If you can't kill it with a 9mm, you need a rifle [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : If you can't kill it with a 9mm, you need a rifle


Andy W
11-12-2012, 18:49
That about sums up what I've come to think about the debate between various service calibers in pistols. I mean, maybe .40 and .45 are marginally better than 9mm but really, it's not gonna make that big of a differene. If you ever encounter a situation where several center mass hits with quality 9mm ammo can't take care of it, you need to either 1) consider retreating or 2.) get to a long gun if that isn't an option. If you really think about it, if it's not dying after beiing hit with a 9mm, that little bit of extra power a .40 or .45 offers probably won't make a difference.

What do you guys think?

flw
11-12-2012, 18:56
As the saying goes,

"Never take a handgun to a rifle fight"

I don't care what the pistol caliber is.

TK-421
11-12-2012, 18:58
I think I like .40 because it has a bigger boom than 9mm, what do you say to that? :tongueout:

Marine123
11-12-2012, 19:01
I like all guns and rifles in general. They all do what they are supposed to do when SHTF. Unless........


Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire (http://www.outdoorhub.com/mobile/)

purrrfect 10
11-12-2012, 19:05
If the 9mm is all you can handle I can see why you would think it is the best. DON"T discredit others for shooting much more superior rounds. That said there is no better pistol the a Glock 20 10mm if you can handle it? if not stick to what you can, hell ya might want to try a 22 if the 9 is a little snappy for ya. I say it is what you are comfortable with. 9 mm is like shooting a bb gun to me never would want one see no need for one for me it is a useless round
FOR ME :perfect10: doesn't get any better

Andy W
11-12-2012, 19:05
I think I like .40 because it has a bigger boom than 9mm, what do you say to that? :tongueout:

Bigger boom and kick but not much more effective than 9mm IMO

flw
11-12-2012, 19:09
On pistols only, you choose that largest caliber you can accurately shoot. If it a 22 then that's it, Doesn't matter what caliber you almost hit the target with.

TK-421
11-12-2012, 19:11
Bigger boom and kick but not much more effective than 9mm IMO

More effective? Eh, maybe, maybe not, I haven't formed an opinion because I haven't shot enough different calibers. I was just trying to give you some s*** from an angle I don't see too often. :tongueout:

uz2bUSMC
11-12-2012, 19:13
That about sums up what I've come to think about the debate between various service calibers in pistols. I mean, maybe .40 and .45 are marginally better than 9mm but really, it's not gonna make that big of a differene. If you ever encounter a situation where several center mass hits with quality 9mm ammo can't take care of it, you need to either 1) consider retreating or 2.) get to a long gun if that isn't an option. If you really think about it, if it's not dying after beiing hit with a 9mm, that little bit of extra power a .40 or .45 offers probably won't make a difference.

What do you guys think?

Maybe you should start thinking about stopping a threat instead of killing it.

Andy W
11-12-2012, 19:32
Maybe you should start thinking about stopping a threat instead of killing it.

You know what I meant smartass :tongueout:

cowboy1964
11-12-2012, 19:33
What do I think? I think I'm tired of these debates. The .38 Special was king in law enforcement for a freaking long time. It did the job too.

Andy W
11-12-2012, 19:34
More effective? Eh, maybe, maybe not, I haven't formed an opinion because I haven't shot enough different calibers. I was just trying to give you some s*** from an angle I don't see too often. :tongueout:

Not sure where this came from but I remember somebody joking about how people that carry .40s are trying to compensate for something. :tongueout:

TK-421
11-12-2012, 19:38
Not sure where this came from but I remember somebody joking about how people that carry .40s are trying to compensate for something. :tongueout:

Oh most definitely, I'm trying to compensate for being new to firearms and being an awful shot. :rofl: I have issues hitting the broad side of a barn. Need to get more money so I can get more range time, and hopefully I can learn how to shoot accurately.

uz2bUSMC
11-12-2012, 19:44
Oh most definitely, I'm trying to compensate for being new to firearms and being an awful shot. :rofl: I have issues hitting the broad side of a barn. Need to get more money so I can get more range time, and hopefully I can learn how to shoot accurately.

Dry fire, it's free. If you know how and can apply the fundamentals when you are dry firing it's nothing more than discipline when you're at the range and you know it's gonna go boom instead of click. (target shooting that is)

uz2bUSMC
11-12-2012, 19:53
You know what I meant smartass :tongueout:

Well, specifics help in CC. You and others may think there is no difference within the service calibers and that's fine. I often see the 9mm crowd defending their choice but there is really no need. If it's fine for you then that's all that really matters. 9mm is fine types should just spend more time in the "what works best in 9mm these days" type threads. After all, if it all works the same there is no need for a 9mm guy to be in CC besides ammo selection.

Funny thing is many 9mm guys defend it with a ton of tenacity and others question wether it's enough. I never really here anyone doubt that the .357 mag is an astounding man stopper. Sure, people choose 9mm over the .357 but it's usually because of platform not reputation.

countrygun
11-12-2012, 19:54
That about sums up what I've come to think about the debate between various service calibers in pistols. I mean, maybe .40 and .45 are marginally better than 9mm but really, it's not gonna make that big of a differene. If you ever encounter a situation where several center mass hits with quality 9mm ammo can't take care of it, you need to either 1) consider retreating or 2.) get to a long gun if that isn't an option. If you really think about it, if it's not dying after beiing hit with a 9mm, that little bit of extra power a .40 or .45 offers probably won't make a difference.

What do you guys think?

I can eventually kill most anything with most any gun, or it will eventually die from the wounds.

I think my handloads especially in a .41, .44, or 10mm may cause me a bit less concern by hurrying the project along.

I do hunt with a handgun and, no I don't consider the 9mm as effective at killing a large animal as a heavier pistol, but I don't "need" a rifle at less than 100yds.

RWBlue
11-12-2012, 20:19
For people, 9 is fine. If you make the shot, there isn't enough difference between it and 460S&W to live on.

For animals, as a hunter I can tell you there are things in between the 9mm and a rifle like thee 44mag. There is a difference.

unit1069
11-12-2012, 20:30
Funny thing is many 9mm guys defend it with a ton of tenacity and others question wether it's enough. I never really here anyone doubt that the .357 mag is an astounding man stopper. Sure, people choose 9mm over the .357 but it's usually because of platform not reputation.

Believe it or not I recall at least one GT thread where one or two Facklerites did devalue the legendary .357 Magnum's reputation. I remember it very well because I located a graphic of the "perfect wound profile" created by Fackler himself that still failed to sway the GT members who refused to give the Magnum its proper credit.

9mm +p+
11-12-2012, 22:13
I carry 9 and 45, but from a pistol the bigger hole seems to me to make more sense.

NEOH212
11-13-2012, 02:21
I carry 9 and 45, but from a pistol the bigger hole seems to me to make more sense.

The 9mm fits into the, "It might be small but it fit's them all" category. Kind of like the jack of all trades but the master of none.

While we are on the subject of comparing sizes I'll say the following:

Size does matter and the bigger the hole the more it bleeds!


With that said, I'll gladly take the .45 any day!

:supergrin:

NEOH212
11-13-2012, 02:23
The 10mm may have more penetration but it's just long and skinny.

The .45 is short and fat. Just the way it ought to be!

The 10mm may go in deeper but you'll really feel that short fat .45 they day after!

:cool:

Andy W
11-13-2012, 02:25
People should carry whatever they feel most comfortable with. I don't deny that.

What i was saying was, in the case of service caliber handguns and dealing with hostile bipedal primates, if you hit them with a 9mm and they are not ceasing hostility, a .40 or .45 isn't gonna magically stop them. It's possible that maybe a .45 would shatter a femur or pelvis a little more than a 9mm or an artery could be barely missed with a 9mm where an identically placed shot with a .45 would have nicked it. However I just don't see it making a huge difference most of the time.

I do like the .45 ACP cartridge. A Glock 21SF is just as easy to shoot as a 17 in my experience. And a Glock 22 loaded with 180 grain bullets is only a little snappier than the 9mm or .45. I never have particularly enjoyed shooting .40 but guess what, I have a G22. I shoot it well enough but I would have rather had a 21. I was going to buy a 21 SF or Gen 4 but I ended up with the 22 because at the time I thought I needed a pistol bigger than 9mm but didn't like the cost of .45ACP ammo. So I ended up just getting the 22 Gen 4 because the ammo was a little less expensive. I figured I could just learn to deal with the snappy recoil of the lighter, faster loads or just stick with 180 grain ammo. I can control any .40 load but it just isn't as pleasant to shoot as 9mm and .45 Auto. 180 grain bullets aren't snappy per se but still, what's the point when I could be launching 230 grain .45 slugs with follow up shots coming just as fast or maybe even faster. Or I could be shooting a 9mm which would do the same thing as either of these two most of the time and get undeniably faster followup shots.

Or I could step up to a G20 but I don't want to kill everything within a 5 square mile area behind my target.

NEOH212
11-13-2012, 02:31
People should carry whatever they feel most comfortable with. I don't deny that.

What i was saying was, in the case of service caliber handguns and dealing with hostile bipedal primates, if you hit them with a 9mm and they are not ceasing hostility, a .40 or .45 isn't gonna magically stop them. It's possible that maybe a .45 would shatter a femur or pelvis a little more than a 9mm or an artery could be barely missed with a 9mm where an identically placed shot with a .45 would have nicked it. However I just don't see it making a huge difference most of the time.

I do like the .45 ACP cartridge. A Glock 21SF is just as easy to shoot as a 17 in my experience. And a Glock 22 loaded with 180 grain bullets is only a little snappier than the 9mm or .45. I never have particularly enjoyed shooting .40 but guess what, I have a G22. I shoot it well enough but I would have rather had a 21. I was going to buy a 21 SF or Gen 4 but I ended up with the 22 because at the time I thought I needed a pistol bigger than 9mm but didn't like the cost of .45ACP ammo. So I ended up just getting the 22 Gen 4 because the ammo was a little less expensive. I figured I could just learn to deal with the snappy recoil of the lighter, faster loads or just stick with 180 grain ammo. I can control any .40 load but it just isn't as pleasant to shoot as 9mm and .45 Auto. 180 grain bullets aren't snappy per se but still, what's the point when I could be launching 230 grain .45 slugs with follow up shots coming just as fast or maybe even faster. Or I could be shooting a 9mm which would do the same thing as either of these two most of the time and get undeniably faster followup shots.

Or I could step up to a G20 but I don't want to kill everything within a 5 square mile area behind my target.


The .40 nicely fills the gap (that does exist by the way despite what some people think) between the 9mm and the .45 ACP.

The .40 is always a solid choice and is personally the smallest caliber that I will choose to carry when I'm not able to carry a .45 which is almost never.

The 9mm is the bare minimum that I would ever consider but I would have to be in a pinch and not have a .40 or .45 available to warrant me carrying one.

samurairabbi
11-13-2012, 02:55
For (1) concealed carry (2) in public (3) by a civilian (4) in the US, the rifle is simply inapplicable. The rifle's superiority against an opponent becomes irrelevant if the situation precludes your possessing it at that moment.

The greater the energy/momentum/wound-area the projectile possesses, the greater chance of incapacitation with fewer hits. I think it better to have a higher chance of needing only a single hit to incapacitate than needing multiple hits for the same chance. The 9mm is entirely servicable as a carry round: I think OTHER rounds are MORE serviceable IF THE FIREARM CAN BE CONCEALED IN PUBLIC.

Glockworks
11-13-2012, 03:13
That about sums up what I've come to think about the debate between various service calibers in pistols. I mean, maybe .40 and .45 are marginally better than 9mm but really, it's not gonna make that big of a differene. If you ever encounter a situation where several center mass hits with quality 9mm ammo can't take care of it, you need to either 1) consider retreating or 2.) get to a long gun if that isn't an option. If you really think about it, if it's not dying after beiing hit with a 9mm, that little bit of extra power a .40 or .45 offers probably won't make a difference.

What do you guys think?
You guys kill me so to speak. I have chosen after a few years of trial and error on my part to stay with a few selections of calibers mainly due to a logistics viewpoint. I have a supply of 9mm/.38spcl/.357/7.62 bullets for my 3 types of firearms, and that is it. I had a lot more types but it was a mess to keep straight.

If you think 9mm is a whoose round (it did in Trevon didn't it?), then stand still and let me shoot you in a non-lethal area and see what you think then.

I recognize that .40/.45ACP/10mm/.44Mags are more powerful, but so what? If I had to use my 9mm on a person (hopefully never), well I would not want to be them. I train to be accurate and steady, and do not shoot to wound, that is BS. I shoot to hit them in the center mass and if I do so with a 9mm, it is going to be better than nothing, and a lot better than missing.

Elysianarcane
11-13-2012, 03:30
9mm for flexibility.

.45 is the undisputed king of manstoppers.

uz2bUSMC
11-13-2012, 05:15
The 10mm may have more penetration but it's just long and skinny.

The .45 is short and fat. Just the way it ought to be!

The 10mm may go in deeper but you'll really feel that short fat .45 they day after!

:cool:

You really went there...

uz2bUSMC
11-13-2012, 05:27
Double

uz2bUSMC
11-13-2012, 05:30
Believe it or not I recall at least one GT thread where one or two Facklerites did devalue the legendary .357 Magnum's reputation. I remember it very well because I located a graphic of the "perfect wound profile" created by Fackler himself that still failed to sway the GT members who refused to give the Magnum its proper credit.

Shawn Dodson probably the culprit.

4949shooter
11-13-2012, 05:59
Load selection is more important than caliber selection.

That having been said, there are some calibers that are more forgiving of the lesser load selections. The 10mm and .45 ACP would be in this category.

Shoot what you feel most comfortable with. If you can handle a .40 or .45, then by all means go for it.

4949shooter
11-13-2012, 06:00
You really went there...

Yes, she did..

English
11-13-2012, 06:20
That about sums up what I've come to think about the debate between various service calibers in pistols. I mean, maybe .40 and .45 are marginally better than 9mm but really, it's not gonna make that big of a differene. If you ever encounter a situation where several center mass hits with quality 9mm ammo can't take care of it, you need to either 1) consider retreating or 2.) get to a long gun if that isn't an option. If you really think about it, if it's not dying after beiing hit with a 9mm, that little bit of extra power a .40 or .45 offers probably won't make a difference.

What do you guys think?

What do I think? I think you are falling into a logical error in which time is negleted.

If you need to shoot someone who is shooting at you, you ned to stop them shooting at you as quickly as possible to reduce their chance of killing you. Whether a 9mm will kill them or not if they stand still while you shoot enough rounds at them is irrelevant. All that matters is how long it is before they stop shooting.

All the rounds which are more powerful than the 9mm have more bullet momentum and so pistols shooting those rounds take a little longer to get back to aim. But the first shot takes just the same time for a .40 as for a 9mm and just a little longer for a .45 or 10mm because the pistol has more mass. So, you need to maximise the effect of the first shot and maximise the effect of the number fired per time to fire them.

In other words, if it takes fewer shots of .40, 357SIG, .45 or 10mm on average to stop the fight than a 9mm, can you fire those shots in more or less time than the number needed for the 9mm. As far as I am concerned the split time difference is very small and I think the extra effect of the better than 9mms save you time to the stop. Your opinion and time difference might be different but that does not mean the 9mm is always as good as the more than 9mms.

Incidentally, getting shot with almost anything is likely to hinder the process of making an aimed shot, so the first hit is very important because it buys you some time before your opponent's next shot. Because of this, although the 10mm almost certainly has a greater effect per shot than the 357SIG, the 357SIG might be a better choice because the lighter weight of the pistol lets you get that first shot just a tiny part of a second sooner. This argument does not apply between the 9mm and the 357SIG, in Glocks at least, because they are the same weight.

English

clarkz71
11-13-2012, 07:51
The LE guys seem to like the .40

If the 9mm was just as good they all would
carry it and save on ammo.

FBI issues the G23

Secret service the 357 sig

alwaysshootin
11-13-2012, 09:10
If you think 9mm is a whoose round (it did in Trevon didn't it?), then stand still and let me shoot you in a non-lethal area and see what you think then.


I'll tell you what I'm going to do. We will discuss between the two of us, and decide, where that "non-lethal" shot will be taken. I'll shoot first, because it was your idea, and, shoot you with my G20, in the spot we decided as "non-lethal". Then you go second! :shocked: Thought so! Off the top of my head, a hand shot may be the only option for surviving the first shot, but guessing, you will probably lose that hand! :faint: So for Gods sake, don't pick your shooting hand. :supergrin:

alwaysshootin
11-13-2012, 09:13
The LE guys seem to like the .40

If the 9mm was just as good they all would
carry it and save on ammo.

FBI issues the G23

Secret service the 357 sig

Don't forget those special forces heroes! Which firearm company, just won a large contract, and, what caliber was it in? :whistling:

Andy W
11-13-2012, 10:37
The LE guys seem to like the .40

If the 9mm was just as good they all would
carry it and save on ammo.

FBI issues the G23

Secret service the 357 sig

The .40 round is so prevalent in LE because it is a compromise round. As with any organization, the leadership like to make compromise decisions because it makes them look good.

My guess is most cops who are gun savvy would choose to carry a 9mm or .45 if given the choice.

ditto1958
11-13-2012, 11:37
I think this is my favorite non-political subject to debate.

I think the most important thing is whether you can consistenty hit what you are shooting at. If I can't hit the broad side of a barn with 17 rounds of 9mm, but I can get five hits out of a 10 rd magazine of 22lr I'm way better off with the 22. Likewise, a shooter who is good enough with his 1911 to get 3 or 4 shots into the chests of two attackers from one mag? He should definitely carry his .45.

fredj338
11-13-2012, 13:07
That about sums up what I've come to think about the debate between various service calibers in pistols. I mean, maybe .40 and .45 are marginally better than 9mm but really, it's not gonna make that big of a differene. If you ever encounter a situation where several center mass hits with quality 9mm ammo can't take care of it, you need to either 1) consider retreating or 2.) get to a long gun if that isn't an option. If you really think about it, if it's not dying after beiing hit with a 9mm, that little bit of extra power a .40 or .45 offers probably won't make a difference.

What do you guys think?

The question HAS NEVER BEEN whether a 9mm kills better than any other caliber but does it stop better? With good JHP, a 9mm gets off it's knees & becomes as good a stopper as any other service pistol. That IMO, others have theirs. There is a reason the 9mm took so long to become a viable LE caliber, you have to have good JHP. I would rather carry a good 9mm JHP than ball in 45acp. Given good JHP in any caliber, bigger is slightly better & slightly may be all that you get in a gunfight.

bunk22
11-13-2012, 18:15
For (1) concealed carry (2) in public (3) by a civilian (4) in the US, the rifle is simply inapplicable. The rifle's superiority against an opponent becomes irrelevant if the situation precludes your possessing it at that moment.

This :cool:

uz2bUSMC
11-13-2012, 18:21
This :cool:

He's right. Fight your way back to your rifle is BS in my opinion.

K.Kiser
11-13-2012, 18:41
They're all pretty anemic in the grand scheme of things, and is there any adult's that can't "handle" a 10mm..? I do believe it to be a fine cartridge that surpasses the other big 3, It's really not that much gun outside of an argument...

Andy W
11-13-2012, 20:55
9mm for flexibility.

.45 is the undisputed king of manstoppers.

I do love the .45 ACP round.

However, the real undisputed king of manstoppers at close range is 12 guage 00 buckshot. Well, I guess there is also the Barrett but if you're engaging a threat with one of those, especially at the ranges they are intended for, you're gonna have some 'splainin' to do

FishyOne
11-13-2012, 22:21
It's hard to beat a .45 +P loaded with 230gr HP pill at 950fps.

Zombie Steve
11-13-2012, 22:53
It's hard to beat a .45 Colt loaded with 250gr HP pill at 1,200fps.


Fixed. Welcome to Glocktalk.

:supergrin:

countrygun
11-13-2012, 23:47
The LE guys seem to like the .40

If the 9mm was just as good they all would
carry it and save on ammo.

FBI issues the G23

Secret service the 357 sig

Most LE carry what hey're issued. The guys who make the and not gunfighters decisions are generally bean counters (and very few LE are gunfighters ither) the .40 is helped along GREATLY because of it's tie to the FBI and the fact that Glock all but throws G-22s at LEAs helping the bean counters balance the budget.

Not knocking the .40 (I am wearing a CZ P-06 right now) but stop and look at the numbers. IF the .40 was "so good" because the bullet is bigger in diameter and usually a little heavier, than the 9mm despite the lower velocity then the .45 acp has to be much better than the .40 by the same yardstick.

A lot of things go into the choices that lead to what an LEO is issued. Few of them should impress a civillian.

NEOH212
11-14-2012, 02:47
You really went there...

Yep!

Trust me on this one! :whistling:

Glockworks
11-14-2012, 02:58
I'll tell you what I'm going to do. We will discuss between the two of us, and decide, where that "non-lethal" shot will be taken. I'll shoot first, because it was your idea, and, shoot you with my G20, in the spot we decided as "non-lethal". Then you go second! :shocked: Thought so! Off the top of my head, a hand shot may be the only option for surviving the first shot, but guessing, you will probably lose that hand! :faint: So for Gods sake, don't pick your shooting hand. :supergrin:
Maybe I wasn't clear, I don't want to get shot at by even a .22LR, I am a whoose when it comes to such things. :wow:

NEOH212
11-14-2012, 03:14
9mm for flexibility.


Agree.

.45 is the undisputed king of manstoppers.

One of the best in a handgun but certainly not the king, even in a handgun. Maybe when comparing the 9mm, .40S&W and .45 ACP it could be considered the best of the three.

I still say the .357 Mag with a 4" barrel loaded with a 125 grain JHP loaded to 1,450 fps has a good bit of a edge over the .45 ACP and just about everything else in the handgun world that you are likely to tote with you on a daily basis.

(That ought to piss some people off! :rofl:)

Electrikkoolaid
11-14-2012, 04:35
I still say the .357 Mag with a barrel loaded with a 125 grain JHP loaded to 1,450 fps has a good bit of a edge over the .45 ACP and just about everything else in the handgun world that you are likely to tote with you on a daily basis.

Set that off inside your house some night, and I hope you actually get that "one shot stop", because you'll be blind and deaf for several minutes afterwards.

SCmasterblaster
11-14-2012, 07:05
I carry a G17 that launches 115gr JHPs at 1400 FPS. And it is true, if I can't resolve a gun battle with 34 of these rounds, then I'll get my Mossberg M500 12ga and use OOO buck, which is like shooting 8 nine-millimeter slugs at once at 1350 FPS.

English
11-14-2012, 09:03
I carry a G17 that launches 115gr JHPs at 1400 FPS. And it is true, if I can't resolve a gun battle with 34 of these rounds, then I'll get my Mossberg M500 12ga and use OOO buck, which is like shooting 8 nine-millimeter slugs at once at 1350 FPS.

But if you haven't resolved the battle after 34 rounds, do you think you will still be able to get to your M500 even if they were only shooting .22s at you?

English

alwaysshootin
11-14-2012, 09:12
Maybe I wasn't clear, I don't want to get shot at by even a .22LR, I am a whoose when it comes to such things. :wow:

Everyone is! Don't want to get shot with a broadhead, either!:shocked:

uz2bUSMC
11-14-2012, 09:21
:supergrin:Agree.


I still say the .357 Mag with a 4" barrel loaded with a 125 grain JHP loaded to 1,450 fps has a good bit of a edge over the .45 ACP and just about everything else in the handgun world that you are likely to tote with you on a daily basis.

(That ought to piss some people off! :rofl:)

Except...the 10mm.

uz2bUSMC
11-14-2012, 09:46
Maybe I wasn't clear, I don't want to get shot at by even a .22LR, I am a whoose when it comes to such things. :wow:

Now, when you say "whoose", do you mean "wuss"? This is important.

alwaysshootin
11-14-2012, 10:10
Now, when you say "whoose", do you mean "wuss"? This is important.

No it's not! :upeyes: You knew what he meant! That's how they spell it in the north!:supergrin:

Andy W
11-14-2012, 10:55
I carry a G17 that launches 115gr JHPs at 1400 FPS. And it is true, if I can't resolve a gun battle with 34 of these rounds, then I'll get my Mossberg M500 12ga and use OOO buck, which is like shooting 8 nine-millimeter slugs at once at 1350 FPS.

You better be going for your Mossberg before you've expended all 34 rounds. I'd say if you're getting close to having to reload your G17, then you need to either retreat or go for the shotgun. But obviously as a civilian retreat wasn't the best option in the first place or you wouldn't be in a gun fight at all.

Kentguy
11-14-2012, 11:45
I think that flw came about as close to the heart of the matter as anyone... "On pistols only, you choose that largest caliber you can accurately shoot. If it a 22 then that's it, Doesn't matter what caliber you almost hit the target with."

I really don't now how many of you have every had to actually pull your pistols to defend yourself either here in the States or in the military over-seas, but if you have you understand just how fast "things go down". You don't have time to truly utilize your expensive sights & lights, you have about 1 or if you lucky 2 seconds to pull and shoot! That's the truth.

Rather than be concerned about what you use, spend more of your time & money being damn good and what you have. If it's a 380 or 45-70, you'll most likely get 1 shot, so be proficient enough to make it count!

Well... that's my 2 cents FWIW.

SCmasterblaster
11-14-2012, 12:13
You better be going for your Mossberg before you've expended all 34 rounds. I'd say if you're getting close to having to reload your G17, then you need to either retreat or go for the shotgun. But obviously as a civilian retreat wasn't the best option in the first place or you wouldn't be in a gun fight at all.

You are right, of course. If I have to go to my second mag, it is time to get my shotgun. BUT, I am an expert shot under stress (1990 Second Chance Combat Shoot Champion), and I would have to be faced by 12 or more assailants to need more than 17 9mm shots.

CigarandScotch
11-14-2012, 12:47
I wonder about what the plural form of "whoose" would be. Wheese? Whice? Whooses?

SCmasterblaster
11-14-2012, 14:15
I wonder about what the plural form of "whoose" would be. Wheese? Whice? Whooses?

Whose (?) :cool:

NEOH212
11-15-2012, 03:03
:supergrin:

Except...the 10mm.

Sorry but outside of penetration, I don't see what the 10mm does that the .40 doesn't already do for all practical purposes.

For self defense, I don't need more than the .40 S&W or the .45 ACP.

For the woods, I want more that what the 10mm has to offer.

It's a good cartridge in it's own right but I can't justify the cost and recoil when the .40 or .45 does everything I need them to do without the cost, recoil, bulk, and the sever potential for over penetration.


To sum it up, my personal feeling on the 10mm is it's too much for the two legged critters and too little for the four legged ones. Too much in one case and not (or barely) enough in the other. I just never saw what the 10mm could do for me that cartridges slightly larger or slightly smaller couldn't do already.

The 10mm was a solution in search of a problem and was more of a bastard round than the .40 S&W IMHO.

NEOH212
11-15-2012, 03:05
Set that off inside your house some night, and I hope you actually get that "one shot stop", because you'll be blind and deaf for several minutes afterwards.

Yet another reason I carry a .45 and not a .357 Mag. It's still hard to argue against the track record of the .357 Mag and that particular load though. Maybe if this was 1960 I'd be carrying one!

JW1178
11-15-2012, 05:28
It seems to me that it's the 9mm people who are trying to compensate for something.

I mean, why do they have to post about things like this to reassure themselves?

All these threads about "Hey, my 9 is fine". Seems like there is some insecurities.

clarkz71
11-15-2012, 07:12
Sorry but outside of penetration, I don't see what the 10mm does that the .40 doesn't already do for all practical purposes.

For self defense, I don't need more than the .40 S&W or the .45 ACP.

For the woods, I want more that what the 10mm has to offer.

It's a good cartridge in it's own right but I can't justify the cost and recoil when the .40 or .45 does everything I need them to do without the cost, recoil, bulk, and the sever potential for over penetration.


To sum it up, my personal feeling on the 10mm is it's too much for the two legged critters and too little for the four legged ones. Too much in one case and not (or barely) enough in the other. I just never saw what the 10mm could do for me that cartridges slightly larger or slightly smaller couldn't do already.

The 10mm was a solution in search of a problem and was more of a bastard round than the .40 S&W IMHO.

Excellent and accurate post.

SDGlock23
11-15-2012, 08:01
Sorry but outside of penetration, I don't see what the 10mm does that the .40 doesn't already do for all practical purposes.

For self defense, I don't need more than the .40 S&W or the .45 ACP.

For the woods, I want more that what the 10mm has to offer.

It's a good cartridge in it's own right but I can't justify the cost and recoil when the .40 or .45 does everything I need them to do without the cost, recoil, bulk, and the sever potential for over penetration.


To sum it up, my personal feeling on the 10mm is it's too much for the two legged critters and too little for the four legged ones. Too much in one case and not (or barely) enough in the other. I just never saw what the 10mm could do for me that cartridges slightly larger or slightly smaller couldn't do already.

The 10mm was a solution in search of a problem and was more of a bastard round than the .40 S&W IMHO.

I agree with your post for the most part. I have nothing against the 10mm at all, however for carry I'm fine with the .40 and .45. If I go out in the woods, I'm carrying something with a good bit more power than the 10mm can offer, although there is nothing wrong with hunting with a Glock.

If there was a huge difference between the 10mm and .40, say 400-500 fps and it used bullets designed specifically for the extra speed, maybe the 10mm would have more merit with me. As it stands, there's maybe 150 fps difference between them both (loaded hot), which brings me to the issue of penetration.

I don't think the 10mm generally suffers from over penetration with JHP bullets and here's why. A hot loaded 10mm (as well as a hot loaded .40) can both push essentially every JHP bullet out there beyond the velocity they're designed for. That generally decreases penetration instead of increasing it. That's not necessarily bad, but then again, pushing a bullet faster than what it's meant to be driven isn't exactly good either, as bullet failure tends to limit penetration.

ChuteTheMall
11-15-2012, 08:36
The 9mm is the superior choice because it has a reputation for requiring mag dumps, so it's politically correct to burst a quick 15 rounds to center mass before the BG can even fall down. Cops routinely do this, even in groups, making it legally defensible.

Anybody who tries this with a super-dooper one shot stop state of the art caliber like 10mm or anything starting with a 4 could be charged with excessive force.

:whistling:

JW1178
11-15-2012, 09:08
Sorry but outside of penetration, I don't see what the 10mm does that the .40 doesn't already do for all practical purposes.

For self defense, I don't need more than the .40 S&W or the .45 ACP.

For the woods, I want more that what the 10mm has to offer.

It's a good cartridge in it's own right but I can't justify the cost and recoil when the .40 or .45 does everything I need them to do without the cost, recoil, bulk, and the sever potential for over penetration.


To sum it up, my personal feeling on the 10mm is it's too much for the two legged critters and too little for the four legged ones. Too much in one case and not (or barely) enough in the other. I just never saw what the 10mm could do for me that cartridges slightly larger or slightly smaller couldn't do already.

The 10mm was a solution in search of a problem and was more of a bastard round than the .40 S&W IMHO.

Did you just say too much power and mention a handgun cartrige in the same sentence? God forbid using a 12g, that's too much power!!!

SCmasterblaster
11-15-2012, 11:50
But if you haven't resolved the battle after 34 rounds, do you think you will still be able to get to your M500 even if they were only shooting .22s at you?

English

I'd go for my shotgun while I was still shooting my initial 17 rounds from my G17. :supergrin:

uz2bUSMC
11-15-2012, 15:47
Sorry but outside of penetration, I don't see what the 10mm does that the .40 doesn't already do for all practical purposes.

For self defense, I don't need more than the .40 S&W or the .45 ACP.

For the woods, I want more that what the 10mm has to offer.

It's a good cartridge in it's own right but I can't justify the cost and recoil when the .40 or .45 does everything I need them to do without the cost, recoil, bulk, and the sever potential for over penetration.


To sum it up, my personal feeling on the 10mm is it's too much for the two legged critters and too little for the four legged ones. Too much in one case and not (or barely) enough in the other. I just never saw what the 10mm could do for me that cartridges slightly larger or slightly smaller couldn't do already.

The 10mm was a solution in search of a problem and was more of a bastard round than the .40 S&W IMHO.

Well, I've replied to you in another thread on nearly the same thing so I won't repeat it here too much...but I'll cover a few different points.

I understand that you test your ammo, I don't know how or what you do for testing. It would seem to me that if you can't see any difference between the other calibers you mention besides penetration, I would only guess that you may not be shooting enough stuff. Whether it's water jugs, magazines, car parts, whatever...it's been my experience the 10mm flat out stands above the others you've mentioned with authority. Here again, this is just an assumption and I won't pretend to know what you do for testing. My tests are not scientific in the least but I do not form my opinions of the 10mm capabilities on my tests, or any one test alone.

On another note, in reference to your post regarding the .357 mag. You would think it would be hard to argue the 10mm ballistic capabilities when it's toting the same numbers or better than the King of stopping. The .357 did this with antiquated bullet design which had a strong tendency to fragment. I know you like published street data for backing but damn, sometimes a freight train is a freight train.

SCmasterblaster
11-15-2012, 15:54
The 9mm is the superior choice because it has a reputation for requiring mag dumps, so it's politically correct to burst a quick 15 rounds to center mass before the BG can even fall down. Cops routinely do this, even in groups, making it legally defensible.

Anybody who tries this with a super-dooper one shot stop state of the art caliber like 10mm or anything starting with a 4 could be charged with excessive force.

:whistling:

This is good to hear, CTM. For I will put a 12-round group on the torso of my attacker.

copo9560
11-15-2012, 19:09
Sorry but outside of penetration, I don't see what the 10mm does that the .40 doesn't already do for all practical purposes.

For self defense, I don't need more than the .40 S&W or the .45 ACP.

For the woods, I want more that what the 10mm has to offer.

It's a good cartridge in it's own right but I can't justify the cost and recoil when the .40 or .45 does everything I need them to do without the cost, recoil, bulk, and the sever potential for over penetration.


To sum it up, my personal feeling on the 10mm is it's too much for the two legged critters and too little for the four legged ones. Too much in one case and not (or barely) enough in the other. I just never saw what the 10mm could do for me that cartridges slightly larger or slightly smaller couldn't do already.

The 10mm was a solution in search of a problem and was more of a bastard round than the .40 S&W IMHO.


I am always amazed how the 10mm has the love/hate thing going. Few folks in the middle.

As for me, I like my G20SF and actually chose this over a 45, also owning 9 mm and 40 SW. The 10mm pistols are really no bigger than the 45's and not really much more expensive to shoot either, biggest issue is ammo is harder to find. Last time I checked, G20 and G21 were about same price too and far less than a decent 1911.

I picked the 10 over 45 as it has more options in a single platform. Can run a wider range of bullet weghts than either 40 or 45 and factory loads range from 40 power to near nuke loads from Underwood. I have found the G20 also shoots 40 bulk ammo you can buy at Walmart and after using this hundreds of times have yet to have it fail to function. Recoil, even with the hottest loads, is managable and muzzle blast is far less than a 4 inch 357 or 44.

I am a better shot with the G20 than my other choices which would make me lean towards this for HD. 165 Gold Dots at about 1400 fps seem like a reasonable choice for this duty. The G23 is a better CCW choice but if I could I would swap it for a G29. (they also function with 40 ammo)

There are lots of bastard rounds out there that have their fans. Besides 10 mm there is the 38 Super, 9x25 Dillon, 45 Super, 45-08 and newest on the block 460 Rowland. I am considering the 9x25 next, mostly as it is different. Each to his own.

SCmasterblaster
11-15-2012, 19:42
I am always amazed how the 10mm has the love/hate thing going. Few folks in the middle.

As for me, I like my G20SF and actually chose this over a 45, also owning 9 mm and 40 SW. The 10mm pistols are really no bigger than the 45's and not really much more expensive to shoot either, biggest issue is ammo is harder to find. Last time I checked, G20 and G21 were about same price too and far less than a decent 1911.

I picked the 10 over 45 as it has more options in a single platform. Can run a wider range of bullet weghts than either 40 or 45 and factory loads range from 40 power to near nuke loads from Underwood. I have found the G20 also shoots 40 bulk ammo you can buy at Walmart and after using this hundreds of times have yet to have it fail to function. Recoil, even with the hottest loads, is managable and muzzle blast is far less than a 4 inch 357 or 44.

I am a better shot with the G20 than my other choices which would make me lean towards this for HD. 165 Gold Dots at about 1400 fps seem like a reasonable choice for this duty. The G23 is a better CCW choice but if I could I would swap it for a G29. (they also function with 40 ammo)

There are lots of bastard rounds out there that have their fans. Besides 10 mm there is the 38 Super, 9x25 Dillon, 45 Super, 45-08 and newest on the block 460 Rowland. I am considering the 9x25 next, mostly as it is different. Each to his own.

I may get a G20 soon!

closetoreality
11-15-2012, 21:29
Love my 19, and have no worries of putting someone to the ground with it if need be.


Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire (http://www.outdoorhub.com/mobile/)

Billy10mm
11-16-2012, 09:55
Here's what the FBI has to say on the subject: http://www.firearmstactical.com/pdf/fbi-hwfe.pdf

SCmasterblaster
11-16-2012, 11:11
Love my 19, and have no worries of putting someone to the ground with it if need be.


Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire (http://www.outdoorhub.com/mobile/)

Good for you, sir - outstanding! :cool:

Billy10mm
11-16-2012, 11:32
Sorry but outside of penetration, I don't see what the 10mm does that the .40 doesn't already do for all practical purposes.


And penetration is the only part I care about. I want as much of it as I can get.

It's a good cartridge in it's own right but I can't justify the cost and recoil when the .40 or .45 does everything I need them to do without the cost, recoil, bulk, and the sever potential for over penetration.

There is no such thing as "over penetration" with handgun rounds. Any handgun caliber bullet that passes THROUGH a human being gives us a GREAT amount of energy in doing so. It never ceases to amaze me how often this concept of "over penetration" comes up despite the fact that in my 14 years of shooting and being a member of multiple gun-centric internet forums, despite clicking on literally thousands of provided links to local shootings/murders/gun-related events - I've never ONCE read about an actual situation where a handgun-caliber bullet passed through someone COM and still managed to injure someone behind the initial victim. Despite this, there is at least one thread per day where SOMEONE feels like they have to use the term "over penetration".

Let's make this clear: "Over Penetration" is a term coined by people who've chosen a relatively "smaller" caliber firearm for any number of reasons, who wish not to be seen as "wimpy". I feel that .38s and 9mms have their place with benefits like concealment, low-recoil, cost to train, and most importantly, capacity. But since I live in NY and capacity is a moot point (I'm limited to no more than 10 round magazines for any weapon), I'll take 10+1 rounds of physically larger and deeper-penetrating 10mm over 9mm every day of the week.

To sum it up, my personal feeling on the 10mm is it's too much for the two legged critters and too little for the four legged ones. Too much in one case and not (or barely) enough in the other. I just never saw what the 10mm could do for me that cartridges slightly larger or slightly smaller couldn't do already.

The 10mm was a solution in search of a problem and was more of a bastard round than the .40 S&W IMHO.

I like the 10mm because it has the same OAL as a .45ACP which means it fits in those handguns (for instance the 1911, a favored platform of mine) and has significantly more energy and penetration than a .40S&W which already has a penetration advantage over .45ACP.

Also, I don't like wasting things. Putting a short-cased 9mm or .40S&W in a platform like a 1911 designed for a cartridge with a 1.275" OAL is like putting a .38-special into a .357 revolver. Sure, you can do it, but why give up all that potential, especially when the heavy weight of the 1911 platform does so much to reduce the recoil (full power 10mm loads out of my 5" 1911 feel remarkably similar to full power .40S&W loads out of my Glock 23). I'm getting off track here, but that's why I prefer the 10mm.

Billy10mm
11-16-2012, 11:38
Re-reading my above post - it sounds as if I'm putting down smaller calibers. I am not. In fact, I think the Glock 19 is one of the greatest firearms ever and would still have mine (it was my first firearm) if I didn't consolidate calibers a few years back.

My post was not meant to attack smaller calibers but to defend larger ones. That "over-penetration" term is thrown about so often around here one starts to feel like others are looking at them as being irresponsible and I fear that new-comers to our sport/hobby might end up being turned away from the idea of a larger caliber for reasons that aren't sound.

Apologies.

SCmasterblaster
11-16-2012, 13:10
Re-reading my above post - it sounds as if I'm putting down smaller calibers. I am not. In fact, I think the Glock 19 is one of the greatest firearms ever and would still have mine (it was my first firearm) if I didn't consolidate calibers a few years back.

My post was not meant to attack smaller calibers but to defend larger ones. That "over-penetration" term is thrown about so often around here one starts to feel like others are looking at them as being irresponsible and I fear that new-comers to our sport/hobby might end up being turned away from the idea of a larger caliber for reasons that aren't sound.

Apologies.

So true. We expect ammo makers to make cartridges that will deliver a bullet to the back-side skin of an attacker and not an inch farther. I am happy to use a round that is known to "overpenetrate" because of the wound channel along the way through the target.

RYT 2BER
11-16-2012, 18:40
Did you just say too much power and mention a handgun cartrige in the same sentence? God forbid using a 12g, that's too much power!!!

Exactly. I love these gt threads... First they'll all blather about how a handgun is too weak, then they'll tell you 10mm is too strong...

Bottom line... My 155 grain underwood 10mm is putting out practically 2x the kinetic energy of the average 45.... In all honestly they aren't even in the same ball park

Hot 10mm is so vastly ballistically superior to 45acp that it isn't even worth discussing. Not saying you need all that power, but the power is there nevertheless.

pupcuss27
11-16-2012, 18:41
If you shoot any creature on earth in the face, it will tend to leave you alone.

PUP

SCmasterblaster
11-16-2012, 19:57
If you shoot any creature on earth in the face, it will tend to leave you alone.

PUP

THAT is good info!

bunk22
11-16-2012, 20:13
If you shoot any creature on earth in the face, it will tend to leave you alone.

PUP

Funny :supergrin:

uz2bUSMC
11-16-2012, 21:13
Depends on what the creature is and what you shoot it with. It might decide to eff your day up.

JW1178
11-17-2012, 02:27
If you can't get it done with a rifle, better call in an airstrike. :)

NEOH212
11-17-2012, 03:14
There is no such thing as "over penetration" with handgun rounds.



That's the best joke I've heard in a long time! Thanks for the laugh! :rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:


I won't even waste my time with the rest of your post. No offense but you really need to do your research and homework before making statements like that.

Go up to GATE and inquire to Mas about overpenetration and handgun bullets.

You will become enlightened to the fact that not only is it possible, it's very real, has happened many times, and there are many people dead and in jail because of it.

NEOH212
11-17-2012, 03:18
Did you just say too much power and mention a handgun cartridge in the same sentence? God forbid using a 12g, that's too much power!!!

Did I say power or penetration?


Did you misread what I wrote or did you read what you thought I meant?





For that matter did you even read my post?




If you did read my post than you missed my point either accidentally or on purpose.





Nevermind.........:faint:

SCmasterblaster
11-17-2012, 05:45
9mm for flexibility.

.45 is the undisputed king of manstoppers.

I mostly agree! :cool:

Darkangel1846
11-17-2012, 10:43
If you shoot anyone COM with any hand gun cal, they will die!.....the big question is how soon will they die. Will they live long enough to kill you then die 3 days later from a massive infection and blood loss, or 10 seconds after that GSW stops their heart from working as a pump?
Also if I'm standing 10 feet away from you and shoot you in the forehead, does it make any difference what cal. I use? Most likely not!
Carry what you can carry and shoot accurately. there is no way my wife can carry and shoot accurately a 50 AE Desert eagle......but she's a bad ass with that .38 J frame.

cowboy1964
11-17-2012, 11:07
There is no such thing as "over penetration" with handgun rounds. Any handgun caliber bullet that passes THROUGH a human being gives us a GREAT amount of energy in doing so. It never ceases to amaze me how often this concept of "over penetration" comes up despite the fact that in my 14 years of shooting and being a member of multiple gun-centric internet forums, despite clicking on literally thousands of provided links to local shootings/murders/gun-related events - I've never ONCE read about an actual situation where a handgun-caliber bullet passed through someone COM and still managed to injure someone behind the initial victim. Despite this, there is at least one thread per day where SOMEONE feels like they have to use the term "over penetration".


So because YOU'VE never heard about it, it's never happened? As NEOH212 says, go ask Mas Ayoob about the cases he has documented where innocents HAVE BEEN KILLED by passthroughs through bad guys. It's happened. Mas is in the GATES Self-Defense forum and responds to all messages usually within hours. We're looking forward to seeing your question for him posted there.

http://thefiringline.com/forums/archive/index.php?t-302002.html

And what makes you think that a round that goes 24" in gel wouldn't still have a GREAT DEAL of energy left after going the first 10-12"? Obviously it does if it's still going another 14". Geez, doesn't anyone have logical and critical thinking skills any more??

cowboy1964
11-17-2012, 11:09
If you shoot anyone COM with any hand gun cal, they will die

People get shot all the time COM (and sometimes multiple times) and survive.

I seriously wonder sometimes if you people are joking and I just don't get the punchline.

uz2bUSMC
11-17-2012, 11:40
And what makes you think that a round that goes 24" in gel wouldn't still have a GREAT DEAL of energy left after going the first 10-12"? Obviously it does if it's still going another 14". Geez, doesn't anyone have logical and critical thinking skills any more??

One reason I don't like slow moving, heavy for caliber bullets. If it fails to expand it will penetrate essentially like a FMJ and have a high sectional density.

Lt Scott 14
11-17-2012, 14:13
Have carried all the above calibers for self defense, LEO duty, Security, even as a BUG for hunting.
For multiple aggressors, a 15 rd mag does equalize the playing field. 9mm, 40 cal, and 45 all fit the bill. The 38 spec fits for a great home defense, or CCW for shooters who don't want the semi auto.
The Magnums(357, 44, 41) all have their niche and as a outdoor application you should match your need to supply.
As for the last, 45 acp, or 45 LC, I would carry either as both are multi purpose. It is a known man stopper, and 1911 started the roll call.
Keep shooting, be safe, and good luck.

SCmasterblaster
11-17-2012, 15:02
People get shot all the time COM (and sometimes multiple times) and survive.

I seriously wonder sometimes if you people are joking and I just don't get the punchline.

I'd like to read the doctor's report of the wound channels in question on people who have been shot multiple times COM.

I bet that the description would often include reports of shallow bullet penetration and/or missed aorta or vital organs.

I know about the reduced capabilities of handgun bullets, so I am ready to use all 17 of my 9mm +p+ 115gr bullets if I ever need to shoot an attacker.

FishyOne
11-17-2012, 15:26
I've got a family of 5 living on the other side of 2 sheets of drywall. Skinny meth-heads couldn't contain many high power handgun rounds and the drywall sure won't either. Misses happen under stress. I'm responsible for them all.

dukeblue91
11-17-2012, 17:00
These are all theoretical discussions and are all based on once feelings and or what type of weapons they carry.
My choice has been the .45 acp for over 20 years in various guns and I feel as good and protected by it as the first day.
Actually even more so with the advancements made in bullets.
Which is also one of the arguments I read that the 9mm has come such a long way due to the advancements in bullet design but at the same time these same people don't acknowledge the same advancements in all other calibers too.

on the other hand when having to go in deep concealment I even use a .380 acp and feel fine and protected too.

dukeblue91
11-17-2012, 17:02
I've got a family of 5 living on the other side of 2 sheets of drywall. Skinny meth-heads couldn't contain many high power handgun rounds and the drywall sure won't either. Misses happen under stress. I'm responsible for them all.

You are right, I too live in an apartment and this is a real concern as you are responsible for every round that comes out of your gun.

Kentguy
11-17-2012, 17:38
Greetings everyone,

I missed the .40/10mm thing, what I mean is I don't own either one of these pistols. I do have a 380, 9mm, 38 special, 357 magnum, .45 & a .44 magnum. I have nothing against either one, as a matter of fact one of these days I'm going to have to pick these up for some reloading, I'm collecting a ton of brass for each.

What is enlightening about this discussion is the diversity of firearms and everyone's particular use for what they own. My neighbors are not very close to me so over penitration is not that much of an issue where as like in FishyOne's case... "I've got a family of 5 living on the other side of 2 sheets of drywall. Skinny meth-heads couldn't contain many high power handgun rounds and the drywall sure won't either. Misses happen under stress. I'm responsible for them all." I think this is nothing short of brilliant insight!

I personally carry and practice with a G19 & G26 as my EDC, Although I may not agree with OP's opinion about "If you can't kill it with a 9mm...", my opinion is that the object is not to kill but to stop the treat, and a 9mm with do that quite well.

I just wanted to make this observation this far into this tread. Great conversation by all.

By the way... just between me - you - and the lamp post... I like the .40 over the 10mm any day. :thumbsup:

Andy W
11-17-2012, 21:44
I've got a family of 5 living on the other side of 2 sheets of drywall. Skinny meth-heads couldn't contain many high power handgun rounds and the drywall sure won't either. Misses happen under stress. I'm responsible for them all.

Have you ever thought about putting up bookcases along that wall? Either that or something else that would stop a bullet from passing through into their apartment in the event someone broke into your apartment and needed some shooting?

Andy W
11-17-2012, 21:49
Greetings everyone,

I missed the .40/10mm thing, what I mean is I don't own either one of these pistols. I do have a 380, 9mm, 38 special, 357 magnum, .45 & a .44 magnum. I have nothing against either one, as a matter of fact one of these days I'm going to have to pick these up for some reloading, I'm collecting a ton of brass for each.

What is enlightening about this discussion is the diversity of firearms and everyone's particular use for what they own. My neighbors are not very close to me so over penitration is not that much of an issue where as like in FishyOne's case... "I've got a family of 5 living on the other side of 2 sheets of drywall. Skinny meth-heads couldn't contain many high power handgun rounds and the drywall sure won't either. Misses happen under stress. I'm responsible for them all." I think this is nothing short of brilliant insight!

I personally carry and practice with a G19 & G26 as my EDC, Although I may not agree with OP's opinion about "If you can't kill it with a 9mm...", my opinion is that the object is not to kill but to stop the treat, and a 9mm with do that quite well.

I just wanted to make this observation this far into this tread. Great conversation by all.

By the way... just between me - you - and the lamp post... I like the .40 over the 10mm any day. :thumbsup:

I've backed off a little from the position originally taken in this thread. What I meant was, if you shoot someone multiple times center mass with a 9mm and they aren't stopping, a .45 isn't gonna magically drop them. It's probably more of a shot placement issue or an issue of needing a 12 guage with 9 pellets of 00 buckshot.

If you can shoot a .45 just as well as a 9mm, then you should consider carrying it instead. However, if you cannot or maybe just prefer to have 15 rounds in the mag instead of 10 or whatever, then the 9mm is what you want.

mds1140
11-18-2012, 06:16
Shot Placement! I have see a BG shot with several 40's and 45's, ranger'T ammo. all hits were around COM and thighs. He stopped....but he is fine.

Another BG pulled an airsoft on an officer. Officer shot back with 45, Ranger-T, bg's puffy coat must have plugged up the hollow point, did minimal damage, passing through the torso. Survived.

Another BG shot in a car with 9mm RA9T. One hit. Good shot placement, this BG bled out quickly and did not survive.

Anther BG shot with 45 RangerT and 9mm Gold Dot 147. Again, low abdomen and leg shots. Although.....one leg shot was high inside thigh, I believe it hit an artery, bled badly. I had to hold direct pressure on that one.....The cool part...I didnt want to stare at his crotch the entire time, so I looked around and saw, the expanded 45 and partially expanded 9mm lying on the ground right under and around the BG! Not so cool part....he peed on my hand, fortunaltely i was wearing gloves, and it was cold outside, sooooooo.....

I like the 9mm, 40 and 45. It's all about shot placement. Sometimes the hollow points work, sometimes they dont. **** happens.

I have choice between calibers. In my research and testing and experience, I believe they all work about the same. In watching ammo reps shooting gel blocks...they all work about the same. There are so many good choices.

My choice? 9mm. I shoot it better than the others. I will not poo-poo another's choice, because I'm a gun nut and I still like them all. All good choices.

SCmasterblaster
11-18-2012, 06:33
Shot Placement! I have see a BG shot with several 40's and 45's, ranger'T ammo. all hits were around COM and thighs. He stopped....but he is fine.

Another BG pulled an airsoft on an officer. Officer shot back with 45, Ranger-T, bg's puffy coat must have plugged up the hollow point, did minimal damage, passing through the torso. Survived.

Another BG shot in a car with 9mm RA9T. One hit. Good shot placement, this BG bled out quickly and did not survive.

Anther BG shot with 45 RangerT and 9mm Gold Dot 147. Again, low abdomen and leg shots. Although.....one leg shot was high inside thigh, I believe it hit an artery, bled badly. I had to hold direct pressure on that one.....The cool part...I didnt want to stare at his crotch the entire time, so I looked around and saw, the expanded 45 and partially expanded 9mm lying on the ground right under and around the BG! Not so cool part....he peed on my hand, fortunaltely i was wearing gloves, and it was cold outside, sooooooo.....

I like the 9mm, 40 and 45. It's all about shot placement. Sometimes the hollow points work, sometimes they dont. **** happens.

I have choice between calibers. In my research and testing and experience, I believe they all work about the same. In watching ammo reps shooting gel blocks...they all work about the same. There are so many good choices.

My choice? 9mm. I shoot it better than the others. I will not poo-poo another's choice, because I'm a gun nut and I still like them all. All good choices.

You sure do have a lot of wound data. Good for you. :cool:

sgtbones
11-18-2012, 08:20
I did 2 LEO C Q C courses and they emphasize 2 to the pelvis.
Seems to drop the bad guy even if he wear body armor.
:supergrin:

bdcremer
11-18-2012, 08:31
I think we as firearms enthusiast focus way too much on scientific data only. Bullets and bullets hitting humans do unpredictable things. These things cannot always be quantified in a lab.

I have read a lot of differing opinions on pistol calibers and have come to some conclusions. 9mm parabellum fans like the recoil. .40 s&w fans like the size, relative similar capacity and better penetration. .45 acp fans are nostalgic and like an even bigger bullet than .40 s&w.

Yes these are informed generalizations but I read the same arguments over and over. I refer to a man like Col. Jeff Cooper instead of the interweb commandos.

I like and carry the .40 s&w.


Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire (http://www.outdoorhub.com/mobile/)

Smithers
11-18-2012, 09:42
I think this is my favorite non-political subject to debate.

I think the most important thing is whether you can consistenty hit what you are shooting at. If I can't hit the broad side of a barn with 17 rounds of 9mm, but I can get five hits out of a 10 rd magazine of 22lr I'm way better off with the 22. Likewise, a shooter who is good enough with his 1911 to get 3 or 4 shots into the chests of two attackers from one mag? He should definitely carry his .45.

This thread is a fun one. I'm not a "serious" gun guy, but respect them and have my CCW.
I can hit a barn with my S&W Airweight and the barn
doorknob with my G-19.

I hope I never have to draw on someone and practice mentally to avoid and practice physically (and mentally)
to stop.

Teecher45
11-18-2012, 10:47
Over penetration won't get you killed, under penetration will.
How many of you actually think the BG will just stand there and let you shoot him 15 times.
With BG's and bears, you may only get one shot.
Make it count.

SCmasterblaster
11-18-2012, 11:52
Over penetration won't get you killed, under penetration will.
How many of you actually think the BG will just stand there and let you shoot him 15 times.
With BG's and bears, you may only get one shot.
Make it count.

None. The BGs are likely to run away from defensive gunfire.

SevenSixtyTwo
11-18-2012, 12:04
I've only drawn one time over thirty years ago. The BG who was coming out of my own house with one of my own kitchen knives, had a sudden change of plans. Just the sight of the revolver stopped him.
On the other hand, this guy wasn't stopping for anything. Warning to the lilly livered. Very graphic.

http://catm.com/yabbfiles/Attachments/FBI_Defensive_Systems_Unit_Ballistic_Research_Facility_FBIAcademy.pdf

Somewhere in the middle, grumpy old man fired one shot into the heart of a hot headed young man not too long ago known as Mr. Dooley and Mr. James. Mr. Dooley's choice of SD handgun was a .32cal pistol. Mr. James rolled over, said call 911 and died within seconds. This according to the trial so far.

Those of you ladyboys too limp wrist to conceal and carry a 12g better make sure your aim is good. Or lucky.:tongueout:

SCmasterblaster
11-18-2012, 13:41
So true - a very graphic link. From the xrays, it looks like he got shot in the foot real bad, a well as nearly everywhere else.

PBR Sailor
11-18-2012, 15:22
The LE guys seem to like the .40

If the 9mm was just as good they all would
carry it and save on ammo.

FBI issues the G23

Secret service the 357 sig

Many agencies transitioned from the 9MM to the .40 S&W, because of it's effectiveness on auto glass.

If you are not shooting through an intermediate barrier like auto glass, the 9MM works just fine. It's more about shot placement than anything else.

SCmasterblaster
11-18-2012, 15:25
Many agencies transitioned from the 9MM to the .40 S&W, because of it's effectiveness on auto glass.

If you are not shooting through an intermediate barrier like auto glass, the 9MM works just fine. It's more about shot placement than anything else.

Good quote by Yamamoto!

AWoods
11-18-2012, 17:22
Would you rather be shot in the pinkie toe by 40, or through the heart by a 9mm? I guarantee you that 9mm is going to be a lot easier to place a bunch of bullets through someone's vitals than 40. Heck even 45 is easier to shoot than 40.

With 9mm, I can pretty much mag dump and get all my shots in the vitals at 21ft. With 45 it's a lot more deliberate. With 40 I just think what a stupid caliber it is.

PBR Sailor
11-18-2012, 17:47
This is the same old debate that pops up all too often. It's not the machinery in use; it's the operator at the switch.

clarkz71
11-18-2012, 18:05
With 9mm, I can pretty much mag dump and get all my shots in the vitals at 21ft. With 45 it's a lot more deliberate.
With 40 I just think what a stupid caliber it is.

Really, so I guess I, and anyone who uses a .40 Glock
are stupid? Must be for depending on a stupid caliber
to protect our lives.

AWoods
11-18-2012, 18:12
Really, so I guess I, and anyone who uses a .40 Glock
are stupid? Must be for depending on a stupid caliber
to protect our lives.

Eh, some people do fine with that stupid caliber. Most of the ones at the range I go to suck with it. Most of the guys in the steel matches do good with it.

I don't know if you're an idiot or not, you're some guy on the internet.

Dogbite
11-18-2012, 18:16
I always wonder why people love the 9mm and the 45acp, but hate the 40. If you like the 9mm, why would you not like the 40, which is the ballistically superior round? It makes more sense to me to choose the 40 and the 45acp rather than the 9 and 45. I see it quite often though. I have heard people say the the 40 is a compromise round, but that depends how you look at it. You could say the same about the 45 and the 9. The nine is smaller, to get more rounds. The 45 is bigger, but you compromise capacity. It makes sense, like someone else said, that they are all marginally effective, but the 9mm is more ammo dependent than the others.

clarkz71
11-18-2012, 18:19
Eh, some people do fine with that stupid caliber. Most of the ones at the range I go to suck with it. Most of the guys in the steel matches do good with it.

I don't know if you're an idiot or not, you're some guy on the internet.

So you can't tell me why the .40 is stupid.

Come on, you can tell me.

Since you don't know if I'm an idiot or just some guy
on the net, give me the simple version.

AWoods
11-18-2012, 18:19
40 may be "ballistic-ally superior" by my results with it are ballistic-ally inferior.

clarkz71
11-18-2012, 18:20
I always wonder why people love the 9mm and the 45acp, but hate the 40. If you like the 9mm, why would you not like the 40, which is the ballistically superior round? It makes more sense to me to choose the 40 and the 45acp rather than the 9 and 45. I see it quite often though. I have heard people say the the 40 is a compromise round, but that depends how you look at it. You could say the same about the 45 and the 9. The nine is smaller, to get more rounds. The 45 is bigger, but you compromise capacity. It makes sense, like someone else said, that they are all marginally effective, but the 9mm is more ammo dependent than the others.

Now there's a smart post.

AWoods
11-18-2012, 18:25
So you can't tell me why the .40 is stupid.

Come on, you can tell me.

Since you don't know if I'm an idiot or just some guy
on the net, give me the simple version.

Well, this is regarding my ability, but here goes:

I can make 4-5 good hits with 9mm in the time it takes to make 2 good hits with 40. I can make 3 good hits with 45. According to my understanding, that's a lot more damage on the target in the same amount of time.

I also figure that if I ever have to do this in a gun fight, it's going to be a lot harder, to make a good hit, so being able to do it much easier counts for a lot.

uz2bUSMC
11-18-2012, 18:31
Well, this is regarding my ability, but here goes:

I can make 4-5 good hits with 9mm in the time it takes to make 2 good hits with 40. I can make 3 good hits with 45. According to my understanding, that's a lot more damage on the target in the same amount of time.

I also figure that if I ever have to do this in a gun fight, it's going to be a lot harder, to make a good hit, so being able to do it much easier counts for a lot.

You're not teacup'in that grip are you?

clarkz71
11-18-2012, 18:38
I can make 4-5 good hits with 9mm in the time it takes to make 2 good hits with 40. I can make 3 good hits with 45. According to my understanding, that's a lot more damage on the target in the same amount of time.
.

Now that sounds a lot better the calling the .40 stupid.

Everybody has a certain platform & caliber their better with.

Training with them is the important thing. Some people
run 50 rounds through a new gun & think their set.

clarkz71
11-18-2012, 18:39
You're not teacup'in that grip are you?

Damn, now that's funny.:rofl:

samurairabbi
11-18-2012, 20:14
Would you rather be shot in the pinkie toe by 40, or through the heart by a 9mm? I guarantee you that 9mm is going to be a lot easier to place a bunch of bullets through someone's vitals than 40. Heck even 45 is easier to shoot than 40.

With 9mm, I can pretty much mag dump and get all my shots in the vitals at 21ft. With 45 it's a lot more deliberate. With 40 I just think what a stupid caliber it is.

The FIRST shot in a string inherits its placement ONLY from shooter control; you are as likely to place your first .40 shot in center of mass as you are your first 9mm shot.

If your first .40 shot goes in the toe instead of COM, then you are psyched by the caliber. LATER shots may be affected by heavier recoil, but not the FIRST.

WilliamDahl
11-19-2012, 04:20
It's hard to beat a .45 +P loaded with 230gr HP pill at 950fps.

How about a .45 win mag?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.45_Winchester_Magnum

230gr at 1400 fps
300gr at 1150 fps

SCmasterblaster
11-19-2012, 12:48
You're not teacup'in that grip are you?

That is a very good question. :cool:

SCmasterblaster
11-19-2012, 12:50
How about a .45 win mag?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.45_Winchester_Magnum

230gr at 1400 fps
300gr at 1150 fps

The .45 Winchester Magnum is a very powerful cartridge!! :cool:

FishyOne
11-19-2012, 15:23
The .45 Winchester Magnum is a very powerful cartridge!! :cool:

Yes it is. If you're defending yourself against grizzly bears it would be a great choice.

For anti-personnel use? I'll take a .45acp.

WilliamDahl
11-19-2012, 17:06
The .45 Winchester Magnum is a very powerful cartridge!! :cool:

Or the .460 Rowland...

Now, if you were to take a Para P14-45 and convert it to .460 Rowland, you would have a serious backup gun for hog hunting.

copo9560
11-19-2012, 18:17
With 9mm, I can pretty much mag dump and get all my shots in the vitals at 21ft. With 45 it's a lot more deliberate. With 40 I just think what a stupid caliber it is.[/QUOTE]

If that is how you feel about 40, you must think the 10mm and magnum revolver guys are plum crazy.

Seriously it all depends on practice and pistol selection. With an M9 it is easy to pop off 9mm quickly with pretty good accuracy. A lot harder to do with a baby G26 in 9 or G36 in 45. Try 40 in a G20 - I have found you can run these off very quickly like a 9mm. Heavy slide damps recoil very nicely. That said, I don't choose them for SD loads.

SCmasterblaster
11-21-2012, 13:13
Yes it is. If you're defending yourself against grizzly bears it would be a great choice.

For anti-personnel use? I'll take a .45acp.

The recoil would likely break my hand!

WilliamDahl
11-21-2012, 14:08
Yes it is. If you're defending yourself against grizzly bears it would be a great choice.

For anti-personnel use? I'll take a .45acp.

But the advantage of the .45 win mag (or the .460 Rowland for that matter) is that you can still supposedly shoot the .45ACP rounds in them.

Just like with the 10mm -- you don't have to shoot full power loads, you can shoot the 10mm-lite "FBI loads" that they created for their female agents (which eventually was made into the .40SW caliber).

Hell, I've got .357mag loads that I periodically shoot for pests (armadillos, 'possums, etc) that are 158 gr LRN at 400 fps max. Very quiet, doesn't wake the neighbors, no ear protection needed... Just because you have a magnum caliber (and I'm including the 10mm in this category), it doesn't mean that you *have* to shoot full power loads. Sometimes, the task at hand can be perfectly handled by a light load.

SCmasterblaster
11-21-2012, 15:33
But the advantage of the .45 win mag (or the .460 Rowland for that matter) is that you can still supposedly shoot the .45ACP rounds in them.

Just like with the 10mm -- you don't have to shoot full power loads, you can shoot the 10mm-lite "FBI loads" that they created for their female agents (which eventually was made into the .40SW caliber).

Hell, I've got .357mag loads that I periodically shoot for pests (armadillos, 'possums, etc) that are 158 gr LRN at 400 fps max. Very quiet, doesn't wake the neighbors, no ear protection needed... Just because you have a magnum caliber (and I'm including the 10mm in this category), it doesn't mean that you *have* to shoot full power loads. Sometimes, the task at hand can be perfectly handled by a light load.

Imagine the velocity that the .45 WinMag would get with a 185gr JHP. 1500FPS? 1600?

RYT 2BER
11-21-2012, 16:51
With 9mm, I can pretty much mag dump and get all my shots in the vitals at 21ft. With 45 it's a lot more deliberate. With 40 I just think what a stupid caliber it is.

At 13 my kid could do that mag dump with 9mm.


40 just take more skill and it sounds like you need lots of practice. :rofl:

RYT 2BER
11-21-2012, 16:55
Well, this is regarding my ability, but here goes:

I can make 4-5 good hits with 9mm in the time it takes to make 2 good hits with 40. I can make 3 good hits with 45. According to my understanding, that's a lot more damage on the target in the same amount of time.

I also figure that if I ever have to do this in a gun fight, it's going to be a lot harder, to make a good hit, so being able to do it much easier counts for a lot.

Oooooooooh. So it's not a stupid caliber.. You're just not much of a shot.

Might I suggest that you buy a .22. They're vastly easier to shoot lots of rounds quickly.

RedsoxFan4Lyfe
11-21-2012, 18:04
I carry and own all three major service caliber, those being the 9mm the .40S&W and the .45acp. I like the 9mm as it's cheaper to shoot and easier to shoot and carries the most rounds in a given handgun. I know handguns are a compromise anyway, so I carry a 9mm most days because I can shoot it the best whether two handed, weak handed or one handed, it doesnt matter.

My buddies who served in Iraq both shot men with their M9 pistols with FMJ ammo. No HP ammo, just FMJ and both men went down and stopped what they were doing and never moved again. Shot placement is everything.

WilliamDahl
11-21-2012, 19:40
My buddies who served in Iraq both shot men with their M9 pistols with FMJ ammo. No HP ammo, just FMJ and both men went down and stopped what they were doing and never moved again. Shot placement is everything.

I have to suspect that a lot of the people who are so much of a zealot of one caliber over another have not actually been put in a situation where they had to defend themselves. I've been in that situation.

Many years ago, when I was *much* younger, I shot two guys with a Beretta .22LR who wanted to "share the (my) wealth" and they stopped what they were doing... Or at least it slowed them down enough that I could outrun them... I didn't bother wasting time looking behind me as I was running... I later found out that I had accomplished nothing more than flesh wounds, but apparently it was enough... On the other hand, I was once shot with a .38 and I didn't even notice it in the excitement of the moment...

It all boils down to shot placement and the determination of both parties... In the first incident, my shot placement was crap and their determination was low... In the second incident, his shot placement was crap and my determination (to not get shot) was rather high...

I wasn't any sort of badass, just someone who was minding my own business, but in the wrong place at the wrong time.

JimFS
11-21-2012, 19:44
OK. One more opinion. If you hit the mark with good ammo, a 9, 40, or 45 will all do the job. (the statistics prove that) NATO uses 9s. Most agencies use 9s or 40s. My 9s are easy to shoot well, conceal, carry more rounds, cheaper ammo (so more practice), and ammo available everywhere. So ---- I am not discrediting the larger cals but just saying. This is why I run 9s. And the beat goes on........

mayhem23
11-21-2012, 19:58
considering winter is coming. .40 or .45 cal. in summer where everyone wears a t-shirt 9mm.

Southswede
11-21-2012, 20:10
I've never heard of anyone thanking God they were only shot with a 9mm.........

RYT 2BER
11-21-2012, 21:36
I think this brings up a point rarely discussed. My buddies recently did some of their own ballistics testing.

Using gel may be good for penetration testing. But I think it's exceptionally poor at illustrating "damage".

After firing 9mm vs 10mm...penetration was one thing into gel, but shooting into pork "picnic" cuts and ribs showed no comparison. The 9mm made a nice hole....the 10mm absolutely disintegrated the meat ...total psychotic destruction. .... Penetration is one...ONE aspect of bullet performance....penetration... But after seeing what I saw I'm finding penetration in gel to be a fairly misleading.

nicovg
11-21-2012, 22:57
Hi guys, it is not about caliber. Of course the size of the hole matters. What matters more is the first rule in any gunfight: have a gun! I have a Ruger Super Redhawk in 44Mag. Will surely make a mess of any attacker, but it resides in my safe, it is too big to carry. My Glock 19 sits on the hip, sleeps under my pillow. Which means I have a gun!
I have experience of what a 9mm can do in the hands of a skilled person. Use what you are comfortable with, the rest is bull****.
Any gun, more than an armslength away when the sh... hits he fan, is of no use, no matter the size the of the bullet.

Zombie Steve
11-22-2012, 00:36
Yes it is. If you're defending yourself against grizzly bears it would be a great choice.

For anti-personnel use? I'll take a .45acp.


I ain't LE or military, but I have drawn a gun with the expectation of shooting someone in self defense. Believe me, when you're there, you always wish you had more gun. I almost exclusively carry .45 auto, by the way...

Hi guys, it is not about caliber. Of course the size of the hole matters. What matters more is the first rule in any gunfight: have a gun! I have a Ruger Super Redhawk in 44Mag. Will surely make a mess of any attacker, but it resides in my safe, it is too big to carry. My Glock 19 sits on the hip, sleeps under my pillow. Which means I have a gun!
I have experience of what a 9mm can do in the hands of a skilled person. Use what you are comfortable with, the rest is bull****.
Any gun, more than an armslength away when the sh... hits he fan, is of no use, no matter the size the of the bullet.

Well, if it's under the pillow when you're sleeping, you ain't exactly carrying it, are you? I understand the Redhawk won't be as comfortable to rest your head on, but you might consider putting in on the night stand. :whistling:

Andy W
11-22-2012, 07:38
Oooooooooh. So it's not a stupid caliber.. You're just not much of a shot.

Might I suggest that you buy a .22. They're vastly easier to shoot lots of rounds quickly.

There's no need to be insulting people now.

clarkz71
11-22-2012, 08:30
There's no need to be insulting people now.

You should read the whole thread, Woods started it.
Here's what he said to me after I questioned him on
calling the .40 S&W a "stupid caliber"


Eh, some people do fine with that stupid caliber. Most of the ones at the range I go to suck with it. Most of the guys in the steel matches do good with it.

I don't know if you're an idiot or not, you're some guy on the internet.

Andy W
11-22-2012, 11:15
You should read the whole thread, Woods started it.
Here's what he said to me after I questioned him on
calling the .40 S&W a "stupid caliber"

Yeah. It's amazing how hostile people get when talking about their preferred caliber. Me, I use 9mm now but I have no problem with .45. I don't like the .40 round but it'll do the job. 10mm is a cool round but its probably too much recoil for me to shoot comfortably + it's expensive and not commonly available.


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

clarkz71
11-22-2012, 11:33
Oh well, me I'm a gun nut, I like shooting anything that goes bang.

I just happen to like the .40 for carry. But anything from
.380 on up is better then having nothing on you.

denn1911
11-22-2012, 11:45
On my day job, I issued a .40 caliber pistol for 12 years. We now carry a .45 acp, which I am a huge fan of. Although I would carry my duty pistol off-duty occasionally, my off-duty pistols were either .45 acp or 9mm. I don't put people down for their caliber choice. As long as it fits their needs, and they can shoot it well, that's fine with me. I'd rather have someone put accurate rounds on a threat than shooting a caliber that they can't control. Not everyone will put in the time to train and become proficient with their chosen firearm, defensive ammo and gear.

HKLovingIT
11-22-2012, 22:00
I own .38 Special, 9mm, .40s, .45 ACP and .357 SIG.

I carry 9mm almost exclusively in an urban environment. Here is why it makes sense for me in that situation:

1. I'm carrying Speer factory 124 gr Gold Dot +p which has a proven street and lab record. There is nothing boutique about it and if it is ever a legal question I can point to several major metropolitan departments with thousands of officers that carry the same load.

2. The wolves travel in ever larger packs these days. For a given size firearm I want the most on tap within that platform that I can have, before a reload is required.

3. Given the above point and that I tend to carry smaller pistols because of my personal logistics, the 9mm meets that requirement better for me. Yeah, I know it's usually only a round or two difference in most cases but I'll take it. Shot placement is king but in a dynamic situation with less than ideal shot placement I'll take the cumulative effect of two less than ideal hits with a 9mm over one less than ideal hit with a larger caliber. (Except 10mm which is known to lift the assailant clean off their feet with even a thumb hit, but it violates the Geneva conventions :tongueout:)

4. I'm a civilian and I don't work in and around vehicles all day so the heavier caliber's auto glass performance is not a factor for me.

5. I can shoot 9mm fast and accurate. In a me vs me comparison I will always outperform myself using 9mm versus another service caliber. Now I might shoot .40 or .45 faster and more accurate than another guy shoots 9mm but I can always out shoot me vs me using 9mm. I could shoot all year with a G27 and be damned good but at the end of that year I would still shoot a G26 that much better.

6. The firearms that I carry most often were all originally designed around the 9mm. I have a gut feel belief that carrying a firearm in the caliber it was originally designed for gives the best reliability and lessens the chance of a freak parts breakage at a bad time.

Do I think the .40 and .45 ACP are more effective by a degree or two? Yup. But given my above perceived personal requirements and situations I think the 9mm is my best choice for most of my carry situations. I think .357 SIG smokes them all in the common service calibers and if I was going to ditch the 9mm for everyday use (I'm not) I would go that route because it somewhat duplicates the famed 125gr .357 Magnum but in a platform that would work for me from a practical carry perspective.

I do carry other calibers in more rural settings but then I usually do have a shotgun or rifle right there so it's moot.

Good discussion.

Mr.Reignman
11-22-2012, 22:26
If the 9mm is all you can handle I can see why you would think it is the best. DON"T discredit others for shooting much more superior rounds. That said there is no better pistol the a Glock 20 10mm if you can handle it? if not stick to what you can, hell ya might want to try a 22 if the 9 is a little snappy for ya. I say it is what you are comfortable with. 9 mm is like shooting a bb gun to me never would want one see no need for one for me it is a useless round
FOR ME :perfect10: doesn't get any better

Lawl.......

GlocknamStyle
11-22-2012, 22:27
SHOT PLACEMENT. I've read from one of the articles written by an experienced law enforcer (just forgot his name) that regardless of the caliber, shot placement determines whether a guy shot gets killed (or goes down) immediately or continues moving but drops after some time..If you hit him in the head between the eyes or directly in the heart, regardless of whether you used a .22 cal. or .45 caliber, the person would surely go down and cease to live immediately after..

Andy W
11-22-2012, 22:39
SHOT PLACEMENT. I've read from one of the articles written by an experienced law enforcer (just forgot his name) that regardless of the caliber, shot placement determines whether a guy shot gets killed (or goes down) immediately or continues moving but drops after some time..If you hit him in the head between the eyes or directly in the heart, regardless of whether you used a .22 cal. or .45 caliber, the person would surely go down and cease to live immediately after..

If a person gets a bullet through the heart they will bleed out and go down but it may not be instant. I believe it is like 10 to 15 seconds (don't quote me on the numbers) that you can continue to function if your heart is completely destroyed. So a person shot through the heart will go down pretty fast but they could continue to fight for several seconds before blood loss and lack of oxygen to the brain makes them go down.

Warp
11-22-2012, 23:16
If a person gets a bullet through the heart they will bleed out and go down but it may not be instant.

Correct.

Southswede
11-23-2012, 01:36
I own .38 Special, 9mm, .40s, .45 ACP and .357 SIG.

I carry 9mm almost exclusively in an urban environment. Here is why it makes sense for me in that situation:

1. I'm carrying Speer factory 124 gr Gold Dot +p which has a proven street and lab record. There is nothing boutique about it and if it is ever a legal question I can point to several major metropolitan departments with thousands of officers that carry the same load.

2. The wolves travel in ever larger packs these days. For a given size firearm I want the most on tap within that platform that I can have, before a reload is required.

3. Given the above point and that I tend to carry smaller pistols because of my personal logistics, the 9mm meets that requirement better for me. Yeah, I know it's usually only a round or two difference in most cases but I'll take it. Shot placement is king but in a dynamic situation with less than ideal shot placement I'll take the cumulative effect of two less than ideal hits with a 9mm over one less than ideal hit with a larger caliber. (Except 10mm which is known to lift the assailant clean off their feet with even a thumb hit, but it violates the Geneva conventions :tongueout:)

4. I'm a civilian and I don't work in and around vehicles all day so the heavier caliber's auto glass performance is not a factor for me.

5. I can shoot 9mm fast and accurate. In a me vs me comparison I will always outperform myself using 9mm versus another service caliber. Now I might shoot .40 or .45 faster and more accurate than another guy shoots 9mm but I can always out shoot me vs me using 9mm. I could shoot all year with a G27 and be damned good but at the end of that year I would still shoot a G26 that much better.

6. The firearms that I carry most often were all originally designed around the 9mm. I have a gut feel belief that carrying a firearm in the caliber it was originally designed for gives the best reliability and lessens the chance of a freak parts breakage at a bad time.

Do I think the .40 and .45 ACP are more effective by a degree or two? Yup. But given my above perceived personal requirements and situations I think the 9mm is my best choice for most of my carry situations. I think .357 SIG smokes them all in the common service calibers and if I was going to ditch the 9mm for everyday use (I'm not) I would go that route because it somewhat duplicates the famed 125gr .357 Magnum but in a platform that would work for me from a practical carry perspective.

I do carry other calibers in more rural settings but then I usually do have a shotgun or rifle right there so it's moot.

Good discussion.

Stop making sense!! There is no room for logic in a topic filled with internet hyperbole.
:supergrin:

SCmasterblaster
11-25-2012, 18:31
If a person gets a bullet through the heart they will bleed out and go down but it may not be instant. I believe it is like 10 to 15 seconds (don't quote me on the numbers) that you can continue to function if your heart is completely destroyed. So a person shot through the heart will go down pretty fast but they could continue to fight for several seconds before blood loss and lack of oxygen to the brain makes them go down.

This is a very thoughtful description. A violent, murderous felon can do a lot of damage with those 10-15 seconds. That is why I practice for head shots with my G17.

Andy W
11-25-2012, 21:47
This is a very thoughtful description. A violent, murderous felon can do a lot of damage with those 10-15 seconds. That is why I practice for head shots with my G17.

Good idea. It's actually quite possible the '86 FBI shootout in Miami would most likely have ended quite differently had the agents 1) been using heavier bullets in their 9mms as .38s and 2.) practiced head shots. Platt, who inflicted most of the FBI casualties during the fight, was actually mortally wounded fairly early on but was able to continue fighting for several minutes. I believe he actually inflicted most of these casualties after being fatally wounded. He took a 115 grain 9mm JHP through the arm, which continued on into his side, collapsing a lung and stopping less than 2" from his heart. Had the agents been using heavier 124-125 grain + bullets, he would have gone down a lot sooner and wouldn't have been able to kill the two agents or wound as many of the others. Maybe he would have fired a few more shots but it wouldn't have been as bad. In fact, I bet a nice 147 grain Hornady XTP would have done quite well with identical shot placement; probably taking out his heart as well as collapsing both lungs


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

PBR Sailor
11-25-2012, 21:54
If you do your job, the 9MM will do it's job.

JimFS
11-25-2012, 23:22
OK. All good discussions. But in the heat of battle what are the odds that you can make a head shoot? And is he standing still waiting for the shoot? And what about a miss? Where does it go? Remember the last NY shooting. 9 bystanders shot by LE taking down the bad guy. So, if in that situation (with my 9) certainly would not shoot once and wait 15 seconds, but enough to stop the threat. How many times? From reports I have read. (no I am not LE) Depending on size, (9 through 45), and bullet type, 2.1 to 2.4 rounds to stop a threat. Yes 9 was the highest (but many researched were FMJ). However the conclusions were that shot placement is #1, so carry what you can shoot well, not the biggest you have in the closet.

Warp
11-25-2012, 23:45
OK. All good discussions. But in the heat of battle what are the odds that you can make a head shoot? And is he standing still waiting for the shoot? And what about a miss? Where does it go? Remember the last NY shooting. 9 bystanders shot by LE taking down the bad guy. So, if in that situation (with my 9) certainly would not shoot once and wait 15 seconds, but enough to stop the threat. How many times? From reports I have read. (no I am not LE) Depending on size, (9 through 45), and bullet type, 2.1 to 2.4 rounds to stop a threat. Yes 9 was the highest (but many researched were FMJ). However the conclusions were that shot placement is #1, so carry what you can shoot well, not the biggest you have in the closet.

Stating it like that does not accurately represent what actually happened.

SCmasterblaster
11-26-2012, 10:58
OK. All good discussions. But in the heat of battle what are the odds that you can make a head shoot? And is he standing still waiting for the shoot? And what about a miss? Where does it go? Remember the last NY shooting. 9 bystanders shot by LE taking down the bad guy. So, if in that situation (with my 9) certainly would not shoot once and wait 15 seconds, but enough to stop the threat. How many times? From reports I have read. (no I am not LE) Depending on size, (9 through 45), and bullet type, 2.1 to 2.4 rounds to stop a threat. Yes 9 was the highest (but many researched were FMJ). However the conclusions were that shot placement is #1, so carry what you can shoot well, not the biggest you have in the closet.

The NYC shooting goes to show you what one gets with poor shooting skills, NYC should enact a whole new, comprehensive training program.

bdcremer
11-26-2012, 18:28
When SHTF there are many things we say we will do however, these things are tremendously more difficult when the lead starts flinging. The FBI has done a lot of bullet testing and they still chose to stick with the .40 S&W.

clarkz71
11-26-2012, 18:46
The FBI has done a lot of bullet testing and they still chose to stick with the .40 S&W.

They do, and they issue G23's to agents out of the academy last I heard.

But what are the chances they know more then
internet commando's?? . (sarcasm)

Warp
11-26-2012, 19:05
The NYC shooting goes to show you what one gets with poor shooting skills, NYC should enact a whole new, comprehensive training program.

Why do you say that?

WilliamDahl
11-26-2012, 21:14
They do, and they issue G23's to agents out of the academy last I heard.

But what are the chances they know more then
internet commando's?? . (sarcasm)

With a large organization like that, their requirements are different than might be a single person's requirements. They want to standardize their weapons. They want to have something small enough that people with smaller hand or slighter builds can easily fire. For the agents who can handle full power 10mm loads, they probably get kind of shortchanged.

Warp
11-26-2012, 22:13
When SHTF there are many things we say we will do however, these things are tremendously more difficult when the lead starts flinging. The FBI has done a lot of bullet testing and they still chose to stick with the .40 S&W.

Do you use a handheld flashlight like this?

http://img185.imageshack.us/img185/7662/chooseweaponlight10kb4.jpg

Tiro Fijo
11-26-2012, 23:30
With a large organization like that, their requirements are different than might be a single person's requirements. They want to standardize their weapons...


This.

Anyones who thinks the FBI is infallible either does not know of or has forgotten this:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/spy-talk/2010/03/whitehursts_legacy_still_haunt.html

clarkz71
11-27-2012, 07:10
For the agents who can handle full power 10mm loads, they probably get kind of shortchanged.

Back when they adopted the 10mm they
down loaded it to the 10 lite 180/950
They never issued full power 10mm loads

This.

Anyones who thinks the FBI is infallible either does not know of or has forgotten this:


What does the crime lab have to do with
ballistic testing?

WilliamDahl
11-27-2012, 07:40
This.

Anyones who thinks the FBI is infallible either does not know of or has forgotten this:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/spy-talk/2010/03/whitehursts_legacy_still_haunt.html

I've never been under the mistaken notion that the legal system was about finding "truth" or dispensing "justice". Their job performance is rated by how many convictions that they get and the possible innocence of a suspect is just an inconvenient fact that can be gotten around if necessary.

WilliamDahl
11-27-2012, 07:44
Back when they adopted the 10mm they
down loaded it to the 10 lite 180/950
They never issued full power 10mm loads

My understanding was that during the initial testing phase, it was determined that the full power 10mm loads proved to be too much for the smaller agents, so they then downloaded it to the 10mm-lite (which eventually became the .40SW when the brass was shortened, primer size switched to small, and maximum pressure reduced).

I'm not saying that there is anything wrong with their reasoning in this, just that what might be appropriate for a large group of people will not necessarily be appropriate for one particular person.

clarkz71
11-27-2012, 07:52
That's true, the should have kept the 10mm
and let those that could qualify with full
power loads use them & give the others the
10mm lite. Everyone has the same gun just
a different load

English
11-27-2012, 08:08
My understanding was that during the initial testing phase, it was determined that the full power 10mm loads proved to be too much for the smaller agents, so they then downloaded it to the 10mm-lite (which eventually became the .40SW when the brass was shortened, primer size switched to small, and maximum pressure reduced).

I'm not saying that there is anything wrong with their reasoning in this, just that what might be appropriate for a large group of people will not necessarily be appropriate for one particular person.

No. I believe clarkz71 was correct. Before any initial testing the specification stated that no pistol tested should have a load with more momentum that the standard 230gn .45ACP ball. At that point no consideration was given to the 10mm. It was a 10mm enthuiast on the team who gaot permission to add it and handloaded it with 180gn bullets to that momentum. In that form it scored highest on the battery of tests by a small margin over the .45ACP and the FBI ordered a very large batch of ammunition to the 10mm lite specification to go with their new pistols.

The pistols they chose were single stack magazine and just a little heavier than the 1911 Government so recoil was quite mild and anyone who could shoot the 1911 could shoot that 10mm. The rest is just rumours that spread on their own or were spread for malicious reasons.

English

SCmasterblaster
11-27-2012, 08:20
Why do you say that?

Because the NYPD had a highly-publicized shooting where they fired dozens of rounds and accidentally shot nine innocent bystander civilians.

WilliamDahl
11-27-2012, 08:51
The rest is just rumours that spread on their own or were spread for malicious reasons.


I don't have any vested interest one way or the other on the 10mm. It's just one of numerous calibers that I own. Each serve a purpose (or I just bought the firearm for the 'ell of it). Although I probably like a M1911 better than any other firearm, I suspect that it is because that is what I have shot the most over the years, either in the military or afterwards. Maybe I'm old fashioned, but I like an exposed hammer single action semi-auto. Sometimes I carry a .45, sometimes a .357SIG, sometimes a 10mm. I have even been known to carry a subcompact 9mm and .22LR / .22mag "mouse gun", but that's for when I'm visiting places that are either rather anti-2nd-Amendment or *extremely* anti-2nd-Amendment.

Dogbite
11-27-2012, 08:55
Fixed. Welcome to Glocktalk.

:supergrin:

Father(45lc), and son(45acp), That's my kind of family!!!

alwaysshootin
11-27-2012, 11:16
Father(45lc), and son(45acp), That's my kind of family!!!

Father(45LC), Son(.45ACP), and Holy Spirit(10MM)

THE HOLY TRINITY

:rock:

:supergrin:

bdcremer
11-27-2012, 12:35
Do you use a handheld flashlight like this?

http://img185.imageshack.us/img185/7662/chooseweaponlight10kb4.jpg


Lol. That's not a flashlight, it's a light-saber.

Warp
11-27-2012, 13:24
Because the NYPD had a highly-publicized shooting where they fired dozens of rounds and accidentally shot nine innocent bystander civilians.

You do realize that they didn't really shoot nine innocent bystanders, right?

Dogbite
11-27-2012, 18:03
I own .38 Special, 9mm, .40s, .45 ACP and .357 SIG.

I carry 9mm almost exclusively in an urban environment. Here is why it makes sense for me in that situation:

1. I'm carrying Speer factory 124 gr Gold Dot +p which has a proven street and lab record. There is nothing boutique about it and if it is ever a legal question I can point to several major metropolitan departments with thousands of officers that carry the same load.

2. The wolves travel in ever larger packs these days. For a given size firearm I want the most on tap within that platform that I can have, before a reload is required.

3. Given the above point and that I tend to carry smaller pistols because of my personal logistics, the 9mm meets that requirement better for me. Yeah, I know it's usually only a round or two difference in most cases but I'll take it. Shot placement is king but in a dynamic situation with less than ideal shot placement I'll take the cumulative effect of two less than ideal hits with a 9mm over one less than ideal hit with a larger caliber. (Except 10mm which is known to lift the assailant clean off their feet with even a thumb hit, but it violates the Geneva conventions :tongueout:)

4. I'm a civilian and I don't work in and around vehicles all day so the heavier caliber's auto glass performance is not a factor for me.

5. I can shoot 9mm fast and accurate. In a me vs me comparison I will always outperform myself using 9mm versus another service caliber. Now I might shoot .40 or .45 faster and more accurate than another guy shoots 9mm but I can always out shoot me vs me using 9mm. I could shoot all year with a G27 and be damned good but at the end of that year I would still shoot a G26 that much better.

6. The firearms that I carry most often were all originally designed around the 9mm. I have a gut feel belief that carrying a firearm in the caliber it was originally designed for gives the best reliability and lessens the chance of a freak parts breakage at a bad time.

Do I think the .40 and .45 ACP are more effective by a degree or two? Yup. But given my above perceived personal requirements and situations I think the 9mm is my best choice for most of my carry situations. I think .357 SIG smokes them all in the common service calibers and if I was going to ditch the 9mm for everyday use (I'm not) I would go that route because it somewhat duplicates the famed 125gr .357 Magnum but in a platform that would work for me from a practical carry perspective.

I do carry other calibers in more rural settings but then I usually do have a shotgun or rifle right there so it's moot.

Good discussion.

Great post. It's very reasonable, and well thought out.

uz2bUSMC
11-27-2012, 18:14
You do realize that they didn't really shoot nine innocent bystanders, right?

What were the details? Vid looked bad. I thought 9, as well.

WilliamDahl
11-27-2012, 20:28
Here's an interesting read on the 10mm history and considering that it is from the Bren Ten website, it might have a bit of validity...

http://www.bren-ten.com/website/id7.html

More interesting reading:

http://nordicg3k.tripod.com//sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/fbi-bulletin_intro.jpg
http://nordicg3k.tripod.com//sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/fbi-bulletin_pg01.jpg
http://nordicg3k.tripod.com//sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/fbi-bulletin_pg02.jpg
http://nordicg3k.tripod.com//sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/fbi-bulletin_pg03.jpg
http://nordicg3k.tripod.com//sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/fbi-bulletin_pg04.jpg
http://nordicg3k.tripod.com//sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/fbi-bulletin_pg05.jpg
http://nordicg3k.tripod.com//sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/fbi-bulletin_pg06.jpg
http://nordicg3k.tripod.com//sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/fbi-bulletin_pg07.jpg

Warp
11-27-2012, 20:29
What were the details? Vid looked bad. I thought 9, as well.

I'd first like to give SCmasterblaster a chance to explain, since he brought it up, and seemed very matter-of-fact in his assertion.

WilliamDahl
11-27-2012, 20:39
What were the details? Vid looked bad. I thought 9, as well.

This here, perhaps?

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/08/25/nypd-shooting-bystander-victims-hit-by-police-gunfire/

Warp
11-27-2012, 20:43
This here, perhaps?

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/08/25/nypd-shooting-bystander-victims-hit-by-police-gunfire/

"Police have determined that three people were struck by whole bullets -- two of which were removed from victims at the hospital -- and the rest were grazed "by fragments of some sort," Kelly said."

WilliamDahl
11-27-2012, 21:19
"Police have determined that three people were struck by whole bullets -- two of which were removed from victims at the hospital -- and the rest were grazed "by fragments of some sort," Kelly said."

In other words, what comes out your barrel has to end up somewhere. Bullets don't just magically turn to dust and stop when they hit a wall or the street. They can fragment and those fragments might end up in a place that it might be preferred that they not end up. We like to say that you should be sure of your target and your backstop when you are shooting at something, but sometimes, all the choices available to you are not good. If the cops didn't shoot, they're in danger of being shot by the guy who quickly turned around and pointed the handgun towards them. There's also the chance that anyone behind the cops could have been shot. Now, an argument could be made that the cops posed more danger to the surrounding people than the original assailant did due to the larger number of round that they carried and subsequently shot, but no one in their right mind is going to let the other guy get the first shot in a situation like this before returning fire.

OK, technically, if the other person hasn't already shot, I guess it's not returning fire... :)

Warp
11-27-2012, 21:23
In other words, what comes out your barrel has to end up somewhere. Bullets don't just magically turn to dust and stop when they hit a wall or the street. They can fragment and those fragments might end up in a place that it might be preferred that they not end up. We like to say that you should be sure of your target and your backstop when you are shooting at something, but sometimes, all the choices available to you are not good. If the cops didn't shoot, they're in danger of being shot by the guy who quickly turned around and pointed the handgun towards them. There's also the chance that anyone behind the cops could have been shot. Now, an argument could be made that the cops posed more danger to the surrounding people than the original assailant did due to the larger number of round that they carried and subsequently shot, but no one in their right mind is going to let the other guy get the first shot in a situation like this before returning fire.

OK, technically, if the other person hasn't already shot, I guess it's not returning fire... :)

Absolutely.

Especially the part in bold.

Andy W
11-27-2012, 21:51
In other words, what comes out your barrel has to end up somewhere. Bullets don't just magically turn to dust and stop when they hit a wall or the street. They can fragment and those fragments might end up in a place that it might be preferred that they not end up. We like to say that you should be sure of your target and your backstop when you are shooting at something, but sometimes, all the choices available to you are not good. If the cops didn't shoot, they're in danger of being shot by the guy who quickly turned around and pointed the handgun towards them. There's also the chance that anyone behind the cops could have been shot. Now, an argument could be made that the cops posed more danger to the surrounding people than the original assailant did due to the larger number of round that they carried and subsequently shot, but no one in their right mind is going to let the other guy get the first shot in a situation like this before returning fire.

OK, technically, if the other person hasn't already shot, I guess it's not returning fire... :)

Just to play devils advocate, couldn't we make the argument that the police choosing to take the suspect down in a crowded area as they did actually posed more danger to the public than did the original shooting? If I remember correctly, the guy was only there to shoot a couple of people with whom he had a dispute, not to go on a shooting spree and harm the general public. After he shot the two people he was after, he would have left. However, the police showed up and engaged in a gunfight with the suspect in a crowded street outside the Empire State Building, which greatly increased the amount of bullets flying through the air and as a result also increased very significanly the danger to the general public. Of course, The responding officers most certainly would not have known what the suspect's intentions were and therefore thought it best to try and neutralize the suspect immediately. After all, he had just shot two people. However, I think the shootout between the police and suspect undeniably had the result of placing the people in the area in greater danger than the original shooting did. The police could not possibly have known this at the time and therefore could not be expected to have considered it, but that's what happened.

Just putting that out there.

Warp
11-27-2012, 22:02
The responding officers most certainly would not have known what the suspect's intentions were and therefore thought it best to try and neutralize the suspect immediately.

Yes.


After all, he had just shot two people. However, I think the shootout between the police and suspect undeniably had the result of placing the people in the area in greater danger than the original shooting did. The police could not possibly have known this at the time and therefore could not be expected to have considered it, but that's what happened.

Just putting that out there.

Yes.

Andy W
11-28-2012, 23:32
Back to shot placement. Is it possible that not all head shots have the effect of immediate incapacitation? I'm not talking about a shot that glances off the skull or goes through the jaw and misses the brain. What I mean is can a bullet go through certain parts of the brain and not immediately kill or incapacitate someone. I've seen diagrams and targets where there is a triangle That goes roughly from just above the eye sockets and tapers down, ending around the base of the nose. Does this mean you can hit them in the brain but outside this area they may not go down immediately and therefore continue to fight for a time?

countrygun
11-29-2012, 01:10
Just to play devils advocate, couldn't we make the argument that the police choosing to take the suspect down in a crowded area as they did actually posed more danger to the public than did the original shooting? If I remember correctly, the guy was only there to shoot a couple of people with whom he had a dispute, not to go on a shooting spree and harm the general public. After he shot the two people he was after, he would have left. However, the police showed up and engaged in a gunfight with the suspect in a crowded street outside the Empire State Building, which greatly increased the amount of bullets flying through the air and as a result also increased very significanly the danger to the general public. Of course, The responding officers most certainly would not have known what the suspect's intentions were and therefore thought it best to try and neutralize the suspect immediately. After all, he had just shot two people. However, I think the shootout between the police and suspect undeniably had the result of placing the people in the area in greater danger than the original shooting did. The police could not possibly have known this at the time and therefore could not be expected to have considered it, but that's what happened.

Just putting that out there.

Nice to have the luxury of being able to call the play on Monday morning.

and if the suspect had taken a hostage, ot wasn't done yet?

If the guy had killed one more person after the police had him spotted then they would be getting blamed for NOT taking him immediately


Society asks these people to do things most people are unwilling and unable to do. on a good day, when everything goes perfectly, they still end up with at least 25% of the armchair experts telling them that they should have done it differently. I think we should be grateful that we have people still willing to make thosed decisions at all.

"Success has many step-fathers, but failure is an orphan"

tcruse
11-29-2012, 06:54
I agree that the police have some really difficult decisions to make with out much timeor all of the facts. Now, I also ink that police should be held to a higher standard than these two demonstrated. I think that the difference between 'stop' and 'kill' is lost far too many times. I agree that in many cases the outcome is the same but shooting until you run out of ammo even if the bg is down is not acceptable.

WilliamDahl
11-29-2012, 07:47
Back to shot placement. Is it possible that not all head shots have the effect of immediate incapacitation? I'm not talking about a shot that glances off the skull or goes through the jaw and misses the brain. What I mean is can a bullet go through certain parts of the brain and not immediately kill or incapacitate someone. I've seen diagrams and targets where there is a triangle That goes roughly from just above the eye sockets and tapers down, ending around the base of the nose. Does this mean you can hit them in the brain but outside this area they may not go down immediately and therefore continue to fight for a time?

If you want *immediate* incapacitation, you need to sever the brain stem. "Immediate" as in it is not possible for the person to even pull the trigger if they have a cocked gun to the head of a hostage. Having grown up on a ranch, periodically, we might have to put down a cow due to illness or whatever. It is entirely possible to accomplish this with a .22LR at extremely close range by aiming between the eyes and towards the back of the skull where the brain connects to the spinal column. It is like turning off a light switch. At worst, you get a slight shudder and then the head drops.

Just poking a hole through the brain does not stop a person. There have been people who have walked into the emergency room at a hospital after having shot themselves with a nail gun. There are parts of the brain that do not control motor functions and putting a hole through those parts of the brain will not necessarily kill a person or even stop them from doing whatever they are doing.

http://www.inquisitr.com/184504/man-shoots-self-in-brain-with-nail-gun-finishes-shed-before-going-to-hospital
http://cdn.inquisitr.com/wp-content/2012/01/nail-in-brain.jpg

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/health/2012/01/21/x-ray-reveals-nail-in-mans-brain

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/3685791.stm (http://www.joe-ks.com/archives_may2004/6_Nail_Head.htm)
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/40117000/jpg/_40117643_nailxray203.jpg

http://www.medicaldaily.com/articles/10358/20120619/teen-yassar-lopez-head-brain-injury.htm
http://images.medicaldaily.com/data/images/full/4317/an-x-ray-shows-a-fishing-spear-lodged-in-the-skull-and-brain-of-yasser-lopez-16-who-was-shot-when-his-friend-accidentally-shot-a-spear-gun.jpg?w=280&h=187&l=50&t=50

uz2bUSMC
11-29-2012, 14:43
I agree that the police have some really difficult decisions to make with out much timeor all of the facts. Now, I also ink that police should be held to a higher standard than these two demonstrated. I think that the difference between 'stop' and 'kill' is lost far too many times. I agree that in many cases the outcome is the same but shooting until you run out of ammo even if the bg is down is not acceptable.

Have you seen the video?

WilliamDahl
11-29-2012, 14:48
Have you seen the video?

Would you care to post a link to it?

uz2bUSMC
11-29-2012, 15:16
Would you care to post a link to it?

Sure.

Graphic video shows police killing ESB gunman - CBS News Video

4949shooter
12-01-2012, 05:24
I agree that the police have some really difficult decisions to make with out much timeor all of the facts. Now, I also ink that police should be held to a higher standard than these two demonstrated. I think that the difference between 'stop' and 'kill' is lost far too many times. I agree that in many cases the outcome is the same but shooting until you run out of ammo even if the bg is down is not acceptable.

Would you care to post a link to it?

The innocents hit in that video were struck with fragments from ricochet rounds. It is very unfortunate, but is a fact of life in the big city where there is a lot of concrete and asphalt. The LEO's on scene did a good job stopping the threat. Was it perfect? I say "no," but show me how many shooters could have done better under the circumstances. I am not talking about Monday morning quarterbacks either, I am talking about real shootings under the duress of life and death situations, with tens or maybe hundreds of innocents in the area. This changes the perspective on things a bit, doesn't it?

BTW, those NYPD cops were working overtime in that area, and were from one of the busier precincts.

WilliamDahl
12-01-2012, 07:06
The innocents hit in that video were struck with fragments from ricochet rounds. It is very unfortunate, but is a fact of life in the big city where there is a lot of concrete and asphalt. The LEO's on scene did a good job stopping the threat. Was it perfect? I say "no," but show me how many shooters could have done better under the circumstances. I am not talking about Monday morning quarterbacks either, I am talking about real shootings under the duress of life and death situations, with tens or maybe hundreds of innocents in the area. This changes the perspective on things a bit, doesn't it?

BTW, those NYPD cops were working overtime in that area, and were from one of the busier precincts.

I'm not one of those people who blindly believe everything that cops say or support everything that they do. I've met too many cops over the years who are just on a power trip and have no business being an officer. That said, I cannot really find any fault in the actions of the officers in this incident. It was a crappy situation and they made the best of it with minimum collateral damage.

4949shooter
12-01-2012, 08:00
I'm not one of those people who blindly believe everything that cops say or support everything that they do. I've met too many cops over the years who are just on a power trip and have no business being an officer. That said, I cannot really find any fault in the actions of the officers in this incident. It was a crappy situation and they made the best of it with minimum collateral damage.

And I'm not saying cops do everything perfectly, either. It's just that the factors in the incident in question were blown out of proportion by the media.

WilliamDahl
12-01-2012, 08:25
And I'm not saying cops do everything perfectly, either. It's just that the factors in the incident in question were blown out of proportion by the media.

Which is not that different than anything else addressed by the liberal media. Sensationalism sells... The *truth* just gets in the way of a good story... :(

SCmasterblaster
12-01-2012, 09:33
You do realize that they didn't really shoot nine innocent bystanders, right?

The story said that nine bystanders were wounded by police gunfire. Or did I read it wrong?

cajun_chooter
12-02-2012, 09:57
I think shot placement is more important than caliber... to an extent... if you cannot hit the broad side of a barn.. even a cannon won't suffice..

WilliamDahl
12-02-2012, 11:09
I think shot placement is more important than caliber... to an extent... if you cannot hit the broad side of a barn.. even a cannon won't suffice..

Or as we used to say, "Close only counts in horse shoes, hand grenades, and nuclear depth charges"... :)

Now, if you can't hit the broad side of a barn, then you need to just up your caliber a bit... A 16 incher like from the New Jersey (BB-62) would be the perfect thing for you... During Vietnam, a single HC round fired into the jungle would create a helicopter LZ that was 200 yds in diameter and would defoliate trees for an additional 300 yds after that. One might argue that you only would need to get *close to* a barn with one of those rounds... :)