[C-grunt]

Ok guys Im kinda stuck here.....I want a good BUG for my duty weapon and for off duty carry. My Dept requirements are a Glock in .40 or .45, or Ruger/S&W .38 or .357 with under a 4 inch bbl.

I already have a S&W 442 but the problem is I have to qualify with it....full qual, same as my duty weapon. Now Im sure with practice I could qualify, but the thing is I dont have confidence in myself with this weapon past about 10 yards. Plus I dont enjoy shooting it at all.

Dont get me wrong, the 442 is a great gun and strictly as a SD weapon I think its one of the best. But at the same time, it might have to do double duty when Im at work and my primary goes down for some reason. In that case a baby Glock will be much more accurate (for me) and would use spare mags on my belt. This really intrigues me as a couple of our officers here in Phx this weekend, got in a full on shoot out with a guy using an AK-47 (clone) and got pinned down.

Im starting to think that a Glock 27 would be a much better choice than my S&W. I can get a G27 pretty cheap through law enforcement discounts and if I sell the S&W there will be fairly little out of pocket. I just wanted to run this by you guys to make sure Im not just going out on a limb here.

So what do you guys think?

[The Lone Haranguer]

But at the same time, it might have to do double duty when Im at work and my primary goes down for some reason. In that case a baby Glock will be much more accurate (for me) and would use spare mags on my belt.
I can get a G27 pretty cheap through law enforcement discounts and if I sell the S&W there will be fairly little out of pocket.
I would say you've just found your new backup gun.

[mrmeval]

Agree on the glock, if a gun is uncomfortable to shoot get rid of it for something you can use. Just make sure you can use a glock.

It really sounds like your department needs to issue P90s. No really. Maybe we should start a phone in campaign and so all of you can get them. Even if you pay for them at government prices. ;)

[NCHornet]

In your situation it would seem the mini Glock would be your best choice!! Having your BUG use the same ammo as your primary is a very smart choice.

[armoredman]

Are you issued a firearm, permantly? If so, and it's a Grock, get a baby Grock in the same caliber, so it can use the full size mags if neccesary.

[Creature]

get a baby Grock in the same caliber, so it can use the full size mags if neccesary.

Excellent point.

[Ed Ames]

The b'glock sounds fine and practical. Everyone else has said it, I've said it, we all agree.

Now go out and practice with that 442! Seriously... get to the point where you can qualify with it just for your own peace of mind.

I know from personal experience that at least some older S&W 37s (that's a 12.5oz 2" barrel snubby -- similar to the 442 except external hammer), bone stock (straight out of the box), can reliably hit man-sized targets at 75 yards. I had to hold high but not that high. I bled for doing it (hammer bite), and my hand stung a bit after practicing a while, but those guns are very accurate for all that the rear sights are a groove in the frame. I bet your 442 is in the same league.

[wcwhitey]

I didn't see if you stated what you duty weapon was. If you have a full size Glock for a duty weapon it is a no brainer. Similar manual of arms, magazines, ammunition just so many reasons to chose the 27. As a side note the 442 can be mastered, I have been carrying a S&W 640 for 15 years as Off Duty and BUG. This is second to my Sig 226 (originally a S&W 64). The 640 made much more sense when I was carrying a revolver as my duty gun but I have stuck with it for practical reasons. I learned to shoot it well, qualify easily with it twice a year and it is utterly reliable. If I were to do it over again I would not hesitate to go with the baby Glock.

P.S. I compliment you on committing yourself to a back-up gun (and effective off duty weapon). I see a trend away from second guns, quite a few of my co-workers only own one gun. Bill

[spwenger]

...of the 442 (as compared to a 640), is likely to be a liability in a conventional "qualification," I have found that the most crucial issue with these small-frame revolvers is the fit of the grip stocks. I have average-size hands for an American male and find that Craig Spegel Boot Grips, with the high-horn Centennial option, make all the difference for me. By insisting that my revolvers have to be amenable to being fired in either hand, I get Craig to carve an "ambi speedloader cut" in the right grip panel. This gives me the same grip in either hand and actually seems to position the shooting hand better even when shooting right-handed.

Centennial vs. baby Glock? It's your gunfight. I view the Centennial, with its fully shrouded hammer, as the ideal backup gun. Short of a mechanical breakage or an injury that drops hand strength below that required for the double-action trigger stroke, only two things will keep it from firing: a finger jammed behind the trigger or a firm enough grip over the cylinder to keep it from rotating.

The gun doesn't care if the cartridge has a light or heavy load of powder, a round- or sharp-nosed bullet, if the gun is grasped loosely or tightly, whether the wrist is cocked away from its "neutral" position, whether the back of the gun is pressed against the user's body or whether the muzzle is pressed against the assailant's body.

As a private citizen, I view both handguns I carry as backups (and the means to fight my way to a long gun), so I carry a pair of Centennials, mirror-image, on the belt. Your requirements and priorities may be different from mine but, if you want to give the 442 another shot, make sure that the grip stocks are optimal for your use.

[Juna]

I agree. I'm not a big Glock guy, but if my primary were a full sized Glock .40 S&W, my BUG would be the Glock 27 so it can share mags if the SHTF. I think that's a no-brainer.

This really intrigues me as a couple of our officers here in Phx this weekend, got in a full on shoot out with a guy using an AK-47 (clone) and got pinned down.

Please be careful about where you use the 'AK-47' term in public. I realize that you said 'clone' here, but a biased media reporter will read 'AK-47' and start printing BS about how they fire 600 rounds/min, etc.

There is so much public misinformation that is rampant about semi-auto clones of Kalashnikovs. Every recent shooting I've read about throws around the 600 rounds/min statistic and claims that the expired AWB would have prevented criminals from buying real AK-47s, which, of course, is not what they're using. Moreover, criminals are already banned from buying firearms as it is, so the AWB would not have made a difference even if it were actually regulating AK-47s.

Just please be careful about using that term. I'm tired of many media quotes from LEOs saying criminals were using AK-47s. Remember, the 'A' stands for 'Automatic' in Russian, which these semi-auto rifles are not. We need to stop perpetuating this misinformation.