Amp Mangum
The debate is over.... LOL... My hell, the arrogance of the High Priests of Gunkata...
I've read so much of this over my gun-packing life.
Wonder Nines came out as the end all, be all of Defensive Capabilities. Then the Clinton Assault Weapons Ban happened and a big swing came back to the .45's and 1911 popularity surged once again. And then the AWB sunsetted and all sudden over-stuffed magazines became the ticket again. Training videos like Magpul's make lots of rapid fire look cool and that's become the model of the cool Tactical Guy... Ripping off a high cap mag as fast as you can.
Sure, 9mm projectiles have become much better than the old Silver Tips after the 1986 Miami Dade Massacre. But the same engineering tricks going into the 9mm bullets is going into the .40's and the .40's and .38's and .357's as well. All handgun bullets have gotten better.
9mm gives you decent performance in a package that has lower recoil and a couple more rounds in the mag... Which is nice.
But I like to follow the advice of Sun Tzu. Have you guys read the Art of War? If not, you need to. Sun Tzu said to Hit the Enemy first, and hit him so hard he can not hit back. Think about that for a moment. Consider it. And consider that most defensive shootings are one shot events. Average shots being 1 point something... So Sun Tzu's advice holds true. He who hits first usually wins. So I want my first shot to be a hit. And I want that first shot to be as powerful as I can get it. For me - that means .357 Magnum or .45 Auto. I prefer loads that are Heavy for Caliber. I have a 9mm, but I don't carry it very often...
I've experience from first hand actions to first hand observations of the effectiveness of 9mm... And I do find it adequate. But I want more than adequate.
So for me - No. The Debate is not over.... because for me, there is no debate. A Bigger Hammer solution is always my preference.
I've read so much of this over my gun-packing life.
Wonder Nines came out as the end all, be all of Defensive Capabilities. Then the Clinton Assault Weapons Ban happened and a big swing came back to the .45's and 1911 popularity surged once again. And then the AWB sunsetted and all sudden over-stuffed magazines became the ticket again. Training videos like Magpul's make lots of rapid fire look cool and that's become the model of the cool Tactical Guy... Ripping off a high cap mag as fast as you can.
Sure, 9mm projectiles have become much better than the old Silver Tips after the 1986 Miami Dade Massacre. But the same engineering tricks going into the 9mm bullets is going into the .40's and the .40's and .38's and .357's as well. All handgun bullets have gotten better.
9mm gives you decent performance in a package that has lower recoil and a couple more rounds in the mag... Which is nice.
But I like to follow the advice of Sun Tzu. Have you guys read the Art of War? If not, you need to. Sun Tzu said to Hit the Enemy first, and hit him so hard he can not hit back. Think about that for a moment. Consider it. And consider that most defensive shootings are one shot events. Average shots being 1 point something... So Sun Tzu's advice holds true. He who hits first usually wins. So I want my first shot to be a hit. And I want that first shot to be as powerful as I can get it. For me - that means .357 Magnum or .45 Auto. I prefer loads that are Heavy for Caliber. I have a 9mm, but I don't carry it very often...
I've experience from first hand actions to first hand observations of the effectiveness of 9mm... And I do find it adequate. But I want more than adequate.
So for me - No. The Debate is not over.... because for me, there is no debate. A Bigger Hammer solution is always my preference.
Sun Tzu may have said hit them so hard they can't hit back. Chiefjason says kept hitting them till they can't hit back. I don't train to shoot once. If I need to shoot, expect multiple incoming rounds. I think part of that percentage is a lot of people just shoot once because they don't train any other way.
And IMO, carry whatever you shoot best. Doesn't bother me.
And IMO, carry whatever you shoot best. Doesn't bother me.
Give larry 2 hours. The .40 S&W will win. I do not trust his view on anything anymore.
Do you guys remember his line of Vickers 1911 custom pistols? Then one day BAM its Glock and 1911's are 2nd class.
Then the DD rifle sponsorship where the best, then BAM, now BCM is the best.
Pure BS
John
Do you guys remember his line of Vickers 1911 custom pistols? Then one day BAM its Glock and 1911's are 2nd class.
Then the DD rifle sponsorship where the best, then BAM, now BCM is the best.
Pure BS
John
Your still shooting them with a pistol..... Which you should be using to leave or get to a long gun...which I am going to get to put this dead horse out of its misery.
I determined early in life, that although I was not man enough to punch big holes, I prefer them.
9mm pistols hold a lot of bullets and are easy to shoot.
The guns are harder to shoot, hold less bullets and are no more effective on the street than 9mm.
<cringe>
Pet peeve of mine, I reckon.
The guns are harder to shoot, hold less bullets and are no more effective on the street than 9mm.
<cringe>
Pet peeve of mine, I reckon.
Yep! The debate is OVER! YIPEE! WAHOO!
Now starts the debate over the claim that the debate is over...
Let's look at the question posed: "The question was simple; if you had to choose one pistol caliber for self defense and range use what would it be."
Not for self defense OR range use, but BOTH. I don't know about you, but my needs for the one do not coincide 100% with the needs of the other by any stretch of the imagination.
Now let's look at some of the posting on why:
It was no surprise to me; I've been preaching the benefits of 9mm for quite awhile now and I'm not alone. 9mm pistols hold a lot of bullets and are easy to shoot. There are many good models to choose from. Practice Ammo is easy to get and fairly cheap. And most importantly some of the self defense loads on the market are very effective.
So, the criteria is a lot of easy to shoot, fairly cheap bullets and many good models to choose from. Oh yeah...and SOME of the self defense loads on the market are very effective.
Well, tie me up and slap me silly! First we ask what pistol caliber for BOTH self defense AND range use. Not one or the other: two different uses. Then we go on about how it's so much easier and cheaper to shoot and how SOME of the self defense loads on the market are very effective.
With that kind of justification, gimme a PMR-30, folks!
One thing I had been doing for years is asking LE officers who carry 9mm what specific load they use and what performance has it provided on the job. Without exception anytime officers were carrying the Winchester Ranger 127 grain +P+ or the Speer Gold Dot they had nothing but good things to say.
Hurray for anecdotal evidence! WOOHOO! There's justification for you! No real reasons WHY based on performance analysis anywhere, just go with the touchy-feely flow, man! How 'bout some actual evidence which backs up these claims?
An exception to that in my opinion would be if you are stuck for whatever reason to carrying ball Ammo only. At that point all the calibers are just gonna poke a hole in the bad guy and a bigger hole is better than a smaller one so .45 ACP rules.
Ohhhhh...now we put in a disclaimer here! "Well, the 9mm is better all the way around EXCEPT..."
No. In fact, NO, NO, NO, NO!
Ball ammo doesn't poke holes the way he's claiming in human tissue. They poke a hole that EXPANDS around the rounded tip of the bullet like elastic...and then closes back down again after the bullet passes through the tissue. .45 caliber ball may make a marginally bigger hole than the 9mm hole, but that's about it. Human tissue is extremely elastic and rebounds very well. Shoot a guy with wadcutters or hollowpoints on the other hand and the tissue damage is radically different because these types of bullet designs will cut and tear their way through tissue.
Everything about comparing two different calibers of bullets is stupid UNLESS you make allowances for things. And the more allowances you make, the worse the comparison becomes.
Let's toss out expense of ammunition here. There is a pretty hefty difference between the price of target ammo. But that difference is not nearly so pronounced for comparable self-defense ammo.
That leaves us with essentially three issues here:
1. Terminal ballistics
2. Capacity
3. Recoil.
Just based on terminal ballistics alone, a larger bullet will cause more tissue damage than a smaller bullet of the same design. This means the .45 wins, hands down.
That said, terminal ballistics also involves penetration...and the smaller cross-sectional area of the smaller 9mm, combined with its higher velocities, can poke holes easier. But hey! That's why there are so many weights and velocities available in BOTH calibers! Put them on a fairly equal basis, and the .45 terminal ballistics still tops the 9mm.
Capacity: OK, now we're talking about the gun itself and not the ammunition. But there ARE high capacity .45's out there. The obvious issue between them is that it's easier for most people to grip a double-stack 9mm than a double-stack .45. More bullets IS an important factor...but not the be-all. But for a lot of us who carry concealed...the slim profile of a single stack often wins out over the higher capacity of a double-stack.
Recoil: Sorry, Charlie...I'm not seeing much of a problem here. I suppose for rapid fire, the 9mm is easier to handle. But honestly, is it really THAT much of a problem for people who actually visit the range frequently enough to maintain their skills...like, oh, I dunno...all those officers Larry interviewed who are SUPPOSED to be proficient with their weapons?
I have pistols in both, and I like them both. But to say that the ,45/9mm debate is over is asinine. It will always be around.
Larry Vickers didn't do much more here than conduct a public opinion poll, and that's where he lost me on this.
Now starts the debate over the claim that the debate is over...
Let's look at the question posed: "The question was simple; if you had to choose one pistol caliber for self defense and range use what would it be."
Not for self defense OR range use, but BOTH. I don't know about you, but my needs for the one do not coincide 100% with the needs of the other by any stretch of the imagination.
Now let's look at some of the posting on why:
It was no surprise to me; I've been preaching the benefits of 9mm for quite awhile now and I'm not alone. 9mm pistols hold a lot of bullets and are easy to shoot. There are many good models to choose from. Practice Ammo is easy to get and fairly cheap. And most importantly some of the self defense loads on the market are very effective.
So, the criteria is a lot of easy to shoot, fairly cheap bullets and many good models to choose from. Oh yeah...and SOME of the self defense loads on the market are very effective.
Well, tie me up and slap me silly! First we ask what pistol caliber for BOTH self defense AND range use. Not one or the other: two different uses. Then we go on about how it's so much easier and cheaper to shoot and how SOME of the self defense loads on the market are very effective.
With that kind of justification, gimme a PMR-30, folks!
One thing I had been doing for years is asking LE officers who carry 9mm what specific load they use and what performance has it provided on the job. Without exception anytime officers were carrying the Winchester Ranger 127 grain +P+ or the Speer Gold Dot they had nothing but good things to say.
Hurray for anecdotal evidence! WOOHOO! There's justification for you! No real reasons WHY based on performance analysis anywhere, just go with the touchy-feely flow, man! How 'bout some actual evidence which backs up these claims?
An exception to that in my opinion would be if you are stuck for whatever reason to carrying ball Ammo only. At that point all the calibers are just gonna poke a hole in the bad guy and a bigger hole is better than a smaller one so .45 ACP rules.
Ohhhhh...now we put in a disclaimer here! "Well, the 9mm is better all the way around EXCEPT..."
No. In fact, NO, NO, NO, NO!
Ball ammo doesn't poke holes the way he's claiming in human tissue. They poke a hole that EXPANDS around the rounded tip of the bullet like elastic...and then closes back down again after the bullet passes through the tissue. .45 caliber ball may make a marginally bigger hole than the 9mm hole, but that's about it. Human tissue is extremely elastic and rebounds very well. Shoot a guy with wadcutters or hollowpoints on the other hand and the tissue damage is radically different because these types of bullet designs will cut and tear their way through tissue.
Everything about comparing two different calibers of bullets is stupid UNLESS you make allowances for things. And the more allowances you make, the worse the comparison becomes.
Let's toss out expense of ammunition here. There is a pretty hefty difference between the price of target ammo. But that difference is not nearly so pronounced for comparable self-defense ammo.
That leaves us with essentially three issues here:
1. Terminal ballistics
2. Capacity
3. Recoil.
Just based on terminal ballistics alone, a larger bullet will cause more tissue damage than a smaller bullet of the same design. This means the .45 wins, hands down.
That said, terminal ballistics also involves penetration...and the smaller cross-sectional area of the smaller 9mm, combined with its higher velocities, can poke holes easier. But hey! That's why there are so many weights and velocities available in BOTH calibers! Put them on a fairly equal basis, and the .45 terminal ballistics still tops the 9mm.
Capacity: OK, now we're talking about the gun itself and not the ammunition. But there ARE high capacity .45's out there. The obvious issue between them is that it's easier for most people to grip a double-stack 9mm than a double-stack .45. More bullets IS an important factor...but not the be-all. But for a lot of us who carry concealed...the slim profile of a single stack often wins out over the higher capacity of a double-stack.
Recoil: Sorry, Charlie...I'm not seeing much of a problem here. I suppose for rapid fire, the 9mm is easier to handle. But honestly, is it really THAT much of a problem for people who actually visit the range frequently enough to maintain their skills...like, oh, I dunno...all those officers Larry interviewed who are SUPPOSED to be proficient with their weapons?
I have pistols in both, and I like them both. But to say that the ,45/9mm debate is over is asinine. It will always be around.
Larry Vickers didn't do much more here than conduct a public opinion poll, and that's where he lost me on this.
What if I told you that you should carry what YOU are proficient AND comfortable with whether it is 25 auto or 454 Casull. If you are comfortable and proficient with what you are carrying, and you practice and train with it on a regular basis, should the (God forbid) situation ever arise, your muscle memory and subconscious mind will give you a much better chance at staying alive, even eliminating the threat altogether.
I don't need some super-shooter with some world-famous name giving me his advice on this or that. Some of them are REALLY good at competitive shooting, and I'm happy for them, but they are going to rooster for the henhouse that writes the fattest check. That's fine, I get it, but when you're in a Waffle House and a thug comes in with intentions of armed robbery, there's a very high likelihood the "super-shooters" will not be sharing a booth with you. Just sayin'....
That's why you practice, practice, practice, practice, practice, practice, and when you're tired take a break and then practice some more......your carry weapon, regardless of caliber, should be YOUR point-and-click (bang) solution. You don't have to put two in the body and one in the head, from concealment, seated at the table with the fork in your strong hand...you MUST be able to analyze the scenario, decide in less than a second if the threat requires deadly force, if "yes" then draw and engage the threat............
You know, I could go on and on and on ad nauseum about this, but until you are facing another human being with a gun, pointed at YOU or a loved one, you don't REALLY know....that's why you train and practice...to make as much of it as autonomous as humanly possible. Under duress, your physiology and psychology changes DRASTICALLY. Face it...cardboard and steel are NOT deadly threats, but it's the best we can do. You don't have to be that guy who ALWAYS scores in the top 5%....you just have to be comfortable and confident with your own self.....
My $.02.....
I don't need some super-shooter with some world-famous name giving me his advice on this or that. Some of them are REALLY good at competitive shooting, and I'm happy for them, but they are going to rooster for the henhouse that writes the fattest check. That's fine, I get it, but when you're in a Waffle House and a thug comes in with intentions of armed robbery, there's a very high likelihood the "super-shooters" will not be sharing a booth with you. Just sayin'....
That's why you practice, practice, practice, practice, practice, practice, and when you're tired take a break and then practice some more......your carry weapon, regardless of caliber, should be YOUR point-and-click (bang) solution. You don't have to put two in the body and one in the head, from concealment, seated at the table with the fork in your strong hand...you MUST be able to analyze the scenario, decide in less than a second if the threat requires deadly force, if "yes" then draw and engage the threat............
You know, I could go on and on and on ad nauseum about this, but until you are facing another human being with a gun, pointed at YOU or a loved one, you don't REALLY know....that's why you train and practice...to make as much of it as autonomous as humanly possible. Under duress, your physiology and psychology changes DRASTICALLY. Face it...cardboard and steel are NOT deadly threats, but it's the best we can do. You don't have to be that guy who ALWAYS scores in the top 5%....you just have to be comfortable and confident with your own self.....
My $.02.....
You ever tried nailing a 60d 6" nail into solid wood with a small 10oz hammer for trim / finishing? 
Take's more taps.....like 9mm may
Take's more taps.....like 9mm may 
Good points all. I have both, carry 9mm. Carry what you want. Why the debate?
I will say LAV's 1911s are still some of the best out there. And it is good to know that if I had one and needed it worked on it is a 90 minute drive to have him work on it.
I will say LAV's 1911s are still some of the best out there. And it is good to know that if I had one and needed it worked on it is a 90 minute drive to have him work on it.
Many people will always want to justify and defend what they own or prefer. It is a sign of insecurity.
But we can all agree that 10mm > all.
But we can all agree that 10mm > all.
I went from .45 to 9mm because 9mms tend to be easier to carry and now that I can do that here it's important.
The house gun is a giant sized .45 because if you don't have to carry it around all day, why not have lots of big bullets instead of lots of small bullets?
Another AWB hits and we're all limited to 10 rounds again then maybe .45 picks up in popularity again for carry?
The house gun is a giant sized .45 because if you don't have to carry it around all day, why not have lots of big bullets instead of lots of small bullets?
Another AWB hits and we're all limited to 10 rounds again then maybe .45 picks up in popularity again for carry?
Practice 45 ammo is cheaper if you reload it than having to buy 9mm. And 45 is easier to reload, if you also reload .308/.243/.30-06, since they use the same shell holder
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
