Shot placement is more important than caliber but...

[stroo]

If your wife will not carry any other gun, definitely get the .25. The first rule of gunfights is to have a gun.

if you can have her shoot it or one like it before you buy, that would be a good idea. The kick may be more than she expects.

Having said that, If she will carry almost anything else, it would be better. If you can get her to .380, .38 or 9mm, it would be much better.

A .25 is better than nothing though.

[jlangton]

In my opinion your better off with a high capacity (7 or 8 shot) 22 LR revolver, loaded with CCI mini-mags that a 25...a 25 is not BG stopper...!

That just might work if the assailants you're planning on dealing with aren't as tough as this 7 year old girl who will be walking around with one of those ferocious man stoppers in her head for the next week until the docs get around to removing it:

http://www.kcra.com/news/16775464/detail.html

She might not have noticed the shot at all when she was hit except for the ear ache it gave her.

Personally, I don't bet my life on that kind of ballistic performance.

If you choose to do so and end up using a .22 to try to resolve a real world encounter with a deadly assailant, please be sure to let us know how it works out .

Terrible comparison. This girl was struck from an unknown distance -at least far enough away that the person shooting was not seen,nor identified. This says NOTHING at all about the ballistics or effectiveness of any particular caliber-esp when comparing their use at defensive distances.
JL

[HerbM]

HerbM

Suggestion: the Glock 21 is a good gun, but as you say, can be a little big for most hands. Can I suggest that you spend about $100 and have someone do a grip reduction on the weapon? Dale Hunnicutt, here in Houston area does great ones. There are others as well. I personally did mine myself, but have had others done by Dale.

These people can help customize the grip to fit the hand. I had one person I taught pick up my daughter's (18yrs old) glock 34 that we had done and put down her other gun, went to the gun show, picked up a glock 34, took it over to Dale's booth, and one week later, had not only a gun she could shoot well, but fit perfectly in her hand.

JMO

Good suggestion if she were using this gun much or having trouble shooting it -- she only uses this for home invasion scenarios. She has her own .380 for most purposes. This is just something that she can get to in an emergency.

I don't want my Glock grips reduced -- I only a bit above average in height but i have really big hand

Thanks for helping and caring -- I always appreciate such even if I am unable to (immediately) use it.

[DoubleJ]

Saw an episode of The First 48 where a man was shot in the chest with a .22LR, once and died. I mean he dropped and was DRT. the perp said he shot him with the .22 cause he didn't think it would hurt him too bad, but would scare him good.
srsly.

and we've all heard of the Cop who was shot with a .22LR in which the round went through the arm hole of his vest and killed him DRT.

and we've all heard of the Car Salesman who shot the perp several times in the noggin with a .45ACP, and the round skipped off the skull and stayed directly under the skin.


I still wouldn't just let anyone flick a booger at me, but I'm still not gonna depend on a booger-flicker for self defense.

I don't want my Glock grips reduced -- I only a bit above average in height but i have really big hand

just one, really big hand??

[iratollah]

IIRC, handgun owners are statistically more likely to use their guns as a deterrent without ever firing the weapon. I'm certain that if someone points a .25 at you that the barrel will appear about the same diameter as a 155mm howitzer. While a .25 is better than nothing, I still doubt that most women will enjoy shooting them enough to spend any range time familiarizing themselves with the weapon.

[Excaliber]

Terrible comparison. This girl was struck from an unknown distance -at least far enough away that the person shooting was not seen,nor identified. This says NOTHING at all about the ballistics or effectiveness of any particular caliber-esp when comparing their use at defensive distances.
JL

Please note that there was no attempt at comparison of any kind. I merely responded to a contributor's unsupported opinion about the wisdom of opting for .22 rounds for defense with a news article detailing the results of a real life shooting of a person with the ammunition in question. There was no second fact pattern offered to match the information against.

According to the article I cited, the victim was close enough to hear the weapon's report, which doesn't carry very far. While it clearly wasn't a point blank shot, the impact on the injured party was consistent with many other .22 caliber wounds I've seen, including rifle fired shots to the forehead at about 50 feet. I have seen people killed with .22 caliber rounds, and I do not suggest that the circumstances in the article represented a scientifically valid, all variables controlled comparison with the effects of a close up .22 handgun shot. It was merely a convenient and timely way to illustrate that the real life ballistic performance of .22 long rifle rounds is not what I consider confidence inspiring for fight stopping applications.

Although I've been an LEO investigator or investigative commander at a goodly number of shootings, I make no representation that my opinions are perfect or the best available, and my feelings won't be hurt if yours are at variance with mine.

In the final analysis, we all choose our mentors, make our choices and live with the consequences when we meet the real wolves on the street.

[NcongruNt]

As others have mentioned, some folk opine that .22lr is a better caliber for defense than a .25ACP, due to the reduced frontal surface area, making it a better penetrator. Personally, I do not think I would ever carry something in that small of a caliber. as penetration and vital shots are much less likely than with larger common SD calibers. .380 is where I draw the line, and only as a backup weapon. In times of stress, it may be difficult to place a good enough shot to incapacitate someone, and repeated shots are more likely to be needed to stop a threat.

While a lot of people have been killed with .25 ACP rounds, the anecdotal evidence I have seen points to calculated criminal attacks where shot placement was easier to control. My mother was killed with a .25 ACP pistol, but it was execution-style with 6 rounds to the head. I don't have access to the autopsy reports (and haven't read them for myself), so I couldn't tell you whether it took multiple shots to be fatal or it was simply an emptying of the magazine that was cause for 6 rounds.

My advice is to talk it over with her about your concerns regarding the weak performance of the round, and let her decide on the pistol. Since this seems to be mainly a preference for comfort, perhaps some shopping around may necessary to find something in a caliber that performs better. The Taurus .25 pistols are quite compact, so you may be somewhat limited in what you can find that's small enough in a limited caliber. If you can find one, have her take a look at a Ruger LCP (or Kel-Tec P3AT, which is similar in size) and see what she thinks about it. I personally find the LCP to be pretty comfortable, even in my large hands, and the ergonomics of the grip are a considerable improvement from the P3AT. Something in .380 will give you considerably better ballistics than the .25 ACP (though you'll find people here who will dump all over it anyway, as it's not adequate enough in their opinions), and the market seems opening up considerably for these kinds of weapons. You're not likely to find something similar in size in any larger caliber except the Rohrbaugh, and even then the recoil is going to be stiff, and the gun would cost you well over a grand. If you can convince her to carry something a little larger in 9mm or better, that would be preferable, but that seems to be counter to what she is wanting. At any rate, carrying something is better than carrying nothing (IMO), but better firepower will help in the event that she has to defend herself. It's a good idea to let her make an informed choice for herself.

[Will938]

I can see two issues for this that might need to be addressed separately. First, as someone pointed out full frame guns tend to be more controllable, but bigger calibers usually have more force and push further off target/have less capacity. This is why I went with 9mm and bought a P228. Huge capacity, +P JHP offers the same penetration and from what I've seen expansion as well, full frame is easy to keep on target and fire rapidly in an accurate manner, the more powerful +P does worsen the kick a bit but less than larger calibers. Seems to be the best all around concept to me, larger frame smaller caliber (so long as that particular caliber has good ballistics).

The second issue is one of comfort and convenience. I wanted something very concealable so I bought a P3AT, it's pretty much spot on for comfort. In fact I find that I CC that thing more than the "perfect" full frame pistol I bought. Then again they call it a back up gun for a reason and I would rather have the P228 if anything went down. So then I'm reduced to having a visual deterrent with less capacity and worse ballistics which is harder to aim and more likely to jam. Choice seems easy, but people forget about these things and go for comfort instead. Dare I say that many people will stop carrying if they aren't comfortable, so whatever she gets has to be unobtrusive. This is easier if she plans on carrying in her purse, but I kid you not my sister quit carrying a 4oz can of OC I got her because it got in the way of that more important crap in her purse. Well, that is until her dog got mauled while she was out walking it.

[KD5NRH]

FWIW a Kel Tec P32 has a pretty stout and uncomfortable recoil...

You'd have a hard time convincing my wife of that.

She hates the recoil of a Bersa .380, but shoots her P32 quite well.

[stevie_d_64]

Anything is better than nothing...

Time, training and practice should alieviate any perceived deficiencies in anyone's capabilities and resolve in the serious pursuit of that "self defense mindset"...

I believe the .38 is probably one of the most unsung calibers out there these days...Just my opinion...

[mr.72]

FWIW a Kel Tec P32 has a pretty stout and uncomfortable recoil...

You'd have a hard time convincing my wife of that.
She hates the recoil of a Bersa .380, but shoots her P32 quite well.

Well I don't dispute that at all. I was just making the point that stepping up in caliber doesn't always result in more harsh or uncomfortable recoil. Or in other words, felt recoil is much about the pistol design as it is about the caliber.

One day we were out at the range and between myself and my friend we had the following:

Kel-Tec P32 .32
Kahr PM9 9mm
Beretta Cheetah .380
Sig 232 .380 (similar to a Bersa Thunder .380 AFAICT from the pictures)
Kahr CW9 9mm
M&W Sigma SW9VE 9mm

Of all guns, the Sigma had the least felt recoil and was the most comfortable to shoot. It was the biggest of the poly guns. The Kel-Tec P32 was worst of the poly guns most likely because of its small size. But the worst of all for recoil feel in your hand was the Sig 232 which beat the crud out of my right thumb like I was getting hit with a tack hammer every time. It's a lightweight, alloy frame gun that flexes little and doesn't dampen the recoil much at all. The bigger, heavier Beretta Cheetah was much lighter in recoil.

So I'm not surprised that a P32 has less felt recoil than a Bersa .380.

[Excaliber]

I believe the .38 is probably one of the most unsung calibers out there these days...Just my opinion...

+1.

With a huge variety of loadings to balance effectiveness with acceptable recoil and a very wide selection of easily concealed and easy to operate carry packages, this caliber is a "can't go wrong" starting point for someone just getting into CCW. It's a solution that is very concealable, comfortable to carry, and uses a cartridge that has performed reasonably well in countless incidents over many years.

[yerasimos]

I believe the .38 is probably one of the most unsung calibers out there these days...Just my opinion...

Another +1.

With a huge variety of loadings to balance effectiveness with acceptable recoil and a very wide selection of easily concealed and easy to operate carry packages, this caliber is a "can't go wrong" starting point for someone just getting into CCW. It's a solution that is very concealable, comfortable to carry, and uses a cartridge that has performed reasonably well in countless incidents over many years.

I have a nuanced disagreement with this.

The ammunition and firearm manufacturers sought to cater to growing numbers of concealed carry licensees by introducing lighter-weight, compact, easy-to-carry and easy-to-conceal revolvers as well as ammunition tailor-made for moderated recoil and improved terminal ballistics from these handguns’ shorter barrels. And revolvers are simple to operate and do not require much hand or upper body strength to accomplish the basic manual of arms.

However, the less useful sights (as they sometimes come from the factory), shorter sight radius, lack of recoil spring, and smaller grips, along with the light weight that makes carry easier, conspire against the casual user (not necessarily the same as “someone just getting into CCW�---but I reckon there is a fair amount of overlap) from becoming truly proficient with these types of handguns.

In addition, I am starting to believe that grip and hand strength may play more of a role in controlling revolvers during recoil than with semi-automatic pistols. The semi-automatic pistols frequently use higher-pressure cartridges and do not bleed pressure via a cylinder gap, yet they have recoil-absorbing springs and their frames allow the user to position his hands more effectively to control remaining recoil and muzzle flip. On the other hand, the irregular surfaces and other characteristics of revolvers require a user to place his hands further away from the bore axis, and the lack of recoil spring gives the user an unmitigated, sharper recoil experience.

Barrel length and composition may play a major role here. In my (limited) experience, shooting .357 Magnums from a 4� barreled, >35oz stainless-steel revolver was more comfortable than shooting .38 Special powder-puffs from a 2� barreled, 12oz alloy snubnose sold to the public as a great handgun for concealed carry. The 4� barreled .357 Magnum also enjoyed a disparity in muzzle blast and flash; if the bullet barely missed a malandro, then either the sound would prompt involuntary elimination from bladder and/or colon, or he would be set aflame. Understandably, some people may have difficulty getting over the blast and flash while pulling the trigger on such a weapon, or would find it difficult or uncomfortable to conceal such a handgun. However, I reckon a similarly dimensioned .38 Special would not have such overwhelming blast and flash, or may be slightly lighter and more comfortable to carry.

For these reasons, I do not believe a lightweight, snubnose .38 Special is a good starting point for someone beginning to CCW. A heavier, longer-barreled .38 Special revolver may work well if such a person can conceal it and is comfortable doing so.

[Excaliber]

[the less useful sights (as they sometimes come from the factory), shorter sight radius, lack of recoil spring, and smaller grips, along with the light weight that makes carry easier, conspire against the casual user (not necessarily the same as “someone just getting into CCW�---but I reckon there is a fair amount of overlap) from becoming truly proficient with these types of handguns.i]

The 4� barreled .357 Magnum also enjoyed a disparity in muzzle blast and flash; if the bullet barely missed a malandro, then either the sound would prompt involuntary elimination from bladder and/or colon, or he would be set aflame.[/i]

I have to agree with Yerasimos that a .357 magnum revolver does produce impressive blast and flash, but I took his remarks about the laxative effects of a near miss as very much tongue in cheek. The reality is that loud noises and bright flashes from missed shots don't stop fights. A miss is a miss. Only hits count.

I very deliberately did not recommend a specific .38 revolver barrel length, grip size, construction material, or weight because, as yerasimos pointed out, there are somee combinations that would not be a good choice for someone new to CCW. I certainly agree that the lightest guns with rudimentary sights and very small grips are difficult to handle well under recoil from well chosen defensive rounds and are an unnecessary handicap when one is learning to handle weapons. On the other hand, all steel offerings like the Ruger SP101 make excellent first revolvers, and the addition of a properly chosen set of aftermarket grips to fit the individual shooter's hand can make a good package even better.

To be clear here, I do not recommend that everyone start CCW with a .38 revolver. I do agree with stevie_d_64 that in today's semiauto saturated world the .38 is one of the most unsung (read: no longer sexy) calibers available, but there are many fine semiauto weapons in 9mm, .40 and .45 ACP that are also excellent for initial CCW use. There is a combination out there to fit every new shooter's needs and likes.

One couldn't go wrong with any of the Glocks, Springfield XD's, Smith & Wesson M&P's, or Kahrs in these calibers, and I generally recommend that a new shooter try out both these guns and a couple all steel .38 revolvers in different configurations and start out with what they can shoot best. Any of the compact versions of any of these guns can be readily concealed on the vast majority of body types with a little bit of thought and effort. Like most of us the folks who are new to our ranks will continue to refine their likes and dislikes over time, and will eventually settle on a weapon / carry system that works well for them.

As I've said before, I personally don't recommend guns in calibers below .38 special for defensive use by people I care about because cartridges below this threshold have been overwhelmingly documented as delivering very poor fight stopping performance in critical incidents way too much of the time. Yes, I know they sometimes get the desired results when either an attack is deterred by the weapon's presence alone, or the stars align right and once in a very great while a bad guy is stopped with one of these guns (usually by emptying the magazine into a single individual). It just doesn't happen often enough to make me feel good about recommending that option as a viable way to prepare to save oneself or one's family from a vicious attack. Others are certainly entitled to believe otherwise, but, since I'd feel really bad if someone who relied on me for advice was badly hurt or killed because the advice I gave was fatally flawed, I stick to my guns on this one.

Small guns for backup are a different story. Something like a Ruger LCP in .380 would not be a bad choice for this purpose if circumstances were such that a larger caliber weapon couldn't (or wouldn't) be carried. It won't work any better in this capacity than it would as a primary gun, but it does fit the bill for something is better than nothing.

[KD5NRH]

I have to agree with Yerasimos that a .357 magnum revolver does produce impressive blast and flash, but I took his remarks about the laxative effects of a near miss as very much tongue in cheek. The reality is that loud noises and bright flashes from missed shots don't stop fights. A miss is a miss. Only hits count.

Well, according to my wife, the gap flash from the Blackhawk is quite painful at close range, though I didn't notice any stains on the carpet

The exterior surface of the wall also had some scorching from the muzzle flash, which is fairly impressive considering it had to pass through the little hole in the sheetrock and a couple inches of insulation to get there.