Ruger is a very good choice, not as expensive as a Glock but just as good, maybe better. I actually think the M&P from S&W is better based on LEAs switching to it over the Glock. It is a shame that no depts use the Ruger that I know of. It was same phenomena with revolvers many moons ago. S&W was the king, and Rugers were left with the security market, though their frame was superior.
WW, I am only addressing the bold part of your comment; from my experience, it is not necessarily a reflection of a more quality product, but more to do with dollars and cents. Although anecdotal, the switches I'm familiar with are strictly a cost basis. Both companies produce a quality product, at this time, SW is buying the business, just like Glock did/does.
To the OP, there are a lot of variables that come into play for a carry weapon. Some people focus on the physical features of the weapon to carry; some focus on the weight, some the manufacturer, some the caliber. My suggestion is to fondle as many as you can, speak to those who have the specific firearm you are curious about, fire it if possible; but once you buy it, practice with it. I mean not only shooting, but drawing, cleaning it. The more familiar you are with it, the more comfortable you will feel with it.
So to answer your question between the two guns; the LC9 is lighter and I can tell a noticeable more amount of recoil than the SR9c, which is little larger and heavier. IMHO, for tight conceal, I would have chosen then the LC9; for the home or to go out shooting or to open carry, I would select the SR9c. Just my $.02. You really can't go wrong with either one of them.
) They both have strong & weak points. SR9c you get more options - small 10 rd cc mag and 17 round mag included. Better holster selection and after market parts / accessories selection. Thicker tough and not as easy to carry discretely as the LC9.
