.32 ACP for SD?? [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : .32 ACP for SD??


ADK_40GLKr
07-14-2011, 19:03
Does anyone besides "Kinsey Milhone"* carry a .32 for SD?

The restoration on my 1890's vintage Forehand and Wadsworth British Bulldog is almost complete, and my gunsmith has assured me I'll be able to use .32 ACP in it for occasional shooting.

Probably not quite as powerful as a .380, but better than a .22LR, IMHO.

Anyone out there admit to carrying .32's?

(Kinsey Milhone is the fictional private investigator from a fictional beach town in California, who is featured in Sue Grafton's alphabet mysteries.)

fastbolt
07-14-2011, 20:32
So, you're "accessorizing" because of a fictional character in a series of books, or because of a nostalgic interest in owning a restored historical firearm?

There was a time in my younger days when I bought and occasionally carried one or another handgun chambered in .22 LR, .25 ACP or .380 ACP. Never a .32 ACP, oddly enough.

Those days are long past, though.

Foxtrotx1
07-14-2011, 20:35
Use FMJs to maximize penetration. The .22 kills so i don't see why the .32 won't.

Vartarg
07-14-2011, 20:53
Self defense is serious business.....carry a serious gun.

I don't EVER want to be in a gunfight, but IF I am, I hope the other guy has a gun like yours!:supergrin:

Deaf Smith
07-14-2011, 21:24
ADK,

I have this neat Webley .38 revolver. 3 inch barrel, top break, .38 S&W, six shooter to!

http://glocktalk.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=214420&d=1298420628

Now it was made in the '50s and no doubt someone carried it for self defense (many cops and soldiers did just that.) They even made the same gun in .32.

But these are enlightened times.

Sure a .32 or .38 S&W will kill. And it will scare someone just about as much as any handgun. And now and then they will stop someone with one shot. But it is well known they don't immediately stop very often and you give your opponent a chance to pay you back for your efforts.

My wife has been a ER nurse, OR nurse, CV-ICU nurse, head of CV-ICU, director of cardiovascular nursing, and other such duties. She has seen many a gun shot wound in the ER. She told me that the ONLY ones that were consistently carried in on a stretcher were shotgun wounds. She said in general the bigger the gun used the more likely they were carried in and not walked in. .22s, .32s, and the like had a fair amount walk right in and complain they had been shot.

Now I know 'James Bond' packed a .32, and all kinds of detective novels have them carrying some little gun. But that is fiction.

Yes they make good backup guns or hideout guns but I do suggest if you carry a gun for serious purposes then carry a serious gun.

And if you do decide to pack a .32 then become a fast and very accurate shot so as to overcome the lack of power of your chosen weapon.

Because ADK you can evade reality, but you cannot evade the consequences of evading reality (to paraphrase Aya Rand.)

Deaf

janice6
07-14-2011, 21:31
Does anyone besides "Kinsey Milhone"* carry a .32 for SD?

The restoration on my 1890's vintage Forehand and Wadsworth British Bulldog is almost complete, and my gunsmith has assured me I'll be able to use .32 ACP in it for occasional shooting.

Probably not quite as powerful as a .380, but better than a .22LR, IMHO.

Anyone out there admit to carrying .32's?

(Kinsey Milhone is the fictional private investigator from a fictional beach town in California, who is featured in Sue Grafton's alphabet mysteries.)



Before the Rhino .357 Magnums, my wife carried a Inox Tomcat. She needed the tip up barrel because she couldn't rack the slide on other guns. Sometimes she used to carry the .38 spl J frame.

ADK_40GLKr
07-15-2011, 05:10
So, you're "accessorizing" because of a fictional character in a series of books, or because of a nostalgic interest in owning a restored historical firearm?

I'm not sure I like the term "accessorizing" but my interest is more in the nostalgic element and family history aspect. The story goes that my grandfather bought the "Saturday Night Special" in 1899 when he went to Florida to accompany his father-in-law's casket back north on the train. Apparently there was a lot of "body snatching" going on in those days to supply medical schools.

Now all I need is a "Gucci" holster to carry it in, and I'll be good to go!:tongueout:

H&K 4 LIFE
07-15-2011, 08:23
I'm not sure I like the term "accessorizing" but my interest is more in the nostalgic element and family history aspect. The story goes that my grandfather bought the "Saturday Night Special" in 1899 when he went to Florida to accompany his father-in-law's casket back north on the train. Apparently there was a lot of "body snatching" going on in those days to supply medical schools.

Now all I need is a "Gucci" holster to carry it in, and I'll be good to go!:tongueout:

Based on the family history of that gun alone it is something I would just put in the safe, fire on special occasions, but would not carry.

Probably not a first choice for something to defend myself with nor is it something I would want to risk losing to the police evidence locker in the event I do.

It's a great family heirloom, not a great carry gun. Just my opinion.

Donn57
07-15-2011, 09:52
I suppose the .32 ACP can be a carry option for some, but no longer for me. I sold my Kel-Tec P-32 after I had an unpleasant encounter while carrying it as my primary. I realized that I had no confidence in it being able to stop the individual I was facing.

Clint Smith says that your carry gun should be comforting. On that day, my .32 ACP was not, so no more mouse guns for me. YMMV.

cce1302
07-15-2011, 10:01
I occasionally carry a .32

HarleyGuy
07-15-2011, 10:43
I have my .32 Kel-Tec in my pocket holster right now.
I usually carry it in warm/hot weather.

NO, my little .32ACP will not thrust an attacked back against the wall when hit by this little bullet, but the same could also be said if I were to use my .40cal.A .32 in my pocket is far better than my .40cal (at home in the safe):supergrin:

TV and movies have created a false image of how a person/body reacts when hit with a bullet of any caliber.

As a civilian, my only objective when faced with a lethal threat is to stop the threat. This could be accomplished by leaving if I could so so safely.

If leaving (backing off or running) is not an option, the only option left in stopping the threat is to use or threaten to use your own lethal force.

Nobody, good guy or bad guy wants to be shot even once with a .32, let alone 10 times and the first (well placed) shot is the best shot.

My best friend was killed (murdered) with ONE .32ACP bullet, so don't try to tell me that is isn't and effective bullet.

Donn57
07-15-2011, 11:37
My best friend was killed (murdered) with ONE .32ACP bullet, so don't try to tell me that is isn't and effective bullet.

Was your friend hopped on dope trying to rob someone? Was he in a blind rage trying to kill the person who shot him? I suspect not.

The question isn't really whether or not someone can be killed with a .32 ACP. Certainly they can. The question is will it stop someone quickly enough to prevent him from doing the victim harm?

But, hey, if you're confident in the effectiveness of the .32 ACP and are willing to bet your life on it, who am I to question your decision? You based your decision on your experience and I based mine on my experience and we came to two different decisions. That's the way life works.

fastbolt
07-15-2011, 12:18
I'm not sure I like the term "accessorizing" but my interest is more in the nostalgic element and family history aspect. The story goes that my grandfather bought the "Saturday Night Special" in 1899 when he went to Florida to accompany his father-in-law's casket back north on the train. Apparently there was a lot of "body snatching" going on in those days to supply medical schools.

Now all I need is a "Gucci" holster to carry it in, and I'll be good to go!:tongueout:

I used the term rather tongue-in-cheek, so don't take it too seriously. ;)

I can see the family history aspect, but bear in mind there's likely a reason the smaller caliber personal defense revolvers eventually evolved upwards to reach the .38 S&W Special. Nostalgia probably ought to go only so far when it comes to someone using equipment to save their life (or the lives of their loved ones).

Nice family heirloom, though.

David Armstrong
07-15-2011, 12:42
Does anyone besides "Kinsey Milhone"* carry a .32 for SD?

The restoration on my 1890's vintage Forehand and Wadsworth British Bulldog is almost complete, and my gunsmith has assured me I'll be able to use .32 ACP in it for occasional shooting.

Probably not quite as powerful as a .380, but better than a .22LR, IMHO.

Anyone out there admit to carrying .32's?

(Kinsey Milhone is the fictional private investigator from a fictional beach town in California, who is featured in Sue Grafton's alphabet mysteries.)
For a long time a .32 was considered perfectly fine for CCW. It was never the best choice but it worked for most situations. Nothing has changed since that time. Are you as well armed as you could be...no. Are you armed well enough to take care of most CCW events....yes.

Burncycle
07-15-2011, 12:43
If it's what you have, and if it means the difference between carrying something and leaving it at home, then absolutely carry it. Use FMJ and avoid the hollow point stuff so that you can at least get adequate penetration.

Just know it's not ideal, or even in the range for what many people consider the minimum for stopping a fight reliably. As long as you keep that in mind when you're making your decisions you can probably avoid getting into bad situations.

Taking a step back to look at a broader picture...

Obviously the sight of any gun can deter threats, even (for example) a little .22 NAA mini. They're not going to ask what caliber you're using if the little guy starts barking. In many situations just the sight of a gun can deter further aggression and save your bacon.

But what if it doesn't? In many situations that little .32 can save your life, but when possible it's wise to prepare for the worst case scenario* (within the relm of practicality) and then assume all the lesser cases are also covered. *In other words, a determined aggressor under the influence.

The .32 ACP is more than capable of killing someone, nobody is arguing that... but more importantly: How many mortally wounded bad guys have been able to continue harming and killing you and yours before they finally expire? The question is not if the caliber is lethal, it absolutely is. It's will it stop the fight fast enough to stop the bad guy from continuing to carry out his intentions before it's too late. Obviously shot placement is the number one factor, but the .32 doesn't give you much in the way of margin for error.

You shot the guy dead, but he doesn't know it yet and that didn't stop him from killing you and yours in the meantime.

By all means carry the thing... but I'd plan on upgrading when you can. Take a .38 special airweight back to 1899 and your grandfather might have been more confident carrying that ;) Get an heirloom of your own that your grandkids will talk about carrying one day!

ADK_40GLKr
07-15-2011, 14:47
;) Get an heirloom of your own that your grandkids will talk about carrying one day!

You mean like my OTHER handgun, a 2nd gen G22, imported 2/7/1994, with "DETROIT POLICE DEPARTMENT" engraved on the slide?

OctoberRust
07-15-2011, 15:38
Based on the family history of that gun alone it is something I would just put in the safe, fire on special occasions, but would not carry.

Probably not a first choice for something to defend myself with nor is it something I would want to risk losing to the police evidence locker in the event I do.

It's a great family heirloom, not a great carry gun. Just my opinion.


Exactly what this guy said.

Many don't realize, if you're ever involved in an SD shooting, and even if it's as plain as night and day, you're VERY likely to have your gun confiscated for "evidence" for a subjective amount of time. You may or may not get it back, things tend to get "lost"...

Burncycle
07-15-2011, 15:43
You mean like my OTHER handgun, a 2nd gen G22, imported 2/7/1994, with "DETROIT POLICE DEPARTMENT" engraved on the slide?

Exactly :thumbsup:

Spiffums
07-15-2011, 15:44
When your in your jockey shorts........ a Beretta in the butt beats a Glock on the Hip. Extra Points for Movie and Character who said that.

HarleyGuy
07-15-2011, 15:48
I guess everyone has to do their own soul searching before making certain decisions.
I put a helmet on when I ride my motorcycle.
I put a seat belt on when I drive my car or truck.
I put a .32ACP, a .40cal, or a .45ACP on before I leave home, just in case of an emergency.

If I KNEW that I was definitely going to have an accident on my motorcycle, or in my car or truck, I wouldn't just add more protective clothing or gear, I'D STAY HOME!

For me the same applies for the gun I choose to carry.

Perhaps a .32 cal isn't enough in some situations, but I think the same could also be said for a .45ACP.

When I see a cop (in real life or on TV) get out of their patrol car and then unholster their handgun I'm thinking to myself "why doesn't he or his partner have the shotgun"?

IMO, if you ever need a gun, you're never gonna have too much gun, but we can't walk around all day with a shotgun in our hands, and for some it's also not practical to lug a .45ACP around when in reality the chances of a civilian is darn near "0".

I carry a G-27 or a Kimber when the weather is cooler and the Kel-Tec .32 when it's hot. I hope that I never need either of them regarless of the weather.

dnuggett
07-15-2011, 19:33
Are you armed well enough to take care of most CCW events....yes.

That is true. Statistically speaking most "CCW events" do not require firing the gun for the situation to be defused.

That said, there are better choices if you will need the bullet to do it's job.

There are many other factors that count for a lot more than caliber choice.

How accurate are you with that old revolver? How reliable is it?

Just1More
07-15-2011, 19:40
It depends if you like wounding people, I guess.

Warp
07-15-2011, 19:42
No. I have never been so lazy as to carry a mouse gun. If I need something small I'll take it my 642.

Teej
07-15-2011, 19:43
SE Florida. Bad divorce situation. Husband has large guy break in to kill wife.

Woman is home alone with 5 shot .32 revolver when assailant breaks in. She shoots him 4 times before he gets to her and wrestles the gun from her.

She runs for her life and bad guy shoots her in the back with the last remaining bullet.

Bad guy died and to this day she remains paralyzed.

OP, true story. I hope this helps.

dcc12
07-15-2011, 19:44
Self defense is serious business.....carry a serious gun.

I don't EVER want to be in a gunfight, but IF I am, I hope the other guy has a gun like yours!:supergrin:
If he hits you with good shot placement you will be just as dead as being shot with a "real" gun. Having seen alot of gunshot wounds (work in large Trauma center) I'll take placement over cal. any day.

Teej
07-15-2011, 20:05
If he hits you with good shot placement you will be just as dead as being shot with a "real" gun. Having seen alot of gunshot wounds (work in large Trauma center) I'll take placement over cal. any day.


I agree with you 100%. My question is how will your shot placement be in a life and death situation after that addrenal dump possible surprise and shock kick in...?

But I'll say this. A .32 is better than nothing at all...........

Caver 60
07-15-2011, 22:09
"I can see the family history aspect, but bear in mind there's likely a reason the smaller caliber personal defense revolvers eventually evolved upwards to reach the .38 S&W Special."

Not to derail the thread, but I hope everyone realizes there is a significant difference between 38 Special and 38 S&W.

Donn57
07-15-2011, 22:42
"I can see the family history aspect, but bear in mind there's likely a reason the smaller caliber personal defense revolvers eventually evolved upwards to reach the .38 S&W Special."

Not to derail the thread, but I hope everyone realizes there is a significant difference between 38 Special and 38 S&W.

Yes, but there is no difference between a .38 Special and a .38 S&W Special.

ScottieG59
07-15-2011, 23:01
I guess this is at least not the old 9mm vs 45ACP argument that has broken the century mark. As Jeff Cooper said, you are only outgunned if you miss. People really seem to invest their egos in their particular views. You can look at the odds and what may happen. You can do everything right and come in second place.

I am sure some of you know what happens with your best laid plans once you meet the enemy. They will not play by your rules or follow a script. If you think you have it all figured out.. Well, you are wrong.

Sharky7
07-16-2011, 11:22
I'd keep that .32 for nostalgia only....

As for .32 for self defense...it's getting harder to justify it's use anymore in my opinion. You have guns like the Ruger LCP and Kahr PM9 that are either the same size or only a tiny bit bigger, but more powerful.

Nutt51
07-16-2011, 11:33
If that's all I could find in an emergency situation, it's what I'd use.
However, if with forethought, I had to make a decision on a caliber for
SD, it would not even be on the list.
Yes folks can argue, and rightly that many people have been killed with
.32's and 22's, but if I were going to defend my life, I'm going with
something larger with a higher velocity hollow point.
To each his own.

fastbolt
07-16-2011, 11:34
"I can see the family history aspect, but bear in mind there's likely a reason the smaller caliber personal defense revolvers eventually evolved upwards to reach the .38 S&W Special."

Not to derail the thread, but I hope everyone realizes there is a significant difference between 38 Special and 38 S&W.

?

Which is why the .38 S&W Special became the dominant defensive/service revolver caliber as the 20th century progressed. The .38 Long Colt and .38 S&W (among others) faded once the more powerful round (and smokeless powder) was developed.

I can't denigrate the decision to carry a defensive handgun for nostalgic reasons upon occasion too much. When I was a young cop there was a period when I'd sometimes carry a 4 5/8" Blackhawk off-duty. I'd grown up learning to shoot using Blackhawks of various caliber. I could shoot them 1 & 2-handed fast & accurately ... but it was the reloading that got me bogged down. :rofl:

BK63
07-16-2011, 12:40
I have a British Bulldog just like that one pictured. It was my fathers. I have never shot it. When I was very small he used to carry it in a bad section of a city he had to travel at night and pulling it out saved his A** many times. I wouldn't bother to shoot it or carry it, just something cool to have and look at.

rohanreginald
07-16-2011, 16:55
here's an analogy for you:

I hunt with a Winchester model 12 shotgun that used to be my fathers. I only use it on certain occasions and yes I use it for nostalgic reasons. It is chambered in 12 gauge, 2 3/4 inches. Today a lot of people hunt with 3 inch chambers and 3 1/2 inch chambers. The measly 2 3/4 is considered by some to be inadequate. The ducks I shoot die just the same from my winchester as they do from my hunting partners Benelli 3 inch mag.

I also hunt with an Ithaca 16 gauge shotgun. The 16 gauge is considered by some to be obsolete. A 12 gauge will work better and can be just as light to carry. I shoot pheasants side by side with other guys using 12 gauges and 20 gauge shotguns. My birds die just the same. Oh yeah the ithaca was inherited and only comes out once a year or so for nostalgic reasons. It performs just fine.

I now that the .32 ACP is somewhat a cartridge of the past. But there are still companies making handguns chambered for .32 ACP. There must be a reason. I say there is no problem carrying that gun on the odd occasion that you want to be nostalgic and remember your heiratige. Are there better options? Just like the shotguns mentioned above, there are a lot of better options out there today. Would your .32 ACP still work today? I say yes.

I have .32 ACP pistol. It is my favorite pistol to shoot. I have carried it in the past, and if for some reason my main carry rigs were down, I would carry it again with comfort. If it made me feel good to carry it because it was my dad's or grandpa's I would do so and feel fine, knowing they were on my side!

Vartarg
07-16-2011, 17:36
If he hits you with good shot placement you will be just as dead as being shot with a "real" gun. Having seen alot of gunshot wounds (work in large Trauma center) I'll take placement over cal. any day.
My point had less to do with the caliber, and more to do with SD use of a "1890's Vintage" .32 that the gunsmith said was OK for "occasional shooting." I doubt that the owner of that pistol will train with that firearm as I do with my G19.

That said, your comment re shot placement is of course spot on!

Cheers

Dukeboy01
07-16-2011, 18:19
Like others have said, a .32 in your pocket when you need it is better than a .45 back home in your gunsafe.

Warp
07-16-2011, 18:30
Like others have said, a .32 in your pocket when you need it is better than a .45 back home in your gunsafe.

And like I said, I (and many others) are not so lazy and apathetic as to be stuck with a mouse gun. Carrying something better than a little .32 really isn't hard.

GAFinch
07-16-2011, 18:57
I frequently carry a .32, as does my aunt, as did my grandfather.

-There was a shooting here a few months ago where a single shot from a .380 killed a man.
-There was another shooting here a couple years ago where a deputy shot a robber multiple times in the chest with .40 HP's, eventually having to shoot the guy in the head.
-I was in a car wreck once where it took about half an hour before I realized the seat belt had fractured my rib heads.

Unless you hit a very critical area, adrenaline is going to overpower any pistol caliber for a period of time.

michael e
07-16-2011, 19:00
Is a 32 what I would go with no, but if its all you are going to carry its better than nothing. The better half dont carry becasue she hasnt found anything she will actually carry. I wish she would carry a 32 over nothing. Trying to talk her into a small 9mm or giving her my LCP and getting me another pocket carry.

up1911fan
07-16-2011, 19:01
No. While I wouldn't want to get shot with one, I also wouldn't want to depend on one.

DWARREN123
07-16-2011, 19:59
Been done by some but I like something with more size and speed. :supergrin:

Dukeboy01
07-16-2011, 20:50
And like I said, I (and many others) are not so lazy and apathetic as to be stuck with a mouse gun. Carrying something better than a little .32 really isn't hard.

So having different tools for different situations automatically makes you lazy and apathetic? I have five different hammers out in my garage, but I guess I technically could do all of my nail driving with a 9lb sledge. :upeyes: Come to think of it, it's also possible to use a flathead screwdriver in most Phillips head screws, so I guess I can thin out my tool box there as well.

Sometimes deep pocket carry is the best tactical approach, like when you're penetrating the perimeter for a day at Disneyworld and other "gun free" zones that are enforced only with signs and not metal detectors. Would I like to have the spare scratch to drop on a new Ruger LCP or a single- stack 9mm? Sure.

In the mean time I've seen plenty of people dropped with "mouse guns" and plenty of cockroaches survive multiple hits with 9mm or higher. The important thing is to carry a weapon you are confident that you can use effectively.

Warp
07-16-2011, 21:09
Sometimes deep pocket carry is the best tactical approach, like when you're penetrating the perimeter for a day at Disneyworld and other "gun free" zones that are enforced only with signs and not metal detectors. Would I like to have the spare scratch to drop on a new Ruger LCP or a single- stack 9mm? Sure.

In the mean time I've seen plenty of people dropped with "mouse guns" and plenty of cockroaches survive multiple hits with 9mm or higher. The important thing is to carry a weapon you are confident that you can use effectively.

Disney? I would carry my sub compact Glock or my J-frame revolver, not a .32.

FireForged
07-17-2011, 08:41
I do not carry a 32 but I am confident that I can stop a human attacker at close range with one. If the attacker happens to survive the encounter, thats just fine with me. If some armed street criminal receives the impact of a couple 32cal fmj's and still wants your wallet, that is one tuff son-of-a-gun straight out of the movies. I agree that people can act even after being seriously injured but being so determined to commit something like a mugging would just be freak.

People are always saying that you cant stop a attacker with this or with that... heck, a honey bee can stop and cause the largest of men and most animals to flee. I think I can manage the same with a fast moving lead projectile.

David Armstrong
07-17-2011, 10:47
And like I said, I (and many others) are not so lazy and apathetic as to be stuck with a mouse gun. Carrying something better than a little .32 really isn't hard.
That makes a rather unwaranted assumption that one is stuck with a mousegun, or that carrying a mousegun is the result of laziness or apathy. Plenty of folks carry mouseguns by choice following a logical analysis of their needs and situation.

Darkangel1846
07-17-2011, 10:51
Was your friend hopped on dope trying to rob someone? Was he in a blind rage trying to kill the person who shot him? I suspect not.

The question isn't really whether or not someone can be killed with a .32 ACP. Certainly they can. The question is will it stop someone quickly enough to prevent him from doing the victim harm?

But, hey, if you're confident in the effectiveness of the .32 ACP and are willing to bet your life on it, who am I to question your decision? You based your decision on your experience and I based mine on my experience and we came to two different decisions. That's the way life works.

so you think your 9mm, .40 or .45 will do any better in that situation, man you need a reality check. "Stopping Power" is pure nonsense when your talking about handguns.:wavey:

Warp
07-17-2011, 11:01
so you think your 9mm, .40 or .45 will do any better in that situation

Most likely, yes.

If you think a .32 will consistently and reliably do just as well as a service caliber you need a reality check.

436
07-17-2011, 11:51
Does anyone besides "Kinsey Milhone"* carry a .32 for SD?

The restoration on my 1890's vintage Forehand and Wadsworth British Bulldog is almost complete, and my gunsmith has assured me I'll be able to use .32 ACP in it for occasional shooting.

Probably not quite as powerful as a .380, but better than a .22LR, IMHO.

Anyone out there admit to carrying .32's?

(Kinsey Milhone is the fictional private investigator from a fictional beach town in California, who is featured in Sue Grafton's alphabet mysteries.)

Sure…. I’d admit to carrying a .32 ACP at one time... Back in the day when I was working on the streets {leo} I carried a Colt .32 ACP pocket hammerless for a back up piece; the issue weapon at that time {1967} was a model 10 S&W 38 Spl. I believe the .32 ACP has a little poop then yours in .32 S&W short from a revolver, not much... In any case, the Colt never missed a beat when I fire it... it’s a very reliable weapon with good ammo and a good magazine; that’s why I carried it. The idea was to get as many .32’s into the target as possible... dump a load {or all} of 70gr ball and look for cover or away out. Would I use it today? Nah; I don’t think so… back then I had very little idea about what was going on between target and shooter, on the two range. Could it kill or incapacitate a suspect, sure as would the .32 S&W short or long; it’s probable’…, just not the best pick though, especially in a vantage revolver.
I’ve seen shooting involving .32’s both fatalities and none- fatalities... The DOA’s only took one or two rounds... On the survivors’.., they said; it hurt like hell.

As a side; I wish I had that old Colt back, it was a very comforting companion back then; it never failed to fire, never jammed and shot pretty accurate.
Let’s see’ what was it that man said?? Oh yeah; “make the right choice; your life might depended on it”
Good luck.
436

snowbird
07-17-2011, 11:58
There's an interesting little study on stopping power written up at www.buckeyefirearms.org/printable/node/7866

His conclusion: Carry what you want, because caliber isn't that important, even if it's only a .32ACP or even a .22LR. Reliability of your self-defense gun is important. Shot placement is important.

Headshots = 75% immediate incapacitation
Torso shots = 41% immediate incapacitation
Arms and legs shots = 14% immediate incapacitation

He found that "average number of rounds until incapacitation" for .22LR was 1.38, and for shotguns (90% were 12 gauge) it was 1.22.

NAA minis in .22LR are a lot more convenient to lug around all day and keep concealed, than are 12 gauges, and most of us civilians live and work in fairly peaceful areas, for now (let's stop Islamic immigration now to try to keep it that way, but I digress:)).

David Armstrong
07-17-2011, 15:21
His conclusion: Carry what you want, because caliber isn't that important, even if it's only a .32ACP or even a .22LR. Reliability of your self-defense gun is important. Shot placement is important.

Agreed. Of all the factors that go into DGU with a CCW, caliber ranks very near the bottom, IMO.

happyguy
07-17-2011, 15:25
.32 ACP for SD??

No, absolutely not!

Regards,
Happyguy :)

fastbolt
07-17-2011, 15:58
Well, the reliability consideration has surfaced ...

That being the case, I'd have to give some consideration to the many qual courses-of-fire (both for LE & non-LE) which I've attended as an instructor, and how the diminutive caliber semiautos have performed overall, over many years.

While it's always going to be possible to have a center-fire semiauto of 9mm or greater caliber experience a feeding stoppage, magazine-related problem or some other general malfunction ... and even an occasional revolver may exhibit some problem (usually related to reloaded ammunition, poor quality/budget factory ammunition or some maintenance/neglect issue) ... more often than not it's one of the little .22's, .25's. 32's or .380's that makes the line stop while someone tries to resolve a functioning problem so they can continue.

The .22's mostly seem to involve ammunition QC issues (rimfire), or the occasional dry pistol or ancient magazine spring.

436
07-17-2011, 17:04
Well, the reliability consideration has surfaced ...

That being the case, I'd have to give some consideration to the many qual courses-of-fire (both for LE & non-LE) which I've attended as an instructor, and how the diminutive caliber semiautos have performed overall, over many years.

While it's always going to be possible to have a center-fire semiauto of 9mm or greater caliber experience a feeding stoppage, magazine-related problem or some other general malfunction ... and even an occasional revolver may exhibit some problem (usually related to reloaded ammunition, poor quality/budget factory ammunition or some maintenance/neglect issue) ... more often than not it's one of the little .22's, .25's. 32's or .380's that makes the line stop while someone tries to resolve a functioning problem so they can continue.

The .22's mostly seem to involve ammunition QC issues (rimfire), or the occasional dry pistol or ancient magazine spring.

Agree in most part. I believe the .32 ACP cartridges in the smaller frame autos of then and now; seem to be the most reliable in the function department. Seem like .22's are very prone to ammo malfunctions, otherwise they function fine... the .25's the small platforms they use seem to small for the cartridges and the 380 cartridges in weapons that are in the mid range of size work fine… but…. the smaller; smaller frame ones want to malfunction a bit more and are very magazine sensitive.
For a hideaway the .32 ACP seems to work well in most "smallish" weapon {ratio cartridge to frame size} the others have problems with in that area. Perhaps that’s why at one time the .32 ACP aka: 7.65x17mm and 7.62mm Browning was so popular both here and overseas.
Reliability was and is its strong suit.
436

fastbolt
07-17-2011, 17:49
Agree in most part. I believe the .32 ACP cartridges in the smaller frame autos of then and now; seem to be the most reliable in the function department. Seem like .22's are very prone to ammo malfunctions, otherwise they function fine... the .25's the small platforms they use seem to small for the cartridges and the 380 cartridges in weapons that are in the mid range of size work fine… but…. the smaller; smaller frame ones want to malfunction a bit more and are very magazine sensitive.
For a hideaway the .32 ACP seems to work well in most "smallish" weapon {ratio cartridge to frame size} the others have problems with in that area. Perhaps that’s why at one time the .32 ACP aka: 7.65x17mm and 7.62mm Browning was so popular both here and overseas.
Reliability was and is its strong suit.
436

It's often been said that it's easier to make a reliable .32 than a reliable .380, the usual reasoning being that the .32, being slightly slimmer than the .380, is an easier feeding round in the stubby pocket pistols.

I think we're seeing more of a trend for smaller pistols in this category nowadays, though, and that might ... or might not ... be something that may skew things a bit when it comes to the former inherent "reliability" of the cartridge in the larger pocket pistols of yesteryear.

The allure of the smaller .32's is still with us, and probably growing more as more new guns are being dropped into the marketplace.

SCmasterblaster
07-17-2011, 18:07
I do not own a .32. I have a 3rd gen G17. I am not that confident in the 9mm, and I would feel even less confident in the .32. They are small bullets that have a hard time making it through a Winter coat. The 9mm loads I carry (115gr +p+) will do the job, but only if I hit the heart and/or brain/brain stem. I would feel way less than confident relying on a .32 for CCW.

Donn57
07-18-2011, 11:50
so you think your 9mm, .40 or .45 will do any better in that situation, man you need a reality check. "Stopping Power" is pure nonsense when your talking about handguns.:wavey:

Which is why our military and police all carry handguns chambered for the .22 LR. Oh wait.

Anyone who wants to argue that .32 ACP is just fine for self defense will have to explain why they don't carry such a gun exclusively.

Donn57
07-18-2011, 11:53
here's an analogy for you:

I hunt with a Winchester model 12 shotgun that used to be my fathers. I only use it on certain occasions and yes I use it for nostalgic reasons. It is chambered in 12 gauge, 2 3/4 inches. Today a lot of people hunt with 3 inch chambers and 3 1/2 inch chambers. The measly 2 3/4 is considered by some to be inadequate. The ducks I shoot die just the same from my winchester as they do from my hunting partners Benelli 3 inch mag.

I also hunt with an Ithaca 16 gauge shotgun. The 16 gauge is considered by some to be obsolete. A 12 gauge will work better and can be just as light to carry. I shoot pheasants side by side with other guys using 12 gauges and 20 gauge shotguns. My birds die just the same. Oh yeah the ithaca was inherited and only comes out once a year or so for nostalgic reasons. It performs just fine.

I now that the .32 ACP is somewhat a cartridge of the past. But there are still companies making handguns chambered for .32 ACP. There must be a reason. I say there is no problem carrying that gun on the odd occasion that you want to be nostalgic and remember your heiratige. Are there better options? Just like the shotguns mentioned above, there are a lot of better options out there today. Would your .32 ACP still work today? I say yes.

I have .32 ACP pistol. It is my favorite pistol to shoot. I have carried it in the past, and if for some reason my main carry rigs were down, I would carry it again with comfort. If it made me feel good to carry it because it was my dad's or grandpa's I would do so and feel fine, knowing they were on my side!

I don't consider this a valid analogy. If your nostalgia inspired shotgun choice fails to do the job, you just go home without some game. If one's self-defense handgun fails to do the job, the consequences are likely to be significantly more troubling.

Warp
07-18-2011, 11:59
Which is why our military and police all carry handguns chambered for the .22 LR. Oh wait.

Anyone who wants to argue that .32 ACP is just fine for self defense will have to explain why they don't carry such a gun exclusively.

Some departments will not even let their officers carry a .32 as a backup. My local dept only authorizes certain calibers and .32 is most certainly not one of them

Donn57
07-18-2011, 12:26
There's an interesting little study on stopping power written up at www.buckeyefirearms.org/printable/node/7866

His conclusion: Carry what you want, because caliber isn't that important, even if it's only a .32ACP or even a .22LR. Reliability of your self-defense gun is important. Shot placement is important.

Headshots = 75% immediate incapacitation
Torso shots = 41% immediate incapacitation
Arms and legs shots = 14% immediate incapacitation

He found that "average number of rounds until incapacitation" for .22LR was 1.38, and for shotguns (90% were 12 gauge) it was 1.22.

NAA minis in .22LR are a lot more convenient to lug around all day and keep concealed, than are 12 gauges, and most of us civilians live and work in fairly peaceful areas, for now (let's stop Islamic immigration now to try to keep it that way, but I digress:)).

Given the following quote, I'm not sure that was his conclusion:
Some people will look at this data and say "He's telling us all to carry .22s". That's not true. Although this study showed that the percentages of people stopped with one shot are similar between almost all handgun cartridges, there's more to the story. Take a look at two numbers: the percentage of people who did not stop (no matter how many rounds were fired into them) and the one-shot-stop percentage. The lower caliber rounds (.22, .25, .32) had a failure rate that was roughly double that of the higher caliber rounds. The one-shot-stop percentage (where I considered all hits, anywhere on the body) trended generally higher as the round gets more powerful.

I believe that you may have looked past some of the most important statistics and conclusions offered by the author. In his studies, 40% of individuals shot with the .32 were NOT incapacitated at all. In fact of all the "mouse-gun" calibers, the .32 had the highest percentage of non-incapacitation. This percentage drops dramatically once you reach .380 caliber which has only 16% of those shot escaping incapacitation.

So what I get from this study is not that caliber doesn't matter, but that the number of shots doesn't matter after a certain point. If you land two well placed shots with the right caliber, you have at least an 83 percent chance of incapacitating an attacker. If you use a caliber of .32 or less, that percentage drops to between 60 and 70 percent.

Warp
07-18-2011, 12:41
Given the following quote, I'm not sure that was his conclusion:


I believe that you may have looked past some of the most important statistics and conclusions offered by the author. In his studies, 40% of individuals shot with the .32 were NOT incapacitated at all. In fact of all the "mouse-gun" calibers, the .32 had the highest percentage of non-incapacitation. This percentage drops dramatically once you reach .380 caliber which has only 16% of those shot escaping incapacitation.

So what I get from this study is not that caliber doesn't matter, but that the number of shots doesn't matter after a certain point. If you land two well placed shots with the right caliber, you have at least an 83 percent chance of incapacitating an attacker. If you use a caliber of .32 or less, that percentage drops to between 60 and 70 percent.



Good call.

Short version:

"The lower caliber rounds (.22, .25, .32) had a failure rate that was roughly double that of the higher caliber rounds."

ADK_40GLKr
07-18-2011, 13:00
OK, guys, thanks for all the input. At least you managed to disagree without shooting anyone. :whistling:

My conclusion is that when I carry, it will NOT be my British Bulldog, Saturday night special. It will be more of a conversation piece I take to the range or back yard with friends.

The historical aspect is more important than its self defense value.

Until I get my G27, the G22 will have to do for my rare carry opportunities.

David Armstrong
07-18-2011, 14:34
Which is why our military and police all carry handguns chambered for the .22 LR. Oh wait.
Yes, wait. The police and the military have a very different role for firearms use than do most who carry for CCW.

Anyone who wants to argue that .32 ACP is just fine for self defense will have to explain why they don't carry such a gun exclusively.
Nonsense. A 1911 in .45 is just fine for self defense, but lots of folks don't carry one exclusively. Faliure to use a particular tool for a task doesn't have any impact on the suitability of that tool for the task. More accurately anyone who wants to argue against the .32 as being just fine for SD will have to explain why it has worked so well for SD for so long but suddenly no longer works.

dkf
07-18-2011, 14:39
Only .32 caliber handgun round I'd carry is a .327 Fed Mag.

David Armstrong
07-18-2011, 14:39
Some departments will not even let their officers carry a .32 as a backup. My local dept only authorizes certain calibers and .32 is most certainly not one of them

And other departments have assigned .32s (and smaller) to their officers. So does that make them good??:dunno:

cloudbuster
07-18-2011, 15:17
I do not own a .32. I have a 3rd gen G17. I am not that confident in the 9mm, and I would feel even less confident in the .32. They are small bullets that have a hard time making it through a Winter coat. The 9mm loads I carry (115gr +p+) will do the job, but only if I hit the heart and/or brain/brain stem. I would feel way less than confident relying on a .32 for CCW.

This is a myth. There's not enough money in the world to make me take a .32 round protected by only a winter coat.

dnuggett
07-18-2011, 15:18
Nonsense. A 1911 in .45 is just fine for self defense, but lots of folks don't carry one exclusively. Faliure to use a particular tool for a task doesn't have any impact on the suitability of that tool for the task.


:thumbsup:

g17 & g21
07-18-2011, 15:31
A round designed and personally favored by The Great John Browning should not be taken lightly or overlooked? The 32. Auto will do just fine in any situation calling for a "Moe Greene Special." I wouldn't pick it first for SD, but I wouldn't pick it last either.

Erik

Warp
07-18-2011, 16:37
And other departments have assigned .32s (and smaller) to their officers. So does that make them good??:dunno:

I am not familiar with .32s being issued. Which departments, issued to whom and for what purpose?

David Armstrong
07-18-2011, 16:55
I am not familiar with .32s being issued. Which departments, issued to whom and for what purpose?
The .32 ACP was a common round for LE all over Europe until the late 20th Century. The .32 S&W was also the duty round of many U.S. LE agencies early in the 20th Century, NYPD and Philadelphia PD being a couple of the larger ones. Both the S&W Regulation Police and the Colt Police Positive in .32 were commonly found as LEO sidearms into the 1950s.
FYI, the HS derringer in .22 was the issued BUG/off-duty firearm for several agencies, the Louisiana State Police being one of them. And for the real trivia fans out there, Pat Garrett is said to have carried a Hopkins and Allen .32 as a back-up gun.

Warp
07-18-2011, 17:01
The .32 ACP was a common round for LE all over Europe until the late 20th Century.

Then what, they learned what a mistake it was and stepped up?

Both the S&W Regulation Police and the Colt Police Positive in .32 were commonly found as LEO sidearms into the 1950s.

Is that the best you have? 50-60 years ago?

What I am taking away from this is that nobody issues .32 anymore. Good to know.

g17 & g21
07-18-2011, 17:12
Proper use of a small cal. weapon...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8RHBOfM9CFQ

:rofl::rofl::rofl:

Gray_Rider
07-18-2011, 17:16
I have carried my KelTec P32 for hundreds of thousands of miles when I was a bonded courier. I must admit it was trusted too much, but it went into hundreds of stops that banned weapons coming into the facility. Now-a-days it is carried as a third gun backing up my Glock 30/26 or my SW 642 .38 special. The prime directive of any handgun is to keep you and or your family alive during and after an attack. Larger caliber vs smaller caliber fussing comes down to one thing. History. Larger calibers, regardless of design, have the edge, hands down, when history is consulted. There just isn't any argument when you take the history of fight stopping into consideration. Larger stuff works better. If you pack a mouser as a primary, you are NOT betting on the odds. History proves it. Mousers have their place, and are better than nothing. But you must accept the facts that you have marginalized your chances in carrying something smaller than a hot 9mm with the best HP money can buy. That said, no one wants to bleed. .22s .25s .32s and .380s have done the job many times, but not like larger calibers have. You just have to understand you are playing bad odds if you depend on small calibers only for SD. When the large stuff fails occasionally, imagine how mouse calibers would have stacked up in the same situation. You just have to know the odds and how you much you want to trust Lady Luck over what you can carry, and hide if need be, effectively. Just my thots.

Gray_Rider
Deo Vindice!

"I have heard. You are the gray rider. You would not make peace with the Bluecoats. You may go in peace."

PAPACHUCK
07-18-2011, 17:46
I carry a XD40sc most of the time. I carry a P32 all the time.

I tried the P3AT, I couldn't keep it on the target rapid fire. It jumps too much in my hand. I can fire all 8 rounds as fast as I can pull the trigger with the P32 and keep all the shots in a baseball size group from 7yds. That's gonna mess up someones face pretty bad. He may not go down, but he ain't gonna be able to see where I'm at to shoot back!

Donn57
07-19-2011, 07:41
Yes, wait. The police and the military have a very different role for firearms use than do most who carry for CCW.

I don't think so. Everyone who finds themselves needing to shoot someone with a handgun has the same end in mind and that is stopping the threat as quickly as possible. However, if you have another position on what the handgun's role is in military or police use, please explain.


Nonsense. A 1911 in .45 is just fine for self defense, but lots of folks don't carry one exclusively. Faliure to use a particular tool for a task doesn't have any impact on the suitability of that tool for the task. More accurately anyone who wants to argue against the .32 as being just fine for SD will have to explain why it has worked so well for SD for so long but suddenly no longer works.

All I'm saying is that why would someone lug around a 1911 during the cooler months if they are convinced that the .32 ACP is adequate for self defense during the summer?

I'm not convinced that it has worked well for so long. I'm not aware of any research that would convince me of that. You may have some available that I haven't seen.

Donn57
07-19-2011, 07:47
And other departments have assigned .32s (and smaller) to their officers. So does that make them good??:dunno:

As duty weapons or as BUGs? Personally, I won't even carry one as a BUG, but I'm not a cop who is already carrying around a ton of equipment, some of which is also additional weapons.

Donn57
07-19-2011, 07:53
I carry a XD40sc most of the time. I carry a P32 all the time.

I tried the P3AT, I couldn't keep it on the target rapid fire. It jumps too much in my hand. I can fire all 8 rounds as fast as I can pull the trigger with the P32 and keep all the shots in a baseball size group from 7yds. That's gonna mess up someones face pretty bad. He may not go down, but he ain't gonna be able to see where I'm at to shoot back!

I'm not sure the bad guy will stand still so you can empty your P-32 into his head or that the stress and adrenaline will have no adverse affect on your marksmanship. You'll never know until you're in the situation, tho, so maybe it will work out just the way you envision it. I hope so.

Donn57
07-19-2011, 08:10
The .32 ACP was a common round for LE all over Europe until the late 20th Century. The .32 S&W was also the duty round of many U.S. LE agencies early in the 20th Century, NYPD and Philadelphia PD being a couple of the larger ones. Both the S&W Regulation Police and the Colt Police Positive in .32 were commonly found as LEO sidearms into the 1950s.
FYI, the HS derringer in .22 was the issued BUG/off-duty firearm for several agencies, the Louisiana State Police being one of them. And for the real trivia fans out there, Pat Garrett is said to have carried a Hopkins and Allen .32 as a back-up gun.

I know that the .32 ACP was a common round in Europe for LE, but I'd have to see some real data about how late into the 20th century it was commonly used in LE. But regardless, in the end, as Warp points out, even those crazy Europeans finally realized that they needed something bigger. My guess is that they did so because they were finding the .32 inadequate.

I also think I'd need the hard data on how many US police departments were still issuing .32s into the 1950s. But again, even if every police department in the U.S. were issuing them, that was 60 years ago.

Except as an aside, the backup issue is moot. The folks here who are advocating for the .32 are asserting it is fine for a primary carry gun.

GAFinch
07-19-2011, 08:10
The .32 ACP was a common round for LE all over Europe until the late 20th Century.

That's true, although Fiocchi ammo combined with a longer barrel gun is ballistically superior to a .380 mouse gun.

David Armstrong
07-19-2011, 09:56
Then what, they learned what a mistake it was and stepped up?
Hmmm. Using that reasoning our military learned what a mistake the 1911 in .45 ACP was and stepped up.

Is that the best you have? 50-60 years ago?
Did the human anatomy change in some significant way in the last 50 years to make things that worked then suddenly not work now?

What I am taking away from this is that nobody issues .32 anymore. Good to know.
If that is what you are taking away from this I would suggest you are missing a rather important concept.

David Armstrong
07-19-2011, 10:03
I don't think so. Everyone who finds themselves needing to shoot someone with a handgun has the same end in mind and that is stopping the threat as quickly as possible. However, if you have another position on what the handgun's role is in military or police use, please explain.
The primary military and LE role of the firearm is to assist the person in an offensive action against another person. For a civvie the role is just to convince the BG to quit bothering you.
All I'm saying is that why would someone lug around a 1911 during the cooler months if they are convinced that the .32 ACP is adequate for self defense during the summer?
And all I'm saying is basing successful use on what is carried exclusively is rather silly, as the two have little or nothing in common.
I'm not convinced that it has worked well for so long. I'm not aware of any research that would convince me of that. You may have some available that I haven't seen.
Gosh, all I have is about a century of use without many complaints, and the fact that when given a choice many people and many organizations chose, (and still choose) the .32. I guess you can argue that they would intentionally select something that did not work, but I think it would be rather hard to explain such reasoning.

David Armstrong
07-19-2011, 10:08
I know that the .32 ACP was a common round in Europe for LE, but I'd have to see some real data about how late into the 20th century it was commonly used in LE. But regardless, in the end, as Warp points out, even those crazy Europeans finally realized that they needed something bigger. My guess is that they did so because they were finding the .32 inadequate.
As I pointed out, if that is the reasoning then one must logically conclude the 1911 was inadequate.
I also think I'd need the hard data on how many US police departments were still issuing .32s into the 1950s. But again, even if every police department in the U.S. were issuing them, that was 60 years ago.
And again, unless you can explain why the human body has changed in the last 50 years, that seems irrelevant, particularly given the fact that the .32 is still used regularly for SD purposes today.
Except as an aside, the backup issue is moot. The folks here who are advocating for the .32 are asserting it is fine for a primary carry gun.
And historically that has been true. It would seem that given that history those who argue against it have a rather heavy burden of proof.

OldCurlyWolf
07-19-2011, 10:56
Not in my world as long as I have a choice of something better
:wavey:

Donn57
07-19-2011, 10:58
And again, unless you can explain why the human body has changed in the last 50 years, that seems irrelevant, particularly given the fact that the .32 is still used regularly for SD purposes today.

And historically that has been true. It would seem that given that history those who argue against it have a rather heavy burden of proof.

Human anatomy has not changed. Neither has the .32. It was inadequate as a SD round the day it was introduced. Then as now its only advantage is the small size of the guns for which it is chambered. I have never seen any research that would support carrying a .32 ACP as your primary SD weapon. Apparently neither have you or you would have presented it.

The fact that many folks still use the .32 as a SD round means nothing. As shown here, the main reason for that choice is due to the size of the gun. It has nothing to do with the effectiveness of the round. That some individuals have convinced themselves that because they don't want to be a little uncomfortable in the summer the .32 ACP is adequate means squat.

It would seem that it is you that have the burden of proof having stated many unsupported "facts".

As I pointed out, if that is the reasoning then one must logically conclude the 1911 was inadequate.

As far as the 1911 is concerned, I believe the change had nothing to do with the caliber. The design was over 70 years old when it was finally phased out in favor of a more modern design with a higher ammunition capacity which necessitated a smaller, but still adequate caliber. The Beretta is a good balance of ammo capacity combined with a reasonably effective cartridge.

On the other hand, the .32 is a small cartridge to begin with. European LE could have gone to a modern high-capacity .32 without changing the caliber, so why do that if the .32 was doing such a bang-up job?

And for decades after the 1950s, the .38 Special reigned supreme in the holsters of LEOs. The only real difference between the phantom .32 revolvers you claim were all the rage in LE during the 1950s is the larger caliber. Why would a LE agency throw out a bunch of great six shot .32 revolvers in favor of six shot .38 Special revolvers unless they wanted a more powerful round.

Donn57
07-19-2011, 11:01
That's true, although Fiocchi ammo combined with a longer barrel gun is ballistically superior to a .380 mouse gun.

Quite possibly true. It is that pesky "longer barrel" that gets in the way since most folks carrying .32s nowadays are carrying P-32 size guns, not the PP size guns that were the common sidearm of European police.

Donn57
07-19-2011, 11:18
The primary military and LE role of the firearm is to assist the person in an offensive action against another person. For a civvie the role is just to convince the BG to quit bothering you.

We aren't talking about what is adequate for scaring someone. We're discussing which calibers are better for stopping hostilities when you have to actually shoot someone. And I could be wrong, but I don't think a lot of offensive action is taken by either police or military with handguns. And I still contend that the end goal is the same when using a handgun, regardless of whether it is an offensive or defensive action, and that is to stop the bad guy. No handgun does that 100% reliably, but a .32 is among the least effective according to my research.


And all I'm saying is basing successful use on what is carried exclusively is rather silly, as the two have little or nothing in common.

So explain to me why someone carries a .32 in the summer and a .45 in the winter if the two are equally effective.



Gosh, all I have is about a century of use without many complaints, and the fact that when given a choice many people and many organizations chose, (and still choose) the .32. I guess you can argue that they would intentionally select something that did not work, but I think it would be rather hard to explain such reasoning.

Please point me to the database of complaints you are reviewing that contains complaints about cartridges. I wasn't aware there was one, but you must have found it.

I'll grant you that many folks, many who aren't really gun people and have no understanding of ballistics, have a .32 for self defense. So what? Until they shoot someone it doesn't matter what they have. When you have to use it is a bad time to find out that the .32 really isn't as effective as a .45.

So, which organizations today are choosing the .32 as a primary SD weapon?

436
07-19-2011, 11:22
I know that the .32 ACP was a common round in Europe for LE, but I'd have to see some real data about how late into the 20th century it was commonly used in LE. But regardless, in the end, as Warp points out, even those crazy Europeans finally realized that they needed something bigger. My guess is that they did so because they were finding the .32 inadequate.

I also think I'd need the hard data on how many US police departments were still issuing .32s into the 1950s. But again, even if every police department in the U.S. were issuing them, that was 60 years ago.

Except as an aside, the backup issue is moot. The folks here who are advocating for the .32 are asserting it is fine for a primary carry gun.

The Israeli Mossad seems to prefer the Beretta M70 & 71 in .22 Rim Fire for their Shy Marshal work as well as their Covert Operation teams... I’d think a .32 ACP would up the power factor a bit… Again; when you get into small caliber pistols it’s “all” about reliability and accuracy, no on could be talking Dirt Harry here.
I have an Israeli Sniper buddy in Jerusalem, from time to time we’ve had many conversations about why they prefer a particular caliber for their work ; not just the sniper calibers, like the .30 Carbine cartridge {converted M16’s} to {CQC} clear rooms; and the .22 Rim Fire for a large majority of their other work. It’s pretty simple; they just work... Kinda like a Bumble Bee not having the correct aero dynamically ratio in design to fly… but it does.
Agree it’s not a primary weapon with all the good ones that are out there, but! as a secondary, hide out, back up or light carry it’s got a place at the table.
Just my .02
436

SIDE NOTE; I stand corrected on the Bumble Bee analogy, it was pointed out to me by another member that the analogy was in fact wrong... Thank you Sir.. But! I stand by the rest of the aforementioned.
436

PBCounty
07-19-2011, 11:28
.32 acp is my "around the house" caliber. I feel just fine with one in my pocket.

David Armstrong
07-19-2011, 11:35
Human anatomy has not changed. Neither has the .32. It was inadequate as a SD round the day it was introduced. Then as now its only advantage is the small size of the guns for which it is chambered.
You are certainly entitled to your opinion. Please don't let the fact that actual fighting professionals all over the world have disagreed with you on a regular basis get in the way of a good rant.
I have never seen any research that would support carrying a .32 ACP as your primary SD weapon. Apparently neither have you or you would have presented it.
Huh?? Don't know what research you would want. The fact that it was selected regularly and still is selected regularly seems to be a pretty good indicator.
The fact that many folks still use the .32 as a SD round means nothing.
Just as the fact that many folks still use the 9mm, or the .40, or the .45 means nothing??
As shown here, the main reason for that choice is due to the size of the gun.
Hmm. I seem to remember that ease of carry and concealment is an important factor in choosing a CCW gun for many. So perhaps that is a pretty good reason.
It has nothing to do with the effectiveness of the round. That some individuals have convinced themselves that because they don't want to be a little uncomfortable in the summer the .32 ACP is adequate means squat.
Interesting position, but it seems that the facts are against it, given the fact that many carry the .32 in the winter as well as the summer, and that it has been found to be an adequate sidearm for so many in so many situations for so many years.
It would seem that it is you that have the burden of proof having stated many unsupported "facts".
As pointed out, given the fact that the .32 has such a long history of use behind it, and that it was and still is regularly chosen when alternatives are available, the burden of proof would lie with those who are claiming it does not work for SD.
As far as the 1911 is concerned, I believe the change had nothing to do with the caliber.
And yet you reject that same belief with the .32.
And for decades after the 1950s, the .38 Special reigned supreme in the holsters of LEOs. The only real difference between the phantom .32 revolvers you claim were all the rage in LE during the 1950s is the larger caliber. Why would a LE agency throw out a bunch of great six shot .32 revolvers in favor of six shot .38 Special revolvers unless they wanted a more powerful round.
Please do not make things up and then claim I have said it. I have not claimed that .32 revolvers were all the rage, I said that they were commonly issued. As for "phantom", that seems to indicate more of your lack of knowledge about the history of LE firearms than any problem on my part. Here's a hint: "What was the first standardized firearm and caliber of the NYPD?"

mrt949
07-19-2011, 11:40
I carry a SEECAMP 32 DAILY .If I go out it is in my pocket. Is it the baddest on the block ?I would not want to be shot with it. I have larger caliber pistols .38 sp 357 mag 40 sw .LIKE THEY SAY IF IT'S IN THE SAFE IT IS NOT DOING YOU ANY GOOD.

Rick O'Shay
07-19-2011, 11:40
The .32 ACP is a killer round, all right. IF you can shoot the bad guy in the eye, 10 times out of 10. Otherwise, get a real gun.

David Armstrong
07-19-2011, 11:55
We aren't talking about what is adequate for scaring someone. We're discussing which calibers are better for stopping hostilities when you have to actually shoot someone.
No, we are talking about using the .32 for SD. Please review the title of the thread if you get confused.
And I could be wrong, but I don't think a lot of offensive action is taken by either police or military with handguns.
Yes, you would be wrong.
And I still contend that the end goal is the same when using a handgun, regardless of whether it is an offensive or defensive action, and that is to stop the bad guy.
That may be your goal, but it is not the goal of SD. the goal of SD is to preserve the safety of the GG. How that is done is somewhat immaterial.
No handgun does that 100% reliably, but a .32 is among the least effective according to my research.
And according to other research it is just as effective as .45 ACP hardball and assorted .38 Spl. and .380 ACP rounds.
So explain to me why someone carries a .32 in the summer and a .45 in the winter if the two are equally effective.
Again, since you seem to have a hard time understanding this, folks carry different guns for a lot of different reasons. Effectiveness of caliber may be one of those reasons, but it usually isn't a particularly big reason.
Please point me to the database of complaints you are reviewing that contains complaints about cartridges. I wasn't aware there was one, but you must have found it.
It always amuses me when folks demonstrate how little they understand how to read and understand the literature on a subject, yet they still want to talk about the subject as if they actually know something.
I'll grant you that many folks, many who aren't really gun people and have no understanding of ballistics, have a .32 for self defense. So what?
I'll grant you that many folks, many who aren't really gun people and have not understanding of ballistics, have a .45 or a 9mm for self defense. So what?
Until they shoot someone it doesn't matter what they have. When you have to use it is a bad time to find out that the .32 really isn't as effective as a .45.
Effectiveness of caliber (if one can decide how to accurately determine that) is rarely the deciding factor in a CCW DGU incident.
So, which organizations today are choosing the .32 as a primary SD weapon?
What has that got to do with using the .32 for SD??

David Armstrong
07-19-2011, 12:00
I carry a SEECAMP 32 DAILY .If I go out it is in my pocket. Is it the baddest on the block ?I would not want to be shot with it. I have larger caliber pistols .38 sp 357 mag 40 sw .LIKE THEY SAY IF IT'S IN THE SAFE IT IS NOT DOING YOU ANY GOOD.
Good point, and an interesting one. For the .32 to be so inadequate for SD it was interesting the number of well-known pistoleros that carried a Seecamp .32, and how long the waiting list was to get one. Pretty interesting to see how many carried them, given that "a .32 is among the least effective" and "adequate for scaring someone".:dunno:

David Armstrong
07-19-2011, 12:04
The Israeli Mossad seems to prefer the Beretta M70 & 71 in .22 Rim Fire for their Shy Marshal work as well as their Covert Operation teams... I’d think a .32 ACP would up the power factor a bit… Again; when you get into small caliber pistols it’s “all” about reliability and accuracy, no on could be talking Dirt Harry here.
I have an Israeli Sniper buddy in Jerusalem, from time to time we’ve had many conversations about why they prefer a particular caliber for their work ; not just the sniper calibers, like the .30 Carbine cartridge {converted M16’s} to {CQC} clear rooms; and the .22 Rim Fire for a large majority of their other work. It’s pretty simple; they just work... Kinda like a Bumble Bee not having the correct aero dynamically ratio in design to fly… but it does.
Agree it’s not a primary weapon with all the good ones that are out there, but! as a secondary, hide out, back up or light carry it’s got a place at the table.
Just my .02
436
The U.S. is about the only place that seems to have this fascination with large caliber guns and a subculture that finds mouseguns inadequate. Strange that they seem to work quite well all over the rest of the world. One of the Israeli's I work with at times can't figure out why anyone not in the military or LE would even want to carry anything more than a S&W airweight, much less why they would need to.

fastbolt
07-19-2011, 12:40
You know, the .32 ACP (or 7.65 Browning) is an interesting bit of American firearms history that needn't create divisiveness.

Apparently, it's reduced power made for a couple of things that became an acceptable compromise about a hundred years ago. It made for a reliable and controllable little pocket pistol in blowback design, but at the same time it was seemingly considered possessed of marginal "power" as a defensive handgun.

It was lethal enough to be used for an assassination and start WWI, but I doubt it was more than an officer's dress sidearm for actual hostilities.

When it comes to "minimum" approved calibers for secondary & off-duty usage among LE agencies, as you can imagine, things are pretty much all over the place. I've known of agencies who set their minimum at .32, .380 and .38 S&W Spl. I remember when we were told that .22's & .25's would no longer be approved.

I also remember when one of our guys got involved in a shooting which took place off-duty, involved distances up to across a normal city street. Our guy was facing an attacker armed with a 9mm while using a diminutive .25 pocket pistol. Miraculously, our guy wasn't wounded, and the attacker fled on foot with no evidence of having been wounded (never identified or caught, as I recall). Our guy immediately started carrying a larger off-duty weapon. As I recall, he wanted something he could shoot more accurately, especially under the stress of being fired upon, and he wanted something with more power.

Lots of folks seem to have pretty strong preferences (or prejudice) when it comes to selecting and using a handgun caliber for defensive purpose. Not surprising.

Lots of folks used to carry a rabbit's foot on a key chain when I was a youngster, too. ;)

I think that if folks aren't limited by an employer's restriction, or by a local statute/policy involved in lawfully carrying a handgun under a CCW permit or license, it's not my business what they choose to use for themselves.

My knowledge, experience, opinions & preferences have certainly changed over the years.

Warp
07-19-2011, 12:41
Good point, and an interesting one. For the .32 to be so inadequate for SD it was interesting the number of well-known pistoleros that carried a Seecamp .32, and how long the waiting list was to get one. Pretty interesting to see how many carried them, given that "a .32 is among the least effective" and "adequate for scaring someone".:dunno:

You sure are persistent. Maybe if you keep trying to convince us that people selecting a small, easy to carry gun means they believe the caliber it is chambered in is effective we will actually believe it?

Or not.

Just like I presumed awhile back...people carry it because they are lazy. I mean, lol, the post you quoted when making the above response stated a variation of hte old "a .22 on your person is better than a .45 at home". Well, yeah, of course the .32 looks good when the other option is being too lazy to carry anything at all.

Donn57
07-19-2011, 12:45
You are certainly entitled to your opinion. Please don't let the fact that actual fighting professionals all over the world have disagreed with you on a regular basis get in the way of a good rant.

Name me five fighting professionals who recommend the .32 ACP as a primary SD round.


Huh?? Don't know what research you would want. The fact that it was selected regularly and still is selected regularly seems to be a pretty good indicator.

You know. Research. Facts that back up a claim. One such example is the research cited in this thread that the .32 only incapacitates an attacker 60% of the time. That kind of research.


Just as the fact that many folks still use the 9mm, or the .40, or the .45 means nothing??

That's correct. It means nothing. Only results mean anything. Those calibers have all been shown by actual research to be considerably more effective than the .32.


Hmm. I seem to remember that ease of carry and concealment is an important factor in choosing a CCW gun for many. So perhaps that is a pretty good reason.


It is one factor. The idea that it should be the overriding factor is rather shortsighted. If it isn't effective, there is no advantage to it being easy to carry and conceal? You used a hammer analogy earlier, so I'll use one. If one needs a sledge hammer to bust down a wall, carrying a tack hammer because it is smaller and easier to carry doesn't really make a lot of sense.


Interesting position, but it seems that the facts are against it, given the fact that many carry the .32 in the winter as well as the summer, and that it has been found to be an adequate sidearm for so many in so many situations for so many years.

But you're answering a question I didn't ask. I asked why the folks who carry different calibers in summer and winter do so. Many individuals who post here indicate that that is their habit - mouse guns in the summer and larger caliber guns in the winter.


As pointed out, given the fact that the .32 has such a long history of use behind it, and that it was and still is regularly chosen when alternatives are available, the burden of proof would lie with those who are claiming it does not work for SD.


The .32 has a long history of carrying. I don't think that it has a long history of effectively stopping hostilities. Research, which you seem to be unfamiliar with, would answer this question. Again, how many people carry it has nothing to do with effectiveness, particularly if the only reason for choosing it is its small size.


And yet you reject that same belief with the .32.


I do and I gave the reason clearly in my original response. I'll repeat it, tho as you seemed to have missed it the first time around. When selecting a new pistol, European LE did not simply upgrade the pistols they upgraded the caliber even though the .32 would have been able to give them a greater ammo capacity. In at least a portion of the cases, there was no real upgrade in technology or ammo capacity. The only real change was caliber. U.S. LE (e.g., NYPD) went from the .32 to the .38 with no real upgrade in the revolver. There was no higher capacity in the .38 and no technological advancement in the revolver itself. So what was the reason for the caliber switch?



Please do not make things up and then claim I have said it. I have not claimed that .32 revolvers were all the rage, I said that they were commonly issued. As for "phantom", that seems to indicate more of your lack of knowledge about the history of LE firearms than any problem on my part. Here's a hint: "What was the first standardized firearm and caliber of the NYPD?"

I don't have to make things up. You seem to be doing a great job yourself. You can't back up any of your statements regarding how many LE agencies were using the .32 in the 1950s or how many European LE agencies were using the .32 ACP late into the 20th century. You claim there are organizations still issuing the .32 as a primary SD weapon, but you don't say which ones. You just say stuff and expect it to be accepted as fact. I say the vast majority of U.S. law enforcement agencies in the U.S. were using the .38 Special during the 1950s and that any agency that wasn't was probably planning to do so when the budget permitted. This is supported by your own claims since you seem to indicate that by the 1960s, the .32 was no longer in common use in LE agencies.

As to your question regarding the NYPD, here is what their website says:
"Members of the NYPD were originally armed with .38 caliber revolvers. Throughout the 1960s, 70s and late 80s the NYPD service weapon remained virtually unchanged."

However, further research indicates that the first standardized gun and caliber was the Colt New Police in .32 Long Colt adopted in 1896. And it was such a wonderful choice that it took a whole nine years before they upgraded to .38 caliber in 1905. I guess the NYPD wasn't one of those agencies issuing .32s in the 1950s.

Donn57
07-19-2011, 12:51
Good point, and an interesting one. For the .32 to be so inadequate for SD it was interesting the number of well-known pistoleros that carried a Seecamp .32, and how long the waiting list was to get one. Pretty interesting to see how many carried them, given that "a .32 is among the least effective" and "adequate for scaring someone".:dunno:

So let's see the list of those pistoleros who were carrying it as their primary SD arm. The Seecamp was for a long time the ultimate BUG, but I don't recall anyone recommending it for primary SD carry. Note that during that time, it was the largest caliber available in a gun that size. Times have changed.

Donn57
07-19-2011, 12:55
I think that if folks aren't limited by an employer's restriction, or by a local statute/policy involved in lawfully carrying a handgun under a CCW permit or license, it's not my business what they choose to use for themselves.


You're right about that, in general. However, in this case we were asked our opinion which then resulted in this lively discussion. I agree as often as disagree with David Armstrong, but in this case I don't think he has done a good job of defending his position.

Warp
07-19-2011, 13:10
I don't have to make things up. You seem to be doing a great job yourself. You can't back up any of your statements regarding how many LE agencies were using the .32 in the 1950s or how many European LE agencies were using the .32 ACP late into the 20th century. You claim there are organizations still issuing the .32 as a primary SD weapon, but you don't say which ones. You just say stuff and expect it to be accepted as fact...

You noticed?

David Armstrong
07-19-2011, 13:14
You sure are persistent. Maybe if you keep trying to convince us that people selecting a small, easy to carry gun means they believe the caliber it is chambered in is effective we will actually believe it?
Or not.
No need to convince anyone of anything. I simply point out that when there is a question about firearms we can often find the truth by looking at history. If it has worked fine for a hundred years there is no reason to thinnk it won't continue to work fine, unless one can show something that has changed.
Just like I presumed awhile back...people carry it because they are lazy.
Given that many of the .32s over the years have been larger or heavier than other calibers that doesn't make much sense.

Foxtrotx1
07-19-2011, 13:15
It’s pretty simple; they just work... Kinda like a Bumble Bee not having the correct aero dynamically ratio in design to fly… but it does.


wives tale.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bumble_bee#Myths

Donn57
07-19-2011, 13:16
No, we are talking about using the .32 for SD. Please review the title of the thread if you get confused.


There's the problem. I'm arguing the effectiveness of the round to incapacitate an attacker. At times you seem to be arguing the same thing. Maybe because a gun that has a high percentage of failures to stop an attacker is a poor choice for SD.



Yes, you would be wrong.

Some examples of the police using handguns for offensive purposes, please.


That may be your goal, but it is not the goal of SD. the goal of SD is to preserve the safety of the GG. How that is done is somewhat immaterial.

And that will never involve having to shoot someone until they are incapacitated. Only if that is true would it make sense to carry a round with such a poor record of incapacitation.


And according to other research it is just as effective as .45 ACP hardball and assorted .38 Spl. and .380 ACP rounds.


If so, I would also recommend against carrying those particular rounds. Any round with the same effectiveness as a .32 ACP should be avoided.


Again, since you seem to have a hard time understanding this, folks carry different guns for a lot of different reasons. Effectiveness of caliber may be one of those reasons, but it usually isn't a particularly big reason.


Does this mean you are agreeing that there is a difference in the effectiveness of calibers? That would be a breakthrough.



It always amuses me when folks demonstrate how little they understand how to read and understand the literature on a subject, yet they still want to talk about the subject as if they actually know something.

Yes, I find that amusing as well. People who spit out "facts" with absolutely nothing to back them up.



I'll grant you that many folks, many who aren't really gun people and have not understanding of ballistics, have a .45 or a 9mm for self defense. So what?


So they have luckily chosen a caliber that has been shown to be more effective than the .32. Luck of the draw, I guess, or maybe a knowledgeable gun salesman who talked them out of making a mistake.



Effectiveness of caliber (if one can decide how to accurately determine that) is rarely the deciding factor in a CCW DGU incident.


If you can't determine the effectiveness of a caliber how can you say it is ever a deciding factor?



What has that got to do with using the .32 for SD??


I don't know. You brought it up. I'm just trying to keep you honest by asking which organizations you are referring to that still issue the .32 as a primary SD weapon. If you just made that up and can't really name any, just say so.

Warp
07-19-2011, 13:26
No need to convince anyone of anything. I simply point out that when there is a question about firearms we can often find the truth by looking at history. If it has worked fine for a hundred years there is no reason to thinnk it won't continue to work fine, unless one can show something that has changed.

Right. IF. However, it has not worked fine for a hundred years. That is why everybody upgraded.

ADK_40GLKr
07-19-2011, 13:49
Hmmm.....Did the human anatomy change in some significant way in the last 50 years to make things that worked then suddenly not work now?

I'm out of this argument. I'm the OP, if you recall, and you guys basically answered my question a long time ago. I'm getting a G27!

However, I think human anatomy has changed over the last 50-60 years. WE'RE FATTER! We're all eating more*, and therefore (on the average) have more body mass to slow down those "inadequate" .32 slugs. :wavey:

Warp
07-19-2011, 13:53
I'm out of this argument. I'm the OP, if you recall, and you guys basically answered my question a long time ago. I'm getting a G27!

However, I think human anatomy has changed over the last 50-60 years. WE'RE FATTER! We're all eating better, and therefore (on the average) have more body mass to slow down those "inadequate" .32 slugs. :wavey:

I wouldn't say we are eating better. I'd say we are simply eating "more" food, though probably lower quality food on the whole, and exercising less. It is not a good thing. :(

David Armstrong
07-19-2011, 14:04
Name me five fighting professionals who recommend the .32 ACP as a primary SD round.
Why? Every time I point out the flaw in your claim you want to change it. How about sticking to the topic...is the .32 adequate for SD?
You know. Research. Facts that back up a claim. One such example is the research cited in this thread that the .32 only incapacitates an attacker 60% of the time. That kind of research.
Oh, you mean like all those claims and research that you have neglected to provide? Again, if you will take a bit of time and actually read about this stuff (I know that is difficult for some) you might actually find it.
That's correct. It means nothing. Only results mean anything.
OK then, we go that out of the way. You agree that your argument, as posted, was meaningless. That is a good start.
Those calibers have all been shown by actual research to be considerably more effective than the .32.
But again, as you keep ignoring, effectiveness is only one factor, and a minor one at that, when discussing SD.
It is one factor. The idea that it should be the overriding factor is rather shortsighted.
I'm not aware of anyone who has said it should be the overriding factor. Seems yo keep wanting to argue things that nobody else has said.
If it isn't effective, there is no advantage to it being easy to carry and conceal?
But it is effective. It may not be as effective as something else, but that something else may have other issues that cause it to lose an advantage.
You used a hammer analogy earlier, so I'll use one. If one needs a sledge hammer to bust down a wall, carrying a tack hammer because it is smaller and easier to carry doesn't really make a lot of sense.
True, but we don't need to break down a wall. We need to convince a BG to leave us alone. You have provided absolutely nothing to show why the .32 now fails in that after decades of it being used to do that.
But you're answering a question I didn't ask. I asked why the folks who carry different calibers in summer and winter do so. Many individuals who post here indicate that that is their habit - mouse guns in the summer and larger caliber guns in the winter.
And I answered it. Different people, different reasons. I might carry based on a number of factors. Caliber is almost never one of them. Are you suggesting that many people here intentionally carry a gun with the understanding that it will not work for them in the SD situation they envision? Seems rather odd to me.
The .32 has a long history of carrying. I don't think that it has a long history of effectively stopping hostilities. Research, which you seem to be unfamiliar with, would answer this question.
Again it seems as if you are the one unfamiliar with the research. It is either that or you seem to be under a delusion that people will voluntarily carry a gun for SD when they know it will not perform that job.
I do and I gave the reason clearly in my original response.
No, you gave a personal belief without any support, not a reason.
I'll repeat it, tho as you seemed to have missed it the first time around. When selecting a new pistol, European LE did not simply upgrade the pistols they upgraded the caliber even though the .32 would have been able to give them a greater ammo capacity. In at least a portion of the cases, there was no real upgrade in technology or ammo capacity. The only real change was caliber.
And in many cases, and for many years, they did not change caliber even when getting new guns, and when they did change it was to "upgrade" to a .380. So it seems that they rejected the idea of the .32 not working for them.
U.S. LE (e.g., NYPD) went from the .32 to the .38 with no real upgrade in the revolver. There was no higher capacity in the .38 and no technological advancement in the revolver itself. So what was the reason for the caliber switch?
Again you are asking a question that does not have a generic answer. Different departments changed for different reasons. Some went up in caliber. Lots of LE went down in caliber. And again note that when there was this change almost inevitably the old calibers were grandfathered in and officers continued carrying and using them. If it was as bad as you claim that would have been noticed and the ineffective guns pulled, don't you think?
I don't have to make things up.
I agree, you don't have to. So I don't know why you do so.
You seem to be doing a great job yourself. You can't back up any of your statements regarding how many LE agencies were using the .32 in the 1950s or how many European LE agencies were using the .32 ACP late into the 20th century. You claim there are organizations still issuing the .32 as a primary SD weapon, but you don't say which ones.
See, that is exactly what I mean. I have not said any of those things. You are making them up. I have not said anything about how many agencies were doing anything, or that any agency was still issuing the .32 as a primary SD weapon.
You just say stuff and expect it to be accepted as fact.
Actually I say stuff that should be common knowledge on a topic to anyone who has a reasonable knowledge of the literature on the topic, such as the fact that until the mid-1970s the standard sidearm of the German police was a Walther PP in either .32 or .380, and of the two the .32 was far more popular. Seems to have worked for them, as they rejected larger caliber sidearms on a fairly regular basis.
I say the vast majority of U.S. law enforcement agencies in the U.S. were using the .38 Special during the 1950s and that any agency that wasn't was probably planning to do so when the budget permitted. This is supported by your own claims since you seem to indicate that by the 1960s, the .32 was no longer in common use in LE agencies.
OK, I think I already said that.
As to your question regarding the NYPD, here is what their website says:
"Members of the NYPD were originally armed with .38 caliber revolvers. Throughout the 1960s, 70s and late 80s the NYPD service weapon remained virtually unchanged."

However, further research indicates that the first standardized gun and caliber was the Colt New Police in .32 Long Colt adopted in 1896. And it was such a wonderful choice that it took a whole nine years before they upgraded to .38 caliber in 1905. I guess the NYPD wasn't one of those agencies issuing .32s in the 1950s.
So it appears I was right when I said "The .32 S&W was also the duty round of many U.S. LE agencies early in the 20th Century...."

David Armstrong
07-19-2011, 14:07
So let's see the list of those pistoleros who were carrying it as their primary SD arm. The Seecamp was for a long time the ultimate BUG, but I don't recall anyone recommending it for primary SD carry. Note that during that time, it was the largest caliber available in a gun that size. Times have changed.
Again you are making stuff up. I never said a thing about pistoleros who carried it as their primary SD arm. The actual statement was "For the .32 to be so inadequate for SD it was interesting the number of well-known pistoleros that carried a Seecamp .32, and how long the waiting list was to get one."

David Armstrong
07-19-2011, 14:12
You're right about that, in general. However, in this case we were asked our opinion which then resulted in this lively discussion. I agree as often as disagree with David Armstrong, but in this case I don't think he has done a good job of defending his position.
Stop making things up. What was asked was
"Does anyone besides "Kinsey Milhone"* carry a .32 for SD?"
--and--
"Anyone out there admit to carrying .32's?"
And my position has been defended just fine. It is the positions others make up and claim that I have that are problematic. My position is very simple...the .32 has been successfully used for decades for SD and it is still being used successfully today.

David Armstrong
07-19-2011, 14:37
There's the problem. I'm arguing the effectiveness of the round to incapacitate an attacker.
OK then, since you have recognized the problem, can we get back on topic?
At times you seem to be arguing the same thing. Maybe because a gun that has a high percentage of failures to stop an attacker is a poor choice for SD.
All handguns commonly used for SD have a high percentage of physical failures to stop an attacker. That does not make them a poor choice for SD, as that is rarely required for SD.
Some examples of the police using handguns for offensive purposes, please.
Good grief, Donn, has it come to this? ANYTIME the police act in an affirmative manner to take a person into custody they are on the offensive. So if you are serving a warrant, or chasing a BG, or any of the multitude of things we do, it is offensive in nature, not defensive.
And that will never involve having to shoot someone until they are incapacitated. Only if that is true would it make sense to carry a round with such a poor record of incapacitation.
Given that most handguns have a poor record of incapacitation that makes absolutely no sense. You don't reject something that works 99.99% of the time just because it doesn't work 100% of the time.

If so, I would also recommend against carrying those particular rounds. Any round with the same effectiveness as a .32 ACP should be avoided.
And yet those rounds have proven to be just fine for SD over and over.

Does this mean you are agreeing that there is a difference in the effectiveness of calibers? That would be a breakthrough.
No breakthrough at all. I've always said there is a difference in the effectiveness of calibers. The question is how to figure out that difference and then deciding if the difference matters. In SD it rarely does.

Yes, I find that amusing as well. People who spit out "facts" with absolutely nothing to back them up.
Sad that you would not consider historical records as backing up a fact.
So they have luckily chosen a caliber that has been shown to be more effective than the .32.
There you go again confusing caliber with effectiveness.
If you can't determine the effectiveness of a caliber how can you say it is ever a deciding factor?
I didn't say you couldn't determine the effectiveness of a caliber. You really need to start responding to what is written instead of making things up. Sometimes one can conclude that a caliber was effective where another would not have been, thus the "if one can decide how to accurately determine that" phrase. A particular round or caliber might be determined to be more effective in one situation, another might be determined to have been more effective in another situation.
I don't know. You brought it up. I'm just trying to keep you honest by asking which organizations you are referring to that still issue the .32 as a primary SD weapon. If you just made that up and can't really name any, just say so.
There you go again making things up and then claiming I said it. Here is what I said: "when given a choice many people and many organizations chose, (and still choose) the .32." Nothing there about issuing the .32 as a primary SD weapon. You made that up.

David Armstrong
07-19-2011, 14:38
Right. IF. However, it has not worked fine for a hundred years. That is why everybody upgraded.
Again, that is sort of like saying the .45 didn't work since we upgraded from it. Again, if the .32 had not worked it would not have been used so much, chosen so often, and still be selected by so many today.

Warp
07-19-2011, 14:44
Again, if the .32 had not worked it would not have been used so much, chosen so often, and still be selected by so many today.

Still waiting on who issues the .32ACP today, to whom it is issued, and what the intended purpose is.

So far you have made this statement without backing it up with anything. Care to change that?

cloudbuster
07-19-2011, 14:57
Most of us don't live lives that are that dangerous. I live in a very, very low-crime area ( 1/6 the national average), but I sometimes have to work on my rental houses in a nearby big city in not the best areas. Even in those areas, I see the bad elements around there and most of them are just looking for what they can get at minimal risk to their lives. If you start shooting, with any gun at all, they're heading for the hills.

Life is about weighing risks, yeah, there's the "pumped up on PCP maniac" or the "bad ass who shrugs off two .32 rounds to the chest" but, seriously, how likely?

You'd probably be upping your survival chances more by installing a 5-point harness and always wearing a helmet when you drive your car, than by upgrading from a .32 to a .45, because you are far, far more likely to be in a serious auto accident than to be in a gunfight. But I bet nobody here is gonna say "Hey, Cloudbuster, that's right! I'm gonna start wearing a helmet when I drive!"

David Armstrong
07-19-2011, 15:05
Still waiting on who issues the .32ACP today, to whom it is issued, and what the intended purpose is.

So far you have made this statement without backing it up with anything. Care to change that?
Perhaps you have missed the several folks here who have said they have chosen and use a .32? And I don't believe I've said anything about the .32 being issued today. Is this another one of those things that we are making up instead of dealing with what was actually said??:upeyes:

Sharky7
07-19-2011, 15:32
Why go .32 though today for self defense? The Ruger LCP and Kahr PM9 are similar sizes/concealment and weight and give you the advantage. Don't get me wrong, I am not volunteering to be shot by a .32, but just seems like a no-brainer to upgrade.

Gunnut 45/454
07-19-2011, 15:34
Nope my cut off is .380 ACP! Now if it was the only thing I had and needed to use it -the bad guy would catch every round I had in it!:supergrin:

Warp
07-19-2011, 15:50
And I don't believe I've said anything about the .32 being issued today. Is this another one of those things that we are making up instead of dealing with what was actually said?? :upeyes:

O rly?

Again, that is sort of like saying the .45 didn't work since we upgraded from it. Again, if the .32 had not worked it would not have been used so much, chosen so often, and still be selected by so many today.

If you cannot remember what you have and have not claimed you should probably check the attitude.

So, who selects the .32ACP today?

436
07-19-2011, 16:09
wives tale.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bumble_bee#Myths


SIDE NOTE; I stand corrected on the Bumble Bee analogy, it was pointed out to me by another member that the analogy was in fact wrong... Thank you Sir.. :wavey: But! I stand by the rest of the aforementioned.
436

dnuggett
07-19-2011, 16:31
O rly?



If you cannot remember what you have and have not claimed you should probably check the attitude.

So, who selects the .32ACP today?

Well my guess would be anyone who buys one and chooses to carry it? :dunno:

I'm not in that crowd, I personally think there are better choices. I'm just saying, all the man said was that people select it. He didn't say departments issue it.

As a side note.. the only statistic that is worth mentioning in this whole thread is the mere presentation of ANY firearm is proven to have the best result in a SD situation that involves a firearm. All the rest of you folks are arguing over who's dick is bigger (or smaller).

Warp
07-19-2011, 16:39
Well my guess would be anyone who buys one and chooses to carry it? :dunno:

I'm not in that crowd, I personally think there are better choices. I'm just saying, all the man said was that people select it. He didn't say departments issue it.

Right. Apparently nobody currently issues it. This is for a reason.

Donn57
07-19-2011, 17:40
Why? Every time I point out the flaw in your claim you want to change it. How about sticking to the topic...is the .32 adequate for SD?


Because you brought it up as a defense of your position.


Oh, you mean like all those claims and research that you have neglected to provide? Again, if you will take a bit of time and actually read about this stuff (I know that is difficult for some) you might actually find it.


At least I pointed out the research that was cited by another poster and how it supports my position. You have shown no research at all.


OK then, we go that out of the way. You agree that your argument, as posted, was meaningless. That is a good start.


No. All my arguments are valid and correct all the time. You have incorrectly interpreted my response.


But again, as you keep ignoring, effectiveness is only one factor, and a minor one at that, when discussing SD.


But I don't prescribe to your opinion that the effectiveness of a particular caliber is a minor factor. You can't assume something as given that is simply opinion.


I'm not aware of anyone who has said it should be the overriding factor. Seems yo keep wanting to argue things that nobody else has said.

That is the implication when someone carries a full size .45 one day and a mouse gun on another day based on the temperature outside. I've never heard anyone give a different reason besides the size of the gun as to why they choose a mouse gun in the summer and a larger caliber in the winter.


But it is effective. It may not be as effective as something else, but that something else may have other issues that cause it to lose an advantage.


There is no advantage to carrying a less effective round. It may be more convenient, but not advantageous.



True, but we don't need to break down a wall. We need to convince a BG to leave us alone. You have provided absolutely nothing to show why the .32 now fails in that after decades of it being used to do that.

Not true. During any given SD situation where a gun is needed, we may need to "break down a wall." That is, we may need to completely and totally incapacitate the attacker. The .32 is not the most effective handgun for the job.


And I answered it. Different people, different reasons. I might carry based on a number of factors. Caliber is almost never one of them. Are you suggesting that many people here intentionally carry a gun with the understanding that it will not work for them in the SD situation they envision? Seems rather odd to me.

It is odd which is why I don't understand why people carry the .32.


Again it seems as if you are the one unfamiliar with the research. It is either that or you seem to be under a delusion that people will voluntarily carry a gun for SD when they know it will not perform that job.


That's not quite my delusion, but close. I contend that because they know the odds of needing any gun is slim, that carrying a gun chambered for one of the least effective cartridges is okay. That same person may then strap on a 15 round 9mm and carry two spare magazines when it is more convenient.


And in many cases, and for many years, they did not change caliber even when getting new guns, and when they did change it was to "upgrade" to a .380. So it seems that they rejected the idea of the .32 not working for them.


How does upgrading to a .380 mean they didn't reject the .32.


Again you are asking a question that does not have a generic answer. Different departments changed for different reasons. Some went up in caliber. Lots of LE went down in caliber. And again note that when there was this change almost inevitably the old calibers were grandfathered in and officers continued carrying and using them. If it was as bad as you claim that would have been noticed and the ineffective guns pulled, don't you think?


What other reason would there be to go from a six shot .32 revolver to a six shot .38 revolver of the same design by the same company beside the desire to change caliber? Since we are discussing the change from .32 to something else, perhaps you can tell me what caliber agencies who went down in caliber went to.


See, that is exactly what I mean. I have not said any of those things. You are making them up. I have not said anything about how many agencies were doing anything, or that any agency was still issuing the .32 as a primary SD weapon.


Are you really going to make me go back and pull quotes? I'll do it, but not right this minute.


Actually I say stuff that should be common knowledge on a topic to anyone who has a reasonable knowledge of the literature on the topic, such as the fact that until the mid-1970s the standard sidearm of the German police was a Walther PP in either .32 or .380, and of the two the .32 was far more popular. Seems to have worked for them, as they rejected larger caliber sidearms on a fairly regular basis.

So the Europeans gave up the .32 ACP nearly 40 years ago. Why do you suppose that is?



So it appears I was right when I said "The .32 S&W was also the duty round of many U.S. LE agencies early in the 20th Century...."

Not really. The only agency you can point to is the NYPD who dumped the .32 in 1905 after only 9 years.

Donn57
07-19-2011, 18:01
There you go again making things up and then claiming I said it. Here is what I said: "when given a choice many people and many organizations chose, (and still choose) the .32." Nothing there about issuing the .32 as a primary SD weapon. You made that up.

But my whole argument is against carrying the .32 as a primary SD weapon and you've kept on using examples of LE having used it as such half a century or more ago so why would you now bring up organizations that don't issue it as a primary SD weapon?

At any rate, I'm done. You have begun contradicting yourself, are denying making statements that I have actually quoted, and you have accused me of going off the rails on subjects that you actually brought up in defense of your position.

So you win. You've convinced me. The .32 is the greatest caliber ever even tho not a single LE agency or military still issues it and not a single professional would recommend it as a primary SD weapon despite it having instantly stopped every bad guy ever shot with it for over 5000 years. I recommend everyone sell all their guns and replace them with .32 caliber guns. You'll be the best armed SoB on the block. Your attackers will quake with fear at the mere sight of your mighty hand canon. Unless of course you can find a nice .22 short revolver. Now that's the real ticket.

Have a great evening.

436
07-19-2011, 19:55
Couple things I came across as to whether the .32 ACP has enough bite. I think as time has moved along, so has the ammo. There are far better bullets, power and weapons for the round now... Take the Walther PPK/S or PP and few more. "Don't start spotting" I did say it was duty combo.

Buffalo Bore.
32 ACP +P Ammo - 75 gr. Hard cast F.N. (1150fps/ M.E. 220 ft. lbs.) - 20 Round Box

Corbon
Caliber: 32 Auto. Bullet Wt.: 55gr. Velocity: 1100fps. Energy: 148ftlbs. Test Barrel Length: 2.5 Inches.

Speer.
Ammo .32 ACP Speer Gold Dot JHP 60 Grain 960 fps 123 ft/lbs. energy muzzle

Hornady
32 ACP 60 Grain Jacketed Hollow Point Extreme Terminal Performance Muzzle Velocity: 1000 fps Muzzle Energy: 133 ft lbs.

And many more; they claim this is all Self Defense Ammo. That Buffalo 220 ft. lbs round “if’ it functions reliable is nothing to sneeze at, as always; it’s all about reliability.


436

David Armstrong
07-19-2011, 21:30
O rly?



If you cannot remember what you have and have not claimed you should probably check the attitude.

So, who selects the .32ACP today?
You might want to try to keep up with what you are saying, as there is a world of difference between what you made up (issued) and what I actually said (selected). As for who selects it today, apparently lots of folks, as they sell a bunch of them.

David Armstrong
07-19-2011, 21:32
Well my guess would be anyone who buys one and chooses to carry it? :dunno:

I'm not in that crowd, I personally think there are better choices. I'm just saying, all the man said was that people select it. He didn't say departments issue it.
Thank you. As I pointed out, way too much making stuff up and then claiming it was said instead of responding to what was actually said.

As a side note.. the only statistic that is worth mentioning in this whole thread is the mere presentation of ANY firearm is proven to have the best result in a SD situation that involves a firearm. All the rest of you folks are arguing over who's dick is bigger (or smaller).
That is it. Caliber just doesn't seem to matter much in SD situations.

Warp
07-19-2011, 21:55
You might want to try to keep up with what you are saying, as there is a world of difference between what you made up (issued) and what I actually said (selected). As for who selects it today, apparently lots of folks, as they sell a bunch of them.

You cannot provide even one single law enforcement department or agency or military that "selects" .32 ACP.

This speaks volumes.

Those who know, and whose life is most likely to depend on their firearm, look elsewhere.

David Armstrong
07-19-2011, 22:11
Because you brought it up as a defense of your position.
No, I did not. You are making things up again.

At least I pointed out the research that was cited by another poster and how it supports my position. You have shown no research at all.
Why do you keep trying to argue that the historical record does not count as research when discussing history?

No. All my arguments are valid and correct all the time. You have incorrectly interpreted my response.
Hey, you were the one who said the argument was meaningless. I just agreed with you.

But I don't prescribe to your opinion that the effectiveness of a particular caliber is a minor factor. You can't assume something as given that is simply opinion.
Sure I can, given the huge number of successful DGUs that are the result of small calibers. Again, just because YOU are not aware of the information doesn't mean that the information isn't there.

That is the implication when someone carries a full size .45 one day and a mouse gun on another day based on the temperature outside. I've never heard anyone give a different reason besides the size of the gun as to why they choose a mouse gun in the summer and a larger caliber in the winter.
That may be more a function of your limited range rather than anything else. I have regularly run across folks who carry different sized guns at different times for a variety of reasons.

There is no advantage to carrying a less effective round. It may be more convenient, but not advantageous.
If the round serves to accomplish the task it is not less effective. And convenience can certainly be an advantage at times.

Not true. During any given SD situation where a gun is needed, we may need to "break down a wall." That is, we may need to completely and totally incapacitate the attacker. The .32 is not the most effective handgun for the job.
We "may" need to do lots of things. One can tailor any situation to lead to a preconceived answer using "may". I prefer to focus on what actually has been seen rather than some mystical and magical "may". And what has actually been seen is that the .32 has a long history of successful selection and use for SD.

It is odd which is why I don't understand why people carry the .32.
Because it has a long history of doing the job. Don't need much beyond that.

That's not quite my delusion, but close. I contend that because they know the odds of needing any gun is slim, that carrying a gun chambered for one of the least effective cartridges is okay.
The basic problem there is that for SD it is not one of the least effective cartridges. It does the job just fine for most situations, which is why it has been selected so often by so many.

How does upgrading to a .380 mean they didn't reject the .32.Because the .32 remained in the system and available for use

What other reason would there be to go from a six shot .32 revolver to a six shot .38 revolver of the same design by the same company beside the desire to change caliber?
There are all sorts of reasons agencies change guns, calibers, and everything else. A great example is the FBI going from the 9mm to the 10mm then back to the 40 S&W, all while allowing agents that wanted to continue carrying a .38 Spl.
Since we are discussing the change from .32 to something else, perhaps you can tell me what caliber agencies who went down in caliber went to.
Probably the most common was the move from .45 down to .38 or .32.

Are you really going to make me go back and pull quotes? I'll do it, but not right this minute.
If you can come up with a quote where I mentioned a specific number I'd like to see it. Until then, we'll just go on the premise that it is another one of those things you made up.

So the Europeans gave up the .32 ACP nearly 40 years ago. Why do you suppose that is?
No suppose to it. They went to the 9mm for NATO compatibility, largely as the result of an increased concern for anti-terrorism issues.

Not really. The only agency you can point to is the NYPD who dumped the .32 in 1905 after only 9 years.
Still making things up I see. I specifically mentioned two agencies, NYPD being one of them. I could have pointed out that the .32 was standard issue for the Evansville, Indiana PD in the 1920s, or a number of other agencies. Again, your lack of knowledge has no bearing on what I know or what the facts are.

David Armstrong
07-19-2011, 22:20
But my whole argument is against carrying the .32 as a primary SD weapon and you've kept on using examples of LE having used it as such half a century or more ago so why would you now bring up organizations that don't issue it as a primary SD weapon?
Because the two have no true relationship to each other. What an agency decides to issue as a primary weapon for a uniformed officer has little if anything to do with what is OK for SD. I point out the .32 is not inadequate for SD based on the fact that it was selected and used as a sidearm by LE and the military for a long time and has a record of success behind it. I don't think any agencies still issue the S&W Mdl 65 as a primary, but that doesn't mean it is not a good choice for SD.
At any rate, I'm done. You have begun contradicting yourself, are denying making statements that I have actually quoted,[/quoted]
No, I've denied statement that you have made up and claimed for me.
[quote] and you have accused me of going off the rails on subjects that you actually brought up in defense of your position.
Because you take that defense and rather than respond to it you then try to apply it to something else.
So you win. You've convinced me. The .32 is the greatest caliber ever even tho not a single LE agency or military still issues it and not a single professional would recommend it as a primary SD weapon despite it having instantly stopped every bad guy ever shot with it for over 5000 years. I recommend everyone sell all their guns and replace them with .32 caliber guns. You'll be the best armed SoB on the block. Your attackers will quake with fear at the mere sight of your mighty hand canon. Unless of course you can find a nice .22 short revolver. Now that's the real ticket.
Ahh yes, when one can not respond with logic and rational discussion toss out a bunch of stuff nobody has said. Sad.

Have a great evening.
I will, thank you, and you also.

David Armstrong
07-19-2011, 22:23
You cannot provide even one single law enforcement department or agency or military that "selects" .32 ACP.

This speaks volumes.
I can't provide a single LE or military agency that selects the .357 Magnum either. Does that speak volumes also?:rofl:

Those who know, and whose life is most likely to depend on their firearm, look elsewhere.
Which may be why so many of those who know select and carry .32s.

Warp
07-19-2011, 22:30
I can't provide a single LE or military agency that selects the .357 Magnum either. Does that speak volumes also?:rofl:

The only thing this speaks to is your inability, or unwillingness, to look as well as you complete lack of objectivity, only a resounding need to argue whatever opinion is most contrary.

I could point out that I don't have to look beyond my own county to find a LEA that authorizes .357 mag. We could discuss departments that have 'selected' .357 mag over in the recent past. I could discuss how silly your attempted statement is by discussing semi auto vs revolvers as it applies to this. But given your position as a contrarian (sp/word?) an nothing more I would be wasting my time. Fortunately I suspect I don't need to do any of these things.

David Armstrong
07-19-2011, 22:43
The only thing this speaks to is your inability, or unwillingness, to look as well as you complete lack of objectivity, only a resounding need to argue whatever opinion is most contrary.
Let's see now, I'm arguing that something that was done by thousands of people, hundreds of agencies, and dozens of countries is worth considering, while you are trying to argue all those folks didn't know what they were doing while you are all-knowing on the subject. Seems as if the lack of objectivity is on your part.
I could point out that I don't have to look beyond my own county to find a LEA that authorizes .357 mag.
And there you go trying to change things again. Nobody has said anything about what is authorized. Heck, if that is the criteria you want to use I can find dozens of LE agencies that authorize various .32s.
We could discuss departments that have 'selected' .357 mag over in the recent past.
Just like we could discuss the departments that have "selected" the .32 in the recent past??:upeyes:
I could discuss how silly your attempted statement is by discussing semi auto vs revolvers as it applies to this.
So now you want to claim that there is a major issue between revolver versus auto for SD?? And since it appears you don't understand it we have been discussing semis and revolvers throughout much if not most of the thread.
But given your position as a contrarian (sp/word?) an nothing more I would be wasting my time. Fortunately I suspect precious few who actually read this far into this near worthless thread will be reading what you type by now.
Hmmm. Pot meet kettle seems rather appropriate, given your position.

Warp
07-19-2011, 22:46
So now you want to claim that there is a major issue between revolver versus auto for SD??

If "SD" is the purpose that LEA's have in mind when they select pistols for their officers, as that was the topic, then yes there most certainly is a 'major issue' between a revolver and an auto in the minds of said LEAs.

Would you like somebody to explain the major differences and resultant advantages of a semi auto to you?

David Armstrong
07-19-2011, 22:52
If "SD" is the purpose that LEA's have in mind when they select pistols for their officers, as that was the topic, then yes there most certainly is a 'major issue' between a revolver and an auto in the minds of said LEAs.
Nobody mentioned LEAs purposes. That is your attempt to change things again. But if you want to take the position that a .357 Mag revolver is inadequate for SD go right ahead. I'm quite sure that lots of folks will have a good laugh at that.
Would you like somebody to explain the major differences and resultant advantages of a semi auto to you?
Having carried both aautos and revolvers and taught them both, I am rather cognizant of the differences, major and minor. As for advantages, as often happens each has advantages and disadvantages, which is one reason there are so many revolvers sold for SD these days.

GAFinch
07-19-2011, 22:56
Why go .32 though today for self defense? The Ruger LCP and Kahr PM9 are similar sizes/concealment and weight and give you the advantage. Don't get me wrong, I am not volunteering to be shot by a .32, but just seems like a no-brainer to upgrade.

The problem with the .380 is that ammo has been expensive and hard to find the past few years, whereas .32 has stayed pretty cheap if ordered online. Even magnum calibers are useless if you don't practice enough to be able to hit an adrenaline-filled attacker in a critical area. If .380 ammo and it's better hollowpoints become consistently easier to find, then that would diminish the appeal of .32 guns.

Warp
07-19-2011, 23:01
Nobody mentioned LEAs purposes.

:rofl:

GAFinch
07-19-2011, 23:13
Just like I presumed awhile back...people carry it because they are lazy.

Not everyone can wear a Hawaiian/plaid/bowling shirt to work. Whether you're a manager in the field or an office worker wearing a tucked in shirt, or a maintenance guy constantly bending over to do work, mouse guns are your best option. Sure as hell beats the days of having to carry a derringer. Personally, I spend 70-80% of my carry time in work clothes, as I run many of my errands before coming home from work, so a mouse gun automatically becomes my primary SD gun. If I go out at night, it's either to the gym or occasionally to meet someone for a couple drinks, so no carrying then.

If I'm running around for awhile on the weekend or going to see a movie, do I dress around a bigger gun? Sure I do. Do I carry a bigger gun in winter? Sure I do. Do I keep a shotgun in my closet? Sure I do. If I felt service caliber guns were my only adequate choice, however, then I'd end up relying on a 3" pocketknife for protection.

Warp
07-19-2011, 23:22
Not everyone can wear a Hawaiian/plaid/bowling shirt to work. Whether you're a manager in the field or an office worker wearing a tucked in shirt, or a maintenance guy constantly bending over to do work, mouse guns are your best option.

I had no problems carrying my G26 concealed when I wore a tucked dress shirt and pants. If I had I would simply fall back on a J-frame.



If I'm running around for awhile on the weekend or going to see a movie, do I dress around a bigger gun? Sure I do. Do I carry a bigger gun in winter? Sure I do.

Why?

happyguy
07-20-2011, 06:21
The simple truth is that you need enough penetration to reach vital organs and if the bullet has to pass through someones arm, wrist, shoulder, rib, or what ever, before it gets to the torso a .32 probably isn't going to get the job done.

Regards,
Happyguy :)

cloudbuster
07-20-2011, 07:29
Couple things I came across as to whether the .32 ACP has enough bite. I think as time has moved along, so has the ammo. There are far better bullets, power and weapons for the round now... Take the Walther PPK/S or PP and few more. "Don't start spotting" I did say it was duty combo.

Buffalo Bore.
32 ACP +P Ammo - 75 gr. Hard cast F.N. (1150fps/ M.E. 220 ft. lbs.) - 20 Round Box

Corbon
Caliber: 32 Auto. Bullet Wt.: 55gr. Velocity: 1100fps. Energy: 148ftlbs. Test Barrel Length: 2.5 Inches.

Speer.
Ammo .32 ACP Speer Gold Dot JHP 60 Grain 960 fps 123 ft/lbs. energy muzzle

Hornady
32 ACP 60 Grain Jacketed Hollow Point Extreme Terminal Performance Muzzle Velocity: 1000 fps Muzzle Energy: 133 ft lbs.

And many more; they claim this is all Self Defense Ammo. That Buffalo 220 ft. lbs round “if’ it functions reliable is nothing to sneeze at, as always; it’s all about reliability.


436

As far as I know, there is no +P standard for .32 ACP. That Buffalo Bore has got to be loaded waaay above the pressures the round was designed for, which means it's loaded above the pressures the guns were designed for. I'd be really hesitant about putting that stuff in my pistol. I doubt there is any manufacturer out there who, if you wrote to them, would sign off on using that stuff in their pistol.

436
07-20-2011, 10:02
As far as I know, there is no +P standard for .32 ACP. That Buffalo Bore has got to be loaded waaay above the pressures the round was designed for, which means it's loaded above the pressures the guns were designed for. I'd be really hesitant about putting that stuff in my pistol. I doubt there is any manufacturer out there who, if you wrote to them, would sign off on using that stuff in their pistol.

Pretty hard to sell ammo these days’s that would damage pistols with high psi. In my first post I said; I used a Colt .32 ACP Hammerless... even today I believe that pistol is regarded as one of the all time best and most reliable .32 auto's hide out's ever made. As I also mentioned the Walther PP & PPK'S would be my next pick for one and I’d add the Berretta M70, there are a few others, which I'm sure would have no problem with Buffalo’s ammo. I wouldn’t be big on using it in a Jennings or Raven type pistols because of the +P factor. In most case's +P or +P+ will only damage a gun if fed a steady diet of them. Practice with the light stuff, kit up with the hard stuff.
So if Buffalo is to far out on the making for their .32 APC +P load; they must have one hell of an insurance premium each month… that is; if they could find some insurance company crazy enough to write them.
http://www.buffalobore.com/index.php?l=product_list&c=31

I’ve never used the ammo, just an observation on my part. I’m not promoting the ammo as duty carry, but at the same time I think its better than a sharp stick. Obviously if you move up in caliber you move up in power factors, but not necessary reliability in all case’s. No matter what, reliability has got to be the first consideration for self defense; I know it was for duty.

As for me; I’m a big Elmer Keith type guy when it comes to duty usage; “make a big hole, let a lot of hot blood out and cold air in, cut tear and sever artery’s veins and capillary’s”… that’s a fight stopper. In self defense, I want to shoot & scoot... Put some bad news on his head and get the hell out of his kill sack. I believe my old Colt .32 APC would have given me that opportunity if I had of needed it.
436

David Armstrong
07-20-2011, 10:22
Not everyone can wear a Hawaiian/plaid/bowling shirt to work. Whether you're a manager in the field or an office worker wearing a tucked in shirt, or a maintenance guy constantly bending over to do work, mouse guns are your best option. Sure as hell beats the days of having to carry a derringer. Personally, I spend 70-80% of my carry time in work clothes, as I run many of my errands before coming home from work, so a mouse gun automatically becomes my primary SD gun.
And you are not alone. Plenty of folks carry smaller caliber and/or size guns and they carry them in less than ideal locations and they don't practice with them on a regular basis and all sorts of other things that some think you just have to have/do for SD. THEY can carry XYZ so obviously YOU can carry XYZ also, according to them. THEY decide that one issue (caliber, capacity, speed of draw, etc.) is the most important thing to them so obviously it must be the most important thing for YOU also. Of course what they neglect is that we are all individuals and that most SD is not that gear oriented or one dimensional. Way to many fall into the trap of what does the latest gun-rag say, or what is the latest high-speed trainer saying, and they neglect the lessons we have already learned from history. Do things get new and improved? Sure. But that doesn't mean that what has worked fine for the last 50 years suddenly does not work any more. Small caliber mouse guns have done a fine job of SD for a long time, and nothing indicates they won't continue to do so for a long time to come.
Rant mode off.:rant::fred:

dtyndall
07-20-2011, 10:29
It's obviously better than being unarmed. The .32 can kill with one shot like any other gun; it's all about shot placement, yadda yadda yadda. People tend to forget that guns like the .32 and .22 have contributed to serious murders in our past: Hitler's death, the Archduke's death... heck, the guy at Virginia Tech was killing people off with a Walther P22.

In a life or death situation, carry something. Just be sure it is realiable and you can shoot it. Otherwise move on and find something more suitable to your skillset or requirements.

cloudbuster
07-20-2011, 11:16
Pretty hard to sell ammo these days’s that would damage pistols with high psi.

On the contrary, it's super common:

1. Many .38 and 9mms that are not specifically +P rated will be quickly adversely affected by shooting +P ammunition -- quickly developing microscopic fractures in the frame and chamber, leading to an eventual Kaboom. Fortunately, there is an agreed-on standard for +P ammo and ratings. You don't stick +P rounds in a gun not rated for them if you care about the gun (And your hand. And your face). I've seen guns come with warnings "Do not use +P ammunition!"

2. There are loads marketed for .45 Colt that are dangerously over-pressure for most traditionally-designed SA .45 colt revolvers. They are intended for use only in Ruger Blackhawks.

The existence of an ammo load doesn't mean it's safe to shoot in any gun that will chamber it.

I don't see why I should have to prove this, as it's the conservative commonsense response, but I've sent emails to both Walther and Kel-Tec asking what they think of using the Buffalo Bore ammo in the PPK and P32. We'll see how they respond.

Has the Buffalo Bore team done extensive long-term metal fatigue tests on a variety of makes of handguns, to determine what guns can safely support their load over long periods? Did they shoot hundreds of rounds and do imaging on the barrel and frame to spot micro fractures? Their technical data page gives me no reason to think so. It sure looks a lot like "We tried this in some of our guns and it worked great!" Color me skeptical.

http://www.buffalobore.com/index.php?l=product_detail&p=132

Anybody can make an overpowered handload -- and serious reloaders warn against the danger of loading to pressures beyond the design specs. of the weapon. There is no +P standard for .32 ACP and thus there is no industry-standard design and pressure specs for such a load. It's irresponsible.

cloudbuster
07-20-2011, 11:27
On the contrary, it's super common:
I don't see why I should have to prove this, as it's the conservative commonsense response, but I've sent emails to both Walther and Kel-Tec asking what they think of using the Buffalo Bore ammo in the PPK and P32. We'll see how they respond.


Wow, Kel-Tec's reponse came back fast:


We don’t recommend using any +P at all in our P32, specifically Buffalo Bore.

Thanks,
Kel-Tec
Customer Service

P.O. Box 236009
Cocoa FL, 32923
321-631-0068
Mon-Fri 8-3p EST

"specifically Buffalo Bore" -- I think that's not just a "no," but a "hell no." ;)

Warp
07-20-2011, 11:31
And you are not alone. Plenty of folks carry smaller caliber and/or size guns and they carry them in less than ideal locations and they don't practice with them on a regular basis

Sucks to be them.

cloudbuster
07-20-2011, 11:34
Wow, Kel-Tec's reponse came back fast:


We don’t recommend using any +P at all in our P32, specifically Buffalo Bore.

Thanks,
Kel-Tec
Customer Service

P.O. Box 236009
Cocoa FL, 32923
321-631-0068
Mon-Fri 8-3p EST

"specifically Buffalo Bore" -- I think that's not just a "no," but a "hell no." ;)

I like the entry in Buffalo Bore's FAQ:

Yes you can. Gun makers often warn against using any ammo that is not SAAMI spec. and there is no SAAMI spec. for the 380 auto +P cartridge. Gun makers do this to protect themselves from any liability in our super litigious American society.

Buffalo Bore and others have tested our 380 auto +P ammo in the LCP and many LCP owners currently shoot our +P ammo in their LCPs and we've never heard of any problems from the "power" or "pressure" of the ammo, but obviously the use of +P ammo in these little guns should be limited to just enough to test reliable feeding and point of impact, then carry the ammo in your LCP in the event you need it, but don't go plinking with it.


"we've never heard of any problems"

Very scientific. :faint:

David Armstrong
07-20-2011, 11:38
Sucks to be them.
Why? They are happily carrying a gun/ammo/SD combo that they like and that will be sufficient for most any SD situation they will encounter. :upeyes:

Warp
07-20-2011, 11:59
Why?

Sucks to be carrying a slow to draw mouse gun you don't practice with.

David Armstrong
07-20-2011, 12:20
Sucks to be carrying a slow to draw mouse gun you don't practice with.
LOL! We get it, Warp. You are scared to death that your personal skills won't cut it and you hope that your personal compromise point for gear and training is going to be enough, so you feel the need to attack and denigrate those who aren't as afraid and select a different compromise point for their own personal SD needs. We get it. So perhaps in the long run it sucks to be you, always carrying around a big gun, worrying about fast draws and calibers, when it really doesn't matter much. :dunno:

Warp
07-20-2011, 12:29
LOL! We get it, Warp. You are scared to death that your personal skills won't cut it and you hope that your personal compromise point for gear and training is going to be enough, so you feel the need to attack and denigrate those who aren't as afraid and select a different compromise point for their own personal SD needs. We get it. So perhaps in the long run it sucks to be you, always carrying around a big gun, worrying about fast draws and calibers, when it really doesn't matter much. :dunno:




lol you mad? Cause you sound mad.

My 'personal skills' are fine, just fine. :cool:

And it still sucks to have to carry a slow to draw mouse gun you don't practice with. ;)

David Armstrong
07-20-2011, 12:35
lol you mad? Cause you sound mad.
Mad? No, I'm LMAO, as I usually do when someone comes along and claims they know best what everyone else should do.
My 'personal skills' are fine, just fine. :cool:
Personally I'd question that given your apparent phobia about mouseguns.:dunno:
And it still sucks to have to carry a slow to draw mouse gun you don't practice with. ;)
Probably not as much as it sucks to be so afraid.:wavey:

Warp
07-20-2011, 12:38
Probably not as much as it sucks to be so afraid.

Strong anti tactics.

Why are you so afraid that you feel the need to carry a gun?

smoke
07-20-2011, 12:46
I carried a .32 Seecamp for a long time as a hideout pocket gun. I never thought it was the utimate, but it was the smallest, relatively powerful gun that was available. Never had to use it, but any gun's better than no gun, so I felt comfortable with it. I still have it, but rarely carry it anymore.

Bilbo Bagins
07-20-2011, 12:52
Sorry to cut in on the little catfight going on in this thread, but I carry a .32 OCCASIONALLY.

Before the .380 pocket gun craze, and the 9mm pocket gun craze, .32 ruled the roost. Cops carried .32 S&W long revolvers up until the 1950's and a .32acp actually has slightly more ommph. Could I stop and kill a bad guy with a .32acp? Sure but I would stick with headshots just like I would if I was forced to carry a .22lr.

.32acp is not a spray and pray type of caliber, you got to know what you are doing.

436
07-20-2011, 13:10
On the contrary, it's super common:

1. Many .38 and 9mms that are not specifically +P rated will be quickly adversely affected by shooting +P ammunition -- quickly developing microscopic fractures in the frame and chamber, leading to an eventual Kaboom. Fortunately, there is an agreed-on standard for +P ammo and ratings. You don't stick +P rounds in a gun not rated for them if you care about the gun (And your hand. And your face). I've seen guns come with warnings "Do not use +P ammunition!"

2. There are loads marketed for .45 Colt that are dangerously over-pressure for most traditionally-designed SA .45 colt revolvers. They are intended for use only in Ruger Blackhawks.

The existence of an ammo load doesn't mean it's safe to shoot in any gun that will chamber it.

I don't see why I should have to prove this, as it's the conservative commonsense response, but I've sent emails to both Walther and Kel-Tec asking what they think of using the Buffalo Bore ammo in the PPK and P32. We'll see how they respond.

Has the Buffalo Bore team done extensive long-term metal fatigue tests on a variety of makes of handguns, to determine what guns can safely support their load over long periods? Did they shoot hundreds of rounds and do imaging on the barrel and frame to spot micro fractures? Their technical data page gives me no reason to think so. It sure looks a lot like "We tried this in some of our guns and it worked great!" Color me skeptical.

http://www.buffalobore.com/index.php?l=product_detail&p=132

Anybody can make an overpowered handload -- and serious reloaders warn against the danger of loading to pressures beyond the design specs. of the weapon. There is no +P standard for .32 ACP and thus there is no industry-standard design and pressure specs for such a load. It's irresponsible.

Interesting and I would agree in part as to your statement... But the "one sentence” {are you news reporter by night :-)} you used was part of the over all insurance problem... And clearly there are many loads and weapons that point out “not” to use them with and/or in “none +p or +p+” firearms. I personnel have not seen a Kel-Tec with that warning on them, nor any of the aforementioned ammo company’s warning of using them in a Kel-Tec... “I haven’t seen it” but then I don’t own a Kel-Tec…. And I’m not buying .32 ACP on the open market any more. That's not saying your wrong; only that a company will always look after their best interesting; that goes for quotes outside their industry. It’s called liability of which I’m sure you’re aware of.

We could go on about rifles like older M96’s and pistols like black power 1873’s using higher pressure loads... forever. That seems to get away from the meat of subject.

If you really want to get to the Buffalo Bore bottom of the barrel question… give them a call…and see what they tell you about their ammo... I personally’…, have never used Buffalo Bore ammo and have no real world idea how it works.

Clearly though they’ve used Kel-Tec in the research and added them to their +P info adds I’d find it "hard to believe" they didn’t contact Kel-Tec about using their pistol with Buffalo ammo together.
From their add:

A. Berretta Mod. 70, 3 inch bbl.- 1001 fps

B. Kel Tek, 2.5 inch bbl - 910 fps

C. Seecamp, 2 inch bbl. - 856 fps


In the day’s I carried a .32 ACP for a back up we pretty much only had ball… one or two in their noggin, the rest in their fanny or until they stop.

By the way serious reloaders push the envelope all the time, right or wrong… they do.


This is one of those subjects where there is no real right or wrong answers...
436

HerrGlock
07-20-2011, 14:51
People argue over the stupidest garbage.

Is a .32 better than being unarmed? Yes
Is a .32 better than a sharp stick? Yes
Is a .32 better than a .38? Well if you can hit with a .32 and flinch with a .38 then yes it is.

I've said before and I'll say more than this time I'm more afraid of a person with a plastic fork who honestly knows how to use it and has the mindset to do so than I am with most of the petty thieves out there if they had a .45.

The rest is just mindless noise.

Warp
07-20-2011, 20:47
People argue over the stupidest garbage.

Is a .32 better than being unarmed? Yes
Is a .32 better than a sharp stick? Yes
Is a .32 better than a .38? Well if you can hit with a .32 and flinch with a .38 then yes it is.

I've said before and I'll say more than this time I'm more afraid of a person with a plastic fork who honestly knows how to use it and has the mindset to do so than I am with most of the petty thieves out there if they had a .45.

The rest is just mindless noise.

I I think I would rather have a good 'stick', sharp or not, than a .32 mouse gun.

Ruggles
07-20-2011, 20:57
I I think I would rather have a good 'stick', sharp or not, than a .32 mouse gun.

I will take the gun over a stick :supergrin:

I mean if nothing else the stick is gonna be a pain to carry concealed :tongueout:

The little .32 has seem to hang on for a long time in commercial production and use, that is a pretty good sign of any product that it has merit.

EKUJustice
07-20-2011, 21:03
I have the 32, 380 that I carry all the time. Usually there is a larger gun to go with it but some situations its just not possible to carry the larger gun. In those stiuations, the 380, and 32 is better than nothing. That said, the 1911 is a lot more comforting to have.

Foxtrotx1
07-21-2011, 00:55
People argue over the stupidest garbage.

Is a .32 better than being unarmed? Yes
Is a .32 better than a sharp stick? Yes
Is a .32 better than a .38? Well if you can hit with a .32 and flinch with a .38 then yes it is.

I've said before and I'll say more than this time I'm more afraid of a person with a plastic fork who honestly knows how to use it and has the mindset to do so than I am with most of the petty thieves out there if they had a .45.

The rest is just mindless noise.

/thread

PAPACHUCK
07-21-2011, 03:39
I worked as a gun salesman/range officer at a local indoor shooting range a few years back. I sold a lot of little .380's, Kel-Tecs and Rugers could not get put into the case before they were sold. As the craze for .380's heated up, the availability suffered and people demanded small carry guns. We sold a lot of P32's as well.

I cannot tell you what percentage of .380 rounds never touched paper, but it was a bunch. Very small .380 pistols are not easy to shoot well, and most folks won't practice regularly with a gun that is uncomfortable or painfull to shoot. The hit rate with the .32's is much greater, from newbies to experienced shooters. I would venture to say that 90% or more of the posters here on GT would shoot a much better group with a P32 than a P3AT.

Yes, I want the most effective caliber/bullet if I have to confront a BG, hence my carrying a 40S&W primarily. But the 32 that hits it's mark will do more damage than the .380 that missed. I carried a Kel Tec P11 for a long time, but even it was too large for some summer time carry.

I agree with a previous poster who stated that the .32 was better than his pocket knife, 'cause that's all he would have had. And that's the correct mindset. To say that you would rather have a knife than a .32 is just plain stupid, and probably was stated just to validate a point.

There are times when a larger CCW gun cannot be carried, and if YOU cannot shoot a diminutive sized .380 as well as a similar sized .32, then I believe you should carry a 32. If you shoot the .380 well enough, then by all means go for it; it is a superior cartridge. But don't assume all people can shoot as well as you, for there are many that want protection who aren't pistoleros`.

There's a reason J-frames aren't chambered in 44 magnum.


SHOT PLACEMENT is still KING. Shoot the largest caliber YOU shoot well.

David Armstrong
07-21-2011, 07:29
Strong anti tactics.

Why are you so afraid that you feel the need to carry a gun?
Nothing anti to it, as nobody is saying don't carry a gun. The question is why you are so worried you couldn't handle the problem using the same type of tools that thousands of others use successfully without any problem. That seems to be the issue to me, at least. As was discussed on Even Marshall's forum, anyone carrying a gun for personal defense is on the right track, and way ahead of the majority. They should be commended for their effort, and not ridiculed for making what I or you or anyone else considers a less-than-optimum choice of firearm, particularly when that firearm has a solid history of success behind it.

David Armstrong
07-21-2011, 07:34
People argue over the stupidest garbage.

Is a .32 better than being unarmed? Yes
Is a .32 better than a sharp stick? Yes
Is a .32 better than a .38? Well if you can hit with a .32 and flinch with a .38 then yes it is.

I've said before and I'll say more than this time I'm more afraid of a person with a plastic fork who honestly knows how to use it and has the mindset to do so than I am with most of the petty thieves out there if they had a .45.

The rest is just mindless noise.
That is pretty much it. I just have to wonder about the thought process of someone who would rather have a stick than a gun for general SD.

David Armstrong
07-21-2011, 07:37
Before the .380 pocket gun craze, and the 9mm pocket gun craze, .32 ruled the roost. Cops carried .32 S&W long revolvers up until the 1950's and a .32acp actually has slightly more ommph.
Careful now. You and I both know that is common knowledge, but someone is going to jump up and start arguing that it isn't true since you didn't provide a link to some research!:rofl:

Warp
07-21-2011, 10:23
The question is why you are so worried you couldn't handle the problem using the same type of tools that thousands of others use successfully without any problem.

Please provide proof that "thousands" of licensed carriers have successfully defended themselves with a small .32ACP. Thank you.

Warp
07-21-2011, 10:24
I will take the gun over a stick :supergrin:

I mean if nothing else the stick is gonna be a pain to carry concealed :tongueout:


Yes. Just like when comparing to the larger calibers/guns, the .32 is selected for its convenience, not effectiveness.

A little bit of skill and a good 'stick' can be extremely effective. It can be used to keep an attacker out of arms reach (a BIG deal if they have a knife, especially) and the risk of a jam, breakage, or running out of ammo becomes a non-issue. Of course, your range is extremely limited compared to a firearm. Not much more than arms reach.

I wouldn't really replace a gun with a stick. But that is because I don't have adequate training with a stick, and I do with a gun. Give me as much 'stick' training as I have firearms and, based on what I have seen, I might take the stick. Seriously

David Armstrong
07-21-2011, 10:44
Please provide proof that "thousands" of licensed carriers have successfully defended themselves with a small .32ACP. Thank you.
There you go trying to change the parameters again. Nothing was said about licensed carriers.
FWIW, the burden of proof traditionally rests with those who are arguing there is a difference. Given the fact that the historical record shows the .32 has been used for SD purposes for over a century, and is still used for that today, the basic assumption is that it has worked and those who argue against it need to show some proof to show either something has changed so that it no longer works or that the historical record is somehow defective.

Warp
07-21-2011, 10:52
Nothing was said about licensed carriers.

notsureifsrs

shark_za
07-21-2011, 16:26
I was 20 and the week I got out the army I rushed over to the gun shop to buy my first pistol and the .38 I had my mind set on had just been increased in price. Bastard gun shop owner!
I settled for a CZ-70 .32 ACP because I wanted it then and other costs needed taking care of. (history - CZ-70 = 1970 rework of the CZ-50, showing it was still in official service in the 70's, all the way up to 1982 probably)

I carried it for around 2 years and shot it a lot.
Loaded with everything from 60gr Silvertips to ball to THV (SA made RAM copies at 2000fps - fill up the case with powder, fill up the hollow base with powder and using some tissue paper to hold the bullets powder in, seat the bullet for a compressed load.).
Settled on the older Fiocchi 60gr SJHP in the end, expanded less than the ST, fed better and penetrated deeper in my tests.

I was a gun nut on a budget and that is what I had.
Once I had a steady job and started earning properly I bought a Browning HP and the .38 I wanted and the .32 was sold.

I presented it to a pipe wielding potential robber in a parking lot one night, he ran away and all was good.
An old lady down the road shot two guys in her bedroom with a .32, one died on the spot and the other ran about 200m before expiring.

Personally I feel the .32 is equal to the .380 and I liked the extra shot more than the extra diameter.

20 years later I now carry a .40 Glock 23 as my primary but would carry .32 is it was all I had.
I'd load it with 8+1 of 75gr PMP ball and shoot it a lot.

Right now I own a Colt 1903 and then quite a few FN 1900's,1910's and 1922's
Its probably my single most common chambering in my possession after 9mmP.
Being a FN collector makes this so as it was JMB's first.


As for the OP talking about shooting .32 ACP in a revolver, this is a bit flakey and not 100% with ignition and extraction. I have played with my uncles .32 revolver and there would be light strikes as the rimless round would move in and out the cylinder a little.

If I was ever forced to carry a .32 S&W long revolver I would reload a 90gr flat-point at around 900fps and put the bullets where they count.


As for military that use it, I know a few states where the Skorpion is still used, old Gaddafi's hot chick bodyguards used to use them.
In Angola and Mozambique you still see them.

Dukeboy01
07-21-2011, 17:10
People argue over the stupidest garbage.

Is a .32 better than being unarmed? Yes
Is a .32 better than a sharp stick? Yes
Is a .32 better than a .38? Well if you can hit with a .32 and flinch with a .38 then yes it is.

I've said before and I'll say more than this time I'm more afraid of a person with a plastic fork who honestly knows how to use it and has the mindset to do so than I am with most of the petty thieves out there if they had a .45.

The rest is just mindless noise.

Pretty much says it all.

wnr700
07-21-2011, 20:48
For a few months I carried a Keltec P32.

It was an awesome little BUG gun, and went with me everywhere.

Recently bought my new shooter wife a SP101 in .32 H+R Magnum. She shoots the mouse calibers with confidence.

Until she can step up to a Glock 19 or 26 in the future, its better than nothing.

David Armstrong
07-22-2011, 11:26
from shark_za
I presented it to a pipe wielding potential robber in a parking lot one night, he ran away and all was good.
An old lady down the road shot two guys in her bedroom with a .32, one died on the spot and the other ran about 200m before expiring.
Gee, must have sucked to be you or the old lady. Wait a minute....the gun did exactly what you needed it to do, just like it has done for thousands of other people (some of whom might be licensed carriers, but that is a different issue :rofl:) so apparently it didn't suck to be you.
As for military that use it, I know a few states where the Skorpion is still used
I'd forgotten about the Skorpion. A really interesting little sub-gun. I wouldn't be at all surprised to find a fair number of .32 Walthers and Berettas still floating around the Angola and Mozambique area.
Sterkte, en Welkom!

Warp
07-22-2011, 13:21
Gee, must have sucked to be you or the old lady. Wait a minute....the gun did exactly what you needed it to do

In his case it could have been an unloaded airsoft gun and it would have done what it needed to do.

Glenn E. Meyer
07-22-2011, 16:04
Dave and HerrGlock have it nailed.

Since we like data - does anyone have an analysis showing the number of criminals who took a 32 ACP round and continued their crime to a succesful completion as compared to those who took another round - be it a 22 or 50AE and successfully completed their crime?

I'll do the Chi-Square if you have a realistic sample. I once asked Gary Kleck if he saw a caliber difference in successful deterrence or stopping a crime and said he didn't.

436
07-22-2011, 17:06
Dave and HerrGlock have it nailed.

Since we like data - does anyone have an analysis showing the number of criminals who took a 32 ACP round and continued their crime to a succesful completion as compared to those who took another round - be it a 22 or 50AE and successfully completed their crime?

I'll do the Chi-Square if you have a realistic sample. I once asked Gary Kleck if he saw a caliber difference in successful deterrence or stopping a crime and said he didn't.

Well if anyone would care to, they could start here with the F.B.I. http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/ucr
436

David Armstrong
07-22-2011, 17:44
In his case it could have been an unloaded airsoft gun and it would have done what it needed to do.

Which is true of most DGUs, and completely ignores the little old lady's situation.

Warp
07-22-2011, 17:48
Which is true of most DGUs, and completely ignores the little old lady's situation.

What old lady? Got a link?

David Armstrong
07-22-2011, 17:49
I'll do the Chi-Square if you have a realistic sample. I once asked Gary Kleck if he saw a caliber difference in successful deterrence or stopping a crime and said he didn't.
That's the essence of it all. I know it irritates the heck out of some folks who just can't (or won't) seem to understand the true dynamics of CCW, but AFAIK NOBODY who has seriously looked at the issue has seen any difference in successful outcomes of SD that can be attributed to caliber.

David Armstrong
07-22-2011, 17:52
What old lady? Got a link?
Having reading problems??

"I presented it to a pipe wielding potential robber in a parking lot one night, he ran away and all was good.
An old lady down the road shot two guys in her bedroom with a .32, one died on the spot and the other ran about 200m before expiring." Post #168.

Warp
07-22-2011, 17:59
Having reading problems??

"I presented it to a pipe wielding potential robber in a parking lot one night, he ran away and all was good.
An old lady down the road shot two guys in her bedroom with a .32, one died on the spot and the other ran about 200m before expiring." Post #168.

Nobody on the internet ever lied or exaggerated about anything

David Armstrong
07-22-2011, 18:11
Nobody on the internet ever lied or exaggerated about anything
I'll assume that includes yourself? Should we now assume that any time you post you are lying or exaggerating? Were you being dishonest with us when you said "I have never been so lazy as to carry a mouse gun." Maybe you have, and really are lazy? Personally I will assume that folks are telling the truth unless there is some factual error or apparent discrepancy in what they say. Makes it a little easier to have a rational conversation. Perhaps that is why it has been difficult to have that rational discussion with you?:dunno:
In fact, it seems the only one here who has proven their lack of honesty is you. You first said "I think I would rather have a good 'stick', sharp or not, than a .32 mouse gun", but then when called on it said "I wouldn't really replace a gun with a stick."

Warp
07-22-2011, 18:18
I'll assume that includes yourself? Should we now assume that any time you post you are lying or exaggerating? Were you being dishonest with us when you said "I have never been so lazy as to carry a mouse gun." Maybe you have, and really are lazy? Personally I will assume that folks are telling the truth unless there is some factual error or apparent discrepancy in what they say. Makes it a little easier to have a rational conversation. Perhaps that is why it has been difficult to have that rational discussion with you?:dunno:
In fact, it seems the only one here who has proven their lack of honesty is you. You first said "I think I would rather have a good 'stick', sharp or not, than a .32 mouse gun", but then when called on it said "I wouldn't really replace a gun with a stick."

References and citations. ;)

If my options were .32 mouse gun or stick, I would put my time, training and effort into the 'stick'. Fortunately those are not the options

David Armstrong
07-22-2011, 18:21
References and citations. ;)
For what? The fact that you said you would do one thing at one time, but when called on it said you would do something different? Please don't expect others to provide references to your own statements.
If my options were .32 mouse gun or stick, I would put my time, training and effort into the 'stick'.
I believe that pretty well tells us all we need to know about either (a) your understanding of self-defense principles, or (B) your honesty.

Warp
07-22-2011, 18:25
For what? The fact that you said you would do one thing at one time, but when called on it said you would do something different? Please don't expect others to provide references to your own statements.

My statements are all in agreement, but thanks for asking

David Armstrong
07-22-2011, 18:31
My statements are all in agreement, but thanks for asking
Sure, just like Bill Clinton's statements about his activity with Monica were all in agreement.:rofl:

436
09-08-2011, 12:31
I know this is kinda a dead horse; but.... I did run across an interesting article in the American Rifleman September 2011 "A History Of FBI Handguns". On page 66 I was surprised; not really... to see the chronology order of hands guns that Agents were allowed to carry... 1935 showed; two Colt Police Positive revolvers in .32 Police... one in that .32 caliber was J. Edgar Hoover’s which he carried as a duty weapon. Of course they also carried other models and calibers, but it was interesting to see the .32 caliber was in the mix.
The other thing that struck me funny was there were no Colt Pythons or Diamondbacks in the models they showed. In the late 60's and 70's, these and the S&W Model 19 were big in Law Enforcement... I had many of these models of three mentioned in many different barrel lengths both for Patrol and Detectives they were great wheel guns.
What they also didn’t show was the early S&W model 459 9mm auto’s that got them in so much trouble when they proclaimed the 9mm as the all time best man stopper ever, and then ended up with Agents killed due to it lack of stopping power in the 1986 Dade County, Florida shoot out.
At any rate the article is a good read.
436

SCmasterblaster
09-08-2011, 12:54
SE Florida. Bad divorce situation. Husband has large guy break in to kill wife.

Woman is home alone with 5 shot .32 revolver when assailant breaks in. She shoots him 4 times before he gets to her and wrestles the gun from her.

She runs for her life and bad guy shoots her in the back with the last remaining bullet.

Bad guy died and to this day she remains paralyzed.

OP, true story. I hope this helps.

Where did the 4 bullets hit the attacker? In the heart or spinal cord? Not at all likely, in this case. I would not rely on ANY handgun to stop an attacker with anything other than hits to the CNS or perhaps the heart.

436
09-08-2011, 13:16
Where did the 4 bullets hit the attacker? In the heart or spinal cord? Not at all likely, in this case. I would not rely on ANY handgun to stop an attacker with anything other than hits to the CNS or perhaps the heart.

Agree; all rounds should be properly placed for best out come. But… in the real world; it doesn't always give the good guy the breaks.
436

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1986_FBI_Miami_shootout



Agents


Richard Manauzzi: lost control of weapon in the initial vehicle collision, no shots fired. Minor injuries from shotgun pellets.[7] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1986_FBI_Miami_shootout#cite_note-EFOIA-6)
Gordon McNeill: S&W M19-3 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smith_%26_Wesson_Model_19) .357 Magnum (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.357_Magnum) revolver, six rounds .38 Special (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.38_Special) +P fired. Seriously injured by .223 gunshot wounds to the right hand and neck.
Edmundo Mireles: Remington M870 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remington_870) 12-gauge shotgun, five rounds 00 buckshot fired, .357 Magnum revolver (S&W, records show that it was a Smith & Wesson Model 686 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smith_%26_Wesson_Model_686) despite not being FBI issue), six rounds .38 Special +P fired. Seriously injured by a .223 gunshot wound to the left forearm.
Gilbert Orrantia: S&W (model unknown) .357 Magnum revolver, 12 rounds .38 Special +P fired. Injured by shrapnel and debris produced by a .223 bullet near miss.
John Hanlon: S&W M36 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smith_%26_Wesson_Model_36) .38 Special revolver, 2-inch barrel, five rounds .38 Special +P fired. Seriously injured by .223 gunshot wounds to the right hand and groin.
Benjamin Grogan: S&W M459 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smith_%26_Wesson_Model_59#Model_459) 9mm (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9mm) pistol, nine rounds fired. Killed by a .223 gunshot wound to the chest.
Jerry Dove: S&W M459 9mm pistol, 20 rounds fired. Killed by two .223 gunshot wounds to the head.
Ronald Risner: S&W M459 9mm pistol, 13–14 rounds fired, S&W (model unknown) .38 Special revolver, one round .38 Special +P fired. Uninjured.
Suspects


William Matix: S&W M3000 (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Smith_%26_Wesson_Model_3000&action=edit&redlink=1) 12-gauge shotgun, one round #6 shot fired. Killed after being shot six times.
Michael Platt: Ruger Mini-14 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruger_Mini-14) .223 Remington (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.223_Remington) carbine, at least 42 rounds fired, S&W M586 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smith_%26_Wesson_Model_586) .357 Magnum revolver, three rounds fired, Dan Wesson (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Wesson_Firearms) .357 Magnum revolver, three rounds fired. Killed after being shot 12 times.

1 old 0311
09-08-2011, 16:06
He** no! I come home to a hot girlfriend. I WANT to live.:whistling: