Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.
Separate names with a comma.
If you consider yourself a beginner or an avid shooter, the Glock Talk community is your place to discuss self defense, concealed carry, reloading, target shooting, and all things Glock.
Discussion in 'Caliber Corner' started by Andy W, Nov 12, 2012.
You sure do have a lot of wound data. Good for you.
I did 2 LEO C Q C courses and they emphasize 2 to the pelvis.
Seems to drop the bad guy even if he wear body armor.
I think we as firearms enthusiast focus way too much on scientific data only. Bullets and bullets hitting humans do unpredictable things. These things cannot always be quantified in a lab.
I have read a lot of differing opinions on pistol calibers and have come to some conclusions. 9mm parabellum fans like the recoil. .40 s&w fans like the size, relative similar capacity and better penetration. .45 acp fans are nostalgic and like an even bigger bullet than .40 s&w.
Yes these are informed generalizations but I read the same arguments over and over. I refer to a man like Col. Jeff Cooper instead of the interweb commandos.
I like and carry the .40 s&w.
Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire
This thread is a fun one. I'm not a "serious" gun guy, but respect them and have my CCW.
I can hit a barn with my S&W Airweight and the barn
doorknob with my G-19.
I hope I never have to draw on someone and practice mentally to avoid and practice physically (and mentally)
Over penetration won't get you killed, under penetration will.
How many of you actually think the BG will just stand there and let you shoot him 15 times.
With BG's and bears, you may only get one shot.
Make it count.
None. The BGs are likely to run away from defensive gunfire.
I've only drawn one time over thirty years ago. The BG who was coming out of my own house with one of my own kitchen knives, had a sudden change of plans. Just the sight of the revolver stopped him.
On the other hand, this guy wasn't stopping for anything. Warning to the lilly livered. Very graphic.
Somewhere in the middle, grumpy old man fired one shot into the heart of a hot headed young man not too long ago known as Mr. Dooley and Mr. James. Mr. Dooley's choice of SD handgun was a .32cal pistol. Mr. James rolled over, said call 911 and died within seconds. This according to the trial so far.
Those of you ladyboys too limp wrist to conceal and carry a 12g better make sure your aim is good. Or lucky.
So true - a very graphic link. From the xrays, it looks like he got shot in the foot real bad, a well as nearly everywhere else.
Many agencies transitioned from the 9MM to the .40 S&W, because of it's effectiveness on auto glass.
If you are not shooting through an intermediate barrier like auto glass, the 9MM works just fine. It's more about shot placement than anything else.
Good quote by Yamamoto!
Would you rather be shot in the pinkie toe by 40, or through the heart by a 9mm? I guarantee you that 9mm is going to be a lot easier to place a bunch of bullets through someone's vitals than 40. Heck even 45 is easier to shoot than 40.
With 9mm, I can pretty much mag dump and get all my shots in the vitals at 21ft. With 45 it's a lot more deliberate. With 40 I just think what a stupid caliber it is.
This is the same old debate that pops up all too often. It's not the machinery in use; it's the operator at the switch.
Really, so I guess I, and anyone who uses a .40 Glock
are stupid? Must be for depending on a stupid caliber
to protect our lives.
Eh, some people do fine with that stupid caliber. Most of the ones at the range I go to suck with it. Most of the guys in the steel matches do good with it.
I don't know if you're an idiot or not, you're some guy on the internet.
I always wonder why people love the 9mm and the 45acp, but hate the 40. If you like the 9mm, why would you not like the 40, which is the ballistically superior round? It makes more sense to me to choose the 40 and the 45acp rather than the 9 and 45. I see it quite often though. I have heard people say the the 40 is a compromise round, but that depends how you look at it. You could say the same about the 45 and the 9. The nine is smaller, to get more rounds. The 45 is bigger, but you compromise capacity. It makes sense, like someone else said, that they are all marginally effective, but the 9mm is more ammo dependent than the others.
So you can't tell me why the .40 is stupid.
Come on, you can tell me.
Since you don't know if I'm an idiot or just some guy
on the net, give me the simple version.
40 may be "ballistic-ally superior" by my results with it are ballistic-ally inferior.
Now there's a smart post.
Well, this is regarding my ability, but here goes:
I can make 4-5 good hits with 9mm in the time it takes to make 2 good hits with 40. I can make 3 good hits with 45. According to my understanding, that's a lot more damage on the target in the same amount of time.
I also figure that if I ever have to do this in a gun fight, it's going to be a lot harder, to make a good hit, so being able to do it much easier counts for a lot.
You're not teacup'in that grip are you?