Buying first pistol for carry, any advise?

Originally posted by Melvin-Purvis
Neophyte: "My son's coming up on 11, and we're thinking about getting him his first dog...what type of dog should we get?" Talking heads nodding in agreement: "A Rottweiler, definitely a Rottweiler..." :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Do I detect a note of sarcasm here? Are you saying a Rott wouldn't be an fine dog for an 11 year old? What, don't want to take the same time training your dog (and your son) that you do training with your pistola?

You can slam my glock as a poor choice, but when you start puttin' down my breed, them's fightin' words. :D
 
Yikes...now I'm old school...lol

Yes Rick, I did mean unchambered, not empty. "Whoops"

Where I was coming from is that I've found "most" new shooters don't practice enough. Also, I think there is a higher potential for operator induced errors with an auto loader than with a revolver.

As far as the breed goes, I have nothing against Rotties, they're just a very large powerful dog that can get a child into a situation that he can't handle.

Some things should be worked into...IMNSHO. ;)

Training with dogs and guns is a great concept, but unfortunately my experience has been that most people don't do enough of it.

Real world guys, not forum talk.

I stand by my earlier statements.
 
Hopefully you noticed the big :D in my earlier post, Melvin.

I agree that people do not train enough with either their firearm or their dog. Both is bad. Both can get you into BIG trouble. Both can be, well, not mastered, but "employed?" with some dedicated training. Having used revolvers, Colt 1911, Beretta, and Glock, the Glock is the easiest to learn and get good with, hands down. It has the easiest and most foolproof manual of arms. If you can pull the trigger, then it is loaded (chambered). If it isn't chambered, you cannot pull the trigger. In other words, never point it at anything and pull the trigger unless you are ready and willing to destroy whatever you are pointing at. (Dry-fire practice is another story, but I don't want to get into that here). Pretty much the same as a SA/DA revolver, but the trigger pull is shorter. Incidentally, it is fairly easy to get the trigger module changed for a heavier pull in the Glock, making it even more similar to the revolver, although it maintains the shorter trigger reach/pull.

In any case, this is digressing to a debate on the Glock, which it shouldn't. I am (hopefully) not coming across argumentative, because I don't want to. And I would agree that a revolver is a good weapon. But it can get you in trouble just as quick as a Glock or Rottweiler. :)
 
Steve-

You caught me on that "always" word. Damn! I should know better. I should have said, "In my limited experience with the Ruger centerfires, AND taking into consideration the general consensus of the shooting community, the Ruger can qualify as one of the more reliable firearms available, although exceptions may occur. Your milage may vary, see your local dealer for details....."

I guess with me, it's primarily a reliability issue. It's not that I do not appreciate quality, or the work of a fine craftsman, it's just that I wanted to make the point that reliabilty doesn't have to cost you $500.00 and up. My Mak (so far, fingers crossed) came out of the box and hasn't bobbled in 1000 rounds. To me, that is a very good thing. Admittedly, the Glocks, Sigs, HK's, et al may share the same level of reliability, with a higher quality rating thrown in for good measure. I would love to own one of them,(hell, I'd love to own ALL of them!) but right now, in my life as it stands right now, I'll happily settle for reliable. Higher level stuff will be easier to justify when the kids are a little older (i.e; costing less).

Oh, BTW, my wife works at a vet clinic and loves Rotts. Says they're great dogs.
 
ZipTie has come to us asking for advice with a very important, yes-life or death decision. We do him a disservice by reducing this thread to a popularity poll.

Doubtlessly we have good reasons for making our different selections of firearms. Notice the words GOOD and DIFFERENT in the same sentence. Your favorite piece may be great for you, but it is IGNORANT to assume that it is right for everyone. When a customer came into my shop asking about a "first gun", either for carry or home defense, it was annoyingly common for some well-meaning bystander to step in with "You just can't beat a Desert Eagle in .50AE" or " If your wife's gonna shoot it get a revolver. Women are too stupid to handle a semiauto". In every case the "helpful" individual was selling HIMSELF a gun, not the person I was talking to.

I would always ask:
What have you fired before?
Did you like it? Why or why not?
If you expect your wife to use this, shouldn't she help you pick it?
How will you carry this? Shoulder? Small of the back? Waistband? Pocket? Ankle?
Do you usually wear a jacket or sportcoat? Will you need to reach it while driving?
Is this one comfortable? Can you reach the trigger/hammer/safety without changing your grip? Can you release the cylinder/magazine without shifting your grip? Can you grip it comfortably so that you can do these things?
Do you understand how this operates?
Will those sights snag on your holster or clothing?
Will you carry extra rounds? Where?

-and a host of other questions to raise factors the customer may not have considered. That way, he can be much more confident in his decision and will be far more likely to have made an appropriate one. I also made them promise to put at least one box of ammo through it a month. I told couples to make a date of going to the range to shoot the family protection gun. I told them to take apart and clean their gun more often than they shot it so as to stay familiar with it operation, because after a decision is made, exercising it becomes the most important thing.

Here in Ohio we don't have concealed carry, so I do not have real, personal experience to offer. The above thoughts are the best I've got. Surely, with all the experience represented in this forum, someone has some practical considerations for ZipTie here, to help him know HOW to decide, rather than just tossing off pat, pet brands and models.

Come on gang.
 
Good point, machete. Let's answer the question, restated here:

Originally posted by ZipTieNinja
I'm doing the research, but not getting too far. All the gun makers say that theres is better than the rest (of course). I have looked at H&K, Glock, Sig, Beretta, Walther... I would like to have dependability and accuracy, in as small as possible package. Not asking much am I? :) Does anyone know any statistics on the accuracy of any of these guns in .40cal? Any help would be greatly appreciated. If there is any gun makers I left out let me know. Thanks people.
Click to expand...

H&K, Glock, Sig, Beretta, Walther.... yep, we've pretty much covered them. Oh, and even brought up Kahr and Makarov. Yep, pretty much everyone here has given advice or pointed out pros and cons of the various weapons. Once we've done that, it pretty much becomes a popularity poll from then on, not unlike "what's the best knife?" Good questions you point out, though. Definitely some things to consider. I guess the biggest one is, "Considering the use the weapon will be put to, is a pistol actually the best tool for the job?" While they are concealable, if you live in an area where concealed carry is not an option, then something larger and more powerful would be much better.

Pistols are notoriously underpowered for self defense. Additionally, they tend to overpenetrate at absolutely the worst times. If you live in an apartment, townhouse, or condominium, you are actually better served by a 5.56mm rifle (a la AR-15) than a 9mm, considering the stopping power versus the overpenetration. I can't find the web site address, but a test was done that compared the penetration of .45, 9mm, .357/.38, and 5.56 ammo on various building materials. The least penetrating through the building materials was the 5.56. I'll keep looking for the specific page, and repost it here if I can.

Bottom line is, depending on your needs, a pistol may not be the best option.

Here is a boat load of information regarding personal defense.
 
Well Melvin, before you get on your high horse and label everyone
a "bunch of dorks" perhaps you should go back and re-read the original question "BUYING FIRST PISTOL" Do you understand the
difference between a pistol and revolver? Your contention is that a
revolver is safer than a double action pistol? Go to any range and watch a novice shoot a revolver. How do they shoot it? Single action
because double action is too difficult for a beginner to master and obtain acceptable scores. Do you think a revolver on single action is safer? I contend that NO handgun should be carried/used without classroom instruction, training and range time with an experienced
instructor. And yes, if you've only fired 50,000 rounds you are still a novice. I'll stand by my previous posts.
 
Quote Richsrd K:
I contend that NO handgun should be carried/used without classroom instruction, training and range time with an experienced instructor
Click to expand...

I agree and I'd add:
"Practice doesn't make perfect . . . "Perfect Practice" makes perfect. Sh*t practice makes Sh*t"
 
Rich,

I like the view from up here... :rolleyes:

For the record:

The operative term was "First pistol for a novice" Did I somehow morph "Pistol" into "Handgun", i.e "Revolver"...sure I did, and farther down I'll tell you why.

Do I feel that revolvers are inherently "safer" than pistols, no, not necessarily. Do I think that revolvers are inherently more reliable than pistols? Not necessarily.

Do I think a revolver is a better choice for a novice? Sure I do. Why? Because there is less to go wrong. Multiple firing chambers, no concern with magazine/ammo seating, no concern with loaded chamber condition, no concern with safety position, less prone to limp wristed shooter induced jams...for a litany of reasons.

50,000 rounds...5 to 15 at a time. That's real numbers, over 15 years. I think it works out to about a box a week... I agree, that's not many, but then again, I might have missed a few weeks... ;)

Now, I take it from your post that you are more experienced than I, and god willing, someday I too will have the insight that you do with regards to "real world" scenario's...but that's not yet the case, so I'll tell you what my "real world" experiences are...

In my "world", most novices buy a "Pistol" because that type of firearm appears "cooler" than a stuffy old revolver. Most novices never master the firearm because, and only because, they don't shoot it enough...lack of time, money, or range access. Most novices don't seek out qualified training for the same reasons. Most novices don't care for, or respect, their firearms because they don't become intimate with it.

Things may be different in your "world" Rich, but I was talking about the majority of novices in the "real" world from my perspective...and it would seem that my opinion is a little different than the "reality" of the forum world... :rolleyes:

Again, the key words here were "First, carry, and novice"

Did I get a warm fuzzy that the original poster had a well defined understanding of the question that he was asking? No I didn't. Did you?

IMNSHO, a reliable, quality revolver makes a better choice for a novice. If for no reason(s) other than initial cost, above average safety, and the likelyhood that the interest in firearms ownership may be fleeting.

Anyhoo, thanks for sharing Rich, but you're still a dork.

"If the (horse) shoe fits, wear it..." ;)

John,

Agreed. "Garbage in, Garbage out"
 
Well Melvin, as the old saying goes-opinions are like a$$holes,
everyone's got one and they all stink! Another comes to mind as well,
never argue with someone who has been educated beyond their intelligence.
 
Does this mean I won't be getting a Christmas card from you this year Rich? :( *sob*

Add these to your list of tired clichés old pro; "We teach best what we most need to learn...", "He can't see the forest for the trees...", and the perennial favorite, "Familiarity breeds contempt"

Besides, I always thought opinions were more like small-block Chevy's... ;)

Any thoughts on a belt-fed subgun for novices?

----Isn't this fun?----

Wanna try again pal? Nicer, less inflamatory rhetoric possibly? I'm game if you are Rich...and maybe I could learn a thing or three from your experience.

But, before we get started, I'll make this clear...I sold my early Glock 19 after 8 years...because it broke twice, the trigger sucked, and I hated the little bastard...but that's ok, I don't like cats much either...

*Hugs and Kisses*
 
Mel, Rich,

Can I say something?

First of all, ZipTieNinja asked about a "40 cal." so he did want a pistol.

In his second post he said "I like the feel and weight of an all metal gun. Probably due to the fact that I have logged more time with a Ruger MK 2 Target pistol, will a 7" bull barrel. "

So I don't think he is a novice.

Mel you said, "You guys are recommending a Glock as a "First Pistol For Carry" ???

Yeah right...what a buncha dorks!

Emphasis on "First Pistol"...c'mon guys."

If the guy knows how to shoot the Ruger bull barrel; he doesn't need a revolver for his first carry hand gun.

Rich, I agree with all you have said; everything, but I consider Mel a friend.

He some times says what he is thinking and not want he means; dork and empty gun instead on empty chamber.

Rich, as a police officer, I am sure you have been called worse than dork and I'm sure it wasn't directed at you.

It was probably directed at me.

Again Mel, I think starting with a revolver is old school, but a lot of people feel that way and that is their opinion.

Mel, as far as your bad luck with the Glock 19, that's the first bad thing I have ever heard about a 9 mm Glock.

I have heard of some problems with the .45's.

What I am getting at is I don't think we should be taking this so personal.
 
Thanks Rick for the note of civility and in that spirit I'll reply to one or two of Mels assertions. Mel you worry about malfunctions on an auto but it is very easy to teach someone to clear a jam (tap, rack, bang)and also easy to teach field stripping and cleaning. To the contrary I've seen many malfunctions in revolvers, including but not limited to, lead build up in and around the forcing cone that freezes the cylinder, burrs and binding springs on the rebound slide causing malfunctions, end shake on the crane and yoke, hands ill fitted so badly as to effect timing and cause nearby shooters to be hit with lead shavings. I've pulled side plates and found the internals so gummed up with powder residue mixed with oil that it caused malfunctions, firing pins (S&W calls it a hammer nose)so out of alignment that it strikes the frame and causes light primer hits, etc., etc., etc. Once, as an experiment, I took a Glock and, over a period of months, fired 3000 rounds through it without cleaning it. No malfunctions. Did the same with a Sig 220 but got tired of the game after only 2000. No malfunctions. The Glock armorers course is one day in length and one small tool is needed for complete tear down and parts are interchangable. The S&W armorers school is a week long and a quite a few specialized tools are required to work on one and most parts require hand fitting (one reason I let my certification expire). BTW I've directed academies in which many recruits had never held a handgun and have found it much easier to teach autos than revolvers. The key is proper training.
 
I'll agree with that...again.

If only more people would get it. Possibly it should be a mandatory part of the purchase...

You two have more experience, I'll concede that, and are probably more knowledgable...

(and a whole lot nicer I might add...lol)

What I've seen at the ranges is different that what you two describe.

Not having a LEO background or training, like the majority of folks at our local range, I learned the hard way...and I've seen more than my share of "funky" pants soiling encounters by newbies with semi's...at the local range of course.

So, we're in agreement on mindset and training being key.

I guess we were coming at the problem from different angles. I was thinking the worst...a clueless newbie. You were (I think) thinking the best...a highly motivated, trained individual.

I didn't get that feeling from the first post, so I assumed the worse.

My mistake.

Anyhoo, ultimately, it's his choice.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I have some revolvers to clean...lol

Regards,

-S
 
Well Melvin, glad we can conclude this discussion on a friendly
note, I just took umbrage at the "dork" label. FWIW I carry an
S&W 640 on occasion off duty but after qualifying with it, I tear it
down completely and clean it. Which is something I would NEVER advise
a novice to do. Have fun cleaning and be sure to scrape the lead from
around the forcing cone LOL.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top