Choices

[harbormaster]

I did

Well I did; I personally have almost gone off 45's except for a CZ 97 and a few 1911's the guns I shoot, carry and keep available are all 9mm. I suggested the same. We went to the range, he shot the Colt 1911 45 and the Springfield 1911 9mm. He opted for the 45.

As for Glocks they are of no interest to me. My conversation about them goes like this: "I prefer metal, but the Glock is very popular and you might like it - its just not for me." I don't have a glock so I can't offer one up to a friend to shoot. My friend shot the Springfield 1911 9mm, the Colt 1911 45, and the CZ 75. He was also able to shoot a SW 27 that I have with 357 rounds. After those choices he wanted the 1911 45.

It would be the rare person that I would recommend a 45 acp 1911 for a first defensive handgun, for a relatively new shooter.

I would likely go 9mm for the less recoil and cheaper ammo...which means more practice for a new shooter. I'd probably also suggest a striker gun for the easier maintenance, simple manual of arms, and generally lower cost for a high quality weapon. He/she could likely get into a Glock or M&P for $500-$600...maybe less for new and definitely less if he went used (and didn't live in Ca).

Out of what is left I would budget for a good 2 day beginning defensive pistol class, a decent holster, then buy a few mags and ammo with whatever was left.

YMMV.

[cline]

Everyone says that until they try the high-end guns. Nothing wrong with that price range and that type of gun, those are the bread and butter guns of self/home defense. But they are as exciting as a two decade old budget sedan.

the high end stuff looks gaudy and ironically, chintzy to me.

i think a humble shield plus or m&p 2.0 3.6 inch compact actually look better than a high end 1911

besides, the shield plus is more versatile and concealable, and thus more useful and practical. it's something you can keep with you at all times. i value that aspect a lot.

[IVC]

the high end stuff looks gaudy and ironically, chintzy to me.

i think a humble shield plus or m&p 2.0 3.6 inch compact actually look better than a high end 1911

It's not about the looks, it's about performance.

[cline]

It's not about the looks, it's about performance.

the high end 1911 have too light triggers are not suitable to everyday or self defense use. they're mostly jewelry for men to show off at bbqs and play around on the range.

[deckhandmike]

the high end 1911 have too light triggers are not suitable to everyday or self defense use. they're mostly jewelry for men to show off at bbqs and play around on the range.

I?m not even a 1911 fan and this is a ridiculous statement. A 1911 is a fine fighting weapon and my trigger is controlled by my finger. A lighter trigger makes for better accuracy. I run my hunting rifles with a 2 pound pull weight. Haven?t found a pistol with too light of a trigger yet.

And to answer OP I wouldn’t have suggested a RIA. If I was getting a 1911 I would have spent the full amount on the gun and got something known for higher quality. Or something like a 600$ glock and some training. Certain style guns benefit from buy once cry once and the 1911 platform is one of them.

[IVC]

the high end 1911 have too light triggers are not suitable to everyday or self defense use. they're mostly jewelry for men to show off at bbqs and play around on the range.

Self defense is far from everyday use. Carrying a gun is not really "use." And those high end guns are used to shoot 15,000-50,000 rounds a year. That's the real "everyday use."

You really need to visit a local shooting match to get some perspective both about the amount and quality of shooting. Southern CA has some of the finest shooters around, you'll be amazed at the skill, speed and accuracy...