Newbie questions on CHL gun selection

[neilp]

Some background: I'm a Brit who has lived here in TX for about 15 years. Love it here! I was taught to shoot by the British military many years ago. A few years ago I decided some target shooting would be a good pastime and went to the range many times renting everything they had to offer. I ended up buying a Springfield XD 9mm. Great pistol, never a problem with it, but my then wife (now ex!) decided she needed to sell it when I was out of town for a business trip.....

Now, 2 years later: I recently decided (despite having been laid off a few weeks ago) to treat myself to a trip to the range. What the heck happened to ammo prices!! So I decided a .22 pistol made sense and after some consideration purchased a SIG Mosquito. Cheap ammo but still feels like a "real" pistol. I can get a lot of practise for a few $$ and use it to train my 12 yo son in gun safety. No problems with it yet despite their mixed reputation for reliability.

But, now I'm thinking getting a CHL might be a good idea. I don't feel threatened unarmed but think it would be good to be able to carry if need arose. Better to have the CHL and not use it than to need it and not have the ability. I'd like to be able to carry something in the car without any question of my right to do so. I know some recent laws have changed things in this regard but they seem ambiguous to me and as a green card holder I can't risk any legal issues or y'all will kick me back!

I know I can't use the Mosquito for the CHL test (someone even told me you can't carry a .22 as a CHL, but I believe that to be inaccurate?). So another pistol is in order (oh dear .

So here's my issue. I want to buy something small and concealable to carry. A SIG 232 or Bersa 380 maybe? But are these pistol going to be accurate enough for the CHL test? Should I get a full size pistol to qualify on the test? Maybe another XD? Always wanted a 1911.... Cost is an issue, and I don't feel the need to own an arsenal, so I'd prefer to make one purchase. I'd like to be familiar and accurate with any carry pistol so I'd prefer to use the same pistol for the CHL test and afterwards. I have seen a good deal on a Bersa 380 and I'm very tempted (although 380 auto ammo availability seems questionable)

So the question is: Would you advise taking the CHL test with a smaller "carry" pistol or with a full size pistol?

Apologies for the long post, I appreciate any advice offered.

Neil

[boomerang]

The shooting test is easy peasy. Pretty much any gun is more than accurate enough.

[Beiruty]

Do not worry about the gun for the test. The instructor can provide you a a gun for the test for FREE. This is at least what the instructor (a Police Officer) offered.

To my knowledge, the state of taxes requires that you are "legal" resident for last 90 days to own a gun. Feds do require to furnish a permit residency card to get your CHL or even to purchase a firearm. Carrying in your car after September 2007 is allowed with no CHL as long as it concealed. If in doubt of legality, just pick a phone and call the TX DPS (department of public safety) and talk to a state trooper and he will clear any issue.

I recommend a PX4-Sub in 9mm or XDm-9 SC if you can afford, some $600 to spend.
Look into CZ or Taurus in 9mm if you like to be in 300-400 range.

[seamusTX]

NeilP, welcome to Texas and to the forum.

I'm sorry to hear about the layoff, which is a worry that all of us who "punch the clock" have these days. Good luck with finding a new job quickly.

As for the choice of carry piece, I suggest that you do a bit more reading in this forum and elsewhere.

Micro-size .380s like the Bersa Thunder are very easy to conceal, but they are difficult to shoot accurately. That said, it is possible to shoot anything accurately if you develop good technique and practice enough.

The power of .380 ACP is also marginal compared to 9 mm and up.

You would be amazed what people can conceal successfully -- everything from compact to full-size service pistols. The casual standards of dress here in Texas make it easier, unless you must wear a suit for work.

(someone even told me you can't carry a .22 as a CHL, but I believe that to be inaccurate?)

In Texas, you can legally carry any handgun when you have a CHL.

- Jim

[dewayneward]

As far as the gun to use for the CHL, it must be above (i belive) a .380) so a .22 wont work. Also, just to clarify another posters comment on carrying any gun. If you qualify (take the shooting part of the exam) at CHL with a revolver, you can ONLY carry a revolver. If you qualify with a semi automatic, then you can carry either a semi auto OR a revolver.

Any size gun is better than no gun at all in a defensive situation. I have read a number of reports where for some folks 17 rounds with a hi powered weapon (center mass hits) wont immediately stop them, so realize that there isnt a magic bullet (which I am sure that you know) that will drop them. that being said, a .22/.380 shot to the skull or spinal cord will stop the attacker. There is alot of literature out there that goes into more detail.

Hope that you join the ranks of the CHL's soon!!!

[seamusTX]

Also, just to clarify another posters comment on carrying any gun. If you qualify (take the shooting part of the exam) at CHL with a revolver, you can ONLY carry a revolver. If you qualify with a semi automatic, then you can carry either a semi auto OR a revolver.

That's true. I tend to forget about it because so few people qualify with a revolver -- about 2%.

- Jim

[USA1]

NeilP, welcome to Texas and to the forum.

I'm sorry to hear about the layoff, which is a worry that all of us who "punch the clock" have these days. Good luck with finding a new job quickly.

As for the choice of carry piece, I suggest that you do a bit more reading in this forum and elsewhere.

Micro-size .380s like the Bersa Thunder are very easy to conceal, but they are difficult to shoot accurately. That said, it is possible to shoot anything accurately if you develop good technique and practice enough.

The power of .380 ACP is also marginal compared to 9 mm and up.

You would be amazed what people can conceal successfully -- everything from compact to full-size service pistols. The casual standards of dress here in Texas make it easier, unless you must wear a suit for work.

(someone even told me you can't carry a .22 as a CHL, but I believe that to be inaccurate?)

In Texas, you can legally carry any handgun when you have a CHL.

- Jim

im pretty sure that the class requires a minimum caliber for test. cant rememberfor sure, but i think its 32cal or larger. after that you may carry anything you want. i have owned the bersa380 for a few years it is a great gun, but wile recently looking for ammo and having the clerk laugh when i asked for some 380ammo, i spotted a nice taurus millennium pro 45cal and decided to trade in the 380 for the 45. it is a bit larger but i know that it packs alot more punch. 45 ammo is still hard to find, but if youre willing to spend a little more $ you can find it at gun stores. by the way..when someone asks you if youre from texas,,, just say no ,but i got here as fast as i could !

[seamusTX]

Just for clarification, the caliber requirement for the CHL shooting proficiency test in .32. It is stated in GC §411.188.

- Jim

[Derekhie]

I recommend a PX4-Sub in 9mm or XDm-9 SC if you can afford, some $600 to spend.

I believe Beiruty meant an xd 9sc since they don't have an xdm sc as of yet. I was going to suggest the same thing though. A Springfield xd sub compact in 9mm or .40 would be a great choice. The xd .40sc is what I used for my chl class and I have well over 1500 rounds through it without a single problem.

[Mike from Texas]

You will get tons of great advice here. As to a carry weapon, were you not happy with your XD? If so maybe a clean used one would fit the bill. Don't over look a good used Glock such as a model 26 or 19 if you are partial to the 9mm. Another weapon that I have been interested in has been the Taurus Millenium Pro in 45ACP, but I am heavily biased toward the 45ACP round. Any of those choices should be able to be found in the $400 range.

[surprise_i'm_armed]

To Mike from Texas
You stated, roughly, "Didn't you like your XD?" Read neilp's opening post.
The ex wife sold it out from under him while he was out of town.

Neilp:
It's great that you are going down the CHL road. I'm surprised that you
question the quality of your Sig Mosquito. My impression of Sig's is that
they are expensive because they are high quality.

Yes, your Sig looks like a significant handgun, but the .22 caliber is way
too small for a carry pistol.

You need to move way up the size ladder for your carry gun. My carry gun
is a 9MM Taurus Millenium, which is fine since it's my "starter gun". But in
roughly the same size mid-frame package, Taurus offers the PT-140, a .40
caliber semi-auto, the PT-145 (10+1 capacity .45) and the PT-745 (6+1 capacity
.45 with a slimmer grip than the PT-145.) Any of those 3 will give you the
stopping power you may need since their rounds start with the critical number '4'.

I've put several hundred rounds through my PT-111 without any problems. It goes
bang every time. The Milleniums are larger than some pocket pistols but not as
large as a big boy 1911. I use pocket carry most of the time. I have a soft Uncle
Mike's pocket holster and carry in my right front pocket. It will also fit in the pocket
of cargo shorts.

That said, I consider my Taurus kind of like a dependable Ford. It's not the most
expensive gun, but it gets the job done.

If I had my 'druthers, I'd like to own a fancy Kimber 1911 maybe, but I likely won't
have one of those any sooner than I'll have a BMW M3!!!

[solaritx]

Although cost does not equal dependability, do not stake your life to the cheapest thing you can find. This is a good place to get information but try things out as well, when possible. I highly suggest that you even get a chance to shoot your possible weapon of choice in scenario type shooting like IDPA. It will quickly show you the strength and weakness of the weapon.

There is also a reason that the majority of those that carry weapons for a living go with the KISS principle in firearms. Glocks, S&W M&P's, XD's. When things go bad, fine motor skills decrease and finding the safety, etc can be forgotten IF ONE does not practice alot with the weapon.

Most people that carry and have multiple weapons find that IWB holsters behind the hip is the way to go and most find that one can carry a full sized weapon just as easy as a small one. (excluding pocket carry). This said, you will find that making hits on target, especially in stress situations is more consistent with the longer barrel weapon (full size weapon)

There are generally two ways to stop the "human machine" that is trying to do you bodily harm. Stop the computer (brain and spinal cord) Small targets, moving target and life/death stress = hard to hit target. The second is stop the hydraulics. (bleed out) As they loose blood and thus blood pressure, life systems shut down. The quicker you can do this, the quicker they no longer are a threat.......and there is the debate of all time. What bullet/caliber/etc does this job the best.

There is no real answer (IMO) but I highly suggest the LARGEST caliber that you can make multiple accurate shots is the caliber to use. A .22 that hits is more effective than a .44 mag that misses. That said, 9mm + P for me and my family is minimum. (I do carry a .38 snubby or a .32 Kel-Tec as a back-up in my pocket, but my carry gun is a full sized .45....either a Glock 21 or a 1911)

Some say that a .45 is hard to control, etc. My daughter has been shooting a .45 in IDPA and doing it well. She started with a 9mm glock when she was 12 and started shooting the .45 at the age of 14. She is now 19.

My opinion:
.32 and .38 and .380 are great for BACK UP GUNS or when you just can't carry your regular weapon.
9mm: minimum caliber and then for defense need hollow point ammo and +P (this generally takes this round to a .40 in "stopping power"
.40 caliber: a defense round with no purpose. The current 9mm equals the stopping power and this round was developed because of political correctness because some lawyers talked that the .45 was inhumane. bull, bull and more bull. I have also seen more catastrophic gun malfunctions in .40 than in any other caliber.
.45 caliber: There is a reason that most anyone that uses a handgun in real gunfights use this caliber. (Police, FBI, Special OPs, etc). Hollow point ammo and for my money......+P even makes this tried and true defensive round the best there is.

All this said: Try out some guns, Try out some guns in IDPA to see what works for you, Try out some guns to see what caliber you can make repeated hits with (double taps in under 2 seconds at 10-15 yds in the "0" or "1" down on an IDPA target) and THEN BUY YOUR GUN <G>

You are always welcome to come see us at the West Houston IDPA.

[frazzled]

I want to buy something small and concealable to carry. A SIG 232 or Bersa 380 maybe?

-Both are accurate. I have shot several Bersas and my wife has one. She can pop a 6in target without difficulty at 17 yards. Its almosty a perfect gun. Light, minimal recoil, accurate, with righteously good big sights.

-A second question is how much do you intend to shoot? Another option is one of the smaller Taurus models or Walther. Walther is more expensive initially but both use 9mm, which in normal times is cheaper than .380. but if you’re not shooting more than once a month or so then the Bersa is the cheapest of all the options.

As cost is an issue I would also recommend biting the bullet and getting an inexpensive .22 target pistol. They are great for practice and fun as all get out, plus we’re talking $15 or so for 500 rounds. Beretta, which makes the cougar also makes a nice inexpensive .22 pistol called a NEO which is lethally accurate and very cheap. $300 should do you well, maybe $350 for the 6 in barrel version. Academy sells them on the cheap.

[The Annoyed Man]

.40 caliber: a defense round with no purpose. The current 9mm equals the stopping power and this round was developed because of political correctness because some lawyers talked that the .45 was inhumane. bull, bull and more bull. I have also seen more catastrophic gun malfunctions in .40 than in any other caliber.

Mind you, I'm not a huge supporter of the .40 (my daily carry is a .45), but I do own, and occasionally carry, a .40 cal in the form of an H&K USP Compact. Perhaps it's true that the cartridge answers a question that fewer people are asking today, but you have to remember that it was developed because A) the 9mm offerings at the time left something to be desired; B) high capacity magazines for duty weapons were still desirable; C) many found the 10mm round too difficult to handle for "non-enthusiasts;" and D) it still wasn't the "evil .45" so feared by the politically correct. In my opinion, it is a limited round because it is already loaded to near maximum pressures in the standard offerings; but that being said, it is still a very effective round, and it still bridges the gap between the 9mm and the .45 ACP quite nicely (notice that you have to load your 9mm to +P pressures to get into the .40-.45 caliber performance range).

As to the reliability factor, I'm not sure the claim can be made and substantiated. While it is not my favorite pistol for reasons having nothing to do with reliability, my USP has digested something on the order of 1500-2000 rounds of .40 cal. now without a single malfunction. Ever. And I'm sure that other manufacturers like Glock, Smith & Wesson, Ruger, etc., etc., can all make the same claim. In my opinion, the biggest safety problem with the cartridge isn't the guns themselves, it is bullet setback from repeatedly rechambering the same round when unloading/reloading the pistol. Since the cartridge is already loaded to near maximum pressure, bullet setback runs the risk of increasing case pressures to beyond SAAMI maximum specifications for the cartridge - putting the firearm/shooter at risk if the pressure gets too high. All the same, I don't think there are that many documented cases of this actually happening. I wouldn't recommend testing it, but the truth is that, for product liability reasons, most firearms manufacturers - at least those with the best reputations - build their guns to withstand a fair amount of abuse before catastrophic failure ever puts the user at risk. . . .my point being that, while taking things too casually isn't good, getting too worried about them isn't necessary either.

[Excaliber]

.40 caliber: a defense round with no purpose. The current 9mm equals the stopping power and this round was developed because of political correctness because some lawyers talked that the .45 was inhumane. bull, bull and more bull. I have also seen more catastrophic gun malfunctions in .40 than in any other caliber.

Mind you, I'm not a huge supporter of the .40 (my daily carry is a .45), but I do own, and occasionally carry, a .40 cal in the form of an H&K USP Compact. Perhaps it's true that the cartridge answers a question that fewer people are asking today, but you have to remember that it was developed because A) the 9mm offerings at the time left something to be desired; B) high capacity magazines for duty weapons were still desirable; C) many found the 10mm round too difficult to handle for "non-enthusiasts;" and D) it still wasn't the "evil .45" so feared by the politically correct. In my opinion, it is a limited round because it is already loaded to near maximum pressures in the standard offerings; but that being said, it is still a very effective round, and it still bridges the gap between the 9mm and the .45 ACP quite nicely (notice that you have to load your 9mm to +P pressures to get into the .40-.45 caliber performance range).

As to the reliability factor, I'm not sure the claim can be made and substantiated. While it is not my favorite pistol for reasons having nothing to do with reliability, my USP has digested something on the order of 1500-2000 rounds of .40 cal. now without a single malfunction. Ever. And I'm sure that other manufacturers like Glock, Smith & Wesson, Ruger, etc., etc., can all make the same claim. In my opinion, the biggest safety problem with the cartridge isn't the guns themselves, it is bullet setback from repeatedly rechambering the same round when unloading/reloading the pistol. Since the cartridge is already loaded to near maximum pressure, bullet setback runs the risk of increasing case pressures to beyond SAAMI maximum specifications for the cartridge - putting the firearm/shooter at risk if the pressure gets too high. All the same, I don't think there are that many documented cases of this actually happening. I wouldn't recommend testing it, but the truth is that, for product liability reasons, most firearms manufacturers - at least those with the best reputations - build their guns to withstand a fair amount of abuse before catastrophic failure ever puts the user at risk. . . .my point being that, while taking things too casually isn't good, getting too worried about them isn't necessary either.

There is a valid concern with catastrophic firearm failures due to case rupture upon firing. Anecdotal evidence from many sources suggests it may be related to the design of pistols that do not support the entire case head of this cartridge, which is loaded very close to maximum safe pressure.

There have been a great many such reports, and the issue is summarized in the following Wikipdeia article. Scroll down below the cartridge background info for an outline of the problem.

My son had a first hand experience with this in a Glock 23. He didn't enjoy the experience, which blew the magazine out of the gun and numbed his hand. The exterior portion of the slide stop was never found. Fortunately, he received only minor cuts and no permanent damage. He was using reloads at the time. I suspect but can't prove that the projectile was set back into the case mouth as the round encountered the feed ramp, which sharply increased the internal pressure when the round was fired. He doesn't use .40S&W reloads at all anymore.