One more Caliber Discussion

Same old tired statistics, only coming from a different different expert....I wonder how many times this one has had to fight for his life?. I would bet, none.....On a different but related note, prior to stumbling onto this thread, I had just finished reading a different thread about Frank Hamer on this same forum. Seems that Mr Hamer mostly carried a .45 Cal sidearm, often backed up with a DA-.44, and if he thought more penetration may be called for, a 38-Super Auto. In other words, he seems to have approached the subject of gunfighting in a very serious manner.....So....Given the number of gun fights that he is believed to have participated in (and won), me thinks that I'll stick with his line of thinking on what constitutes a proper fighting gun....But tell the lawyer that I said thanks for playing..LOL.

DGW
 
Last edited:
Agreed. But, they can be. I load 45 Colt to the hilt, "Ruger, T/C, FA Only", for my single action Ruger Bisley. It is a handful. When I let others shoot it, often if they don't hit the target on the first round they won't hit it at all because they become concerned with the recoil. That is, IF they decide to even take a second or third...
 
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases. Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change.
Sounds like 1,700 shootings studied. Sounds like solid stats from a substantial study!!! This is probably the most comprehensive study currently. The thing about people claiming increased accuracy with smaller calibers are discounting that people are carrying these smaller calibers are carrying them in even smaller less accurate guns. IF you are carrying a 22 optic equipped 3"+ barrel pistol that you can actually make that head shot with consistently then more power to you. I don't think with any amount of practice that a NAA belt buckle revolver would meet that standard. Being able to reliably reach the CNS through the torso is where being able to stop a threat should be the minimum standard. Even a pelvis shot will drop someone "Right There".
 
Last edited:
To add, most of those guns are quite small. My daughter wanted a little purple pistol so I got her an LCP. She got quite frustrated when trying to bust 6" balloons at a mere 7 yards, but has gotten better over time. Even I have to concentrate hard on my trigger discipline with that little toy. They are not easy to shoot well in the best of circumstances, much less when under stress.
 
Sounds like 1,700 shootings studied. Sounds like solid stats from a substantial study!!! This is probably the most comprehensive study currently. The thing about people claiming increased accuracy with smaller calibers are discounting that people are carrying these smaller calibers are carrying them in even smaller less accurate guns. IF you are carrying a 22 optic equipped 3"+ barrel pistol that you can actually make that head shot with consistently then more power to you. I don't think with any amount of practice that a NAA belt buckle revolver would meet that standard. Being able to reliably reach the CNS through the torso is where being able to stop a threat should be the minimum standard. Even a pelvis shot will drop someone "Right There".
While I am in agreement regarding the range of accuracy with small guns, I have both witnessed personally ( line of work when younger) and watched news regarding HANDGUN killings. Most occur at what I call personal distances. 5-10 feet. At longer distance attempts with HANDGUNS, the chances of success dropped way down no matter what caliber. Police detectives used to carry Colt Detective Special .32 or .38 with a 2 inch barrel for just that reason. I have full confidence in, say, an LCP .380 for carry.
 
Last edited:
I actually listened to the whole video and generally agree with the guy. I and we in police training have discussed much of what he said over the years with each other and students. FBI firearms division really has done decades and millions of tax dollars studying all that stuff, done experiments and conclusions on what works, what doesn't and why.
 
People carrying a smaller caliber (32acp, 380) are more likely to have less firearms experience, and not able to shoot as accurately.
I'm not sure I necessarily agree with that but I base that only on my personal experience. First off, my basic CCW carry if a Colt Commander .45 ACP. Back up gun is usually an S&W M60 .38 Spl. However, there have been a few times when the CCW piece was a Walther PPK/s .380 ACP with a Walther PP in .32 ACP. Attire at those occasions was more on the formal side so hiding the .45 and .38 was a bit difficult. Also, those Walther have a nasty habit if biting the hand that's feeding them. The slide will draw blood when the gun is fired. I have given some thought to rounding off the very sharp edge at the bottom rear of the slide to see if it might cure the problem. The Commander had a bad habit of eating a hole in the web of my hand so I replace the original safety with a beavertail style and the gun is very comfortable to use.
Paul B.
 
85% of all shots taken in a self defense encounter are misses.
Plus I'm surprised he didn't even mention capacity. People that carry a 45 ACP seem to think it's a one hit wonder: just one hit and the bad guy is out of commission. That's not true. As this video pointed out the statistics show the 9mm stops the threat practically as good as the 45.

You need to be ready for follow up shots. There may also be multiple attackers.

With all this in mind the best self defense gun is a 9mm with the largest magazine you can get. Then practice, practice, practice.
 
Yep, the FBI decided the 10mm was perfect. Except some agents were unable to use it. Oops!
Yes sir, you are right. That was many years ago. It's still used as a training tool discussion about the best calibers. Problem was the men in the lab determined it was a great man stopper on paper. Then picked a gun was too damn large for many agents and the caliber kicked too damn much for even large men. I hoped those guys were kicked out of the firearms lab.
 
I do believe that every handgun & every handgun caliber is a compromise. These days I usually carry a 9. For my own reasons I prefer .40. If I could conceal it easily I would carry my M&P 2.0 40 Compact 4"everywhere. Concealment is a priority for me so I carry a Ruger Max 9 most of the time. I haven't fired a .40 or a .45 from a pistol the size of a Max-9 & I honestly don't want to.
My boy wants to hunt this fall. When we go to the woods I will be carrying either the M&P 2.0 or if I want more penetration my old 4" .357. About the biggest thing I expect to run across down there would be a hog.
 
I just finished the book "First 30 Seconds". and it is a book everyone here and beyond should read... in that book the author describes a citizen stopping an active shooter in a Mall.... (Greenwood Park Mall). The citizen that stopped the active shooter hit him 8 times before he went down. The first two hits caused the shooter to retreat and then the armed citizen follows him and shot him 4 more times and the guy still, staggering, tried to get back to cover and was shot two more times before he went down for good.
 
With all this in mind the best self defense gun is a 9mm with the largest magazine you can get. Then practice, practice, practice.
I won't completely disagree with you. A 9MM is a bit easier to shoot than the .45CP but I'm old and pretty well set in my ways so I'll stick with my 1911 Colt Commander. I would love to find one of the original lightweight Commanders with the aluminum frame. My biggest gripe is the all steel Commander is quite heavy and I have two 9MMs, one with a 15 round magazine and the other an 11 round magazine. Nice guns but with a full magazine they literally pull my pants down. The .45 Commander isn't much better. Two things; one the Commander fits my hand very well and two, I shoot it quite well.
I've only had to pull a gun twice in my 87 years. Once during the LA riots back in 1966 and once more sometime in the lower 80s IIRC. Case of mistaken identity wereI came very close to having the shoot the fellow. No shots fired in either instance. In the second situation, at a distance of roughly two to three feet, odds are that I wouldn't have missed.
Paul B.
 
I just finished the book "First 30 Seconds". and it is a book everyone here and beyond should read... in that book the author describes a citizen stopping an active shooter in a Mall.... (Greenwood Park Mall). The citizen that stopped the active shooter hit him 8 times before he went down. The first two hits caused the shooter to retreat and then the armed citizen follows him and shot him 4 more times and the guy still, staggering, tried to get back to cover and was shot two more times before he went down for good.
This case shows the shooting was not the best man stopper. BUT it did make the shooter retreat. So maybe the killing then ended. Suspect may have bleed out in a few minutes if left alone and no more targets available to him. The citizen showed a lot of courage by just pulling the trigger on the killer. Even more so by following him. For the CCW person involved in a shooting, I call it is a win if the shooter retreats. Cops have the duty and have taken an oath to follow and finish/stop the suspect a CCW shooter not so. (Yeah I know some cops don't take their oath to that level and need to be weeded out before that type of call).
 

Latest posts

Back
Top