This made me think of this thread last week. Might be of some help. I had a chance to have a training session with my wife last week. I had bought her a new .38 for her to carry in her purse. She has an XD Sub-Compact 9mm that she keeps beside the bed. We got them both out and I set up some targets. I had her shoot the 9 milli first. I put a laser/flashlight combo on it for her. So that she wouldn't have to really learn and practice sighting and target acquisition. She never has been really fond of firearms. A disability that I have been working to help her overcome. She did real well with the laser sight at 10-15 yards. I was proud of her, without any prompting from me she decided that she wanted to learn to use the open sights "just in case". She did remarkably well with open sights. Next we got the .38 snubby. I was concerned that the recoil and the loud report would scare her off of it. But again she did me proud. She jumped a little at first, but she tried again until she had very good control of it. The I set up a human silhouette target. I had her shoot the first round single action. By cocking the hammer first ( for falcondance’s sake). Then fire the next 4 rounds double action ( pulling the trigger only) as fast as she could. She was able to put all 5 rounds in the center of mass on the target with the exception of one flyer that was in the throat. I then had her practice a two to the chest, one to the head drill with both guns. She did excellent with both. So for the discussion here I would recommend either one. The .38 is a great womans gun. It is enough power to do the job and not to much to frighten off or deter the female shooter from practice. A revolver is simple and very safe. I read an article in a gun rag some time back about a study that found a definite "intimidation factor" in seeing the hollow points in a revolver aimed at you. Whereas some criminals were not detered by a small semi with the rounds hidden from view. I have a Bersa .380 and a Kel-Tec .32. Both serve a purpose and I would go to either one if that was what I had at hand. For the price they are great little guns. But, the bigger the better. And that is not just a male phallic symbol metaphor. The bigger, more powerful a round, the more stopping power. In a life and death situation, whether you target is man or beast, you want to reach the desired effect with as few rounds as possible. 7 rounds of .32 will achive the same results (generally speaking) as half that many from a larger caliber. A .45 is not knicknamed the "sledgehammer" for nothing. One round is generally suffecient. what I would recommend is going with the largest caliber you are comfortable shooting and then choosing revolver or semi depending on your own preference and/or how much fire power you feel you may ever (in a worst case scenario) need. Or generally, the smaller the caliber, the more of them you will want to have. So a small caliber semi would be equal to having a larger caliber revolver. It all depends on what you would and could use effeciently enough, and suffeciently enough, to protect yourself with.
I would have to somewhat disagree in reguards to bigger=better. So long as the person can handle the gun then, over penetration or ammo price aside, bigger dont tend to equal worse for sure BUT it is often kind of ignored or overlooked that dead is like pregnant, it dont have degrees, you are or arent. SO LONG AS a calibur will RELIABLY penetrate enouph tissue and bone even in a less than optimal situation (haveing to go through an arm to get to the chest, heavey clothes, etc) to reach and destroy vital organs (preferably heart, spinal cord or brain) and end their ability to function then there isnt much in the way of degrees to it, the organ works or dont. If it dose the person isnt dead soon enouph to do you any good if it dosent function any more then the person is dead and thus can not do any more to try to kill you or others. So, if you have a .380 with ammo that would say, go through an arm (bone included) and still go through the tissue and a rib and have enouph left to disrupt the hearts ability to function and put the shot where it needs to be then the results other than astetics/mess will be exactly the same as if the wound were a .454 causal or .50 BMG, the person is dead, no more or less dead (even if mess may be more or less), just dead. Now you DO have to get into the class of caliburs that will meet that basic standard of 'being able to disrupt the organs reliably even in less than ideal situations' before my statment applies. A .22 CAN reach them and stop their functioning BUT not in the less than ideal situations for instance. So untill you get to that point then the bigger you go the closer you come to meeting it but once you meet that standard then the only 'more' it really offers is more mess or splatter factor (as in bug on the windshield effect say from a 30mm round) and more potential to pass through your target and still have enouph energy to destroy something you did NOT intend to. Granted you also can then get into the arguments of haveing to shoot through cover of various types and still meet the standard BUT when we are talking about self defense in a civilian setting and chooseing a handgun for it I dont figure that comes in so much. I figure the particular concerns of haveing the ability to reach through cover if needed is a job that falls to a long arm. So short version, a .50 cal wont stop anyone reliably if you hit them in the pinky and neither will smaller rounds but a .38 spl or .380 with apropriate ammo to the head will just the same as a .50 drop them NOW.
I suppose I should also concede that ammo selection is more important the smaller you go and that is why .38 spl and .380 are often considered debatable as meeting the requirement as a defensive round while the 9mm or .357 are not really disputed by hardly any as being adequate. A poor load in a 9mm or .357 (less than top shelf premium or carefuly selected) will meet the standard while in .38 spl and .380 ammo selection becomes far more important.
Ap-RIGHTY then. Flogged, whipped, warped, stretched, distended, racked, bent and worked over. Hey FalconDance, what is your pick, and why?
Haven't picked yet --- husband suggested I go to Blairstown sometime soon and look over the selection there. (Blairstown is barely a wide spot in the road but reknowned for firearms.) I have noticed, however, that the number of establishments posting firearms prohibition seems to be growing ........... Pansy-asses. Besides, no one coated anything in chocolate! How's a girl supposed to choose if no one includes chocolate somehow!?!?!?!???????
Now you're talkin'! I am a big revolver fan (never had one jam yet ) and thought you might consider this one:
This is what I carry. Can be had for less then $200.00. I like the only downside is the 29lb trigger pull and after about 12 round your hand feels like it has been hit with sledgehammer. If you get the trigger pull below 18ls the mag can fall out when the gun is fired. For it’s size it is very accurate and will shoot single action so if you have to use it for self defense just flip the safety off and pull the hammer back. Here is a link that will tell you a little about it. http://www.surplusrifle.com/shooting2005/polishp64vsppk/index.asp
The Bersa Thunder .380 is pretty much a clone of the Walther, for a price between the Walther and the surpluss (closer to the surpluss) that often beats the Walther in head on comparison.
At the pawn shop yesterday, there were 3 new Bersa Thunders priced at $269 (also a beauty of a Ruger rimfire .22LR I tried not to drool over - the only semi .22 I'd consider). I'm going to go to Blairstown in the near future and have a look-see then decide, I think.
I wouldn't pay that for a Bersa 380 when I just saw them a few months ago for $220 new . As for the Ruger I'm sure it was nice but if this is suppose to be a CCW piece controlling drooling wouldn't be hard at all . You really need to find a new sample of the PA-63 and see how it fits your hand as they can still be had for under $200 . Brass and Hollow point bullets can both be found at www.midwayusa.com to make the round useful for defensive work and it is closer to the 9mm than a 380 in performance .
If you go for the Bersa call or go by The Country Store on 13 halfway to Clinton, IIRC they sell them for $30-40 less.
Oh, and did you see the P3-AT kel-Tec they had? It was priced at $300 there at the pawn shop but it was the little tiny one they had up in the corner of the case.
Have you seen the new Ruger 380 yet? I'd say it is a candidate. Somewhat more frns than the Bersa, but lighter as well.
Dont recall if it has been mentioned on here or not but found a link on another board for a similar question that may be helpful. www.corneredcat.com is a site/bunch of articles, writen by a woman for women, related to handguns and concealed carry. It has a LOT of good info includeing some advise on how to find the right gun for you. If you havent checked it out before do, its well worth the time to read for they guys and gals alike and even a person with considerable knowledge or experience is likely to find some pearls by reading it but its all in terms easy for a person who knows NOTHING about guns to understand.
LOL imagine the fits that would be caused by putting a chocolate gun and bullets in your kids lunch box these days !
