TexasCHLforum.com

surprise_i'm_armed wrote: OP Dicion: Please let us all know what your friend buys. It's a big wide world of choices out there,
and sometimes what someone eventually chooses is just a throw of the dice and a surprise
to both the buyers and their expectant audience (us on this thread!)

SIA

Oh I will.

He's going to try most of the ones recommended here, see how he (and she) likes them.
I'll let ya know what they decide upon in the end.

Give http://www.summitgunbroker.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; a look - lots of good used guns at good prices. I'd personally try to sell him on the Glock if he likes everything other than the manual safety, but a 92FS may be the ticket.

Liberty wrote:Ruger p95;
Should be able to be got within his price range, perhaps even in stainless..
Its meets his safety requirements
It has a reputation of extreme reliability, and my experience is that in thousands of rounds has never failed to cycle or go bang.
Is very easy to disassemble and reassemble.
It uses economical 9mm. economical yet effective in defencive loads.
Its a full size gun there fore not much perceived kick. real easy to learn on.
Made in America by Americans.
Lifetime warranty (It sounds like your friend might not know many gunsmiths).
It does have a large grip but the trigger isn't a far stretch and ladys with small hands haven't had many problems.

My future son in law is "monetarily challenged" and he just bought one of these for $419...including tax. The grips are smaller than my Glock 19...seem that way...and the pistol feels thinner than my glock 19. The safety feature is kind of cool...especially for those who don't like the "glock style" safety. He likes his and is actually pretty accurate with it. I fired a few rounds through it and thought the trigger felt a little stiff...I guess that would be the right word...maybe rough? He said it is smoothing out with some break in. Nice handgun for the money...

I think the suggestions for Taurus and Ruger are right on for the given specifications. I would also mention a used S&W semi-auto (old LEO guns can be found in price range). Also, I've been highly impressed with Bersa - but I've only shot the .380. I know they make a 9mm, but I don't have any experience with it. But it should fit in the price range.

I'm curious why the strong objection to semi-autos without external manual safeties? I've seen well-used Glocks (old LEO guns) in this price range, especially the Glock 17 and 22. Also the S&W Sigma is a great choice new in a striker-fired weapon in this price range. Used Springfield XD is another strong choice. Do I assume correctly that these folks don't have a lot of background with firearms? I'm just wondering if a bit of education on firearms safety basics ("keep the booger hook off the bang switch") or discussion of how the gun will be stored (round in tube with full mag? full mag but no round in tube? empty with mag stored elsewhere?) might help them understand that as long as the basic gun rules are followed (don't point it at anyone, don't touch the trigger), then a striker-fired weapon with no external manual safety is every bit as safe as a weapon with an external safety. Since this is likely a "house gun", they can use the Israeli method (empty tube, grab gun and rack slide in one motion when needed) and ANY semi-auto will be equally safe.

I only ask the questions in the above paragraph because they are missing out on superb pistols in their price range based solely on the external safety requirement. And, like a good revolver, I think a striker-fired semi-auto with no external safeties to fiddle with is THE BEST and THE SAFEST choice for a novice shooter. IMHO, an external safety can give a false sense of security to novices, but also an extra easily overlooked step in a crisis situation. If a novice shooter knows that touching the trigger will make the gun go bang, then they are more likely to follow proper safety rules and also more likely to be able to use the gun effectively when needed. I've seen novices "check" to see if an external safety is properly engaged by PULLING THE TRIGGER!!! If there is no external safety, then they know good and well not to touch the trigger.

03Lightningrocks wrote:

Liberty wrote:Ruger p95;
Should be able to be got within his price range, perhaps even in stainless..
Its meets his safety requirements
It has a reputation of extreme reliability, and my experience is that in thousands of rounds has never failed to cycle or go bang.
Is very easy to disassemble and reassemble.
It uses economical 9mm. economical yet effective in defencive loads.
Its a full size gun there fore not much perceived kick. real easy to learn on.
Made in America by Americans.
Lifetime warranty (It sounds like your friend might not know many gunsmiths).
It does have a large grip but the trigger isn't a far stretch and ladys with small hands haven't had many problems.

My future son in law is "monetarily challenged" and he just bought one of these for $419...including tax. The grips are smaller than my Glock 19...seem that way...and the pistol feels thinner than my glock 19. The safety feature is kind of cool...especially for those who don't like the "glock style" safety. He likes his and is actually pretty accurate with it. I fired a few rounds through it and thought the trigger felt a little stiff...I guess that would be the right word...maybe rough? He said it is smoothing out with some break in. Nice handgun for the money...

I have to correct myself here. I started thinking about it and the Ruger he bought was the SR9....not the P95. The rest of my post still applies. Suggested retail on these is five hundred something but they were getting sold for 389 at the Dallas gun show a month or so back. I saw them for sale at Academy the same day for 449.00. Might want to look at this one as well.

austinrealtor wrote:
I'm curious why the strong objection to semi-autos without external manual safeties? I've seen well-used Glocks (old LEO guns) in this price range, especially the Glock 17 and 22. Also the S&W Sigma is a great choice new in a striker-fired weapon in this price range. Used Springfield XD is another strong choice. Do I assume correctly that these folks don't have a lot of background with firearms? I'm just wondering if a bit of education on firearms safety basics ("keep the booger hook off the bang switch") or discussion of how the gun will be stored (round in tube with full mag? full mag but no round in tube? empty with mag stored elsewhere?) might help them understand that as long as the basic gun rules are followed (don't point it at anyone, don't touch the trigger), then a striker-fired weapon with no external manual safety is every bit as safe as a weapon with an external safety. Since this is likely a "house gun", they can use the Israeli method (empty tube, grab gun and rack slide in one motion when needed) and ANY semi-auto will be equally safe.

I only ask the questions in the above paragraph because they are missing out on superb pistols in their price range based solely on the external safety requirement. And, like a good revolver, I think a striker-fired semi-auto with no external safeties to fiddle with is THE BEST and THE SAFEST choice for a novice shooter. IMHO, an external safety can give a false sense of security to novices, but also an extra easily overlooked step in a crisis situation. If a novice shooter knows that touching the trigger will make the gun go bang, then they are more likely to follow proper safety rules and also more likely to be able to use the gun effectively when needed. I've seen novices "check" to see if an external safety is properly engaged by PULLING THE TRIGGER!!! If there is no external safety, then they know good and well not to touch the trigger.

There are a few reasons why the SA/DA is prefered by some users including myself.

1. It's one extra safety feature, It is insurance against Glock leg, Sometimes a gun falls Sometimes people people reach blindly into a drawer, The Safety is is just extra insurance that the gun doesn't go off if the fingers accidently go inside the trigger guard. Some people drive only with compulsory insurance in their cars some have million dollar riders the choice is personal.
2. The SA/DA is a prefered action and has the Safety of a DA and accuracy of a SA, or at least thats the idea. I like shooting in SA but I also like the added safety of it being a DA.
3. It works just like most hunting and military guns some of us have been trained in and are so used to, for years before we decided to own a handgun.
4. Its not so difficult to use, I've even seen Marines capable of unlatching the safety. (Sorry an Army Joke ) Really its not that difficult to learn, although I can understand how a Glock owner who has developed a muscle memory especially in something like IPDA might struggle, but like any gun there is a code of arms that should be learned for any weapon.
5. A gun without a proper hammer just isn't right. ... OK this isn't a rational reason, but there is some sort of satisfaction in cocking a hammer, just before knocking out the center of an X at the range.

I don't believe that a novice should be trusting their life to a used gun. As long as I can afford it I would prefer a new cheaper model gun or car than buying a fancier model used car or gun.

Please this thread isn't the proper place to debate Glock vs any thing, I was just atempting to answer a reasonable question, There are also good reasons why someone might prefer a DA only, We can always open another thread on why Glocks are the superior gun.
edit for disclaimer.

03Lightningrocks wrote:[
My future son in law is "monetarily challenged" and he just bought one of these for $419...including tax. The grips are smaller than my Glock 19...seem that way...and the pistol feels thinner than my glock 19. The safety feature is kind of cool...especially for those who don't like the "glock style" safety. He likes his and is actually pretty accurate with it. I fired a few rounds through it and thought the trigger felt a little stiff...I guess that would be the right word...maybe rough? He said it is smoothing out with some break in. Nice handgun for the money...

M p95 smoothed out considerably after some use, I assume it would do the same for the SR9.

austinrealtor et al:
As a relatively new handgunner myself, I totally understand the newbies who
desire a manual safety.

There are some Glock lovers who preach that all you have to do is follow the
4 rules and you too can carry a Glock. Let me be the heretic/infidel on this
issue and say "A trigger safety is like no safety."

There are those of us though who desire a little something more of a safety.
Some have pointed out that an XD might be a good choice. I agree, because the
addition of the grip safety now gives you a weapon that you can still fire quickly,
but has a little sumpin/sumpin more than the trigger safety.

I would stress to these new owners that if they get a pistol with a manual safety
they should get a lot of range time to develop the muscle memory in the thumb to
snick that baby down when needed. It's not hard.

They also need to drop their mag with one in the pipe, then try to fire that 1 shot.
That way they will be aware of their gun's ability/inability to fire in such a mode.

But you know, I too could carry a Glock if it appealed to me on other levels, which it
does not.

My asbestos suit has now been donned in anticipation of Glock wielders' wrath. :-)

SIA

Thanks for all the good points!

Liberty wrote:...Glock leg

Lol, had to comment here. Is this now an officially coined term?

"Hey man, wanna go golfing tomorrow?"
"Sorry Bill, I can't, got me a case of glock leg"
"Aw, sorry to hear that Tom, well then hopefully next month!"

Seriously though, I have nothing against glocks (Other than they aren't 1911's )
Theyre quality, durable, reliable, accurate, and set at a good price point.

I just don't like the way they feel _to me_, and, this is only a personal choice, I prefer an additional safety.
I know they're just as safe as any other other handgun as long as you use the safety between your ears. It's just a personal choice.

I purchased my first Glock in 1986 or 87...it was the Glock 17. Before that I had owned mostly DA revolvers and one Colt series 80 Gold Cup 45. That trigger safety had me paranoid for quite some time. LOL...like a couple years or more. I carried it with no round in the chamber because of it. I realized it would not go off by itself and realized it was just like a DA revolver with one very large exception. The trigger on the Glock took MUCH less force to pull than a DA revolver trigger. I used to sit around and try to pull the trigger from different angles, just to see what kind of situation might cause an accidental discharge. I liked the gun and was terribly accurate with it. I kept it and eventually realized a Glock was as safe as any handgun. Now I own 6 of them.

I can understand why this configuration is intimidating to a new shooter. Psychologically, it seems like an easy accident just waiting to happen.

The Bersa in 9 are very nice guns. I have a few of my ladies that shoot them. They run and run and run without any issues. I have learned to really appreciate Bersa guns due to my women classes. They are dependable, fairly accurate, easy to shoot, and easy to conceal. Well worth looking at.

I am definitely in the camp that new shooters should not necessarily be subjected to having to learn to operate a manual safety, or develop a reliance on a SA trigger action in order to be able to shoot accurately. I say this as a recent (18 months) new, first-time gun owner. If you are going to have to learn a new skill, you might as well learn to operate a DA trigger and control the pistol that way, and there is really no reason to become dependent on a manual safety.

That's not to say that it's the only way, but just that it is a perfectly valid way and I think preferential to many (maybe most) first-time shooters and new gun owners. For those of you who have learned to shoot hunting rifles growing up or were trained with pistols with manual safeties in the military etc. then of course it makes sense to stick with something more comfortable such as SA triggers and manual safeties. But if it's a new shooter, I see no good purpose in developing a reliance on a mechanical safety to make the gun "safe" or for a reliance on a short, light trigger.

My wife learned to shoot a gun with our S&W Sigma with its 9-10 lb long trigger pull and after about 50 rounds she was able to put a whole magazine on a 6" target at 15 yards. Same for my daughters, who are now 12 and 15. I am sure that if you had handed them a 1911 and my Sigma when they first shot anything, they would have preferred the light, short trigger. But it was easy for them to learn to shoot the hard trigger gun and now they don't have that crutch.

IMHO!

I used to not like Glocks. Bought a 19 at a good price last year, then sold it before I ever had a chance to fire it.
Just did not fit my hand, it seemed.
Then recently a bought Glock 19. I like the size better, so I took it to the range last trip. After shooting it, I'm a believer. It is now my bedside gun, and I'm shopping for a couple more.

Back to the topic, one gun to add to your list is the Stoeger Cougar.
It's a 9mm Beretta at half the price.
It has a safety/decocker, it's DA/SA, and hi-capacity.
It's rotating barrel softens the recoil.
Good shooter, well-made, and you can find them for around $349 if you shop it.

If you can raise $100, there are a whole lot more guns that can be had and are of much better quality.

A brand new Glock 19 or Beretta 92F sells about $460-480. I have both and love both. Excellent excellet firearms.

Another option is CZ, which is valued by many shooters as great price/quality ratio.

Of course, I don't know much about guns and only go by what the Internet says.

CZ75 is a good choice but not very easy for small hands/short fingers to reach the trigger in DA mode.