Looking To get My First Pistol

[Hoss632]

Greetings everyone! So the time has finally come in my life where I will be getting my first pistol for home defense. Not so much looking to carry though it may ride in the car with me. So size wise that compact range around 4inch barrel on up to full size is where I've focused. I've got family members and friends that have several guns that I'll be going to the range to try out with them soon. Several Taurus models, Glocks, M&P, and a couple of Sig (P226,229). Went in this past week to a local gun store, spoke with a gentlemen who was great. Got to hold guns that none of my friends/family have. Hellcat pro, Canik (I believe it was a tpsf9), Walther PDP F model, and a Tisas 1911 45 ACP.
So I've at least had the change to hold several firearms in my hands to get an idea of what at least feels comfortable. Shooting will definitely further help. All this to say I have a couple of questions.
1. Is having an optic/red dot sight on my first gun a good idea? For me it feels more natural aiming wise.
2. If I didn't go the route of something like a Hellcat pro (striker fires) is a 1911 a good first gun? I've always loved how they look and holding the Tisas felt surprisingly comfortable.

[MC 1911]

Remember opinions are just that! Do not overlook a good revolver as a first choice. Learn to use the sights on the gun before thinking you "need" optics. Some will say a 1911 isn't a good first gun..I disagree just don't try & make it something it isn't.

I would suggest you find a range that rents guns and try as many as you can. Just because it feels good doesn't mean you will like it once you shoot it. Take a few lessons,and practice!! Good luck!

[ammo.crafter]

MC 1911 is exactly correct. Try as many handguns as you can over time and see what feels right in your hand. The gun that you shoot most accurately is a big concern as well.
1911 454acp has a kick that many people object to. There are so many factors that must be considered. My petit wife loves her 1911 and shoots it quit well.
My son .loves his S&W 41mag and shoots it well.

Good luck.

[BarryLee]

Don't overlook one of the most popular guns GLOCK. I avoided them like the plague at first thinking they were just ugly. However, they are popular for a reason reliable and reasonably priced.

[The Verminator]

Reliability is your first concern.

That's why you should choose a Glock.

The new ones come with backstraps you can change out for a perfect fit to your hand.

If you may sometimes carry it concealed choose the Glock 19 Model.

If not carrying you may as well choose the larger Glock 17 Model.

Both are in 9mm which is the best all around choice for most people.

The Glock night sights are all the sights you need.

Then start practicing (a lot) until you are a competent pistolero.

Did you consider starting out with a .22 until you have more experience?

It's a good way to go.

[Webleymkv]

I'll address the questions specifically asked first, and then add a couple of general thoughts.

Originally posted by Hoss632
1. Is having an optic/red dot sight on my first gun a good idea? For me it feels more natural aiming wise.

Red dot sights on handguns is something that's debated a lot. In full disclosure, I don't have any red dot sighted pistols and am not particularly interested in them. That being said, I do have experience with them on rifles and there are a couple things that I think should be borne in mind about red dots. First and foremost they are electronic devices and, while the newer ones are much more rugged than the older ones, they aren't as bomb-proof and a good set of irons. Part of the issue that I have with red dot sights on handguns is that many of them either do not co-witness with the iron sights or require removal of the rear iron sight all together. While I do have a Sig Romeo on one of my "social work" rifles, I also have a set of back-up iron sights which can be deployed very quickly should the Romeo fail. The other issue to keep in mind about red dots is that you're adding a device which requires maintenance to your firearm. While the newer models have much better battery life than their predecessors did, the batteries do not last forever. If this is to be a "stick it in the sock drawer and forget it until something goes bump in the night" sort of thing, you need to remember to periodically replace the batteries or at the very least check and make sure that the optic is still working. Also, if you do choose to mount an optic to your pistol, pay attention to what is required to change the batteries as some models require the optic to be removed from the gun, and thus re-zeroed when reinstalled. Finally, shooting red dots and irons require different techniques and switching from one to the other can be difficult for some people. I know you said you're not really interested in carrying on your person now, but if there's a chance that might change in the future you'll likely want a smaller, easier to carry gun and many which fit that category aren't so small and easily carried with optics mounted, if they're capable of accepting optics in the first place.

2. If I didn't go the route of something like a Hellcat pro (striker fires) is a 1911 a good first gun? I've always loved how they look and holding the Tisas felt surprisingly comfortable.

Both a striker-fired gun and 1911 have certain attributes that might cause a beginner issues (though none that are insurmountable). With a striker-fired gun that does not have an active manual safety (the dingus on the trigger is a drop safety) you have to be extremely careful about trigger finger discipline and, if the gun is carried, holster selection. This is because if your finger is on the trigger when it shouldn't be or something like a holster strap, jacket zipper, or other foreign object finds its way into the trigger guard, there's only about 5-6 lbs of pressure between you and the gun going off when you don't want it to. Now, if you fastidiously follow the four rules of firearm safety you're extremely unlikely to have a problem, but that assumes you follow those rules religiously which isn't always the case with a new shooter.

A 1911, on the other hand, is arguably "safer" because you've got both the grip safety and a manual thumb safety that both have to be disengaged before the gun can fire (assuming the gun is in good working order of course). However, this brings up the opposite issue as the striker fired gun with no safety in that you have to remember to have a proper grip and disengage the thumb safety to make the gun fire when you want it to. It is not particularly uncommon for new shooters to be puzzled as to why their 1911 won't shoot until they remember that they forgot to take the safety off, obviously not a situation that you'd want to have should you need to defend yourself. Likewise, you need to remember to manually put the safety back on when you put the gun into your holster, safe, nightstand, or wherever you keep it at the ready. To sum it up, the striker-fired gun has a simpler, easier to learn manual-of-arms but is less forgiving of newbie safety violations while the 1911 is more forgiving of newbie safety violations but has a more complex manual of arms that needs more training/practice to use effectively.

All that having been said, there are other types of handguns you might want to consider besides just a striker-fired pistol or 1911. Other options are hammer-fired DA/SA semi-autos, DAO semi-autos, and DA revolvers. DA revolvers are often recommended for beginners because of their very simple manual of arms. Most revolvers have no manual safety, but have a longer, heavier trigger pull (usually around 10-15 lbs) when fired double-action which is unlikely to be pulled unintentionally. While many can be fired single-action for a very light, crisp trigger pull, this requires manually cocking the hammer. They are also very simple and easy to load, unload, or check whether they're loaded or not as one simply needs to open the cylinder and insert/remove/look directly into the chambers. The primary disadvantages of a revolver is that they usually hold fewer rounds than a comparable semi-auto (most revolvers hold 5 or 6 cartridges though some hold more) and the longer, heavier DA trigger is more difficult for some shooters to learn to shoot accurately.

DA/SA semi-autos have a long, heavy, revolver-like trigger pull for the first shot but the hammer is automatically re-cocked for subsequent shots thereby giving a light-crisp trigger pull. Some models like the Beretta 92FS have manual safeties which de-cock the hammer and disengage the trigger when applied and must be manually disengaged before the gun will shoot while others like the Sig P220 only have de-cockers which drop the hammer from the cocked position but do not disengage the trigger. The primary disadvantages of DA/SA semi-autos is that for some people transitioning from the DA first shot to the SA follow-up shots and the DA triggers on most hammer fired semi-autos is not as smooth and often even heavier than that of a good revolver.

Finally, a hammer-fired DAO semi-auto requires the long, heavy DA trigger pull for every shot. These types of guns rarely have manual safeties and thus have some of the revolver's simplicity of use and inherent safety while retaining the magazine capacity of a semi-auto. The primary disadvantage of a hammer-fired DAO semi-auto is that you're stuck with that long, heavy trigger pull for each and every shot and if you can't manage the DA trigger well, you're out of luck until/unless you can get better with it.

The best way to decide what type of gun you want is to try out as many as you can. If your gun-owning friends/family are willing to take you to the range and let you shoot their handguns, that's a great start. If you have a local range which rents handguns, that's even better as you're not restricted to just what friends and family already own.

[Webleymkv]

Originally posted by The Verminator
Reliability is your first concern.

That's why you should choose a Glock.

While I won't argue that Glocks are reliable, because they certainly are, they're not the only reliable gun out there. With the excellent offerings available from companies like Ruger, S&W, Sig, Beretta, Walther, HK and many, many others, it's harder to find a new pistol which is unreliable than a reliable one these days. With the exception of a few outliers from known junk-makers like Jiminez or Phoenix Arms or oddball designs and/or unusual calibers, reliability really isn't that big a concern in the modern-day handgun market. Heck, even the Taurus and Hi-Points seem to be at least reliable.

[The Verminator]

Originally Posted by Webleymkv

While I won't argue that Glocks are reliable, because they certainly are, they're not the only reliable gun out there. With the excellent offerings available from companies like Ruger, S&W, Sig, Beretta, Walther, HK and many, many others, it's harder to find a new pistol which is unreliable than a reliable one these days. With the exception of a few outliers from known junk-makers like Jiminez or Phoenix Arms or oddball designs and/or unusual calibers, reliability really isn't that big a concern in the modern-day handgun market. Heck, even the Taurus and Hi-Points seem to be at least reliable.

Reliability is the top concern in a self-defense pistol.........TOP.

Yes, other pistols are reliable it's just that Glocks are regarded as the most reliable and chosen by cops and military worldwide because of it.

Glocks are also simple and extremely easy to take down for cleaning.

That's important for a newcomer or anybody who hates taking things apart.

It's true that there are many other good options......it's just that they may not be the best.

The cheaper pistols are a gamble......High point and Taurus might be ok, but we're getting to the low end there.

The 1911s as a group have always been a bit more finicky......I like the way they feel and look.......and I avoid them for defense. They require more skilled and experienced users I think.

We should not forget revolvers, either........they have a lot of advantages to consider. I stick with the older Smiths myself.

[Webleymkv]

Originally posted by The Verminator
Reliability is the top concern in a self-defense pistol.........TOP.

Yes, other pistols are reliable it's just that Glocks are regarded as the most reliable and chosen by cops and military worldwide because of it.

I'd like to see some empirical evidence that Glocks are more reliable than other pistols of comparable quality, price, and features. While it is true that Glock is the most popular pistol among U.S. law enforcement agencies, it isn't widely used by the U.S. military and both militaries and police agencies internationally use plenty of other makes of pistol including HK, Sig, FN, and CZ among others. Likewise there are many reasons besides reliability that a military or law enforcement agency might choose a particular pistol over another including cost, marketing, and institutional momentum.

Consider this, Glock became a major player in the U.S. police market in the 1990's. At that time, there were few other polymer-framed, striker-fired pistols to compete with them (certainly nowhere near as many as today) and most of their competition was metal-framed, hammer-fired guns like 3rd Generation S&W's, Beretta 92 Series, and Sig 220 series. It's no secret that polymer-framed pistols are a lot less expensive to produce and between this and the fact that Glock was willing to sell their guns to police for deep discounts, they were able to significantly undercut the price of competing pistols of comparable quality and features. I personally know a small-town Sheriff's Deputy who bought a brand-new Glock 21 for his duty weapon in the mid-90's for $300 while another acquaintance of mine bought an identical gun on the retail market around the same time and paid well over $500.

Fast forward to today and many departments likely stay with their Glocks not because they're that much better or more reliable than something like a S&W M&P, HK VP9, or Sig P320, but because they still work as well as they ever did, are still competitively priced and they simply see no reason to change. Much like the current trend of LE going back to 9mm, it isn't that the Glock is better, or in some attributes even as good as their competition, it's that they're good enough.

Glocks are also simple and extremely easy to take down for cleaning.

That's important for a newcomer or anybody who hates taking things apart.

I've taken Glocks apart before and while they're certainly not difficult guns to field strip and clean, they're no easier to do so with than any of my several S&W M&P series pistols, my Walther P99AS, my Ruger SR45, or several of the hammer-fired, metal-framed pistols I have such as my CZ-75, CZ-82, Walther PP and many others. Like reliability, Glock does not have the market on ease of maintenance cornered.

It's true that there are many other good options......it's just that they may not be the best.

They may not be, but a Glock may not be either. Believe it or not, there are several good reasons why someone might not want a Glock or may prefer something else. Glocks are striker-fired pistols without active manual safeties, if someone wanted a hammer-fired pistol or wanted a manual safety, they aren't going to get if from Glock. Glocks also have a grip size, shape, and angle which doesn't work well for everyone. I personally find the grip of a Glock to be too wide and too square and other guns fit my hand much more comfortably. I'm not saying that the OP definitely should not buy a Glock, but I think it's short-sighted to make the blanket statement that it's the only gun he should consider.

The cheaper pistols are a gamble......High point and Taurus might be ok, but we're getting to the low end there.

Knowing what I do of Hi Point's manufacturing methods and the materials they use, I'd be hesitant to bet my life on one. However, everyone I've ever known who had experience with them tells me that despite how cheaply they're made that they are surprisingly reliable. I do personally know several people who've bought the newer Taurus semi-autos and I've yet to hear of an unreliable Taurus G2c or G3c, they may not be as refined as something more expensive but they do seem to work and for the price point I think a person could do a lot worse.

The 1911s as a group have always been a bit more finicky......I like the way they feel and look.......and I avoid them for defense. They require more skilled and experienced users I think.

In my experience, 1911's can be very reliable as long as one understands a few things about them. The 1911 is a 100+ year old design that was designed to shoot a specific 230 gr FMJ loading. The feed ramp geometry, magazine feed lip geometry, spring tensions, extractor tuning, etc. were all designed around .45 ACP ammunition with specific velocity, bullet weight, and ogive. If you want one to be reliable with something much different than the .45 ACP ammunition it was originally designed around (much less a completely different caliber), you're going to have to make a few changes to the design. A vintage 1911 or close approximation thereof isn't going to have things like a throated or ramped barrel and will likely not have magazines designed for anything but 230 gr FMJ-RN ammunition and so cannot be expected to be reliable with anything but that type of ammo.

Also, 1911's have been made for over a century by dozens, if not hundreds, of different manufacturers to wildly different specifications and levels of quality. Many 1911's have been made as target and competition guns rather than combat pistols and, as such, reliability took a back seat to accuracy or other factors. While something like a Colt Gold Cup National Match is an excellent pistol for what it was intended to be used for, it's probably not the most reliable 1911 to be carried with JHP ammunition for self-defense. Also, some 1911's have been made as replicas of vintage ones and many of these don't have the upgrades I mentioned earlier because they're meant for collecting and re-enacting rather than defensive use.

Finally, there are a myriad of different makers of 1911 magazines out there and they aren't all created equal. It's no secret that good magazines are essential to reliability in any self-loading firearm and even Glocks have been known to become unreliable with certain aftermarket magazines. Unfortunately, there are several very good 1911's that ship with substandard magazines and, to someone who doesn't know the difference, this can taint the design. Based on my own experience, I would only depend on Wilson Combat or Chip McCormick magazines in a 1911 I intended to use defensively. There may be other good 1911 mags out there, but those two have been the most reliable that I have found. The brands of 1911 that I have personally had good experience with or people who I personally know and trust have had good luck with include Colt, S&W, Springfield Armory, Dan Wesson, Wilson Combat, and Rock Island Armory. While I don't have first or even secondhand experience with them, I've also heard/read very positive things about the 1911's made by Ruger, Tisas, and Sig.

We should not forget revolvers, either........they have a lot of advantages to consider. I stick with the older Smiths myself.

On this we agree, I think that revolvers are highly underrated defensive firearms particularly for a novice.

[gwpercle]

I always reccomend a good 22 LR as a first handgun .
You have to learn how to shoot first before you move up to the big bores .
Starting out with a 45 is tough .
A good S&W K-frame sized 38 special would be my #2 suggestion ... a 357 magnum will allow you to shoot the more powerful loads after you have learned to shoot 38 special , light target wadcutter loads work well for beginners .

The 1911 is not a beginners gun ... it takes a good bit of practice to learn to shoot it well and handle it's recoil .
My favorite handgun is a K-frame S&W in 38 special with a 4" barrel .
Gary

[rmh3481]

Beretta 92 would be my pick.

[The Verminator]

Originally Posted by Webleymkv

I'd like to see some empirical evidence that Glocks are more reliable than other pistols of comparable quality, price, and features. While it is true that Glock is the most popular pistol among U.S. law enforcement agencies, it isn't widely used by the U.S. military and both militaries and police agencies internationally use plenty of other makes of pistol including HK, Sig, FN, and CZ among others. Likewise there are many reasons besides reliability that a military or law enforcement agency might choose a particular pistol over another including cost, marketing, and institutional momentum.

Consider this, Glock became a major player in the U.S. police market in the 1990's. At that time, there were few other polymer-framed, striker-fired pistols to compete with them (certainly nowhere near as many as today) and most of their competition was metal-framed, hammer-fired guns like 3rd Generation S&W's, Beretta 92 Series, and Sig 220 series. It's no secret that polymer-framed pistols are a lot less expensive to produce and between this and the fact that Glock was willing to sell their guns to police for deep discounts, they were able to significantly undercut the price of competing pistols of comparable quality and features. I personally know a small-town Sheriff's Deputy who bought a brand-new Glock 21 for his duty weapon in the mid-90's for $300 while another acquaintance of mine bought an identical gun on the retail market around the same time and paid well over $500.

Fast forward to today and many departments likely stay with their Glocks not because they're that much better or more reliable than something like a S&W M&P, HK VP9, or Sig P320, but because they still work as well as they ever did, are still competitively priced and they simply see no reason to change. Much like the current trend of LE going back to 9mm, it isn't that the Glock is better, or in some attributes even as good as their competition, it's that they're good enough.



I've taken Glocks apart before and while they're certainly not difficult guns to field strip and clean, they're no easier to do so with than any of my several S&W M&P series pistols, my Walther P99AS, my Ruger SR45, or several of the hammer-fired, metal-framed pistols I have such as my CZ-75, CZ-82, Walther PP and many others. Like reliability, Glock does not have the market on ease of maintenance cornered.



They may not be, but a Glock may not be either. Believe it or not, there are several good reasons why someone might not want a Glock or may prefer something else. Glocks are striker-fired pistols without active manual safeties, if someone wanted a hammer-fired pistol or wanted a manual safety, they aren't going to get if from Glock. Glocks also have a grip size, shape, and angle which doesn't work well for everyone. I personally find the grip of a Glock to be too wide and too square and other guns fit my hand much more comfortably. I'm not saying that the OP definitely should not buy a Glock, but I think it's short-sighted to make the blanket statement that it's the only gun he should consider.



Knowing what I do of Hi Point's manufacturing methods and the materials they use, I'd be hesitant to bet my life on one. However, everyone I've ever known who had experience with them tells me that despite how cheaply they're made that they are surprisingly reliable. I do personally know several people who've bought the newer Taurus semi-autos and I've yet to hear of an unreliable Taurus G2c or G3c, they may not be as refined as something more expensive but they do seem to work and for the price point I think a person could do a lot worse.



In my experience, 1911's can be very reliable as long as one understands a few things about them. The 1911 is a 100+ year old design that was designed to shoot a specific 230 gr FMJ loading. The feed ramp geometry, magazine feed lip geometry, spring tensions, extractor tuning, etc. were all designed around .45 ACP ammunition with specific velocity, bullet weight, and ogive. If you want one to be reliable with something much different than the .45 ACP ammunition it was originally designed around (much less a completely different caliber), you're going to have to make a few changes to the design. A vintage 1911 or close approximation thereof isn't going to have things like a throated or ramped barrel and will likely not have magazines designed for anything but 230 gr FMJ-RN ammunition and so cannot be expected to be reliable with anything but that type of ammo.

Also, 1911's have been made for over a century by dozens, if not hundreds, of different manufacturers to wildly different specifications and levels of quality. Many 1911's have been made as target and competition guns rather than combat pistols and, as such, reliability took a back seat to accuracy or other factors. While something like a Colt Gold Cup National Match is an excellent pistol for what it was intended to be used for, it's probably not the most reliable 1911 to be carried with JHP ammunition for self-defense. Also, some 1911's have been made as replicas of vintage ones and many of these don't have the upgrades I mentioned earlier because they're meant for collecting and re-enacting rather than defensive use.

Finally, there are a myriad of different makers of 1911 magazines out there and they aren't all created equal. It's no secret that good magazines are essential to reliability in any self-loading firearm and even Glocks have been known to become unreliable with certain aftermarket magazines. Unfortunately, there are several very good 1911's that ship with substandard magazines and, to someone who doesn't know the difference, this can taint the design. Based on my own experience, I would only depend on Wilson Combat or Chip McCormick magazines in a 1911 I intended to use defensively. There may be other good 1911 mags out there, but those two have been the most reliable that I have found. The brands of 1911 that I have personally had good experience with or people who I personally know and trust have had good luck with include Colt, S&W, Springfield Armory, Dan Wesson, Wilson Combat, and Rock Island Armory. While I don't have first or even secondhand experience with them, I've also heard/read very positive things about the 1911's made by Ruger, Tisas, and Sig.



On this we agree, I think that revolvers are highly underrated defensive firearms particularly for a novice.

Well, I don't have empirical evidence that Glocks are the most reliable......don't know if there is any.

But, it seems to me that it's a widely and generally accepted fact and my Glocks have never failed while every other kind of semiauto I've had has had jams of various kinds.

And many of us have discovered that no safety and no hammer are good ideas......not bad ideas.

And when you say, "1911's CAN be very reliable"........well, that kind of says it all.

They CAN be.......but it takes tinkering, experience, high maintenance and probably higher prices.

Seems to me that Glock has a trifecta of virtues--Reliability, ease of takedown, superb magazines, good sights, plus low price (I guess that's a "fivefecta").

But, I do agree with the other 98% of your post.

[TunnelRat]

I don’t think having a red dot on your first pistol is inherently bad. I find that getting more proficient with a red dot has also improved my shooting with my pistols that only have iron sights. I don’t see the skills as competing or at odds with each other. That said, as mentioned above there are maintenance and installation challenges associated with red dots. I would look for a pistol capable of mounting a red dot in the future. It is generally cheaper to pay the extra up front than have a slide milled after the fact. You can find pistols of various sizes that are optics capable from the factory.

[Hoss632]

Originally Posted by rmh3481

Beretta 92 would be my pick.

I've held a Beretta and given that I don't have big hands, it was just not a comfortable gun to hold.

Also thank you everyone for your advice. Trust me I'm taking notes so I can consider all of this. As for the revolvers, I did forget to mention while I was in the gun shop they brought up the same thing of the revolver being simpler and put a Ruger SP101 in my hand which for a revolver was actually not that bad to hold.

As a follow up questioin to the few that mentioned it. Should it be necessary is a 22 good for defense? I know it doesn't pack the punch of other calibers which might result in needing to possibly fire more than 1 shot.

[jmhyer]

I take it that you have no experience with pistol shooting...or basic operation...or assembly/disassembly and maintenance. Assuming this to be correct, I would make the following suggestions.

Choose a caliber and platform that is fairly soft-shooting. This would probably lead you to the 9mm caliber in a larger gun. Larger, means heavier, which means less felt recoil. From a weight standpoint, heavier can also be accomplished via metal-framed firearms (as opposed to polymer-framed ones).

Simplicity of operation, assembly/disassembly, and cleaning are probably important. This leads me away from the 1911, honestly. And it might lead you away from DA/SA pistols.

Reliability is paramount (as has been stated). This means a pistol with a good reputation. And also, ammo with a good reputation which functions reliably in your pistol.

While I like revolvers and they are certainly easy to operate and are reliable, I think they are harder to learn to shoot well. And the capacity may leave something to be desired in the way of a home defense pistol.

So, based on all that, I'm thinking of a full-sized striker-fired pistol such as the full-sized M&P 9 (maybe even the metal one), a Glock 17, or an HK VP9. Ruger, Springfield, CZ, and FN also have similar offerings that would be good choices. In fact the CZ P-10F may be the best deal out there, in terms of quality/reputation vs price.

I wouldn't be concerned with a red dot/reflex sight at this time...unless you are as old as me and just can't quite pick up the open sights as well anymore. Just learn to use the iron sights for now. Having said that, you may want to pick up a model that is optic-ready...for future red dot/reflex sight consideration.

And, as has been suggested, be sure to take some instruction on safety and operation. And get out there and practice, practice, practice.

Addendum...
I would not recommend 22LR for self/home defense...primarily due to being less reliable to fire and function.

[RickB]

If you have kids, and other "non-designated personnel" who may access the gun, despite your best efforts, you might want a gun with manual safety, and magazine disconnect (gun won't fire without a magazine in the gun).

[Hoss632]

Again thank you to everyone for all of the advise and suggestions. If there's one thing that has made me less "nervous" about getting into firearms it's that this so far has been one of the most welcoming communities I've gotten into. And it means a lot so thank you all.

[Hoss632]

Originally Posted by jmhyer

I take it that you have no experience with pistol shooting...or basic operation...or assembly/disassembly and maintenance. Assuming this to be correct, I would make the following suggestions.

Choose a caliber and platform that is fairly soft-shooting. This would probably lead you to the 9mm caliber in a larger gun. Larger, means heavier, which means less felt recoil. From a weight standpoint, heavier can also be accomplished via metal-framed firearms (as opposed to polymer-framed ones).

Simplicity of operation, assembly/disassembly, and cleaning are probably important. This leads me away from the 1911, honestly. And it might lead you away from DA/SA pistols.

Reliability is paramount (as has been stated). This means a pistol with a good reputation. And also, ammo with a good reputation which functions reliably in your pistol.

While I like revolvers and they are certainly easy to operate and are reliable, I think they are harder to learn to shoot well. And the capacity may leave something to be desired in the way of a home defense pistol.

So, based on all that, I'm thinking of a full-sized striker-fired pistol such as the full-sized M&P 9 (maybe even the metal one), a Glock 17, or an HK VP9. Ruger, Springfield, CZ, and FN also have similar offerings that would be good choices. In fact the CZ P-10F may be the best deal out there, in terms of quality/reputation vs price.

I wouldn't be concerned with a red dot/reflex sight at this time...unless you are as old as me and just can't quite pick up the open sights as well anymore. Just learn to use the iron sights for now. Having said that, you may want to pick up a model that is optic-ready...for future red dot/reflex sight consideration.

And, as has been suggested, be sure to take some instruction on safety and operation. And get out there and practice, practice, practice.

Addendum...
I would not recommend 22LR for self/home defense...primarily due to being less reliable to fire and function.

Correct I'm coming in with no experience. I fired a gun at a range in 2006, but only got about half a clip in when the gun malfunctioned. The clip fell out and would not stay in when re-inserted. And unfortunately after that I never went back again which is something I wish I had done. What is your opinion on Canik? I've found a few of their guns to be well priced for the features.

[Nathan]

Originally Posted by Hoss632

Greetings everyone! So the time has finally come in my life where I will be getting my first pistol for home defense. Not so much looking to carry though it may ride in the car with me. So size wise that compact range around 4inch barrel on up to full size is where I've focused. I've got family members and friends that have several guns that I'll be going to the range to try out with them soon. Several Taurus models, Glocks, M&P, and a couple of Sig (P226,229). Went in this past week to a local gun store, spoke with a gentlemen who was great. Got to hold guns that none of my friends/family have. Hellcat pro, Canik (I believe it was a tpsf9), Walther PDP F model, and a Tisas 1911 45 ACP.
So I've at least had the change to hold several firearms in my hands to get an idea of what at least feels comfortable. Shooting will definitely further help. All this to say I have a couple of questions.
1. Is having an optic/red dot sight on my first gun a good idea? For me it feels more natural aiming wise.
2. If I didn't go the route of something like a Hellcat pro (striker fires) is a 1911 a good first gun? I've always loved how they look and holding the Tisas felt surprisingly comfortable.

First, welcome to the forum. Sincerely.

If I hear you right, you want your first pistol for home defense and possibly car carry.

Also, you have no experience.

What does your budget look like for something like this?

I would recommend you seriously consider that you don’t really know safe gun handling or how to shoot. It seems a class of some sort is in order. Most places have a good enough “learn to shoot” course.

Then, after that, I’d suggest something like a Buckmark or TX22 to practice both the shooting and safe handling.

The long term goal should be a 9mm with a 4-5” barrel and 15 to 20 round mags. I would still steer clear of the safetyless pistol designs like the Glock that are so popular. They really are less safe and have the accidental/negligent discharges to go with their lower safety level.

S&W M&P comes with all you want, pretty good trigger, excellent reliability, long sight radius and a great thumb safety. It is a great tool for new and experienced folks.

You mentioned a compact. I would not do that until after the full size is mastered. They are much harder to shoot. Most shooters have a sizable drop in capability. There is a time to do that, but that time is after full size mastery.

Remember when you are choosing caliber and guns that speed of draw and shot to shot speed are what matter. Especially when choosing between 9,40,45.

Also, many will have you think there is an ideal or best gun….there is not. The best gun is the one you are 100% dedicated to learn & shoot. That includes making sure it is 100% reliable, even if it needs a rare case trip back to its maker.

1) Optics Ready is not a bad idea. Diving into an optic is, IMO. Optics are oddly not really best at SD distances. At those distances, a quick front sight or look through optic glass is all you need. I find sights train pistol alignment better than optics, lasers or anything else.

2) A 1911 is a great gun. Even a great first gun. Remember it was designed as a hand fitted gun. It was designed as a 5” 45 auto. It was designed over 100 years ago…..making every 1911 an engineered copy of the original. Some like the Dan Wesson, Wilson Combat, etc are an effort to elevate the original design. Others are meant to make something that looks like a 1911(from a distance) and run most of the time, but since it is an engineered copy, you get what you pay for. They are obviously trying to cut costs. I would suggest either buying a Dan Wesson, Wilson, Nighthawk or waiting until you can distinguish what is good enough.

Good luck in your endeavors.

[Hoss632]

Originally Posted by Nathan

First, welcome to the forum. Sincerely.

If I hear you right, you want your first pistol for home defense and possibly car carry.

Also, you have no experience.

What does your budget look like for something like this?

I would recommend you seriously consider that you don’t really know safe gun handling or how to shoot. It seems a class of some sort is in order. Most places have a good enough “learn to shoot” course.

Then, after that, I’d suggest something like a Buckmark or TX22 to practice both the shooting and safe handling.

The long term goal should be a 9mm with a 4-5” barrel and 15 to 20 round mags. I would still steer clear of the safetyless pistol designs like the Glock that are so popular. They really are less safe and have the accidental/negligent discharges to go with their lower safety level.

S&W M&P comes with all you want, pretty good trigger, excellent reliability, long sight radius and a great thumb safety. It is a great tool for new and experienced folks.

You mentioned a compact. I would not do that until after the full size is mastered. They are much harder to shoot. Most shooters have a sizable drop in capability. There is a time to do that, but that time is after full size mastery.

Remember when you are choosing caliber and guns that speed of draw and shot to shot speed are what matter. Especially when choosing between 9,40,45.

Also, many will have you think there is an ideal or best gun….there is not. The best gun is the one you are 100% dedicated to learn & shoot. That includes making sure it is 100% reliable, even if it needs a rare case trip back to its maker.

1) Optics Ready is not a bad idea. Diving into an optic is, IMO. Optics are oddly not really best at SD distances. At those distances, a quick front sight or look through optic glass is all you need. I find sights train pistol alignment better than optics, lasers or anything else.

2) A 1911 is a great gun. Even a great first gun. Remember it was designed as a hand fitted gun. It was designed as a 5” 45 auto. It was designed over 100 years ago…..making every 1911 an engineered copy of the original. Some like the Dan Wesson, Wilson Combat, etc are an effort to elevate the original design. Others are meant to make something that looks like a 1911(from a distance) and run most of the time, but since it is an engineered copy, you get what you pay for. They are obviously trying to cut costs. I would suggest either buying a Dan Wesson, Wilson, Nighthawk or waiting until you can distinguish what is good enough.

Good luck in your endeavors.

Appreciate the welcome. I had not realized I didn't put a budget anywhere in my initial post. Frankly I am willing to save up to get a reliable firearm. So saving up for a full size gun like the M&P which seems be in that 700+ range depending on the model, is fine with me. If I were to try and go a little more budget minded full size the Canik SFT Mete 9 at 520 bucks seems like a good option based on reviews.

[jar]

Originally Posted by Hoss632

Correct I'm coming in with no experience. I fired a gun at a range in 2006, but only got about half a clip in when the gun malfunctioned. The clip fell out and would not stay in when re-inserted. And unfortunately after that I never went back again which is something I wish I had done. What is your opinion on Canik? I've found a few of their guns to be well priced for the features.

First, welcome home. Pull up a stump and set a spell.

So far you're making all the right early steps beginning with saying you want to buy a "FIRST gun. As you gain experience you'll find additional features and functions and unless you are most unusual even experience the "Oh! Shiny!"

The recommendation of a 22lr pistol or revolver as a first choice is reasonable. While it's not ideal for self defense it is more than what you have now and has the advantage of really low cost ammo allowing more practice which is what you really need starting out. The first goal should be getting you comfortable around guns and proficient in getting hits where you intended. The 22lr is perfect as that initial stage; it makes small holes but really shows improvement as you gain that so necessary experience.

Use the time to shoot anything any of your friends and neighbors might share with you and silly as it may seem, take notes. Jot down what you liked or disliked or found as a new experience or that surprised you.


Don't rush towards finding The Perfect Gun™; you will find there are lots of such candidates out there but you are looking for the ones that feel like they were made just for you.

And keep us posted during your journey.

[Aguila Blanca]

Originally Posted by Hoss632

1. Is having an optic/red dot sight on my first gun a good idea? For me it feels more natural aiming wise.

You mentioned that this will be your first handgun, but how much shooting have you done? Do you own rifles? If so, do they have open sights, telescopic sights, or red dot sights?

This is important because, if you are accustomed to shooting with open sights, red dots are anything BUT "natural." If you have spent much time shooting with open sights, adapting to red dots requires rewiring your eye-brain-hand neural connection.

[Hoss632]

Originally Posted by Aguila Blanca

You mentioned that this will be your first handgun, but how much shooting have you done? Do you own rifles? If so, do they have open sights, telescopic sights, or red dot sights?

This is important because, if you are accustomed to shooting with open sights, red dots are anything BUT "natural." If you have spent much time shooting with open sights, adapting to red dots requires rewiring your eye-brain-hand neural connection.

For all intents and purposes zero experience shooting. In 06 I went to the range with a friend, got half a clip in and the gun had a failure to where the magazine would not stay in. Outside of that, I've only held unloaded guns on occasion so I'm definitely coming into this 100% as a novice.

[rc]

You should check out the CZ P01, Ruger SP101 and GP100.

[44 AMP]

For a first pistol, get a .22 LR. It can even be a revolver. Learn to shoot the pistol, THEN look at something in a suitable self defense caliber.

Take the NRA Hunter Safety course. Then, before you move up to a defensive pistol, take some kind of instruction about your legal rights and responsibilities.

Learn to drive (operate the vehicle), and learn the rules of the road, and get some milage under your belt, before you get behind the wheel of a high performance sports car. Otherwise, you're an accident waiting to happen.

And, sadly, if you don't have any skills built up, you might not have to wait long before that accident happens.

The .22 pistol offers the benefit of lowest cost ammo, lowest recoil and report, and generally good to excellent accuracy. Down sides are lowest power, so not a good choice for self defense use, and .22 semi autos can be the most finicky /picky guns out there, for reliability. Best basic training tools, not the best for serious defensive use.

Get a .22, learn how to shoot. Save your pennies for the actual defensive handgun of your choice, and get it when you are able to use it properly. What you think best now, might change as you gain some experience.

And, do be aware of information overload. You're going to hear opinions from all kinds of people, some will be valid, some will just sound valid. DO steer clear of the ones who say "if you don't do it the way I say, you will die!!"

While it may be blasphemy in the semi auto forum, don't overlook a medium frame .38 special revolver as an option. Despite all the talk about everything that is better, and you "need better" the simple, reliable, revolver does work.

Good Luck, welcome to TFL, we're here to help, share experience and give tons of advice. Some of it will be good advice! Some, not so much. As you get some experience, you'll see better which is which.