What guns do you usually recommend to beginners?

Do you always recommend a .22 to beginners?


  • Total voters
    127
most people I know who buy guns aren't buying them to get into the shooting sports, they're buying guns for self defense, do you want to recommend a .22lr to someone for self defense purposes?

Yes, and bear spray and cell phone and a whistle. Without a specific threat, I would recommend a .22. Assuming the person asking for a recommendation has no gun they would be better off with a .22 than without one.
 
Two instructors start with two complete newbies on the same day and one trains their student on a .22 and the other trains their student on a 9mm. They both fire 1000 rounds through their guns during their training. At the end of the day you line 8 guns of increasing caliber in front of each student (.32, .380, 9mm, .40S&W, .357mag, .45acp. 10mm, .44mag) and let them both fire each gun. I feel the student that trained equally on the 9mm would fair much better than the student that trained on the .22 caliber firearm.
If the student is lucky enough to hit a well-stocked Wal-Mart, which is the single cheapest place that I have ever actually seen to buy newly manufactured 9mm ammo, at the very minimum, that thousand rounds is 20 boxes of ammo... $200, before tax. Anywhere else you go, more than $200.

This, for a new shooter who doesn't even own a firearm.

Now I'm sure there are some folks out there that have the funding to peel off a couple of hundos, but not most folks that I've ever met.

That's also about $35 worth of quality rimfire from the same sporting goods counter.

My argument isn't that what you've said is dead wrong, but I don't think your thousands rounds out of a 9mm is more than FIVE times as effective than a thousand out of a quality .22LR pistol.

Would you continue your argument that a thousand rounds of 9mm out of a borrowed handgun is as effective as five thousand rounds of .22LR out of a borrowed handgun?
 
mindset

they might as well spend a little more money when their lives might be at stake and learn with the more encompassing round.
for a first handgun I will generally point them toward something that can be useful for Home or Personal Defense. IMHO, a .22 is not the best choice.

Those ideas are not wrong but they reflect a mindset. I haven't met most people but the ones that I have met who are interested in shooting are interested in becoming, as mentioned in the OP, marksmen/ good shots. A .22 is the best choice for a start.
Y'know, there is a tremendous emphasis on this site and others on the use of handguns for SD/HD. Worthy goals both but not the only goals.

.22s boring? Me, I have never shot ANY gun that was boring.

They simply need to know the basics.
Absolutely - and the basics of sight alignment, proper grip and trigger control are best taught with a .22. They are fine motor skills easily lost in the kerblam of CF shooting.

Pellet guns - yes. Anyone who wants to increase the precision of their shooting or really learn what "follow through" means should spend some time with a quality pellet gun.

Another $0.02
Pete
 
Depends on what the person wants. For someone who only wants a revolver to stow in a drawer to hopefully never be used there's little need to have a 22lr.
 
I try not to recommend it's should be up to the person to decide what he or she wants to shoot. I now pretty much ignore those posts:eek: You can recommend till you are blue in the face and they will buy what ever they want be it right or wrong:D
 
In recommending the .22, I didn't mean to imply it would necessarily be the only gun bought by a new shooter. However, cheap ammo and comparative comfort should help to encourage good practice. And practice is perhaps the most important factor in acquiring skills.
My first handgun was a .357 revolver - but very soon after I bought a second-hand .22 and have never regreted it :)
 
Last edited:
If the student is lucky enough to hit a well-stocked Wal-Mart, which is the single cheapest place that I have ever actually seen to buy newly manufactured 9mm ammo, at the very minimum, that thousand rounds is 20 boxes of ammo... $200, before tax. Anywhere else you go, more than $200.
Once agin, the fact that .22lr is not the better training method, but instead simply the cheapest is being ignored and the "cheap" aspect is being expressed as more important. I do not believe most people will shoot more with a .22 than they would with a 9mm. Most professional people, successful people, or just people with full lives that I know simply do not have the time or desire to shoot that often. Most people I know have to make time to get to the range and fire off even 50-200 rounds...much less spend all day shooting hundreds upon hundreds of rounds.
Those ideas are not wrong but they reflect a mindset. I haven't met most people but the ones that I have met who are interested in shooting are interested in becoming, as mentioned in the OP, marksmen/ good shots. A .22 is the best choice for a start
I believe it is quite the opposite. For every person that wants to become a "marksman" I am willing to bet there are a dozen, or two dozen, people who simply want to learn the basics. That has been my experience both in my military/LEO career and my private life.

I have also never been a part of any profession that starts your firearms training with a .22lr of any kind...not the military nor the police force.
 
Assuming we are talking about handguns here...

For adults, I generally recommend either a 9mm or a .38 Special when first starting out (although I started out with .357 Mag and .45ACP, so my learning curve took a bit more effort). Now, I havent "introduced" many individuals in to the world of the handgun. However, those I have brought in to the "fold" have always done very well with either the .38 Special or the 9mm. Its my belief that these calibers (when using standard pressure ammo) offer ease of shootability, in terms of learning the fundamentals, while also offering good HD as a bonus.

There are, of course, exceptions to this "rule" however. For instance, my wife shoots my .45ACP better than she does her 9mm, go figure.

Regardless, while there are certainly benefits to training with a .22, most individuals I know buy a weapon with HD in mind. Hence, not only do I recommend the .38 Special or 9mm (to "beginners"), but I also try stressing the importance of becoming intimately familiar with their HD weapon of choice.

Keep in mind, in addition to HD concerns, many of these same individuals simply arent interested in firing off hundreds, much less thousands, of rounds a month. Therefore, the "cost benefits" of .22 ammo is of no real issue in this case. Also, lets face it, most of them do not desire to own more than one handgun.

In the case of training youngsters, of course the .22 would be my first (and probably only) choice.
 
Last edited:
The question did not say rifle or hand gun

Assuming the person is of legal age and you are not buying it for your kid.

Rifle 10/22 or build your self an AR15 from scratch. You will learn a lot and have something to be proud of. The 10/22 you can customize later any way you like.

Hand Gun - A Taurus 38/357 or High Point 9mm.
 
What guns do I recommend to beginners ?

Easy answer: my guns.
I usually try to set up an afternoon at the range, and bring a variety to share. I'll generally spend the time using my 4 5/8" single six .22, and making conversation. If my devious plan comes together, I may end up with another range buddy, with guns and ammo of his own.
 
Is there any reason to not start with the .22LR?

There are several that I can think of...

Just logical that you'd want a new shooter to have the best experience possible the first time out.

But, again, many are only interested in buying a weapon (and only one weapon) for one reason and one reason alone...HD or PD. So, I see no sense in recommending that these same individuals spend the majority of their time learning to shoot a .22 when they have a 9mm (for instance) sitting at home for HD duty. Besides, other than the somewhat easily attained tight groups and the lack of recoil, I just dont see much "thrill" coming from the .22 caliber. With just a bit more practice, beginners shooting a 9mm can attain similar results, but with much more "thrill" factor.


In my experience, new shooters are less likely to acquire bad habits and flinches when starting out with 22s..

The first time my wife ever (and I mean ever) shot a weapon was with a Sig P239 DA/SA 9mm. Her first few mags were lousy shooting. By the third or fourth mag, she was hitting sub 3" groups from 15 feet. When she went with the DAK version, her groups opened up to 5" or so. But, given that she had no previous experience with such a trigger pull, this wasnt bad either. Her "groups" using the DAK probably had less to do with "bad mechanics and/or flinching" and had much more to do with simply needing to learn how to compensate for/dealing with a heavier trigger pull. This is something we all would experience at first...regardless of caliber I imagine. However, again, her "performance" with the DA/SA platform was quite impressive.

BTW- She eventually ended up with the DAK (per my suggestion) based on the fact that she wants a revolver one day and we both felt the DAK offered a "similar" trigger system vs. the DA/SA. Thus, once she acquires a revolver (DAO), she should benefit from both weapons having similar "action." In addition, she wanted something a bit smaller than, say, a P226 (which would have been my preferred 9mm of choice).

Anyway, she bought this weapon for one reason alone...HD/CC. She was not and is not interested in going shooting just to shoot. She wants it to count...each and every time. Hence, she only shoots with her HD weapon.

Regardless, while I agree with you in theory, the reality of it can be a different story altogether. I feel that the likes of the 9mm are very, very shootable right from the start. Hence, unless cost is an issue or one is simply interested in shooting "just to shoot" and does not have an HD weapon sitting around (needing attention), when it comes to adults, I just dont see any real compelling reason for recommending the .22 caliber vs. the likes of 9mm or .38 Special.
 
Last edited:
Just a quick story...

I took my younger sister to the range for the first time a few months back. She had never fired a weapon of any kind and was visibly nervous after watching me send a few rounds down range. Also keep in mind that she is all of 120lbs. I handed her my H&K P7 and braced myself, expecting her to hit the target wires or something other than the paper. To my surprise, she put 7rds in a 6in group on the targets CBM area from 7yds out. She absolutely loved that gun!

After that, why would I ever recommend that she buys a .22 for her first handgun? Actually why would I recommend that any capable adult buy a .22 for their first handgun?

It's like learning to crawl before you walk... but in this case you have the option to just start walking and skip the whole crawling thing.
 
A BB gun would be a good starter. Its how my father tought me gun saftey and how to shoot. Then a .22 and a .410 then up and up.
 
Didn't vote, because "it depends." If someone is looking to get into the hobby of shooting and likely going to spend a lot of money and a lot of time building a collection and learning how to shoot, I DO recommend a .22 as a good place to begin. Good and inexpensive way to learn to shoot, and plinking provides great trigger time.

But if the person is going to be an occasional shooter who wants a gun for security, I recommend a 4" revolver in .357, and a beginning diet of .38 special target loads. Also good and (relatively) inexpensive way to learn, and IMHO a .357 mag revolver is the one to have if you're going to have only one.

And if I take a newbie to the range to introduce them to shooting, they start with a .22. If their interest is in revolvers, we start with a .22 revolver; if semiautos, we start with a .22 semiauto.
 
It's like learning to crawl before you walk... but in this case you have the option to just start walking and skip the whole crawling thing.

I agree.

Didn't vote, because "it depends."

True.


Sure, the .22 may offer less recoil and tighter groups at the start, but to what end? In my opinion, good shooting and solid gun mechanics are not exclusive to the .22 caliber. In fact, many crucial "mechanics" can be learned at home...with an unloaded weapon. The only factor that cannot be replicated here is recoil compensation. But, this can be overcome with a decent amount of exposure. You cant tell me that someone going from a .22 to a 9mm, much less a .357 Mag or .45ACP, will all of a sudden become impervious to "flinching" and/or the need to compesate. This "flinching" response, once again, should diminish based on exposure/familiarity....regardless of caliber.

Besides, and I cant emphasize this enough, many are simply interested in buying a weapon exclusively for HD use. So, should I point them to the .22 and tell them to "work their way up" to other calibers? No way. Its simply not prudent and often not practical, IMHO.
 
Last edited:
Two instructors start with two complete newbies on the same day and one trains their student on a .22 and the other trains their student on a 9mm. They both fire 1000 rounds through their guns during their training. At the end of the day

Playboy, at the end of the day the guy who shot the 1000 rounds of 9mm has a tired hand and wrist. They are also out $260 dollars.
While the person who shot 1000 rounds of .22 in one day may be tired from shooting that many rounds in a day they haven't injured themselves. After spending ~$30 for their 1000 rounds they have the funds necessary to shoot off a box of each of five progressively heavier rounds.

But you've created a false dilemma. Few people will say a person can jump right from a .22 to a .44. Few new shooters will shoot 1000 rounds in a day.
I don't think anyone who recommends a .22 as a first handgun expects people to shoot no other handgun in the mean time.

In fact one of the main reasons for recommending a .22 is to give a person time to rent and try out many different centerfire handguns before they commit to one.
Although I do recommend different guns, in the end that choice is very subjective. A person has to find a gun that fits them, not one that fits me.

The process of becoming a competent marksman is not a strictly linear process. To have a person go right out and buy a centerfire limits that person much more than they have to be. Conversely a starting with a .22 gives a person the leisure to take their time picking out a handgun while still allowing them to practice and take classes.
 
learning

to learn the basics
Trigger control, sight alignment, grip - and all the intricacies therein. Small muscles, fine movements that are easy to loose track of, as I wrote before, in the larger bang and recoil of a CF pistol.
I can't argue with your observation about the training of LEOs and in the military. There is the Ruger Mk.II Government that was used for training in the military but that's a limited use.

The thing about "most people that I know" really depends on who you know, doesn't it? I just came from a range and a pistol match; most people that I know bought their pistols for target shooting. Doesn't mean anything - "most people" in each of our lives represents a very small sample of the world at large.

the fact that .22lr is not the better training method, but instead simply the cheapest is being ignored and the "cheap" aspect is being expressed as more important. I do not believe most people will shoot more with a .22
Whether it is "not the better training method" has not been established - that's what at least part of this discussion is about. The cheap aspect is important because it allows more shooting to happen for the same cost, not for any other reason.
"I do not believe that..." Kinda hard to substantiate that, though, isn't it? I believe that the opposite is true. I can't prove it. (It's true for me but that's all I can prove.)
Pete
 
Trigger control, sight alignment, grip - and all the intricacies therein.

Most of which can be practiced at home...regardless of caliber.

Small muscles, fine movements that are easy to loose track of, as I wrote before, in the larger bang and recoil of a CF pistol.

So, in essence, it amounts to recoil. Fair enough. But, is this reason enough to suggest or even use the .22 for anything other than "recreation"? Again, Im mainly speaking of those who are interested in acquiring a weapon primarily for HD/CC duty.

Even the recoil of the 12 gauge shotgun can be overcome within an evening...the "fear" of it at least.

Either way, I truly dont mind the .22 at all and I can appreciate its place. However, I usually do not prefer this caliber and often recommend the 9mm or .38 Special to beginners whose interest goes beyond "recreational" shooting.

Personally, Im a .45ACP nut, so....:)
 
Last edited:
Depends on what the person wants. For someone who only wants a revolver to stow in a drawer to hopefully never be used there's little need to have a 22lr.
Hopefully, it'll never be used. But what if it is?

If it's some person who bought a cheap mousegun and shot it once five years ago, they're probably not ready to use it under crisis. They may not deploy it effectively, and they may not be able to use it safely.

Owning a gun, particularly for self-defense, carries certain responsibilities. Those include regular practice and some skill in marksmanship. Phrases like "minute of bad guy" don't take into account the intricacies of hitting a moving target under low light that's trying to kill me.

That's what I meant by "no shortcuts." If you're going to be a defensive shooter, you're going to have to take this up as a hobby.

Now, not everyone's going to spend massive amounts of time shooting and training on a weekly basis. They probably don't work ammunition into the household budget like some of us do. In that case, a brick of .22 that runs >$20 and lasts several range trips is a boon.

Ammunition scarcity and price hikes are often cited as an impediment to regular practice. The .22 addresses that well, and without the stress of dealing with recoil fatigue.
 
You don't need to start on a .22 that is nonsense.

However I would recommend a .22 for the simple reason that the rounds are extremely cheap and have a tiny kick so you can practice shooting without flinching and all that. You can buy a box of 500 .22s for 15 bucks.

Other than that, there is nothing fundamentally different shooting a .22 over say a .45.
 
Back
Top