How to buy a pistol for my wife

[molonlabe]

You know I have been on this forum since it's inception. And yes I don't have a high post count. Go anywhere on the internet and you will find pro's and cons on this subject. I evaluate my students as I did my wife and the revolver was the best option for her and she would agree with me. She is not mechnical she is an artist. Yes we have a shotgun out but the fastest go to is the revolver. Lint?????? Any action will jam if you never clean it especially if you keep it in your lint hose of your dryer. I teach cleaning of a firearm in all my pistol classes. That’s the last thing they do after they come from the range. This forum has developed a nasty habit of eating its own and turning every discussion into a 9 vs. .45 debate.

That's my 2 cents.

 

[traveller]

This forum has developed a nasty habit of eating its own and turning every discussion into a 9 vs. .45 debate.

Funny you should mention that, which caliber IS the only correct one for home defense

I think for an untrained female, you want to go with something like .500 S&W or .44 mag as absolute minimum. I mean she is going to miss most shots anyway, so if she gets one on the target, you got to make sure that it counts, right ?

 

[AntiGun]

Funny you should mention that, which caliber IS the only correct one for home defense

I think for an untrained female, you want to go with something like .500 S&W or .44 mag as absolute minimum. I mean she is going to miss most shots anyway, so if she gets one on the target, you got to make sure that it counts, right ?

beowulf 50
She can have the rifle and the power.

 

[molonlabe]

Funny you should mention that, which caliber IS the only correct one for home defense

I think for an untrained female, you want to go with something like .500 S&W or .44 mag as absolute minimum. I mean she is going to miss most shots anyway, so if she gets one on the target, you got to make sure that it counts, right ?

If she missies then the muzzle flash will scare the hell out of them.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2d/FNFLASH01.jpg

 

[Vile Shadow]

Which pistol do YOU think would be easiest for an untrained person to manipulate under stress?

If I may take a stab at it....

G17?

 

[Traveler]

If I may take a stab at it....

G17?

Agreed. In the book by Massad Ayoob, he stated that they found new shooters did better with the lighter trigger pull of the semi auto. They found they could get new shooters hitting consistently more quickly. Very experienced shooters did equally well with either.

I loved my GP100 .357, but my Glock 17 is just dead nuts simple and accurate. Lots of rounds in case of multiple attackers. The only downside I can see, is some women, and people with arthritis, might struggle getting the slide back.

In my opinion, a self defense firearm should have one in the pipe, and be in a simplex locking quick safe.

 

[smokey]

How many news reports have you heard a child was shot? Those many didn't miss.

Ok, I could agree with you on a lot of why a revolver makes a good option...mostly due to the software side of things...but huh? First, the incidence of kids being shot on accident is pretty low. It's a rare thing relative to how they hurt themselves with other things. In the incidents where they are shot, you seem to be implying that they are intentionally aiming and pressing the trigger without understanding the consequences and it's so easy that even a child can point-shoot. Ok.....but that's not under stress, probably at near contact distances, and there's a large percentage of these types of shootings where a kid accidentally presses a trigger and ends up hitting someone next to them or even through a wall when the gun goes off.

As a counter to the feeling that it's caveman-simple to hit a moving target in the dark, when startled and adrenaline-filled...here's some police stats on hit-rate

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/09/weekinreview/09baker.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&

For example, a 43 percent hit rate for shots fired from zero to six feet might seem low, but at that range it is very likely that something has already gone wrong: perhaps an officer got surprised, or had no cover, or was wrestling with the suspect.

...and that's from 0-6 feet. Of course 43% still means if you fire 3 times, you're likely to hit them at least once...but still. It's far from a guarantee that an untrained person will be able to naturally point-shoot a threat at night.

As far as the other things...I do agree that it's even less likely that an untrained shooter would be able to switch motor programs and effectively engage a target, recognize a malfunction, clear the malfunction, and re-engage the target in a reasonable timeline to act in their own defense in home-defense distances. I'm just not getting the "kids shoot each other all the time therefor it's not that hard to engage a badguy at night as an untrained shooter" argument.

 

[Blaster229]

Ok, I could agree with you on a lot of why a revolver makes a good option...mostly due to the software side of things...but huh? First, the incidence of kids being shot on accident is pretty low. It's a rare thing relative to how they hurt themselves with other things. In the incidents where they are shot, you seem to be implying that they are intentionally aiming and pressing the trigger without understanding the consequences and it's so easy that even a child can point-shoot. Ok.....but that's not under stress, probably at near contact distances, and there's a large percentage of these types of shootings where a kid accidentally presses a trigger and ends up hitting someone next to them or even through a wall when the gun goes off.

As a counter to the feeling that it's caveman-simple to hit a moving target in the dark, when startled and adrenaline-filled...here's some police stats on hit-rate

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/09/weekinreview/09baker.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&


...and that's from 0-6 feet. Of course 43% still means if you fire 3 times, you're likely to hit them at least once...but still. It's far from a guarantee that an untrained person will be able to naturally point-shoot a threat at night.

As far as the other things...I do agree that it's even less likely that an untrained shooter would be able to switch motor programs and effectively engage a target, recognize a malfunction, clear the malfunction, and re-engage the target in a reasonable timeline to act in their own defense in home-defense distances. I'm just not getting the "kids shoot each other all the time therefor it's not that hard to engage a badguy at night as an untrained shooter" argument.

I am making a point and shoot comparison. The kids who have done it are not trained. They simply pointed a gun, pulled the trigger and made a shot.

Next time you go to the range, set a pistol down in front of your less than trained person or yourself for that matter. In 1 smooth, slow, safe, deliberate motion, reach down, pick the pistol up point it right out to a 7 yard target and pull the trigger. No aiming, just pointing, and when your arm is extended, break the shot and see what happens.
NOBODY has to be "trained" to do that and it will land a shot. At least it has for every person I had do it.
I am pretty sure I haven't been talking about going it alone clearing the house for things that bump in the night. Someone rushing through the door or breaking through the door while you huddle in the corner your not going to aim anything. You will be pointing and shooting.
Am I the only 1 on the forum who knows how well point shooting works? I am setting my hair on fire trying to explain this.

 

[pilotguy299]

...

Am I the only 1 on the forum who knows how well point shooting works? I am setting my hair on fire trying to explain this.

No, you are not.

This is one of the things we harped to our people about every time we went to the range. We started off with about 20 minutes of natural point of aim shooting before we even began qualifications. A fair amount of that time was with both eyes closed at 3-5 yards and reinforcing proper technique. It is amazing how much much more confident shooters are after spending a little time doing that.

I also think that a bit less practice but done more often is more productive, than spending an entire day training. At some point people get tired and all you end up doing is reinforcing poor technique. Unfortunately too many agencies (and people) don't get that, and try to do everything in one 8 hour block of time.

I'd rather see people practice proper technique for 15 minutes every day for two weeks, than spend 8 hours all at once every two weeks.

 

[Blaster229]

No, you are not.

This is one of the things we harped to our people about every time we went to the range. We started off with about 20 minutes of natural point of aim shooting before we even began qualifications. A fair amount of that time was with both eyes closed at 3-5 yards and reinforcing proper technique.

Amen. And it inspires confidence too, when people are making solid shots and not getting worked up because they aren't "shooting a quarter sized group".

 

[smokey]

I am making a point and shoot comparison. The kids who have done it are not trained. They simply pointed a gun, pulled the trigger and made a shot.

Next time you go to the range, set a pistol down in front of your less than trained person or yourself for that matter. In 1 smooth, slow, safe, deliberate motion, reach down, pick the pistol up point it right out to a 7 yard target and pull the trigger. No aiming, just pointing, and when your arm is extended, break the shot and see what happens.
NOBODY has to be "trained" to do that and it will land a shot. At least it has for every person I had do it.
I am pretty sure I haven't been talking about going it alone clearing the house for things that bump in the night. Someone rushing through the door or breaking through the door while you huddle in the corner your not going to aim anything. You will be pointing and shooting.
Am I the only 1 on the forum who knows how well point shooting works? I am setting my hair on fire trying to explain this.

I'll give it a whirl again next time. In the past I've been pretty able to do it. It's not an exact transfer, but I know when doing clay games I'm actually more likely to bust a clay when surprised and reacting rather than taking time to rely on the sight and my eyes. I also know I'm a LOT faster point-shooting from IDPA stuffs I've done, although I usually started dropping points beyond 15 feet or so.

Something else interesting is watching experienced shooters get into a sims training environment, paintball, airsoft, or something similar. I've noticed it's fairly common for the shooter in all these kinds of force on force settings to fall back to running away and point-shooting one-handed when things get intense and rarely demonstrate a more structured 2-handed hold. I know I personally have tried a couple(airsoft, paintball...not lucky enough to do sims yet.....jerk ) and can't remember using or even being aware of the sights when engaging someone inside 20 feet or so...and still got hits. Of course, I've been shooting since I can remember and just always chocked it up to muscle memory...or at least hours spent in front of the nintendo playing duck-hunt.

I think I'm starting to dig-yo-rap, but still don't think I'd use the "kids shoot each other all the time" argument as much as the one you responded to me with. It has a little more to support it and isn't as distracting from the point you're making with the whole kids getting shot thing.


..fun times...

 

[pilotguy299]

Amen. And it inspires confidence too, when people are making solid shots and not getting worked up because they aren't "shooting a quarter sized group".

This was one of the worst training scars we had to break people of. The next one was getting people to work the gun when needed.

When we finally broke away from the FLETC course and target, we had a bunch of high score shooters who were very slow, and would raise their hands instead of working on a malfunction. Amazing how quickly that changed once we started doing sim regularly


To answer the OP's original question if the gun is truly going to be hers, then she really should go through the HQL & purchase process instead of you being the one filling out the applications.

Although the OP didn't specifically asked about handgun selection, my two cents is that there is no one perfect handgun for everyone. The closest to a correct answer IMHO is whatever handgun she feels most comfortable holding, shooting, and operating. Comfort leads towards confidence, which leads towards competence, provided proper instruction on technique is provided.

 

[BlackBart]

Look at the mechanism to revolve the cylinder and lock if up tight as the hammer falls and tell me how simplistic it is.

Simplistic to operate, but NOT in mechanism.

One can take a lint filled revolver, cock and shoot it single action if it were that bad. An auto not so much.

I don't think you have a single ally on this one.

 

[Mr Bear]

Amen. And it inspires confidence too, when people are making solid shots and not getting worked up because they aren't "shooting a quarter sized group".

Amen. B-229, please douse the flames.

I think there's a huge disconnect within the shooting community over target practice vs point shooting/shooting under stress. I cringe when I hear target shooters talking about how accurate they are on paper targets, but if you ask them about point shooting they give you this blank look.

Yes, target practice helps develop good fundamentals, but in a self-defense scenario, point shooting is going to be your technique, more than likely.

For students interested in gun ownership for self defense, I make certain they have good fundamentals 1st, then have them learn to point shoot on targets with limited or no scoring rings (FBI or IDPA) & even 8.5" x 11" white, blank copy paper. Hits are what matter, not points! Next, learning to shoot faster while still scoring hits.

It's a process & not everyone can master this, but without adequate practice, most people fall back on bad habits.

I wish there were more establishments available to us where we could practice stress-shooting & shoot/no shoot scenarios.

 

[pilotguy299]

...
I wish there were more establishments available to us where we could practice stress-shooting & shoot/no shoot scenarios.

There is an airsoft place in rockville that might work:

http://www.tacticalairsoftarena.com/

 

[fidelity]

Range officer was not watching her.



And the rounds were fired fairly quickly. She was not fully recovering from the recoil, but still pulling the trigger.



I was quite a ways away from the incident.

Sounds a bit hyperbolic, but then again, it fits your narrative.

 

[Mr Bear]

There is an airsoft place in rockville that might work:

http://www.tacticalairsoftarena.com/

Thx for the link. May just check them out.

 

[ThawMyTongue]

Most people, I would bet 99.9%, have NIGHTSTANDS next to the head of their beds that have a small reading lamp and set their water glass on for the night. These NIGHTSTANDS usually have 1 drawer with junk in it, along with a pistol (if they own one).
I have been in MANY bedrooms and have NEVER seen a chest of drawers with clothes next to the headboard of a bedroom bed as a usual piece of furniture for a NIGHTSTAND.

There is no clothes in my nightstand. There's just one small drawer... call it the "drawer of protection". The items therein can protect you from a variety of threats. Threats addressed include: intruder, power outage, dry skin, boredom, conception, etc. ...and no lint to be found

 

[Publius]

I'm a big fan of training all the non-trained shooters in the household on a revolver; a loaded revolver. There are no buttons or slides or clearing of jams or racking or whatnot. There is only opening the safe, picking up the gun, and pointing it between the intruder's nipples. For my wife and daughters, this is their defense weapon. For my son and me, it's the first weapon we grab before we seat loaded mags in other weapons in the safe.

I've shot in a few low key friendly competitions and its amazing how the human brain and manual dexterity can short circuit under stress. Anyone who's experienced buck fever can relate as well.

Keep things simple OP. Having your wife go through the entire HQL process would probably be a good thing in terms of raising her awareness of the firearm overall.

OP, I couldn't agree more with this. Follow the KISS principle in matters of self defense. I know of one close account, of an uncle, used to shooting, who could not get his 870 to fire when he confronted an intruder inside his bedroom. The intruder fired at him, and by the grace of God missed (he managed to flee). I have been shooting for 33 years, but I follow this message. In my nightstand, in a V-Line box, I have a 7-round .357 revolver. First because of the above. If I'm impaired by sleep and adrenaline, I want something that is 100% idiot proof. Yes, there is a cost, 7 rounds isn't 15. It's a tradeoff I'm willing to live with. Secondly, I have a wife who so far has refused to go shooting. But she is a strong woman. If it ever comes down to protect our kids, and I'm away, on the phone giving her instructions, I wanted something that is point & click. Nothing beats a revolver in that regard.

Please note that this is not a nuanced defense of magazine limit bans. I think every gun has its niche. If I could carry I would do so with one of my Glocks, using standard capacity mags. On the street sleepiness or the need to share the gun with my wife is not an issue. The smaller profile of a semi-auto also is preferable for carry.

FYI, S&W also has 8-round .357 models.

 

[molonlabe]

OP, I have been shooting for 33 years, but I follow this message. In my nightstand, in a V-Line box, I have a 7-round .357 revolver.


FYI, S&W also has 8-round .357 models.

I think you’re quite safe with 7 rounds. My smith has 5 and I am proficient with it and practice often (and proven under stress). I would think if you need more rounds than that getting to a shotgun then its time for the calvary to come over the hill. I am not expecting a gang of assassins like in Scarface.