deerslayer

+1 Do it!

You should not assume that you will be able to get off five shots w/ your .22.

Yes, back when I was still slim and trim.

Who cares if they are killed? Immediate incapacitation is what CCW types need, and these rounds are not as effective as others. Someone shot with a .22 or .380 may die immediately, or they may die after a few days in the ICU; did that .22 or .380 prevent them from killing/harming someone AFTER they were shot with it? The chance of such prevention is better with a 38 or 9mm, which should be at the BOTTOM of the power level of a CCW, IMO.

LOL, I forgot that Smith always has a seperate model number for stainless. Thanks!

Ok, I've had a couple Michelobs and am too lazy to go to the S*W website. What is the difference between the 442 and 642? Sooner or later, I'm getting one of these.

+1 As new to shooting as you are, a .38 revolver is definitely the way to go.

a little clarification... A heavier gun, in general, will not "kick" as hard as a lighter one (all other things being equal). A heavier .38 will kick less than a lighter .38. True, the .45 was a heavier gun, but it was also a different caliber using different, more powerful ammo. Just because the .45 may have beem heavier than the 9mm does not mean the .45 would kick less. Sorry if I confused you earlier.

That's funny (well, not really), but this weekend at the local IDPA match, the match director's daughter was in town from Chicago; so, he set up a stage in her honor. We shot, you guessed it, an Illinois stage. In honor of IL's gun laws (gun and ammo cannot be stored in the same place--even in your own house), our IL stage began with your gun at one spot, all your mags (up to three) in another and the shooter running to one, then to the other, loading the gun, and then dealing with the targets. I knew about Chicago, but had no idea that this was statewide law in IL. That sucks! Remind me not to move to that place.

Ouch, do tell.

Don't be silly, plastic guns aren't capable of that kind of accuracy.

When he said he traded up for a Wilson, I immediately started thinking he was out another $1200-1500. A guy I shoot IDPA with has a $2600 Wilson, and it's a piece of shi...there I go again. Anyway, he really would be crazy not to trade if he only had to add $200--it's worth a shot, even to me.

Buddy, I was there with ya; I tried and tried to make 1911s work for me, but finally gave it up. The more I spent on one, the more disappointed I became. In my never-ending quest to find the perfect defensive handgun with ONE trigger pull, I reluctantly turned to Glocks about two years ago. I found out, however, that they are more accurate than I ever imagined, have just about the biggest aftermarket support, and are dirt simple to work on. You'll never hear me yell the "perfection" warcry, but they work better than anything else I've ever shot.

Hmmm...my plastic gun is anything but mediocre--it's a one-holer that refuses to malfunction. BTW, I've taken the 1911 "excellence" chance and lost more than once, but I can't blame him for trying a Wilson, especially if it will only cost another $200.

Wow! $200 extra? That is a deal.

Old wise men often lectures us youngsters: "You only get what you pay for." I submit that they don't know it all: If you're lucky, you get what you pay for. In my book, spending that kind of $$ on a Wilson is a risk, but I've had a bad run of luck with 1911s.

All right, maybe I missed something here; I thought you were all excited about the CDP--what changed your mind?

Sarah, here is a great gun for a new shooter; my wife started with this gun. It's a Smith & Wesson Model 60 revolver with a 3" barrel. Unlike some of the small-frame Smith & Wesson revolvers, it has a steel frame, which means the guns is a little heavier and will therefore recoil (or "kick") a little less. It's a .357 Magnum, but will also shoot .38 Special ammo. In fact, I would only use .38 Special ammo in a gun like this if I were you. It's very simple and user-friendly, but don't get the wrong idea; this is a potent weapon. My wife became extremely accurate with it in a short period of time. If you were closer, she'd let you try it out. Here's a link for it on the S&W website: http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?catalogId=11101&storeId=10001&productId=14755&langId=-1&parent_category_rn=15704&isFirearm=Y Edit: Ignore the suggested retail price; it will cost substantially less.

Agreed.

molon, han solo, I have a P3AT (hard chrome/green frame) that I am debating selling. My gotta have it gun (sooner or later): http://www.olyarms.com/index.php?page=shop.browse&category_id=24&option=com_virtuemart&Itemid=37

Agreed on all counts (even the "not every Glock will" part). I shot at 50 yards (offhand) about a month ago--we were shooting at IDPA offical targets (for the hell of it), and while I did hit the target, you would need a yard stick to measure the "group." Years ago, I shot my Colt 1911 at 110 yards, and it was a blast (although not a very precise one). I also don't see much of a need to practice regularly at 50 yards, unless you are a Delta operator or a SWAT team member, and they would probably not take many shots at 50 yards with a handgun.

Hmmm...my Glock 19 can shoot one hole groups at 7 yards; not every 1911 will. Perhaps they should stand a little closer. Whatever the case, I have never seen 1911 guys shooting "on the rifle lanes." I certainly never did when I was a 1911 guy.

They are a bit monotonous...load them, shoot them, load them, shoot them, load them, shoot them, never any excitement--no FTEs, FTFs, etc.

I see that Kimber QC continues to be an issue.