[BHPshooter]

What is your take on the NAA mini revolvers? They look to me like they'd be a nifty little choice for pocket carry, but then, I don't know a lot about CCW yet. At the end of this year I will be turning 21 though, so I'd like to learn as much as I can until then.

These seem like they'd be really easy to carry, but how much harder would it be to pocket-carry something like a .38 spl J-frame? I don't know much about the ballistics of the .22 LR, and nothing about the .22 WRM, but I do know that they're probably last-ditch calibers, yes?

So would that make these perhaps a fair BUG?

I'm just trying to see where these little guns fit into the scheme of things. I must admit, they do look like a fun little gun. :D

Anything you can tell me, I'd love to hear it.

Thanks,
Wes

[Correia]

Fun, and it is a gun. But they are pretty darn far down my list of guns that I would recommend for defensive use. They are super tiny,and therefore extra hard to shoot fast/accuratly. And they are a .22 out of a super short barrel.

I've used them, and they are fun, but I would only use them for fun. With a good carry method much larger and more effective guns can be easily carried.

Wes, send me an e-mail when you turn 21. :) /shameless self promotion on/ I'm going to be a Utah CCW Instructor. I'm just waiting for BCI to approve my paperwork.

[dairycreek]

I'm just trying to see where these little guns fit into the scheme of things. I must admit, they do look like a fun little gun

They are a fun little gun to shoot and to own. IMHO NAA makes solid, dependable, quality small arms.

Its efficacy as a concealed carry gun is going to be a matter of opinion and mine is that it is certainly not a gun I would opt to carry. Only if I had absolutely no other choice available to me would I opt to carry a weapon that small.

If I am going to protect my life with a gun then I would want that gun to give me every possible advantage which, IMHO, the little NAA does not. My personal CCW is a 9mm and I have never carried a BUG.

As I said this is a matter of opinion and FWIW this is mine. Good shooting;)

[P95Carry]

Wes .. at the range ... nice lil fun gun for sure ..... BUG - at a pinch!

The cal is really rather too ''mousy'', plus, there is a greater likelehood of an FTF with rimfire too.

Would strongly suggest you consider your first carry piece as minimum .380 (9 x 17) ... that could help keep things small ..... P3AT at extreme end of ''tiny'' .. but then a Bersa Thunder too would work. Next step up perhaps Makarov (9 x 18) .... then on to the smaller 9mm's perhaps.

With revo's .. consider something ''J frame-ish'' .. whether Smith, Taurus or Ruger SP-101. At least then you'd be .38spl and up .... to .357 with some.

Keep a NAA in mind perhaps for later .. more in the ''fun'' category. :)

[Ala Dan]

I find the NAA "Mini's" to be of excellent quality
in both materials and workmanship. Contrary
to popular belief, these tiny minature revolvers
do offer the user a choice as a "deep cover"
firearm.

Like others have said, I would prefer the better
advantages of something larger and a bit more
potent than the .22LR/.22 mag; such as a 2"
barrel .38 Special at the minimum for most self
defense scenarios. My personal CCW is a .45
caliber West German SIG-SAUER P220A; but
I do carry a 1-1/8" barrel NAA "Mini" .22 mag
as a BUG!

I guess the old rule of "any gun is better than
NO gun" applies here!

Best Wishes,
Ala Dan, N.R.A. Life Member

[Standing Wolf]

If I'm just going out to the mail box, I drop my pre-agreement Smith & Wesson model 60 into a trousers pocket. It might print a bit; then again, I live in an open carry state. It's not a comfortable way to carry the gun any length of time, so I normally use an inside the waist band holster, and occasionally use a cross draw holster or a shoulder rig.

If I carried a back up gun, I'd think about a micro-revolver, but believe it makes more sense to carry more ammunition than a second gun, especially one in another caliber.

[azrael]

Naa minis are a good looking little gun...I use a 22mag standard or a Black widow as a fishing gun

That being said...To me they are not even in the top 5 choices for BUG's...

Kel-tec .380
kel-tec P-32
Naa .32
Naa .32NAA
Naa .380
etc.etc.

[BHPshooter]

Thanks for the replies. :)

It seems my preliminary thinking was right -- .22 is just not enough for carry. I don't pay a lot of attention to ballistics debates, but I've heard many people say that .380 is the minimum, others say .32 or .25...

Is there some kind of general consensus on what is a reasonable minimum for carry? I'm aware that the proper reasoning is to ask "What is the biggest caliber I can comfortably carry?" Instead of "What is the smallest caliber I can get away with carrying?" But I would still like to know what is considered minimum.

While I'm at it, what's considered maximum? .44 Spl? .44 Mag? .50 AE?

Thanks,
Wes

[goalie]

They are, IMO, a "contact weapon."

[BluesBear]

I consider a NAA .22WMR to be a BU-BUG.

I call mine, "Throat Coat" because thats how I practice with it.

People tend to panic when they can't breathe and the spinal column is more accessable there.
I use a B-27E target at between 6-15 feet and I aim for the throat.

It's the same drill I used to use for my Hi-Standard Derringer.
Back in my LEO days, the HS was carried in a wallet holster, it was there to enable me to get to the Model 40 in my ankle holster in case my Model 58 ran dry.

[Chip Dixon]

Maximum reasonable backup would be a M-79 40mm grenade launcher.

[Joe Demko]

I own three. Two .22lr models and a .22 magnum. The mangnum frame is just enough larger to make the piece much easier to shoot. If you decide to buy one, get a magnum. They are available with an additional .22lr cylinder if you want to keep the costs of practise down.
I wouldn't carry one as a primary gun or even as a back-up. I frequently use one as a third gun, though. Since they are typically used at contact range in self-defense shootings, they are a tad bit more effective (especially the magnum) than shooting one at the range might indicate. At contact distance, you get the "bonus" damage of hot, high pressure powder gases being blasted into the wound.
IAC, they aren't particularly expensive, they are a lot of fun, and so why not get one?

[Old Fuff]

A lot of folks who get a carry license don’t really want to tote a big, heavy gun. Instead they chose what is convenient – the smaller and lighter the better. Admittedly I sometimes do this myself and stake my neck on marksmanship rather then raw power. I don’t expect to get into trouble, but if something happens it will likely be at arms-length or slightly further. In my case over a long lifetime there have been two incidents and in both no shots were fired. I agree that the N.A.A. little revolvers are good for a last-ditch, deep cover backup – but not as a primary weapon. For that I would recommend something in at least .32 caliber, that you could interlock shots into one ragged hole at 5 yards with.

Carrying a weapon for personal protection is a serious business with a lot of serious implications. Therefore if you chose to go armed pick a serious handgun and make convenience a secondary consideration.

[Larryect]

I don't have experience with the NAA mini. And I understand, in Utah, you do not have the same limitations we do in California. I can tell you that where I am, the smallest gun allowed to be listed on a CCW permit is a .32 caliber. I believe there is probably a good reason for that.

Larry

[BluesBear]

I can tell you that where I am, the smallest gun allowed to be listed on a CCW permit is a .32 caliber. I believe there is probably a good reason for that. No there isn't.

The government shouldn't be allowed to tell you what you can carry or not.

If they deem you to be worthy enough for CCW they ought to at least deem you intelligent enough to chose what's best for you.
Some states limit you to only a revolver unless you have a semi-auto classification. Others only let you carry the exact gun(s) you have listed.
The next thing you know they'll be choosing one model and telling you that's all anyone can carry.

The comedian Gallagher had a good idea. He has a prop revolver made with a 30" barrel. He says that everyone should be allowed to carry one because you'd have plenty of time to see the other person draw and suicide would be almost impossible.
:rolleyes:

[BHPshooter]

Thanks again, very informative. :)

The reason I ask all of this is because I want to have a pocket carry option when I can't wear my Hi Power (that's what I plan to be my main carry piece).

I was thinking "revolver," which was why I asked in the first place. Is there a revolver out there that is small enough for pocket carry, but in the .380 - .38 Spl caliber range?

Or is an auto a better choice for pocket carry? How would a Kahr K9 or MK9 work?

I apologize for all of the questions -- I'm like a curious kid in a candy store. :D

Wes

[rappa]

I was thinking "revolver," which was why I asked in the first place. Is there a revolver out there that is small enough for pocket carry, but in the .380 - .38 Spl caliber range?

Check out the 2" snubbies by S&W, Taurus, Ruger, etc.

I apologize for all of the questions -- I'm like a curious kid in a candy store.

Hey, the more questions, the better. At least you're making the effort to educate yourself so when you become legal, you'll have a clue. Sad to say, there are many people who purchase\carry guns and don't bother to practice or read up on stuff!

[yayarx7]

how about the brand new Taurus smaller than small frame 9mm snubby

http://www.taurususa.com/main/images/17ibss.jpg

[azrael]

hmmm...revolver?? how about an airweight smith or taurus?? they both seem to work nice...

I like the smith bodyguard the best but that is just me

In semi auto I would either go with a kel-tec P3at or a Naa .380 or .32 NAA

my .02 pesos

[.45FMJoe]

Be like me, get a Kel-tec .380 :)

[strambo]

I have a K9 as my primary carry gun now, it ain't no pocket gun. (A little too big and about 10 ounces too heavy). Only drawback to the PM9 is it is very expensive for a BUG. But it would do better than most of the other suggestions IMHO in the shootability/power category. I like the looks of that 9mm Taurus too ;) just bob the hammer.

I like your primary carry choice! My BHP will fill that role as soon as I test my carry load for reliability in it. As to caliber, with all the 9mm and .38/.357 pocket choices these days I don't see any reason to compromise.

[edited to add, I just checked the Taurus website and they make a concealed hammer model...but no weights are listed for the steel or lightweight versions!!:cuss: Thats critical pocket gun data!]

[BHPshooter]

I like your primary carry choice!

Thanks! :D

As to caliber, with all the 9mm and .38/.357 pocket choices these days I don't see any reason to compromise.

That's a very good point. I'm interested to see one of the new Taurus "Instant Backup" revolvers.

Wes

[happyguy]

In my opinion it doesn't fit the bill for a primary carry gun.

It doesn't fit the bill for a back up gun.

It might be a good choice for a hideout gun.

Regards,
Happyguy:D

[mdsteele]

I have one. I can't lie. It went back to the factory just today because it wouldn't lock all the way back. It would still fire though. I just thought it may be unsafe to use while not working properly.

I would carry mine when it was just too hot or I didn't have a way to conceal something larger.

It isn't the best choice for defense. I always thought of it as a belly gun, but I think it was Colonel Cooper who said "a twenty two in the hand, beats a forty five left at home".

Forgive me if I misquoted the Guru.:D

[goon]

I just wish they would make one in .32 ACP.

BTW- does the Taurus 9mm use moon clips or does it extract some other way?

[Old Fuff]

Yup - - The Taurus 9mm revolvers use moon clips. Sometime down the road I going to suggest that they make a version of their "Instant Backup" revolver in .32 ACP. One is now planed in .32 H&R Magnum.

[Mike Irwin]

They say having any gun is better than having a rock.

I think, given the choice, I'd rather have a rock. :)

[HardCOR]

I wish I could carry something really small like a NAA or a derringer. As a Correctional Peace Officer for the State of **********, this is not an option as I am required to shoot the same course of fire with a off-duty weapon as I do with our departMENTAL sidearm, the S&W .38 Special 4" Revolver. The Bersa Thunder 380 will do as well or better than the S&W on this course, although, with a less powerfull round. The Bersa conceals much better and is much lighter. The rules say I can carry anything from .22 to .45 as long as I can qualifiy with it. Right now as a new Officer at the bottom of the payscale, the Bersa seems to me to be a low priced, light, concealable and accurate weapon that is very practical. Did I mention, WAY reliable. Smallest, inexpensive pistol I would trust my life to.

[JPM70535]

I have owned one of the 22lr models and although they are better than nothing at all, IMO, not by much. They are strictly a contact piece, meaning if you want to be sure of hitting your target, be at contact distance. Accuracy is not it's forte, and stopping power of the 22 lr round out of the 1" bbl. is minimal. Better bet includes J frame Smiths, Taurus, 380 autos, or perhaps a Louieville slugger.

PS I still have the NAA 22, don't know why but I kust hate to sell guns once I buy them.

JPM

[arinvolvo]

barely better than nothing?

cmon now. Shooting someone is a distraction. No matter if it is 45 cal or 22 short....shooting anyone with any caliber should give them pause enough for you to ESCAPE. Remember people, escape and preservation of self is our main goals in CCW. Stick an NAA 22 revolover in someones face and pull the trigger, and i will bet dollars to donuts that you could escape danger after that.

with that said...the NAA revolvers have a niche in the market. They are not the OPTIMAL self defense weapon, however, if that is all you can manage, it will have to do.

Id take a 22 NAA over a can of mace any day.