I'll know more after testing but I'm not sure I understand all the reviewer complaining about the trigger. It seems smooth and breaks pretty nicely, from what I can tell dry firing. Certainly better than any DA revolver I've ever owned. This spawns a theory for me: Many/most shooters now grew up since the intro of the Glock. They probably have not spent as much time with a revolver as those of us who grew up when autoloaders were still considered "iffy". These younger reviewers will then dismiss this long trigger pull without taking the time to learn to work with it.

On the other hand, I'm a little sad I got this before the S&W Shield was released. From the video, Youtube's hickok45 was amazingly accurate with the Shield. I'd love to have tried one before making my final selection. Still, I very much like the smooth lines compared to the Shield, Kahr or any of the pocket-sized striker fired pistols.

UPDATE: Spent the morning out at the range and I have to say that both of my new Ruger pistols came through with flying colors. The long trigger pull didn't bother me a bit. It was smooth and I had no problem finding the reset. I did have some sort of personal problem with the sights, though, and shot much better after going with point shooting. For me, the grip was in a very natural position and helped me a lot when I gave up on the sights. I was also not awe-stricken by the recoil. Easy to manage and not the muzzle-flip monster my Gen 2 Glock 19 was. I like the LC9 a lot and encountered no problems one couldn't expect when going to a small, light pocket pistol in a harder hitting caliber than one normally finds in a pocket pistol. I see no immediate need to look into that M&P Shield but I still might have gone with it if I'd had both to compare when I made the original purchase. That's life, always something newer and better coming along.