Do you really feel safe?

[Lurper]

I've noticed that a lot of people here carry sub-standard man stopper calibers for self-defense. By that I mean 38 spl or smaller.
The question is: Do you really feel safe carrying a small caliber gun?

These are the guidelines in which I ask the question.
1. Don't preach to me about shot placement - my placement is good with whatever pistol I use. If you have trained properly, your placement is as good with a .44 mag as with a .22 mag.

2. Don't use the "a small gun in pocket beats big gun at home" argument. It's true but it doesn't address the underlying issue. If you have the option of carrying a bigger (read: more effective) gun, why don't you?

3. Don't justify it by saying a big gun is too heavy. Weight is not an issue if you are dead. Unless you have some legitimate reason that requires you to carry a small gun.


These are the undisputable facts (yet some continue to argue them): larger caliber handguns are far more effective in stopping an attack with one shot than smaller calibers. Yes, there are cases where small calibers have resulted in one shot stops, but they are statisical outlyers.

Obviously, I am biased - I have always carried a 1911, Officer's acp, or L frame S&W. I just want to understand the rationale behind your decision.

 

[Dwight55]

The rationale is simple: what is effective and what is not.

Your position as stated hinges on one concept: "larger caliber handguns are far more effective in stopping an attack with one shot than smaller calibers".

My training is basically military style, . . . my attitude is simple: when I observe a noticeable change in the assailant's ability to harm me, . . . I'll quit shooting: that would be the same if I were carrying an XD45 (14+1) or my Bersa .380 (7+1).

One shot stops other than Barret .50 cals are generally anomaly's in my opinion, . . . therefore I don't subscribe to that policy.

I have no qualms at all with our Browning slabside .22 auto in one pocket (10 rd mag in it, c&l) and another mag in the other pocket. It is utterly reliable, no recoil to speak of, absolutely accurate, and very easy to use. If the assailant is close enough to me to be a lethal threat, . . . he/she is close enough to receive a total of 490 grains of soft .22 caliber lead in his/her face and neck area. And I just have a sneaking hunch it will hurt, . . . disorient, . . . and dissuade the attacker from continuing.

If it doesn't, . . . 3 seconds later, . . . another total of 490 grains of soft .22 caliber lead will be coming air mail, . . . special delivery.

I use the same rationale, . . . whether it is 9mm, .380, .22, .38 special, .45, or heaven forbid, . . . .44 Mag.

May God bless,
Dwight

 

[Edward429451]

I do carry a 39 oz bigbore and when I do occcassionally decide to go small it's a 44 special, but I do understand the rationale behind those who choose to carry a small gun. In my mind, it goes like this...

1) The brain is the primary weapon and when used effectively, you'll likely be somewhere else when the shoe drops.

2) As citizens, just how many incidents do you think will happen to you? Coming to a board like this and hearing horror stories from LEO's and such, doesn't really change the statistical likelyhood that we would need an inordinate amount of firepower. LEO's get the call to go look for trouble, citizens do not.

 

[tubeshooter]

It's a balance, and it's a very individual thing.

I guess people assess their threat risk and arm accordingly.... if they arm at all. Don't forget that a lot of people don't even bother to do that; of course that doesn't apply to virtually everybody here.


I'm not military or LEO and I'm not asked such duties, so some quality .38 +P on up with a pocketknife backup works fine for me. I feel that it is "enough". Others may feel similarly. YMMV. Short answer: Yes, I feel safe.

 

[G-Cym]

I've noticed that a lot of people here carry sub-standard man stopper calibers for self-defense. By that I mean 38 spl or smaller.
The question is: Do you really feel safe carrying a small caliber gun?

These are the guidelines in which I ask the question.
1. Don't preach to me about shot placement - my placement is good with whatever pistol I use. If you have trained properly, your placement is as good with a .44 mag as with a .22 mag.

That actually negates your question. If your shot placement is good no matter what you use, why not carry something smaller? Smaller caliber guns tend to be smaller, lighter, and more easily concealed. The only thing really against them is that unless you hit a very critical area, they lack stopping power. But, as you said, if you have great accuracy no matter what weapon you use, then hitting a very critical area should not be a problem.

Shot placement as the only thing that really matters, no matter what caliber you use. Call it preaching if you want, but it's the truth.


I carry .40SW JHP btw.

 

[Lurper]

The rationale is simple: what is effective and what is not.

By what and who's measure?

Your position as stated hinges on one concept: "larger caliber handguns are far more effective in stopping an attack with one shot than smaller calibers".

Not a concept, but a proven fact by historical and statistical data. Everyone from Hatcher to Fackler have all reached the same conclusion: bigger bullets are more effective.

My training is basically military style, . . . my attitude is simple: when I observe a noticeable change in the assailant's ability to harm me, . . . I'll quit shooting: that would be the same if I were carrying an XD45 (14+1) or my Bersa .380 (7+1).

Exactly what I teach people to do: continue firing until the treat is removed.
By no means was this question intended to advocate firing just one shot. One shot stops is simply the way that Fackler, Hatcher, et al measured handgun cartridge effectiveness.

The brain is the primary weapon and when used effectively, you'll likely be somewhere else when the shoe drops.

Absolutely! But, there are times when the situation is thrust upon you no matter how much situational awareness you have.

As citizens, just how many incidents do you think will happen to you?

To me specifically, in my 48 years it has been 6 or 7 times. But that is not really relevant. My point is that it only needs to happen once. Doesn't it make more sense to tilt every factor that you have control over in your favor?

LEO's get the call to go look for trouble, citizens do not.

Not that it's relevant to the question, but last time I checked, citizens shoot more criminals than cops do nationwide.

Shot placement as the only thing that really matters, no matter what caliber you use. Call it preaching if you want, but it's the truth.

Not true. This is the main point here. A well placed shot with a smaller caliber is extremely less likely to incapacitate than a well place shot with a large caliber. Again proven by historical and statistical data. In fact my argument on shot placement is exactly the opposite of yours. It is just as easy to have good shot placement with a large caliber as with a small. Many people present the (invalid) argument that it is easier to get better shot placement with a smaller caliber.

 

[10 MickeyMouse]

What I carry is decided by my clothing, which in turn is decided by the weather and/or my destination. Most of the time (when not at work), I carry a Witness Compact 10mm under a coat, jacket or light vest. However, when weather gets up to 70+ degrees, I get too hot with anything more than a light tee shirt. The fact that I wear properly fitting Wranglers and tuck my shirt in further limits my options. In this case, I carry a K-T P3AT. On the flip side, potential threats will also likely be wearing lighter clothing in such weather, so the .380 can acheive adequate penetration that it might not during winter time, when everyone is wearing heavy coats and multiple layers.

Forcing oneself to be uncomfortable for the sole purpose of having a more powerful cartridge does two things; One, it makes you less likely to carry at all times (which is the most important aspect of effective CCW practice, IMO). Two, the requirement for heavier clothing to conceal a larger weapon when the weather or occasion suggests that you should be dressed lighter makes one stand out-kind of defeats the purpose of CCW.

Most of us use common sense to determine what we carry; That is, the most effective firearm that can be effectively and comfortably concealed under a given outfit.

 

[G-Cym]

There's also more than 452 times more civilians than police in the US.

 

[cheygriz]

"Bigger bullets are more effective" is an urban myth, with no basis in street experience.

I carry a Sig P239, 9MM and I feel just as safe, and have just as much confidence in it as I have in a .454 Casull. (and BTW, I can put 6 bullets in in a 4 inch group at 100 yards wth my .454 Casull)

I carry a sidearm now, for the same reason that I did in my 22 year LE career. It's a defensive tool, not a phallic symbol carried to "prove my manhod."

 

[Edward429451]

Absolutely! But, there are times when the situation is thrust upon you no matter how much situational awareness you have.

To me specifically, in my 48 years it has been 6 or 7 times. But that is not really relevant. My point is that it only needs to happen once. Doesn't it make more sense to tilt every factor that you have control over in your favor?

This I have to agree with, statistics, schmatistics. Probably why I haven't laid down the 45 for the 38.

 

[BillCA]

The question in my mind is what do you mean by "safe"?

I never "feel safe" going out in public since I try to maintain condition yellow at all times.

If you mean, do I believe my carry gun is capable of reliable one-shot stops?
The answer is no, as no handgun is routinely capable of doing that.

Do I feel adequately armed for "whatever might happen" in practical terms?
Again no, as I don't spend my time planning for extraordinary events -- fighting 4 armed gangbangers or a pair of heavily drugged sociopaths.

Now, if you're asking do I feel comfortable with my choice of carry guns and my ability to use them effectively, the answer is YES.

My rationale is simple - stay as alert to danger as possible, try to stay out of trouble and retreat if necessary. If forced to engage, I'll use all means to survive, even if I have to club him with an empty weapon.

As to choice of firearms, while I prefer a .45 caliber platform, there are times when weather and social constraints dictate carrying something smaller and lighter. I'll dispute your assertion that the .38 Special (+P) is inadequate, especially for urban usage. In some situations, I've carried my lightweight

S&W 432PD .32 H&R Magnum and felt adequately armed against your run of the mill thug.

 

[HiltonFarmer]

Do they make derringers in .454 Casull?

HiltonFarmer

 

[Sturmgewehre]

The original poster seems to subscribe to the notion that 45 ACP = death ray.

I don't see a point in trying to carry on a rational discussion with someone who thinks the 45 ACP kills instantly whereas the 9mm barely breaks the skin. It's pointless, you'll never educate them to the reality of handgun ballistics and it's extremely frustrating.

The only way to keep your blood pressure down is to avoid the discussion entirely.

 

[Sturmgewehre]

Great carry gun BillCA.

Here's mine, a Khar CW9.

Granted, the 9mm will probably only anger an assailant but I continue to take my chances.

 

[JR47]

When did the .38 Special move BELOW the minimum power floor? As far as I know, all of the major schools still teach the .38 Spec. as the minimum defensive caliber to use.

I have an extensive collection of arms, but there are times when the .44 Magnum guns are left at home in the safe, while a .380 or .38 Special go out into the world. Weather, social requirement, and dress codes can, and will, affect how heavily one can be armed. Somatotypes will also have a bit to say about what you can carry.

I don't know about the rest of the posters, but I can't always justify the latest production weapon, in the latest hot caliber in that size frame, to my budget. No handgun will beat a rifle, ask the CCW who was killed outside of that court. Using your logic, we should all be carrying the heaviest caliber rifles that we can physically manage. After all:

1) Shot placement with long-arms is usually easier than with handguns.

2) Handgun vs. long gun doesn't address the underlying issue. If you have the option of carrying a more effective caliber, why don't you?

3) Rifles aren't that heavy if you're dead, either.

That was tongue-in-cheek. But, it also shows how you set up your arguement. By limiting factors advanced by others as trivial, you leave only the answers that you feel are appropriate. If you wanted to actually understand the thinking behind others posts, ask for reasons, don't dismiss them.

I have also had the unfortunate experience of defending myself in the civilian world. I did so successfully twice. Once with a Star PD, and once with a S&W Model 39. I have also defused situations (robbery) where the presentation of a Sauer Model 38H, in .32 ACP, was all that was required.

A gun is a weapon, nothing more. It doesn't act for you. Your own intelligence is the most effective tool that you can possibly wield. Face it, if you're placed in a position where you need a gun, you've already allowed a serious tactical error to occur.

 

[Sturmgewehre]

"Bigger bullets are more effective" is an urban myth, with no basis in street experience.

I agree completely.

I carry a Sig P239, 9MM and I feel just as safe, and have just as much confidence in it as I have in a .454 Casull. (and BTW, I can put 6 bullets in in a 4 inch group at 100 yards wth my .454 Casull)

I have just about every handgun known to man in my safe. In auto's I have everything from .380 to 454 Casull represented. I carry a Khar CW9 because it's small, accurate, reliable and very ergonomic for its size.

I carry a sidearm now, for the same reason that I did in my 22 year LE career. It's a defensive tool, not a phallic symbol carried to "prove my manhod."

Some folks do view their weapons as symbols of manhood. While I take pride in my weapons, I also view them as tools.

 

[G-Cym]

Good post JR

 

[AngusPodgorney]

Not a concept, but a proven fact by historical and statistical data. Everyone from Hatcher to Fackler have all reached the same conclusion: bigger bullets are more effective.

Then why is the .357 magnum rated above the .45acp? Same diameter as the .38 special and a cat hairs difference from the 9mm.

 

[Playboypenguin]

Your whole post is flawed. You are basing it on personal opinion and prejudice.

To call a .38spl sub-par shows a lack of understanding of both balistics and marksmanship.

Seems to me like you listen way to much to gun shop commandos and "so-called internet experts" or gun columnists.

 

[rantingredneck]

I'm still looking for volunteers willing to take six in the chest from my .32NAA Guardian........the fact that no one has yet volunteered contributes to my feeling of safety when I am forced to carry my BUG..........