Which gun for CCW: Glock 26, Sig p238, or S&W shield

[deckard]

True, there hasn't been a gun he couldn't plink that gong with huh?

[57K]

My shooting partner has the 9mm Shield, formerly owned the Walther PPS and carried a G26 for a number of years. The PPS had a few issues. S&W learned from them and built a better pistol, IMO. The Shield is easier to conceal vs. the G26. Although he recently bought an XDm 3.8 Compact 9mm that I believe he'll end up carrying full time.

Along with its ability to conceal more easily, the Shield is still a comfortable little pistol to shoot at the range. You get a short mag for concealment and the extended mag to carry for a reload. If you were to consider the larger G26, I'd definitely recommend that you take a look at the XDm 3.8 Compact in 9mm as it is no longer in grip dimension than the G26 and the slightly longer barrel isn't an issue for CC. 13+1 with the short carry mag and the extended 19 round mag for carry and reload and it comes with the grip extensions to match the backstrap you choose to install on the pistol.

[Fox84]

I just wish I could find a M&P Sheild to buy. I'am also considering the Beratta Nano but I like the safety on the Sheild. I have a Keltec PF9 and Sig P238. The PF9 is my car gun and I carry the P238.

[sho'nuff]

I would say glock 26 for many reasons. But I have to admit I have not yet fired the shield

[dayman]

Those are 3 very different guns, and so it's just going to come down to your own preferences and which works best for you. I don't think you could make a "better - worse" comparison.

The 238 is far and away the smallest. If you plan on carrying while dressed in fitted clothes a lot it might be the best choice. It would be very small IWB, or it could be pocket carried - though you'd want to keep the hammer down. Also, .380 is also pretty marginal as far as SD rounds go.

The shield is - probably - going to be the next easiest to conceal. It's thinner than the glock, and for most people the width rather than the height is what makes or breaks a guns concealability. They do tend to be hard to find, and you're probably going to be limited on options for mags. I'm not sure what the holster situation is with them, but that's something else you may want to check out.

The g26 is the fattest, and thus - in my mind - the least easy to conceal. However, lots of people conceal them very effectively. I would guess it's close to the most popular CCW around - at least as far as autos go. You also do have to option to run 15, 17, or 33 round mags through it when you go to the range. If you have a a stable of guns this might not be a big deal, but if you have only 1 or 2, having it more fun to shoot is going to be a big plus. Also, they've been around long enough that there are tons of accessories that are pretty easy to get, and it's easy to find someone who can work on them in the unlikely event that it ever needs anything fixed.


Any one of them would be a great choice but each offers a different set of advantages, so you just have to figure out exactly what you want out of your gun, and choose accordingly.
If you have the option to rent them (or at least hold them) before you buy that might make your decision easier.

[Kevin_d77]

I just bought 4 extra mags for my Shields and the holsters aren't an issue either. I picked up a Theis Holster for cheaper than the Crossbreed. You can find Shields right now online for around $530.

Great little guns!

[BigJakeJ1s]

The Glock system of having a safety on the trigger is to help prevent negligent discharges due to something snagging the trigger. The Glock design removes almost all chances of the gun firing accidentally; a Glock fires only if the trigger is pulled. If you follow basic safety rules and keep your finger off the trigger you'll be fine.

On the other hand, a gun with a manual safety can cause people to be LESS safe; they rely on the manual safety and don't practice basic safety techniques like keeping their finger off the trigger.

In other words: A glock is safe unless you don't follow basic safety rules, and a gun with a manual safety is also safe unless you don't follow basic safety rules.

Guns don't cause people to ignore basic safety rules any more than they cause people to kill people.

Andy

[Theohazard]

In other words: A glock is safe unless you don't follow basic safety rules, and a gun with a manual safety is also safe unless you don't follow basic safety rules.

You appear to have missed my point completely. I'll say it yet again: a manual safety sometimes gives people the luxury of practicing unsafe gun handling techniques with fewer consequences. For example: you can get away with always keeping your finger on the trigger of a loaded gun if it has an engaged manual safety. With a Glock, most people are more likely to be careful with it because they know it will fire when the trigger is pulled.

Guns don't cause people to ignore basic safety rules any more than they cause people to kill people.

Just as a gun can make it easier to kill people, a gun with a manual safety can make it easier to ignore basic safety rules. I see it every day. It's far easier to teach new shooters to keep their finger off the trigger when you tell them the gun they're holding has no safety and will fire when the trigger is pulled.

I'm guessing the reason I've gotten so much flak for making this point is that people somehow think that I'm against manual safeties and I think that the Glock is a superior design. But that's not the case at all. Every good design has its pros and cons: a con of the Glock is that it's easier to fire accidentally because it has no manual safety. But because of this, many people are more conscientious when handling Glocks.

[skeeter]

By far the Glock is the way to go. I would move up to the Glock 27 (40S&W) if it were I.

[dakota.potts]

My mom got the 238 for her carry gun, having never fired a gun before.

It is small, comfortable, and easy to use. The slide is easy to operate. After shooting a .40, the recoil felt like nothing in my hands. Similar to an old gas blowback airsoft gun I had fired (not that it really kicked so little, but the recoil was that smooth).

I've never used the others but the 238 is one that's worth looking at in my opinion.

[led0321]

IMO the longer handle is harder to conceal than the thickness of the slide.

[thedudeabides]

I like the P238 because it's not plastic, it's very accurate, nearly all come with night sights, and it operates like a 1911 (allowing for carry in Condition 1).

Glock 26 holds a lot more rounds, but it's a fatty. Glock doesn't understand the concept of single stack, except with the G36.

The shield is single stack, 9mm and probably the best of both worlds since it steps up to a 9mm.

My money would go to the Sig, tho, it's by far the best gun.

[AK103K]

You appear to have missed my point completely. I'll say it yet again: a manual safety sometimes gives people the luxury of practicing unsafe gun handling techniques with fewer consequences. For example: you can get away with always keeping your finger on the trigger of a loaded gun if it has an engaged manual safety. With a Glock, most people are more likely to be careful with it because they know it will fire when the trigger is pulled.

I understand where youre coming from, but I think you might be missing the point as well.


First and foremost, there is no "luxury of practicing unsafe gun handling techniques", you either do it right, or youre going to have problems.

Second, with a gun with a manual safety, the safety will be, or should be, off the second it clears the holster, or is picked up. Why would you leave it on? On or off, the gun is no different than any other gun, Glock included, and your finger stays off the trigger until the gun starts to come to bear on the target.

If youre counting on that safety to keep you safe while you put your finger on the trigger, youre just asking for serious trouble.

Just as a gun can make it easier to kill people, a gun with a manual safety can make it easier to ignore basic safety rules. I see it every day. It's far easier to teach new shooters to keep their finger off the trigger when you tell them the gun they're holding has no safety and will fire when the trigger is pulled.

Safety rules are safety rules, you either follow them, or you dont. What type safety the gun might have, means nothing.

Its far easier to teach someone that if the gun is in their hand, the safety should be off (assuming the gun has one), and if they touch the trigger, the gun will go off. Why instill bad habits?

I'm guessing the reason I've gotten so much flak for making this point is that people somehow think that I'm against manual safeties and I think that the Glock is a superior design.

This has nothing to do with gun design at all. It has to do with proper education and gun handling.

Every good design has its pros and cons: a con of the Glock is that it's easier to fire accidentally because it has no manual safety. But because of this, many people are more conscientious when handling Glocks.

The only con to any of them, is the person handling it. Im no more conscientious in handling a 1911 than I am a Glock or anything else. The rules are the rules, regardless. Dont touch the trigger until you intend to shoot. You always handle, holster, and treat the gun, as if it had no safety and a hair trigger.

[Theohazard]

First and foremost, there is no "luxury of practicing unsafe gun handling techniques", you either do it right, or youre going to have problems.

That's not true at all. There are plenty of gun owners out there who are completely unsafe with their weapons, but they get away with it for a while with nothing bad happening. I see it every day. Maybe they get lucky. Maybe they always keep their guns on safe. For whatever the reason, they haven't had a ND and shot themselves or anyone else yet.

If youre counting on that safety to keep you safe while you put your finger on the trigger, youre just asking for serious trouble.

Exactly! That's my whole point right there. This is the very reason why I think that sometimes (note I didn't say "always") a manual safety can make someone less safe; unsafe people often count on it to make the gun safe to handle.

Safety rules are safety rules, you either follow them, or you dont. What type safety the gun might have, means nothing.

That's true for people like you and me where safety has been engrained in us for decades. But not necessarily for someone with no training who has had it engrained in them by popular culture to put their finger on the trigger the moment they pick up a gun.

Its far easier to teach someone that if the gun is in their hand, the safety should be off (assuming the gun has one), and if they touch the trigger, the gun will go off. Why instill bad habits?

Of course that's what they should be taught. But how fast they retain the information is a different story. It's hard to teach someone to keep their finger off the trigger when they've done it (or seen it done) differently their whole lives. And I've found it easier to teach this on a weapon like the Glock that has no safety.

I agree that the rules are the rules and they should be followed the same way no matter what. But I'm talking about new shooters or people who have been gun owners all their lives who never learned basic safety. Untraining bad habits is a process, it doesn't happen immediately. And the design of the gun can make a difference in the mind of someone who practices unsafe gun handling.

[BigJakeJ1s]

Theo,

For this argument to have any merit, you have to compare how the same person might be more or less dangerous to himself or others with one gun vs the other. If you compare how different people react to different guns, you can't rule out that some people are just more reckless than others in the first place.

Saying a gun that has an additional safety feature causes a person that uses it to be more dangerous to themselves or others than they would be using a gun lacking that safety feature is ludicrous.

Note that I'm measuring "more dangerous" by the effects of their recklessness (e.g. deaths/injuries), not the degree to which they act recklessly. A more reckless person with a safer gun might even be less dangerous to himself and others than a less reckless person with a less safe gun.

Saying that a gun with fewer safety features would actually cause the same person to be more reckless is like saying a sedan makes a driver more reckless than when he drives a convertible, or that airbags would make him more reckless.

The only thing a "safer" gun might do is allow a reckless shooter to live longer without hurting/killing themselves or others. They were going to be reckless no matter which gun they used.

Andy

[Theohazard]

Saying a gun that has an additional safety feature causes a person that uses it to be more dangerous to themselves or others than they would be using a gun lacking that safety feature is ludicrous.

I never once said that it always would cause a person to be more unsafe: I simply stated that it could, and sometime does, cause certain people to be more unsafe, and I gave several examples of when and how. It's not ludicrous at all to say that an unsafe person might tend be more careless with one type of gun over another.

Saying that a gun with fewer safety features would actually cause the same person to be more reckless is like saying a sedan makes a driver more reckless than when he drives a convertible, or that airbags would make him more reckless.

I'm not saying that at all. What I'm saying is similar, but different in a fundamental way: A gun with more safety features CAN cause CERTAIN people to be more reckless, just as a very safe car with state-of-the-art safety features might encourage an irresponsible, reckless teenager to take chances he wouldn't normally take.

I don't know how to say this more clearly: Some people who practice unsafe gun handling skills sometimes use a weapon's manual safety to make the weapon safe, instead of using safe gun handling skills. This is a fact. I've seen it many, many times.

[BigJakeJ1s]

A gun with more safety features CAN cause CERTAIN people to be more reckless

Theo,

You do realize that you are making the same argument that the gun-control nuts make, don't you?

It's a cop-out! People are ALWAYS responsible for their own behavior (whether they're held responsible or not). They, not the gun nor the car, make the choice to be more reckless.

Oh, poor me! I'm just a helpless victim of my handgun with an extra safety! It made me be so reckless! Help me!

Andy

[Tactical Jackalope]

G26 or even better G19

[Theohazard]

You do realize that you are making the same argument that the gun-control nuts make, don't you?

Except I'm not blaming the gun at all, I'm still blaming the irresponsible person who is handling the gun recklessly. I'm merely offering an observation, not an excuse. If someone handles a gun with a manual safety more recklessly, it's their fault, not the gun's.

It's a cop-out! People are ALWAYS responsible for their own behavior (whether they're held responsible or not). They, not the gun nor the car, make the choice to be more reckless.

I agree completely. That doesn't change anything I've said so far. I'm not condoning anyone being reckless, I'm just noticing trends.

If someone is reckless and relies on a gun's safety to make the gun safe, they're still being completely reckless. Noticing trends is not the same as offering excuses for them.

[JimmyR]

OP, If you like the idea of pocket carrying, but would prefer a 9mm to a 380, perhaps you should look at the Kahr single stack CW/CM 9/40 series. I have the CM9 that I use for CC/BUG, and carry either ankle, IWB, or pocket. It's sized right to be able to carry multiple ways, making it easier to dress around my gun.

Of the three you mentioned, having not owned any, I would have to reccomend the Glock (and I can't believe I am saying this) because of its durability and available parts/accessories. The Shield is a great gun from what I have read from others, but Glock is still the more prevalent.

[1hogfan83]

If anyone were to pick a new compact gun today then I would have to say either an HK P2000SK or a Walther PPS. The HK is expensive but it will not fail no matter what, short of being out of ammo. The Walther is pretty much the same.

[breakingcontact]

Unsubscribe.