Ivan the Butcher
Member
380 was enough gun to kill Arch Duke Ferdinand, and thus begin WWW I. How much more could you ask of any handgun? Ivan
.380 Not Good Defensive Caliber??
- Thread starter rlight
- Start date
- Status
380 is considered the minimum by most. As you read, one forum member carries a 32 and doesn't feel under armed. The confidence in your gun is important. Getting your hits with a 32 or 380 is more important than misses with a 45 or 357.
That being said, my wife's Sig 232 in 380, to me, recoils more than my M&P compact in 40 for roughly the same size gun.
That being said, my wife's Sig 232 in 380, to me, recoils more than my M&P compact in 40 for roughly the same size gun.
Last edited:
chaparrito
Member
Carry what you shoot well. A .22 in the eye beats a .40 in the shoulder any day.
Triathloncoach
Member
So the odds that you will ever need to fire your gun in self defense. Multiplied by the odds that a larger caliber bullet would significantly increase a positive outcome for you. Yes, you never know and be prepared...........
Might as well play powerball.
I'm buying myself a Glock 42 next month and putting my Glock 19 on the night stand.
Might as well play powerball.
I'm buying myself a Glock 42 next month and putting my Glock 19 on the night stand.
Erich
Member
First off, I carry a .380 sometimes. And I fully trust every grown-up to decide what's best for his/her own carry based on his/her individual circumstances/requirements.
Years ago in the early online caliber wars, I coined the signature line "Shot placement is king; adequate penetration is queen; everything else is just angels dancing on the heads of pins." The first question, accordingly, is can you hit the vital areas (heart/aorta, brain/spinal cord) with your gun and ammo at the quick speed necessary? (A related question is, do you know where these structures are in a human attacker? Gray's Anatomy can be found online and is worth a study: Gray, Henry. 1918. Anatomy of the Human Body .) And then let's look at adequacy of penetration to damage those structures (a bullet that won't penetrate to the vitals is not going to suffice) . . . and only then should we think about energy, expansion, etc.
My friend Mas (who is kind enough to not give me grief for doing so, myself) says, "Friends don't let friends carry mouse guns." I've thought about this quite a bit, because when Mas says something, he's got a hell of a lot of research and experience behind his statement. Which got me thinking about the whole "mousegun" thing.
Mas certainly has a point in this particular statement. First of all, unless you're a pretty skilled/experienced shooter, small guns are difficult to work - their size makes them hard to shoot accurately with even the minimal recoil of the light rounds they launch (and accurate shooting is crucial for the shot placement necessary for adequate penetration with light rounds) and they don't always function as well as larger guns. And the rounds themselves aren't as reliably effective: I've worked on three separate shooting cases in which .380 JHPs failed to adequately penetrate. On the other hand, I've worked on so many cases in which a .380 was used quite effectively - I've never seen a case in which .380 ball failed to penetrate adequately.
Based on the shooting cases I've worked on, I believe that .380s (and .32 ACPs, FWIW) can be adequately penetrative to get to "the good stuff" if ball ammo is used. I don't trust these calibers to penetrate adequately with JHP rounds - and gel tests confirm that no .32 or .380 JHP presently on the market will meet FBI penetration protocols.
Naturally, the performance of your ammo in your gun is what's at issue. I (personally) carry ball in .380 or .32 ACP. I'm not weighing in here on whether ball ammo is a good idea from an overpenetration standpoint - I've worked on one case in which .380 ball overpenetrated the leg of the intended target and shot another person beyond him . . . but the leg probably isn't where an expert will be aiming, is it?
Years ago in the early online caliber wars, I coined the signature line "Shot placement is king; adequate penetration is queen; everything else is just angels dancing on the heads of pins." The first question, accordingly, is can you hit the vital areas (heart/aorta, brain/spinal cord) with your gun and ammo at the quick speed necessary? (A related question is, do you know where these structures are in a human attacker? Gray's Anatomy can be found online and is worth a study: Gray, Henry. 1918. Anatomy of the Human Body .) And then let's look at adequacy of penetration to damage those structures (a bullet that won't penetrate to the vitals is not going to suffice) . . . and only then should we think about energy, expansion, etc.
My friend Mas (who is kind enough to not give me grief for doing so, myself) says, "Friends don't let friends carry mouse guns." I've thought about this quite a bit, because when Mas says something, he's got a hell of a lot of research and experience behind his statement. Which got me thinking about the whole "mousegun" thing.
Mas certainly has a point in this particular statement. First of all, unless you're a pretty skilled/experienced shooter, small guns are difficult to work - their size makes them hard to shoot accurately with even the minimal recoil of the light rounds they launch (and accurate shooting is crucial for the shot placement necessary for adequate penetration with light rounds) and they don't always function as well as larger guns. And the rounds themselves aren't as reliably effective: I've worked on three separate shooting cases in which .380 JHPs failed to adequately penetrate. On the other hand, I've worked on so many cases in which a .380 was used quite effectively - I've never seen a case in which .380 ball failed to penetrate adequately.
Based on the shooting cases I've worked on, I believe that .380s (and .32 ACPs, FWIW) can be adequately penetrative to get to "the good stuff" if ball ammo is used. I don't trust these calibers to penetrate adequately with JHP rounds - and gel tests confirm that no .32 or .380 JHP presently on the market will meet FBI penetration protocols.
Naturally, the performance of your ammo in your gun is what's at issue. I (personally) carry ball in .380 or .32 ACP. I'm not weighing in here on whether ball ammo is a good idea from an overpenetration standpoint - I've worked on one case in which .380 ball overpenetrated the leg of the intended target and shot another person beyond him . . . but the leg probably isn't where an expert will be aiming, is it?
James Bond likes the Beretta 32 cal.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tU98uP7pXA8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tU98uP7pXA8
sgtsandman
US Veteran
Depending on the round, .380 can be adequate. 9x19, .38 Special, .357, or something in .45 would be better.
In my humble opinion, carry what's comfortable and concealable. Who cares what the caliber is as long as you can shoot well enough to put holes in the bad guy. The more important question is: "how accurate can you shoot when you're in a highly intense situation with some nut job intending to inflict bodily harm?" In my experience with bullseye shooting, even a small case of nerves can ruin your day. When your life is in danger I would guess that you'd be in a high state of anxiety.
I shoot my Bersa .380 pretty well, but it is a bit on the "barky" side for recoil. I can put all of the rounds into a 9" paper plate at 25 feet, which I think is sufficient.
USAF385
US Veteran
My wife has good placement and quick / accurate follow up shots with her Sig P238. I'd much rather her use that than my Ruger SR40c which she limp wrists often.
labworm
US Veteran
So I guess if you get hit with a .380 it will just bounce off you and sting a little.
My latest purchase, Sig P238 Equinox .380
My latest purchase, Sig P238 Equinox .380
Last edited:
forrestinmathews
Member
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2009
- Messages
- 1,063
- Reaction score
- 725
Well I carry an NAA in .22 short. I don't feel undergunned at at all. I feel like I can make sufficient noise and I won't pause to wonder whether my assailant is rolling around laughing or has actually been injured by a bullet.
That oughta take the heat off the .380 crowd...haha...it's a cute little gun.
Seriously, the .380 is quite accurate in the PPK. I like mine. It will hit water bottles out to fifty yards rested. The ammo isn't cheap and the 9mms are better supplied and practiced with. AVOID HYDRASHOKS...they aren't worth a darn. Enjoy yourself in your search.
That oughta take the heat off the .380 crowd...haha...it's a cute little gun.
Seriously, the .380 is quite accurate in the PPK. I like mine. It will hit water bottles out to fifty yards rested. The ammo isn't cheap and the 9mms are better supplied and practiced with. AVOID HYDRASHOKS...they aren't worth a darn. Enjoy yourself in your search.
Grayfox
US Veteran
There are a lot of self proclaimed "experts" out there you just love to force their opinions on anybody near them. Pay no attention and carry whatever you're comfortable with.
I've been known to carry a .25acp from time to time. I don't have a problem with it and really don't care what other people think.
I've been known to carry a .25acp from time to time. I don't have a problem with it and really don't care what other people think.
spydermanDan
Member
I sometimes carry my Colt Mustang Plus II which is a .380 holstered in my front jean pocket. Ammo is Remington Golden Saber JHP. I have qualified for last several years for yearly CCW license qualifications. I alternate between that and my S&W 9mm semi auto Model # 3919 for
CCW. I have never felt unsafe with my .380 that some call a "mouse gun". I agree that proper shot placement, right ammo, and mind set R key factors. Shoot what you carry and feel comfortable with. That's my story and I'm sticking to it!!
silentflyer
Member
No it's not a .357, but for a "bad breath" gun, if he is close enough to tell what he had garlic with his lunch it's OK.
Buffalo Bore 95 gr. hollow points are what my wife carries in her Sig P238
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KVCsosglj8E
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KVCsosglj8E
- Status
