Hallo again guys.
After assessing all the information provided by you and also that found on the internet researching my questions I've made a set of pros for semi-auto pistols versus revolvers (pros for one are cons for the other) as for a CCW here in Latvia. I've understood that first I need to make a clear decision on platform I want to go with and only then I'll choose the best fit handgun for my own purposes based on your advice etc.
Here is my list of the pros for both pistols and revolver in general circumstances, that is, when both hand are available for operation of handgun:
Pistol pros:
1) Higher capacity than that of a snub nose revolver (which is what I would possibly carry if I'll go with a revolver) - minimum for pistols in my options list is 7 rounds;
2) Possibility of me reloading a semi-auto pistol in a middle of gunfight or any other attack is way higher that for a revolver + reloading a semi-auto pistol will generally be faster;
3) Comparing to a snub nose revolver (which is what I would possibly carry if I'll go with a revolver) I should be able to get off faster shots with more accuracy;
4) If I'll buy a pistol with external safety then I'll have to carry the gun with it enabled, which will serve me good if in any case my handgun is taken from me giving me few seconds to try and take it back (attacker possibly won't be able to disable the safety fast enough to use the gun against me);
5) If I'm sure that I'll lose my handgun in a hand-to-hand combat or whatever there is a possibility for me to quickly drop the magazine and maybe kick it away so that my attacker cannot shoot me;
6) Most of the typical malfunctions can be cleared relatively fast;
7) Ammo (either .380ACP, 9x18 or 9x19) costs only around 60-75% of what costs .38 Special which is what I would possibly carry if I'll go with a revolver);
8) As my budget for practicing with real ammo is quite limited for every month (from around 50 round of .38 Special to 95 of 9x18 or 9x19) I could possibly supplement my training with airgun training (would aid my skill development anyway).
Revolver pros:
1) It is ready to shoot as soon as I draw it (round is in chamber);
2) Possibly it would be easier to draw a revolver with a good grip from many awkward positions (like being on ground or any other awkward position);
3) I should be able to fire a revolver continuously in a situation where my revolver is in direct contact with attackers body (semi-auto pistol could jam after first shot);
4) Possibility of little malfunctions is probably smaller that for semi-auto pistols (like malfunction to feed, extract, etc).
Here is my list of the pros for both pistols and revolver in circumstances where only one hand for operation of handgun is available:
Pistol pros:
1) Possibility of me reloading a pistol with one hand in any situation is higher than that of reloading a revolver;
2) In general I should be able to make better one handed shots with a semi-auto pistols than a revolver;
3) If I would get a malfunction it would be more probable to sort it out with one hand only on a semi-auto pistol compared to a revolver.
Revolver pros:
1) Again, it is ready to shoot as soon as I draw it (instead a pistols would need to be racked which is extra difficult for one handed operation of a handgun);
2) In any case it should be easier to draw a revolver in any situation with one hand only compared to a pistol.
Just to add some additional info, I really think that the possibility of me actually needing a handgun for self defense here in Latvia is lower than that for you living in US. Also, I suspect that the most likely encounter in a self defense situation could be a 1 on 1 situation with an attacker somewhere on a street or something. Also we typically don't have terrorist attacks, mass shootings or home invasions for that matter (although later might happen occasionally). So in general I don't think that it is likely that I would ever encounter more than 3 attackers in any possible shooting situation.
Also I've done some ballistics calculations which are given in the book "Quantitative Ammunition Selection" and I've come to a conclusion that .380ACP and 9x18 in FMJ would be my best choice if over-penetration is a serious problem. My calculations show that .380ACP and 9x18 FMJ bullet would over-penetrate (in summer conditions with a slim T-shirt as an extra barrier) and would possibly fully penetrate the second body (thickness of bodies assumed - 7" - average 5'10" guy in Latvia) and in worst case would exit the second body with a velocity that would not be enough to penetrate another humans skin (in a winter environment it could be possible that the bullet would not exit the clothes of the attacker and thus would not over-penetrate). The .380ACP and 9x18 FMJ would produce 75% of the permanent wound cavity mass of 9x19 FMJ bullet (as I understand it basically would produce 75% of the damage that 9x19 bullet would do). Also, the .380ACP and 9x18 would only cause damage to the second body penetrated of the magnitude of 75% of what would be caused to the first body penetrated (the attacker) instead of 64-78% for 9x19, .38Spl and .357Mag. 9x19 FMJ and .38Spl FMJ available to me would have pretty much the same terminal ballistics performance, except that 9x19 FMJ round would have higher possibility to penetrate the skin of the 3rd body (it would only penetrate something like 2" - could do a lot of harm, though).
Just to remind of the local laws:
- One needs to carry a handgun without a round in the chamber with enabled external safety (if gun has one) and with hammer at rest. This means that I'll need to rack the slide of the pistol to set it up for shooting if needed;
- One needs to carry not more than two full magazines of ammo, that is, on in the handgun and another in the holster (so for a 5 shot revolver a total of 10 rounds);
- One is allowed to use only FMJ rounds;
- One carries only calibers not larger that 9mm in the diameter (basically options are limited to .380 ACP, 9x18 Makarov, 9x19 Parabellum, .38 Special and .357 Magnum);
- Law states: "one should not fire a handgun if one cannot guarantee the safety of those who are not intended to be shot" - this implies the consequences of a bullet that would over-penetrate the attacker.
I have to admit that I really didn't thought that there is so much to go in a decision of what platform/handgun to buy for self defense use - the matter really overwhelmed me - this is why I'm really thankful for all or your help.
I hope you'll be able to give some last advice on what platform (semi-auto pistol or revolver) should I choose for my CCW.
Thanks to everyone - you've all helped me tremendously!