How would that imply a belief that the attacker would be standing still for the first shot?I don't, but the way some people draw up their safety plan it seems to be the paradigm. I hear responses like, "I like [.380 or 9mm] because I can make faster follow-up shots."
Do you still subscribe to the discredited theory that "impact" is the basis for handgun effectiveness?While certainly true, those calibers cannot defy physics; the lack of recoil on the sending end of it means a lack of impact on the receiving end as well.
If it penetrates adequately, that's all the "impact" it needs. As labnotl put it above,
"It's safe to think of any handgun (regardless of the cartridge) as a puncturing machine. It's not sane to think of handgun terminal effects, even magnums, as explosive. We should think, puncture, puncture, puncture... not "it will blow your head clean off."
The best one can do is make every shot hit within a general area of the body. Each bullet will travel into the body doing damage, which will depend upon the precise location of the entry wound, the angle of entry, and the posture of the assailant. At that point, whether the damage be effective will depend upon what is damaged, and the defender not only has no control over that, he or she had no way to influence that when the trigger was pulled. It's a matter of probability, and more quick shots increase the probability of effective wounding.If we ever need to go to guns- make every shot count, and make every shot do the most damage it can do if it hits.
What leads you to believe that?The first shot will have the most potential.
Really?Planning for the worst- I don't plan to have multiple hits...
Have you ever really considered how little difference there is between the expanded bullet diameter of a 9mm and a .45, when compared to the size of the human body and the sizes of the critical body elements that must be damaged?...so I choose a caliber and bullet design that makes the biggest ugliest hole it can
Have you entered it into the analysis of whether that, or the ability to make additional hits more quickly, would be more important?
Full disclosure: around a decade ago, I acquired a .45 auto. Decades of folklore about Moros, militaries using FMJ bullets, "knockdown power", "bigger holes", and so on made it inevitable.
I embarrassed myself by speaking of those things here.
Then I was introduced to the reality of Dr. Marvin Fackler's work, and I also found out in realistic training that I was likely to make fewer hits with it in the drills than with a 9mm.
That was due to the higher recoil on the sending end.
The .45 is retired.
I hear you!And actually worry more about a Cell Phone Text messaging driver taking me out than needing more than 7 rounds of ammo.