A couple of thoughts regarding semi vs auto & caliber

[StrawHat]

I believe the Miami shoot-out was ended with a 38 Special revolver and a shot gun. At least the reports that were sent out at that time indicated such. Has that history been rewritten?

Also, I am not at all comfortable carrying a self loading pistol. I am totally at a loss about how to clear it if it malfunctions. I have 5+ decades experience with S&W revolvers so carrying one is my choice. MY CHOICE. Not saying you can't carry what you want to lug around by my choice is a revolver.

As for the "If your reloading..." Nonsense. If you can't reload without looking at what you're doing, you need more practice.

Carry what you want but train with it.

Kevin

 

[pistolpete10]

I carry a 642, no reload. I have a new 9MM EZ that I plan to carry, I will carry a spare mag for it. There is a chance of losing the mag in the gun or a malfunction with the mag in the gun. I have shot a bit of defensive pistol and it is geared toward the autoloader, I have accidently engaged the safety on a reload, had the bottom of a mag fall out, had mags puke out ammo when removed from the mag carrier or when inserted in the gun, had mags fall out of the gun. Bottom line a lot to go wrong with the auto and end up with only one round or none if it won't shoot without a mag in it.
It is my hope to never end up in a fire fight and need 30 rounds to survive.

 

[ispcapt]

That's not really accurate. The so-called 21 foot rule is a knife at a gunfight rule. To wit, if at that close a distance you are faced with an aggressor with a knife you are justified to shoot. That's the root of that rule. It has nothing to do with several aggressors beating you to the ground.

There is no 21 ft rule. People have morphed the Tueller Drill into something that Dennis Tueller never intended with the drill. It is not a rule, it's a drill. What the Tueller Drill was set up to show was officers often felt they had plenty of time to react should an agressor attack them from as far away as 21 ft. Until the Tueller Drill was common interviews with LEOs injured in confrontations generally said in their after action reports was the attacker was far enough way they thought they could defend themselves if attacked.
Many thought 21 ft was plenty far enough. What Dennis Tueller intended to show with the Tueller Drill was if an aggressor 21 ft away suddenly began an attack that the attacker could cover the 21 ft before the officer could react with a firearm to defend himself. Later on the 21 ft distance was changed to 27 ft drill with the same result. The attacker is close enough at that distance that he will inflict injury on the officer before the officer can deploy their weapon.
That is the Tueller Drill, not a 21 ft rule. As a result of people for so long misstating the Tueller Drill and calling it a "rule" they have provided defense attorneys with an argument. Sadly too many officers have fallen into this mistaken "rule" name.
I've trained under Tueller. Heard it straight from the man's mouth.

 

[ispcapt]

The same circumstances that forced the FBI to seriously reevaluate their needs and quantify questions like "what is stopping power?" force us to ask those same questions as well.

Prior to the 1986 Miami shootout the FBI had already done what they thought the needs of LE were and they had the answer to "what is stopping power". They had the scientific approach.
Prior to Miami the FBI had developed their Computerman Model. At that time they were preaching that rapid expansion, limited penetration was what was needed for stopping threats. Their Computerman Model was basically the old RII formula. They were absolutely sure that formula was what was needed.
In 1980 we had been issued, for a very short time, the same W-W 115 gr Silvertip ammo that was used by the FBI in Miami. We had some people who were making the ammo call who went along with the FBI and their Computerman Model, ie, rapid expansion, limited penetration. We had only carried that round a few months when 2 of our Troops were in a shootout with a Chicago biker gang member. They hit the biker 11 times COM at a distance of just a little over the length of the squad car. None of the 11 rds penetrated deep enough to reach the vitals. The biker emptied his 5 rd revolver, missing our Troops but fell over dead. Not from any of the bullets tho. He died of a heart attack from the stress of being shot at. Seems his life style had not been a healthy one and he had several major clogged arteries that did him in. It wasn't a Silvertip that killed him, it was bacon cheeseburgers.
The Silvertip did not fail. Every Silvertip performed exactly like it was designed. Rapid expansion, limited penetration. It was just the wrong design for what was needed. Within days of the shooting we had pulled all the Silvertips from our Troops.
Now fast forward a couple of years. The FBI was going to 9mm. They were still preaching rapid expansion, limited penetration, and singing the praises of the Silvertip. A couple of guys from our main range loaded up the investigation file of the biker shooting and drove to Quantico to meet with their range people. Our people showed them the results we had seen. The FBI said they didn't care. They had their Computerman Model which showed that rapid expansion, limited penetration was what LEOs needed to stop a fight. They blew off our results as anecdotal. Their Computerman Model was more accurate. Our guys packed up our file and came home.
Unfortunately for the FBI several months later they learned about the Silvertip like we had 6 years earlier but they had more tragic results.
It was after Miami that the pendulum at the FBI swung to the other side. They then became advocates of all about penetration, expansion little or no importance. Eventually their pendulum swung more center line.

 

[dave1918a2]

Load fast noises never stopped anything. Stopping power never stopped anything. 1st, 2nd, or 3rd rounds never stopped anything. The first round hitting center where aimed is what stops. DVC used to be the IPSC code. Accuracy, power, speed, in that order stops.

 

[YkcorCal]

Tactical Anatomy Training

 

[uncleted327]

How about you ultra paranoid people who insist on carrying a high capacity 9mm with ten extra mags just carry that and shut up about it? Stop trying to convince the rest of us, or maybe yourselves, that its necessary. If you add in all your yeah buts and what ifs you definitely have more ammo than you need. None of you are Chuck Norris, if you are alone and face multiple armed people you will probably lose, regardless of what you're carrying. Also what LEO's need/do has NOTHING to do with civilian needs. The overwhelming odds are you will never need to pull your sidearm, and the small percentage that do will never need to fire it. And the even smaller percentage that do fire will only have to fire a few rounds. Stop trying to what if yourself into being right all the time...

 

[cracker57]

You can also look up "Cardiac Box". Basically, it's a box bordered by a horizontal line along the clavicles, vertical lines through each nipple, and another horizontal line at about the diaphragm. It's where the heart, lungs, and aorta reside, as well as the spine. Here's a good picture:

When I go shooting I often put up a silhouette target and then put a 8.5x11" sheet of blank white paper to correspond to the cardiac box, or use a negative target and cut out the cardiac box from the silhouette. The X-ring on many silhouette targets is too low.

The X-ring on many silhouette targets is too low. Agree 100%

 

[otis24]

How about you ultra paranoid people who insist on carrying a high capacity 9mm with ten extra mags just carry that and shut up about it? Stop trying to convince the rest of us, or maybe yourselves, that its necessary. If you add in all your yeah buts and what ifs you definitely have more ammo than you need. None of you are Chuck Norris, if you are alone and face multiple armed people you will probably lose, regardless of what you're carrying. Also what LEO's need/do has NOTHING to do with civilian needs. The overwhelming odds are you will never need to pull your sidearm, and the small percentage that do will never need to fire it. And the even smaller percentage that do fire will only have to fire a few rounds. Stop trying to what if yourself into being right all the time...

As I stated earlier, the danger isn't in asking the question. It's in being afraid of the answer. Simply making an observation that after a big rush to more potent calibers like 10mm, .40 S&W, and .357 Sig, the FBI switched back to 9mm because advances in bullet design closed the gap between effectiveness of different cartridges. Not trying to convince anyone of anything. So I won't shut up about it. If there is anything you don't agree with here refute it with facts or scroll past and move on. Sounds like you are trying to convince yourself of your choice. A rude response such as yours is an indication of a weak minded individual who has had his feathers ruffled.

So how about loading your J frame with 5 rounds of ball ammo, no reload, and moving on to conquer the world!

The rest of us will learn from each other, the experiences of others, and the advances in firearm and bullet technology. And if there is anything we question or disagree with we will discuss it in a civil and gentlemanly manner. Something of which seem incapable of doing.

 

[SuperMan]

...all the capacity in the world can't make up for bad tactics.

While I have watched and enjoyed a lot of Paul Harrell's videos the one he did on the FBI sickened me as he got so much wrong...even the names....

If you do some research and reading it is easy to find the reason the FBI came full circle back to 9mm...and it isn't "just" the crop of new "magic" 9mm ammo. Basic bottom line is that is all the recoil that the average non-shooter, which is 90+% of those in LE, can stand and still be effective with their handguns especially during qualification....and it is quals that count isn't it...

As to the FBI going up against "two heavily arms suspects"...each had a .357 revolver, one had a folding stock Mini14 and the other a pistol grip cruiser shotgun loaded with #6 birdshot....and he only fired one shot during the whole altercation into the grill of the vehicle behind him... So it was really 7 FBI agents, three armed with high capacity 9mm handguns, four .38 Special revolvers and two shotguns (one of which was never deployed), against one guy with a Mini14.

...as said...you can't make up for bad tactics or inadequate training...

Bob

 

[seldon14]

I've gotten pretty sick of both ends of this argument. People defending there carry choices by tearing down the choices of others.

The j frame and pocket 380 guys insisting that people carrying a 15 round gun and reload, obviously can't be skilled shooters, "if you can't sole it in 5 shots....." and that they are paranoid etc.

The guys that carry a full sized gun and reloads insisting that anything else means your "not serious about self defense" , and that you will be killed by multiple attackers.

The more shootable your gun is, the more ammo it holds, and the better you can shoot it, all lead you better prepared. Carry what you are comfortable with, and feel leaves you satisfied with your level or protection.

 

[Mister X]

I own both. Sometimes a revolvers makes the most sense, other times an auto. It's all about understanding situational and contextual differences, rather than defaulting to this is always better than that, because so and so uses it.

 

[500SNW]

I own both. Sometimes a revolvers makes the most sense, other times an auto. It's all about understanding situational and contextual differences, rather than defaulting to this is always better than that, because so and so uses it.

Excellent point. Every platform has its limitations. Many people would laugh at my even daring to compare a .38 snub to an AR-15 rifle. But a .38 snubby is far superior to the most tricked out AR if you have to put on a suit and tie and head downtown for an office meeting. It is all about context.

 

[max503]

-A J frame allows me to carry without intruding into my everyday life.
-Not many weeks go by where I don't shoot it.
-There's something to be said for familiarity and muscle memory. (A liberal friend used to call me a "firearm fondler". I said ,"Hell yes".)

 

[AimHigher]

Absolutely agree. But if/when avoidance fails, you need effective ammo and capacity. In the knife scenario cited above, a 7th or 8th round might have prevented potential close contact with a perp. Contact which could have been deadly for the officer. Even with better ammo, there is no guarantee of stopping a peep, depending on circumstances like drugs or psychosis.

Or one well placed .357 Mag 125 gr. SJHP

 

[Rushing1]

I practice for head shots. Also a moving " head" on a wire.

Also my 45 and 44 go for pelvis shots.

Lehigh bullets in all my pistols-extreme Defender is preferred.

Be more aware of your surroundings and get off the phone when out and about. Gives you a few seconds for a better shot.

 

[sotexas]

Gun hand free and proficient with what I carry figure I've got a chance.

 

[Old cop]

I had to reload my revolver in the middle of a 1974 gunfight but my agency didn't transition to semi autos for almost another 10 years. My situation in retirement is much different and I'm comfortable w/a J Frame or LCP.

 

[ImprovedModel56Fan]

There is no 21 ft rule. People have morphed the Tueller Drill into something that Dennis Tueller never intended with the drill. It is not a rule, it's a drill. What the Tueller Drill was set up to show was officers often felt they had plenty of time to react should an agressor attack them from as far away as 21 ft. Until the Tueller Drill was common interviews with LEOs injured in confrontations generally said in their after action reports was the attacker was far enough way they thought they could defend themselves if attacked.
Many thought 21 ft was plenty far enough. What Dennis Tueller intended to show with the Tueller Drill was if an aggressor 21 ft away suddenly began an attack that the attacker could cover the 21 ft before the officer could react with a firearm to defend himself. Later on the 21 ft distance was changed to 27 ft drill with the same result. The attacker is close enough at that distance that he will inflict injury on the officer before the officer can deploy their weapon.
That is the Tueller Drill, not a 21 ft rule. As a result of people for so long misstating the Tueller Drill and calling it a "rule" they have provided defense attorneys with an argument. Sadly too many officers have fallen into this mistaken "rule" name.
I've trained under Tueller. Heard it straight from the man's mouth.

I can only like this once, so I guess I'd better quote it, too.

 

[ImprovedModel56Fan]

Prior to the 1986 Miami shootout the FBI had already done what they thought the needs of LE were and they had the answer to "what is stopping power". They had the scientific approach.
Prior to Miami the FBI had developed their Computerman Model. At that time they were preaching that rapid expansion, limited penetration was what was needed for stopping threats. Their Computerman Model was basically the old RII formula. They were absolutely sure that formula was what was needed.
In 1980 we had been issued, for a very short time, the same W-W 115 gr Silvertip ammo that was used by the FBI in Miami. We had some people who were making the ammo call who went along with the FBI and their Computerman Model, ie, rapid expansion, limited penetration. We had only carried that round a few months when 2 of our Troops were in a shootout with a Chicago biker gang member. They hit the biker 11 times COM at a distance of just a little over the length of the squad car. None of the 11 rds penetrated deep enough to reach the vitals. The biker emptied his 5 rd revolver, missing our Troops but fell over dead. Not from any of the bullets tho. He died of a heart attack from the stress of being shot at. Seems his life style had not been a healthy one and he had several major clogged arteries that did him in. It wasn't a Silvertip that killed him, it was bacon cheeseburgers.
The Silvertip did not fail. Every Silvertip performed exactly like it was designed. Rapid expansion, limited penetration. It was just the wrong design for what was needed. Within days of the shooting we had pulled all the Silvertips from our Troops.
Now fast forward a couple of years. The FBI was going to 9mm. They were still preaching rapid expansion, limited penetration, and singing the praises of the Silvertip. A couple of guys from our main range loaded up the investigation file of the biker shooting and drove to Quantico to meet with their range people. Our people showed them the results we had seen. The FBI said they didn't care. They had their Computerman Model which showed that rapid expansion, limited penetration was what LEOs needed to stop a fight. They blew off our results as anecdotal. Their Computerman Model was more accurate. Our guys packed up our file and came home.
Unfortunately for the FBI several months later they learned about the Silvertip like we had 6 years earlier but they had more tragic results.
It was after Miami that the pendulum at the FBI swung to the other side. They then became advocates of all about penetration, expansion little or no importance. Eventually their pendulum swung more center line.

Oh, look! Another great post I can only like once!

BTW, note the bolded sentence. I'm not sure what "anecdotal" means, but I think it means what lawyers usually call "direct evidence," meaning something someone actually saw and is swearing to. Like eclipses. I don't actually believe in eclipses, because the only evidence is anecdotal, at best. I know I never saw one.

I would like to discuss this further, but I need to check to see if there are any more "likes" I need to reinforce.

Keep 'em coming, ispcapt!

 

[ImprovedModel56Fan]

As to the FBI going up against "two heavily arms suspects"...each had a .357 revolver, one had a folding stock Mini14 and the other a pistol grip cruiser shotgun loaded with #6 birdshot....and he only fired one shot during the whole altercation into the grill of the vehicle behind him... So it was really 7 FBI agents, three armed with high capacity 9mm handguns, four .38 Special revolvers and two shotguns (one of which was never deployed), against one guy with a Mini14.

AFAIK, you missed a couple of agents who had at least one full auto weapon, but they were "unavoidably detained" elsewhere. Of course, they might not have made any difference even if they had showed up.

 

[Phenix]

A 5 shot J frame will get the job done..... until it doesn't. The pro-revolver crowd always resorts to the argument that those who carry autos will engage in "spray and pray" tactics while those who carry revolvers are more proficient out of necessity and less affected by the adrenaline that will affect the mind/body in an armed confrontation.

With today's autos, one can get improved capacity in a concealable package. The Glock 43X can be equipped with 2 Shield Arms 15 round magazines for a total of 31 rounds if you have one in the chamber.

The same people who argue that the average citizen has only a slight risk of facing multiple armed attackers also let the, IMHO, slight risk of an auto jamming dictate that they carry a revolver.

For those that like to prepare for a "worst case scenario", a high capacity auto with a proven 9mm round gives one the opportunity to do so in an affordable and concealable package.

A .45 ACP will get the job done. Until it doesn't.

 

[fatcat3]

If you're expecting trouble

DON'T GO.