04-23-2022, 02:06 AM
Jim's HP-35 is a good gun for defense, but I can see where it might be a problem for a small framed person to carry concealed.
I've only got two pistols now, a Taurus PT92 and a black powder revolver, but again they would, either one, be problems for a small framed person to carry concealed. I carry the Taurus in either a shoulder holster under a light jacket (typically an old Desert Tiger Stripe BDU shirt) if I'm going to be sitting a lot, like driving, or in an inside the waistband holster at the small of my back if I'm going to be mostly standing.
I would not shoot a rabid dog in the ass with a Smith and Wesson - just a personal beef I have with the company. I have an aversion to doing business with companies that make bad business decisions. Back in the 90's or early 2000's I think it was, they threw in with Michael Bloomberg and his "Mayors that want to ban your guns" organization, and that seemed to me to be a lot like cutting their own throats business-wise. As a matter of fact, the day I heard about that poor decision, I went into the office and gave them back the Smith and Wesson issue sidearm I was carrying, and told them they could give me a Taurus instead, or I could patrol bare knuckles and boot heels, but I would never carry a Smith again on duty. They issued me a Taurus instead.
I also won't carry a Glock, but for different reasons. Glocks are not ergonomically suited to me - trying to point one is like trying to aim a 2x4 to me. I don't know what Glocks are like now since I don't deal with them at all any more, but back in the day, there was no way to NOT carry one cocked and locked unless you unloaded it altogether and rendered it useless, and that was a safety issue to me. Glocks are funny guns - you either swear by them, or you swear AT them.
I won't carry any pistol I cannot see the hammer on - I consider that a safety issue, as I sometimes carry cocked and locked if I'm expecting trouble - otherwise I don't. Ring hammers are better than spur hammers, for the snagging reason that @"OmegaLogos" mentioned. I had one with a spur hammer snag on me once when I was trying to draw it out of a field jacket pocket when I was being charged by two Rottweilers. It was pretty exciting there for a couple of seconds until I got it freed up. No, I didn't shoot the dogs. they seemed to know what time it was as soon as I got it freed up and leveled down on them, and they skidded to a halt so fast their feet raised dust clouds. So no actual shooting was necessary.
The only thing beyond that which I can recommend is to go to gun stores and hold the interesting looking ones in you hand. See how they feel to you, and whether they point naturally when you hold them or not. Ambiodextrous safeties are a nice touch, nicer still if your strong side arm gets disabled in a tussle. Since you are smaller-framed, look at the smaller frame pistols that still pack a decent punch. I wouldn't go any smaller than a .380 - same bullet diameter as a 9mm, but shorter case, so less power to push it... but it'll still do the job with a good hit.
Really, it's a matter of personal preference - whatever you are comfortable with. I have one sister that bought a 9mm and asked me to teach her how to shoot it, so I did, but it lives in the box in her closet on a shelf, so won't do her much good like that. I have another sister that carried a .22 revolver in her purse for years, and was a good shot with it, so that was her comfort zone. She's about 5 foot nothin' or a bit shorter, and would weigh around 100 pounds if you soaked her for two days. And Elmer Keith did once say that "a hit with a .22 rimfire is a lot more discouraging than a loud miss with a .45".
So I would say a small or medium frame sidearm, no less than a .380, and make sure to get a concealment holster to fit it and a few extra magazines if it's a pistol instead of a revolver, and a few speed loaders of it's a revolver. Internal capacity doesn't matter quite as much if you have the ability for rapid reloads. When I'm out and about, I carry mine with one in the chamber and a full 17 round mag in the well, and two extra 17 round (usually) magazines for a total of 52 rounds. I hate to loose. I also have a few 20 round mags for it, and a few 32 round mags, but I never carry those because they stick too far out of the grip. They're just for fun, or in case I experience a wave attack at home from the rabbits.
Practice with it until it's second nature, especially the draw and reloading. One dark night when you can't see your hands, you might be grateful for all that practice. If you go to an indoor range, check out their rules for night fire, too. I was surprised to find that, when I'd go for my yearly pistol qualifications, I shot better at night than I did in the light. Not a lot better, but some - I usually scored around 93% day fire on a modified FBI course, and around 96% during night fire on the same course. They usually ran me through the first wave of qualifications so that I was free to assist the range instructors for the rest. Practice is important.
.
I've only got two pistols now, a Taurus PT92 and a black powder revolver, but again they would, either one, be problems for a small framed person to carry concealed. I carry the Taurus in either a shoulder holster under a light jacket (typically an old Desert Tiger Stripe BDU shirt) if I'm going to be sitting a lot, like driving, or in an inside the waistband holster at the small of my back if I'm going to be mostly standing.
I would not shoot a rabid dog in the ass with a Smith and Wesson - just a personal beef I have with the company. I have an aversion to doing business with companies that make bad business decisions. Back in the 90's or early 2000's I think it was, they threw in with Michael Bloomberg and his "Mayors that want to ban your guns" organization, and that seemed to me to be a lot like cutting their own throats business-wise. As a matter of fact, the day I heard about that poor decision, I went into the office and gave them back the Smith and Wesson issue sidearm I was carrying, and told them they could give me a Taurus instead, or I could patrol bare knuckles and boot heels, but I would never carry a Smith again on duty. They issued me a Taurus instead.
I also won't carry a Glock, but for different reasons. Glocks are not ergonomically suited to me - trying to point one is like trying to aim a 2x4 to me. I don't know what Glocks are like now since I don't deal with them at all any more, but back in the day, there was no way to NOT carry one cocked and locked unless you unloaded it altogether and rendered it useless, and that was a safety issue to me. Glocks are funny guns - you either swear by them, or you swear AT them.
I won't carry any pistol I cannot see the hammer on - I consider that a safety issue, as I sometimes carry cocked and locked if I'm expecting trouble - otherwise I don't. Ring hammers are better than spur hammers, for the snagging reason that @"OmegaLogos" mentioned. I had one with a spur hammer snag on me once when I was trying to draw it out of a field jacket pocket when I was being charged by two Rottweilers. It was pretty exciting there for a couple of seconds until I got it freed up. No, I didn't shoot the dogs. they seemed to know what time it was as soon as I got it freed up and leveled down on them, and they skidded to a halt so fast their feet raised dust clouds. So no actual shooting was necessary.
The only thing beyond that which I can recommend is to go to gun stores and hold the interesting looking ones in you hand. See how they feel to you, and whether they point naturally when you hold them or not. Ambiodextrous safeties are a nice touch, nicer still if your strong side arm gets disabled in a tussle. Since you are smaller-framed, look at the smaller frame pistols that still pack a decent punch. I wouldn't go any smaller than a .380 - same bullet diameter as a 9mm, but shorter case, so less power to push it... but it'll still do the job with a good hit.
Really, it's a matter of personal preference - whatever you are comfortable with. I have one sister that bought a 9mm and asked me to teach her how to shoot it, so I did, but it lives in the box in her closet on a shelf, so won't do her much good like that. I have another sister that carried a .22 revolver in her purse for years, and was a good shot with it, so that was her comfort zone. She's about 5 foot nothin' or a bit shorter, and would weigh around 100 pounds if you soaked her for two days. And Elmer Keith did once say that "a hit with a .22 rimfire is a lot more discouraging than a loud miss with a .45".
So I would say a small or medium frame sidearm, no less than a .380, and make sure to get a concealment holster to fit it and a few extra magazines if it's a pistol instead of a revolver, and a few speed loaders of it's a revolver. Internal capacity doesn't matter quite as much if you have the ability for rapid reloads. When I'm out and about, I carry mine with one in the chamber and a full 17 round mag in the well, and two extra 17 round (usually) magazines for a total of 52 rounds. I hate to loose. I also have a few 20 round mags for it, and a few 32 round mags, but I never carry those because they stick too far out of the grip. They're just for fun, or in case I experience a wave attack at home from the rabbits.
Practice with it until it's second nature, especially the draw and reloading. One dark night when you can't see your hands, you might be grateful for all that practice. If you go to an indoor range, check out their rules for night fire, too. I was surprised to find that, when I'd go for my yearly pistol qualifications, I shot better at night than I did in the light. Not a lot better, but some - I usually scored around 93% day fire on a modified FBI course, and around 96% during night fire on the same course. They usually ran me through the first wave of qualifications so that I was free to assist the range instructors for the rest. Practice is important.
.
Diogenes was eating bread and lentils for supper. He was seen by the philosopher Aristippus, who lived comfortably by flattering the king.
Said Aristippus, ‘If you would learn to be subservient to the king you would not have to live on lentils.’ Said Diogenes, ‘Learn to live on lentils and you will not have to be subservient to the king.’
Said Aristippus, ‘If you would learn to be subservient to the king you would not have to live on lentils.’ Said Diogenes, ‘Learn to live on lentils and you will not have to be subservient to the king.’