Quote Originally Posted by HardToHandle View Post
Pretty much my analysis, but my 442 is way cooler than a LCP. The LCP is the cheap Ruger copy of the even more low-rent P3AT. It has the sex appeal of 1982 Ford Fiesta and similar performance. It will never shoot well, as it aspires to be better than nothing.

The 442 has been putting bad guys in the ground for 60 years. It is the gun you reach for when you sense trouble might be just around the bend. It is a pain to shoot, difficult to shoot well but invokes Greater confidence for me.
Don't get me wrong: I LOVE my 642's. But when I stick a Ruger LCP in my chest pocket and it freaking FITS THE POCKET I have to take step back and say, "Yeah, I know it's a polymer framed 380 and not a metal-framed gun capable of shooting +P ammo, but to the extent that shot placement trumps power level I have to say that the flatter and smaller gun is the better of the two because it will get carried even in situations where that thick round cylinder on the revolver prevents viable concealment in the summer. "

Sure, maybe a Ruger LCP has only a few thousand rounds in its service life before it's a paperweight not worth fixing, but in the dark on a Saturday night when it's hot and humid enough that all you're wearing is a Hawaiian shirt with shorts and flip-flops then its advantages become real friggin' apparent.

Preferring a Ruger LCP almost makes you ashamed that you pick a polymer gun that feels like a toy over a real man's concealment pistol in the J-Frame, but once you get past that you can carry that cheapo-feeling semi-auto 380 with pride.

I'm doing that soul-searching right now. I'm convinced the 642 will outlast the Ruger by thousands of rounds, but if I have to leave the 642 in the truck because it's slightly too big to conceal in the summer, then what good is it? Maybe the Ruger elicits "I feel so cheap and dirty carrying this" feelings, but if it's there in a pinch and the 642 is in the glove box, then where did you go wrong preferring the Ruger?