Ruger LC9 thoughts

[torment]

I'm buying an LC9 because the Kimber solo is twice the price....

I'd love an EMP but good lord are they overpriced.

 

[1911user]

For a small, single-stack 9mm, I'd buy a Kahr 9mm instead; probably the CW9.
It has no tiny thumb safety, mag disconnect, or annoying loaded chamber indicator.
Ruger can add the excess safety baggage to their pistols and I can choose not to buy because of it.

EDIT: I don't hate Ruger guns, just the idea of having to remove the nanny-state extras before practical use. Other companies sell without the extra baggage; Ruger could do the same.

 

[Bighead]

Ruger added all the baggage to the gun to make it 50 state legal, so they can sell it places like California. Personally, I would let CA go without, or produce a CA pistol with the gimmicky crap. I don't mind the loaded chamber indicator, but I am not a fan of the magazine disconnect or the manual safety. I want to like this gun, and would buy one if it was setup like the LCP, but I've trained for years with guns without safety catches, and don't want to start now. I would probably go with the Kahr PM9, or the new value model version the CM9. I also like the excellent Walter PPS.

 

[CharlieWH2O]

I purchased and shot the LC9. I own and carry an LCP. I also carry a Kimber Ultra Carry II. The ONLY reason I gave up the LC9 is it just isn't that much smaller than my Kimber. The LC9 shot flawlessly and was comfortable but a handful. Plenty of pistols have mag disconnects and loaded indicators. I don't believe that's a reason not to purchase and carry an LC9. Just practice with your carry weapon.