overheard at dinner....

[madhatta]

I know this topic has been covered, but I still just get a kick out of some people's opinions on ballistics...
I met this guy who is going through the local police academy, and he says that if you carry a 9mm, you would be better off just taking the cartridges out of the gun and just throwing them at your threat/bad guy! He then goes on to say that one of his instructors !! even told him, "that if you get shot with a 9mm it will just 'sting a little', but if you hit somebody with a .40 or .45, its gonna knock them right down in the dirt..." I almost put my fork down and tried to explain some things to him and give him a quick physics lesson... but I just let him go on, it was quite entertaining.

[Sisco]

I believe I would have challenged the instructor to take a couple of 9mm rounds center-of-mass just to prove his point.

[Neal Bloom]

I agree with Sisco. Let him go down range and soak a couple nines up, shake em off and come back and tell us about it. This guy is an instructor?

[madhatta]

yup, he said 'instructor'
maybe the instructor made a joke or said it somewhat 'tongue in cheek'...
but he had this guy believing it

[10-Ring]

Modern defensive ammo in 9mm is pretty darn effective. That instructor is...well...AN IDIOT! :rolleyes:

[Onslaught]

:confused: MAYBE he meant "while wearing body armour"? :confused:

[ruger357]

Insructor? :rolleyes:

[Quartus]

Well, that just shows what YOU know! Hmmmphh. If this guy is a cop, it should be obvious that he knows a lot more about guns than any 'civilian' ever could! THAT'S why they can be trusted with guns and YOU can't!!!!




:rolleyes:

[spacemanspiff]

i was told a similar fable by a pawnshop gunny. he says "i dont worry about getting shot by anything less than a .40; that 9mm wont put any guy down, no matter what."

oo-kaayy....

[Croyance]

How does he explain murders? Those killed by gangs and drug dealers? The great majority of those are killed by 9 mm and smaller.
From what I have observed in the news, few murders are committed with .40 S&W and larger calibers.

[Rickstir]

I live out in the country. We don't have trash pickup. We recycle aluminum, throw away glass and metal a local saloon, and burn the rest.

I get these heavy steel drums for $10.00. But they don't come with holes so I have to make my own. My 92FS and FMJs are my hole-maker. One shot, two holes. I would not want to be inside that barrel as the round makes from one side to the other. These are not lightweght drums. Pump about 25 rounds, that's 50 holes for you math challenged folks. The barrel will last about six months, they they fall apart from rust and its back to the shooting mound! :D

[Stevie-Ray]

The fact that somebody believes this and is trying to be a cop, scares me.

[Ala Dan]

Most police officer wannabe's would pass this off
as coming from the mouth of an idiot. As a matter of
fact, most of them would not want to be shot
with a BB gun!

Best Wishes,
Ala Dan, N.R.A. Life Member

[bad_dad_brad]

Modern 9mm SD JHP rounds have pretty impressive balistics. Check around I think it is the ideal self-defense handgun round, combining accuracy, low recoil, high capacity, and lethality.

Three of my 6 handguns are 9mm semis. Personally, if I were going to up-gun, I would go straight to the .45 Glock 21 or 36, and skip the in betweens like the .40S&W.

[Minute_Of_Torso]

Sounds like some of the local law enforcement I've overheard at the range. :rolleyes:

Maybe that instructor should be used as a poster-child for a campaign to get rid of the "high capacity" magazine ban on, at least, 9mm handguns . . . I mean, if they're so ineffective why would anyone care if I'm carrying 10 or 30?

[Gerald McDonald]

Last year at the range I was punching paper with my most accurate HiPower in 9mm when the guy next to me shooting a Glock 40 at 7 yards (his target looked like he used a shotgun on it) told me "accuracy's not that important if your using a 40, one hit anywhere and their down" I nodded and said no kiddin and kept shooting until he went away.
Gerald

[Lord Grey Boots]

Lets see, 115grain GoldDot hollow point at 1400 fps. = 500 FPE


Yup, that 9mm will just "sting a little"....

[trapshooter]

I have to think that his instructor was jerking his chain. Hard. He was just too dim to get the sarcasm part. OTOH, if true,

LMFAO!:D

[Kahr carrier]

Yup I agree I think the instructor was yanking his chain , maybe he was trying to sucker him into a vest and taking a couple of hits from a 9mm.:neener:

[22luvr]

Any volunteers to stand in front of a CorBon 115 gr JHP+P being fired from, say a long barreled autoloader, perhaps a Glock model 34 ?? Oooohhhh that smarts!

Anyone who has to strut around telling the world he/she is an "expert" is someone to avoid or ignore! :fire:

[PCRCCW]

Ammolab and others, including self chronoe'd Corbon 115's from a 4 1/2" barrel or longer are easily clocking 1400 FPS....Does he really think a 9mm with 500 FPE isnt as effective as a 40/45 is smoking his lunch....(no offense meant to those people who smoking hasnt effected this way :D )
Errrrr.......hmmmmmm.......
Shoot well

[curt]

I wouldn't be surprised if the instructor was making a joke and the newbie didn't know better.

There's a wide spectrum of firearm knowledge out there. Some of it is generated by hollywood and gunshop/keyboard commandos. Keep this in mind the next time you're talking to someone whose knowledge level you don't know.

[12-34hom]

Graveyards are full of people shot with 9mm.

If you don't believe them - just ask them..........;)

12-34hom.

[JohnK]

The fact that somebody believes this and is trying to be a cop, scares me.

I'm more worried about an instructor saying BS like that than some rookie falling for it. If the instructor was making a joke he needs to work on his delivery so impresionable (aka stupid) people KNOW it's a joke.

[smooth operator]

That guy should hang out at a hospital emergency room around here. Alot of people die from .22's.
Jerry

[Rockrivr1]

I would hope as well that the instructor was joking, but the tough part is you never know. Sometimes even full time officers will suprise you with what they do not know.

My wife has a good friend who's husband is a officer for a local town. While out to dinner one night I brought up the conversation about firearms. He talked with me about it but I could tell he was unsure about some of the stuff he was talking about. First off he indicated that his primary carry weapon was a Sig 229. Well later on that night we were back at his house and he showed me it. To my surprise, he's carrying a Sig 2340. It states the model number right on it. That was the first surprise. The second was that he indicated that they carry a shotgun in each cruiser, but couldn't tell me what make, model or caliber. He described it and it sounded like a Marine Magnum to me. He also indicated they have a sniper rifle, which he shoots often. Again absolutely no idea of the make, model, caliber or scope on it. The best part was when he indicated he wanted to get his own AR-14. Conversation over!!

Now I'm not saying he's a bad police officer. From what I hear, he's very good at his job. It just makes me wonder what, if anything, these guys are being taught about firearms in general.

[Quartus]

rock, I was at a firearms course taught by John Farnam & Dennis Tueller. They both agreed that about 10% of LEOs are interested in shooting enough to practice on thier own. The rest carry because it's part of their job, and shoot only when they have to.

Yet another of the Brady Bunch's lies: "The police are trained and qualified to carry guns!"

:rolleyes:

[goon]

I fail to see where this guy is coming from.
A 115GR (FMJ) bullet coming at you at 1250+ fps is going to shoot through you. If your heart or spine is in the way, it will shoot through it too.
How could you possibly think that you could shake that off?

The only reason that I use HP for my carry loads is that I don't want to have to worry about shooting someone half a block away because my bullet didn't stop. Other than that, I would use FMJ.
Call me an idiot, but that is how I see it.

[Leibster]

Goon,

One reason hollowpoints are more effective is precisely because they DON'T go through a person (if they expand.) Thus, you have a projectile of similar weight and velocity to a FMJ projectile, but it's both creating a larger wound transfer AND transferring 100% of it's kinetic energy into the target. If the projectile continued on, some of that energy would be lost.

--Leibster

[Austin]

"Yet another of the Brady Bunch's lies: 'The police are trained and qualified to carry guns!"'

Actually the police are trained and qualified to carry guns, at least in FL. There are 80 hour firearms courses in the academies, with practical and written tests at the end, all departments that issue firearms have familiarization training on the particular weapon, and every officer in the state must qualify annually on a timed course. If it bothers you that they're able to qualify when they're only shooting when they have to, I suggest you contact your state legislation.

I don't know who John Farnam & Dennis Tueller are, but could you please direct me to their published studies on police interest in firearms?

This was an example of an ignorant instructor, or naive cadet, or both, but it certainly does not represent every police officer in the nation. When a friend and I were in a police academy and brought our 9mm v. .40 debate to an instructor the answer was, "whichever one you practice with more will be more effective when it counts."

The same goes for the officer who didn't know the right model number of his sig, or the make and model of his other weapons. If you were issued a gun as part of a job, as well as ammunition, and you had to use that gun on duty to the exclusion of all others, would you need to pay attention to the model number? You probably would want to know, I would want to, but this particular officer didn't need to. He's also probably not buying the ammunition for any of his weapons, its given to him at the range. Many departments (and gun manufacturers) issue the proper cleaning hardware for weapons. As long as he can qualify with his weapons, and maintains them, I couldn't care less if he knows what they are.

[Quartus]

I don't know who John Farnam & Dennis Tueller are


They're two of the top combat handgun instructors in the country.

Farnam is a current LEO, and gets invited to train people like the FBI and a plethora of state and local law enforcement TRAINERS. IOW, he trains the TRAINERS. (In additon to nobodies like me.)

Dennis Tueller is a recently ('bout 3 years ago, IIRC) retired Salt Lake PD Lieutenant, and the developer of the Tueller drill. Yes, THAT Tueller. Oh, and the things I said about John Farnam apply to Dennis, as well.

They are in a unique position to assess the general level of LEO firearms competence across the nation, because they travel across the nation training LEOs. And they interact with LEO trainers at departments big and small.

As for the training you outline, that sounds pretty standard. And the usual result is that a small minority is really proficient. Most don't care, and don't do any more than is required. The "annual qualification" is a joke in most departments. It's not realistic, and it's not demanding. It represents lowest common denominator thinking. It looks impressive to those who don't know better, but it's really inadequate. Of course, this varies by department - it's possible that yours actually does a good job. (But motivation is the real issue.)


John's web site (http://www.defense-training.com/) has some interesting observations on a range of gun-related subjects (http://www.defense-training.com/quips/quips.html) which he posts on a semi-regular basis. It's good reading.

Last time I spoke to him (when I took the class) Dennis (who is a fine gentleman) was working as a consultant for Action Targets (http://www.actiontarget.com/), in addition to teaching combat shooting. Those running man targets are cool!

[Blackhawk]

Gullible rookie.

Sometimes rubbing their noses in it is the most effective way to show them they don't know S**t from Shinola.

[Quartus]

How could you possibly think that you could shake that off?


Goon, what gave you the idea that thinking was any part of that guy's modus operandi? :D

[Austin]

Do these guys know how high their pedestals are? If they turn around too quickly they might fall and hurt themselves... My acadamy's range master was also an instrutor of INSTRUCTORS. His second in command was a retired FBI firearms instructor. The dozen or so other instructors we had were highly experienced. Big whoop, their word is still not gospel. I'm still waiting to see the empirical study by John Farnam & Dennis Tueller that proves only 10% of police officers do more than the minimum required firearms training.

I'm sure your training was much more advanced than the "standard" training I or other police get (even though you never asked what the 80 hours consisted of). But I am legally trained, and legally qualified, so again I urge you to contact your state goverment if the police aren't interested or well enough qualified for you. Of course the fact that I pass a second-rate qualification course doesn't mean I can't pass a harder one either, now does it?

Why don't you go after the concealed weapons holders instead? I've taken that class as well. An hour and a half, and two shots from a low-velocity .22 at about 6', now thats grueling training...

I understand that law enforcement should be prepared for the worst, but to do firearms training at a level that would make you happy would probably leave little time to train for anything else. The average officer spends a career performing tasks that don't include shooting badguys

[Quartus]

Do these guys know how high their pedestals are? If they turn around too quickly they might fall and hurt themselves...


Don't worry. Their feet are solidly on the ground. They aren't impressed with themselves, and they certainly aren't wannabees.


My acadamy's range master was also an instrutor of INSTRUCTORS. His second in command was a retired FBI firearms instructor. The dozen or so other instructors we had were highly experienced.


Good. Glad you had good instructors. Didn't imply that you didn't. Did you ask them how many LEOs, in their opinion, actually care about shooting well? Try it.


Big whoop, their word is still not gospel.


No, but it carries more weight than some rookie cop who only knows what goes on in his department. Or a non LEO who only knows what cops tell him. It's interesting to me that you are the first cop I've encountered who thinks differently. And I've talked to a lot of them. The number varies, but it's always pretty low. And that 10% comes up a lot.


I'm sure your training was much more advanced than the "standard" training I or other police get

Oh, maybe, maybe not. Probably not. But it's irrelevant, because I'm not making my point based on the 'superiority' of my training, but simply passing on the opinion of men who have much more experience than you and I will likely ever have.


(even though you never asked what the 80 hours consisted of).


Again, not relevant. But I'm pretty familiar with standard police training. Some is better than others, and yours might have been excellent. None of which is relevant. It's not about YOU, nor even your department. It's about the general trend, nationwide.


But I am legally trained, and legally qualified


I'm sure the lawyers are impressed. Of course, the same is true of the CCW class you made up. Or even the real ones. And I don't hear anyone calling that adequate training. The same was true of the "Guard Card" class/certification that I took when I got out of the Army. Most of the men there were shaking in their boots at the thought of the "powerful recoil" of the .38s they were going to fire. (target load wadcutters :rolleyes: ) But they all came out of there "legally trained, and legally qualified", same as you.

I suspect that most cops are a bit better than that group. (It would be hard not to be.)


But it's more about motivation than training. How many cops do you know who train more than required?


BTW, do you know what the Tueller Drill is?

[Al Thompson]

Ten percent? Sounds about right. The average cop is just not a gun person. Remember the Philly Cop on TV that thought the 9mm he seized was loaded with "Cop Killer bullets"? Turns out it was probably Federal Nyclads. My bro-in-law (long time instructor for his dept) owned a Tech-9 for years - just to teach his folks how to clear an open bolt firearm.

Not cop bashing, just noting that a tool that is seldom used is only used often by enthusiasts.

[Archie]

Marine Corps rifle and pistol training; shot in Western Div rifle and pistol matches; basic academy for two different federal agencies; passed requirements to carry concealed weapon in PDSR California. I was a range coach for a while in the Marine Corp; was a rangemaster in the Border Patrol.

I have numerous friends in various areas of law enforcement; feds, state, county and city. Some of them are shooters, some are not. (Most are.)
I've shot in various competitions, some restricted to lawmen, some not.

Am I an expert? Not been recognized as such in court. One court did take judicial notice that I was "...educated, trained and could count to six." At any rate, I've been around.

Cops are not generally shooters. Most see a firearm as one of the things they have to do. A very few really resent having a gun, and will not do anything more than the minimal amount to qualify. A very few at the other end of the spectrum are enthusiasts. They own their own weapons and study the subject.

I've known rangemasters who were shooters and good at it. I've known a couple who took the position to get out of real work. In my experience, getting a range officer position is a political matter. The instructor and certainly the head instructor have to be "acceptable" to management.

Which brings us to qualifications.
Everyone may rest assured that qualification courses are carefully researched and designed to insure the maximum number of officers will qualify. All qualifications provide the legal fiction that the qualificants are actually trained to use a firearm.

Certainly every officer gets basic training in safety rules and such. I don't mean to give the impression that no agency or department turns it's personnel loose with no training at all, but it usually minimal and applies only to the issue weapon.
I do know officers who can qualify with their issue duty weapon, but cannot operate any other weapon. They aren't stupid, they just aren't interested.

There are those (like me and probably most of the lawmen types that frequent this forum) who know lots. But it is from our own study, not from any official training.

And yes, there are those who have had that minimal amount of training and think it's the secret of the universe.
But be nice to them. Most are okay folks once you get past the BS.

[Quartus]

One court did take judicial notice that I was "...educated, trained and could count to six."


WHEW! THAT'S A RELEIF! Especially that 'cout to six' part! I was worried. :what:


:D


Hi Arch! ;)

(NOTE TO HYPERCRITICAL READERS: ARCHIE AND I ARE FRIENDS. THIS IS CALLED "KIDDING")


Not cop bashing, just noting that a tool that is seldom used is only used often by enthusiasts.


That about sums up what I've been jawing about. I'd love for it to be otherwise, and I'll go on record (again) as saying that I would gladly pay higher taxes if I could be sure it would go straight into the pockets of the good men who put their lives on the line for us every day. Or for better training.

But things are what they are, not what we want them to be. And again, it's more about motiviation than training, and I don't know how to solve that problem. I wish I did. :(

[goon]

Leibster- I don't subscribe to the whole "stopping power" school of thought. A 9mm hole in your chest is a bad thing. An exit wound is two holes for the bad guy to bleed through. A hole through your spine will put you down whether it is a 32 or a 45.
I don't use JHP because they make a mess, I use them because I am trying to be responsible. I only want to stop the agressor, not the old lady down the street. I think that an FMJ would be equally bad to get hit with.
For instance, what about the 30'06?
The old school full power battle rifles would shoot right through several of the enemy, but they still put the guy down. They had energy up the ying yang, but how much of it got put into the target?
All you got was a .30 to 8mm hole, unless you hit a bone.
They still seemed to get the job done.
Bottom line says that no matter what, if you get into a shootout, you will shoot until you are dead, until the bad guy is no longer in front of you, or until you are out of ammo.
Even if I get killed, I doubt that the other guy will fare very well with several holes in his chest cavity.

[Quartus]

I doubt that the other guy will fare very well with several holes in his chest cavity.


"A sucking chest wound is nature's way of telling you to slow down."

:D



Actually, I suspect the truth is somewhere BETWEEN "expansion is everything" and "expansion is nothing".


I just don't know where.

[Austin]

Don't worry. Their feet are solidly on the ground. They aren't impressed with themselves, and they certainly aren't wannabees.

I'm sure they're fine trainers, but I was speaking of the pedestal you put them on.

No, but it carries more weight than some rookie cop who only knows what goes on in his department. Or a non LEO who only knows what cops tell him. It's interesting to me that you are the first cop I've encountered who thinks differently. And I've talked to a lot of them. The number varies, but it's always pretty low. And that 10% comes up a lot.

Wow, you know my life story. You've talked to so many cops, I suppose only 10% of those you talked to were interested in shooting?

I suspect that most cops are a bit better than that group. (It would be hard not to be.)


But it's more about motivation than training. How many cops do you know who train more than required?

Every cop I know trains more than required, especially when it comes to firearms. But I guess thats just the company I keep, or a bunch of cops just looking to get out of work.

BTW, do you know what the Tueller Drill is?

Its based on reaction time principles, a person can cover 21 feet in the time it takes the average person to draw and accurately fire. I'm sure the guy is a great role model, but get over it.

[Gerald McDonald]

I have to agree with Quartus, if I am issued a tool I usually learn it inside out. I cant see that a firearm would be any different. Its similar to not knowing what kind of cruiser you are issued. I am not saying they are bad cops, its just hard to imagine they would have been field stripping and cleaning and learning how to operate the weapon for 80 hours or so and not realize what model they were shooting. My son inlaw is a state trooper, he practices when he has to qualify and otherwise doesnt shoot that often and there is only one officer who shoots regularly at the range I shoot at, a lot come in to qualify but thats the only time I see them.
Gerald

[kannonfyre]

I agree with the assertion that the majority of LEOs and a great proportion of soldiers out there shoot only when they have to. For example I only shot 60 LRN rds through my standard issue S&W M67 to qualify when I was drafted. (Shot 180 rds whilst on vacation :D)

However, in my case my old military colleagues placed far TOO MUCH confidence in the 158gr .38 special LRN. Typical comments were....

"Dude, one shot in the stomach and you're going down. 2 shots to the torso and you're dead in 15 seconds."

"One in the chest and it's INSTANTLY over."

.....the sad thing is that local cops still use the 158gr LRN. Suggestions to use +P JHP or +P SWCHP ammo have fallen on deaf ears. :cuss:

[Quartus]

I was speaking of the pedestal you put them on.

I was simply according them the respect they have earned.

You've talked to so many cops, I suppose only 10% of those you talked to were interested in shooting?

I've talked to a lot more cops than most people who are not in the business. I tend to have them as friends, and my Reserve outfit was probably 90% LEOs of one form or another. (In their civilian job.) You are the first one I've ever heard who thinks that most cops are good shooters, or even care about being one. Hmmm. Since I know that the cops I've talked to are really cops, and they ALL have the same opinion, and you are just a poster on the anonymous Internet, I have no reason to believe you are really a cop. You MIGHT one. If so, you are in an unusual department and have little or no experience outside of that department.


BTW - I'm not giving my opinion on this issue. I've just been passing on the opinion of the LEOs I've heard on the subject. They are many, and they all say the same. I take their word for it. They have ranged from the aforementioned instructors, to Federal Marshalls, to deputy sherriffs, California Highway Patrol, vice cops, you name it. And they all say the same as the other LEOs who have posted on this thread.


Your contempt for the vast majority of police is blatantly obvious.

That would come as a big surprise to the cops who know me. I'm as far from a cop hater as you could hope to have in your corner. But lies don't help people. The idea that most cops are good shooters is a lie. You can't fix a problem until you know it's a problem.

Why the guard class and not an academy, Quartus?



Well, it wasn't an either/or thing. The guard job was just a convenient way to earn money while in school. (Fresh out of the Army - geology major. ) Armed guards make more than unarmed. <shrug> Not exactly an impressive line of work. But it pays the bills while in school, with some help from the VA.

As for why NOT the Academy, same reason I changed my mind and didn't make a career of the Army. Same reason I didn't become a fireman. Having a family was and is the most important thing to me. None of those careers (all of which appealed to me) are very kind to family life. Sometimes I look back and wish I had, but then I look at my wife and kids and I know I made the right choice.


If we ever get to move to a rural area, I still might take up being a reserve sherriff, if'n I ain't too old by then.

http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?s=&postid=170680

:D


I'm sure the guy is a great role model, but get over it.


What do I need to get over? Respecting a man who is deserving of that respect?

Thanks, I'd rather not get over that.


BTW, where did you look it up?


(Remember? You hadn't heard of him.)

[Austin]

You're just as anonymous as I am, Quartus, lest you forget. I do work for a small dept., so I thought that might have something to do with it. I spoke to deputies in my county and the neighboring county who put the percentage of cops who take an outside interest in shooting at 30, not 10. I never claimed that most officers are good shooters, but as I said, all are good enough to qualify. If you or Archie had a better qualification course and a funding proposal to implement it, it would probably have been done already. As I said, some take an interest in firearms, others get training in DUI/Drug recognition, defensive tactics, victimology, interviewing and interrogation... there's more to being a cop than just shooting. The academy I went to was a central training facility for several state agencies and served about 8 surrounding counties. I've encountered a wide variety of LEO's at my age and I disagree with you, especially, "Yet another of the Brady Bunch's lies: 'The police are trained and qualified to carry guns!" If they're not well enough trained for you, then do something about it. Take some action, your words don't matter much otherwise.
BTW The "tueller drill" was taught to us as a simple rule of thumb, if you can't see hands, be more than 21 feet away to give yourself time to draw and fire. I guess they didn't think the concept was profound enough to have us stand back to back and run a drill. I did my homework to make the correllation.

[V-fib]

Rickstir,

If you want your burn barrels to last allot longer than 6 months put some drain holes in the bottom and always cover them. Mine last 2 years easily. Of course you don't have the fun of shooting them full of holes as often :cool:

[arinvolvo]

A couple of 9mm JHP CorBon 125 grains travelling at 1250 fps, and hitting him with 434 ft/lbs of force might change his mind....or blow his mind....



out the back of his head.:evil:

[Archer]

Quartus,

Your patience with the gentleman you have been trying to educate on this thread is remarkable. It does sadden me to see such a viewpoint in a member of a profession that has gained so much from people like Dennis.

I would imagine the person in question has never heard of Gunsite either...

-Archer (in SLC)

[Quartus]

Thanks, Archer. http://www.thehighroad.org/images/icons/icon14.gif I'm trying. (Very trying, sometimes :D )


You're just as anonymous as I am, Quartus, lest you forget.


Yep. But then, I'm not claiming any expertise - I'm just passing on the opinion of some who are well qualified to have an opinion. BTW, it's pretty easy to verify John Farnam's on this. I've given a link to his site, which has his email address. If you drop him a line, he'll respond. It may take a while, as he's a busy man, but he's also a gentleman, and will take time to answer honest questions.


a better qualification course and a funding proposal to implement it

The first part is easy. The second part is a tad more difficult! :( I'm not sure if I said it in this thread (I suppose I could go back and look! :D ) or not, but I would gladly pay higher taxes IF I could be sure that the money would go directly to the benefit of the police officers, instead of to a bloated administration. I wouldn't hesitate to add better training to that.

But we'd still be left with the problem of motivation. :(


there's more to being a cop than just shooting.

Yep. But the subject here is shooting.

I never claimed that most officers are good shooters, but as I said, all are good enough to qualify.

Aye, but therein lies the rub. The level of expertise needed to qualify is not very high. That's why the Brady Bunch's line IS a lie. They want people to believe that cops are all highly trained, highly motivated, professional gunmen who know how to handle guns safely due to their exhaustive training. And of course, we mere "civilians" can never HOPE to acheive that level of expertise. Therefore we can't be trusted with guns.

That's a lie. Even if the level of cops who are interested in shooting well is as high as 30%, the Brady Bunch line is a lie. Anyone who is interested can obtain all the needed training to handle firearms safely. Those who WANT to can obtain training and proficiency that is superior to the average cop.

That's simply reality. It doesn't say or imply that cops are evil, lazy, or incompetent. It's just a fact. I'd like it to be different. But it ain't. Like teaching or doctoring, people go into law enforcement for good and bad reasons. I have an uncle who was a motor officer with the RCMP because it was a secure civil service job. :rolleyes: His younger brother became a police chief because he wanted to make a difference in the world. His son is following in his footsteps for the same reasons. There are some few who get into it to take advantage of the opportunities for bribes. Some because they are bullies and want to throw their weight around. There are all kinds of people wearing badges.

I think the evidence is that the majority are decent, dedicated people. They do a difficult job, some even laying down their lives "to protect and to serve". My hat is off to them. I respect them.

But I can't help them by pretending to things that ain't so.


I'm glad that your neck of the woods is better than average. Good on ya! Keep up the good work!

[MJRW]

I'm going to chime in here because this is getting a bit out of hand. I think you are both being a bit rowdy, but Austin, you aren't even addressing his point.

[davesofi]

Unfortunately, I've heard and read a lot of similar opinion... that the 9mm is too ineffective to be a CCW, or that it sets the standard for MINIMUM carry caliber. :confused:

It is a sad commentary that things like that are said by instructors or the "learned", and believed by the "gullible".

[Quartus]

it sets the standard for MINIMUM carry caliber.


I think I can buy that part. I mean, would you want to carry LESS? I sure wouldn't. There are plenty of good 9s that are as small as the .32s and .380s out there.

If 9mm is adequate, and less is NOT, then 9mm is the minimum.


Of course, we're talking about effectivness of the caliber, not concealability and other ergonomic factors.

[MJRW]

I slightly disagree on that being the minimum. Basically, a bigger bullet is more desirable. But I carry a Bersa .380 regularly. People say its anemic, I agree. However, I am very comfortable with that weapon - note I said weapon - because there is something about that weapon and I that get along fantastically. I have a great deal of confidence in my shot placement with that Bersa. Sometimes I feel like I can spell my name at 10 yards. Haven't managed that one, don't think I will, but at 10 yards I could place several rounds very quickly on target. 2 rounds of .380 to the heart and one to the head in sequence? Yeah, I'm as comfortable with that as I am anything else. But what makes it really great to me is how quickly and effortlessly I can conceal 15 rounds of .380. Its in a Desantis holster with spare mag right on the holster and I can clip that on really quickly. Very comfortable, too.

[BHP9]

The Myth of the knock down power of the .45acp goes way back to the Phillipean insurrection back during the early part of this century.

What they do not tell you is that even the rifles they used during this time did not knock down people either.

It is simply against the laws of physics. A bullet from a .45 weighing 230 grains will not knock a man down weighing many, many times more. Neither will rifle bullets either. Documented cases of people being hit by 70 calilber projectiles has shown that even they do not knock people down.

As far as the 9mm being inferior to the .45. Simply not true and in many cases it is superior and here is why.

Without penetration their is no incapacitation and this is why the .45 AcP has failed more than once. As the range increases its effectivness goes down dramatically.

Case in point. Tests show that the 9mm will penetrate a steel helmet at a phenominal distance of 130 yards with ordinary ball ammo not armor piercing. The .45 acp incontrast bounces off steel helmets at point blank ranges of only 30 yards. Without sufficient penetration their is no incapacitation. And to compound the issue when firing through wood, walls, cars etc. the .45 becomes much more of a liablity than the fast stepping hard penetrating 9mm ball round as used by the worlds militaries.

20 milliion dead Russians in WWII proved once and for all that the Germans using the 9mm pistol and sub-gun found the 9mm not lacking in any way in the combat that took place there. [B]So the next time the myth is repeated that the .45 knocks people down and that the 9mm is so small it is not worth using point out some HIstorical Fact especially in regards to the .45 acp bouncing off Helmets at ranges as close as 30 yards.

[Beorn]

MAYBE he meant "while wearing body armour"?
Maybe he meant 9mm would sting a little while hiding behind a cinder block wall?

"sting a little?"

WTF!?!?!:confused:

[Quartus]

MJRW, any statment like teh above has to be taken as a generalization, and as such is subject to exceptions, no?

Beiing able to reliably hit yoru target is more important than anything else. If the only thing you can hit with reliably is a .22, then a .22 is YOUR best choice. Still not generally recommended.


I dumped a hi-cap 1911 (Springfield) because it just DID NOT fit me. Couldn't do much with it. Went back to a single column, even though the capacity isn't as great. But I'd rather hit with 8 than miss with 14!

[Double Naught Spy]

If a person ends up being shot with any caliber of handgun, they aren't going to be knocked down unless they are leaning so far to be off balance that a shot might knock them down if shot to the direction of the lean.

If people go down when shot by a pistol, more than likely it will not be due to the force of the slug hitting the bad guy's torso. It will be due to their own cognitive decision making, learned behavior, or some involuntary instinctual behavior that was triggered by the shot.

[Quartus]

Well, severing the spinal cord would do it, too. At least it would appear that way.