In the golden state of California, I’m only allowed 10 rd capacity magazines. Would you still go with a 9mm or 40sw? If the latter, which model: full size, compact or sub compact?
Its no secret that I greatly favour Glocks. There’re lots of guns out there but none of the is like the Glock. I’m also not the only guy that thinks this way. Most firearms experts that I consider worth listening to will repeat the same thing.
Now, which Glock should we go for.
My standard response is get a Glock 17 or if you want something a bit smaller a Glock 19 both in 9mm of course.
Listen, you just need a 9mm. It ubiquitous, it just works, bot accurate and with moderate recoil. With quality JHP ammo it will get the job done for defense. Cheap 9mm means you can easily afford the few hundred rounds needed to learn basic gun handling. More importantly, you can afford the thousands of rounds need to acquire proper gun fighting skills.
Having said this, personally what would I carry in such a situation?
A Glock 32. 357 SIG. It’s the same size as the Glock 19, meaning compact but not ridiculously compact that it impairs proper gun operation. If I’m limited to 10 rounds, then yes, I certainly want the most bang per rounds. One of the rules of gunfighting is to carry the most powerful caliber you can realistically shoot fast and accurately. At least in my case, I can shoot 357SIG as if I shot hot military 9mm. Without such restriction I would go for my Glock 31, 15+1 rounds of 357SIG in a gun similar to the Glock 17. That’s hard to beat in my opinion. Some folks will prefer 45 ACP, even 10mm and both are great choices. For me though, Id go with 10 rounds of 357SIG in a Glock 32 if that was the limitation presented with.
Fernando “FerFAL” Aguirre is the author of “The Modern Survival Manual: Surviving the Economic Collapse” and “Bugging Out and Relocating: When Staying is not an Option”.