Single stack vs single stack?

[armedwalleye]

The stats also tell us...less than 3 rounds. Less than 3 seconds. Less than 3 feet.

Don't necessarily agree with all the numbers, but if I only get 3 rounds, I wants big boolits.

[smokintone]

Worry less about the caliber you carry, and worry more about being proficient with whatever you do carry.......and carry often!

[Thunderjohn]

I carry my little 380 99% of the time, where I used to carry my other carry guns 40-50% of the time.
I don't care so much about so-called stopping power as I care about 'get the heck off me you dirt bag'.

I really care more about how safe my family and I are when we're in the car, where our odds of being
in a crash far outweigh our slim chance of ever being mugged, attacked, etc.
Not to say it won't happen someday, but I see a lot of people spend a lot of money of firearms for
protection and very little on things like airbags, good tires and brakes, driving schools, etc.
Just sayin'

[codilly]

Well, I OC an XDm with a 13 round mag + 1 for 14, plus a spare 13 round mag for a total of 27 for that firearm. Once I get good enough with it, I plan on CCing as a backup, my XDs with 2 7-round mags (1 in the gun and 1 spare) + 1 in the chamber for a total of 15. I figure 42 rounds ought to be enough, (even for that ain't-ever-gonna-happen-mall-zombie-attack-situation), don't ya think?

The XDm is a double stack, the XDs is a single stack, so soon I'll do both.

As for 9 vs. 45, it's an old debate like OC vs. CC is. 9mm is cheaper, I sure wouldn't want to get shot with one, and I agree, it's shot placement that matters most of all because your goal is to stop the threat.

My reasoning for a .45ACP is simply because a) it will cause severe blood loss (with the right shot placements and type of ammo) and b) it will provide one heck of a shock to their nervous system (as will many calibers), so that's why for me...making cavities and shocking the system to stop the threat.

LOL

[tazdevil]

Well, I OC an XDm with a 13 round mag + 1 for 14, plus a spare 13 round mag for a total of 27 for that firearm. Once I get good enough with it, I plan on CCing as a backup, my XDs with 2 7-round mags (1 in the gun and 1 spare) + 1 in the chamber for a total of 15. I figure 42 rounds ought to be enough, (even for that ain't-ever-gonna-happen-mall-zombie-attack-situation), don't ya think?

The XDm is a double stack, the XDs is a single stack, so soon I'll do both.

As for 9 vs. 45, it's an old debate like OC vs. CC is. 9mm is cheaper, I sure wouldn't want to get shot with one, and I agree, it's shot placement that matters most of all because your goal is to stop the threat.

My reasoning for a .45ACP is simply because a) it will cause severe blood loss (with the right shot placements and type of ammo) and b) it will provide one heck of a shock to their nervous system (as will many calibers), so that's why for me...making cavities and shocking the system to stop the threat.

LOL

Yeah, well I carry a panzerfaust, so there.


I believe the whole argument simply boils down to WHAT DO YOU SHOOT BEST?? A 22 can be quite lethal, and a 50 can miss. SO quit worrying about caliber, and carry what you feel comfortable with, and what you shoot straight with.

[Tronster]

Ok I'll concede a couple of you have brought up some good points about slim 9's vs slim 45's and I suppose there is not a HUGE difference in the overall size between them. I personally shoot 9's great, 45 ok, and 40 like crap (way too snappy). As such I've become a serious 9mm advocate because of it's many good traits and interested in the new crop of ultra slim 9mm like the XDs 9 coming out soon. But everyone says get the XDs in 45. I've shot the XDs 45, and it shoots ok, but after 30 rounds or so my hand is done (tendonitis). How do you become proficient 30 rounds at a time?

Besides, nobody scoffs at a .357 magnum with it's 9mm diameter bullet.

[Ron Burgundy]

I carry my little 380 99% of the time, where I used to carry my other carry guns 40-50% of the time.
I don't care so much about so-called stopping power as I care about 'get the heck off me you dirt bag'.

I really care more about how safe my family and I are when we're in the car, where our odds of being
in a crash far outweigh our slim chance of ever being mugged, attacked, etc.
Not to say it won't happen someday, but I see a lot of people spend a lot of money of firearms for
protection and very little on things like airbags, good tires and brakes, driving schools, etc.
Just sayin'

Well said and good perspective.

[Evad]

I carry my little 380 99% of the time, where I used to carry my other carry guns 40-50% of the time.
I don't care so much about so-called stopping power as I care about 'get the heck off me you dirt bag'.

I really care more about how safe my family and I are when we're in the car, where our odds of being
in a crash far outweigh our slim chance of ever being mugged, attacked, etc.
Not to say it won't happen someday, but I see a lot of people spend a lot of money of firearms for
protection and very little on things like airbags, good tires and brakes, driving schools, etc.
Just sayin'

I was wondering if this would come up. My LCP has gotten many more miles than my other options. I also have a pretty safe car.

[MNGunGuy]

With the exceptions of hits to the brain or upper spinal cord, the concept of reliable and reproducible immediate incapacitation of the human target by gunshot wounds to the torso is a myth. The human target is a complex and durable one. A wide variety of psychological, physical, and physiological factors exist, all of them pertinent to the probability of incapacitation. However, except for the location of the wound and the amount of tissue destroyed, none of the factors are within the control of the law enforcement officer.

Physiologically, a determined adversary can be stopped reliably and immediately only by a shot that disrupts the brain or upper spinal cord. Failing a hit to the central nervous system, massive bleeding from holes in the heart or major blood vessels of the torso causing circulatory collapse is the only other way to force incapacitation upon an adversary, and this takes time. For example, there is sufficient oxygen within the brain to support full, voluntary action for 10-15 seconds after the heart has been destroyed. In fact, physiological factors may actually play a relatively minor role in achieving rapid incapacitation. Barring central nervous system hits, there is no physiological reason for an individual to be incapacitated by even a fatal wound, until blood loss is sufficient to drop blood pressure and/or the brain is deprived of oxygen. The effects of pain, which could contribute greatly to incapacitation, are commonly delayed in the aftermath of serious injury such as a gunshot wound. The body engages survival patterns, the well known "fight or flight" syndrome. Pain is irrelevant to survival and is commonly suppressed until some time later. In order to be a factor, pain must first be perceived, and second must cause an emotional response. In many individuals, pain is ignored even when perceived, or the response is anger and increased resistance, not surrender.
...

Given adequate penetration, a larger diameter bullet will have an edge in wounding effectiveness. It will damage a blood vessel the smaller projectile barely misses. The larger permanent cavity may lead
to faster blood loss. Although such an edge clearly exists, its significance cannot be quantified.
...

Physiologically, no caliber or bullet is certain to incapacitate any individual unless the brain is hit. Psychologically, some individuals can be incapacitated by minor or small caliber wounds. Those
individuals who are stimulated by fear, adrenaline, drugs, alcohol, and/or sheer will and survival determination may not be incapacitated even if mortally wounded.

http://www.firearmstactical.com/pdf/fbi-hwfe.pdf

Using ballistic gelatin to compare the wounding potential of different bullets is most useful when you consider the amount of penetration achieved. Any consideration given to the size of the permanent wound cavity, while interesting, doesn't equate to the effectiveness of the rounds ability to immediately stop the threat. The size of the permanent wound cavity in soft tissue isn't what immediately stops a threat, shot placement in the brain or spinal cord is. A larger diameter bullet, with larger expansion does provide a slight advantage when trying to hit a very small target. A .45 bullet may be "close enough" to nick a vertebrae and damage the spinal column, where a 9mm round might miss entirely. It's a slight advantage, but the larger the projectile, the more likely a close shot will be at stopping the threat.

That's a good read. I posted an ER doctors conference on hand gun wounds somewhere around here.. Another 9 vs 45 thread I think. You mentioned the brain and the spinal cord (really just the base) as being the kill points, which they are. The other obvious and more common method is by bleeding out. A bigger bullet also has a better chance of hitting an artery.

As for size difference.. .45 HST is .2 inches larger in diameter expanded compared to 9mm HST. That's a radius of 2.5mm. Not a huge difference IMO.

[mnmike59]

Stop all the BS! What can you shoot accurately under stress?
Caliber doesn't mean crap if you cant hit what you intend on shooting at. Practice with what you carry. A .22 will work if your accurate with it.

[grousemaster]

Well, I OC an XDm with a 13 round mag + 1 for 14, plus a spare 13 round mag for a total of 27 for that firearm. Once I get good enough with it, I plan on CCing as a backup, my XDs with 2 7-round mags (1 in the gun and 1 spare) + 1 in the chamber for a total of 15. I figure 42 rounds ought to be enough, (even for that ain't-ever-gonna-happen-mall-zombie-attack-situation), don't ya think?

The XDm is a double stack, the XDs is a single stack, so soon I'll do both.

As for 9 vs. 45, it's an old debate like OC vs. CC is. 9mm is cheaper, I sure wouldn't want to get shot with one, and I agree, it's shot placement that matters most of all because your goal is to stop the threat.

My reasoning for a .45ACP is simply because a) it will cause severe blood loss (with the right shot placements and type of ammo) and b) it will provide one heck of a shock to their nervous system (as will many calibers), so that's why for me...making cavities and shocking the system to stop the threat.

lol, this is forum gold

[Tronster]

I carry my little 380 99% of the time, where I used to carry my other carry guns 40-50% of the time.
I don't care so much about so-called stopping power as I care about 'get the heck off me you dirt bag'.

I really care more about how safe my family and I are when we're in the car, where our odds of being
in a crash far outweigh our slim chance of ever being mugged, attacked, etc.
Not to say it won't happen someday, but I see a lot of people spend a lot of money of firearms for
protection and very little on things like airbags, good tires and brakes, driving schools, etc.
Just sayin'

I was wondering if this would come up. My LCP has gotten many more miles than my other options. I also have a pretty safe car.

Same here, there's no excuse to not have at least the LCP with me.

[codilly]

My .380 goes absolutely everywhere with me and even stays in my pocket with complete comfort while at home watching T.V. I can't say that about any of the larger caliber guns I've carried and agree with ThunderJohn completely.

[FJ540]

The standard sidearm in the US Military is the Beretta M9 which replaced the antiquated 1911. So it's apparent the 9mm is better! nuff said.

Because the M9 isn't even shot in BCT - you're under gunned with anything shy of a rifle.

[Pat Cannon]

The standard sidearm in the US Military is the Beretta M9 which replaced the antiquated 1911. So it's apparent the 9mm is better! nuff said.

Because the M9 isn't even shot in BCT - you're under gunned with anything shy of a rifle.

Yep, the military likes 9mm because it's cheaper and easier to train, and mainly because they don't think handguns are important.