I think that both have there benefits. Currently my SD is a striker-fire. I like the way it shoots and feels. I have a SA revolver that I love as well. I have also shot a couple of different 1911's and like the look and feel of those. Some might say this is personal preference (and it is)...but I don't have a preference yet. I like to shoot them all!
The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it.
― Thomas Jefferson
The constitution shall never be construed...to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms.
― Alexander Hamilton
i like both i preferre to carry a striker pistol becuase of the concealibility asspects,i do have a 1911 on my ccw permit but rarely carry it do to weight,if we had open carry in california i would carry it more often but thats not an option.i think it really comes down to your needs and likes,it really is what you preferre or need.
Anyone like me, really prefer a hammer gun over a striker fired gun? After twenty years of having a Glock 20 as my daily carry autoload pistol, purchasing a Beretta Storm was a refreshing step. Getting a hammer in my hands again, I realize how much I missed them, and doubt I will be getting any more striker firearms.
I own one, striker pistol, a XD40SC. The trigger doesn't suck as much as some it's competitors. (Not exactly a ringing endorsement of the design) That will likely be it for me & strikers, for the foreseeable future.
Greg USAF Retired NRA Life Member "If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand." Milton Friedman