Unless he is in the armed forces or, less appropriately, the police force it doesn't matter. I'm sorry if I was supposed to know what his line of work is and he might have had a legitimate basis to distinguish, but I doubt that anybody who needs a concealed permit has any real need to analyze "killing power."
Guys I appreciate the help, but we don't need to bash each other over our opinions of which caliber has more knock down power. I already know all that.....I was merely looking for recommendations for a good quality compact auto. Some people prefer larger calibers, some prefer a 9mm, or a .40 for more capacity. To each his own, and hopefully none of us will ever find ourselves in a situation where we have to take someones life in defense of our own....... Thanks again for everyones help......Hook Em
Compensated barrel, makes all the difference. I’ve shot a compensated .40SW with no barrel rise, pretty sweet! Wish I had it on my 9mm.
Bevo, Yes I am in the Marine Corps. Clearing buildings in Fallujah back in Novemeber required the use of my 9 mm on more than one occasion. The M16A4 is too big in close quarters. The 9 mm did not provide enough punch to get the job done. Our targets were hopped up on drugs and did not feel the impacts to my comfort level. I am sure a .45 would have done the trick. Most special force units carry the .45 for that reason. Beretta 9mm is the mass produced choice for everyone else because it has relatively few parts, larger magazine for more rounds, and is lighter. My point is, if he is thinking about getting this weapon for self defense, he should rule out smaller calibers. He says he already knows about that so that was the end of it.
Drugs? What kind of drugs? Opium? I had never heard anything like that before. Learn something new everyday. Wielding a handgun in Iraq has obvious utility and making observations about the effectiveness of various calibres is not offensive. Sitting at one's desk here in the good old US of A and and analyzing the best pistols to stop an intruder is akin to worrying about tsunamis in Austin. I have never heard of anyone using a concealed handgun for any positive result. I'd bet that your child using it to accidentally shoot someone is probably 100 times more likely than one using it to successfully defend the wife and kids from some deranged intruder. A road rage shooting by a licensed carrier is also probably much more likely than some heroic rescue. Accidentally shooting one's nuts off is probably more likely. I don't have facts or links, only a belief and an opinion. Despite Lowery's obvious offense, it is entirely appropriate to answer a question about which handgun to buy with a question to buy one at all. It's no different than a question about when to plant St. Augustine evoking a question about why plant St. Augustine. Has a stun gun ever been used to stop a rape? Has pepper spray? It's not a question anyone should get their shorts in a knot over. If a handgun is used successfully one time out of a million assaults, is it really a viable option? One time out of 100,000? I don't know, but I'm willing to bet that it isn't a really good use of $800. No one is advocating gun control or anything like that. It's purely a matter of questioning whether handguns really serve any useful purpose as a means of protection. I've been involved in an altercation that involved a handgun. Until I am presented with some evidence that handguns serve a useful purpose in conflict resolution I will continue to maintain that they serve no practical purpose.
You are missing the point of his thread. He has already decided to get his concealed license. He is not asking whether or not he will ever use it. He just wants suggestions on guns. My suggestion was a .40 or .45 because of the nature of business he will be conducting with it. The insurgents were on artificial adreniline (sp?). Let me look for a link. I know a few friends who were in an article about the subject. Here is an article from guys in my Battalion. stopthedrugwar.org/chronicle/370/fallujahfoes.shtml
I'm not missing the point. There are plenty of people reading the thread that haven't already decided to buy a handgun. Well, maybe not, but I gave mine away to my landscaper. There is no way that we will do away with handguns in this country even if we were to outlaw them. I'm not even advocating that. It's just about not pissing away money on useless things. Or, worse yet, things that will ultimately bring more harm to you than help. I've said the last. Artificial adrenaline, huh? I obviously guessed wrong on the opium. Does it give them an Albert Ganns superhuman "I Got Shot?!?!" mentality? 48 hours reference.
I have no idea who Albert Ganns is. The article I posted on this thread comes from an article Tony Perry wrote in the LA Times. I couldnt find the original so this repro will have to do.
ao, ganns is a reference to the "48 hours" movie. i think the point he who will not be named is trying to make, is there is a difference between carrying a pistol in iraq and in austin. and i think having a concealed handgun in iraq would be counterproductive anyway. i think you want the insurgents to know you have a sidearm. i have to say i agree with him. i just don't see the use of a concealed weapon. what good is a gun, if the people you want to defend yourself from can't see it? isn't a gun really a tool of intimidation and a symbol saying "don't f**k with me". in a self defense situation, it could only be used as a oneupsmanship play. [see swingers] i guess really the only real use i see is for convenience, being able to put your gun in the glove compartment as you drive. do people really walk around with pistols in their pocket? and i am not for gun control either.
i started a thread on this in the west mall, because, as someone said before, this really isn't the forum to be discussing the implications of having a concealed handgun
If it were a debate about the morality of handguns, I would probably agree that it belonged somewhere else, but the comment was directed at the practicality. I'm sorry that some people got offended by my comments directed at the usefulness of handguns. There are plenty of discussions outside of the West Mall that are quite similar. There was one on Quacks a few days ago about people who drive big SUV's questioning the thinking that goes into that decision. There have been quite a few threads about the decision to be fat. This particular thread is one about the best calibre and make of gun. My suggestion was that there wasn't any useful calibre or make. If the criteria for appropriateness is solely about agreement, then we should put threads about the best albums of 2004 on the West Mall. Lots of disagreement on that silly subject. It wasn't a political statement about handguns. No NRA or Michael Moore involved. It was about the efficacy of them. I think it's a waste of money. MrMyke thinks its a waste of money to plant grass under trees, to unnecessarily prune the trees, and to put down decomposed granite in an area that is prone to flooding. Does that make it only appropriate on the West Mall? I guess that gun control has been the subject of political controvery and that makes some people defensive. Since I'm not in favor of it, (and also not defensive about the subject) I guess I just wasn't sensitive enough to those who ARE defensive about it. Assailing one's gun control beliefs wasn't the intent of the post and I really don't see how it could be read that way. It's just that I think that people who carry guns for their protection are kidding themselves. With that premise, it really doesn't matter what calibre you are using. Our marine who was dealing with PCP-type druggies had reason to conclude that more stopping power was a better course. 99.99% of us don't have that situation on our plate. Back in the 50's or 60's my very intelligent physician grandfather built a bomb shelter and stocked it. He was misguided. It's no different than questioning whether or not someone really needs the off-road prowess of a Hummer when it's never taken off road. It's also not about concealing the thing. I don't have any thoughts on that issue. In the movie 48 hours, Albert Ganns got shot and then went into a stage of utter disbelief and then summoned up the will and energy to make an attack from an unknown place. Goofy reference. Sorry.
It's clear to me that you did misunderstand. Perhaps you perceived a tone that was not intended. The intent was to express that I find the notion that a handgun will actually come in handy someday to be WAY overblown. I have never known anyone that has used one successfully and cannot recall even hearing news reports of an incident. I do recall a story about an old man who shot (in the back) and killed a boy who was stealing a chicken. I'm not sure that he used a handgun, but I wouldn't have called that a useful act anyway. I don't want to open that can of worms. I am serious when I say that I'm not aware of any incidents. I do recall hearing about children accidentally shooting guns. I may have forgotten some incident that I once heard about. The point is that I don't consider it to be likely enough to warrant the gun. We can happily agree to disagree. I used to own a 9mm. It was a piece of **** Bersa. I looked at it and decided that I didn't see how it was ever going to do me any good so I gave it away. I did envision how it could go bad. Just my perspective. I don't have any problem with handguns. I just don't think they are actually going to do any good. The good that they might theoretically do is probably just as well accomplished by simply waving the gun and sending someone scurrying. The odds that any of us around here are going to need the stopping power of a .44 (or whatever) because we have the misfortune to chance upon armed people who are hopped up on artificial adrenaline (or whatever) and intent on shooting one of us are so miniscule as to evoke the ******* ridiculous comment. Perhaps my life is just way too tame compared to yours. I don't know, but I just don't see myself ever in a situation where I'm going to need a concealed pistol for protection. I don't see it for much of anyone. I'm sure there are situations I'm not thinking of, but I'm not able to think of any. Perhaps if a vending machine was getting ready to fall on me? [insert some goofy emoticon to show that I'm not mad and hope you aren't either or whatever it is you are supposed to do]
I'm not mad, we can agree to disagree. Here are some examples for you about the concealed part. As far as calibler, that is just personal preference. link some more
I never said that. I think handguns are more likely to be used for nothing than to be used to stop a crime. I don't know why you leapt to the conclusion that a landscaper is a bad risk. Maybe you didn't. I've known this guy for 15 years and he has mad talent with dry stack stones and is someone I'd trust my children with. He wanted it and I didn't, so I gave it to him. I'm confident that the gun will not be used to commit a crime. I'm slightly less confident it won't be used to prevent one either. Actually, considering what a piece of **** it was I doubt it could be used for either. So, to get back to the thread topic, I heartily denounce the Bersa brand.
Jesus people. My classmate is ex-military, and he carries 2 pistols in his car. Not too long ago, he had a guy come up to the window to carjack him. The guyu pulled a knife and started to lean in the car. My friend pulled his nine. Nothing was said as the guy dropped his knife and ran away. There. It's just one example, but to my friend, it's the only example that matters.
Al, allow me. You are correct, but you only have one life and if there is a .01% chance that a nut is going to drive up to the courthouse in Tyler and start shooting everybody, I'm going to be ready.
I honestly have to laugh at those of you who think there is such an amazing difference between a .38 or a .40, or 9mm. Or that you need 9 rounds in an auto. I guess you guys are ****** shots. You are not going to be able to ever convince me that in 99% of all self defense situations a well place .38 hollow point isn't going to get the job done. Or that if you are a decent shot you will EVER need more than 4 shots. now if I am dating some gang mambers girlfriend I might feel differently. Now I will say that a heavier frame with a lighter round allows for more accuracy for the average shooter. However in most instance where you would be involved in using a concealed weapon the person will be well within 20 feet. Much more likely within 7 feet. I don't think a .38 is going to go bouncing off some guys head, or not disable them with a good chest shot. Here is the single best conceled weapon in my opinion because it is extremely light, and exceptionally easy to conceal. Also very good for a woman's purse. Charter, Taurus and S&W all have again started manufacturing these hammerless .38's. Fantastic for boot or anckloe holsters, unnoticable in shoulder holster, or my preference in the small of the back.
h4l, I looked at some of the hammerless 5 shot revolvers. I think SW made one with a titanium frame that was extremely light. I think that you are right in that a .38 or 9mm can obviously stop an attacker, I just think that a .45 acp stops them better.
I .50 cal will stop them even better... but I can't carry it well in the small of my back. I could probably also put two rounds into a guy carrying a .45 in most cases before they could clear the holster. but yes a larger caliber weapon has more stopping power. But a .38 hollowpoint to the chest is going stop 99% (or more) of anyone you will be defending yourself against. This guy would for example have considerable knockdown power advange over me and my .38. Of course he would need to learn to shoot from a prone position on his back with massive blood loss to best my concealed little .38
