I have a CW9 that I use for daily carry and have been very happy with it. I love my Glock 19, but the CW9 is so much lighter and thinner. I train equally with both of my carry guns but have never been concerned about "qualifying" with both guns. In Michigan we have the "Castle Doctrine" which has a specific law stating that you cannot be sued for using lethal or less that lethal force (by the BG or his family) if your actions were justified. The law also states that if you are sued the state pays your costs and fees. There are also provisions such as no duty to retreat from anywhere you have a legal right to be and the burden being on the prosecutor to prove you were wrong (instead of you proving you were justified). If you do not have the "Castle Doctrine" in Ohio I would urge you to join groups pushing to have these laws passed (like the NRA). While they are by no means perfect they are an advancement of our rights.

Also, I am curious if you have firsthand knowledge of issues like not "qualifying" with a certain weapon being used in court? I know quite often these type things are put out by writers (like Ayoob) for the shock factor and the need to fill up monthly magazine space. I believe these issues are not normally the problem the writers make them out to be. We have 48 states with some form of CCW laws, 34 or more with "shall issue" laws. Most of these laws have come about in the last 10 or so years. I do not believe that the legislature and judiaciary are as against the right to self defense as the liberal anti-gun media would have us to think. We simply would not have the advancement of the rights we have seen in recent years if that were the case. Rogue prosecutors are always a possibility but I believe it to be the exception and not the rule. Just my opinion! I look forward to reading the results of your CW9.

The castle doctrine only will apply in your "castle" not in line at a small mom and pop store or when some uses a knife or other item of deadly force. Yes it happens. No, Ohio does NOT have a castle doctrine yet. However it is in both the Ohio Senate and House. The bill SB 184 will have another hearing this coming Wednesday. I plan to testify. You would still have to be careful about civil suits when the castle doctrine does not apply. Qualifying a weapon is easy and takes little time it isn't required but it is the smart play.

I did pick up the CW9 this morning won't have any opportunity until Sunday to use it. It was very oily but once the oil was wiped down it looked and felt good to the hand. Anxious to shoot it. Will be dry firing it over the weekend.

If you reread my post you will see that in Michigan the "Castle Doctrine" applies to "anywhere you have a legal right to be", like in line at the mom and pop. It applies to force used to protect not only yourself but also someone else from "death, great bodily harm, rape or sexual assault". Michigans "Castle Doctrine" is a compilation of six seperate bills that lawmakers put together to erase some of the loopholes used by rogue prosecutors and plaintiff attorneys. I applaud your efforts in supporting this type of legislation. Michigan has come a long way in recent years in allowing citizens the right to protect themselves, and also shielding them from rogue prosecution and financial ruin through bogus lawsuits if they are forced too. Hopefully through efforts such as yours Ohio will follow suit.

My CW9 was very oily and very tight when I got it but broke in nicely after a couple of hundred rounds. They have very good triggers but they are a longer pull than Glocks and some other guns so your dry fire practice this weekend is a good idea. I'm interested to see if you like yours as much as I like mine. Good Luck and have fun!

Here is a link where you can read about Michigans Castle Doctrine: http://www.southsidesportsmanclub.co...ur-ground.html

I love my CW9. Good choice. Very good grouping for such a short barrel and fits the hand oh so well.

When the pistol came out of the carrying case and the plastic bag it was in, it was very oily. It was way too oily to even think about shooting it without cleaning it first. No hurry to clean it as we had 13" of snow so today is pretty much digging out and moving drifts. I am hopeful to get to the range tomorrow late afternoon. (Actually I'm like a kid at xmas wanting to shoot the darn thing)

I am a Michigan CCW carrier too with a CW9. I just got my CCW last month and I do not think I would have applied for it if not for that castle law. It would have been too limiting for my liking. Maybe I would have but probably not. When you say "qualify" what do you mean. I think taking my gun to the range and shooting it using different stances and grips would make me qualified. I keep all my targets and I could surely prove that I am qualified to use it.

I just got my CW9 because my XD9 service is just too heavy too carry even with the grip chop. I put 3 types of ammo, about 230 total through it and it was flawless. I shot it very well actually. I put a Hogue slip on grip just for better grip when drawing. This gun fits my smallish hands great. I love my XD but this gun is very nice too.

In Ohio, you have to qualify a pistol .38 or larger caliber to get your certificate to get your chl license. When I say qualify I mean 80% hits in an eight inch target at 7 yards (when I qualified, now it's 3, 5, and 7 yards) you fired 50 rounds if nec. The place where I got my chl certificate and later on advance classes keeps track on what weapons you have qualified. I have on a m&p 9c, ruger sp-101, s&w sigma 9mm, glock 23, glock 36, s&w 642 revolver, and soon as the weather cooperates my m&p .357 sig and this kahr cw-9.

.0Today was day one on the CW-9 test unscientific as it may be. I put 250 rounds thru the weapon at different distances from 9 feet at start to 12, 14, 16, 18, 21, and 25'. I started out with blazer brass, them blazer, then remmington umc, then winchester white box and some range reloads. It was great until the reloads, you could tell they were not as powerful as any of the other rounds and the reloads were dirty. I didn't have the mag slammed in well enough and the first round cycled from the slide relase and then it came out (operator error) and jammed the next round. The next problem came from failure to feed at round 246, it may have been from it being so dirty from the reloads and the last problem was round 248 and it was I think from a real weak round it sounded like a .22 not the crisp sound you would expect and that could have been the reason for the FTE/stovepipe.

The weapon seemed to want to shoot a little low (could again be operator error) but the groups were great! Once I was at 25' the groups got to be a little wide. I was using a b-16 nra target. I was in the black at all distances except for 25' and there were six out of the black and in the 5-6 ring. 21 rounds were shot at each distance. A b-29 target was used from this point on at 18, 21, and 25 feet. The groups were great again getting used to the sights the target showed a marked improvement in placement but started to get wide again at 25'. It could also be that's the distance the operator ran out of marksmanship and skill. All and all I like the pistol and I think my wife will really like it and that is what it was purchased to do make her successful in her concealed carry class. More to follow as the pistol is used more.

Second time shooting the CW-9 was today. 250 rounds. All ammo was blazer aluminum. No hang ups, no failure to feed fire or eject. Now that is 500 rounds with those two hiccups and to me it was clearly the range reloads that were the problem NOT the pistol. The groups today were good however no distance was beyond 25'.

Nobody has ever accused me of being an expert, but, this pistol seems to be a keeper. Will keep all informed about how it goes to about the 1,000 round mark.

That way if anyone is considering a CW-9, you can have the benefit of my experience if it's worth anything.

You'll be returned to your original programming..

Glad to hear the CW9 likes the Blazer aluminums, I just bought 700 rounds of it. It has eaten everything else I fed it so I didn' expect them to be a problem either.

test #3. Today it was 180 rounds of blazer aluminum with not problems at all. I can say I'm not very happy with the long trigger pull. I talked to two others at the range that were Kahr fans and both liked the long pull. They both said it takes a little to get used such a long pull. Today once I tried something told to me about having the trigger half pulled then squeezing it until the break seemed to help greatly from my low and left problem. Today it was pretty much dead on in 2-3" groups at the magic 7 yard mark and even 3" groups at 25'. This pistol may be a keeper for my wife. The pistol did "loosen" and "smooth" after about 200 rounds. The Kahr contingent at the range today seemed to think that the cw-9 was really dialed in. That wouldn't be anything I did it was all the people at the factory. Any other things good or bad I'll report. Now back to my short second pull Smiths...

The long DA pull does take some getting used to and can start to wear on you for extended range sessions. The CW9 is a no bells-and-whistles defense gun and when employed for that purpose the adrenaline dump will make the long trigger pull a non-issue. It may help reduce the chance of an accidental discharge though.

I'm tardy on this report. I qualified the Kahr cw-9 about 10 days ago. It was 40 shots and 40 where they were to go so the last 10 were not needed. The pistol performed real well and I'm happy to say is part of the "arsenal" we have to choose from for concealed carry. More to follow when it is fired again. Now at 720 rounds.