Utah - Home of the M1911

[Schroeder]

I don't want to talk down the .45 but I actually wonder whether there have been cases where a 9mm wasn't enough to stop somebody.
I sure as hell wouldn't want to attack any one anymore if I had been hit by one.

[Freiwillige]

Well ideally you want the most stopping power in the least dangerous to anybody outside your home fashion. The .45 fits that bill perfectly. Its a big round but as was pointed out previously in this thread its velocity is far less than some handgun loads. The 9MM jacketed proved to be low in stopping power in Iraq. Although the military doesn't exactly hand out hollowpoints.

And as far as that empty shotgun scenario
Its a myth. Even if loaded you don't want to cycle it cause you just lost a round in what could be the fight for your life and you just gave away your surprise and position Two things you would be best to keep as long as possible in a worst case scenario!

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by Schroeder

I don't want to talk down the .45 but I actually wonder whether there have been cases where a 9mm wasn't enough to stop somebody.
I sure as hell wouldn't want to attack any one anymore if I had been hit by one.

A .22 in the heart or a major artery will kill him just as well as a .44 magnum. The problem comes with knockdown power. As related in the 'Philippines' story, the attacking Moros could be shot several times with a .36 and still keep coming if not hit in a vital spot, and the .45 would knock them down even if hit in the arm.

On the other hand the .36 in question was a revolver, and only held six shots. The modern 9mm does let you shoot two or three times in rapid succession, which certainly helps. Also important is the fact that most gunfights involve a lot more misses than hits, so having that extra ammo is nice.

I good explanation can be found in the post by Alex Niese here http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?ui...18&topic=19107. He gives the reasons for preferring either weapon, and for his personal preference.

It boils down to preference. The 9mm is faster, has a higher capacity, is more accurate, and is prone to over-penetration. This puts you in situations where you have to worry about wounding an innocent with a through-and-through shot. The .45 is slower, has a smaller capacity, and because of it's slower speed, expands better and is more likely to stay in the body. Also, the .45's wound channel is larger, and has a better chance of staying open. I know, I know, penetration all depends on the bad guy's body mass, clothing, etc, I'm talking about tests in ballistic gelatin. It's honestly just a personal choice--I couldn't decide between the two, thats why I went with .40. Its a nice balance of the two. Then again, thats just my opinion, not the law.

[Gerald]

[Schroeder]

@Freiwillige & Sailor Steve

Thanks, I didn't know that a .45 could get stuck in a human body.

[TLAM Strike]

[August]

Originally Posted by Freiwillige

And as far as that empty shotgun scenario
Its a myth. Even if loaded you don't want to cycle it cause you just lost a round in what could be the fight for your life and you just gave away your surprise and position Two things you would be best to keep as long as possible in a worst case scenario!

Exactly. For safety reasons you don't keep a round in the chamber. Racking the slide both arms the weapon AND opens up a space in the magazine to load another round.

If your serious about defending yourself during Home invasions?
You've alot more rigged then just a Fire Arm.
My home HAS BEEN invaded!
(The wife and I were in Hawaii at the time or bodies WOULD have been hauled out!
My step-son and his friend ended up in a hospital, the perps ended up in prison.)

I have more then just Fire Arms ready to defend my home now.
They are pretty much fail safe in the fact they use one's instincts against the invader, are non-lethal to the invader (unless he hangs around)
, and secure my family in a safe room without getting out of bed.

[Platapus]

Originally Posted by Schroeder

I don't want to talk down the .45 but I actually wonder whether there have been cases where a 9mm wasn't enough to stop somebody.
I sure as hell wouldn't want to attack any one anymore if I had been hit by one.

Both the .45 and the 9mm are effective rounds for self defense. The .45 vs 9mm debate has been going on for years and years.

Bullet design influences each one's effectiveness. But all influences are overshadowed by bullet placement.

A .45 in the "wrong" place will result in the person still standing and being able to shoot back. A 9mm in the "right" place will drop them immediately.

What is the right and wrong place? Depends on the situation.

Neither the .45 nor the 9mm is a guaranteed stop or guaranteed kill.

There is also the influences of how the shooter can shoot the individual gun. .45 handguns are not the same as 9mm handguns and some shooters can shoot better with one than the other.

When I was shooting IPSA scores were downgraded when the shooter used the 9mm (at least they did about 20+ years when I was shooting in competition), but many shooters still choose to use the 9mm round despite this downgrading. Why? Because their shooting ability with the 9mm compensated for the scoring differences.

It is always better to hit with a 9mm than to miss with a .45

It is also better to shoot your target with two 9mm rounds than one .45 round Double tapping with a .45 can be more difficult than with a 9mm, depending on the firearm.

[Gerald]

Originally Posted by Platapus

Both the .45 and the 9mm are effective rounds for self defense. The .45 vs 9mm debate has been going on for years and years.

Bullet design influences each one's effectiveness. But all influences are overshadowed by bullet placement.

A .45 in the "wrong" place will result in the person still standing and being able to shoot back. A 9mm in the "right" place will drop them immediately.

What is the right and wrong place? Depends on the situation.

Neither the .45 nor the 9mm is a guaranteed stop or guaranteed kill.

There is also the influences of how the shooter can shoot the individual gun. .45 handguns are not the same as 9mm handguns and some shooters can shoot better with one than the other.

When I was shooting IPSA scores were downgraded when the shooter used the 9mm (at least they did about 20+ years when I was shooting in competition), but many shooters still choose to use the 9mm round despite this downgrading. Why? Because their shooting ability with the 9mm compensated for the scoring differences.

It is always better to hit with a 9mm than to miss with a .45

It is also better to shoot your target with two 9mm rounds than one .45 round Double tapping with a .45 can be more difficult than with a 9mm, depending on the firearm.

A lot to do with where you aim somewhere, and what type of ammo you use

Anyone shooting in a defensive or offensive mode should be doing a double tap anyway.
Many Military Fire Arms now fire 2 shots anyway on selectable don't they?

Originally Posted by Vendor

A lot to do with where you aim somewhere, and what type of ammo you use

In the dark and in a near panic mode?
Most just fire in a general direction.
Ammo used is based mostly on what you THINK is good.
The average person probably uses what is sold to them by a Gun Shop.
I prep my Ammo to do the worst damage it can.
A hollow point is nice, but an explodeing round is better in Home Defence.
It may be illegal as all get out?
But better judged by 12 then carried by 6!

[Gerald]

Originally Posted by privateer

In the dark and in a near panic mode?
Most just fire in a general direction.
Ammo used is based mostly on what you THINK is good.
The average person probably uses what is sold to them by a Gun Shop.
I prep my Ammo to do the worst damage it can.
A hollow point is nice, but an explodeing round is better in Home Defence.
It may be illegal as all get out?
But better judged by 12 then carried by 6!

Now is this the way that I did not get into a panic mode, the darkness is my friend many times, and I use the weapon, which is best for the current situation, in most cases, I have two weapons, one can be with a silencer, and the other is a back-up so for me I do not use guns to protect me for intruders

In the U.S.?
Sound Suppression on a Fire Arm is illegal!
Worse then explodeing ammo!

On the not getting in a panic mode?
Some may not. Most will just freak due to lack of proper Mind set or training.
There are many cases in the U.S. of people killing loved ones out of shear panic.
Someone came home late and tried to sneak in and such.

Accidental shootings of persons comes from believeing one is better then the weapon.
One MUST fully understand they are the ultimate controller of said weapon!
It will kill you or others at the moment you let your guard down!
I had a fellow ParaTrooper back in the day that forgot this.
In the barracks one night they decided to play 'quick draw'.
Both did a Gun Fight quick draw type thing.
One died. In the blink of an eye?
His whole world was was gone. There is no takeing that back.
The other went to jail for I don't know how long.
His world was therefore crushed also.
Why? Because they let down thier guards about Fire Arms.
They are NOT toys.

[Platapus]

Originally Posted by privateer

In the U.S.?
Sound Suppression on a Fire Arm is illegal!
Worse then explodeing ammo!

Not always illegal, In many states it is a Class III device. If you have the right permits and pay the taxes, you can own them.