"Starter" weapon?

[Tames D]

He did not say it was for SD, he said he was looking for a starter firearm.

He can get another size for SD or HD later on, after he has training. And he may not want a .40. I don't like .40, does that mean you should not like it? No, it doesn't.

My mistake. I thought he used the words "self defense repertoire". I'll go back and check. Maybe you should too.
As far as me suggesting a .40, it was just a suggestion. I'm not here to force him (or you) to like it.
I started years ago with a 9mm. I didn't find it to be difficult, even as a beginner starting out with firearms.

 

[jetboatdeath]

UMM i don't think the .22 is "bad" for SD something to be said for getting off 9 rounds with no recoil. And as it is said the best gun to have in a SD situation is the one you have...

 

[Guardian]

You've got plenty of advice around you as you stated, ex-police, military, they can give you advice, don't come on a forum asking for advice on guns, everyone has their favorite or personal choice, to much opinion can be a negative thing also.

Go with the advice of those closest to you that know you, your family your area, your way of life and go from their.

 

[lklawson]

UMM i don't think the .22 is "bad" for SD something to be said for getting off 9 rounds with no recoil. And as it is said the best gun to have in a SD situation is the one you have...

According to http://www.goldenloki.com/ammo/gel/22lr/gel22lr.htm at least two of the .22LR rounds tested in calibrated ballistic gelatin penetrated a mere 1/2 inch shy of the FBI recommended minimum 12 inches for "effective stopping power."

While few will argue that a .22LR is the optimum (not by a long shot), it does show that it can (nearly anyway) meet the bare minimum requirements and should not be treated too dismissively.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[Drac]

I loved my Sig P-230 ( .380)..

 

[KenpoTex]

I guess I'll throw my $0.02 in...

You didn't specify what type of firearm you're looking for so I'll mention two:

-Shotgun: A long-gun is far superior to a handgun when it comes to stopping people. Nothing fancy is required, I'd recommend either a Mossberg 500 or 590, or a Remington 870. I prefer a 12 gauge with a barrel length of 18-20 inches. The only real downside is that younger kids may find shooting something like this uncomfortable. Even if this is not your first gun, I would recommend that you get one at some point.

-Handgun: While not as powerful, a handgun might be a little better in this case since you're also interested in having your wife and kids learn to use it as well. Furthermore, should you decide at some point to get your concealed-carry license, you'll already have a pistol.
I consider reliability to be the most important criteria with all others (ergonomics, appearance, etc.) coming in a distant second. For this reason, I'd recommend a Glock, Smith&Wesson M&P, SIG, or Walther. All these have a great track record (even though the S&W hasn't been around as long as the others). As far as caliber goes, I'd recommend 9mm...with good ammo, it will do anything the other popular calibers will do and it is the cheapest "defensive caliber" which will allow you to shoot more.

Regardless of what you decide, make sure to get some professional training from a competent instructor who has experience teaching people how to fight with a firearm.
Here's a good place to look for training and it's not that far from you
http://www.coloradoshootingsports.com/Training.html

 

[searcher]

QUI-GON. My apologies on my post. I got stuck on the "starter" portion and failed to keep in mind the SD part.

 

[HM2PAC]

Another variation on the starter/SD gun is this:

Go to a range that will let you try multiple types of handguns. After you have an idea of what you like, get one that you can buy a 22LR conversion kit for.

This way you can train with your main weapon using 22LR. This will save a lot of $$$, and increase the amount of times you can pull the trigger at each setting.

Just a thought.

 

[Andy Moynihan]

Well.....

I'm gonna be the wild card and throw in a different recommendation:

If you just want a practice gun, it doesn't matter what type.

If you want to eventually carry it after you recieve appropriate training?

Well, I have my fullsize Glock 17 with its 3 preban mags, and I like it, it's a nice, uncomplicated, proven reliable design as auto pistols go. It's my "house gun" if I cannot access the shotgun( Mossberg 590A1) in time, and I have an appropriate holster/belt for those occasions when I want to carry a fullsize, full capacity auto when " yer insides tell ya to", as John Wayne might say.

But between you and I?

What do I usually find myself carrying when I do carry? What do I usually end up betting my life on?

My .38 snubbie( S&W model 642-2 with Crimson Trace grips).

They're "old school", and in this day and age of high capacity wonderautos, almost nobody considers them a first choice , but you can't beat the particular balance of power, accuracy and reliability in any modern, well made revolver.

Now,granted, talking specifically of snub revolvers and not fullsize ones, any gun that weighs 12 ounces, with a 2 inch barrel, that can be covered with a man's hand, firing .38 Special or .38 +P, can hardly be considered an ideal target gun.

But its balance of enough power, enough lightness and enough carryability is why they're still around in dangerous places and why the model 642 was S&W's top selling gun of 2006.

The Disadvantage of a snubbie are only three as compared to a fullsize auto:

* Short barrel--not as accurate at longer ranges but within the 21 foot or shorter actual combat distance, practice will yield good enough "combat accuracy" in the snubbie.

* Comparatively fewer rounds between reloads--My fuillsize Glock 17 with it's preban 17+2 extended mag, plus "one in the pipe" gives me an on-tap, ready to go capacity of 20 rounds without needing a reload. That *IS* a comforting thought in this day and age of group assaults, and is an increase in "firepower" of 400 percent compared with the snubbie's five rounds. But as the Marines are fond of saying: "One hundred rounds do not consitute firepower. ONE HIT constitutes firepower". And you can't hit with anything you didn't carry.

* Slower reloads--though with speedloaders and the reintroduction in certain models of the old WWI "moon clips" that gap is not so wide as once it was. Not at all.

The advantage of revolvers( but in particular the snubbie) are, in fact, quite numerous to those who will look and study:


http://www.snubtraining.com/pdfs/WhyRevolversBeatAutos.pdf

something to think about.

 

[lklawson]

My .38 snubbie( S&W model 642-2 with Crimson Trace grips).

[snip]

The advantage of revolvers( but in particular the snubbie) are, in fact, quite numerous to those who will look and study

There's quite a bit to be said for revolvers. However, some of the basic and most powerful arguments are:

1. Will never fail to feed.
2. Will never fail to extract, stovepipe, etc.
3. A failure to fire (dud round) or "underpowered" rounds will not bork up a follow up shot.
4. You don't have to rack the slide.
5. You don't have to worry about the "Safety," Cock-n-lock, or any of that "Condition 1/2/whatever" stuff.
6. Statistically speaking, 6 rounds is sufficient for most Civilian SD situations (ims, 2-4 rounds was the average fired).

Personally, I don't have a carry piece that's a revolver but I do have a .45 SAA and couple of C&R that I just love. Utterly reliable. Completely.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[DergaSmash]

I agree for the msot part. Go to a big range that rents weapons. Try out several different types and calibers. But in terms of defense, you want a cartridge that brings stopping power without a great deal of over-penetration. Kitting your attacker is one thing. Shooting through him into the next house and killing your neighbor is another. Yet you want a cartridge that will take your attacker down even if you don't hit center mass or in the head.

 

[Grenadier]

I agree for the msot part. Go to a big range that rents weapons. Try out several different types and calibers. But in terms of defense, you want a cartridge that brings stopping power without a great deal of over-penetration.

Today's premium hollowpoint ammo has helped reduce the problem of overpenetration.

The problem with the older generation hollowpoints, is that they were highly dependent on high velocities to get reliable expansion. With today's designs, a premium hollowpoint bullet should expand reliably over a much broader range of velocities, which is why previous ideas, such as "never use 147 grain 9 mm ammo" are no longer valid.

If anything, I would feel equally confident using a standard pressure 147 grain Remington Golden Saber JHP (previously a no-no), as I would with my usual carry load, the Winchester Ranger 127 grain +P+ JHP.

 

[Frostbite]

I guess I'll throw my $0.02 in...

You didn't specify what type of firearm you're looking for so I'll mention two:

-Shotgun: A long-gun is far superior to a handgun when it comes to stopping people. Nothing fancy is required, I'd recommend either a Mossberg 500 or 590, or a Remington 870. I prefer a 12 gauge with a barrel length of 18-20 inches. The only real downside is that younger kids may find shooting something like this uncomfortable. Even if this is not your first gun, I would recommend that you get one at some point.

-Handgun: While not as powerful, a handgun might be a little better in this case since you're also interested in having your wife and kids learn to use it as well. Furthermore, should you decide at some point to get your concealed-carry license, you'll already have a pistol.
I consider reliability to be the most important criteria with all others (ergonomics, appearance, etc.) coming in a distant second. For this reason, I'd recommend a Glock, Smith&Wesson M&P, SIG, or Walther. All these have a great track record (even though the S&W hasn't been around as long as the others). As far as caliber goes, I'd recommend 9mm...with good ammo, it will do anything the other popular calibers will do and it is the cheapest "defensive caliber" which will allow you to shoot more.

Regardless of what you decide, make sure to get some professional training from a competent instructor who has experience teaching people how to fight with a firearm.
Here's a good place to look for training and it's not that far from you
http://www.coloradoshootingsports.com/Training.html

I agree with everything you posted and would add that some other advantages of a handgun is that if you actually needed to move around the house with a weapon drawn, a handgun is more mobile and easier to bring to bear on your target, especially if you live in a smaller place/have narrow halls/etc. The other advantage is that if you're a city dweller, like me, it's easier to find places to shoot a handgun, which means you're more inclined to practice. And you should always practice if you intend to use it for self defense.

The advantage of revolvers( but in particular the snubbie) are, in fact, quite numerous to those who will look and study

I'd add the caveat that with snubbies, there tends to be more felt recoil and fairly poor stock sights, so many people wouldn't consider them a "range gun." For a starter gun, I'd recommend something in the full-size to compact range (not sub-compact), whether it was a revolver or semi-auto.

 

[BLACK LION]

Problem with beginning with a .22 as an adult is the transition to higher calibers. More recoil and more intense audible and visual stimulus.

For kids its perfect.

this may sound strange but an AR-15 may not be a bad idea to jump into since it can double as defense/ security option and also as a training device for you and you kids... you can get a dedicated 22lr upper or a 22lr conversion kit and swap it in for the kids or when you just want to drill some basic manipulations... swap it out to the standard caliber when in defense/security/carry mode.

There are pistols out there that offer 22lr conversion kits as well...

I would suggest a dedicated system with a 22lr conversion kit... not a dedicated 22lr...

 

[Carol]

3 years ago, I went to the range for the first time ever. Andy M. started me with a 9mm. I didn't have much trouble with it then. Looking back on it now, I think it was a great first choice. I don't think feeling recoil or watching what it does to your aim when you are pulling the trigger for the first time is a bad thing.

Thread here:

http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?p=585976&highlight=range#post585976

 

[Frostbite]

Nice shooting Carol!

 

[Carol]

Nice shooting Carol!

Thank you! :asian:

 

[KenpoTex]

I agree for the msot part. Go to a big range that rents weapons. Try out several different types and calibers. But in terms of defense, you want a cartridge that brings stopping power without a great deal of over-penetration. Kitting your attacker is one thing. Shooting through him into the next house and killing your neighbor is another. Yet you want a cartridge that will take your attacker down even if you don't hit center mass or in the head.

"Stopping power" and "knockdown power" are terms that need to die...they paint an inaccurate picture of what firearms are/are not capable of.

If you don't put the rounds into the correct areas, you can't count on anything significant happening regardless of what caliber you are using.

 

[zDom]

I came to the same decision late last year and bought my first, a SIG p226 (in .40 cal), in January.

My one bit of advice would be: take a CCW (carry concealed weapon) course even if you think you will never carry (assuming you have CCW in your state).

The first time I fired my new weapon was during the course, so instructors were right there to make sure I started out on the right foot and didn't build in any bad habits.

As recommended, try some firearms out first, see what you like. I thought I was going to go with a 22 Glock having previously decided to go with .40 cal (after extensive research and asking around for opinions), but then I found I really, really liked the feel of the SIG 226.

Plug for the p226: VERY easy to field strip it, as far as autoloaders go.

On the other hand, while I am perfectly happy with it as a vehicle/home defense firearm, I find it is a bit big for me to comfortably carry concealed. Part of that may be that I went through the first 40 years of my life NOT carrying a big hunk of metal with me.

Am really leaning toward a S&W 442 or 642 as a carry firearm in the near future.

* Note/question on snubbies: I was told barrel length affects VELOCITY, not accuracy — anyone care to confirm/refute or elaborate on this?

 

[KenpoTex]

Barrel length does affect velocity. A weapon with a shorter barrel will not generate as much velocity as the same weapon with a longer barrel since there is less time for the bullet to be "pushed" by the burning gases--all the propellant has not been used to push the bullet because it's not in the barrel long enough.

As far as accuracy, a weapon with a longer barrel will be easier to shoot well due to the longer sight-radius (distance between the front and rear sights). Errors in alignment will be magnified by the shorter barrel/sight-radius.

Snubbies are difficult to shoot well due to the short sight-radius, [usually] crappy sights, high levels of felt recoil (due to the light weight of the gun and little real-estate to "put meat on the gun"), and the often long/heavy trigger pull.
While snubbies do have a role, I generally recommend a compact or sub-compact auto for day-to-day concealed-carry. Something like the Glock 26 or 27 is going to be much easier to shoot, has twice the capacity, better sights, much quicker reloads, etc.