Is a 10mm too much for self defense?

I do so from time to time. Only negative is higher ammunition costs.

Aside from the size of the gun, I can see no drawbacks to carrying 10mm. Not too familiar with what platforms are available, but I'd be rather surprised if there were no compact 10mm pistols on the market.

My Glock 29 is a little fatter than some concealed carry guns, but no one has spotted it yet! .......................................................................................... [/URL][/IMG]

My preferred round of choice.

I occasionally carry my G29, but don't see any point in the super hi-vel rounds for s.d.

Figure on 15.5" of penetration from Double Tap's 155gr XPB (Barnes bullet) ammunition with an expansion of 0.840".

Biggest thing I'd say you need to worry about is whether you can use it effectively. If the stiff recoil affects your performance, then I'd say stick with something more manageable. But if you can handle the recoil, then I think it's a great carry choice. Ballistically very similar to a full house .357 Mag load and people have been using that caliber for defense for many, many years.

I carry a 10mm. Either the Glock or the Smith & Wesson. I am not as worried about over-penetration as I am with missed shots.
I try to practice with them as much as I can. I shoot the monthly IPSC match with the Glock. I may use the S&W for the match this month.
Every time I have mentioned carrying a 10mm, someone mentions the Harold Fish case where the Judge determined it was too much gun, and put Mr. Fish in jail. But as Clint Smith says; "None of them are too big to fight with."

Dave

The 10mm ballistic envelope largely overlaps the .357 Mag. Re-asking, replacing "10mm" with ".357 Mag" helps with a lot of these kinds of questions.

Also helps one ignore all the over-the-top proclamations about what a 10mm can do. The Internet exaggerations only hurt adoption of the 10mm, causing some to pass it by.

BTW, my primary carry handgun is a 10mm.

My experience is that Glock 29 is no harder to control than a snub nosed 357. YMMV.

I carry a G20sf in a shoulder holster - Left hand draw because I ride a MC 90% of the time. I don't find the recoil any different than my DW 4inch 357 - protection --there is no overkill

"Judge determined it was too much gun"........really? I guess the FBI was carrying too much gun when they used the 10mm. Very wise judge. Probably an expert on firearms.

YOu will never be in a fight with a handgun and wish you had a less powerful cartridge. Learn it, use it, do the exact same thing you would do with any other cartridge.

Biggest thing I'd say you need to worry about is whether you can use it effectively. If the stiff recoil affects your performance, then I'd say stick with something more manageable.

Click to expand...

This. There is nothing wrong with a 10mm per se. However, it probably is not the best choice for many people. Being able to shoot well and shoot quickly are more important factors than the difference in terminal ballistics between a 10mm and something like a 9x19. I think Ken Hackathorn hit the nail on the head when he said that while a 10mm is one of his favorites its not for everyone and most people can shoot a 9x19 better and thus 9x19 is a better choice. See the following video starting at the 15 minute mark.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f7ViI2UWFKg

Every time I have mentioned carrying a 10mm, someone mentions the Harold Fish case where the Judge determined it was too much gun, and put Mr. Fish in jail.

Click to expand...

The judge made no such determination. Such a statement is even more inane than most of the stupid things said about the Fish case. The prosecutor made arguments with respect to the 10mm Fish used to shoot an unarmed aggressor (or victim depending on your perspective). The judge made no findings about it one way or another as the judge was not the trier of fact. Rather, after one of the trials at least one member of the jury made comments suggesting the prosecutors argument resonated with her. IMHO as someone who has studied law and prosecuted cases, there were so many other factors that were so much more important to how that case played out than the 10mm that it is almost laughable to try and use that case as an argument against carrying such a gun.

IIRC it was the prosecutor in the Fish case the said the 10mm was more powerful than what the LEO's used.

I really like my G-20 and the 10mm round. But I view the 10mm as a better outdoors/hikng/camping pistol in areas where there is a possibility of large predator attack. With the best loads I get magnum revolver performance from a handgun that is much lighter and more compact than a revolver.

For personal protection against humans I don't think it offers any advantages over traditional 9mm, 40S&W or 45 rounds. In fact even when bumming around in the woods I keep at least 2 magazines. One loaded with 200 gr hardcast wadcutter DoubleTap ammo @ 1300 fps. for bear and another magazine loaded with 155 gr HP ammo @ about the same speed for 2 legged predators.

A 10mm makes a great dual purpose round. If protection from humans is your only concern then the lighter 40 S&W equivalent loads are good enough and with less recoil will be faster for repeat shots. The really hot loads are more than needed. If you don't need the hotter loads then there is probably no reason to buy a larger gun that shoots harder to find more expensive ammo. In that case I'd just buy a 40, 45 or 9mm.

The Fish case was an anomaly. The judge should have charged the jury that the caliber had nothing to do with the case, and the defense attorney should have objected to the prosecutor's "opinion" about the 10mm.

You're going to get stupid people on the bench and on juries. That's the way the system works. (or, in this case, doesn't work.)

I believe the prosecutor gets the last closing argument. If he didn't mention the "uniqueness" of the 10mm until then, then the judge should have addressed that idiocy during his charge.

Not if you can hit your target with the round.

If I couldn't shoot well enough to stop a threat with a 9mm or 45 caliber round, then I doubt a 50 cal will make any difference. Accuracy and the bullets effectiveness starts and ends with the guy pulling the trigger. I'm more interested in stopping the threat more than I am killing anyone.

I'm no small guy and far from recoil sensitive, I shoot 454 Alaskan, 44S&W Classic, Contenders in 45-70&30-30. As well as rifles that make many cringe 338-378, 30-378 300UM and 45-70.
I have had 2 10mm and got rid of them both Colt Delta and G20. Not so much because the recoil was painful bet because it distracted so much from the speed/accuracy of subsequent shots.

What the 10mm delivers above other lesser cartridges with the first shot makes me less concerned about the fraction of a second later my second or third shot arrives. I try to make it a point to connect on the first shot, no matter how long it takes to do that. A slow first shot is PROBABLY still better or more deadly than a fast miss.

I carry a G20

I carry a G20 but I have to dress around it. I won't carry it if it warms up unless I'm in the outdoors. Main concerns are size but as far as penetration just get the right ammo nothing close to the Norma loads however the Silvertip is a great choice for SD/HD but me I prefer Buffalo Bore 180 gr. JHP.

This is for the benefit of the OP and answering his question rather than a caliber war so my only reply to SDM is that I doubt that he carry's but one round in that gun and of my own admission I doubt that I would be as judicious with my first shot in a high stakes gunfight.
IMO my carry gun needs to be faster and smaller than what I would use for hunting. A hot 10mm from a rest shooting at a deer is different than a SD situation. If you are down loading the 10 you have a 40 only it's bigger than it needs to be. I never felt that the Colt would stand up to a lifetime of 10mm, but that's just me.