TexasCHLforum.com

Points well taken, Excaliber.

Perhaps it is just me, but I don't include .22s in the category of mouse guns. I own one (a Hi Standard Trophy) and it is a fun gun to shoot but I wouldn't consider it to be a self-defense weapon. I'm not sure about .25 caliber. Is that above or below the minimum restriction for CHL testing?

While some may be able to carry two full sized guns, most people seem to use a BUG that is smaller and of a lower caliber. That was my principle interest when I got my .380. It is not and will not be my primary carry. Since I've had it, there have been times when my clothes for that day dictated that I carried the .380 or nothing. While the percentage of times when that has happened is very small, it has happened.

Based on that, I thought it was a worthy question to ask for actual situations where a mouse gun had failed.

On the flip side, any caliber can fail to stop a threat. One of the other threads running this morning was about a 77 year old woman with a 9mm who finally ran off a man trying to break into her house. She managed to shoot him in the leg. She, too, could have been the victim of a beating (or worse) given her shot placement.

Logic tells me that to stop a threat, a lot of things have to come together rather precisely. I have to sense the threatening situation in time to act. I have to apply sufficient force soon enough. I do understand that I start stacking the odds against me when I don't apply sufficient enough force. In the case of a failure of my EDC, my assumption is that something else is better than nothing.

I know of two, albiet I can't cite sources.

I remeber reading a decade or so about a pharmacist that was robbed. As the robber turned to leave, the pharmacist emptied his. 25 into the robbers back. The robber promptly turned around and beat the pharmacist nearly to death. The robber was found at a hospital having the. 25 slugs removed from just under his skin. He was wearing a navy peacoat which stopped all of the rounds from penetrating.

The second was related to me by a retired Galveston pd officer and TCLOSE trainer. He was called to the scene of an arguement which led one guy to shootthe other several times with a. 22. When the officer arrived, the person was chasing the guy with the now empty. 22 around the front yard. The gunshot victim died at the hospital.

As far as the. 25 being the one that most people who died in the emergency room were shot with, I have a feeling that it has more to do with it's popularity among the group of people most likely to be shot: gang members. That they may not go to the emergency room immediately, because of the questions that will be asked may play into their morbidity rate. Also, it's possible that because the round is underpowered, they may be more likely to survive long enough to die in the emergency room rather than at or near the scene.

With the ever increasing number of bad guys that are likely to be on something like meth or "bath salts" which make it less likely they'll run away even after being shot the first time and makes it more likely their body will keep going longer than a sober person with the same injuries and I want to inflict the most damage I can to vital organs in the shortest time possible.

chasfm11 wrote:Points well taken, Excaliber.

Perhaps it is just me, but I don't include .22s in the category of mouse guns. I own one (a Hi Standard Trophy) and it is a fun gun to shoot but I wouldn't consider it to be a self-defense weapon. I'm not sure about .25 caliber. Is that above or below the minimum restriction for CHL testing?

While some may be able to carry two full sized guns, most people seem to use a BUG that is smaller and of a lower caliber. That was my principle interest when I got my .380. It is not and will not be my primary carry. Since I've had it, there have been times when my clothes for that day dictated that I carried the .380 or nothing. While the percentage of times when that has happened is very small, it has happened.

Based on that, I thought it was a worthy question to ask for actual situations where a mouse gun had failed.

On the flip side, any caliber can fail to stop a threat. One of the other threads running this morning was about a 77 year old woman with a 9mm who finally ran off a man trying to break into her house. She managed to shoot him in the leg. She, too, could have been the victim of a beating (or worse) given her shot placement.

Logic tells me that to stop a threat, a lot of things have to come together rather precisely. I have to sense the threatening situation in time to act. I have to apply sufficient force soon enough. I do understand that I start stacking the odds against me when I don't apply sufficient enough force. In the case of a failure of my EDC, my assumption is that something else is better than nothing.

I agree that anything is better than nothing as long as one keeps in mind that it's necessary to adjust tactics according to what is being carried.

Target areas selected and the impact hits (including imperfect shots) are likely to have on an attacker in the first 3 or 5 seconds after it's used need to be considered more carefully with small caliber guns than with larger ones. One should also expect the deterrent effect of such a weapon when displayed to be considerably lower as well.

The value of avoidance, evasion, and "tactical repositioning" increase markedly in these circumstances and should not be overlooked.

Excaliber wrote:
The value of avoidance, evasion, and "tactical repositioning" increase markedly in these circumstances and should not be overlooked.

With your agreement, I'd like to open up a separate thread on this part of the discussion. It is an area that I've considered for over 6 months and I'd like to explore it. It would be a marked divergence from the intended goal of this thread.

Chas.

barres wrote:Lot's of stories of "I carry X, because of Y," but not much in actual answer to the OP's original question.

I have no documented reports of a mouse gun failing to stop a threat, but I remember a story a few years back (sorry, I can't remember the source, either) where medical/trauma personnel declared that the handgun caliber by which more people are killed each year than any other is the venerable .25 ACP. Yup, .25, not .45.

I would theorize that this comes from the ease with which a .25 can be concealed, combined with the distinct possibility that both shooters could have mortally wounded the other, but not immediately incapacitated them, thus allowing each other to keep shooting those man-stopper .25s.

Actually, as one of those who was formerly in the ER business, .22 LR is even more commonly used than .25. But.... Lots of those shot dead took a considerable while to die. In fact many accomplished whatever savagery they had set out to do, despite being shot in its commission, and they died because for whatever reason they didn't get to medical care as soon as they should have.

But, I only ever saw one person who had been shot by a handgun caliber beginning with "4" who took a long time to die. That person had been hit twice, through and through side to side, in the abdomen with a .41 magnum. His guts turned to soup, and he died in the ICU about a week or so later of massive sepsis. No .22 LR or .25 ACP bullet made will do to a human being what that .41 magnum did to that guy. His partner in crime, shot with the same gun, was dead on arrival. The bullet that had hit his chest and passed through his heart exited where his left kidney used to be, leaving a nearly fist sized exit hole. His kidney was vaporized and exited his body along with the bullet in question. No .22 LR or .25 ACP bullet made will do that.

So yeah, .22/.25 caliber handgun bullets can definitely kill a man, but even with excellent shot placement, unless you can hit the brain stem, they cannot be counted on to STOP an attacker in his tracks. For that matter, you can't absolutely count on a .45 ACP stopping an attacker.....but, you have much higher odds in your favor in that regard with a .45 than with a .22.

And my goal isn't to kill my attacker, it is to stop him.

chasfm11 wrote:

Excaliber wrote:
The value of avoidance, evasion, and "tactical repositioning" increase markedly in these circumstances and should not be overlooked.

With your agreement, I'd like to open up a separate thread on this part of the discussion. It is an area that I've considered for over 6 months and I'd like to explore it. It would be a marked divergence from the intended goal of this thread.

Chas.

Be my guest!

Have you seen what couple 5.45x39 do on gelatin?

Beiruty wrote:Have you seen what couple 5.45x39 do on gelatin?

I wouldn't categorize any centerfire rifle cartridge as a mousegun round.

Rifle velocity easily makes up for what these rounds lack in diameter.

I am comfortable carrying my Seecamp .32. It can go anywhere I'm legally permitted to take it regardless of the weather or clothing I'm wearing. Its 6+1 rounds will hopefully be sufficient to STOP the threat. I am considering carrying something bigger but I don't think I would do it consistently. If I'm already carrying a .32 I see no point in carrying a .380, so it would have to be a 9mm, so far I haven't found one I would be comfortable covert carrying that I can afford. I KNOW I will be consistently carrying this little mouse gun, so I would rather have it than nothing. If I could have afforded the .380 I would have gotten one of those but then my wife would have probably would have me.

terryg wrote:

Keith B wrote:Without going into the formulas, the heavier the object and the faster it is moving means more mass. The higher the mass, the more energy that object will have to keep moving and in turn penetrate.

Sorry to nitpick ... the word your looking for is momentum. The heavier the object is, the more mass it has. The faster it is moving, the more velocity it has. Both increased velocity and/or increased mass equals an increase in momentum. It is the momentum that directly translates to imparted energy.

Sorry to do this, but to be entirely correct weight (a force) is a function of mass and acceleration. An object can be heavier if it is accelerated at an increased rate while maintaining the same mass. Also remember that when imparting energy, the initial velocity before striking does not matter. Assuming constant mass, the rate of deceleration will determine the force applied at any one point and the force applied over a time period is energy. the correct formula for energy imparted should be =(1/2)(mass)(the change in velocity)^2.

Zoomie wrote:

terryg wrote:

Keith B wrote:Without going into the formulas, the heavier the object and the faster it is moving means more mass. The higher the mass, the more energy that object will have to keep moving and in turn penetrate.

Sorry to nitpick ... the word your looking for is momentum. The heavier the object is, the more mass it has. The faster it is moving, the more velocity it has. Both increased velocity and/or increased mass equals an increase in momentum. It is the momentum that directly translates to imparted energy.

Sorry to do this, but to be entirely correct weight (a force) is a function of mass and acceleration. An object can be heavier if it is accelerated at an increased rate while maintaining the same mass. Also remember that when imparting energy, the initial velocity before striking does not matter. Assuming constant mass, the rate of deceleration will determine the force applied at any one point and the force applied over a time period is energy. the correct formula for energy imparted should be =(1/2)(mass)(the change in velocity)^2.

The correction has already been made and acknowledged - see the following post.

Here's some data in this 5 year study.

http://www.facebook.com/notes/claude-we ... 7512504482" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Shot placement is key.

I can't remember where it was, but I saw statistics that made it look like 9mm was the most deadly round in the late 90's. 9mm had the highest rate of death among people hit with it. What skewed the data was that most law enforcement up to that point during the study period were using 9mm handguns. Better training = better shot placement on average.

Today, the numbers are different because law enforcement uses a wider variety of rounds, and more states allow concealed carry.

It's like the guy who drowned in the river that had an average depth of six inches...

terryg wrote:

Zoomie wrote:

terryg wrote:

Keith B wrote:Without going into the formulas, the heavier the object and the faster it is moving means more mass. The higher the mass, the more energy that object will have to keep moving and in turn penetrate.

Sorry to nitpick ... the word your looking for is momentum. The heavier the object is, the more mass it has. The faster it is moving, the more velocity it has. Both increased velocity and/or increased mass equals an increase in momentum. It is the momentum that directly translates to imparted energy.

Sorry to do this, but to be entirely correct weight (a force) is a function of mass and acceleration. An object can be heavier if it is accelerated at an increased rate while maintaining the same mass. Also remember that when imparting energy, the initial velocity before striking does not matter. Assuming constant mass, the rate of deceleration will determine the force applied at any one point and the force applied over a time period is energy. the correct formula for energy imparted should be =(1/2)(mass)(the change in velocity)^2.

The correction has already been made and acknowledged - see the following post.

]


I apologies for the overlap, I was merely attempting to point out, that momentum could be used as a metric, but it is related to mass, not weight, and that momentum is different than kinetic energy. Again, I should have been more concise.

chasfm11 wrote:Perhaps it is just me, but I don't include .22s in the category of mouse guns. I own one (a Hi Standard Trophy) and it is a fun gun to shoot but I wouldn't consider it to be a self-defense weapon. I'm not sure about .25 caliber. Is that above or below the minimum restriction for CHL testing?

I once knew a man quite well who had a pint-sized .22 mouse-gun with a 10-round double-stack mag. I don't know how the company got the engineering to work, but they did. No, you cannot take the CHL qualification with any caliber less than .32, but, once you've gotten your CHL, there is no restriction on what caliber(s) you carry.