No, with the safety of a BHP or CZ, there's no fiddling required. Your grip is over the safety and you ride the safety in your hand. Your firing grip applies pressure and the safety is moved to the off position. Once you learn to grip such guns properly, the safety is a complete and total non-issue.
Best 9mm Pistol for Self Defense?
- Thread starter SuperCubPilot
- Start date
- Status
No, with the safety of a BHP or CZ, there's no fiddling required. Your grip is over the safety and you ride the safety in your hand. Your firing grip applies pressure and the safety is moved to the off position. Once you learn to grip such guns properly, the safety is a complete and total non-issue.
astra600
Member
I think Tirod is s pot on. I'm looking for a pistol to transition from my CZ75 to a simple. slim, pull the trigger pistol, in 9mm. I carry the CZ with hammer down. The DA is so smooth and light - compared to others I've tried - I see no reason to be fighting an adrenalin burst and trying to get the safety off. The safety is not a problem issue, either. when I'm playing shoot up the desert. I see no reason for night sights. If you're in a dark bedroom/house and can't see the target night sights won't do any thing but reflect off your face. He'll see you. If he is silhouetted and you KNOW he doesn't belong there, then they could be handy. Outside it depends on what your habits are. Some towns have very few/no street lights. A laser won't light him up either. A light is best if you don't mind the added bulk. But Massad Ayoob says pointing a light with a gun attached to it is a felony Not the light, of course, pointing the gun at someone to see if they are a threat. All that stuff aside. No one has heard of a limp wrist issue with Glocks. I've never held a Glock. I certainly don't know. I do practice with my weak hand and it's really not that hard. If you like it, you've done your homework, go get it.
SuperCubPilot
Member
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2014
- Messages
- 12
Like I said though, if I could be convinced that the Glock's sensitivity to limp wristing shouldn't keep me from getting one, I would go with that. I want to be convinced that the Glock is the way to go.
I have had at least a half dozen Glocks over the past 20 years and none of them ever had a limp wristing problem, I only shoot 9mm, 40, and 45. Never has one failed me in any way. I have had the following, a 26,27,23,30,19,21. I currently have a 18 yr old 30, and a 5 yr old 26. I keep a mag from a 19 in my 26 with night sites, for the nightstand.
The guns are all "recoil" operated, so they require some resistance to operate. Glock designs the gun to operate over a wide range of parameters. If they put a light enough spring to totally eliminate the possibility of limp wristing with standard pressure 115gr loads that don't generate enough recoil, it'll batter itself with plus p or may start have feeding issues.
One thing that'll keep the possibility of limp wristing to a minimum is to shoot some nice hot plus p.
One thing that'll keep the possibility of limp wristing to a minimum is to shoot some nice hot plus p.
Ed Ames
Member
Really? You want us to convince you? About a gun that is used by millions of people? About something you saw on a tv show?
Have you handled any of these guns?
Have you handled any of these guns?
45_auto
Member
ed ames said:
It's worse than that. He's not even talking about a TV show, but something he saw on the youtube.
The "Military Arms Channel" he refers to is a bunch of youtube videos.
http://www.youtube.com/user/Sturmgewehre
MIL-DOT
member
Apologies if someone mentioned this already, but I only read the first two pages of the thread.
Many posters have expressed confusion about the OP's concern about the supposed cracking of CZ frames. As chance would have it, I stumbled onto something earlier today about problems with the frames of CZ clones made by Tanfoglio (which I think make the EAA Witness and Israeli Baby Eagle/Jericho CZ clones.)
That could be what the OP was referencing, because I also haven't ever heard about these issues with CZ.
Many posters have expressed confusion about the OP's concern about the supposed cracking of CZ frames. As chance would have it, I stumbled onto something earlier today about problems with the frames of CZ clones made by Tanfoglio (which I think make the EAA Witness and Israeli Baby Eagle/Jericho CZ clones.)
That could be what the OP was referencing, because I also haven't ever heard about these issues with CZ.
Says it all. Though I personally don't like or own Glocks, they are exceptionally well made guns with an outstanding service record and an enviable reputation for reliability. I feel no need to convince anyone of the gun's "limp wristing" tendencies. It's a semi auto.
Ed Ames
Member
The '75 uses the slide lock shaft as a stressed part of the action. It isn't unique in that but it does mean the slide lock can be considered a wear item that will need to be replaced every so often if the gun is used heavily. The stress placed on the slide lock pin is transfered to the frame where the pin passes through holes on either side of the frame.
I have heard from several sources that some early CZ75 (non-B models) had overssized slide lock holes that would eventually cause cracking issues. I don't know if that is factual, but it is plausible. It is also irrelevant to current production guns. On the ssubject of irrelevant: There are a few people that point to photos of a different model ('85) with cracks at those holes, which while it shares the same basic design is not the same gun.
Oh.
Maybe the OP lives somewhere that doesn't allow quick and easy ownership of firearms. If so, I guess watching youtube videos makes as much sense as people pouring over the old gun magazines...but only if you watch videos from many different people and take them all with a huge grain of salt. If the OP isn't legally restricted in some way (one gun per lifetime or whatever) it would be much better to just go buy one and use it for a bit. Experience > youtube.
My guess is you have never owned one, right? None, repeat none of mione have
EVER missed a beat. Not one stove pipe, nothing but bang bang bang. So much glock hate, mainly by those who just read about them. There is a reason why most all law enforcement use them. I find that most, not all but most who have "sworn off" never had one.
That said, I stick to gen 3, not on purpose, just all I have had were Gen 3.
Russellc
I believe the OP's concern was about limp wristing due to injury.
That implies the encounter has already gone wrong and many of the clues that imminent danger was at hand were ignored. Therefore, shooting a firearm with the injured hand in reaction to a lethal threat is basically trying to fix things already gone badly.
Buy the Glock, then, train with competent shooters. Obtain or buy a book titled "The Gift of Fear," which explains that we see danger coming along quite readily, what we have working against us is our own disbelief. If you are taking in everybody as being a non-threat, you pass over the ones attempting that ruse as part of their ambush.
You let them get close enough to injure and missed all the clues.
A gun isn't the solution when awareness, or a lack of it, is the problem. Shooting a gun with an injury isn't the best answer, and certainly, choosing one based on that criteria isn't going to offer the best solution.
I sold my G19C precisely because it was a fairly long DA trigger. Having carpal tunnel, it and the LCP I also carried were becoming difficult to comfortably fire. After 61 years of wrenching, remodeling, and keyboarding, the hands aren't what they used to be. I determined that a SA trigger would be the better choice, and that a safety would be required. Since I carried the 1911 and M9 on duty in the Reserves, I've used both, all the caveats about "The safety will get you killed" or "Firing under stress confuses you" miss the point - you see it coming, get the gun out and start controlling the situation. It goes to waiting far too long in the presence of a threat, and having to many internet lawyers telling us the bar is set very high when it comes to defending yourself.
There is also the issue of how did the entire episode be allowed to happen? Again, awareness is the key - don't go or be where danger is likely to happen. If that's the desire, then don't expect that many LEO academies will accept your application once the psych interviews are finished. If you are looking for trouble, the Police don't want you either.
Most of us choose to live where we will never experience a street gun battle, so worrying about limpwristing a Glock with an injured hand runs contrary to normal patterns of behavior. And if you need to be able to shoot one with a barely functional hand, then SA will do the better job. Hopefully you will still have a thumb to push off the safety. If not, I suspect you won't be using that hand at all. Therefore, and ambidextrous one and training shooting with the off hand would be better solutions.
There is another very real issue - we buy the gun, five years later the new is worn off, we've learned things, the gun isn't all what we thought. Or worse - there has been injury to the hand from all the other causes in life, and it's not as easy as it used to be. Or their had been other injury, a heavy belt on the hips with a double stack magazine isn't something you can tolerate 16 hours a day. Cops can't, they've been buying suspenders to wear under their uniform shirt, and many simply have to find other work where they won't be in pain all day from it. Heavy gun belts are not a positive virtue. Changing what gun is carried will happen.
I wouldn't put too much into it, buy the one you like, and if it's still the only one carried twenty years from now, it will be one of the very few that happens to. Most of us have to change and move on.
That implies the encounter has already gone wrong and many of the clues that imminent danger was at hand were ignored. Therefore, shooting a firearm with the injured hand in reaction to a lethal threat is basically trying to fix things already gone badly.
Buy the Glock, then, train with competent shooters. Obtain or buy a book titled "The Gift of Fear," which explains that we see danger coming along quite readily, what we have working against us is our own disbelief. If you are taking in everybody as being a non-threat, you pass over the ones attempting that ruse as part of their ambush.
You let them get close enough to injure and missed all the clues.
A gun isn't the solution when awareness, or a lack of it, is the problem. Shooting a gun with an injury isn't the best answer, and certainly, choosing one based on that criteria isn't going to offer the best solution.
I sold my G19C precisely because it was a fairly long DA trigger. Having carpal tunnel, it and the LCP I also carried were becoming difficult to comfortably fire. After 61 years of wrenching, remodeling, and keyboarding, the hands aren't what they used to be. I determined that a SA trigger would be the better choice, and that a safety would be required. Since I carried the 1911 and M9 on duty in the Reserves, I've used both, all the caveats about "The safety will get you killed" or "Firing under stress confuses you" miss the point - you see it coming, get the gun out and start controlling the situation. It goes to waiting far too long in the presence of a threat, and having to many internet lawyers telling us the bar is set very high when it comes to defending yourself.
There is also the issue of how did the entire episode be allowed to happen? Again, awareness is the key - don't go or be where danger is likely to happen. If that's the desire, then don't expect that many LEO academies will accept your application once the psych interviews are finished. If you are looking for trouble, the Police don't want you either.
Most of us choose to live where we will never experience a street gun battle, so worrying about limpwristing a Glock with an injured hand runs contrary to normal patterns of behavior. And if you need to be able to shoot one with a barely functional hand, then SA will do the better job. Hopefully you will still have a thumb to push off the safety. If not, I suspect you won't be using that hand at all. Therefore, and ambidextrous one and training shooting with the off hand would be better solutions.
There is another very real issue - we buy the gun, five years later the new is worn off, we've learned things, the gun isn't all what we thought. Or worse - there has been injury to the hand from all the other causes in life, and it's not as easy as it used to be. Or their had been other injury, a heavy belt on the hips with a double stack magazine isn't something you can tolerate 16 hours a day. Cops can't, they've been buying suspenders to wear under their uniform shirt, and many simply have to find other work where they won't be in pain all day from it. Heavy gun belts are not a positive virtue. Changing what gun is carried will happen.
I wouldn't put too much into it, buy the one you like, and if it's still the only one carried twenty years from now, it will be one of the very few that happens to. Most of us have to change and move on.
armoredman
Member
Forgive me, but I had to step in on this one...
Most LE agencies use one because they can run well under $200 each for agency purchase.
Yes, I do know the exact amount that was paid for that contract, no I won't list it - you'll just get jealous.
Second, I can't stand Glocks - had more than one fail in front of or on me, including a cracked slide and mag catch that wouldn't hold a magazine for love or money. In the sane defense of these firearms mentioned in particular, one was a range rental gun, the other was a Dept issue training pistol that gets beat to death to the tune of at least 220 rounds per week.
Third, I qualify Expert of Distinguished Expert every year with the Glock 19 or Glock 17, depending which one the Armorer decides to use that year - I think I know my way around them.
I just plain don't like them, truth be told. They don't fit me. Nothing wrong with them, good solid, reliable sidearms, but I can't stand the trigger mechanism or the grip angle. I'd never tell anyone "don't buy a Glock!!!", but I wouldn't go out of my way to encourage one, either. I just know for a fact that the "Glock Perfection" advertising is exactly that - advertising.
I say again - there's nothing wrong with them - I just personally don't like them, that's all. I also don't like Ford cars or rap "music".
We return you to our regularly scheduled program.
Most LE agencies use one because they can run well under $200 each for agency purchase.
Yes, I do know the exact amount that was paid for that contract, no I won't list it - you'll just get jealous.Second, I can't stand Glocks - had more than one fail in front of or on me, including a cracked slide and mag catch that wouldn't hold a magazine for love or money. In the sane defense of these firearms mentioned in particular, one was a range rental gun, the other was a Dept issue training pistol that gets beat to death to the tune of at least 220 rounds per week.
Third, I qualify Expert of Distinguished Expert every year with the Glock 19 or Glock 17, depending which one the Armorer decides to use that year - I think I know my way around them.
I just plain don't like them, truth be told. They don't fit me. Nothing wrong with them, good solid, reliable sidearms, but I can't stand the trigger mechanism or the grip angle. I'd never tell anyone "don't buy a Glock!!!", but I wouldn't go out of my way to encourage one, either. I just know for a fact that the "Glock Perfection" advertising is exactly that - advertising.
I say again - there's nothing wrong with them - I just personally don't like them, that's all. I also don't like Ford cars or rap "music".
We return you to our regularly scheduled program.
45_auto
Member
You would think that our anti-gun, sensationalist news media (seems like at least once a week there's some big news about a public official cheating on his wife, finding his name in a madam's customer list, etc) would be all over stories like this. You think they don't cover them because Gaston pays them off?
surfinUSA
Member
I see this all of the time and its nonsense. And its usually from guys that don't like what their agency purchased or their only involvement with law enforcement is getting a traffic citation.
I've never seen a large department that didn't have rigorous testing requirements for the firearms they buy. Many smaller or local departments may piggyback off of the testing of the larger departments.
But I don't believe many if any agencies just go by price point. If that was the case all of the cops would carrying Ravens. Lol.
Glock got it's foothold in the LEO community because it emulated the handling and use of a revolver, which was the primary gun used in America by them. The 1911 and other auto pistols weren't well regarded - because command frankly thought their officers simply couldn't work them correctly. Too sophisticated.
The design of the gun itself had to conform to traditional use. Marketing was just another ploy, and in and of itself, I seriously doubt was much different than any other makers. After all, Glock distribution was new - so they hired those who had been already proven successful in the field hiring hookers and bribing officials. It's not like Gaston sent hordes of Austrian salesmen in. He hired those already in the know. Good business practice.
It obviously worked for the gun, I didn't see a whole bunch of departments carrying S&W 59's, 459's or such early on, but a pistol that worked just like a revolver was the breakthru.
So, to be blunt, if all it took was hookers to sell a gun in America, then I'm getting shortchanged, as are quite a few others. Then again, I'm told I talk in my sleep.
As for using a gun with an injured hand, it goes to being able to predict what the injury might be. Overall, look to those who suffer handicaps in strength of grip, missing digits or thumbs, a lack of range of motion, etc. A heavy DA trigger may not be the better option, some form of safety operable by finger not thumb, etc, and it gets very confusing or difficult to get all the features together in one design - and still keep it safe.
As they say, prevention is the better cure. Don't practice habits that would contribute to being in danger and receiving injury. Obtain the handgun that is optimized for your ability first, practice with it, and learn how to shoot off hand, too. Using another hand that isn't compromised is better than using one that is.
The design of the gun itself had to conform to traditional use. Marketing was just another ploy, and in and of itself, I seriously doubt was much different than any other makers. After all, Glock distribution was new - so they hired those who had been already proven successful in the field hiring hookers and bribing officials. It's not like Gaston sent hordes of Austrian salesmen in. He hired those already in the know. Good business practice.
It obviously worked for the gun, I didn't see a whole bunch of departments carrying S&W 59's, 459's or such early on, but a pistol that worked just like a revolver was the breakthru.
So, to be blunt, if all it took was hookers to sell a gun in America, then I'm getting shortchanged, as are quite a few others. Then again, I'm told I talk in my sleep.
As for using a gun with an injured hand, it goes to being able to predict what the injury might be. Overall, look to those who suffer handicaps in strength of grip, missing digits or thumbs, a lack of range of motion, etc. A heavy DA trigger may not be the better option, some form of safety operable by finger not thumb, etc, and it gets very confusing or difficult to get all the features together in one design - and still keep it safe.
As they say, prevention is the better cure. Don't practice habits that would contribute to being in danger and receiving injury. Obtain the handgun that is optimized for your ability first, practice with it, and learn how to shoot off hand, too. Using another hand that isn't compromised is better than using one that is.
armoredman
Member
You keep believing that, kid, and have a nice day.surfinUSA said:
BTW, unicorns aren't real, either, FYI. 
meanmrmustard
Member
Agree.You keep believing that, kid, and have a nice day.
I guess he didn't read the back story of the M16.
Warthog. It's a pig. It flies.
Fishman777
Member
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2007
- Messages
- 520
The guns you listed are all good...
Try renting them and decide what YOU like best. After trying almost every gun that I could get my hands on, and doing some internet research, I decided on The M&P platform for defense pistols. By internet research, I mean that I looked at hand gun trial results that were reported by different agencies. I also looked at the problems that were commonly reported. I also researched the materials used to produce the guns.
I didn't base things on other people's opinions. In the past I did this a lot. Every time that I bought something based on reputation, I eventually sold the guns that I bought. I wouldn't recommend that you base YOUR purchasing decision on what other people say or think. I also wouldn't base my purchasing decision on some asinine "torture" test performed by biased parties. I trust very little of what I read in gun magazines and from websites. With all of the advertising money at stake, I don't trust that ANY reviewers and "testers" will be completely honest. Especially not fan boy website torture tests.
To be honest, I'd be happy with any of the guns that you listed, but for my tastes, there isn't a pistol better than the M&P for all around ease of shooting, comfort, recoil management, durability, reliability, and accuracy. On top of these things, the frame is reinforced with a stainless steel chassis and all of the metal parts are stainless. The chambers are also "fully supported." Many aftermarket barrels that claim to fully support the case, don't fully support the case. The slide and barrels are also melonite treated and have a black, non-reflective finish. I also like the thumb safety option. I'm a careful person by nature, but anyone can make a mistake with a firearm. People with a lot more experience and training than I have had negligent discharges. I like the safety option.
Of the guns that you listed, I would go for the USP. Having said that, you'd be foolish to buy one because I LIKE them. I also like the other pistols on your list. I might also go with a CZ, if I could find a stainless model.
Try renting them and decide what YOU like best. After trying almost every gun that I could get my hands on, and doing some internet research, I decided on The M&P platform for defense pistols. By internet research, I mean that I looked at hand gun trial results that were reported by different agencies. I also looked at the problems that were commonly reported. I also researched the materials used to produce the guns.
I didn't base things on other people's opinions. In the past I did this a lot. Every time that I bought something based on reputation, I eventually sold the guns that I bought. I wouldn't recommend that you base YOUR purchasing decision on what other people say or think. I also wouldn't base my purchasing decision on some asinine "torture" test performed by biased parties. I trust very little of what I read in gun magazines and from websites. With all of the advertising money at stake, I don't trust that ANY reviewers and "testers" will be completely honest. Especially not fan boy website torture tests.
To be honest, I'd be happy with any of the guns that you listed, but for my tastes, there isn't a pistol better than the M&P for all around ease of shooting, comfort, recoil management, durability, reliability, and accuracy. On top of these things, the frame is reinforced with a stainless steel chassis and all of the metal parts are stainless. The chambers are also "fully supported." Many aftermarket barrels that claim to fully support the case, don't fully support the case. The slide and barrels are also melonite treated and have a black, non-reflective finish. I also like the thumb safety option. I'm a careful person by nature, but anyone can make a mistake with a firearm. People with a lot more experience and training than I have had negligent discharges. I like the safety option.
Of the guns that you listed, I would go for the USP. Having said that, you'd be foolish to buy one because I LIKE them. I also like the other pistols on your list. I might also go with a CZ, if I could find a stainless model.
Last edited:
If I were on a budget, and knew I had to stay with my budget. Not saying you are. If I knew this would be a home defense weapon and not double as a concealed carry pistol. I'd look long and hard at a 9mm Hi-Point. Cost is low, reliability is great, and full lifetime warranty. Ugly? Yes, but you are defending your life. You are not going to show the gun to the intruder before you shoot them.
Also, if for some reason your gun was taken depending on state laws you would not be out $500-$600 dollars. Probably like $189. The gun will shoot +P rounds, and is pretty accurate. Watch some youtube videos on the pistol. I think you will be amazed. They make a great .45 ACP, also.
Also, if for some reason your gun was taken depending on state laws you would not be out $500-$600 dollars. Probably like $189. The gun will shoot +P rounds, and is pretty accurate. Watch some youtube videos on the pistol. I think you will be amazed. They make a great .45 ACP, also.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
