Advice on full-size 9mm pistols please

pyro777 said:
CZ 75B or BD model depending on if you want the safety or decocking lever. Its a solid built gun, holds well with great ergo, and has a factory trigger better than most upgraded and more expensive pistols (glocks). They can be had fairly inexpensive new or used.
Click to expand...

I'm a range officer. Today, watched a 93-year-old shooter consistently create 3 inch groups on 3 inch paster targets at 30 feet with a stock CZ 75B. Claimed he couldn't do that with any other of his 12 modern pistols.

He wasn't a bit surprised.
 
The Burgh said:
I'm a range officer. Today, watched a 93-year-old shooter consistently create 3 inch groups on 3 inch paster targets at 30 feet with a stock CZ 75B. Claimed he couldn't do that with any other of his 12 modern pistols.

He wasn't a bit surprised.
Click to expand...

So true; I've had six students over the past year who have used CZ 75B with great success. I hadn't seen anyone bring CZ's in before that. When I talk to them, all of them say it's reliable, accurate, and they wouldn't trade it for anything fancier/more expensive.
 
SevenOfNine said:
No problem - it really is scary - they basically have a list now of "Certified Safe" handguns that can be sold in the state of CA and that's pretty much it. Anything not on their silly arbitrary list is deemed illegal and "unsafe." The only way to get some not on the list would be to modify them into shells of their former selves like the mag-restrictions in NY. They do a lot of anti-gun stuff here. I constantly have to monitor what laws and bills are on the table. It's the worst place for someone like me lol

And I have the joy of being a lefty, so mag release is tricky for me depending on what model I'm using that's one of many things that drew me to the XD series
Click to expand...

The worse part is that for a handgun to be listed on the allowed roster, the manufacturers have to pay an annual fee for every model they want to sell, even if the only difference between the two is the color scheme. And if the manufacturer doesn't want to pay up, the handgun suddenly becomes unsafe. It's quite literally extortion.

The manufacturers ought to call out California by refusing to sell anything to anyone in the state, law enforcement included, and demand their property back even though it had already been paid for, which is what the state did to the people. Just literally starve the state out for their actions until they have no choice but to play ball and start removing restrictions.
 
Charlie_K said:
The worse part is that for a handgun to be listed on the allowed roster, the manufacturers have to pay an annual fee for every model they want to sell, even if the only difference between the two is the color scheme. And if the manufacturer doesn't want to pay up, the handgun suddenly becomes unsafe. It's quite literally extortion.

The manufacturers ought to call out California by refusing to sell anything to anyone in the state, law enforcement included, and demand their property back even though it had already been paid for, which is what the state did to the people. Just literally starve the state out for their actions until they have no choice but to play ball and start removing restrictions.
Click to expand...

I agree, but you know it'll never happen. It's just another hissy fit on behalf of the CA gun grabbers. They couldn't outright ban guns so they do everything they can to make it near impossible to obtain one.

It's also just another opportunity to "punish" gun manufacturers and squeeze them for every dollar possible. The law passed in 2005 that protects gun companies from lawsuits if someone uses their products to kill, that really pissed off the gun grabbers. Since they can't squeeze money that way anymore these are their new tactics. It's so transparent. Totally unconstitutional but they get away with it over & over again.
 
I have to say I was kind of disappointed with the NRA's lackluster fight during this latest CA gun ban fever. The laws CA pushed thru recently are very serious threats to the 2nd Amendment and yet they barely put up a fight. They left it to local & state gun clubs & groups to lobby the state legislature.

NRA spent most of their time & resources next door in Nevada to block that ridiculous ballet initiative about private transfers. What a gem that was. You lend a shotgun to a friend or family member on a hunting trip and you're a felon unless you go to an FFL, fill out paperwork "officially transferring" it to your relative/friend, and having your life entered into a federal database. Get real.
 
SIGs fit my hand the best and shoot well for me. Trying to find rental examples of guns
you wanna try out is almost impossible. Carried a .40cal P229 for years and my son has a
P226 at home. Glock just doesn't do it for me. I did like the CZ.
 
severtecher said:
SIGs fit my hand the best and shoot well for me. Trying to find rental examples of guns
you wanna try out is almost impossible. Carried a .40cal P229 for years and my son has a
P226 at home. Glock just doesn't do it for me. I did like the CZ.
Click to expand...

I like the P229 too, carried that one for five years in .40
 
I encourage my students to train on the P226 first so they get a true feel for it in full size. Can always go compact later on
 
SevenOfNine said:
I have to say I was kind of disappointed with the NRA's lackluster fight during this latest CA gun ban fever. The laws CA pushed thru recently are very serious threats to the 2nd Amendment and yet they barely put up a fight. They left it to local & state gun clubs & groups to lobby the state legislature.

NRA spent most of their time & resources next door in Nevada to block that ridiculous ballet initiative about private transfers. What a gem that was. You lend a shotgun to a friend or family member on a hunting trip and you're a felon unless you go to an FFL, fill out paperwork "officially transferring" it to your relative/friend, and having your life entered into a federal database. Get real.
Click to expand...

California was a lost cause from the very beginning, Nevada wasn't.
 
SevenOfNine said:
Very true point, but I feel if people had been staying with the fight from the beginning, it might not have gotten so far downhill in the first place
Click to expand...

We're talking about the same California here, right? The one suffering a serious drought because it long ago allowed itself to be beaten into submission by environmental nuts, rather than following sound science regarding population density and resources needed?
 
Charlie_K said:
We're talking about the same California here, right? The one suffering a serious drought because it long ago allowed itself to be beaten into submission by environmental nuts, rather than following sound science regarding population density and resources needed?
Click to expand...

I don't mean the people of CA necessarily, but the so called defenders of the 2nd amendment who talk big but only seem to operate in areas where gun laws are already great. They should've been putting their money where their mouths are a long time ago.

I work for the ILA we're in touch with all 50 states...there were a ton of local smaller gun groups up & down the state of CA, for example, who were fighting hard but without support they just don't have the funding or the resources to outspend or out-shout the likes of billionaire meddler Michael Bloomberg & company.

Big 2nd amendment groups gave it up as a "lost cause" and left it wide open for gun grabbing liberal nutjobs like Jerry Brown and his ilk to take over an entire state. Nothing is ever lost when it comes to defending your rights. When you stop caring, you start losing them. But that's just my opinion.

You don't just give up fighting for your rights just because it's too hard. At least I don't.
 
Last edited:
Living in NY specifically, I already know people like Cuomo & Schumer will be fighting hard to delay and derail any reciprocity, even if it does pass & get signed into law. So it'll be a long road ahead, but passing the bill would be at least a decent start in the right direction.
 
Krav said:
I believe senate is going to try a concealed carry permit that is valid in all 50 states again in 2017. It was shy two votes before. I think it will push through this time.

http://www.guns.com/2015/02/14/sena...concealed-carry-reciprocity-in-all-50-states/
Click to expand...

Just my opinion, but, I think it's a terrible idea, to many states that have different training stipulations, and regulations on guns that can be carried.
Nobody's going to agree and if they do, the people that already have a concealed carry permit are going to have a bunch of different regs and background checks thrown at them.
Once again, just my opinion, it's a States Rights issue not a federal government issue.
Good for a few, like California, but bad for a lot more, like Indiana, or all the states without any training stipulations.

As for topic of thread, if you're not going to carry it or conceal it, go with what you want, otherwise you have to think about availability of holsters and magazines and the like.
Lot of guns out there, I use a Glock because of the amount of companies and departments that issue them and ease of getting accessories, like holsters and magazines.
Get what you like, enjoy.
 
Reciprocity would allow people to travel to all 50 states without becoming felons in certain commie states like NY and CA just for carrying even though they're allowed to carry in their home-state.

They would be required to obey the laws that apply to conceal carry permit holders in the state to which they travel but that state would recognize their out of state permit and their licensed weapons. This would spare them from being arrested the minute they get there for having a firearm on them.
 
There is no new training or regulations or background checks. The home-issue state has already done whatever is required for you to get your permit, and when you travel those states traveled to would obey it. That is how it works in general. Being a constitutional amendment, the right to keep and bear arms is a federal issue. States rights, according to the constitution, are only those that are not specifically mentioned in the Constitution. More than that, it's a common sense issue.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top