The Myth that .380acp is ineffective for personal defense.

This is a discussion on The Myth that .380acp is ineffective for personal defense. within the Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Duhhh! Sorry, that should have said .380ACP, 95 Grain JHP never get old, it just ain't hardly worth it...good eye, guy. Thanks for catchin' ...

Page 6 of 15 FirstFirst ... 2345678910 ... LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 216
Like Tree15Likes

Thread: The Myth that .380acp is ineffective for personal defense.

  1. #76
    New Member Array RW JENKINS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Posts
    5
    Duhhh!
    Sorry, that should have said .380ACP, 95 Grain JHP never get old, it just ain't hardly worth it...good eye, guy.

    Thanks for catchin' that...smile!

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #77
    VIP Member Array gottabkiddin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    North Georgia
    Posts
    6,864
    Quote Originally Posted by RW JENKINS View Post
    Duhhh!
    Sorry, that should have said .380ACP, 95 Grain JHP never get old, it just ain't hardly worth it...good eye, guy.

    Thanks for catchin' that...smile!
    Yeah, I know the feeling..... I'll never see 45 again..

    Excellent post BTW, good reading...

    Stay safe!
    "He that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one." Luke 22:36

    "If a law is unjust, a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so." Thomas Jefferson

  4. #78
    VIP Member Array crzy4guns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    2,637
    I think most if not all would agree that should a self defense situation occur, you are going to fight with whatever you have with you at the time. Whatever is threatening you at the moment is not going to take a time out on the field to allow you to go home to arm yourself appropriately. The fight is now and if you are unarmed, then you will be at the mercy of your attacker(s)! Not a pleasant thought for anyone.

    I wished I had a crystal ball that could foretell the future, and if I saw that I would be attacked on a certain day and at a certain time, I would be some place else. Since this is not reality, I choose to carry a handgun concealed should trouble arise that I couldn't talk my way out, of or get away from it altogether.

    Yes I believe you should carry the most effective handgun(s) that you can, but doing so comes with a price. Generally a more powerful handgun is bigger, heavier and less comfortable to carry. Just the law of physics. You will have to decide what is best for you. What would work for me may not work for you and vice versa. Just remember that Clint Eastwood took off that big .44 when he was done shooting a scene as Dirty Harry. Movies are fun, reality - not so much.

    To my way of thinking I would rather be armed with a .380 pistol then unarmed and begging for my life from some miscreant!
    God bless our troops!

  5. #79
    VIP Member Array Janq's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    6,781
    Quote Originally Posted by farronwolf View Post
    Well based on some research by a fellow named Kleck, whether you choose to accept it or not is up to you, somewhere around 75% of the people who use a gun in a self defense situation never even shoot the thing before stopping the threat. I wonder whether the bad guy checked the caliber before deciding to break off the attack? Probably not.
    But none of that is relevant to the discussion.

    A non-combat event is a non-combat event.
    A defender holding in hand to clenched fists, golf club or whatever else who is able by _posturing_ to dissuade an attacker has by result not actually entered combat. Same applies to using verbal and non-verbal cues and commands to indicated 'Stop' and 'Do not bother me!'.

    Lets say a study indicates that seventy five percent of women who say 'No I'm not interested' are then able to prevent a rape before it happens; Does that count in the big math as related to actual rape?
    Nope. Great for those people, but as toward the not at all small number other twenty five percent...As much is no consolation.

    The discussion is toward use of force by way of .380, as in to be fired as per combat application.
    That is wholly different than simply having the gun on person unused if even handled for threat reference.

    As to caliber checking by the threat, that too is inconsequential to the specifics of the discussion.
    It was not which caliber is more scary seeming or is the .380 ACP barrel hole and gun in sizing intimidating enough to carry.
    There have been those threads before...But this one in specific is not that, at least not thus far.

    - Janq
    "Killers who are not deterred by laws against murder are not going to be deterred by laws against guns. " - Robert A. Levy

    "A license to carry a concealed weapon does not make you a free-lance policeman." - Florida Div. of Licensing

  6. #80
    VIP Member Array Janq's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    6,781
    Quote Originally Posted by crzy4guns View Post
    I think most if not all would agree that should a self defense situation occur, you are going to fight with whatever you have with you at the time. Whatever is threatening you at the moment is not going to take a time out on the field to allow you to go home to arm yourself appropriately. The fight is now and if you are unarmed, then you will be at the mercy of your attacker(s)! Not a pleasant thought for anyone...

    ...To my way of thinking I would rather be armed with a .380 pistol then unarmed and begging for my life from some miscreant!
    Pretty much all of us agree on this, and many have said so in so many words.
    But that too is not the question; Be armed with a .380 or choose nothing at all.

    Of course being armed with a .380 (or _something_) is better than empty hands, hopes for mercy and prayers to God/Allah/Jehovah/Phil N. Theblank.

    The discussion though is toward minimums (!) as related to combat self defense use; Is the .380 an acceptable as into be shoot a person (not show it to them) functional so as to stop an attacker.

    With no other choices available I would bet it all and the kitchen sink that not anyone on the whole of this forum would pass on a .380.

    But in the real world there are in fact very many other options available, above (i.e. 9x19mm, .38 Special, .357 , .40 S&W and .45 ACP as common combat/defense calibers)...and below (i.e. 32 ACP, .22 Magnum/WMR, .22LR and I have even seen folk argue toward .17HMR in a Kimber 1911).

    So the thread has been about minimums,not choosing to pass on .380 at the risk of otherwise being wholly unarmed altogether.

    - Janq
    "Killers who are not deterred by laws against murder are not going to be deterred by laws against guns. " - Robert A. Levy

    "A license to carry a concealed weapon does not make you a free-lance policeman." - Florida Div. of Licensing

  7. #81
    Member Array mandalitten's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Newport, RI
    Posts
    362
    Wild Bill Hickok killed Tutt with a single shot to the heart at 75 yards with an Colt 1851 .36 Navy. The bullet is a 36 caliber (.375-.380-inch) round lead ball weighs 86 grains and, at a velocity of 1,000 feet per second, not too different than a .380ACP.

  8. #82
    New Member Array RW JENKINS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Posts
    5
    Old Wild Bill was a hell of a shot, eh?
    As I previously said, "to a vital spot"...that's the key with any caliber, as we all know.

    I like that example...I need to study-up more on his history...yep!

  9. #83
    New Member Array RW JENKINS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Posts
    5
    Quote from crazy4guns: "To my way of thinking I would rather be armed with a .380 pistol then unarmed and begging for my life from some miscreant!"
    Boy-howdy, you really said that good, and I totally concur!

    Great response...Richard
    "Guns, in the right hands, save innocent lives...Richard"

  10. #84
    VIP Member Array Janq's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    6,781
    Quote Originally Posted by mandalitten View Post
    Wild Bill Hickok killed Tutt with a single shot to the heart at 75 yards with an Colt 1851 .36 Navy. The bullet is a 36 caliber (.375-.380-inch) round lead ball weighs 86 grains and, at a velocity of 1,000 feet per second, not too different than a .380ACP.
    You do know though that very few of the tall tales from those times were then muchless now substantiated as being factual be it distance of engagement (most commonly estimations that also then were commonly grossly exxagerated by 'writers' for both news and so called history books), actual power factor (rounds then were handloads not commercial manufacture and thus completely variable in power), as well their guns back then were typically long barrel measuring 4" to as long as 7" long while a _modern_ .380 has a barrel that is 2" long (Which directly affects both accuracy by sight radius AND propellant burn factor and by that pressure behind the projectile)...Never mind that these guns often had no sights at all and if they did it was just a front bead or post...So Good luck hitting a man sized target with precise accuracy at _twenty five yards_ never mind seventy five (which is greater than shotgun range!) with any degree of accuracy muchless purposeful shots to hearts or eyeballs and the often depicted in also fiction Hollywood movies of dead bang headshots too.

    A Colt 1851 .36 Navy...The same gun depicted in Clint Eastwood fiction flicks

    Image Source - http://www.clinteastwood.org/forums/...topic=4347.165

    Much of the western tales make no sense at all as related to _physics_.
    A small lead ball pushed by blackpowder from a gun with no sights (or just a front bead) being able to be fired with _extreme_ precision across what is for any handgun even a modern ammunition one quite a distance (seventy five yards!!!) to make a precise not njust combat hit but one that is purposeful as to a persons heart...And that single lead ball projectile was not blown off course by air movement (!) even as it was a non rifled round projectile being fired from a smooth bore barrel OR a round projectile being fired from a rifled barrel whihc we well know again by physics and modern guns does not work at all toward accuracy in general muchless fine accuracy.

    For more on that see the Box of Truth as this was well covered years ago, never mind what has been known by hunters for nearly 40 yrs. now with firing shot through a sabot (rifled) barrel.

    Had you said 75 feet (25 yards) I'd maybe then buy it...Maybe.
    But 75 yards, sorry even if it did happen that would be a miracle shot at best.

    - James Bond depends on .380 ACP, even as he and his adventures are pure fiction

    P.S. - For common man reference the width of a standardized full size NCAA soccer field, line to line, shall be no greater than 80 yards and no less than 65 yards...With a suggested "optimum" sizing of 75 yards wide.
    Source - http://www.athleticfieldmarker.com/soccerfield
    Now unless Bill Hickock was real world some sort of shooting prodigy akin to say modern and _actually substantiated_ shooters Bob Munden or Jerry Miculek, then well okay. But he wouldn't be relevant to this conversation either, as they aren't, because of the fact that he is far outside of averages as being a shooter AND that in kind his ability to deploy a given firearm by type and chambering to a given net effect is also irrelevant toward real world capabilities and function of the those who are not one among the less than 1%.

    Cowboy flicks and so called history books are fun to red for entertainment, but we can't in modern times with any degree of seriousness look back to those for direction nor provision of data when it comes to use of modern arms for purpose of real combat rather than criminals shooting at criminals from ridiculous and even wholly unbelievable ranges, as for who knows what reasons that per those time history often had nothing at all to do with defense as opposed to drunkenness and bravado.
    "Killers who are not deterred by laws against murder are not going to be deterred by laws against guns. " - Robert A. Levy

    "A license to carry a concealed weapon does not make you a free-lance policeman." - Florida Div. of Licensing

  11. #85
    VIP Member Array farronwolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,714
    Quote Originally Posted by Janq View Post
    But none of that is relevant to the discussion.

    A non-combat event is a non-combat event.
    A defender holding in hand to clenched fists, golf club or whatever else who is able by _posturing_ to dissuade an attacker has by result not actually entered combat. Same applies to using verbal and non-verbal cues and commands to indicated 'Stop' and 'Do not bother me!'.

    As to caliber checking by the threat, that too is inconsequential to the specifics of the discussion.
    It was not which caliber is more scary seeming or is the .380 ACP barrel hole and gun in sizing intimidating enough to carry.
    There have been those threads before...But this one in specific is not that, at least not thus far.

    - Janq
    Janq,

    I have to disagree with you. In the original post is about the frustration by the OP over the nonsense that the gunshow guy was feeding the woman.

    I heard it again today at a gun show, a woman was looking to buy a concealed carry weapon, and the salesman was telling her not to even look at the .380acp's because they where ineffective for defense, and she'd probably be safer using a BB-gun or pepper spray!
    Totally false information by the gun show guy. Based on Kleck, it didn't matter what caliber of gun was used, 75% of the attacks were stopped by the production of a gun. As stated in my first post in this thread, the purpose in a self defense situation, and the way that I teach my classes is your goal is to "stop the threat".

    The guy literally told me to shut-up, because I didn't know what I was talking about, he teaches gun safety classes, and he's an expert!
    The correct repsonse should have been the guy is trying to make an upsale so please leave him alone. As I have previously stated if the guy thought .380's were useless, they should not have been occupying space on his table.

    The OP then went on to give some energy data from information he had which clearly showed that the .380 has 34 times as much energy as a BB gun. If 18% makes that much difference to folks between a .38 sp and a .380, then certainly 34 times the energy makes a difference between a BB gun and a .380, since the gun show salesman said she would be safer with the BB gun.

    If this thread was about which caliber was most effective, or what is the minimum effective round we are willing to carry I could stand on your side, but since that isn't what the original post is about, we will have to disagree on this one.
    Just remember that shot placement is much more important with what you carry than how big a bang you get with each trigger pull.
    www.ddchl.com
    Texas CHL Instructor
    Texas Hunter Education Instructor
    NRA Instructor

  12. #86
    Member
    Array Paladin3840's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    NW Florida
    Posts
    362
    #'s 4 U

    Per the Marshall/Sanow Handgun Stopping Power study based on street results:

    .32 ACP WW 60 gr. STHP: 61 shootings, 36 one-shot stops, 59%

    .380 ACP WW 85 gr STHP: 59 shootings, 32 one-shot stops, 54%

    .38 special, 2" bbl, WW 125 gr JHP +P: 41 shootings, 23 one-shot stops, 56%. Many carry a .38 snub and would consider this round "adequate".

    There are other loads listed but these are most similar. How "definitive" their study is has been argued ad nauseam so let's not go there. But their work does give a frame of reference based on something more than conjecture.

    Many factors are at play in determining the outcome of a shooting. The difference between the foregoing 3 rounds is probably inconsequential.

  13. #87
    VIP Member Array nedrgr21's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    KCMO
    Posts
    3,105
    Dead at hospital doesn't equal stopping the attack before lethal damage is done to the victim. I tend to question discussions about cartridges by people who didn't actually see the gun that was used. In the case of the nurses/dr's, aren't they most concerned about fixing whatever damage they can find regardless of what gun was used? How many went straight to the morgue? - I see over and over again people making baseless assumptions about stuff they don't know and then those assumptions accepted as fact. I want the attacker stopped b/c he physically can't fight anymore, not b/c he chooses not to b/c he suddenly realizes he's been shot - I'm just not gonna rely on or hope for that, and not gonna choose my carry gun based on that. WRT the guy not wanting to sell a .380, he's reasoning wasn't valid, buy he still may have done her a favor. .380 ammo is about the most expensive out there, about even with .45 ACP and those small guns the .380 is typically chambered in are hard for the novice to shoot well - small sight radius and harder to hold onto (especially during recoil) due to size and weight - same goes for those airweights. People assume smaller bullet means less felt recoil w/o taking into account the size/weight of the gun. That said, I'd carry a .380 if I couldn't find a way to pull off something bigger - but I'd count on pulling the trigger a lot more. Thanks for the BB tip to whoever added that.

  14. #88
    Member Array mandalitten's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Newport, RI
    Posts
    362
    Quote Originally Posted by Janq View Post
    You do know though that very few of the tall tales from those times were then muchless now substantiated as being factual be it distance of engagement (most commonly estimations that also then were commonly grossly exxagerated by 'writers' for both news and so called history books), actual power factor (rounds then were handloads not commercial manufacture and thus completely variable in power), as well their guns back then were typically long barrel measuring 4" to as long as 7" long while a _modern_ .380 has a barrel that is 2" long (Which directly affects both accuracy by sight radius AND propellant burn factor and by that pressure behind the projectile)...Never mind that these guns often had no sights at all and if they did it was just a front bead or post...So Good luck hitting a man sized target with precise accuracy at _twenty five yards_ never mind seventy five (which is greater than shotgun range!) with any degree of accuracy muchless purposeful shots to hearts or eyeballs and the often depicted in also fiction Hollywood movies of dead bang headshots too.

    A Colt 1851 .36 Navy...The same gun depicted in Clint Eastwood fiction flicks

    Image Source - http://www.clinteastwood.org/forums/...topic=4347.165

    Much of the western tales make no sense at all as related to _physics_.
    A small lead ball pushed by blackpowder from a gun with no sights (or just a front bead) being able to be fired with _extreme_ precision across what is for any handgun even a modern ammunition one quite a distance (seventy five yards!!!) to make a precise not njust combat hit but one that is purposeful as to a persons heart...And that single lead ball projectile was not blown off course by air movement (!) even as it was a non rifled round projectile being fired from a smooth bore barrel OR a round projectile being fired from a rifled barrel whihc we well know again by physics and modern guns does not work at all toward accuracy in general muchless fine accuracy.

    For more on that see the Box of Truth as this was well covered years ago, never mind what has been known by hunters for nearly 40 yrs. now with firing shot through a sabot (rifled) barrel.

    Had you said 75 feet (25 yards) I'd maybe then buy it...Maybe.
    But 75 yards, sorry even if it did happen that would be a miracle shot at best.

    - James Bond depends on .380 ACP, even as he and his adventures are pure fiction

    P.S. - For common man reference the width of a standardized full size NCAA soccer field, line to line, shall be no greater than 80 yards and no less than 65 yards...With a suggested "optimum" sizing of 75 yards wide.
    Source - http://www.athleticfieldmarker.com/soccerfield
    Now unless Bill Hickock was real world some sort of shooting prodigy akin to say modern and _actually substantiated_ shooters Bob Munden or Jerry Miculek, then well okay. But he wouldn't be relevant to this conversation either, as they aren't, because of the fact that he is far outside of averages as being a shooter AND that in kind his ability to deploy a given firearm by type and chambering to a given net effect is also irrelevant toward real world capabilities and function of the those who are not one among the less than 1%.

    Cowboy flicks and so called history books are fun to red for entertainment, but we can't in modern times with any degree of seriousness look back to those for direction nor provision of data when it comes to use of modern arms for purpose of real combat rather than criminals shooting at criminals from ridiculous and even wholly unbelievable ranges, as for who knows what reasons that per those time history often had nothing at all to do with defense as opposed to drunkenness and bravado.
    Neither one of us were there, but it is in fact a very well documented shootout with witnesses and is the base of many classic (movie) shootouts. And yes, Hickok was an EXPERT with his gun and you can compare him to Munden and Miculak. I am not saying we all would be able to make a similar shot with a compact .380 today or that his shot was not a lucky shot, but that the round used back then (and the .380acp today) is lethal. Anyone who fires at someone at 75 yards today will have a hard time convincing a jury it was in self defense. Heck, even Wild Bill was convicted of killing Tutt!
    You can read more about Wild Bill here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wild_Bill_Hickok
    and the 1851 revolver here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colt_1851_Navy_Revolver

  15. #89
    VIP Member Array jwhite75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    West Virginia
    Posts
    5,320
    Well givent he fact that there are as many 9mm offerings that are the same size as their .380 counterparts, i will carry a 9mm first. That being said, I have seen the post mortem results of a .380 first hand and up close. It will do the job. The ammo selection is getting much better, and I would not feel unprotected with a .380.
    Friends don't let friends be MALL NINJAS.


    I am just as nice as anyone lets me be and can be just as mean as anyone makes me. - Quoted from Terryger, New member to our forum.

  16. #90
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,158
    Quote Originally Posted by Paladin3840 View Post
    #'s 4 U

    Per the Marshall/Sanow Handgun Stopping Power study based on street results:

    .32 ACP WW 60 gr. STHP: 61 shootings, 36 one-shot stops, 59%

    .380 ACP WW 85 gr STHP: 59 shootings, 32 one-shot stops, 54%

    .38 special, 2" bbl, WW 125 gr JHP +P: 41 shootings, 23 one-shot stops, 56%. Many carry a .38 snub and would consider this round "adequate".

    There are other loads listed but these are most similar. How "definitive" their study is has been argued ad nauseam so let's not go there. But their work does give a frame of reference based on something more than conjecture.

    Many factors are at play in determining the outcome of a shooting. The difference between the foregoing 3 rounds is probably inconsequential.
    Plug the numbers in here http://statpages.org/ctab2x2.html and you will see that they are not statistically significant. That is, from the numbers presented you can't say with 95% certainty that one is better than the other.

Page 6 of 15 FirstFirst ... 2345678910 ... LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Double Tap 380ACP vs. PDX1 or Critical Defense?
    By dbramhall in forum Defensive Ammunition & Ballistics
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: March 18th, 2011, 11:26 AM
  2. 10mm Personal Defense?
    By AZ Husker in forum Defensive Ammunition & Ballistics
    Replies: 39
    Last Post: February 7th, 2011, 03:00 AM
  3. Personal defense
    By nytestalker in forum Defensive Carry & Tactical Training
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: April 6th, 2009, 08:19 PM
  4. Personal Defense TV
    By nextlevelcell in forum Defensive Books, Video & References
    Replies: 78
    Last Post: November 27th, 2008, 11:02 PM
  5. personal defense ammo for .357 sig ?
    By Shizzlemah in forum Defensive Ammunition & Ballistics
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: April 8th, 2007, 11:58 AM

Search tags for this page

.380 acp effectiveness
,

.380 acp for self defense

,

.380 effectiveness

,

.380 for self defense

,

380 acp effectiveness

,

380 acp for self defense

,
380 acp self defense
,

380 effectiveness

,

380 for self defense

,
effectiveness of .380 acp
,
effectiveness of 380 acp
,
is the 380 acp effective
Click on a term to search for related topics.