New handgun

[Mickeymorris626]

I'm not going to touch on any of these points besides one.

I don't believe you should shoot as large of caliber as you can. Magazine capacity is important to me. I'm going to be using pistol to either A) Spray a CQB target or B) use it to get back to my rifle.

In both situations, I'm going to want 15+ round mag capacity. Thus fueling my decision to go with 9mm. Like some have said, modern day bullets can have upgraded lethality over the original designs. I'm not worried at all that a 9mm HST would fail to stop someone with at least 1 out of the 15-19 rounds.

 

[mdwest]

Capacity is a valid argument...

As stated before, one round is highly unlikely to stop a threat.. Regardless of caliber...

The rifle comment is spot on in my opinion as well...

Handguns suck as defense weapons... About the only advantage they bring is their compact size...

I've found that most people... To include those that spend a decent amount of time at the range and those that have sought out training, THINK they are capable of shooting more gun than they really can...

When you start looking at group sizes, split times, etc.. It becomes obvious they would be well served with a lot more instruction, and a whole lot more range time.. And/or they need to step down from their 357 digs, +p loaded .45's and .44 mags... And pick up a 9mm for a while (or forever)...

I would argue that you can get ample capacity out of most calibers... There are reliable 1911 mags that hold 10.. Plenty of .40's that hold 13, etc...

But... FWIW... I've shot well over a quarter million pistol rounds in my life... Attended over 1000 hours of formal firearms instruction... And carried firearms professionally for over 20 years...

And my pistol of choice is a glock 19 (9mm)... It is the pistol I recommend to most others.. And is the largest caliber weapon that I feel I shoot to standard (very fast split times, very fast first round hits, etc... But also small, lightweight, compact, and easy to carry...

 

[mdwest]

The above should read QUARTER MILLION... posted with iphone... Can't get the text to scroll down to edit...

 

[dtbach]

Another thing to consider would be a laser on the handgun. My bedroom weapon is a Kimber Pro Crimson Carry II in .45. The bad guy might even turn tail and run after being lit up with a laser dot on his chest. If not, you will hit wherever the dot is (as long as you have calibrated it and practice) which is alot easier than trying to line up your sights in the dark.

 

[mdwest]

I'm not a big fan of lasers...

That doesn't make you wrong for using one though... As long as you're using the tool correctly...

Trying to pick up a laser and maintain it on a moving target is actually slower for most people than picking up the front sight post on a good set of sights..

They also are hard to track if multiple lasers are being used... Trying to figure out which dot is yours if you and the wife are both hunkered down in defense mode and using lasers for example can be a challenge...

They can serve a purpose though.. I just don't see a whole lot of use in a civilian defensive setting...

High lumen white light on the other hand is an excellent idea however (but also must be used correctly)...

 

[tazbigdog]

It does not matter what you go for in a home defense firearm. If you don't practice with it and hit what you're aiming at, it will not matter.

That said, I have a Glock 22 (.40 cal) and a Remington 870 Tactical Express (12 gauge). Having used both of these in numerous firearm exercises (including tactical), I am confident with both and will hit what I am aiming at.

 

[mdwest]

It does not matter what you go for in a home defense firearm.

I wish I could agree with that.. but I cant...

a high quality and reliable weapon of insufficent caliber is likely not going to reach vitals.. or do enough damage to them if it reaches them to quickly stop an attack.. a browning buckmark is better than nothing if thats all you have to defend yourself with.. but it is hardly a good choice for a defense weapon.. same thing for a beretta tomcat.. or a sig p230.. etc..etc..

a low quality, and inherently unreliable weapon of sufficient caliber (9mm, .38, anything above, etc..etc..).. isnt a good choice either.. if you cant count on your loricin, raven, etc.. to go "bang" every single time you pull the trigger.... it too is better than nothing.. but it is far from an ideal choice..

training and tactics are only 2 parts of the puzzle.. equipment is important too (although I would argue it is the least important of the three listed)..

If you don't practice with it and hit what you're aiming at, it will not matter.

I somewhat agree...

training is very important.. training is inclusive of practice..

but there are plenty of instances where people with zero training and practice have killed people that have tons of training and practice..

at bad breath distances (the range most gunfights take place).. mindset probably plays every bit as much as actual training.. all the practice in the world isnt going to be worth much if you are all over the map mentally and emotionally..

That said, I have a Glock 22 (.40 cal) and a Remington 870 Tactical Express (12 gauge). Having used both of these in numerous firearm exercises (including tactical), I am confident with both and will hit what I am aiming at.

fine choices in weapons.. I have owned both over the years.. and have carried both professionally at different times in my life..

I do quite a bit of training with firearms.. having confidence is important (it effects mindset).. I would caution against having too much of it however.. when you consider the percentage of misses to hits in law enforcement, military, and civilian shootings (look at the entire spectrum).. even the finest shots on a static range tend to miss quite a bit when the fight is on..

never get over confident.. and never believe you are going to hit what you are aiming at every time you pull the trigger.. chances are you are not..

use that to motivate you to train harder.. train more frequently.. train more realistically.. etc...

 

[Hot_Sauce]

Good advice here.

Besides what has already been mentioned. I would add that getting some night sights is a very good idea.

Definatly a good idea to train & practice as much as possible. Internet comandos & mall ninjas talk about capacity and calibers. People that are serious about self defense talk about training and practice.

 

[turbomunkey]

I have heard good things about the ruger. If you havent, look into the Smith and Wesson M+P line. Just as reliable as the glawk, very similar slide design, and ergonomically much better. The dislikes are the trigger and the fact you have to stick your finger (or some other digit shaped object) down into the mag well to push a little barb down in order to field strip it. Even with a trigger job the break is still far from crisp and the reset is subtle. With that being said in the two times I have shot it I have put out better groups than I ever did with my g19. I will say the 19s trigger was infinitely better though with a stronger spring and lighter disconnect. Crisp break and the reset was like a slap in the face.

I will say go .45/.357 for caliber. Realistically if its home defense you go hot and you bunker down while you or a family member calls 911. No worries about weight or recoil when youre shooting rested pointing at your locked bedroom door from behind the bed or dresser.

 

[tazbigdog]

I wish I could agree with that.. but I cant...

a high quality and reliable weapon of insufficent caliber is likely not going to reach vitals.. or do enough damage to them if it reaches them to quickly stop an attack.. a browning buckmark is better than nothing if thats all you have to defend yourself with.. but it is hardly a good choice for a defense weapon.. same thing for a beretta tomcat.. or a sig p230.. etc..etc..

a low quality, and inherently unreliable weapon of sufficient caliber (9mm, .38, anything above, etc..etc..).. isnt a good choice either.. if you cant count on your loricin, raven, etc.. to go "bang" every single time you pull the trigger.... it too is better than nothing.. but it is far from an ideal choice..

So your saying that a Ruger .22 LR Bull barrel is useless? Certainly many of the tactical guys will say, stay away from a .22. I still stand by my statement, "It does not matter what you go for in a home defense firearm. If you don't practice with it and hit what you're aiming at, it will not matter."

training and tactics are only 2 parts of the puzzle.. equipment is important too (although I would argue it is the least important of the three listed).. [/quote]

Equipment is of course important too, but anything can be used as a weapon if you need to improvise. Once you realize that, a pen, stick, rock, firearm, etc. is available to you as a weapon, tactics, training and COMMITMENT takes over.

THE OP is looking for a HD handgun. Pick a caliber, choose the ammo and practice with it. KNOW your laws!

 

[mdwest]

I wish I could agree with that.. but I cant...

a high quality and reliable weapon of insufficent caliber is likely not going to reach vitals.. or do enough damage to them if it reaches them to quickly stop an attack.. a browning buckmark is better than nothing if thats all you have to defend yourself with.. but it is hardly a good choice for a defense weapon.. same thing for a beretta tomcat.. or a sig p230.. etc..etc..

a low quality, and inherently unreliable weapon of sufficient caliber (9mm, .38, anything above, etc..etc..).. isnt a good choice either.. if you cant count on your loricin, raven, etc.. to go "bang" every single time you pull the trigger.... it too is better than nothing.. but it is far from an ideal choice..

So your saying that a Ruger .22 LR Bull barrel is useless? Certainly many of the tactical guys will say, stay away from a .22. I still stand by my statement, "It does not matter what you go for in a home defense firearm. If you don't practice with it and hit what you're aiming at, it will not matter."

training and tactics are only 2 parts of the puzzle.. equipment is important too (although I would argue it is the least important of the three listed)..

Equipment is of course important too, but anything can be used as a weapon if you need to improvise. Once you realize that, a pen, stick, rock, firearm, etc. is available to you as a weapon, tactics, training and COMMITMENT takes over.

THE OP is looking for a HD handgun. Pick a caliber, choose the ammo and practice with it. KNOW your laws![/QUOTE]

Actually.. no.... if you re-read the post that you quoted.. what was said was that a .22 is better than nothing.. but that it is not a good choice for a defensive handgun..

I would challenge you to find ANYONE that is a reputable firearms or self defense trainer that advocates a rim fire as a decent choice for a primary defense weapon... under any circumstances..

The tool you choose for the job does in fact matter...

You wouldnt use a hammer to push a screw into a sheet of wood.. although you could improvise and make it work if you had to.. but you would recognize on the front end that the chance of success is greatly diminished...

No different than using a .22 or a poorly manufactured handgun to defend your life.. you might make it work... but all the practice in the world, combined with all the tactics, training and comitment added to the pot... still puts you in a position of unneccessary disadvantage..

can you stop an intruder with a rock? sure...

you can also potentially stop one with treble hooks and fishing line...

but I wouldnt recommend it..


I absolutely agree with you on knowing local and state law... there are a complete different set of rules in different states.. shooting in intruder in Texas where castle doctrine is absolutely accepted by the courts.. could result in a "good" shoot... whereas you could take similar circumstances to a state like Oregon and absolutely be screwed...

different states.. different laws...