I just dont get the 40 cal.

[OneStory]

MOST people don't ever get in a shoot out so why carry at all?

MOST shoot outs could have been fought with a knife so just carry a knife?

Sheesh!

 

[Scott.Thornton]

Interesting on all sides.

 

[LouisianaRebel]

Safety's? Glock. M&p. Xd. Pull the trigger. Missfires? Buy better ammo.
Get a good holster and you can't tell it's there.

Sent from Samsung S3 on the toilet.

 

[JBP55]

Interesting on all sides.

I have seen .40 Glocks with round counts much higher that 50,000 rounds.

 

[Jack]

No...but my main point was that most self defensive shootouts are a done deal after 2 or 3 rounds are fired. Furthermore....yes, I am making a compromise for the sake of conceivability and for the sake of not having to deal with safeties or misfires. Revolvers are just no brainers IMO.

Do you have any statistics to support this claim? The article below doesn't qualify as it counts hits. As far as the rest of your points please take a look at this, you might change your line of thought.

http://tacticalelitist.com/2012/05/defensive-firearms-for-ladies-part-1-the-wheelgun/

Below is a very interesting article on stopping power...etc.
An Alternate Look at Handgun Stopping Power

Submitted by cbaus on Fri, 07/08/2011 - 15:00. Education
by Greg Ellifritz

I've been interested in firearm stopping power for a very long time. I remember reading Handguns magazine back in the late 1980s when Evan Marshall was writing articles about his stopping power studies. When Marshall's first book came out in 1992, I ordered it immediately, despite the fact that I was a college student and really couldn't afford its $39 price tag. Over the years I bought all of the rest of Marshall's books as well as anything else I could find on the subject. I even have a first edition of Gunshot Injuries by Louis Lagarde published in 1915.Some interesting findings:

I think the most interesting statistic is the percentage of people who stopped with one shot to the torso or head. There wasn't much variation between calibers. Between the most common defensive calibers (.38, 9mm, .40, and .45) there was a spread of only eight percentage points. No matter what gun you are shooting, you can only expect a little more than half of the people you shoot to be immediately incapacitated by your first hit.
Conclusion

This study took me a long time and a lot of effort to complete. Despite the work it took, I'm glad I did it. The results I got from the study lead me to believe that there really isn't that much difference between most defensive handgun rounds and calibers. None is a death ray, but most work adequately...even the lowly .22s. I've stopped worrying about trying to find the "ultimate" bullet. There isn't one. And I've stopped feeling the need to strap on my .45 every time I leave the house out of fear that my 9mm doesn't have enough "stopping power." Folks, carry what you want. Caliber really isn't all that important.

Take a look at the data. I hope it helps you decide what weapon to carry. No matter which gun you choose, pick one that is reliable and train with it until you can get fast accurate hits. Nothing beyond that really matters!


LINK TO THE FULL ARTICLE WITH DATA AND RESULTS OF SHOOTINGS

http://www.buckeyefirearms.org/handgun-stopping-power

What does this have to do with anything? Aside from being wrong that is.

 

[tim9lives]

Do you have any statistics to support this claim? The article below doesn't qualify as it counts hits. As far as the rest of your points please take a look at this, you might change your line of thought.

http://tacticalelitist.com/2012/05/defensive-firearms-for-ladies-part-1-the-wheelgun/

What does this have to do with anything? Aside from being wrong that is.

If you check out the link Jack...and read the entire article....I think you will get the point. FWIW...the article is data from real life shootings. Not shooting at jugs of water....but actual gun fights.
It's a long article...and I only threw in a couple of excerpts. Like I said...It's a long article....and I only put in a couple of excerpts on my first post....kind of a teaser to grab your interest. In any case...I think everyone should carry whatever gun makes them comfortable. If you feel you will need a high capacity weapon...so be it. As I said in the first post....I was only posting my opinion. And yes...my opinion does have some data to back up my point....that's why I included the article. That said....if you feel the need for more....then I say go for it.

Below....is another excerpt from this article. http://www.buckeyefirearms.org/handgun-stopping-power

------------Some interesting findings:

I think the most interesting statistic is the percentage of people who stopped with one shot to the torso or head. There wasn't much variation between calibers. Between the most common defensive calibers (.38, 9mm, .40, and .45) there was a spread of only eight percentage points. No matter what gun you are shooting, you can only expect a little more than half of the people you shoot to be immediately incapacitated by your first hit.

The average number of rounds until incapacitation was also remarkably similar between calibers. All the common defensive calibers required around 2 rounds on average to incapacitate. Something else to look at here is the question of how fast can the rounds be fired out of each gun. The .38 SPL probably has the slowest rate of fire (long double action revolver trigger pulls and stout recoil in small revolvers) and the fewest rounds fired to get an incapacitation (1.87). Conversely the 9mm can probably be fired fastest of the common calibers and it had the most rounds fired to get an incapacitation (2.45). The .40 (2.36) and the .45 (2.08) split the difference. It is my personal belief that there really isn't much difference between each of these calibers. It is only the fact that some guns can be fired faster than others that causes the perceived difference in stopping power. If a person takes an average of 5 seconds to stop after being hit, the defender who shoots a lighter recoiling gun can get more hits in that time period. It could be that fewer rounds would have stopped the attacker (given enough time) but the ability to fire more quickly resulted in more hits being put onto the attacker. It may not have anything to do with the stopping power of the round.

Another data piece that leads me to believe that the majority of commonly carried defensive rounds are similar in stopping power is the fact that all four have very similar failure rates. If you look at the percentage of shootings that did not result in incapacitation, the numbers are almost identical. The .38, 9mm, .40, and .45 all had failure rates of between 13% and 17%.

Some people will look at this data and say "He's telling us all to carry .22s". That's not true. Although this study showed that the percentages of people stopped with one shot are similar between almost all handgun cartridges, there's more to the story. Take a look at two numbers: the percentage of people who did not stop (no matter how many rounds were fired into them) and the one-shot-stop percentage. The lower caliber rounds (.22, .25, .32) had a failure rate that was roughly double that of the higher caliber rounds. The one-shot-stop percentage (where I considered all hits, anywhere on the body) trended generally higher as the round gets more powerful. This tells us a couple of things...

In a certain (fairly high) percentage of shootings, people stop their aggressive actions after being hit with one round regardless of caliber or shot placement. These people are likely NOT physically incapacitated by the bullet. They just don't want to be shot anymore and give up! Call it a psychological stop if you will. Any bullet or caliber combination will likely yield similar results in those cases. And fortunately for us, there are a lot of these "psychological stops" occurring. The problem we have is when we don't get a psychological stop. If our attacker fights through the pain and continues to victimize us, we might want a round that causes the most damage possible. In essence, we are relying on a "physical stop" rather than a "psychological" one. In order to physically force someone to stop their violent actions we need to either hit him in the Central Nervous System (brain or upper spine) or cause enough bleeding that he becomes unconscious. The more powerful rounds look to be better at doing this.

One other factor to consider is that the majority of these shootings did NOT involve shooting through intermediate barriers, cover or heavy clothing. If you anticipate having to do this in your life (i.e. you are a police officer and may have to shoot someone in a car), again, I would lean towards the larger or more powerful rounds.

What I believe that my numbers show is that in the majority of shootings, the person shot merely gives up without being truly incapacitated by the bullet. In such an event, almost any bullet will perform admirably. If you want to be prepared to deal with someone who won't give up so easily, or you want to be able to have good performance even after shooting through an intermediate barrier, I would skip carrying the "mouse gun" .22s, .25s and .32s.

Now compare the numbers of the handgun calibers with the numbers generated by the rifles and shotguns. For me there really isn't a stopping power debate. All handguns suck! If you want to stop someone, use a rifle or shotgun!

What matters even more than caliber is shot placement. Across all calibers, if you break down the incapacitations based on where the bullet hit you will see some useful information.

Head shots = 75% immediate incapacitation
Torso shots = 41% immediate incapacitation
Extremity shots (arms and legs) = 14% immediate incapacitation.

No matter which caliber you use, you have to hit something important in order to stop someone!

 

[Vanilla Gorilla]

So your arguing that a J Frame is easier to shoot and score hits with?

 

[JR1572]

So your arguing that a J Frame is easier to shoot and score hits with?

I have a J frame that I carry daily. It's a miserable, disgusting, and horrible gun to shoot. I hate it more than any firearm I own. However, it's the best option for the role I use it for.

It is never used by me as the primary firearm I carry. If I have it with me, I'm carrying something else too.

JR1572

 

[JBP55]

I have a J frame that I carry daily. It's a miserable, disgusting, and horrible gun to shoot. I hate it more than any firearm I own. However, it's the best option for the role I use it for.

It is never used by me as the primary firearm I carry. If I have it with me, I'm carrying something else too.

JR1572

I have a like new Kahr PM/CM 9 holster for a dominant right hand shooter if you are interested.

 

[LabRat]

Yeager's response, FWIW

 

[Jack]

If you check out the link Jack...and read the entire article....I think you will get the point. FWIW...the article is data from real life shootings. Not shooting at jugs of water....but actual gun fights.
It's a long article...and I only threw in a couple of excerpts. Like I said...It's a long article....and I only put in a couple of excerpts on my first post....kind of a teaser to grab your interest. In any case...I think everyone should carry whatever gun makes them comfortable. If you feel you will need a high capacity weapon...so be it. As I said in the first post....I was only posting my opinion. And yes...my opinion does have some data to back up my point....that's why I included the article. That said....if you feel the need for more....then I say go for it.

Tim, I've read that study and it is incredibly flawed, it also gives no backing to your statement regarding the number of rounds fired in a self defense situation. First, it only counts hits, as such has nothing to do with total rounds fired. Second, the method for determining fatal shots is flawed. He takes the total number of hits, then factors them against deaths. This information doesn't give anything close to the whole story for a variety of reasons. If someone is shot multiple times, he is limited to one death, but many of those hits can result in death, as such "fatal shots" doesn't equal shots which would cause death. If someone gets shot twice in the head, either shot would most likely be fatal, but using his method, only one round was. This flaw is probably exacerbated when comparing rounds usually fired from revolvers vs. rounds usually fired from semi-automatics, due to the ability to fire more shots from a semi-auto without reloading.

I would also be concerned that his methods for collecting data are skewed. He says:

Over a 10-year period, I kept track of stopping power results from every shooting I could find. I talked to the participants of gunfights, read police reports, attended autopsies, and scoured the newspapers, magazines, and Internet for any reliable accounts of what happened to the human body when it was shot.

Due to the nature of the news media, this form of data collection is clearly flawed. What is more news worthy? Someone being killed or someone being injured? I would venture to say the first, if this is the case, it will skew all of his data to be fatality heavy.

Casting all of these things to the side, how does this provide for any information regarding the number of rounds FIRED in an altercation?

 

[Sin-ster]

On the contrary, Steve-- I love a good history lesson. Especially on an interesting subject!

 

[dwr461]

As a paramedic in the field for nearly twenty years I agree with Tim. All the common full sized self defense calibers work just about as well as the other. Given that all handguns that are carried daily are of about the same size and weight and that the recoil they generate (not perceived recoil) is all about the same the momentum that each bullet carries after hitting a target is similar. They all use different combinations of velocity and bullet weights to achieve that energy delivered. The energy delivered is all about the same particularly when compared to rifles or shotguns.

Dave

 

[Jman1911]

I just put money down on my Gen4 22!!! woo hoo

 

[oleheat]

I have 9's, 40's and 45's.

Now to explain why I do.

BECAUSE I CAN.

Next question!

 

[OneStory]

I just put money down on my Gen4 22!!! woo hoo

Now there is someone who "gets" the 40!!!

 

[Jman1911]

Yeah man!

It's a good mix between 9mm & 45acp........Plus I got a smoking deal on it!

 

[oleheat]

They're all good rounds. I hope we can all agree on that.

Plus, like someone else implied earlier- I'm just thankful the choices are there and we aren't Brazil- or worse.

Shot placement is what matters most, anyways....






......I mean- it's not like we're talking about 10mm here.

 

[Young_gun7]

I like the way the 9 and 45 recoil compared to the 40. I have shot the glock 19, 23, and 36.

 

[rob52]

I carry a 40 because the gun I like to carry currently is not chambered for 45. During the winter months when I wear a jacket then I'll carry my 45 with all them bullets but the reality is I'm 60 years old and never had the opportunity to shoot anyone or even come close to it and I'm probably too old to believe in Zombies. Not to say it will never happen but I suspect my 40 will do just fine if it's called upon.