And of the 17,000 plus law enforcement agencies in the US, there is the ever so remote possibility that some may have went 9mm for reasons other than the NMSP's reason. Another period.
Police shooting 9mm failed to stop bad guy
- Thread starter marathonrunner
- Start date
- Status
And of the 17,000 plus law enforcement agencies in the US, there is the ever so remote possibility that some may have went 9mm for reasons other than the NMSP's reason. Another period.
SchemaEnigma
Member
That's a circular argument. You need a question mark, not a period.
The 9mm is cheaper because it is so popular and the world standard?
Or, maybe, the 9mm is the world standard because it is cheaper?
Around and around you go.
Either way, it wouldn't be the world standard if it didn't work.
If you can place your shot, you probably shouldn't be shooting.
What did John M. Browning choose for his 1911 army pistol? Thy will be done.
Green Frog
Member
St John of Browning didn't choose the 45ACP when he designed his military semiautomatic. He turned in his design prototype and was told by the Army, "Almost, but no cigar. Build it in a 45 and we'll talk!"
Froggie
What did John M. Browning choose as his own carry gun for self defense? His 1910 model in .32 acp even though it was also made in .380.
jtcarm
Member
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2011
- Messages
- 4,422
- Reaction score
- 4,315
And why is that? The 5.56 NATO bullet tumbles in soft tissue and that is why it’s so effective. Some FMJ rifle bullets like the .303 British WW2 bullets were made in a way that assured tumbling. And my penetration test in tightly bound wet newspapers showed that ALL .32 and .380 factory FMJ bullets tumbled to some degree as they plowed through the wet paper. Some actually did a full 180 degree turn. Wound channel size is increased and so is effectiveness.
One of my best friends is a retired 20 year 1st Sargent Army Rangers. The Beretta was never carried on their missions ,only 1911's of various makes. He stated the reason was , that on their missions they were there to kill period , and not to please NATO by carrying a nine.
I’m not sure how to take this. If you mean:
- “If you can’t shoot accurately under extreme stress you probably should not be carrying a gun.”
then we are in agreement.
If however you mean:
- “if you have the time to shoot accurately you probably don’t have a need to shoot at all.”
then we disagree.
If that second one is the case then it’s one of those rare occasions suitable for the southern idiom “Bless your heart”.
I’ll leave it to you to decide which of these applies.
——
For everyone else let’s assume it’s a case of the often cited “you don’t have time to use your sights in a real world shoot.” Well…that’s undoubtedly true if you don’t train enough to become proficient.
I fully understand that the very high percentage of LEOs that shoot just twice a year to qualify probably can’t place a shot under extreme stress. Bless their hearts too.
But when applied to a proficient shooter that just isn’t the case, even when said shooter is receiving fire.
The main gig right now for my semi-retired self is flying and ironically enough the subject came up this morning when discussing what has to happen to plant a tail wheel aircraft on a short, rough strip so that you can immediately get on the brakes. The problem is by the time you think about what you have to do and do it the moment has already passed. Consequently given the stress and time pressure it *has* to be second nature.
Since both of us briefing the flight in the hangar had a shooting background I used the process of learning tactical pistol shooting and being able to do it under extreme stress as an example as it contains the same “has to be totally second nature” elements - if you are going to be able tp do it as an ingrained almost reflex action under extreme stress and time pressure. The lesson plan strategy is the same for both. You start out with drills to ingrain the critical eye motor loop items until they are second nature.
1) For learning to shoot a tactical pistol accurately and very fast, you start out really slow, focusing on your target while you draw and raise the pistol into your line of sight. You then place the front sight on the spot you want to bleed, and then you *pause* while you align the front sight in the rear sight, and then hold that alignment of rear sight, front sight and target while you release the shot.
2) Eventually the muscles in your hand know exactly how much tension they each have to have to align the sights. When that point is achieved, when you pause, you find the sights are already aligned with the front sight, which is in turn already on target.
That might be a few hundred rounds for some shooters and it might be a couple thousand for others. The point here is that you are learning and then over learning the basics of sight alignment, grip and trigger control until they are second nature and require no conscious thought.
3) At that point you start picking up the pace, shortening the pause until it is just to a very small fraction of a second while you confirm the front sight is on target. *But* you also take care not to sacrifice accuracy either. In other words you maintain the basic fundamentals of grip, sight alignment and trigger control, while shooting at speed.
4) In the real world that very small fraction of a second pause is still to ensure the front sight is on target but it’s also used to assess the need to shoot. For example, you’ve just delivered a double tap or a controlled pair center of mass and since the assailant hasn’t went down you are transitioning to the head for a failure to stop shot. As you recover from the recoil of the second shot and bring the front sight to where the head should be, you’re already noting whether the assailant is going down or not.
That’s only happening because the grip, sight alignment and trigger control are all ingrained responses that require zero bandwidth. That is absolutelyvital as under extreme stress, and particularly when receiving fire, you have very little bandwidth to work with and all of it needs to be focused on strategy and tactics, not remembering to place the front sight on target.
LEOs shooting only twice a year to qualify are never going to reach that level. That’s unfortunate as the vast majority of LEOs don’t take shooting seriously enough to bother to get any better. Worse, since they met a (very low bar) community standard by successfully qualifying, then then make the logical fallacy of misidentifying themselves as “qualified” tactical shooting experts.
People devolve to their lowest level of *fully mastered* training under extreme stress and for shoot twice a year LEOs that invariably is something akin to pointing their duty weapon in the general direction of the assailant and shooting as fast as they can. Bless their hearts.
——-
Last time I saw the data on it, 80% of officers in officer involved shoots did not use or remember using the front sight. They literally were pointing their duty weapon in the general direction of the assailant and mashing the trigger as fast as they could.
In short, the “bless your heart” comes from using that unfortunate reality for 80% of LEOs as a justification for statements like “your sights are useless in a gunfight” or “things haven’t too fast to use your sights in a gunfight” or “you don’t have the time motor skills to align your sights in a gunfight”. said “if you can place your shot you probably sho
I disagree. It’s a training and a skills deficiency. Period.
It’s why LEOs in most departments miss about 80% of the time. It’s fortunate (for them, not innocent bystanders) that they have some combination of sovereign immunity, department attorneys and department provided liability insurance to cover the liability of all those misses skipping around the neighborhood hood looking to tag innocent bystanders.
Of course. But the only two reasons NMSP (my old agency) went to 9mm are cheaper ammo and easier training. Not bullet performance, not gel tests, not magazine capacity, not FBI actions.
Last edited:
luvsmiths
Member
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2016
- Messages
- 1,130
- Reaction score
- 2,172
Yeah, but he wasn't shot with a 45ACP round.
luvsmiths
Member
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2016
- Messages
- 1,130
- Reaction score
- 2,172
Last edited:
False dichotomy. Not about time, it's about distance.
To shoot "accurately," you need to use the sights. To use the sights, you need to extend your arms. The assailant must be far enough away from you that he can't grab the gun when you extend it toward him. If the assailant is that far away, you may not be in immediate danger. Shooting may not be justified.
But more. Most civilian defense shootings occur at extremely short range, as should be expected.
"Well…that’s undoubtedly true if you don’t train enough to become proficient."
This is really bad advise. If a civilian actually has to shoot someone, they need to be able to point and shoot at 3 yards. Training to shoot accurately is exactly wrong. Train to shoot quickly and closely. Even from retention position.
Shot placement is very important. Bullet type is too. 9mm is very effective!
SchemaEnigma
Member
Source? ...
Biggfoot44
Member
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2013
- Messages
- 2,060
- Reaction score
- 1,596
Aw Man ..... Gamecock and BB57 have done gotten into it now , with THE philosophical Debate that dwarfs the 9mm vs .45 debate !
A little bit of differing terminology and different base assumptions , but one of them is about 80 % right ( or at least in accordance with my views that I think I can strongly defend ) .
A little bit of differing terminology and different base assumptions , but one of them is about 80 % right ( or at least in accordance with my views that I think I can strongly defend ) .
Biggfoot44
Member
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2013
- Messages
- 2,060
- Reaction score
- 1,596
The Legend of .45acp Hardball is over exaggerated . ( Not saying it's bad within the military context , just grown beyond the reality in the retelling
The Good And Bad hype about 9x19 are Both exaggerated .
Every pistol ( and rifle , and machinegun) round has had " failures " . Every projectile down to BB guns has had instant incapations . Moving on to various true statements :
9mm with most modern era duty/ defensive ammo is more than reasonably adaquate for general usage.
Logistics and training issues shouldn't be the Sole criteria , but are valid additional factors .
9mm isn't " more better than everything else " as the FBI is spinning . As much as wiz bang bullet technology has improved 9mm performance , that technology can also be applied to .357Sig , .40S&W, .45acp, .38 Spl , etc .
In addition to the gun & projectile , terminal effectiveness is also greatly effected by the exact placement , and the shootee's levels of various CDS , alcohol , adrenaline , and general mental attitude at the moment .
My opinions :
Uniformity of equipment is highly overrated , and confidence of the user is meaningful ( if actually justified) .
If the Tooth Fairy snapped her fingers and gave me control over ( organization primarily armed with handguns , for serious purposes ) , my inclinations would be along these lines :
I would Issue a Glock 17 equivalent , with mainstream 124gr std vel JHP ( in my younger years a 4in M10 with +P ).
If anyone was inclined to carry whatever larger/ more powerful , and do so on their own dime , And qualify at 90% or higher , they could do so .
If an
The Good And Bad hype about 9x19 are Both exaggerated .
Every pistol ( and rifle , and machinegun) round has had " failures " . Every projectile down to BB guns has had instant incapations . Moving on to various true statements :
9mm with most modern era duty/ defensive ammo is more than reasonably adaquate for general usage.
Logistics and training issues shouldn't be the Sole criteria , but are valid additional factors .
9mm isn't " more better than everything else " as the FBI is spinning . As much as wiz bang bullet technology has improved 9mm performance , that technology can also be applied to .357Sig , .40S&W, .45acp, .38 Spl , etc .
In addition to the gun & projectile , terminal effectiveness is also greatly effected by the exact placement , and the shootee's levels of various CDS , alcohol , adrenaline , and general mental attitude at the moment .
My opinions :
Uniformity of equipment is highly overrated , and confidence of the user is meaningful ( if actually justified) .
If the Tooth Fairy snapped her fingers and gave me control over ( organization primarily armed with handguns , for serious purposes ) , my inclinations would be along these lines :
I would Issue a Glock 17 equivalent , with mainstream 124gr std vel JHP ( in my younger years a 4in M10 with +P ).
If anyone was inclined to carry whatever larger/ more powerful , and do so on their own dime , And qualify at 90% or higher , they could do so .
If an
.45 ACP in PANAMA
When I was with SBU26 in PANAMA, my SEAL friend who was XO
had the Armorer send back all the 9mms to Little Creek and requested and got 1911s in .45ACP. A lot of the bad guys were druggies in CENTRAL and South America and the 9mm would not stop them if they were juiced up.
It was a beautiful sight to walk into the armory and see 100 gleaming, well oiled 1911s. in the racks.
When I was with SBU26 in PANAMA, my SEAL friend who was XO
had the Armorer send back all the 9mms to Little Creek and requested and got 1911s in .45ACP. A lot of the bad guys were druggies in CENTRAL and South America and the 9mm would not stop them if they were juiced up.
It was a beautiful sight to walk into the armory and see 100 gleaming, well oiled 1911s. in the racks.
STORMINORMAN
Member
Capacity? 14 vs. 17? IMHO, after a dozen (or so?) it really does not matter, much...
Caliber? If skill levels are equal, the BIGGER the better... (Anything is better than nothing!)
Shot placement? Hopefully one of the first few will be in a vital area, otherwise it is probably best to continue until the threat is terminated... (Bella did!)
What is decided (and, ultimately, for WHATEVER reasons?) to be the best for a group does not, and should not, IMHO, dictate what is right for an individual...
Cheers!
P.S. i, too, have a high opinion of the 40 S&W, but would probably choose the 357 SIG if I happened to be looking for trouble. But that's not something I normally contemplate.
Caliber? If skill levels are equal, the BIGGER the better... (Anything is better than nothing!)
Shot placement? Hopefully one of the first few will be in a vital area, otherwise it is probably best to continue until the threat is terminated... (Bella did!)
What is decided (and, ultimately, for WHATEVER reasons?) to be the best for a group does not, and should not, IMHO, dictate what is right for an individual...
Cheers!
P.S. i, too, have a high opinion of the 40 S&W, but would probably choose the 357 SIG if I happened to be looking for trouble. But that's not something I normally contemplate.
- Status
Similar threads
