What is better when choosing a handgun? Capacity (amount rounds the gun can carry) or caliber (size of bullet/case)? For some thing that will shoot fine and work as a self-defense handgun that will last forever under any conditions?
This is always a can of worms.
I'll say neither is better. What is best is reliability. A gun that fails is a small, expensive club.
From trainers I trust, their recommended handgun is the Glock 19, the best compromise in size and capacity. From an organization the sees many hundreds of thousands of rounds fired per year, the highest reliability/lowest failure rate is in the Glock 9mm offerings. The newcomer S&W M&P 9mm is showing itself to be highly reliable, too.
Their lowest reliability seen for a mainstream pistol is in the 1911 platform. No bashing, just a fact based on direct observation.
With modern ammunition, the perceived shortcomings of the 9mm have all but been erased. The round is easier to shoot than .40 or .45, and that lets you put more hits where you want them.
With all this said, my EDC is a SIG P245, a compact .45. I have been using SIGs for so long that I am very comfortable and familiar with them. I carry this not for the caliber, but because it is the smallest reliable "full power" gun I have. The P239 is almost as big as my P225, so I have a hard time making myself buy one. I need to be careful regarding concealment, so smaller is better, even though I would much prefer to have my P228 9mm with me.
I am, however, seriously considering switching to the M&P 9c, as my wife carries that, and it is a great little firearm.
Whatever you choose to do, please get qualified professional training, and practice what you learn. Shooting is a highly perishable skill.
@ sloasdaylight: Your post is full of hyperbole. Please don't give false information to someone looking for assistance.
You state that you have a poor
opinion of Glocks, but it is apparently based on false data. Glocks have integral passive safeties built into the trigger system, the firing pin, and a drop safety. They do not have a manually activated safety, but many other firearms do not, either, such as my SIGs or my revolvers. I am not a Glock fanboy, but they are a fine weapon.
In the cases where people have caused negligent discharges, poor gunhandling skills by the operator do not make the gun unsafe.
Referring to handgun ammunition as "deadly and devastating" is misleading. Yes, people die from being shot with a .22, but they also survive being shot by a .45. The purpose of defensive use of any firearm is to stop the threat when you are in fear for your life or of grievous bodily harm. If the only way to stop the threat is by the death of the attacker, so be it; but the intent is not to kill someone, as you imply.
And stop hanging out with the gun shop commandos.
Nappa, sorry for derailing your post.