Micro Compact vs Full Size: Throwing bricks vs rocks
This is a discussion on Micro Compact vs Full Size: Throwing bricks vs rocks within the Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Originally Posted by juking
*edit*..the following comments by me, were made BEFORE I became aware that the clerk was using the smaller Glock 27..which enforces ...
July 11th, 2007 07:53 AM
Lol!..if you read the above quote carefully, you should see that I am suggesting a smaller gun (than a Glock 23).."say.. a 3" 1911 .45 w/ 10 round double stack mag"..as opposed to a full size Glock 23 (13-15 round mag)..
Originally Posted by juking
Before discovering that the original clip story was indeed incorrect..I decided to leave the original Glock 23 comment unedited.. I could have changed it to.."say.. a Glock 27 w/ 10 round double stack mag"..but that would be cheating, and just wouldn't be right, now would it? LOL! The clerk also said that he has changed his choice of ammo after the incident..since two out of the three rounds "over penetrated"..I also discovered this fact after the original post..I feel that this is the most important point to this whole story, and further proves my original point..The clerk is an instructor who "has fired thousands of rounds down range", but suddenly changes his choice of ammo after only one real life encounter.
The newer ammo designs in later years quite simply have not been subjected to real life test situations like their war time .45 predisesors.
July 11th, 2007 07:53 AM
July 11th, 2007 08:31 AM
Your best carry piece is one that you've practiced with and have become proficient using irregardless the caliber.
For me it's a 1911 in .45. This is not a slam just a fact.
July 11th, 2007 12:11 PM
July 11th, 2007 12:30 PM
I agree with QK, all of his shots WERE well placed shots because all of them hit his target. In tactical shooting with a moving target and high stress that's really all you can hope for.
The human body coupled with modern medicine is an incredible machine.
I read a report about four years ago about a man who was shot eight time in the chest. By some miracle, not ONE bullet struck a vital organ and he was actually able to stay in the fight until medics arrived (if I recall correctly, he was an LEO and no, I don't remember the caliber of the gun, either).
There is also a thread going on right now with a video of a police officer being shot in the face and still surviving.
Sometimes some VERY well placed shots do absolutely nothing and with the help of an Emergency room and the Intensive Care Units around the U.S. it's no wonder that more gun shot wounds fail to be fatal.
We may shoot to kill, but once the bullet leaves the muzzle of the gun we have no control over whether that bullet will finish the job or not. HOWEVER, that should not be our obsession.
The fact of the matter is that despite the gun or its caliber, despite the BG surviving, he was still hit three times and a crime was prevented... THAT, my friends, is the point. It's why we carry guns in the first place.
Now, I'm not saying all of that to say that I think we should all walk around with .22s. I, personally, won't carry anything less than a .380. I do understand wound trauma and all of that, and the bigger the caliber the better chance you are going to have of stopping someone faster. That also doesn't mean that we should all walk around carrying .50 AEs either. Target reacquisition is something that needs to be considered and if a 9mm is what is comfortable for you and what you can use most effectively. BY ALL MEANS, carry that 9.
I'd rather carry a 9 than nothing at all. Heck, I'd rather carry a .380 or even a .22 than nothing at all, but because I have a choice, I carry a .45.
Sometimes things happen and despite all odds, people survive. Let's just rejoice in the fact that they didn't win.
July 12th, 2007 04:39 AM
(FBI Handgun Wounding Factors and Effectiveness)
Found this FBI training article interesting on the topic of caliber, penetration, and shot placement. I came across it when researching ammo for defensive purposes. It, combined with everything else found in my research, leads me to believe that adequate penetration combined with placement are most critical. If your firearm and ammo are reliable in performance then caliber, frame size, and any other conceivable buyer options become more user preferrence than anything else. However, that being said, in the end the author of this article endorses larger calibers for adaquate penetration to the visceral area of the body.
I realize that I have just echoed the comments of several above me, guess I just wanted to add my two cents in addition to the link provided. Think this is good reading for all. Just my opinion though, take it for what it is worth. :)
HK USP .45
HK P2000sk .40
July 12th, 2007 11:15 AM
9mm, .40, and .45 all suck equally...if you know you're going to be in a fight, bring a long-gun. Otherwise, carry a pistol that is reliable and that you can shoot well and hit the person in vital areas (high center chest and head) as many times as necessary.
"Being a predator isn't always comfortable but the only other option is to be prey. That is not an acceptable option." ~Phil Messina
If you carry in Condition 3, you have two empty chambers. One in the weapon...the other between your ears.
July 12th, 2007 07:23 PM
Originally Posted by KenpoTex
Last edited by juking; July 12th, 2007 at 07:30 PM.
Reason: b.s. control
July 12th, 2007 08:06 PM
What in the world is that Juking... a 12ga handgun?
Unified Sportsmen of Florida Member
July 12th, 2007 08:32 PM
It's an AG36 40mm grenade launcher. It attaches to the G36 rifle.
July 12th, 2007 09:43 PM
When hunting game, I aim for the fastest one-shot kill. Generally a messy brain shot, but it's either a quick kill or a clean miss. That's to minimize suffering. It sounds funny, but I dont want to hurt the furry critters, just to kill and eat 'em.
Originally Posted by limatunes
on the other hand...
When practicing for self-defense, my objective is to neutralize (not to kill). That's not PC BS; it's fact.
Yeh, some of my scenarios are head shots (nose when facing hostage with BG's muzzle clear, medulla when BG unaware of my shot from rear) which will almost certainly be fatal. But the simple COM, from barricade or during withdrawal, scenarios are to slow/stop the threat, not to kill.
Heck, choosing a handgun is giving up lethality for concealability.
And in contrast to hunting, I have little compunction to minimize the suffering of someone who attempts a violent felony. My asumption is that threat of jail didn't get the point across, so maybe copper or lead makes a more effective point.
July 12th, 2007 10:24 PM
"It shows a clerk, putting three well placed .40 caliber Speer 165 gr Gold Dots into the side of a fleeing robber, using a Glock 23 (wounding him)."
The shots were "well placed" only with regard to the fact that they were not errant or stray shots and all three were hits on the body.
You know, after watching the vid of this multiple times, I think the clerk did pretty darn good. Making three hits with three shots on a moving target who has just flashed a weapon at you himself... that's pretty darn good for anyone who's not trained in combat - heck -not bad even for someone who is. I've seen plenthy of dashboard vids from police cruisers where the cop is in a quick gunfight and misses with all or most of his shots. That clerk had to have had the adreneline pumping yet he stayed pretty steady on target.
July 12th, 2007 10:40 PM
Thus the term "No magic bullet."
I know, I know, you are smarter than me..just ask you..
July 12th, 2007 10:52 PM
You aren't being fair with that comment. Troops in Iraq are using ball ammunition. If you don't have modern expaning ammo, then there is no doubt that you want the largest caliber you can get your hands on.
Originally Posted by juking
Funny thing, many of my closest friends from my days in the Marine Corps are still on active duty. Troops may be screaming for .45s in Iraq, but the ones I know are carrying 9mm or .40 S&W when the get back home.
Simply put, the shots in the video would not have been any more deadly if they were .45 ACP or .50 AE. With a handgun you MUST hit a vital area to stop someone, and even then it isn't going to be instantanious. If you think your pistol is magical and will overcome physics, that is fine. But, those of us that live in reality know that it is shot placement in a caliber that is able to penetrate to vital areas that matters.
"The only people I like besides my wife and children are Marines."
- Lt. Col. Oliver North
July 12th, 2007 10:59 PM
I agree 100% with "Turbo93" this is it in a nutshell... 9mm, .40 or .45 You still better practice your shot
There is nothing magic about the 45 though and the number one criteria is placement.
I also agree with "MikeB" about the whole 1911 story, i figure its to each his own & i for 1 love my GLOCK 23 the reliability of a GLOCK is unquestionable. 1911's are great shooting guns but i personaly carry a GLOCK because its simple to use, nothing to forget to take off when your not exactly thinking clearly & the biggest thing... what will u do with your 1911 after u dropped it in the mudd ?
July 13th, 2007 04:56 AM
Abusing 1911's for fun:
Originally Posted by packin_glock
By DefConGun in forum In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
Last Post: October 15th, 2010, 02:25 PM
By Takedown in forum Defensive Carry Guns
Last Post: July 22nd, 2010, 12:23 AM
By Olydog in forum Defensive Carry Holsters & Carry Options
Last Post: February 27th, 2010, 11:09 AM
By Daniella in forum Defensive Carry Guns
Last Post: March 19th, 2008, 09:10 AM
By vashooter in forum Defensive Carry Guns
Last Post: July 30th, 2007, 12:44 AM
Search tags for this page
22 caliber hitting mudella
glock micro compact
micro compact glock 23
Click on a term to search for related topics.