TexasCHLforum.com

lkd wrote:

The Annoyed Man wrote: We can cherry pick the data all we want to justify what we carry, but that is exactly what it is—"justifying" or "rationalizing." If you don't cherry pick, you'll see a very clear bias toward the effectiveness of larger calibers. And if you can't make it larger, then make it fast and make it powerful enough to throw a bullet of sufficient mass. That is the rationalization for the 9mm as the minimum for me.

I'm somewhat inclined to agree with you, TAM, but I think we all tend to be too finicky when it comes to picking what calibers constitute "large." I tend to categorize pistol calibers into two slots: 1) End The Fight Calibers, and 2) Get Away From The Threat Calibers.

1) End The Fight: Calibers that, statistically, can stop an attacker's threat with 5 or less hits. That's 45ACP, 40S&W, 9MM, 357SIG, and FN 5.7.
2) Get Away From The Fight: Calibers that, statistically, have a poor record of stopping an attacker, but will deter most attackers when struck or fired at: .380, 32ACP, .22LR, 22 Mag, and even tasers (should I add "slingshot" in here? )

gigag04 wrote:Head shots may not be fatal either

tbrown wrote:

gigag04 wrote:Head shots may not be fatal either

That's important if you're shooting to kill. Maybe less important if you're shooting to stop.

gigag04 wrote:

tbrown wrote:

gigag04 wrote:Head shots may not be fatal either

That's important if you're shooting to kill. Maybe less important if you're shooting to stop.

It didn't stop the officer in the video?

Officer Jared Reston wrote:Why I survived? Because I took it to him. I took that fight to him, and I won that fight is why I surived. I'm not going to sit there and let luck or anything else determine my fate. I'm going to sit there and fight, and that's what I think everybody should do.....'cause it's your life, and your business, and you need to take care of your own business.

lkd wrote:

The Annoyed Man wrote: We can cherry pick the data all we want to justify what we carry, but that is exactly what it is—"justifying" or "rationalizing." If you don't cherry pick, you'll see a very clear bias toward the effectiveness of larger calibers. And if you can't make it larger, then make it fast and make it powerful enough to throw a bullet of sufficient mass. That is the rationalization for the 9mm as the minimum for me.

I'm somewhat inclined to agree with you, TAM, but I think we all tend to be too finicky when it comes to picking what calibers constitute "large." I tend to categorize pistol calibers into two slots: 1) End The Fight Calibers, and 2) Get Away From The Threat Calibers.

1) End The Fight: Calibers that, statistically, can stop an attacker's threat with 5 or less hits. That's 45ACP, 40S&W, 9MM, 357SIG, and FN 5.7.
2) Get Away From The Fight: Calibers that, statistically, have a poor record of stopping an attacker, but will deter most attackers when struck or fired at: .380, 32ACP, .22LR, 22 Mag, and even tasers (should I add "slingshot" in here? )

A bad guy without the will to fight can be just as discouraged by a .22 as by a .45. Many perps don't want to have holes put in them that require a trip to the hospital, even if they have a chance of surviving.

The real problem is this: You don't know who you're dealing with until the fight is engaged. Therefore, Category 1 calibers should always be preferred (I have a Walther PP in .32ACP sitting in my safe (belonged to my father), I can't even imagine how it could penetrate two layers of clothing, much less a person)

lkd wrote:(I have a Walther PP in .32ACP sitting in my safe (belonged to my father), I can't even imagine how it could penetrate two layers of clothing, much less a person)

karder wrote:

lkd wrote:(I have a Walther PP in .32ACP sitting in my safe (belonged to my father), I can't even imagine how it could penetrate two layers of clothing, much less a person)

I swear, people are bigger today than they were in our grandfather's day. It sounds crazy, but I just know my grandpa was not dealing with a lot of 300 pound fellows. I can't walk down the street without seeing 250-350lb guys strolling around. 32ACP would be okay for a 130lb guy, but these days we have to carry bigger calibers because there are so many big guys running around. Must be all the Flintstone vitamins we give 'em as kids.

karder wrote:

lkd wrote:(I have a Walther PP in .32ACP sitting in my safe (belonged to my father), I can't even imagine how it could penetrate two layers of clothing, much less a person)

I swear, people are bigger today than they were in our grandfather's day.

Must be all the Flintstone vitamins we give 'em as kids.

karder wrote:

lkd wrote:(I have a Walther PP in .32ACP sitting in my safe (belonged to my father), I can't even imagine how it could penetrate two layers of clothing, much less a person)

I swear, people are bigger today than they were in our grandfather's day. It sounds crazy, but I just know my grandpa was not dealing with a lot of 300 pound fellows. I can't walk down the street without seeing 250-350lb guys strolling around. 32ACP would be okay for a 130lb guy, but these days we have to carry bigger calibers because there are so many big guys running around. Must be all the Flintstone vitamins we give 'em as kids.

speedsix wrote:...ask someone who's been in law enforcement for the last 20 years...he'll tell you there's been a big change in attitude and mindset in thugs...they're more violent and hair-triggered...more likely to hurt someone than 20years ago...they don't fold up when shot like they used to...meaner and more willing to keep on coming...attitudes aren't anything like when I was a cop...and people still respected/feared the uniform...these days, you're not likely to make them want to stop...you're more likely to have to STOP them...by physically incapacitating them...