Lee ermy On Glocks and caliber selections


PDA






gym
October 21, 2010, 01:07 AM
I'll post the utube link, but you have to add the "www's", as to keep with THR policy of no live links. He basically says that Glocks are number 1 and that 45 should replace the 9mm. I know this will create a stir in here, and we heard these discussions for years, and frankly I never expected him to be that public about this subject. But he says it straight up and down, 2 points he makes is a 45 in the chest will stop any attacker, where as it takes 3 rounds of 9mm to do the same job, and that Glock is the number 1 choice in his opinion for handguns. Both points can be argued to death, and that isn't why I posted it.
I just didn't expect he would be this vocal, considering his position as spokesperson for so many products and the military channel's involvement with him.
"http://.youtube.com/watch?v=4yr_cM8kvig&feature=related"
I believe as a hangun owner for 44 years or more, that one should have both caliber pistols, and I do have Glocks in both calibers. But I also have other handguns in the same and other calibers , who knows what ammo will be available should the worse actually happen.
Correction, he is with "team Glock", now it makes sense

If you enjoyed reading about "Lee ermy On Glocks and caliber selections" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Old krow
October 21, 2010, 01:43 AM
I watched it. Pretty decent. I dunno about the 3-4 times with a 9mm part though. That seems a stretch, but I got the jist of it. I'm a fan of both rounds. In fact, it wouldn't hurt my feelings to reduce all of mine to .45 or 9mm, except the revolvers of course. Both are pretty common and both are useful.

I've been toying with the idea of getting a G21 here lately. Unfortunately our ranges here do not rent guns so I'd have no way to try one out.

yeti
October 21, 2010, 01:48 AM
you have to add the "www's", as to keep with THR policy of no live links.

I believe it is a preference to not "Hot Link," not a prohibition of live links.

Hey, I have been know to be wrong once or twice in the past, but no live links would be a major burden.


Code of Conduct

Welcome to The High Road, an online discussion board dedicated to the discussion and advancement of responsible firearms ownership...

There are only a few house rules:

1...

5. You agree to respect the copyright of others. If you don't own the rights to something, you agree not to post it. Instead, link to it and provide a brief summary of the contents. This helps keep us all out of trouble.


OK, now I gotta go listen to the Gunny.

yeti
October 21, 2010, 02:02 AM
Don't agree with everything he said, but I do agree more than not. I do think my attention would be pretty well focused after the first COM hit with a 9m/m, other than that, and different tastes in handguns, it was good.

... oh yeah, I have run more than 100, even 200 rounds through my 1911, in a range session, with out feeling it was gunking up.

9mmepiphany
October 21, 2010, 02:08 AM
I didn't find it surprising at all.

He is looking at the factors from his point of experience...the military

The Glock is the true successor to the 1911 as a modern military sidearm. It is today, what the 1911 was in...1911. Materials, design and production techniques have changed and been incorporated into the new design.

When you compare military ball ammo in the .45 and the 9mm, it would not surprise me if his views are not based on real world experience...perhaps from talking to the line troops.

His only talking point that I have a quibble about is his point of the .45 GAP allowing for more capacity in a handgun...it is the same diameter as the .45 ACP

JShirley
October 21, 2010, 02:10 AM
Linking to gun-related material is fine. Stealing bandwidth- hot linking- is not okay.

HOOfan_1
October 21, 2010, 02:12 AM
I've read Ermey's view on the .45 before in a gun magazine and I am pretty sure he has probably said something about it in a few of his TV shows, like mail call.

Also as you noted, he works for Glock as a competitor/spokesman.

Big Bill
October 21, 2010, 02:48 AM
I wonder how the Gunny feels about the Gen 4 Glocks? I'm nervous about buying one.

DasFriek
October 21, 2010, 11:25 AM
I think i pretty much agree with him even tho im no Glock fan.
But the gun plain ole works and the .45acp even in fmj which troops are forced to use becomes a much more capable round than a 9mm fmj when talking about stopping power.
Hollow point technology would make that decision harder if HP ammo was allowed for use in the military.

Ragnar Danneskjold
October 21, 2010, 11:41 AM
There's one little problem....the idea that any soldier is going to fire 1 round at 1 bad guy and score a vital hit the first try is nothing but pure fantasy. Realism in combat is volume of fire. I'll repeat, volume of fire.

Two rounds on target, per target is the bare minimum. You draw, you get on target and you execute a controlled pair. You are NOT going to be thinking "well if I have a .45 that means I can get away with only shooting once". Nope, you shoot twice and reassess. Maybe you realize that your first pair was a little off as you haven't really had to use your pistol in combat that much. You give him another two. They were both hits. Good. He's still struggling, so give him one more to the dome if you can.

Yep, sounds like you shot about 3-5 rounds to take out that one bad guy. Except...you would have done the exact same thing with a .45. The only difference being, that with a .45 you're now almost empty. With a 9mm, you've shot less than a third of your rounds. That and it's easier to get back on target after a shot with the lighter recoiling 9mm.

Two smaller holes compared to one bigger one causes more trauma. Two smaller holes doubles the likelihood of hitting the spine or heart. Two smaller holes doubles your chances of even scoring a hit on the bad guy at all. More rounds at the target means more chances of hitting the target. More hits, more trauma, more chances at CNS hits, and more holes to bleed out of. Toss in the likelihood of a lot of your rounds being misses in the first place since on average, handgun shootings result in around 50% misses or more, and you're pretty thankful your pistol can hold 15-17 rounds instead of half of that.

Maybe the 9mm by itself has less knockdown power than the .45. But I would much rather be able to put 3 or 4 light recoil rounds on target and have a 1 in 4 chance of hitting his spine or heart, while still having 13 or 14 rounds left over.

jimmyraythomason
October 21, 2010, 11:47 AM
He basically says that Glocks are number 1 Well,he IS paid to do commercials for them.

CraigC
October 21, 2010, 11:49 AM
I don't care what he says, it's just cool that a popular actor believes as he does and is so outspoken on the subject.

Joe Demko
October 21, 2010, 11:57 AM
Is Ermey a combat veteran? Nothing a little cursory web searching turns up indicates such. I find references to two tours in Okinawa and 14 months in Vietnam as part of an aviation support unit. If he was in combat, did he use 9mm and .45 handguns with results that caused him to reach these conclusions?
I ask because, absent some really impressive first hand experience, I don't see any reason to grant his opinions greater weight than that of some random gun hobbyist.
Whatever he was, he's an actor and a paid spokesmodel now.

longhair75
October 21, 2010, 12:08 PM
I have no reason to question his integrity, but the question is whether Glock is paying for this endorsement. If Glock was willing to pay me, I could pretend to like them. Do you think all of those nascar guys really like M&M peanuts and Coca Cola? They are paid to endorse the product.

Forrest Gump: When I was in China on the All-American Ping Pong team, I just loved playing ping-pong with my Flexolite ping pong paddle. ...

svtruth
October 21, 2010, 12:22 PM
a Glock, or a 9mm, but +1 to Ragnar's comment about ease of reaquiring target, I shot a friends Sig in 9mm, boy what a soft recoiling gun. Capacity is probably a good point as well.
Of course, Para makes 14 round magazines for ACP.

gym
October 21, 2010, 09:56 PM
Thanks for the heads up on the links fellas. I learned something new om Utube last nitht "of course while looking at something completelly different", How to use a crayon to fill in the Glock slide lettering, it looks cool and is easy to do, and the good thing is, if you don't like it, just wipe it off. A little hoppes takes it right off. It may not last too long but it only took ten minutes, now I did my mags, which is a great idea if you have several different callibers of the same type.

Ohio Gun Guy
October 21, 2010, 10:22 PM
I like his car insurance commercial where he is a psychiatrist.....

Throws the box at the guy and says, "Maybe we should take a trip to Namby Pamby land...." Good stuff.

youtube.com/watch?v=b4qKSwc7UOY

russ69
October 22, 2010, 12:17 AM
...I don't see any reason to grant his opinions greater weight than that of some random gun hobbyist.

He's THE GUNNY you jackwagon, now lets get with it! LOL!

Thanx, Russ

MikePGS
October 22, 2010, 01:25 AM
Weird, the guy who is paid to endorse Glocks says that Glocks are the best? What a coincidence :D

bearmgc
October 22, 2010, 01:43 AM
Indeed.

JoeSlomo
October 22, 2010, 01:54 AM
There's one little problem....the idea that any soldier is going to fire 1 round at 1 bad guy and score a vital hit the first try is nothing but pure fantasy.


Up close, shot strings are where it's at.....

rjrivero
October 22, 2010, 02:32 AM
I want one of them "Team Glock" Marine Corps style hats.

Sevenfaces
October 22, 2010, 02:45 AM
I prefer the .45 over the 9mm for a number of reasons. Though to be honest, I do prefer to have more than 7 shots. (sorry 1911) I also agree with Ragnar, for military applications, it is the ability to fire and keep firing, that matters.

Thats why during WWII the Russians favored the PPsH over the Mosin Nagants, in urban enviroments, the high capacity, smaller bullet, was more useful. That being said, I feel the 9-10 rounds of .45 my G30 has is plenty for me, since I'm not in a combat situation, if I need more than 10 shots in any SD situation, I'm already dead.

ljnowell
October 22, 2010, 03:05 AM
I gotta say, this is the most creative way to start a 9 vs 45 debate!!

Afterfire
October 22, 2010, 05:15 AM
Each caliber has it's benefits, and drawbacks.

Comparing the two is not really apples and oranges though, much more like red delicious vs. granny smith. Some like sweet and some tart.

For me, in a combat situation, I'll take the highest amount of a reasonably powered round vs. lower round count of a higher powered caliber.

coloradokevin
October 22, 2010, 06:53 AM
I like Lee Ermey as much as the next guy, but I don't think his anecdotal opinions on this subject should be taken with anything more than a grain of salt (and, I can say all of this as a guy who actually carries a Glock 37 in .45 GAP as a duty weapon).

First, the 9mm vs. .45 debate is about as old as dirt, and with modern ammo I'd say that either one is equally capable of stopping a fight. I've actually attended seminars where various handgun loads were fired into calibrated ballistic gelatin, per the FBI protocol. The 9mm almost always has a slight edge on penetration, and the 45 almost always has a slight edge on expanded size. The emphasis in this statement should be on the term SLIGHT. If you put the bullet where it needs to go, the problem is solved; if not, it is anyone's guess.

I've personally witnessed the stopping power of both the 9mm and the .45 firsthand. I wouldn't hesitate to carry either into a fight, and I've even considered making the switch to 9mm (magazine capacity is much better, and follow-up shots are faster). Conversely, I've seen both the 9mm and .45cal fail to stop a human, and these failures nearly always resulted from poor shot placement.

As for the Glock vs 1911 debate, I think that Glocks have a better track record for reliability, which is more crucial for duty use. 1911 pistols win more action pistol competitions, but that doesn't make them more viable for duty/defensive carry.

Still, I'd say that Lee Ermey might just be a little biased on this subject, particularly since he's on the Glock payroll. Todd Jarret thinks Para is wonderful, and Rob Leatham seems to like Springfield. Notice a trend here? It isn't an unbiased endorsement when they are paying the bills for you!

Just some food for thought.

mljdeckard
October 22, 2010, 07:07 AM
I love the gunny, and I have met him personally, but remember, most of his bluster and attitude is for fun. If someone throws him a couple of bucks to plug a good gun, I don't resent him for it.

But (without watching the link to know exactly what he said,) what he stated above is far from strictly true. A man may take more than two .45s and keep coming. A man might take a .22 and drop. And before you say it's all about shot placement, none of you are good enough to reliably get CNS hits in an emergency situation. It will be largely about luck.

I agree that the .45 is more effective, but that doesn't make it the ideal choice for across-the-board sidearm choices. Having trained a lot of soldiers this summer, many of whom had never shot a pistol before, and many females with small hands, honestly the gun I would prefer to train them on (as long as we are using NATO 9mm,) is a Glock 17. If we were using .45, I don't know if I would want a big double-stack, because many of my female soldiers have a hard time reaching the controls on the M-9. A big .45 wouldn't make it easier.

Mike J
October 22, 2010, 09:44 AM
I agree with mljdeckard. I have met R Lee Ermey also. He did a meet & greet at a local Glock dealer. I liked the man. I also agree that he is doing his job. If he is pushing the .45 GAP though I believe the guns are smaller than many other .45's. Unless I'm mistaken it was designed to be able to put a .45 in a smaller platform.

youngda9
October 22, 2010, 10:18 AM
They should use 9mm so that they don't kill the soldier and it takes 2 more soldiers to haul him off the battlefield, and another guy driving a jeep to take him back to a hospital. If they used a .45 the enemy would detonate and no additional resources would be needed to save him.

Just wondering why we should put any faith in a celebrity opinion?

buck460XVR
October 22, 2010, 10:35 AM
Weird, the guy who is paid to endorse Glocks says that Glocks are the best? What a coincidence :D


.....................surprise, surprise.:uhoh:

HGUNHNTR
October 22, 2010, 10:54 AM
I like Glocks a lot, but he is a paid spokesman for the company. I really don't care what his opinion is on the gun or calibers. Quantifying the number of shots it takes to stop an attacker with various calibers is senseless. There are an infinite number a variables at play in any shooting event. The importance put on caliber and bullet delivery device is disproportionate to its relevance.

daorhgih
October 22, 2010, 11:36 AM
He is only an actor, but a good communicator to those who need a bobble-head figure on their dashboard. His new advert for an insurance agency is a real HOOT! Yes, he is an ex-marine, AND also now an "Honorary Gunny" thanks to his movie acting. And I love his shows on the History channel, especially when he gets off into the non-scripted parts, where he thrives! He IS a leader, but he is also for hire. OOOO-rah! At an air show near INDY, R Lee was supporting the Disabled Marine contingent by signing autographs and posing for pics. I have two Glock slides signed by R Lee with white-Bic-pen. Priceless to me.

Double Naught Spy
October 22, 2010, 12:11 PM
But he says it straight up and down, 2 points he makes is a 45 in the chest will stop any attacker, where as it takes 3 rounds of 9mm to do the same job,

Okay, so we have established the R. Lee maybe really doesn't know what he is talking about. Two .45 shots to the chest isn't a magic number/location for stops.

Quantifying the number of shots it takes to stop an attacker with various calibers is senseless. There are an infinite number a variables at play in any shooting event. The importance put on caliber and bullet delivery device is disproportionate to its relevance.

Right.

and that Glock is the number 1 choice in his opinion for handguns.

Funny thing, the Glocks in .45 acp seem to be some of the least reliable of the Glock line.

longhair75
October 22, 2010, 12:27 PM
Friend Double Naught Spy, Okay, so we have established the R. Lee maybe really doesn't know what he is talking about. Two .45 shots to the chest isn't a magic number/location for stops.

He may very well be right, but the fact that he is R. Lee does not give him any more credibility that the average talking head celebrity. Massad Ayoob and Jeff Cooper have credibility. R. Lee is just an ex-Marine who got a lucky break. I am glad he got it, and I enjoy watching him, but the last time I shot with an ex-Marine (my older brother) he shot me in the leg while trying to clear a jam in a rented pistol with his finger on the trigger and the pistol pointed at me rather than down range.

Strahley
October 22, 2010, 12:33 PM
I don't take advice from anyone who says "lolol 1 .45 will do the job but youll need 3-4 9mms to do the same thing lololol"

(This coming from someone who carries .45/.357 mag)

jimmyraythomason
October 22, 2010, 12:35 PM
I like the gunny. He is on our side and that's good enough for me. I don't choose my firearms based on endosements by actors/celebrities,gun writers(including Ayoob and Cooper regardless of their credibility)nor do I reject brands/calibers because of bad reviews by the same or even gun forum posters. I have this thing about trying them and making up my own mind.

Freedom_fighter_in_IL
October 22, 2010, 12:56 PM
The simple and most effective answer to this debate is this, choose what fits you and your shooting abilities the best and what you are the most efficient with. If that happens to be a .45acp or a 9mm Glock, Sig, Springfield, or whatever and you are CONFIDENT with that weapon then that is the weapon for you. Doesn't matter what any actor or "professional" says. In a combat situation, you have to have a weapon that YOU YOURSELF can fire with accuracy and confidence. The "Gunny" or anyone else is not the one there under fire with you. I personally do not like Glocks. I don't like the feel of them. Too "boxy" for my taste. That doesn't mean they are junk, just means I don't like the feel of it in my hand and that would affect my accuracy with it.

All that being said, as far as calibre .45 vs 9mm goes, either would do the job at hand and do it well if used properly. As would many other calibers.

Big Bill
October 22, 2010, 05:49 PM
I have the (almost) best of all worlds. I have a Springfield XDm 45 ACP - 13+1 rounds of high end punching power. My CZ 75DB is 16+1 of 9mm stinging death. The only question for me is: what to carry? What to carry?

BTW, I owned a Glock 19. It was reliable, but chunky. I wouldn't have a Gen 4 Glock with all the problems, if I got it for free. IMHO, Glock shot themselves in the foot with the Gen 4.

aryfrosty
October 22, 2010, 10:13 PM
Having seen the "gunny" hold forth on Glocks in the past, but not having seen the video you speak of, I feel sure that he is speaking of the .45GAP. I remember hearing about the extreme failures of 9mm ammo to manage gunfights...( Illinois SP is one I remember), and while I own several 9mms and rely on them for CC I would prefer the .45acp's solid reputation for stopping fights and would rather see our military folks armed with them. Having said that I am no fan of .45GAP. It is a round that seems intended to fill a non-existent void in ammo needs. My father carried a 1911 in WWII and I carried one in VietNam, My sons, both US Marines were trained on and issued 9mms. I wish the .45ACP was still respected for what it is and does rather than seeing it cast aside over and again to solve a problem that doesn't exist.

RonDeer10mm
October 22, 2010, 11:37 PM
What's wrong with the 10mm? It surpasses both

Casefull
October 23, 2010, 01:44 PM
Yep, sounds like you shot about 3-5 rounds to take out that one bad guy. Except...you would have done the exact same thing with a .45. The only difference being, that with a .45 you're now almost empty. With a 9mm, you've shot less than a third of your rounds. That and it's easier to get back on target after a shot with the lighter recoiling 9mm.

Two smaller holes compared to one bigger one causes more trauma. Two smaller holes doubles the likelihood of hitting the spine or heart. Two smaller holes doubles your chances of even scoring a hit on the bad guy at all. More rounds at the target means more chances of hitting the target. More hits, more trauma, more chances at CNS hits, and more holes to bleed out of. Toss in the likelihood of a lot of your rounds being misses in the first place since on average, handgun shootings result in around 50% misses or more, and you're pretty thankful your pistol can hold 15-17 rounds instead of half of that.

Some questions: 1. If the first round misses do subsequent rounds become more accurate? Does continued jerking the trigger calm the shooter down so he realizes he is being inaccurate...maybe if he is shooting tracers or the ground is dusty.
2. It takes time to fire each round even if you are shooting a .22. Time is your enemy cause until you incapcitate the other guy he is shooting at you. If he incapacitates you with the first shot then he can move on to shooting your buddies or taking even more careful aim for the ear shot.
3. Wasting ammo is a concern but putting down subjects as quick as possible(least amount of shots) is obviously important if there are multiple adversarys.
4. I believe this is one of the major unintended consequences of high capacity, smaller caliber rifles and pistols. Shooters become trained in spraying lead since volume means "I have to hit my target if I shoot enough times". We recently had a police swat shooting in our city wherein subject was hit with 9 rounds from cop with mp5 up close. He survived and is sueing the city. BTW he was pointing a soldering iron at the cop. This happened in Boise, ID.
I personally like high capacity mags but I know which way I shoot best.

Double Naught Spy
October 23, 2010, 03:35 PM
He may very well be right, but the fact that he is R. Lee does not give him any more credibility that the average talking head celebrity.

No, R. Lee is not right. 2 .45 rounds to the chest won't necessarily stop anybody. There is no proof that it takes 3 rounds of 9mm to do the job of 2 .45 rounds. That is all just fabricated garbage. If 2 rounds of .45 to the chest always stopped folks as claimed, then the celebrity gun experts which you feel have credibility (Ayoob and Cooper) would not have been teaching failure to stop drills to those students who carried the almighty .45 acp.

Celebrity status gives folks all sorts of credibiltiy and marketers have known it for at least the last century. The credibility may not be justified or real, but a message delivered by a famous person is often believed or taken more seriously than a message given by some unknown expert.

Mac's Precision
October 23, 2010, 04:35 PM
RonDeer10mm...

I'm with you. Packs the round count of a 40..with higher horsepower than the 45.

Cheers
Mac.

harmon rabb
October 23, 2010, 05:58 PM
Ermey says some pretty dumb things about 9mm vs. 45. This isn't the first time. I saw a writeup by him in a gun mag where he claims that you might as well use a .22 if you're going to have a 9mm, but a .45 is one shot one kill center mass every time.

I like gunny and all, but man does he sound like a dumbass on this topic.

pvthouse
October 23, 2010, 06:14 PM
i have a small problem with wat a previos poster said. the us military has always used a full size duty pistol as a side arm. with that being said if the switch was made to a FULL size glock pistol chambered for .45 acp it would be the G21 and last i checked mine has a 13+1 capacity which kind of nullifies that whole argument.

joepav
October 23, 2010, 06:50 PM
I didn't read all of the replys.

But he is talking about the 45 GAP not ACP.
Just wanted to make that clear.

GunTech
October 23, 2010, 07:11 PM
45GAP allows 45 ACP performance in a small grip size. Some of us find the 45 GLOCKs too big. The 45 ACP is a pretty old round and has more case capacity than is necessary for the performance. That being said, when comparing 45 to 9mm shooting ball ammo and factoring that if you are using your handgun the sierra has definitely hit the fan, I'd prefer to opt for the bigger round.

Of course there are other issues to consider. The 9mm was adopted primarily for NATO comparability. Switching to another round defeats that aim.

Further, while small arms in general contribute very little to the calculus of combat - handguns are even less important in the 'big picture'. As a former infantry officer, I can definitely say my rifle and handgun were important to me, but to war planners and generals, small arms aren't very important in the whole scheme of things. Current issue weapons are seen as 'good enough'.

Finally, the PDW encroaching on handgun territory. Who among us wouldn't rather have a rifle versus a pistol in a hot situation?

Double Naught Spy
October 23, 2010, 07:27 PM
Okay, so he is talking about .45 GAP. He says the .45 GAP is about half the size of the .45 acp. That is a blatant lie.
http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.tonyrogers.com/news/images/45gap_vs_45acp.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.tonyrogers.com/news/glock_37_usmc.htm&usg=__JiZxN5kzFEywBLrnm_JmsY2OzSY=&h=321&w=300&sz=18&hl=en&start=0&sig2=wb3tBLTUvWZob5Vi8MOyZA&zoom=1&tbnid=GnMkdEPOVb0pdM:&tbnh=149&tbnw=153&ei=FlrDTNUg1JSdB_L_nZkK&prev=/images%3Fq%3D.45%2Bgap%2Bacp%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN%26rls%3Dcom.microsoft:en-us:IE-SearchBox%26rlz%3D1I7TSNA_en___US361%26biw%3D1219%26bih%3D594%26tbs%3Disch:1&um=1&itbs=1&iact=hc&vpx=134&vpy=71&dur=2527&hovh=232&hovw=217&tx=117&ty=128&oei=FlrDTNUg1JSdB_L_nZkK&esq=1&page=1&ndsp=15&ved=1t:429,r:0,s:0

He said that after you should about 100 rounds through a 1911, you can feel it starting to drag, to bind up. WTH? I can honestly say that I don't know what he is talking about.

Average Joe
October 23, 2010, 07:31 PM
I think he should trim his eyebrows.

Vern Humphrey
October 23, 2010, 07:38 PM
I do prefer to have more than 7 shots. (sorry 1911)
If you carry in Condition 1 (as you should) and use an 8-round magazine, you have more than 7 shots -- 9, to be exact.

varoadking
October 23, 2010, 07:48 PM
...he is an ex-marine...

I'm told there is no such thing...

Phil W
October 23, 2010, 11:27 PM
I DO own a M&P 45, but my summer carry is a 9mm. It occured to me that I doubt if I could stop at one shot under extreme circumstances. A minimun of 2 shots would be instinct to me. So I feel the 9mm will suffice.

~Boomslang~
October 24, 2010, 01:27 AM
I love Roy Lee, However everything these days seems to be "Gunny Approved" Including SOG knives and multi tools made in China. I've owned a couple and they are no better than the 18 dollar folders you can buy at the gas station, just prettier, and a hell of alot more expensive. If someone gets popped with a 9mm once, in the arm even. they are changing their plans for the day. Center mass double tap, thats the rule, and believe me the 9mm is fine.

Mikhail Weiss
October 24, 2010, 02:52 PM
Hmm. I just read a firsthand account of a guy who put 5 rounds of .45ACP in the chest of an attacker at close range while that same attacker was shooting at him with a .357 Magnum Colt Python. When the attacker ran out of ammo, he pulled a knife and came across a pool table at the lawman who'd just shot 5 rounds of .45 ACP into that guy's chest. Said lawman then put a sixth round into the attacker's skull, promptly ending the fight.

I like the round a lot, but accounts of its successes and failures are just as numerous as any other commonly used defensive handgun round, and have been around at least as long as when Fairbairn and Sykes wrote about the same back in 1942 (based upon experience drawn from previous years of service in Shanghai, in which they had many opportunities to observe the successes and failures of many handgun and rifle rounds).

In the case of the lawman's experience, he said the usual important thing: the determination of your attacker will have almost as much effect on the outcome of his being shot as your ability to put rounds effectively on target.

Vern Humphrey
October 24, 2010, 04:52 PM
Think of it like poker. There's only one hand that beats all other hands. And you won't be dealt that hand.

So there are no absolutes. Go for the hand that gives you the best odds of winning. With a revolver, I go with .357. With an automatic, I go with .45 ACP.

Ragnar Danneskjold
October 24, 2010, 05:02 PM
In the case of the lawman's experience, he said the usual important thing: the determination of your attacker will have almost as much effect on the outcome of his being shot as your ability to put rounds effectively on target.

That is very true, but with one exception: hits to the central nervous system. A bullet into nerve points such as the spinal cord, brain stem, and brain will shut down body systems like a light switch. Determination cannot overcome dead nerves. Legs that aren't getting the "run" signal aren't going to move. Move higher up on the spinal cord and ever more body functions will just stop working, even if the attacker is willing himself to keep going. There is of course even an exception to this exception. There have been cases where people have suffered trauma to certain parts of the brain and retained their consciousness and ability to move. While extremely rare, physical brain trauma is not 100% effective. Nothing is. But the point remains, the only true reliable way to shut an attacker off light a light switch, is to damage/sever their central nervous system. Personally, I pick the caliber that gives me the most chances to do that reliably. Like I said before, 4 shots of 9mm where 3 are mediocre but one cuts the attackers spine is far better than 1 shot of .45 that causes a big hole but doesn't damage anything vital.

Mikhail Weiss
October 24, 2010, 05:23 PM
Exception included. That's why an important word was used: "almost." :)

luigi
October 24, 2010, 08:11 PM
Do you think all of those nascar guys really like M&M peanuts and Coca Cola? They are paid to endorse the product

How could you not like peanut M&Ms and Coke?

Deaf Smith
October 24, 2010, 10:59 PM
Actually, when Remey says the .45 does better thant the 9mm I think he is right, at least for the military and use of FMJ. But 3 rounds of 9 per attacker? Well some yea, but I would not make a blanket statement on that.

But with good JHPs now made by many a maker we know from use in major police departments the 9mm isn't bad at all.

But if we have to compromise.... .40 is where to start.

Deaf

~Boomslang~
October 25, 2010, 12:17 AM
I had read about a good many fantastic accounts of superhuman feats performed by violent attackers getting shot with this or that inferior cartridge. Then there is what actually happens when a 5.56 or a 9x19 hits the intended target. whether in the leg, arm, or center mass. The reality is, weapons droppin, buckets of blood, running if they can, screaming, and a whole lotta shakin goin on. I sure as hell wouldnt want to trade places with em.

MTMilitiaman
October 25, 2010, 12:27 AM
As always, shot placement is paramount. Stacking the deck in your favor with some mass and frontal diameter is fine. But even with today's JHP, there just isn't as much difference in the actual amount of tissue damaged between most popular defensive handgun calibers. I love my 10mm, but my next handgun will likely be a 9mm.

Handguns are handguns. Rifles are rifles. If a 9mm doesn't do the trick, its not likely a .45 would have done appreciably better. And it only has to work good enough to get me to my M1A or a 12 gauge.

How could you not like peanut M&Ms and Coke?

Coke is gross. I only tolerate it as a mixer for my Jack or Captn', and even then it is almost a waste of perfectly acceptable alcohol. I'd wear their shirt if they paid me to, but if they wanted me to drink it, that would cost extra.

76shuvlinoff
October 25, 2010, 09:42 PM
Coke might be okay for The Capt' but why mess up good Jack?

... and to keep on topic, .45 under the pillow, .357 in the drawer, .40 on the hip, .380 in the pocket..... all to get me to the 870 in the closet

El_Tortuga
October 26, 2010, 12:05 AM
I like Lee Ermey as much as the next guy, but I don't think his anecdotal opinions on this subject should be taken with anything more than a grain of salt (and, I can say all of this as a guy who actually carries a Glock 37 in .45 GAP as a duty weapon).

First, the 9mm vs. .45 debate is about as old as dirt, and with modern ammo I'd say that either one is equally capable of stopping a fight. I've actually attended seminars where various handgun loads were fired into calibrated ballistic gelatin, per the FBI protocol. The 9mm almost always has a slight edge on penetration, and the 45 almost always has a slight edge on expanded size. The emphasis in this statement should be on the term SLIGHT. If you put the bullet where it needs to go, the problem is solved; if not, it is anyone's guess.

I've personally witnessed the stopping power of both the 9mm and the .45 firsthand. I wouldn't hesitate to carry either into a fight, and I've even considered making the switch to 9mm (magazine capacity is much better, and follow-up shots are faster). Conversely, I've seen both the 9mm and .45cal fail to stop a human, and these failures nearly always resulted from poor shot placement.

As for the Glock vs 1911 debate, I think that Glocks have a better track record for reliability, which is more crucial for duty use. 1911 pistols win more action pistol competitions, but that doesn't make them more viable for duty/defensive carry.

Still, I'd say that Lee Ermey might just be a little biased on this subject, particularly since he's on the Glock payroll. Todd Jarret thinks Para is wonderful, and Rob Leatham seems to like Springfield. Notice a trend here? It isn't an unbiased endorsement when they are paying the bills for you!

Just some food for thought.
Wow. Could it be that more than 1 manufacturer makes a good weapon? Blasphemy!

:)

P30shtr
October 26, 2010, 01:00 AM
1. He's kind of sponsored by Glock/represents them (he's on all the posters and shirts," this is my Glock, there are many like it", yada,yada,yada)

2. He's an old head. .45acp is all they know. Not all of 'em but, it seems that way about alot of older guys.

thats all.

Freedom_fighter_in_IL
October 26, 2010, 03:13 AM
2. He's an old head. .45acp is all they know. Not all of 'em but, it seems that way about alot of older guys.

thats all.

Ahem!!!! Granted I am a BIG fan of the .45acp and have more than one (Don't like Glocks though) But I have many other calibres of pistols. I wouldn't say most of us "older folks" are all up for .45. My Dad actually hated the .45. Preferred the .357mag

If you enjoyed reading about "Lee ermy On Glocks and caliber selections" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!