Weighing the options to lighten one's wallet

[Flipside]

I think he's failing to understand that the Military is limited to ball ammo which has a more wounding factor than stopping factor.

Why we still choose to play by 'rules' that made sense in the 'polite socieity' where honor and such was part of the program a century or more ago is beyond my comprehension... But that's something for a different forum on another day. Till then, please see the citations in my post immediately above yours.

 

[mc5aw]

flipside ... First, I do not require a citation for any of your assertions. I merely responded to a statement you made as fact ... one that stated as fact merits a legitimate source. Your two sources are far from legitimate to substantiate your statement as fact, although they may well be sufficient to support your statement as opinion. Further, the citations that you did later list are links to wikipedia, which is widely regarded as less than credible as anything more than subjective on-line information.

Your assertion as fact that the 9mm round was designed as a non-lethal projectile is evidenced by your use of caps lock to emphasize your statement. To this point, myself, and others, will say that you are categorically incorrect and misinformed at best, and carelessly perpetuating urban myth at worst. The hornet's nest you claim to have disrupted focuses on what you posted and how you posted it. The theory that wounding a combatant so as to take others out of action is more effective than killing said combatant is nonsensical ... if it were true, then it could be argued that slingshots and pebbles are more beneficial in a combat zone than lethal rounds due to the propensity for someone to be wounded with a rock to the head, thus requiring other combatants to tend to the slingshotted battlefield casualty.

You have obviously spent a great deal of time and thought posting your opinions, which is commendable, and to many readers, appreciated. That said, stating anything but fact as definitive fact risks invalidating many or all of the points you have made, as well as being called on to support your "factual" assertion(s) with tangible support.

 

[Armed Babysitter]

Till then, please see the citations in my post immediately above yours.

The "bigger bullet is a better bullet" argument is a tired and outdated one. Many Police departments still issue the 9mm as a duty weapon, including the largest one in the country, and they experience great results with it.

.38 spl or .357mag are great calibers, but disregarding 9MM in favor of them based upon folklore ballistics and other peoples opinions is futile.

 

[Armed Babysitter]

Further, the citations that you did later list are links to wikipedia, which is widely regarded as less than credible as anything more than subjective on-line information.

Wikipedia is the online equivelant of "The National Inquirer".

 

[Flipside]

Wikipedia is the online equivelant of "The National Inquirer".

I like your style!

 

[tops]

Larry,

Thanks for the comments.

You're right about bluffing.

But, that's the burden of CCW, isn't it? A big load to carry. If you don't act... or, if you do act...

For me, it's simple. If I'm going to draw, it's for one reason. To give you a hint... It's not because I'm bluffing.

Now on the other hand, if you're dissin' my choice of a 340PD... Well, that's cool with me, and exactly the point of my post. If you feel that a <12 oz pistol with 5 rounds of (pretty slow relative to a 6" barrel) 357 Magum won't be sufficient for your needs, then by all means: do what's best for you! I know people that carry an entire arsenal on their person at any given time. It's what works for them that matters most.

I wasn't dissin' your choice of gun. I was replying to your statement that nobody wants to be in front of a gun when it goes off because there are some people that don't care. Those are the people that you have to shoot and if you don't stop them they will hurt you. Larry

 

[Flipside]

flipside ... First, I do not require a citation for any of your assertions. I merely responded to a statement you made as fact ... one that stated as fact merits a legitimate source. Your two sources are far from legitimate to substantiate your statement as fact, although they may well be sufficient to support your statement as opinion. Further, the citations that you did later list are links to wikipedia, which is widely regarded as less than credible as anything more than subjective on-line information.

Your assertion as fact that the 9mm round was designed as a non-lethal projectile is evidenced by your use of caps lock to emphasize your statement. To this point, myself, and others, will say that you are categorically incorrect and misinformed at best, and carelessly perpetuating urban myth at worst. The hornet's nest you claim to have disrupted focuses on what you posted and how you posted it. The theory that wounding a combatant so as to take others out of action is more effective than killing said combatant is nonsensical ... if it were true, then it could be argued that slingshots and pebbles are more beneficial in a combat zone than lethal rounds due to the propensity for someone to be wounded with a rock to the head, thus requiring other combatants to tend to the slingshotted battlefield casualty.

You have obviously spent a great deal of time and thought posting your opinions, which is commendable, and to many readers, appreciated. That said, stating anything but fact as definitive fact risks invalidating many or all of the points you have made, as well as being called on to support your "factual" assertion(s) with tangible support.

Before I cease defending my original post, I am compelled by your post, quoted here, to point out the contentiousness of the considerations one must make in choosing a weapon for defense. Like you, I don't need citations, which is why I didn't offer any originally. When I receive information from someone who is flesh and blood, face to face, and respected [I'll call them professionals], I take it as legitimate.

As my original post encouraged the reader: DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH. Don't take my opinion, or anyone else's for that matter, as gospel. If one digs deep enough, long enough, they'll find contradictions, inconsistencies and after a while, what they will believe to be fact. Yes, I'm guilty of presenting what I belived to be facts that I found from my journey. The point of my story is that everyone's journey is different, and people will come to different conclusions.

The opinions that we come to as individuals are our own. We personally own them. Thank you for sharing yours. I am certain that the contributions you and other posters have made here will be valued by other readers, and I thank you for your time and effort.