I've been shopping now for some time looking for the right EDC for me. I've consistantly leaned toward handguns with an exposed hammer. Only because that's what I'm used to. Every firearm I've owned had one. So, I've grown accustomed and comfortable with the visual and tactile "hammer".
However, yesterday I finally took a good long look at a couple striker fired autos and theres one or two that's really caught my attention. The Ruger SR9, in particular. It's super thin, thinner than the 1911's I've looked at in my opinion, yet it has an incredible 17+1 capacity! Yet, it also has a good deal of that "service" size I've owned for many years feel to it in what seems to be a very concealable package. Modest price with famed reliabilty and customer service. Finally, it just felt "right"..if that makes any sense compared with the literally dozens of models I've put my hands on. Just a very good fit for my hand.
Here's my question, or more specifically, my concern.... what are the advantages as well as disadvantages with a striker vs. a "hammer". For example, I've always enjoyed the ability to "decock" a hammer on an auto. So, what happens when you've fired off a few shots, and "reholster" or put it away? Is it basically, "locked and cocked"? My understanding is that you have to dry fire it everytime you go to take it down to release that striker. I was always taught it's not good to dry fire too much.
I guess I'm just having trouble feeling "safe" without that darn hammer, even though I know darn good and well that a striker fired auto can be just as safe as one with a hammer.
Help...I really like that SR9 the more I've thought about it all day and the more I've looked into it!!