Well Armed You Say?

Military is issued ball ammo for their pistols, unlike law enforcement which is usually allowed to carry hollowpoint self-defense ammo. The rounds I trained with in the Air Force looked just like your run-of-the-mill Winchester white box stuff, including the rifle ammo. The only people I have heard of getting specialty ammo in the military are snipers.
 
That's right,over in Iraq the ammo our PL and PSG loaded into their M9's was American Eagle red box 115 gr. ball. There were like 1 or 2 boxes that the PL kept under his bed. Not one round of 9mm was fired by either of them the entire deployment........if the Army ever releases all those M9's as surplus one day, those will be some good deals. Heavily worn and dinged up M9's with maybe 200 rounds through them for $300 anyone?

The use of handguns, at least in the Army line infantry, is so minuscule it's not even a factor. Basically if a guy is using an M9 something went seriously wrong. The M9's were more just symbols of rank for Officers and senior NCO's, at best just last ditch self-defense weapons. The fate of the free world does not rest on 9mm handguns.

All of the Spec Ops guys use Sig and HK .45's anyway, and I doubt they do much with handguns either, with all the other hardware they carry..I saw a few of them around, one guy had what looked like an HK USP,...but they need to have their "cool guy" pistols;)
 
With all due respect, as a former member of NSW/ SEAL I was issued a SIG P226, not a "cool guy" gun in my opinion, just a darn nice handgun that was loaded with either NATO 124gr M882 ball or for those times that it wasn't a declared war, Win. 147gr OSM HP! Sure I had at my disposal an MP5, MP5SD, M4, 870, etc. But I was trained to make that pistol save my life and those of my boat crew if necessary! The USP you saw was very probably the massive Mk.23.
As to the caliber thing; it doesn't matter if you don't HIT the target! Also while it's nice to be able to get to your rifle or shotgun, is it going to be in the proverbial dark alley where the fight takes place?
When the time comes (and I pray that none of you ever have to!) aim for center and fire until the threat is no longer a threat! Use something you can control in rapid, accurate fire, and load it with good ammunition, preferibly hollow points, and practice like your life depends on it! Then get some training from one of the many schools out there.
And lastly this is the brain, make good use of it! Dale
 
Last edited:
I read a post a while back that said, I would rather be missed by a 40 than hit with a 9. Makes a lot of sense to me. Given the choice of a larger caliber or an accurate shot placement I will take the placement every time. I say this because I own a .357 and a 9mm, I carry the 9mm because quite simply I shoot it better. Will the .357 have more stopping power than the 9mm if both hit the target in the same place, of course! I just feel like I can hit it more accurately, more often, with the 9mm. Would I feel safe with either in a gun fight, I really doubt it!
 
We certainly agree that 25,000 holes in a guy is not good and when I figure out what that has to do with anything I'll get back to you. As far as chances to hit the vital zone increasing the chances you will win, real life does not support that. There are far more examples of cops firing 15, 20 or more rounds at the bad guy with no harm than where the bad guy is actually hit. Sorry, that is just reality.

Bob

This is pretty simple, I have no idea why you can't see it.

Your position is (from your quote above) that being given multiple shots to hit vitals is no better than not having multiple shots.

So stated another way but following your context, if a bad guy is running at you, dodging and ducking, maybe throwing things, hiding behind cover, whatever, the types of situations where someone may need 20 shots to inflict a stopping wound, you are telling us it is no advantage to be able to fire multiple shots, and by firing multiple shots we have no increased odds of hitting vitals! :confused:

I wish you luck in a real life situation where you may be firing in the rain, at a moving target, perhaps multiple targets, and you just bring your one lucky bullet with you, because after all, one well placed bullet is all it takes right? ;)
 
There were survivors at both Hiroshima and Nagasaki. If those weapons were not capable of "one-shot stops", do you honestly believe that there is a handgun calibre capable of producing one-stop shots 100% of the time? And that is essentially the ultimate test of the famous one-shot stop capability. In order for it to be truly effective, it would need to be effective 100% of the time. Otherwise, while it may work 20%, 50%, or even 99 and 44/100ths per cent of the time, I am not willing to trust my life and the lives of my loved ones to that. I've been in law enforcement and the military my entire adult life, been involved in more than a couple of situations where I have had the opportunity to do real-life testing. The bottom line is simple: no matter the calibre, the weapon, the mindest of the guy on the other side, or any other variable, you shoot until the threat is eliminated. If that takes one shot, great. If that takes 1,000 rounds and air support, so be it. The end goal is to win.
 
There were survivors at both Hiroshima and Nagasaki. If those weapons were not capable of "one-shot stops", do you honestly believe that there is a handgun calibre capable of producing one-stop shots 100% of the time? And that is essentially the ultimate test of the famous one-shot stop capability. In order for it to be truly effective, it would need to be effective 100% of the time. Otherwise, while it may work 20%, 50%, or even 99 and 44/100ths per cent of the time, I am not willing to trust my life and the lives of my loved ones to that. I've been in law enforcement and the military my entire adult life, been involved in more than a couple of situations where I have had the opportunity to do real-life testing. The bottom line is simple: no matter the calibre, the weapon, the mindest of the guy on the other side, or any other variable, you shoot until the threat is eliminated. If that takes one shot, great. If that takes 1,000 rounds and air support, so be it. The end goal is to win.

That is my point, but much better phrased by you sir!! :)

And the deciding factors should be many. Some folks believe 6 rounds of a big caliber is plenty, but they may think differently when confronted by 3 men grabbing their kids and dragging them to a car.

Some folks believe a smaller weapon with 20 rounds is great, but may find themselves shooting at a BG hiding behind a wall or car door or windshield.

My point is I don't ever think the ability to fire extra shots is a disadvantage, and a bigger gun isn't a disadvantage once the fight begins.

The disadvantage to having a Howitzer and 400 rounds is carrying the dang thing to the fight!

And I believe Nagasaki and Hiroshima were pretty devastating for the first 10 miles or so.... Lord help us if anyone ever uses such a terrible weapon again. :(
 
Actually it means nothing. Additional shots do not statistically improve your chances of a stop as each shot is an independent event, they are not cumulative. It's like tossing a coin, the odds of tossing heads or tails do not change depending on previous tosses. The numbers of times this is proven in real life shoots are legend in the field.

The original stats quoted are bogus for essentially the same reason. A one shot stop is an isolated event that has no bearing on subsequent shots. If your particular round does well in a "test" like this and that makes you feel better there's certainly nothing wrong with that however.

Bob

This is a misinterpretation of probability.

Even discounting the cumulative effect of multiple holes in the BG, each shot you take gives you another X% chance of a "stop."

Going back to the coin analogy, while you're absolutely correct that each flip of a coin is independent of previous flips (i.e. the odds of a coin coming up "heads" is one in two, even if the previous nine tosses were all tails), if I flip a coin three times the odds of at least one of those tosses resulting in "heads" is seven in eight--about 86%.
 
Suppose you shoot a couple of thugs with your new hi-tech underpowered duty ammo that was chosen by your department's lawyers. All of them were shot square in the chest. The bullets failed to penetrate but the thugs simply are cowards and didn't like getting shot. They dropped their weapons and said "I stop!" You're starting to feel very good about your 100% stopping power. The lawyers were right! Penetration is bad. I shoot only to stop, not to kill. I am compassionate, etc.

Well, the next guy is a little bigger. Maybe it's cold outside and he's wearing a heavy coat. Maybe he's on drugs or is really angry over his bad day. Maybe he doesn't like being bossed around by a lone cop who is half his body mass, or female. Or maybe he'd just rather die than go back to prison. You shoot him in the chest with your same new hi-tech underpowered duty ammo that was chosen by your department's lawyers. But this time he doesn't go down. One hit, two, three... What could possibly have gone wrong? The one shot stop statistics were so perfect?

Has anybody ever seen a statistic that measures mindset?

Dave Sinko

I did read an article written by a retired LEO who talked about the difference between physical and psychological take downs. Some can take multiple shots to the chest and keep coming, while others will drop when shot in the finger.
 
Funny how many will laugh when I tell them I only carry .380. Even funnier, is I still have yet to find one of those laughing to stand in front of the little .380 and take one for the team. Carrying a little pea-shooter and being confident about it being enough is like the old addage, " Can you tell me how to get to Carnagie Hall ? "----------------- Practice, Practice, Practice.
 
You NEVER shoot to kill, you shoot to stop.

Interesting. Questions, since I'm not a cop and I've never shot anybody, and I hope I never have to:

(1) Are you referring to cops, or to everybody?

(2) Why?

(3) How do I shoot to stop vs. shooting to kill?

(4) Given how hard it is to hit a real target in a situation where it may be dark, I may be scared witless, my target may be moving, and the perp may be shooting back at me, is such nuanced advice really realistic?
 
Interesting. Questions, since I'm not a cop and I've never shot anybody, and I hope I never have to:

(1) Are you referring to cops, or to everybody?

(2) Why?

(3) How do I shoot to stop vs. shooting to kill?

(4) Given how hard it is to hit a real target in a situation where it may be dark, I may be scared witless, my target may be moving, and the perp may be shooting back at me, is such nuanced advice really realistic?


The writer was telling you that if you blow off about how you killed that ***, the prosecuting attorney, the lawyers in the civil lawsuits, etc., will paint you as a blood thirsty rigger happy crazy that needs to go to jail, after donating all of your money and property to the poor fellow who was on the way to turning his life around and whom you so recklessly shot for no good reason.

So you didn't really mean to kill him, that just happened while you were trying to "stop" him from harming you.
 
Exactly! From some of my other posts I detailed how I work for my local govt., and one of the pieces of advice I was given was "if you ever have to use your CC gun, you never use it to "kill" , you use it to "stop"." That's when I was also advised to carry a 9mm, .40 or a .38 Special revolver loaded with +P or +P+, so that you "carry enough handgun to stop a threat" but not a "hand cannon". I was told to avoid carrying anything "magnum". Advice is worth what you pay for it, but it's something to consider if you ever have to go to court.

The Deputy Sheriff's all carry Glock 22 .40's, and off duty most of them carry the same type of gun, or a 9mm or .38. I talk about guns a lot with them, and the guys who carry revolvers seem happy with a .38 for a backup and off duty gun. One of them just got one of the new .38 Bodyguards.
 
This is pretty simple, I have no idea why you can't see it.
My response to you in this thread was regarding your misinterpretation of probabilities. That's it. You're right, I can't see the other stuff perhaps because I'm not even trying.

Bob
 
Exactly! From some of my other posts I detailed how I work for my local govt., and one of the pieces of advice I was given was "if you ever have to use your CC gun, you never use it to "kill" , you use it to "stop"." That's when I was also advised to carry a 9mm, .40 or a .38 Special revolver loaded with +P or +P+, so that you "carry enough handgun to stop a threat" but not a "hand cannon". I was told to avoid carrying anything "magnum". Advice is worth what you pay for it, but it's something to consider if you ever have to go to court.

The Deputy Sheriff's all carry Glock 22 .40's, and off duty most of them carry the same type of gun, or a 9mm or .38. I talk about guns a lot with them, and the guys who carry revolvers seem happy with a .38 for a backup and off duty gun. One of them just got one of the new .38 Bodyguards.


Whereas I agree that a defendant would have to face up to and defend himself against the above theories, I believe a competent attorney can do so.

First, one should carry the weapon most suitable, and that includes stopping power, ability to shoot accurately and comfortably.

I shoot a Redhawk .45 Colt more accurately than a S&W 9MM or the S&W .38 special. For some reason, it fits my hand, balances and instinctively points better.

I will not give up those characteristics which all work in my favor for a legal theory which may or may not ever materialize.

Also the other reasons for carrying a specific weapon. For instance a person who lives in bear country, alligator country, works on a cattle farm, etc., has every reason to carry a powerful weapon.

It is hardly reasonable to expect one to change weapons every time one crosses from one side of the road to the other.

So I believe a more powerful weapon can be successfully defended on several grounds.

Nevertheless, one should not gloat over the fact that he killed a BG. That will not go over well with the court system.

I see frequently see posts bragging that if "Blah blah blah, I'll blow him away" or something similar.

Not smart. There is no real anonymity on the internet. Certainly not if you are the object of a criminal investigation. Your computer will be seized, your passwords hacked and all of your email and posts examined.

Woe to he who bragged that he would "blow him away".
 
This is a really good thread. It is nice to see folks disagree and remain friendly and polite. I felt the need to mention what happened to me way back in 1987. I was 22 at the time and had been married for 4 days when this occurred. To make a long story short... I was shot 4 times by a guy using a Ruger .44 Magnum. He was the ex-husband and it was one of those things like you see on t.v. where the bad guy says "I still love you and if I can't have you then nobody can." He was using magnum ammo and hollow-points. I was shot in both shoulders, left chest and left hip. I was able to keep him from murdering her. And then I drove the both of us to the hospital. The doctors told me that I would never walk again and that I would never be able to lift either arm any higher than to waist level. In a year, maybe 16 months, I was back to working a construction job again. At the time that this all happened, I did not own a gun at all. I wasn't anti 2nd amendment or anything, I just never saw myself owning a gun. Now I own several. I guess I would have to agree with the position that says that caliber is not as important as placement. Not nearly as important. My bedside gun is a Glock 9mm and my everyday carry gun is a model 442 smith j-frame. I use 127 grain +P+ in my Glocks and the old FBI load in my smith. I do feel adequately armed, of course I also have a Winchester model 1300 defender at home in my closet and would go for that if I have the time. Everybody take care and have a great weekend.
 
It would be interesting to know how you stopped him after being so badly wounded.

It would also be interesting to know whether your wife's X served a satisfactory amount of time.

It would also be interesting to hear from cops and others with real life experience who are located in really cold climates, such as MSP or upstate NY as to the effect multiple layers of clothes, heavy insulated jackets, etc., have on the smaller calibers.

The FBI ballistics tests indicate that multiple layers of cotton alone are enough to effect the smaller calibers.

Since a street thug or one lying in wait in darkness waiting for his mark to appear would probably be wearing a heavy insulated jacket over maybe two shirts and long underwear, cops and those who have had to protect themselves must have something to say about the defectiveness of their weapon.


If we do not wish to lose our freedom, we must learn to tolerate our
neighbor's right to freedom even though he might express that freedom
in a manner we consider to be eccentric.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Lots of opinions here. I carry a Springfield XDm .45 as my EDC lately. I actually shoot it better than any other gun and I have faith in the 100 year track record of the .45 ACP round. I didn't purchase it to be a carry gun, but soon realized that it's pretty comfortable and rides easily at 3:30 in my Galco IWB.

The real problem, I think, with all of these discussions is that you have to view a gun as a tool. Every unique job has a "best" tool and likely a handful of "good" tools that will work. Look at screwdrivers; my favorite screwdriver for most jobs is a nice, rubber grip Klein. But, in close quarters, I turn to my Craftsman snubby. Same deal with guns; if you KNEW exactly what was going to happen today, then you could arm yourself with the perfect gun to deal with it. Every situation is different and you can't carry an entire armory with you.

My best advice is to carry the biggest gun you feel comfortable with and can shoot very well with. If that's a .380, fine. If it's a 9mm, great. If you want to carry an M29, ok.

As far as one shot stop statistics (link posted earlier in this thread): you can argue about the ones with relatively small numbers of data points (i.e. shootings), but it's hard to explain away the ones with over 500 data points. Most of the variables will tend to equal out with that much data. Does anybody discount that the ones near the top are pretty good choices? We were taught to do some sanity checking of our data back in engineering school. The sanity check in this case is to look at the top handful of rounds and the bottom and ask if that makes sense; it does when you look at them. Is that chart 100% guaranteed? No. But it's a good place to start and hardly without merit.
 
On another forum a poll showed over half poled carried 9mm for self defense. So, in response to the .357 post which asked this question, I ask, "Do you feel well armed with a 9mm?" Recognizing that this is an arguable subject, I only ask to find out, not start a war. If a fight breaks out, I may buy a .357

Some excellent responses in this thread:

I like my 3913 a lot and I shoot it well; but NO handgun gives me that "Okay I'm in total control here" feeling that would be nice to have. In other words, I HOPE my 9mm will keep me safe.
PS I feel the same about my larger caliber choices.
 
Back
Top