Buying my first handgun - help needed!

[MedWheeler]

Cocking a revolver will align the next chamber ready for fire. The one beneath the hammer will move away as the hammer is cocked.

So, that statement in the law still does not necessarily state that the chamber beneath the hammer may contain a live round. Still, I see no reason for it not to, since even firing the revolver without pre-cocking it would have the same effect.

There is no step necessary to "ready" a revolver for firing unless it's a single-action (think old American West cowboys) type. The Rossi and Taurus models you are looking at are not. One need only to pull the trigger. If it's loaded, it will fire. Every time.

 

[RadekSkylark]

Cocking a revolver will align the next chamber ready for fire. The one beneath the hammer will move away as the hammer is cocked.

So, that statement in the law still does not necessarily state that the chamber beneath the hammer may contain a live round. Still, I see no reason for it not to, since even firing the revolver without pre-cocking it would have the same effect.

There is no step necessary to "ready" a revolver for firing unless it's a single-action (think old American West cowboys) type. The Rossi and Taurus models you are looking at are not. One need only to pull the trigger. If it's loaded, it will fire. Every time.

I didn't think of that. Although you're right - that wouldn't be logical (carrying with empty chamber aligned with the barrel) - if I will pull a DA trigger it will still rotate the cylinder to chamber the next round (not empty) and the one that was initially aligned with the barrel will get moved forward. Maybe the law is written 100 years ago and for SA revolvers (joking)?

Thanks for help with my situation!

 

[Spats McGee]

Maybe the law is written 100 years ago and for SA revolvers (joking)?

Joking, perhaps, but not entirely out of the question. The law probably isn't 100 years old, but 30-40 wouldn't really surprise me. Law plays a constant "game of catch-up" with technology in the legislative process. It also would not surprise me to learn that the legislators just didn't think about revolvers when writing the law.

 

[RadekSkylark]

Hallo guys, thanks for advice so far!

Today I checked all the other local gun shops for what they offer and now I can complete my list of available handguns with these options:

Pistols:
*Glock 26 in good condition with 1 magazine = 460$;
*Glock 19 in really good condition with 2 magazines = 460$.

Revolvers:
*Taurus 85 in good condition (as I understood the shop had few of them) = 140$;
*Taurus .38 Spl (I think it also was Taurus, although it didn't have any model stamp on the frame) - new = 220$;
*S&W .357 Magnum with 5 round capacity (hammerless - it didn't have any model stamp on it [definitely didn't find BODYGUARD on it) in stainless steel and with 2" barrel - in good condition = 400$.

Can someone please comment on those additions to the available handgun list? Also, can someone explain what are actually the differences between hammerless revolver and one with a hammer (pros/cons)? Which model could that S&W revolver be?

Thanks guys - you've helped alot!

 

[mesinge2]

Now I would pick the Glock 19 or 26 in a heartbeat. Accurate, reliable, durable, and low maintenance.

 

[Pete D.]

With no doubt....the Makarov.
It is ultra reliable, accurate, and cheap to shoot.
The last feature is important as this is your first handgun. You should practice as much as possible and more shooting is possible at 25 cents a round than at 40 cents a shot.
I own a commercial Russian made Mak that has had CASES of cheap ammo through it and has NEVER failed to fire.
Buy the Makarov.
Pete

 

[entropy]

To the last two posters. He would have to carry a semi-auto with the chamber empty. A revolver can have a full cylinder. Still want to recommend a semi-auto?

Actually Spats, the law is probably from when Latvia became independent from the USSR, c.1990. I'm sure cilivilan ownership and most certainly concealed carry were verboten when it was part of the USSR.

 

[MedWheeler]

All revolvers have hammers. The "hammerless" ones simply have their hammers enclosed within the frame; there is no part of the hammer exposed. These are typically for the concealed-carry market. The lack of an exposed hammer reduces the chances of the gun snagging on clothing during the draw. It also prevents manually cocking the hammer, and is a feature some police departments had also required to keep their officers from holding suspects at "cocked-gunpoint." The gun is fired only with a full pull on the trigger.

There are also some "low-snag" hammered revolvers out there, too. These have only a flat tip of the hammer exposed for manual cocking. I don't think the Taurus 85 is available that way. It is available, I believe, with a traditional hammer spur, and with a fully-concealed hammer.

S&W revolvers come in far too many "flavors" to speculate which one you have available there. All hammer types are available.

With a defensive revolver, especially a 2-inch-barreled one, manually cocking the hammer is a practice best avoided. There are few, if even any, scenarios that would call for it from a typical armed civilian.

 

[Pete D.]

shots

the last two posters. He would have to carry a semi-auto with the chamber empty. A revolver can have a full cylinder. Still want to recommend a semi-auto?

Yes.

 

[entropy]

I don't think the Taurus 85 is available that way.

It is as the 850B2UL. The .357 version is the 650B2. I don't know what availability in Latvia is like, however.

All revolvers have hammers.

Yup.

Even the Chiappa Rhino, thought the thing that looks like a hammer spur is actually not the hammer. It is a cocking lever that has a strut that acts on the actual hammer.

Even the semi-auto revolvers (Webley-Fosbery, Mateba Unica) have hammers.

Current S&W 'hammerless' and shrouded hammer revolvers:

340 .357 Mag.
M&P Bodyguard 38 .38 Spl. +P
642 .38 Spl. +P
442 .38 Spl. +P
640 .357 Mag.
43c .22 LR
351c . 22 WRM (Winchester Rimfire Magnum, AKA .22 Mag.)

Shrouded hammer models:
638 .38 Spl. +P
649 .357 Mag.


Radek, sounds like the one you described is a 640.

Both Glock models you mentioned are excellent, and the prices on all of them sound good to me.

 

[bannockburn]

RadekSkylark

Given the new choices available I would go Glock 19 in a semi-auto and the S&W J frame in .357 Magnum if you're thinking about going with a revolver.

 

[RadekSkylark]

I have a H&K USP blank pistol copy laying around and today I tried to conceal it in my typical everyday outfit (which is basically pants + long sleeved casual dress shirt which I wear tucked) as in an appendix IWB carry method (I don't have a holster for it - just put it behind my belt to and tucked shirt around to see if it would print). That gun is pretty much the same size as a Glock 19 (only 1/8" higher at the grip) and unfortunately I understood that I won't be able to comfortably conceal it (or any other same size handgun for that matter). Maybe holsters help a bit, but the main problem was that I couldn't really sit down - it would stick in my groin area and in my stomach. Also, the end of the grip did print a bit, although not much - could possibly live with that. Though the gun is large enough and I couldn't really conceal it in any other way than carrying in an appendix IWB holster. I have a shoulder holster for that blank pistol and that gun was still too big to conceal so that it wouldn't print in a suit type jacket which I could add to my wardrobe. Also tried to place it on my hip IWB and it also was too big for that - grip was printing a lot. Between I'm 5'10", 155-160lb so I'm not the biggest guy, which might explain why this size of pistol could be a problem to conceal especially in an office style tucked outfit.

So basically this cuts my options down to:
Pistols:
1) Makarov = 80-120$ (many used in good condition - one mag - probably will be able to find extra mags locally);
2) SigSauer P230 = 195-345$ (used in good condition. Gun for 345$ being as new with two mags, two other cheaper options with one mag - maybe will need to order extra mags from US);
3) SigSauer P232 = 345$ (used in good condition - one mag - probably will need to order extra mags from US);
4) Beretta 84F = 345-460$ (used in good condition - one mag - probably will need to order extra mags from US);
5) Beretta 85F = 460$ (used in good condition - two mags);
6) Glock 26 = 460$ (used in good condition - one mag - probably will be able to find extra mags locally).
Revolvers (I'm pretty sure I'll have to order holsters for either of these revolvers from US as there are only few options available locally):
1) S&W (probably model 640 - 5 rounds, .357 Magnum, with enclosed hammer) = 400$ (used in good condition - most likely will need to order speedloaders from US);
2) Taurus 85 = 140$ (used in good condition - will need to order speedloaders from US);
3) Other previously mentioned Taurus and Rossi models (will need to order speedloaders from US).

So basically if I'll decide on a revolver I will go for that S&W as it is the only quality peace I can get for a reasonable price, also I should be able to conceal it the best as it has an enclosed hammer. If it'll be sold already I think that my second best bet would be a brand new Taurus or other Taurus in good condition (probably the best is to buy the newest model available - or maybe the oldest one?).

If I'll decide on semi-auto pistol it seems that I should basically decide between Makarov and a Glock 26, because if I'm about to spend 230$+ (which is the price of 2nd cheapest of 3 available P230's) for a handgun my best choice would be a Glock 26 (not the Sig P230, P232 or any of the Beretta's) mostly because it's power, capacity, and size/weight (and other Glock system related features). If I'm going to spend less than 230$ for a semi-auto it basically is a choice between Makarov and a Sig P230, in which case I'm pretty sure I'll go with the Makarov, as it is cheaper, it is pretty much indestructible and I'll have a lot of parts and ammo available locally (including mags) + it has a slide catch/release. I have to say though I really did like those Beretta's - though it wouldn't be my best choice to spend 345$+ for a Beretta 84 or 85 instead of 80-100$ for a Makarov - or would it?

Those are my latest thoughts on my options which are mainly based of you're advice guys. I think I will have to go with a revolver at the end though... Although I would like to hear some last comments on my thoughts presented in this post - thanks!

P.S. Also one thing I didn't mention before - we need to do 3 ballistics shots in police every 5 years so they have bullets with rifling impression patterns from all handguns - this costs 90$ (every 5 years). So many handguns mean a lot of money on these ballistics tests unfortunately. I think I could consider two handguns though - the one I buy now and another after some time (if I'll buy a revolver I would buy another semi-auto pistol later).

 

[entropy]

Sounds like you're on the right track. Holster choice will play a big part in concealability- The USP is a bigger gun than the choices you just listed, you should be fine with carrying any of them.

I don't like Appendix IWB either. It works for some people, but even with a holster I get the same problem you had-it hurts to sit down! I prefer IWB at the 4:00 position (just behind the hip); with a good holster, most men can conceal the guns on your list very well.

Based on your list, My recommendation remains the S&W 640. There are tons of holsters made for the J-frames, and as I mentioned before, Safariland makes an excellent concealable speedloader for them also, the Comp I model, and a case/cover for it. The loader straddles the belt, three round inside, three out, and the case slides over it and snaps shut. It's a pretty slick rig.

http://www.midwayusa.com/product/12...-arms-s-and-w-5-shot-38-special-polymer-black

http://www.midwayusa.com/product/13...speedloader-pouch-comp-i-j-frame-5-shot-black

As for a semi auto choice, either the Makarov or the Glock 26. Hard to beat the Makarov's price, good solid gun. The Glock 26 is at a good price for one, easy gun to conceal, (as is the Makarov) high capacity, tons of holsters for it.
The Berettas are good guns, but you should be able to find a CZ82 for a lot less, and it's a little smaller, too, while very similar to them.

 

[RadekSkylark]

Sounds like you're on the right track. Holster choice will play a big part in concealability- The USP is a bigger gun than the choices you just listed, you should be fine with carrying any of them.

I don't like Appendix IWB either. It works for some people, but even with a holster I get the same problem you had-it hurts to sit down! I prefer IWB at the 4:00 position (just behind the hip); with a good holster, most men can conceal the guns on your list very well.

Based on your list, My recommendation remains the S&W 640. There are tons of holsters made for the J-frames, and as I mentioned before, Safariland makes an excellent concealable speedloader for them also, the Comp I model, and a case/cover for it. The loader straddles the belt, three round inside, three out, and the case slides over it and snaps shut. It's a pretty slick rig.

http://www.midwayusa.com/product/12...-arms-s-and-w-5-shot-38-special-polymer-black

http://www.midwayusa.com/product/13...speedloader-pouch-comp-i-j-frame-5-shot-black

As for a semi auto choice, either the Makarov or the Glock 26. Hard to beat the Makarov's price, good solid gun. The Glock 26 is at a good price for one, easy gun to conceal, (as is the Makarov) high capacity, tons of holsters for it.
The Berettas are good guns, but you should be able to find a CZ82 for a lot less, and it's a little smaller, too, while very similar to them.

Thanks for advice - will try that 4:00 o'clock position today - maybe I'll be able to conceal the gun better.

Also, thanks for the links to the speedloader and it's pouch, although they don't ship internationally so I'll need to find a company that does.

 

[RadekSkylark]

Hallo again guys.

After assessing all the information provided by you and also that found on the internet researching my questions I've made a set of pros for semi-auto pistols versus revolvers (pros for one are cons for the other) as for a CCW here in Latvia. I've understood that first I need to make a clear decision on platform I want to go with and only then I'll choose the best fit handgun for my own purposes based on your advice etc.

Here is my list of the pros for both pistols and revolver in general circumstances, that is, when both hand are available for operation of handgun:
Pistol pros:
1) Higher capacity than that of a snub nose revolver (which is what I would possibly carry if I'll go with a revolver) - minimum for pistols in my options list is 7 rounds;
2) Possibility of me reloading a semi-auto pistol in a middle of gunfight or any other attack is way higher that for a revolver + reloading a semi-auto pistol will generally be faster;
3) Comparing to a snub nose revolver (which is what I would possibly carry if I'll go with a revolver) I should be able to get off faster shots with more accuracy;
4) If I'll buy a pistol with external safety then I'll have to carry the gun with it enabled, which will serve me good if in any case my handgun is taken from me giving me few seconds to try and take it back (attacker possibly won't be able to disable the safety fast enough to use the gun against me);
5) If I'm sure that I'll lose my handgun in a hand-to-hand combat or whatever there is a possibility for me to quickly drop the magazine and maybe kick it away so that my attacker cannot shoot me;
6) Most of the typical malfunctions can be cleared relatively fast;
7) Ammo (either .380ACP, 9x18 or 9x19) costs only around 60-75% of what costs .38 Special which is what I would possibly carry if I'll go with a revolver);
8) As my budget for practicing with real ammo is quite limited for every month (from around 50 round of .38 Special to 95 of 9x18 or 9x19) I could possibly supplement my training with airgun training (would aid my skill development anyway).
Revolver pros:
1) It is ready to shoot as soon as I draw it (round is in chamber);
2) Possibly it would be easier to draw a revolver with a good grip from many awkward positions (like being on ground or any other awkward position);
3) I should be able to fire a revolver continuously in a situation where my revolver is in direct contact with attackers body (semi-auto pistol could jam after first shot);
4) Possibility of little malfunctions is probably smaller that for semi-auto pistols (like malfunction to feed, extract, etc).

Here is my list of the pros for both pistols and revolver in circumstances where only one hand for operation of handgun is available:
Pistol pros:
1) Possibility of me reloading a pistol with one hand in any situation is higher than that of reloading a revolver;
2) In general I should be able to make better one handed shots with a semi-auto pistols than a revolver;
3) If I would get a malfunction it would be more probable to sort it out with one hand only on a semi-auto pistol compared to a revolver.
Revolver pros:
1) Again, it is ready to shoot as soon as I draw it (instead a pistols would need to be racked which is extra difficult for one handed operation of a handgun);
2) In any case it should be easier to draw a revolver in any situation with one hand only compared to a pistol.

Just to add some additional info, I really think that the possibility of me actually needing a handgun for self defense here in Latvia is lower than that for you living in US. Also, I suspect that the most likely encounter in a self defense situation could be a 1 on 1 situation with an attacker somewhere on a street or something. Also we typically don't have terrorist attacks, mass shootings or home invasions for that matter (although later might happen occasionally). So in general I don't think that it is likely that I would ever encounter more than 3 attackers in any possible shooting situation.

Also I've done some ballistics calculations which are given in the book "Quantitative Ammunition Selection" and I've come to a conclusion that .380ACP and 9x18 in FMJ would be my best choice if over-penetration is a serious problem. My calculations show that .380ACP and 9x18 FMJ bullet would over-penetrate (in summer conditions with a slim T-shirt as an extra barrier) and would possibly fully penetrate the second body (thickness of bodies assumed - 7" - average 5'10" guy in Latvia) and in worst case would exit the second body with a velocity that would not be enough to penetrate another humans skin (in a winter environment it could be possible that the bullet would not exit the clothes of the attacker and thus would not over-penetrate). The .380ACP and 9x18 FMJ would produce 75% of the permanent wound cavity mass of 9x19 FMJ bullet (as I understand it basically would produce 75% of the damage that 9x19 bullet would do). Also, the .380ACP and 9x18 would only cause damage to the second body penetrated of the magnitude of 75% of what would be caused to the first body penetrated (the attacker) instead of 64-78% for 9x19, .38Spl and .357Mag. 9x19 FMJ and .38Spl FMJ available to me would have pretty much the same terminal ballistics performance, except that 9x19 FMJ round would have higher possibility to penetrate the skin of the 3rd body (it would only penetrate something like 2" - could do a lot of harm, though).

Just to remind of the local laws:
- One needs to carry a handgun without a round in the chamber with enabled external safety (if gun has one) and with hammer at rest. This means that I'll need to rack the slide of the pistol to set it up for shooting if needed;
- One needs to carry not more than two full magazines of ammo, that is, on in the handgun and another in the holster (so for a 5 shot revolver a total of 10 rounds);
- One is allowed to use only FMJ rounds;
- One carries only calibers not larger that 9mm in the diameter (basically options are limited to .380 ACP, 9x18 Makarov, 9x19 Parabellum, .38 Special and .357 Magnum);
- Law states: "one should not fire a handgun if one cannot guarantee the safety of those who are not intended to be shot" - this implies the consequences of a bullet that would over-penetrate the attacker.

I have to admit that I really didn't thought that there is so much to go in a decision of what platform/handgun to buy for self defense use - the matter really overwhelmed me - this is why I'm really thankful for all or your help.

I hope you'll be able to give some last advice on what platform (semi-auto pistol or revolver) should I choose for my CCW.

Thanks to everyone - you've all helped me tremendously!

 

[MedWheeler]

I'm truly impressed with the research and articulation of it you've done here. It's hard to remember at times that you're not in the US. Good on you for all of this, and for how seriously you are taking this very serious subject.

There are millions of people here in the States who go about their daily activities completely unarmed, and evil rarely befalls them. The same goes for virtually all of us who do go about our lives armed.

You have made some very fair assessments of the options available to you, and to the culture of your homeland regarding the likelihood of ever actually ever needing to use a firearm in defense, and how any such need could play out.

If you take your training as seriously as it seems you will, I feel you will become as proficient in the deployment of an unchambered, safety-on, semi-automatic pistol as pretty much anyone could become. Combined with solid mental training on situational awareness and threat-identification strategies, I think you would be well served with a semi-automatic pistol for which you can obtain an ample supply of ammunition, and with which you can train to be proficient. For the price, you could do no wrong with a surplus pistol in 9x18 Makarov (heck, get two of them!)

 

[susieqz]

hiya, rad.
i actually don't think the make of gun is most important.
any reliable gun is fine.

the effectiveness of any gun relies mostly on the shooter.
there is no substitute for shooting thousands of rounds.
you may find that you enjoy range time. most of us do.
so, make shooting your hobby. have fun.
the cheaper gun makes sense if you take the money you save n spend it on ammo.
sharpen your skills n any gun will be fine.

 

[entropy]

Once again my recommendation is the S&W 640.

My responses to your lists:

semis:
2. Safariland Comp I speedloaders are about as fast as a magazine change, with practice. Neither is easy to do one-handed, BTW.
3. Google Ed McGivern and Jerry Mickulek. Revolvers are mechanically faster than semi-autos. With aimed fire for the rest of us, they are about the same.
4. Learn and practice handgun retention techniques, as well as situational awareness.
5. This applies if it has a magazine disconnect; they'll still be able to fire any round you may have chambered.
6. Revolver malfunctions are extremely rare, and usually from parts breakage from age/wear, or extreme abuse. The only revolver malfunctions I've personally experienced resulted from overloading .357 Magnum rounds to the point where the primers backed out, and a hammer broke.
7. There are airgun revolvers made, though most have 4 & 6 inch barrels.

one handed:

1. Possibility of either is not good.
2. What do you base this statement on? With practice, both pistol and revolver can be shot well with one hand.
3. See my answer to #1 here. Also, see my answer to #6 above.

The ballistics of all the rounds are similar, though .357 FMJ would penetrate more than the rest. Rule #3 of gun handling is "Be sure of your target and what's beyond."

I agree with susieqz, practice and train with whichever gun you choose.

 

[RadekSkylark]

Just a quick update:

I'm still awaiting my CCW permit to be issued. This week police came by my place and checked that I have installed a vault for the storage of a handgun. Also there a problem that came up which has put on pause all the CCW issuing process - I hope I'll sort it out next week. If I do and there is no need for the police to take additional time for decision process I should get my permit till 12 of June.

As for now I still haven't totally decided on the gun. Have been watching force on force training videos on youtube to get some idea of how and what could actually happen in real life, so I can better decide on the importance of having a ready handgun with a chambered bullet (thus in my situation a revolver). Really liked first season of series "First Person Defender" - good information there, lots of criticism towards the participants, also the scenarios seem to be quite realistic. That show has also seasons 2 and 3 but in my opinion they're not that good as there seems to be to much advertising going on (especially on everyone needing a crimson trace laser setup on their gun), also the scenarios have lost realism (many times bad guys don't attack even though they could and seem to be willing to do that) and the information provided by instructors (at least to the viewer) is many times are pretty non existent, and the worst part in my opinion is that sometimes participants make really basic stupid mistakes which are not pointed out, at least not in front of cameras, which takes away the value of such a show.

Also want to add that a S&W 686 .357 Magnum National Security Special revolver has come up for sale in a craigslist for 500$ in pretty much new condition (with two speedloaders - actual image below). Last weel that gun was selling for 575$, two days ago seller dropped price to 500$. I think it will get even lower, because of the unpopularity of revolvers around here. Or if it wont, I'm pretty sure that if I would want to purchase that gun I could get another 50$ off of the price. Anyhow, if that revolver will still be for sale when I get my CCW permit and if I will have chosen to carry a revolver will definitely meet up with the seller to check out the gun, although I think it is quite huge and weight a lot, so for now I think that the possibility of me carrying such a gun is slim (as a S&W J-frame for a self-defense ranges with only one round less would serve me better I think).

Thanks for all the help guys,
Best luck to all of you!

 

[hydra]

Do yourself a favor and buy a Glock.

 

[mesinge2]

Now I would pick the Glock 19 or 26 in a heartbeat. Accurate, reliable, durable, and low maintenance.

Do yourself a favor and buy a Glock.

 

[susieqz]

if you enjoy fine machinery, get s&w.

 

[SKILCZ]

I'm not a fan of the Glock grip angle, but the simplicity, size, and capacity make the Glock 19 a pretty good all around carry gun. That said, for the prices you listed, it would be hard to argue against a Makarov if ammo is available in your area.

 

[MedWheeler]

Hydra writes:

Do yourself a favor and buy a Glock.

Okay. Why?

 

[PabloJ]

Do yourself a favor and buy a Glock.

Why? Military/Police Makarov a gun more reliable than Glock costs $100. While magazine only holds 8 cartridges he lives in country with fewer socioeconomic problems. I understand why you would choose a Glock with ability to use high cap magazines.