007Fitz wrote:...I would most likely use it for target shooting, but I want something that I can carry for self defense and use at home in case I need it for self defense. Mainly, I would like a gun that is going to be enjoyable at the range. I am looking for something reliable, durable, and well-functioning. I would like a semi-auto, not really looking for a revolver right now. I know a lot of people say that your opinions and preferences will not be the same as mine, but they very well could be and thats why I am just wondering what your opinions may be, and if they aren't the same for me when I look into then no harm done. To clarify what I am looking for a little more in depth: I would like a semi-auto with at least a 6+1 capacity, in a compact or sub-compact size, preferably a 9mm or .40, concealable (it doesn't have to be something very concealable, as I won't be carrying it daily), and I am looking for something in the used range of $400 give or take $50. Some examples of guns I have been just looking at online that seem appealing (however, I have not held or handled them, so I don't know for sure) would be: Beretta PX4 SC, Glock 26/27, Kel-tech PF9, Walther P99C, Walther PPS, Springfield XD SC, and some others but I'm sure you get the general direction and idea. Hope this helps, and would love to hear what you all think.
User: Thanks for the help.
You're welcome. And as to the gun: With the criteria you've listed, I'd observe that you still have a couple of options to clarify.
The most important (in my opinion) is whether you want one that does "single action / double action" (the traditional method using an exposed hammer that you can cock manually, based on the original 1911 design, and having two or three different trigger pull options), "double action only" (no exposed hammer, striker operated, consistent trigger pull); or one of those using a trigger system that's essentially DAO with restrike capability (e.g., SigSauer's "Double Action Kellerman", and others). Most of the guns you listed are SA/DA, though some have a DAO option.
The next is whether you want a gun that is designed to be reliable or one that is designed to be accurate. That's an over-simplification, of course, but if you're the sort of person who wants the point of impact to be the same as the point of aim on a consistent and repeatable basis, then you want a gun that is made by CNC machining to precise tolerances (and which might blow up if you drop it in the mud and then try to fire it). And, if you mainly want the gun to work no matter what, and are willing to put up with a three to five inch "group" at twenty-one yards, no matter how carefully you aim, that's another.
Finally, the capacity of the gun really depends more on how big your hand is than anything else, and how concealable you want the gun to be. A gun like the SigSauer 229 can be obtained with the DAK trigger system, and with aftermarket MecGar magazines will hold fifteen rounds (15+1), though it's a bit bulky despite the 4" barrel; I've got fairly large hands and I've got one of those that I like a lot, but the double-stack magazine makes the grip large enough that I had to install a "short trigger" (that's really just a "thin" trigger, the "short" designation refers to the distance from the front of the trigger to the back of the backstrap). They generally sell new for about eight hundred bucks. That's one, which like the Glock, is designed for ultra-reliability; the manufacturers don't even bother to try to sight in the sights on those - quality assurance consists of determining whether they shoot "groups", pretty much regardless of any consistency between point of impact and point of aim.
By the way, the Glock is a special case: the barrel is mounted lower in the gun, so that the force of recoil goes against the web of your hand, rather than forcing the muzzle upwards. That's to promote efficient target re-acquisition or rapid secondary target acquisition. People who like them are religious about how they feel. And people who don't like them really dislike them. No accounting for taste, eh?
Based on your criteria, and filling in the gaps with my own preferences, I'd recommend the Kahr CW9; it's a relatively inexpensive 9mm (which is more than sufficient, having sufficient kinetic energy at fifty yards to crush human bone), and machined to fairly exacting tolerances. It's as easy to field-strip and clean as any other semiautomatic (and easier than most Kahrs), and is a DAO. I had a chance to check one out recently, and I was impressed at the quality and workmanship given the reduced cost (especially as compared with the MK9). It's not a "drop in the mud" gun, but as long as you keep it clean and lubricated, it will be very reliable, and a fairly precise shooter. (I like my 229, but I also like to be able to hit what I'm aiming at - in the movies there's always some guy who shoots Badguy right in the head, when Badguy's got a hostage in front of him as a "human shield" - unless Goodguy's shooting a Kahr, I always think that shot is not possible - a Glock or a Sig is just as likely to hit the hostage as Badguy's head - the reliable guns are designed for "center of mass" aiming.)
Well, I think you all get the idea, any clarification on these laws and/or personal input, whatever it is I'm sure it will be helpful. 
of your find!