It appears to me that there is a disturbing trend in the past ten or so years towards the "deranged Shooter" type event. Having been in relative proximity to both Columbine and Aurora (I live in the area I wasn't physically close to either thank God) I have been giving some thought my defensive carry options of late. It seems to me that the trend in events like this is towards planed close actions away from Texas style rifle in the tower events. And that increasingly the planning is involving protection, I think in the case of Aurora it was more a matter Psychological Preparation and Costuming then the actual protective capacity of the equipment. That hardly matters to me in the middle of the theater does it? I have compact 9mm and a week or two ago I would have had a magazine full of hollow points and I'd like to think I would have shot back, maybe I would have got lucky, maybe the assailant retreats, or maybe I put 16 little metal disks on his vest (as if my aim is that good) prove to him he is "invincible" and he goes on to shoot it out with the cops. What I'm thinking is I'd like to have a round that hedges my bets a little like a +p fmj round. I've seen the Buffalo Bore +p+ but I'm hesitant to run that in my plastic compact. any thoughts would be appreciated I'm a newbie and I know it so I've got no attitude here. I know even fmj doesn't make a lot of difference but I'm going on the play every card in the deck philosophy. I don't want to go into the every assailant is armored mind trap but I'm thinking the difference between performance vis-a-vis the unarmored target doesn't justify the trade off in penetration in one of these situations. Am I right? Wrong? Why?