Thinking about buying a handgun. I think going to the range would be fun, but more importantly, I think my wife would find it useful. She has been trained to use the M11 and the M9. She preferred the Beretta, but was a better shot with the SIG Sauer. So when making a purchase should I:

1) Purchase the gun she liked using?

Or

2) Purchase the gun that she found more accurate?

purchase the gun she liked, then let her practice. the particular weapon she fired may have needed sight adjustment or she may just need to get comfortable with it. before I'd release my chick into the wild with an automatic she would have to be able to chamber that first round by hand very quickly, every time. mine hasn't been able to yet so she carries a hammerless revolver.

Why not eventually get both?

I thought Figgs was back for a minute.

Eventually, if I enjoy putting holes in things at the gun range enough, we'll have both. But since my wife has more experience with both weapons than I do, I'll purchase a .22 handgun to learn the basics of gun safety, maintenance, and marksmanship first. If I'm only going to the range once or twice a year, I don't want two civilian models of weapons designed with military use in mind collecting dust in a gun safe.

I have a Ruger .22 Mark III Hunter in stainless for plinking. It is the most accurate and well behaved handgun I've ever shot. I highly recommend it.

What does "well-behaved" mean here, Bornyo; a small amount of recoil?



What's the background here?

Yes, small amount of recoil and a consistent tight pattern clip after clip. Somewhere I posted a pic where I shot through the mouth of a beer can and out the bottom. I can do that regularly with that gun and no others I own.

I'm not sure what you mean by background, but in general one carries an automatic with an empty chamber, especially a woman who may be tossing it around in a purse. In order to fire the gun, you have to "jack" the slide by hand the first time to chamber a shell. The spring on most automatic slides is difficult for a woman to master, and when you consider she will need it most when she is under the most stress, it's just not a good idea for her to depend on something she only gets right on a 50% basis. With a revolver, you pull the trigger and it fires. Hammerless, and it won't snag in a purse and fire inadvertently.

Ah, that explains it.

Why guns would alter their accuracy with a different clip is beyond me, at least if it's for something else than the parts becoming hot and a bit dirty.


What's with the recoil of some Dirty Harry monster handgun; is it stance or do you need to be alpha guy?
I think I saw some popular online clip of a chick almost fucking up her nose with that thing.

Unless you really want to be able to inflict extreme damage or hunt hippos, I see no use for that type of caliber.

I was reading about Beretta on Wikipedia. The family takes blood seriously. The business has been handed down from father to son since 1500. Two brothers were childless, so the husband of their sister adopted the family name, so future generations of Beretta owners will be "Beretta" through matrilineal descent.

Are those little Taurus revolvers easy to handle/accurate? I am guessing they are for close range.

Do some research into Taurus. Some of their models are/were better than others by a big margin, IIRC.

Always buy the gun that a person will actually use and carry. Not one that they will think is pretty or great but one they are comfortable using. BTW, carrying a semi auto with an empty chamber can be a death wish if you need it quickly. Lots of dudes I know carry a 1911 cocked and locked. Not me though. That hammer back gives me the willies. I rotate between a revolver or something semi auto I'm fairly sure of like a 9 or 40 with a decocker or safety.

those stubby taurus revolvers look a little easier to handle; the only handguns i have shot were 40 cal (para ordinance and some other one) and they were just too much fucking gun for me.
i also found loading the clip etc kind of intimidating. i'm sure it's just a case of 'getting your reps in', but keep in mind where i live.

this is all hypothetical of course...

I never had any issues with carrying my Sig with a round in the pipe. 1911s and glocks gave me the willies as far as conceal carry went. Friends tried to convince me the glock was safe but I never warmed to them. I'd carry a Keltec before a glock. Crazy and irrational maybe but true.

^ Why don't you like Glocks? It was the first (and only) handgun I ever fired. It was a lot of fun.

I wouldn't carry any brand of 1911 with a shell chambered and the hammer cocked. Safety be damned. I just don't trust the safety. I have a Kimber I've posted before and I carry it loaded but not cocked. If I can't cock the hammer it's too damned late.

I have shot a lot of Glocks and own a Sig Sauer. I am indifferent to any difference or advantage one over the other in them. Besides, the OP was asking what he should do for his chick and I think the best advice is get her what she is comfortable with and let her work on the accuracy by processing rounds.

I just bought a Walther PPK in a .22 for plinking and one in .380 for cc. I have several guns to rotate for carry now. Variety is the spice.....

The time I got interested with handguns was when Glocks were having an issue with a production run that were literally blowing up in people's hands when being fired. Glocks were never originally chosen by law enforcement for their reliability and safety but because glock gave large police departments such huge discounts on their guns it was almost impossible for them to not buy them. I just never liked the trigger or safety on glocks.

Everyone is different. Its just my opinion. If you like Glock and are comfortable with them then use the tool thats best for you.

I love the M1911 and carried one in the Army for several years, but I give that weapon more respect than every other firearm I've used, including the M16, M60 and M2 .50cal.

One small mistake with a M1911 is guaranteed to have grave consequences.

^ I don't understand why they would want to phase out the M1911? It's designed to put big gaping holes in people. Isn't that the whole point of warfare?

Likely because some general or congressperson's retarded son in law works for a company that came up with a "better" weapon.

How much wheel greasing did it take to switch everyone to the pixelated BDUs, only to throw em overboard 6-7 years later?

nope. we capitulated to using NATO rounds.

Nice shirt...

http://digitaljournal.com/article/341154

I'm not saying Yeager isn't a fucking dipshit, he seems like just the kind of right wing "hero" you worthless meatbags would fall all over your selves to suck the nuts of. It doesn't knock any holes in his obliteration of 1911 fetishist idiots.

Chicks with guns!

^new thread nassim... brilliant.

Less lethal rounds so you have more gimps coming home instead of coffins.

That theory works when you are up against an industrialized state like the USSR. If we're going to send people to Afghanistan or Somalia, I think "big holes" would be better for everyone involved...