If you had $300 to spend?

[czerbe]

Would you buy at cheap 22 pistol or an expensive Crimson Trace for your EDC?

Keep in mind I only have one Fire arm SAXD9mmSC with is on my hip as much as possible.

But would love to start really target shooting at a new range.

[FormerUser123]

I could never bring myself to spend as much on an accessory as I would spend on a gun. I'd add another gun if I were you.

[GreenBlood10]

Personally I would go with the Crimson Trace. If you want to get into serious target shooting with your XD and its the firearm you would rely upon if the situation required it, I would want to get really consistent with one firearm. No point in throwing another gun into the mix.

That is what I personally would do. Others may agree/disagree.

GB

[Steve_NEPhila]

Buy a .22 LR all the way. The low recoil, inexpensive ammunition and precision help to foster better marksmanship fundamentals. I shoot a good 8-10 thousand .22 rounds per year, and it has dramatically improved my ability to shoot handguns. Some people look down on the .22, yet I see range time as pure concentration to achieve the precision and accuracy I want to have. Others go to the range to make noise and pick up shell casings... choose your poison.

[keystoneman 85]

I'd get a crimson trace for $150, and find a used Heritage .22 revolver for $150. Best of both worlds. If I had to pick one I'd pick the .22.

Edit: I see that CT grips for a XD are more expensive then for Glocks. Guess my idea is out. Go with the .22lr.

[KelBench400]

I'm not big on lasers, so I'd add the gun. If the gun happens to be a .22, you'd probably end up with more trigger time since ammo is so cheap. If you play your cards right, you could probably even end up with a .22 plinker pistol and a .22 plinker rifle for your $300. Think used Ruger Mark II and Marlin model 60. That's a full day of fun on the cheap.

[ByAnyMeans]

I would say go with the 22lr. if you can only swing one. As Steve NEPhila said it gives you a lot more abiltiy to practice the fundementals of good marksmanship.

[wellcraft]

i'd buy a 22 before i dropped 300 bucks on a laser site. lasers are cool but i've never really liked them on any of my firearms because my eyes tend to focus on the laser and not the iron sites.

[comsubin61]

Another gun. A laser is really a waste of money. They look cool on TV but in real life and in our situation( civilians), you would not have the opportunity to really use it in a gun fight, due to most of them have to be turned on, and I don't think that is want we want to do when required to draw as fast as we can. On the other hand another gun like a 22 would allow you to train more and therefore became more efficient with a firearm.

[TaurusPT145]

I would go for the .22. I have a .22 LR revolver that came with a .22 Magnum cylinder for under $200. As many have pointed out, the .22 ammo is really inexpensive, so you can shoot a lot without spending a lot.

I carry a .45ACP. The ammo for the .45 is a lot compared to the .22, but I would have to disagree with some in that I would not practice with my .22 revolver in order to help my proficiency with my .45. I get less expensive .45 ammo to become more proficient with my carry weapon. Shooting the .22 is more about just having fun (for me anyway). I figure, the sights are different, the recoil is different, the action is different, the weight is different, all too different from the gun my life my depend on. Just my $.02.

Basically, do what makes you happy. If having another gun makes you happy, go for it. If having your current gun look cooler makes you happy, go for it. Just have fun.