who wants to get shot with a ...

Frankly, I don't find the argument "I don't see people lining up to get shot with a 22/25/380/9mm" to be very persuasive.

If that is your stance, then you should logically a) argue that a pellet gun is an acceptable self defense weapon, or b) let me shoot you a few times with a pellet gun. I, for one, have no desire to be shot with anything including a 22, a pellet gun, a rubber band, or a spit ball. I don't think that makes them acceptable to defend hearth and home though.

Well let me first state that I for one use this comment when some jailhouse ballistic expert (many of whom are present on this forum) decides that he or she wants to give an an depth opinion of how they "heard one time at band camp this one guy got shot fifty times with a 9mm and lived"...and how this particular bullet, load, brand, etc...is so far superior...so I always offer that statement to attempt to make the individual think for a moment about how superior their particular choice is, but hey then again no one has ever offered to take that test to prove to me how inferior the 9mm is. Some folks who have commented here have already expressed their particular favorite cartridge and have touted its "one stop shot" ability.
Now that is out of the way, your statement concerning a "logical argument" fails in the fact that firearms using an explosive charge for propellant are different than pneumatic weapons. That old apples and oranges concept. ;) BTW...before the invention of firearms man killed man with sticks and stones...just saying
I do understand what you said though that you don't want to get shot with anything, that is perfectly understandable. I would how ever argue that whatever type of weapon one chooses to defend their home and hearth with will work as long as they know how to use it. :) How many people do you know that carry a knife clipped in their pocket but yet have no training/experience using one? (There is also that old legal saying of "weapon of opportunity" that many LEO know about) As far as 9mm goes, well I carry one for work and I carry one for self defense, but then again I'll put my 18 years in the military, training, education, and combat experience up against whatever comes through the door.... Is that better than saying I 'lloffer to shoot you with a 9mm? :rolleyes:

The veiws expressed in this comment are exclusively the views of the poster and in no way shape or form are meant to imply that anyone can kill anyone else with any type of weapon as long as they know what they are doing.
 
Last edited:
I absolutely agree with the statement that shot placement is most important, and that anything with you is better than what isn't with you. However, a fight is a chaotic situation that has already spun out of control. It would seem to me to be unwise to make a decision based on an assumption of what you think will happen.

Most every time I have driven, I did not actually need a seatbelt because I didn't wreck, and I have never been in a wreck that caused the airbags to deploy. Most every time I have carried a gun, I did not need it either. I choose to carry a larger caliber handgun for the same reason that I do not disable my airbags. It is a variable that I can control, and it is better safe than sorry.

As to dave75's statement that that air rifles and firearms are apples and oranges, you, sir are mistaken. The means of propulsion is irrelevant. A projectile makes a hole based on size, weight, and velocity (or doesn't make a hole). Now, I may be reading too far in, but are you volunteering to get shot with one? Regardless, it is your business what you choose to carry. If you are comfortable with it, then that really is none of my concern because I don't pay a price if you are wrong.

I do advocate using the most effective weapon you can because that is one of the few variables you can control. If physical limitations restrict you to a minor caliber pistol, then that is what you have to use. The argument that people don't want to get shot by caliber x is just a silly one.
 
As a kid we had the neighborhood BB gun fights. I ended up getting shot in the neck and the BB went in under the skin. It felt like a branding iron. The kid that shot me locked himself inside the house which is a good thing becasue I would have beat the tar out of him. It took a couple people to squeeze the BB out and then trying to sneak in the house without mom or dad noticing. When they did notice they they though I was stung by something (I was in a sense).

Its no joy to get shot by anything but when your hit its either incapacitating or make you a lot madder.
 
As to dave75's statement that that air rifles and firearms are apples and oranges, you, sir are mistaken. The means of propulsion is irrelevant. A projectile makes a hole based on size, weight, and velocity (or doesn't make a hole). Now, I may be reading too far in, but are you volunteering to get shot with one? Regardless, it is your business what you choose to carry. If you are comfortable with it, then that really is none of my concern because I don't pay a price if you are wrong.

Ok well you are most certainly entitled to your opinion, but when we are talking about fighting firearms I really don't consider an airgun in that category since fighting firearms generally fire a centerfire cartridge....hence my statement that it was apples and oranges...so no I don't consider myself to be incorrect.
And I had to go back and read my statement again, don't see how you misread that I would willingly be shot with a weapon....but each to their own. MY WHOLE POINT TO MY JOCULAR DECLERATION WAS IN RESPONSE TO THE ORIGINAL POSTERS PERSONAL OPINION ABOUT OFFERING SOMEONE THE CHANCE TO BE SHOT WITH A "SUB-CALIBER" FIREARM...most people make that comment because of PEOPLE WHO WANT TO SAY ONE CALIBER IS SO MUCH BETTER THAN ANOTHER, AND THOSE PEOPLE ARE USUALLY THE ONES WITH NO EXPERIENCE. As far as conflict being chaotic, well that is the nature of the beast and that is why we train. So you sir are wrong in stating that "It would seem to me to be unwise to make a decision based on an assumption of what you think will happen", that is the whole basis of combat training and the reason for stress inoculation. Now that is my opinion, but that is based upon my own experience...my training....The mindset of the warrior is far more important than what he has in his hand.
 
Baby Face Nelson was shot 17 times with 45acp and OO buckshot. He was still able to kill two law enforcement officers and drive away, where he died.
I just thought I'd bring that up. I've been saving it since I saw it on TV.
 
Baby Face Nelson was shot 17 times with 45acp and OO buckshot. He was still able to kill two law enforcement officers and drive away, where he died.
I just thought I'd bring that up. I've been saving it since I saw it on TV.

Read the history of the gang and see what happened to Nelson. True enough, he was shot as you described but with machine gun fire. Also of the two agents he is credited with killing during his final battle, one survived long enough to have a conversation with Melvin Purvis and I believe the other died after surgery.

One must remember that the guns of the day were not as accurate as today, machine gun fire is seldom accurate unless shown in movies and the bullets back then were much different than today. All this being said, two things are apparent. 1. I will continue to carry and use a .45acp. 2. If I can find a Thompson .45 machine gun of the 30's, I will buy it in a heartbeat.
 
As to dave75's statement that that air rifles and firearms are apples and oranges, you, sir are mistaken. The means of propulsion is irrelevant. A projectile makes a hole based on size, weight, and velocity (or doesn't make a hole). Now, I may be reading too far in, but are you volunteering to get shot with one? Regardless, it is your business what you choose to carry. If you are comfortable with it, then that really is none of my concern because I don't pay a price if you are wrong.

Ok well you are most certainly entitled to your opinion, but when we are talking about fighting firearms I really don't consider an airgun in that category since fighting firearms generally fire a centerfire cartridge....hence my statement that it was apples and oranges...so no I don't consider myself to be incorrect.
And I had to go back and read my statement again, don't see how you misread that I would willingly be shot with a weapon....but each to their own. MY WHOLE POINT TO MY JOCULAR DECLERATION WAS IN RESPONSE TO THE ORIGINAL POSTERS PERSONAL OPINION ABOUT OFFERING SOMEONE THE CHANCE TO BE SHOT WITH A "SUB-CALIBER" FIREARM...most people make that comment because of PEOPLE WHO WANT TO SAY ONE CALIBER IS SO MUCH BETTER THAN ANOTHER, AND THOSE PEOPLE ARE USUALLY THE ONES WITH NO EXPERIENCE. As far as conflict being chaotic, well that is the nature of the beast and that is why we train. So you sir are wrong in stating that "It would seem to me to be unwise to make a decision based on an assumption of what you think will happen", that is the whole basis of combat training and the reason for stress inoculation. Now that is my opinion, but that is based upon my own experience...my training....The mindset of the warrior is far more important than what he has in his hand.

Agreed.

I've made this statement before in caliber threads. So he we go again.

THE CALIBER OF THE MAN COUNTS MORE THAN THE CALIBER OF HIS GUN.
 
Wow, Dave... feeling a little hostile? To quote a piece of classic American cinema, "relax, Francis"....

Do a little less shouting and a little more talking, and you'll find out what actually started this instead of *assuming*. A few weeks ago, someone started talking about using a 22 for defense. Last time I checked, that wasn't a center fire cartridge.

Given your extensive training and warrior mindset, maybe you can guarantee a hit on something critical that is moving, in the dark, and trying very hard not to be shot. I prefer to shoot something that will let for more blood out and more air in as I hope to to hit something important.

As a complete aside, and try not to take this personally Dave, I hate the word "warrior". Our employer loves it, but a warrior fights for his own personal glory while a Soldier fights as a disciplined member of a team. I guess some G.O. thought it was cool. If you ever want to know what happens when a warrior crosses a Soldier, read about Roukes Drift. Between 80 and 100 British Soldiers shot 2000 Zulu warriors into little pieces with their single shot Martini rifles.
 
Wilson...no not hostile, but when you opine on someone's comment and in that opine you tell them they are wrong....well you are gonna get what you get =)

And I commented on the original posters thread, not what occurred a few weeks ago....

And yes wilson, I do gurantee that under stress I can hit what I am shooting at, if a person can't then I really don't feel comfortable around them; sure Murphy will poke his head up time and again, but I sorta like to think that all that "training and experience" is a lot better than just hoping a big wad of lead will save me =) again though each to their own...but in regards to the difference between a warrior and a soldier well last time I checked when someone attempts to assault me or my loved ones off post or in my home here in the United States...I am not being a "soldier" as I am fighting for myself and my family not Uncle Sam, but that's me. And yes I do like and use the word warrior....again though that goes back to "all the training and expereince" that I have, from your post apparently it invokes visions of Zulu tribesmen attacking British forces...of course you didn't say how many of those British forces died at the hands of those "warriors", or some rogue loner out there....but the intent behind that "G.O." who pushed that was to instill esprit de corps, pride, and a fighting mindset in an army that has had back to back deployments and didn't expect to get bogged down in a war fighting an enemy that doesn't stand and fight....so if you don't like it don't use it...personnaly I consider your example to be the difference between a soldier and a mercenary (contractor), but then again those differences are what make this Nation great and this forum awesome....
 
Lets talk about getting shot with a broad tip hunting arrow from a compound bow.

I think those razor blades scare me more than a bullet!:eek:
 
Lets talk about getting shot with a broad tip hunting arrow from a compound bow.

I think those razor blades scare me more than a bullet!:eek:

^^^^That. And I had to have a BB cut from my leg once. Blood everywhere. It kept moving around. Hurt like fire ants crawling around in there.

Still wouldn't carry one.
 
Heck I almost died at the gun shop. Some idiot was sweeping a old Mossin or something with a big old bayonet. One of the thin pointed kind. About took my eye out. Take the damn thing off!!
 
Oldman45 I carry 45acp too. I just mentioned the Babyface Nelson shootout to remind everyone that no pistol cartridge can guarantee a one shot stop. The 22 is a good caliber for an assassin or hit man, but not for self defense. I would only carry a 22 if I had no other choice.

I carry a knife clipped to my pocket and though I have used a knife in my work for the past 35 years, I have had no training on how to use one for self defense. I don't carry it for self defense and probably wouldn't even think of it in a fight.
 
Last edited:
Will Carry....I apologize if you took what I said as an offensive remark...but I see to many soldiers and law enforcement carrying knives because they think they can fight with 'em. I learned long ago that a warrior learns all that he can about what weapons he carries, so after a lot of "experience and training" I have learned to use both folders and straight blades....but that is me...as far as caliber well again I truly believe that a warrior can be proficient with whatever he has in his hand, again though that is me...i have 1911's but I like to carry 9mm's because I can comfortably carry more rounds...that though is the concept that you shoot until the threat goes down...not that this or that makes a bigger hole....carry whatever you like but when a man challenges me because of caliber I will always retort with what I have learned through my training, my education, my experience....good luck and good shooting
 
Had a gal here in St Louis shoot her hubby five times with a .45 at point blank range, hit him three times in the chest, one round punched through his sternum, only round not center mass was one in the arm... he survived, she wasn't charged so it must have been an abuse situation. He needs to stay away from the casinos, he's done used up all his luck...

That said, my personal preference is that to start with, it has to be a centerfire cartridge. While you can certainly be killed with a .22, the dependability of rimfire ammo is less than reliable even in the more expensive manufacturers stuff.
 
I like it. A new thread on the caliber war from a different angle. Everyone should know by now it isn't the size of the bullet it is which lubricant is used on the firearm. What grease do you use??? :rolleyes:
 
The 'caliber wars' were started by gun experts that were never in a gunfight in their lives, while the most deadly gunmen in history often carried the calibers the experts said were ineffective.

While shot placement is important, real life shootings have shown that most shooters are lucky to hit their target at all, let alone where they intended to hit them. It's not what you carry, or where you hit, there is a lot more to surviving a gunfight than most people realize. Being attacked by a lousy shot is the only reason most people survive at all.
 
Back
Top