Would a .45 made a difference?

Didn't we just do this?

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=767699

You want an excuse to do what was done several times recently in the news. Don't. Even IF (and I doubt that highly) the shootings were justified, your thread only makes any sense on Stormfront.

Go there. This thread is the Anti-High Road.

There's a few different ways to think around this. Here's mine:

1) All handguns suck.

2) Shot placement is king.

3) Penetration is a distant second, and all standard service calibers tend to satisfy.

4) If you don't agree with the above, just stop here; we won't see eye to eye, and that's fine.

5) Given the satisfaction of #2 and #3 above, one may as well select a caliber that allows for more shots, more quickly, since that equals more opportunities for well-placed fight-ending shots.

Regardless of how comfortably one shoots a 1911 or other .45 ACP platform, physics would dictate that 9mm will always result in faster follow-up shots. Physics would also dictate that one can fit more rounds in the same space (magazine/firearm), which again gives more opportunities for well placed shots. Economy would dictate that 9mm is less expensive and can therefore be trained on more frequently, though if I felt .45 gained me an advantage in a defensive gun fight I wouldn't mind paying more for it.