Well it's official . . .

[dales]

.380 is a very logical choice. I'm surprised that you feel it is necessary where you are.

I used to love so go up to the pistol range and burn off two boxes of 9mm shells for a little relaxation.

yrs,
rubato

The .357 MAG is my favorite handgun round.

Of course, I'm partial to revolvers.

[Timster]

wait until I get home ruboto. And I will homeschool you on the fine art of recreational firearms.

The 9mm is so impractical as to be obsolete for sport shooting. Even for the complete neophyte.
Mind you, I am giving you the benefit of the doubt of
having discharged a firearm in your lifetime...

[Timster]

thank you dales!

[rubato]

wait until I get home ruboto. And I will homeschool you on the fine art of recreational firearms.

The 9mm is so impractical as to be obsolete for sport shooting. Even for the complete neophyte.
Mind you, I am giving you the benefit of the doubt of
having discharged a firearm in your lifetime...

'


Horses for courses.

One person's purpose in buying a gun is different from an others'.

There is endless tiresome bloviation about the benefits of one hand gun vs another. Mindless pollution of the intellectual firmament.

yrs,
rubato

[loCAtek]

ThX Sue, I've never raised my own chickens and the Latinos I talked to always insisted you needed to have a rooster too.


Hmmm, somebody can't read a dictionary ;

naturalist

nat·u·ral·ist   /ˈnætʃərəlɪst, ˈnætʃrə-/ Show Spelled[nach-er-uh-list, nach-ruh-] Show IPA
noun
1.a person who studies or is an expert in natural history, especially a zoologist or botanist.

It's good to have students who are interesting in asking questions, not passing judgments.

...I had heard atheists preferred it if you admitted 'you didn't know'; as in, 'I didn't know all of the full definitions of naturalist' ...guess that's a myth too.

[Liberty1]

One person's purpose in buying a gun is different from an others'.

OMG I agree with Rubato.

I have different guns for difference purposes. My absolute favorite is a Ruger 10/22 rifle, its fun and 22 ammo is cheap to shoot.

I have a 9mm just for fun too, a MAC 11/9

Then the others are for hunting or protection purposes.

[Jarlaxle]

Jarl,

Try reading my post again. A shotgun isn't any good for concealed carry. I know all the arguments for keeping one for home protection - I read gun enthusiast magazines & forums, too. I only want to buy one gun at present, so a handgun it is.

Never even implied having the shotgun for anything other than home defence. Why are you so defensive all of a sudden?

And my apologies for not explaining the recoil effect satisfactorily for you; of course it's a little gun and no, it wasn't at all difficult for me to handle. It's not very accurate at any distance, is my point, because it's very light - that's what I meant by kick, not that it knocked me on my ass or anything.

You should carry something else. Having something that is that innacurate is worse than not having a gun at all!

My father had a whole collection of shotguns, rifles & handguns and I had no trouble with managing the recoil of far larger caliber weapons as a teenaged girl. Ever shot a 500? I have. Stayed on my two feet just fine.

I have shot my uncle's .500 Smith & Wesson, his Casull, and his Holland & Holland elephant rifle, a side by side double in .577 Nitro.

I can also take apart an M16, clean it and put it back together in short order. Can you?

Never fired an M-16, though after shooting one recently, my next firearm purchase will probably be an M-14.

Can the sexism, please. Lots of girls know how to use guns.

Can the defensiveness, please. My wife is as much of a shooter as I am, my grandmother was a competitive skeet & trapshooter into her 70's.

[BoSoxGal]

My defensiveness was in direct proportion to your condescension. Let's chalk it up to misperception.

I clearly stated in the OP that I was getting geared up for concealed carry. Hence your advice about shotguns was nonsensical to me.

As it turns out, at 10 feet I was able to rapidly fire all six shots into the target circle, two in the bullseye, after just a few shots to get used to the gun. That's adequate for my needs. Further away than 10 feet, I don't see the threat as imminent. I'm not taking a human life unless absolutely necessary.

[The Hen]

Hmmm, somebody can't read a dictionary ;

naturalist

nat·u·ral·ist   /ˈnætʃərəlɪst, ˈnætʃrə-/ Show Spelled[nach-er-uh-list, nach-ruh-] Show IPA
noun
1.a person who studies or is an expert in natural history, especially a zoologist or botanist.

What studies are you undertaking?

[Gob]

Can't be very good studies, (or maybe she’s just pretty thick,) if at her age she doesn't realise that ovulation can occur without insemination.

[quaddriver]

My defensiveness was in direct proportion to your condescension. Let's chalk it up to misperception.

I clearly stated in the OP that I was getting geared up for concealed carry. Hence your advice about shotguns was nonsensical to me.

As it turns out, at 10 feet I was able to rapidly fire all six shots into the target circle, two in the bullseye, after just a few shots to get used to the gun. That's adequate for my needs. Further away than 10 feet, I don't see the threat as imminent. I'm not taking a human life unless absolutely necessary.

Now do this:

stand 5 yards away, no more, no less. gun at side, not cocked. scream at the poster to get back, scream LOUDLY, like you are being attacked. scream louder and louder while someone shouts at you until your heart rate is up.

then snap up the gun and empty it.

let us know if ANY shots hit the paper, let alone the target, let alone springfield.

its a little lesson Ive taught at the range. In other words, its far easier for a person of novice skill to lay one in there from 300yards if time is no object, but seasoned vets can and do fail the above scenario.

most defense actions will be MORE intense and confused than what I just gave you.

sobering.

I hope.

[loCAtek]

I agree with Quad, and remember it's not about speed; it's about accuracy. Letting someone get in that close, means they could close that distance and disarm you ...even if they've been hit. Believe me, I just wrote about it in 'Alpha of Arabia'; strong emotions or drugs, can mean they'll still keep fighting ...this why you shoot to kill, not shoot to wound.

[loCAtek]

What studies are you undertaking?

nat·u·ral·ist   
1.a person who studies ... natural history

Wiki

"Natural history focuses on where organisms are and what they do in their environment, including interactions with other organisms. [8]

G.A. Bartholomew: "A student of natural history, or a naturalist, studies the world by observing plants and animals directly.

I humbly began being a volunteer surveyor this year, for the Silicon Valley Audubon society; keeping tabs on the Burrowing Owls. My first observations were posted in Happy Trails. I'm afraid ovulation isn't something I can watch directly.

[The Hen]

Thank you.

But you needn't have repeated what you said after my quote, that was exactly why I was asking.

[quaddriver]

I agree with Quad, and remember it's not about speed; it's about accuracy. Letting someone get in that close, means they could close that distance and disarm you ...even if they've been hit. Believe me, I just wrote about it in 'Alpha of Arabia'; strong emotions or drugs, can mean they'll still keep fighting ...this why you shoot to kill, not shoot to wound.

that would have been my next point. at 5 yards, its already too late, even for a seasoned vet. given simple reaction time and decision making 10 yards should be considered the minimum. we do the requalifies for LEOs at 15 yards with 80 minimum passing grade. it usually takes a couple boxes of ammo for even an on duty officer to get up to speed.

now some have taken those facts and use it as the base argument for why home defense is useless. But the other reality is, noise, flashes and smoke also seem to work as a deterrent, not everyone attacking you in your house (after you exercise your duty to retreat) is a trained pro.

[Rick]

380 a niece little piece, ammos cheap and readily available, it's got a good heft and light recoil and makes a big enough bang to send em scurrying.

Good choice...

[Liberty1]

All this talk about big guns is nonsense. I fully agree with BSGs gun choice and her statement about immenent threat, farther than 10 feet and you could have legal issues and I would question the immenent threat.

First, who's gonna carry a .357, or a 40 S&W, a polymer small frame 380 is perfect. When I go hunting I don't carry my .357 because of weight, I use my wifes snub nose S&W J-frame 38. I figure if I cant scare a bear or a cat with the noise, it's still not an immenent threat until it's within range.

Like I said on the first page of this, if you are worried about the effectiveness of the 380, use mag-safe ammo.


http://www.magsafeonline.com/

[quaddriver]

"I use an .88 magnum. It shoots thru schools."

[rubato]

One person's purpose in buying a gun is different from an others'.

OMG I agree with Rubato.

I have different guns for difference purposes. My absolute favorite is a Ruger 10/22 rifle, its fun and 22 ammo is cheap to shoot.

I have a 9mm just for fun too, a MAC 11/9

Then the others are for hunting or protection purposes.

There you go. I wanted something in a medium caliber (fun to shoot) and 9mm shells are cheap. Very few people can shoot worth shit with a handgun anyway.



yrs,
rubato

[loCAtek]

IMO Her choice of firearm is good because of its concealability; and it's stopping power should be fine. However, I disagree with training at only ten feet. You can start at that and move the target out. There's a number of urban scenarios where the threat will be further out ...and don't wait for imminent. The police don't. Rack, draw and sight, as soon as you think there is a threat. Like Lib says, that should be all the warning you need to give. If the assailant sees that and still advances; then you know the threat is imminent and use force. Don't reduce your chances of saving yourself, by giving him the upperhand.