40SW
Member
I had an interesting experience today with a 9mm bigot at a local gunshop. Let me first state by saying that I have been around guns all my life, have had well over 1000 students as an NRA certified firearms instructor, but I will be the first to say the following.
1. Ballistics is not an exact science. There is much we don't yet understand about how objects act while moving and how they react in certain media.
2. Stopping Power is not an absolute concept. Energy transfer, bullet size and shape, momentum, etc, as well as hundreds of other variables that we cannot expect to quantify exist, due to the fact that every engagement is unique.
3. Shot placement still wins the day as the dominant component, obviously one increases their chances with a respectable defensive load/type.
So this gentlemen behind the counter was telling a prospective customer who was looking to get a Glock 26 in 9mm that she was wasting her time with such a weak caliber, he proceeded to hand her a model 27 in .40SW without asking probing questions about her proficiency level and experience. Obviously there is a measurable difference in felt recoil, especially to novice shooters, he then proceeded to bash the 9mm and its history, aka the Miami shooting, other police engagements in large agencies who use it,, like NYC, its lack of stopping power. ,etc.
I just stood there and watched, the poor girl looked more confused than ever and eventually said she would think about it. I felt bad for her, but did not butt in, not my store, would not want that done to me, but after she left I politely offered a civilized lecture to the guy behind the counter. Here are the points I laid out, he was very receptive, I am seeking feedback to make sure that I laid out my case to him rationally. Here is a summary.
1. I told him that the cases he sited were accurate with respect to 9mm history in agencies and actual shootouts, but that substantial new developments have been made with respect to bullet technology and that it was unfair to make a generalization of the entire caliber without addressing that.
2. I told him that increased capacity in 9mm semi autos offers increased opportunity for potential follow up shots and that they are an effective combination with modern expanding bullet technology.
3. I told him that lower perceived recoil would offer novice shooters an opportunity to become more proficient and eventually graduate to higher calibers and that the lower expense of 9mm ammo allows more practice time.
4. I told him that proficiency with a 9mm is better than not being able to hit a broad side of a barn with a .40SW or a .357SIG.
5. I told him that a lesson in ballistics and caliber technology is not a good way to talk to a novice customer.
He was actually very receptive. ,even appologetic. My question is, did I overstep my boundaries? By the way, checkout my user name, the .40SW is my favorite cartridge, so I was being the most objective I could be.
1. Ballistics is not an exact science. There is much we don't yet understand about how objects act while moving and how they react in certain media.
2. Stopping Power is not an absolute concept. Energy transfer, bullet size and shape, momentum, etc, as well as hundreds of other variables that we cannot expect to quantify exist, due to the fact that every engagement is unique.
3. Shot placement still wins the day as the dominant component, obviously one increases their chances with a respectable defensive load/type.
So this gentlemen behind the counter was telling a prospective customer who was looking to get a Glock 26 in 9mm that she was wasting her time with such a weak caliber, he proceeded to hand her a model 27 in .40SW without asking probing questions about her proficiency level and experience. Obviously there is a measurable difference in felt recoil, especially to novice shooters, he then proceeded to bash the 9mm and its history, aka the Miami shooting, other police engagements in large agencies who use it,, like NYC, its lack of stopping power. ,etc.
I just stood there and watched, the poor girl looked more confused than ever and eventually said she would think about it. I felt bad for her, but did not butt in, not my store, would not want that done to me, but after she left I politely offered a civilized lecture to the guy behind the counter. Here are the points I laid out, he was very receptive, I am seeking feedback to make sure that I laid out my case to him rationally. Here is a summary.
1. I told him that the cases he sited were accurate with respect to 9mm history in agencies and actual shootouts, but that substantial new developments have been made with respect to bullet technology and that it was unfair to make a generalization of the entire caliber without addressing that.
2. I told him that increased capacity in 9mm semi autos offers increased opportunity for potential follow up shots and that they are an effective combination with modern expanding bullet technology.
3. I told him that lower perceived recoil would offer novice shooters an opportunity to become more proficient and eventually graduate to higher calibers and that the lower expense of 9mm ammo allows more practice time.
4. I told him that proficiency with a 9mm is better than not being able to hit a broad side of a barn with a .40SW or a .357SIG.
5. I told him that a lesson in ballistics and caliber technology is not a good way to talk to a novice customer.
He was actually very receptive. ,even appologetic. My question is, did I overstep my boundaries? By the way, checkout my user name, the .40SW is my favorite cartridge, so I was being the most objective I could be.
