point still stands. For a person beginning in the handgun world, a revolver is much simpler to learn with and offering fewer complications.

I also see and understand that some on here have their favored weapon of choice and lean toward that type as a bias and not due to functional ability. This is natural. Some here feel I shoot revolvers exclusively and that is wrong as well. I likely shoot autoloaders more than revolvers and have nothing against autoloaders as a whole.


----------



## Oldman (Apr 16, 2009)

Bisley said:


> Exactly.
> 
> I have had more than one DA revolver fail, in similar fashion, after firing lead .38 Specials in a .357 magnum. As long as you continue to shoot .38's, you are fine, but the lead and grime will eventually build up enough inside the cylinder to force the longer .357 cartridge backwards, when the cylinder turns. Often, you will be able to load the .357's OK and close the cylinder, but when the cylinder turns, they slide back, restricting the ability of the cylinder to turn, or stopping it completely. And, it doesn't have to be due to not properly cleaning the cylinders, either, because I have had this happen in a single range session, starting out with a perfectly clean cylinder and forcing cone.
> 
> It's hard for me to accept that a person who has been shooting revolvers enough to be considered an expert would not have experienced this.


Again, we are close enough that a meeting is possible and you can examine my credentials and I can get you connected to WestLaw to view my trial work and expertise.

Nor did I say I had been shooting revolvers long enough to be considered an expert. I am an expert in the field of firearms. This is a court qualified designation given based on education, work in the field, experience, specialized tools, research, published papers, accreditation by others established in the field. It does not mean the next Judge will allow the expert status but my credentials has been challenged hundreds of times and never failed to qualify yet.

But again, you are talking about failures from neglect, misuse or human induced conditions. I am talking about mechanical failure and complex operational failures.


----------



## Bisley (Aug 24, 2008)

Oldman said:


> Again, we are close enough that a meeting is possible and you can examine my credentials and I can get you connected to WestLaw to view my trial work and expertise.


Actually, the frequency of your use of the bait and switch technique lends credence to the idea that you really do spend a lot of time with slippery lawyers.

One more time...your credentials are not the issue. You can be everything you claim to be, and it won't make your all-knowing pronouncements any more correct. As PhilR has already explained, your expertise, however valid it may be in certain venues, and however well it may conform to the consensus of opinion among your peer group...is still not the final word.

It is just another opinion, in this venue.


----------



## PhilR. (Apr 25, 2007)

literaltrance said:


> In my two years of owning a Super Blackhawk I did experience one revolver failure. Soot/grime collecting on the breech face and in the cylinder chambers can cause:
> 
> 1) casings to not be seated fully-forward in the cylinder.
> 2) case rims to rub against the breech face.


Other ways a revo fails -- a shrouded ejection rod unscrews and backs out against the forward wall of the shroud's cutout. While this doesn't prevent the revo from firing (AFAIK), it does prevent the cylinder from unlocking and therefore prevents reloading.

Timing of the hand can also get so out of whack that it locks up the cylinder in mid-rotation. This does prevent firing.

I've also read, but not seen, of the locks on S&W revos accidentally locking up (thought to be due to parts movement during recoil), requiring repair to work correctly. Hard to ask a bad guy during a gunfight to stop trying to shoot you while you fish out the key from your pocket and unlock your solidly-locked handgun....


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

*This is addressed specifically to Oldman:*

My tiny, slim, 100-pound wife was a complete novice, having never even touched a gun during her first 64 years of life. Then, one day, out of the blue, she asked me to teach her to safely manipulate and shoot my various pistols. She is a retired Physical Education teacher, and she learns complex physical actions quickly and well. She has been a professional dancer and is a dance teacher, so complex combinations of widely disparate movements are easy for her to master.
I am particularly adept at using the .45 ACP Government Model, so I started her off with that. After two weeks of dry-fire-only practice, she had sufficiently learned to safely handle, manipulate, and aim a full-size .45, so we went to a friend's property to do some real shooting.
At seven yards, all of her hits were center-of-mass, so we backed off to 10 yards. She continued to make center-of-mass groups without a fuss. At 15 yards, the same was true, so we stopped for the day and went home.
Next, I started her out with from-the-holster presentations. In two more weeks of dry firing, she had mastered the in-the-holster firing grip, the presentation stroke including clicking the safety off, and the confident first shot and follow-up. In live-fire presentations, she repeated her earlier performance out to 15 yards.
Next, I introduced her to the Smith & Wesson Bodyguard snubbie that her new concealed-carry permit allowed her to wear. Once again, we started with dry-fire practice, although this time she started off with from-the-holster presentations.
In the subsequent live-fire sessions, she has never been able to equal her performance with my Government Model. The .38's double-action trigger, as light as a gunsmith can make it but still hard for her small hand to pull, causes her groups to spread over the target at 15 yards.
Further, she has great difficulty accomplishing a smooth revolver reload. Unlatching the cylinder takes all of the strength her small hands can concentrate on the job, and using a speed-loader is time consuming. She is much more comfortable with the magazine release of my .45, and her reloads with that gun are smooth and quick.
So, here was a complete novice who found that learning to use a semi-auto well was much, much easier than learning to use a revolver with anything like equal proficiency.
Your comments?


----------

