.25 acp ?

[Billy Shears]

Where you live, as mentioned, will determine "probable cause", as YOU well know. I moved to Georgia from Maryland, where CCW is extremely difficult to obtain. There, especially in Price George's County, which has a serious crime problem, having a "box" in your pocket just might get you searched, and result in the loss of your license.

If a cop stops you and pats you down just because you had something large enough to create a bulge in your pocket, he is violating your 4th amendment rights. PERIOD!

Where you live has nothing to do with this. The Supreme Court has decided, in cases like Terry v. Ohio and others what gives a cop the right to stop you and pat you down, and merely having something in your pockets is not it.

Now if you are in a high crime area, and you are doing something suspicious, and a cop wants to stop and talk to you, he can pat you down for his safety (and he will do this whether or not he sees a bulge in your pocket), and if he discovers you are armed, he will take the weapon while he talks to you. But if you then produce a valid CCW, and he doesn't give the gun back, and arrests you for brandishing, or some such thing, you now have grounds for a false arrest lawsuit. Keep your mouth shut, go quietly, and sue him and his department later.

But to back up a bit, you really have to do something to attract that cops attention to you in the first place. He's not just going to stop you for nothing. If you're out hanging around in areas where a lot of crime is being committed, and doing the kinds of things that will attract a cop's attention to you, you're going to get stopped and patted down, and it's not going to be because you had something in your pocket. So once again, this is a non-issue.

Nobody mentioned carrying anything loose in the pocket, so that entire line of reasoning is out the window as smoke-and-mirrors.

The only way the pistol would print a recognizably pistol-shaped contour through your pocket is if it is not being carried in something that will break up its outline. And the only way you can be charged with brandishing a firearm is if people see something that looks like a gun. Do I really have to spell all this out for you?

OK, YOU try to convince them that they should run out and buy a bigger gun. Let me know if you need some people to impress your wisdom upon. We BOTH know that most gun owners are non-dedicated shooters. That's just reality, and preaching to the choir here ignores that reality. How many of those people do you think are members here?

Sorry, but none of that changes the fact that a .25 is a woefully inadequate caliber, the fact that you are less likely to achieve quick incapacitation of a threat with such a caliber, the fact that in order to achieve such incapacitation, shot placement is even more critical, or the fact that better guns are available that can be concealed just as well. You can whine about the facts, or you can face them. If some people won't... well, that's their lookout. But it doesn't change the facts.

Just as a matter of interest, just how big do you think that these once-or-twice a year shooters, many of whom are now elderly, should go? Shot placement is inherent in ANY caliber against a determined foe. Larger calibers are also going to be heavier guns, with more recoil, which requires the same, or more, practice to master.

You can get .380s which can be concealed under even the lightest of clothing. I'd rather take something larger still, but if you have to go with a small gun, .380 is the minimum I'd recommend. And if you carry a gun, you need to practice more than once or twice a year. If people won't... well, again, that's their lookout. But the fact is that shooting a gun under stress is difficult, the last minute is no time to discover you lack the skill. If your life is at stake -- and it will be if you ever have to shoot a gun in your own defence -- a little time spent at the range, and a little money spent on ammo is a small price to pay to develop the necessary skill. You wouldn't try free climbing El Capitan if you only go to an indoor rock gym a couple of times a year. Why would you be willing to bet you have the skill you'll need in a gunfight if you hardly ever practice?

Don't think that I don't tell people that the .22lr, or .25 ACP aren't the best choices. I do, but after that I try to help them with what they have. That way, they, at the least, remain gun owners.

If you are not going to develop the necessary skill, you may be better off without a gun. A gun can sometimes give a person a false sense of security. They may be willing to take risks they wouldn't take, or go to dangerous places they wouldn't otherwise go, thinking that they are adequately armed to deal with any danger, when in reality they're not.

Once again, I do not carry a .25 ACP today. However, pushing a non-dedicated shooter to buy something else is essentially a non-starter, unless they've recently had a close encounter of the worst kind. I find it much more productive to encourage them to shoot what they have. If they become more interested, it gives an opening to the idea of "up-gunning".

See above.

 

[JR47]

See above.

Saw it. Unfortunately, that hardly true. The old "if you're not doing anything wrong, they won't bother you" mantra has been dead since the 1960's. My suggestion is to go to the County (which is what I posted, not a local hot spot) and see for yourself. I worked for the PG CO. Fire/EMS for 35 years, all over the county. I SAW what you dismiss as "violating my rights". Remember the officer safety part? That was SOP with many officers there. In Baltimore City, there were roving check points looking for just such bulges.

You're preaching to the choir here, sir. Not to the actual people with the guns. Your attitude of expressing that they "may be better off unarmed" is understandable in light of the people on this site's experience. However, it sucks when you're dealing with the majority of gun owners.

Heck, YOU KNOW Officers who's ONLY practice is when they qualify. What group does that put them into? After all, they are much more likely to use their weapon than Joe citizen. Do you advocate dis-arming them, as well? Qualifications, for firearms, across America for LEOs are pathetic. It's not a merit badge for the Boy Scouts, so it should be tougher.

I simply disagree. It always seemed easier, and more productive, to help the owners of firearms, no matter the caliber, develop their basic skills. As they did, shooting became more interesting, and they often upgraded their guns. If they didn't, they were still better shots.

As to the holster question, please read Saturnos post. It refers to holstered pocket-pistols only. Smoke-and-mirrors replies don't help.

 

[Billy Shears]

Saw it. Unfortunately, that hardly true. The old "if you're not doing anything wrong, they won't bother you" mantra has been dead since the 1960's. My suggestion is to go to the County (which is what I posted, not a local hot spot) and see for yourself. I worked for the PG CO. Fire/EMS for 35 years, all over the county. I SAW what you dismiss as "violating my rights". Remember the officer safety part? That was SOP with many officers there. In Baltimore City, there were roving check points looking for just such bulges.

THEN SUE THEM! Abuses continue when people allow them to. If someone is violating your rights, and you do nothing, then of course that's going to continue. It ought not to be necessary to take proactive measures to ensure that your basic rights are respected, but in the real world, sometimes it is. In those jurisdictions, someone is going to have to do something to put a stop to this. When the city government starts having to pay out damage awards because of lost lawsuits, then it will stop.

On the other hand, I honestly don't see much of this from my colleagues in my city, and I suspect that is true in most jurisdictions as well. I do, however see a lot of people caught doing things that are illegal, and then complaining that they were stopped "for no reason."

You're preaching to the choir here, sir. Not to the actual people with the guns. Your attitude of expressing that they "may be better off unarmed" is understandable in light of the people on this site's experience. However, it sucks when you're dealing with the majority of gun owners.

I'm not on that account inclined to change a single thing I've said. Lots of people own and carry guns without practicing enough. Lots of people also smoke, eat junk food, talk on cell phones while they drive, and forego regular exercise too. The fact that lots of people do these things in no way changes the fact that they are all bad ideas.

Heck, YOU KNOW Officers who's ONLY practice is when they qualify. What group does that put them into? After all, they are much more likely to use their weapon than Joe citizen. Do you advocate dis-arming them, as well? Qualifications, for firearms, across America for LEOs are pathetic. It's not a merit badge for the Boy Scouts, so it should be tougher.

As a matter of fact, I do advocate disarming some of them I know, or at least transferring them to jobs in places like crime analysis and central records and other places where they won't ever have to use a gun. I also advocate our range increasing firearms training, and having more open range days. Unfortunately I'm not the one in charge of these things.

I simply disagree. It always seemed easier, and more productive, to help the owners of firearms, no matter the caliber, develop their basic skills. As they did, shooting became more interesting, and they often upgraded their guns. If they didn't, they were still better shots.

Sorry, but I'm just not going to endorse an inadequate caliber, especially not on the grounds of someone's not getting enough practice. As somone has already pointed out, those tiny little .25s, with a grip big anough to get the just middle finger around, and tiny little safety levers and mag release buttons are, if anything, harder to shoot under stress because of their diminutive size.

The fact is, as I've already said, that larger caliber, more effective firearms can be had that are really no more difficult to shoot, and just as able to be concealed effectively under any normal clothing. There is no reason why someone can only carry a .25.

As to the holster question, please read Saturnos post. It refers to holstered pocket-pistols only. Smoke-and-mirrors replies don't help.

I did read it. He states:

About printing.....that is a slippery slope.....if you have even the smallest pistol or anything of reasonably size in your pocket for that matter, there are some clothing that will reveal that you have something in your pocket...is that enough ground for a body search and the loss of your CCW permit???

Sometimes my gun prints a little bit....with the best of my ability and to anyone I asked, including policemen and military personnel friends of mine, they cannot tell if it is a gun or a smartphone or anything else.

I repeat, if you get stopped just because you had "something" in your pocket, your rights are being violated. With very rare exceptions, if you get stopped, that is not going to be the actual reason.

And for those instances where a cop is exceeding his authority, see above.

 

[saturno_v]

JR47

The ballistics numbers I posted for the Winchester 22 LR High Velocity Hollow Point refers to "pistol ballistics" (they have a separate table for Rifle ballistics where the numbers are, obviously, much better...circa 150 ft/lb, depending on the specific load) as per Winchester website.....I assume they intend a barrel not longer than 6"...definitely not 16"

So I agree that these figures are unrealistic for a very short barrel pocket mouse gun but I do not think you are going to have that 90+ ft/lb cut in half....we are talking about 30 ft/lb+ of difference (97 vs. 66) with the published numbers for their 25 ACP HP....so there is a good chance that the performance of the 2 cartridges out of the same barel length are basically equal or with negligible differences in regard to man stopping abilities.

It is true that the rimfire ammo is theoretically more prone to feeding problems and misfire, however, as mljdeckard already said, I still have to witness a problem like that using quality ammo with a gun in good shape.

I did see old/defective 22 guns and/or crappy rimfire ammo giving trouble.....but I did see old 25 ACP pistols jamming also.....
I think the real life malfunctioning statistical differences between the two are nil for practical purposes.

I agree with Billy Shears that when you take the important decision of going around armed you better be proficient with your pistol...sorry but a couple of time at the range per year won't cut it....a gun can give you a false sense of security and if you don't know what you are doing you can make things much worse...we should promote responsible gun ownership and carry....

Personally I would ban anything under .32 ACP for personal defence by law....use the right tool for the job and don't neglet the maintenance of the guns you intend to use for defence.

 

[JR47]

I agree with Billy Shears that when you take the important decision of going around armed you better be proficient with your pistol...sorry but a couple of time at the range per year won't cut it....a gun can give you a false sense of security and if you don't know what you are doing you can make things much worse...we should promote responsible gun ownership and carry....

Then there are thousands of LEOs out there that are equipped with a false sense of security. Mr. Shears may be in a position to alter that in his agency at some point, but until he is, it's just his opinion. Like mine, and both of us knows that their opinion is worth what it cost.

Mr. Shears, I haven't asked anyone to "endorse" anything. You have as much right to your opinion as mine. I've always found that simplistic solutions, like "banning calibers under", or disarming people because they don't meet some arbitrary standard, are useless, and counterproductive.

 

[saturno_v]

JR47

I agree about some LEOs


But, in my opinion, people should be properly trained before considering carrying a gun...it has nothing to do with the right to bear arms...I would actually make mandatory in every state a shooting class with a minimum score to clear before issuing a CCW and maybe a re-test after a long period of time (similarly to what happen with a DL for elderly people)
Same thing for a hunting license.

This should not apply, of course, for guns kept at home for defence or collecting.


Everybody has a right to have a car, but still you need to take a driver license test before being able to do it on public roads...same concept...

Continuing the car analogy....you cannot drive with cars under some minimum engine displacement, power requirements and safety features...but you can drive a go-kart on private land as much as you want.

Same thing should be for defense pistol calibers...some minimum incapacitation capability requirements....after all, it's illegal to hunt deer with a .22...

 

[JR47]

It's a great concept, but as soon as the politicians get hold of it, it will turn into just another scheme. Most CCW states mandate a minimum score for CCW. Have you looked at what an Armed Security Officer must score to qualify, and the ranges they shoot at? Or the qualifications of most LEO departments? My wife took her new Ruger P95 out, and we shot with a Police Instructor. She had shot a pistol twice prior to this outing, but only once with the P95. She scored better than an 85% on the Maryland Police program! Both he and I were up around 100%, for the daylight portion. If an interested amateur like that can pass such a test, it cannot be very hard. This is timed shooting, at ranges from 3' to 25 yards.

If you'll look at my initial statement, you'll note that I was including non-CCW use of these mini-weapons. THOSE tend to be the people I'm talking about. You'd be truly surprised at how many .32 S&W, .38 S&W, .25 ACP, and .32 ACP pistols and revolvers are lurking in dressers and night-stands in America. Many have been there for decades, and come out once or twice a year. Is it any worse than the once a year sighting-in of a rifle that will be used for deer season, then put away?

It happens, and the best that we can do in either case is to suggest more practice. These people, in b oth cases, have no desire for the "current wisdom". What was good enough for dad, or grand-dad, is good enough for them. Ever wonder how many people successfully defended themselves with these puny calibers over the decades? What, exactly, has changed in the human being that renders them so bad?

 

[mljdeckard]

Yes. If the deer rifle fails when you need it, you lose a deer. If your defensive gun fails when you need it, you die.

We know lots of people have them and have used them. I have a broken watch that's right TWICE every single day.

 

[JR47]

That means exactly what? Sorry if I'm not impressed by such cryptic wisdom. These are simply facts of life. Ranting against them, or talking about legislating minimum calibers, or assigning officers non-sworn duties, are great fantasies, with absolutely NO basis in fact.

It's plain that there are those who just KNOW what's best for others, no matter what the others think. Tell you "experts" what, let's see how many otherwise uninterested people you can badger into buying different/better guns, or convincing them to either sell theirs, or quit their jobs. Ready....Set.....Go. Report back when you have something to say, based on your experiences in the real world, not the errornet.

Sure, these words of "wisdom" play well here, among those who are dedicated shooters. That's less than 20% of the gun-owning population, based on market-research by Remington in 2007.

 

[No Quarter]

Statistically, there are a lot more people that will live to a ripe old age that have never even touched a gun than those that are armed to the teeth every moment of their lives.

A gun will not make a lick of difference if you are paralyzed with fear. There are some of us that are fortunate enough to know how they will react in a life or death situation. Some cops, a lot of veterans, very few civilians.

Knowing how you react is more valuable than any caliber. A gun of any caliber in the hand of a man of action and control is worth far more than the .45 in the hand of a gun nut that lives in a fantasy world of penetration statistics, range time and fantasy gun game participant.

I will take a .25 in the hand of a combat vet over a rifle in the hand of an accountant by day, never had a hard day in his life gun-ninja by night and weekend any day of the week.

My point, a gun won't save do you any good if your character and experience does not support it.

 

[saturno_v]

Statistically, there are a lot more people that will live to a ripe old age that have never even touched a gun than those that are armed to the teeth every moment of their lives.

A gun will not make a lick of difference if you are paralyzed with fear. There are some of us that are fortunate enough to know how they will react in a life or death situation. Some cops, a lot of veterans, very few civilians.

Knowing how you react is more valuable than any caliber. A gun of any caliber in the hand of a man of action and control is worth far more than the .45 in the hand of a gun nut that lives in a fantasy world of penetration statistics, range time and fantasy gun game participant.

I will take a .25 in the hand of a combat vet over a rifle in the hand of an accountant by day, never had a hard day in his life gun-ninja by night and weekend any day of the week.

My point, a gun won't save do you any good if your character and experience does not support it.

I agree, obviously...this is beside the point of this discussion.

Assuming, like you said, a man in control of his actions, it's better to have something bigger than a 25 ACP.

 

[Zathras01]

In regards to size, I usually carry a Springfield XD9 subcompact..But if I want to go to something smaller, but with still a bit of a kick for self defence..I take my old reliable NAA Guardian 32 acp..Fires flawlessy and to me is better than a .25, and conceals nicely..I also have a bernardelli 25 and thats as tiny as a bauer or baby browning..

 

[Billy Shears]

That means exactly what? Sorry if I'm not impressed by such cryptic wisdom. These are simply facts of life. Ranting against them, or talking about legislating minimum calibers, or assigning officers non-sworn duties, are great fantasies, with absolutely NO basis in fact.

It's plain that there are those who just KNOW what's best for others, no matter what the others think. Tell you "experts" what, let's see how many otherwise uninterested people you can badger into buying different/better guns, or convincing them to either sell theirs, or quit their jobs. Ready....Set.....Go. Report back when you have something to say, based on your experiences in the real world, not the errornet.

Sure, these words of "wisdom" play well here, among those who are dedicated shooters. That's less than 20% of the gun-owning population, based on market-research by Remington in 2007.

And once again, so what? As I said before, lots of people do a great many things that are bad ideas. But the fact that lots of people do them does not transform them into good ideas. I'm simply not going to concede that it's okay just because lots of people, even a majority, do it. Nor am I going to apologize for the fact that I relentlessly advocate high standards of proficiency. I don't care if I'm a lone voice in the wilderness, and the majority of people are not going to listen. There are simply much better alternatives for defense than a .25 auto. Period.

 

[JR47]

There are a lot better rounds than ANY pistol cartridge. If pistols were so great, the military would use THEM as the main arm.

Note, for the THIRD time, that I don't advocate carrying a .25 ACP pistol as a CCW. I do, however, understand that many people use them as a home-defense, or a CCW.

Somewhere in the convoluted thought processes here, some have been unable to separate the two. A person armed with an ion-cannon, but who never practices, is going to be less of a threat than a man with a bow-and arrow who does.

We spend entirely too much time arguing "which is better", or "what's the minimum caliber/capacity/color". There is entirely TOO MUCH assumption that the owner of such a wonderful weapon will actually practice with it, or has the mind-set to USE it.

How much practice is enough? Never saw a thread lately that addressed that. What constitutes practice? Nothing there, either. The milestone has always been the level of proficiency of the LEO. It's a court defensible position, and plays well there. The fact that most departments don't seem to care how the line-officers shoot, as witnessed by the actual quals, is telling. Yet, how many innocent civilians are "accidentally hit" by errant rounds from the line-officers, even in high crime areas, annually?

Advocate what you will, if it makes you feel superior to do so. Practically, though, the numbers aren't bearing out your points.

Caliber wars are forever. :banghead:

 

[JR47]

Saturno, this is from the Winchester site

http://www.winchester.com/products/catalog/rimfirelist.aspx?cart=MjIgTG9uZyBSaWZsZQ==

They don't give a barrel length for pistol, but usually rim-fire ballistics are from a 6" barrel. However, check the statistics given, and note that at least one is suspicious.

The X22LRHSS1 gives the same ft/lbs rating in both rifle and pistol, even though the pistol is 200 fps less. Math just doesn't work.

The .22 lr, and the .22 WMR achieve about 80% of their velocities in the 6" barrels. However, we're looking at 3", or less in the mini-guns.

 

[Billy Shears]

There are a lot better rounds than ANY pistol cartridge. If pistols were so great, the military would use THEM as the main arm.

Nice bait and switch argument. I never even suggested that pistols were the best option for defense. If you know ahead of time that trouble is coming, you'll arm yourself with a long gun. Pistols are often used because you don't know what's coming, and it's not possible or practical to carry a long gun everywhere. Pistols are a practical compromise that one simply has to make sometimes.

That said, some calibers are more inferior than others. Given the availability of practical alternatives, there is no good reason to settle for a .25 ACP.

Note, for the THIRD time, that I don't advocate carrying a .25 ACP pistol as a CCW. I do, however, understand that many people use them as a home-defense, or a CCW.

Somewhere in the convoluted thought processes here, some have been unable to separate the two. A person armed with an ion-cannon, but who never practices, is going to be less of a threat than a man with a bow-and arrow who does.

I see. So I am foolishly asking too much when I expect people to step up to a more practical caliber. You, on the other hand, are not expecting too much, when you are asking people who are too lazy and/or complacent to spend any time at the range to suddenly start doing so.

We spend entirely too much time arguing "which is better", or "what's the minimum caliber/capacity/color". There is entirely TOO MUCH assumption that the owner of such a wonderful weapon will actually practice with it, or has the mind-set to USE it.

So given that you know most people won't practice enough, I'm not sure what you're advocating here, that's it's okay to carry a pipsqueak gun and lack proficiency with it, just because people are going to do it anyway?

How much practice is enough? Never saw a thread lately that addressed that. What constitutes practice? Nothing there, either. The milestone has always been the level of proficiency of the LEO. It's a court defensible position, and plays well there. The fact that most departments don't seem to care how the line-officers shoot, as witnessed by the actual quals, is telling. Yet, how many innocent civilians are "accidentally hit" by errant rounds from the line-officers, even in high crime areas, annually?

Advocate what you will, if it makes you feel superior to do so. Practically, though, the numbers aren't bearing out your points.

And for the THIRD time, I don't care if they do or not. I'm not going to advocate or accept lower standards.

 

[JR47]

So then, why are you even in this conversation? You've made your OPINION known quite well. It's a pity that you cannot influence anything beyond your opinion, and you're in the system that you state needs changing.

I see. So I am foolishly asking too much when I expect people to step up to a more practical caliber.

Hey, you see my point. Why yes, and you know it. Nobody asked you to agree, and you KNOW exactly what any of our opinions are truly worth.

That said, some calibers are more inferior than others.

Sure, just like the mega-death blaster that I'm saving up to buy is going to impress the felon that I'm facing today. First Rule of a gun fight, HAVE A GUN.

So given that you know most people won't practice enough, I'm not sure what you're advocating here, that's it's okay to carry a pipsqueak gun and lack proficiency with it, just because people are going to do it anyway?

Answered already, read the thread, don't just cherrypick it.

And for the THIRD time, I don't care if they do or not. I'm not going to advocate or accept lower standards.

I'm sure that what you advocate or accept is of intense interest to one of us, anyway. However, to the group addressed, who are NOT forum-dedicated shooters, that is immaterial. It's been some others here who decided that "proficiency" with a pistol equals something beyond the LEO standards, and decides which calibers one needs to be proficient in. I'm a little more accepting of reality. The big world, out where our pronouncements and demands strike the facts of life, is a great amount different than the confined bounds of a dedicated forum. There are zero proficiency requirements for much of life. That used to be considered "life", not the regimented, regulated, minimums of fantasy, or totalitarian administrated governments, which was considered something not American.

We'll just have to agree to disagree.

 

[Johnny Guest]

Has this been hashed out to everyone's satisfaction?

I note that the thread originator hasn't posted on this one since 30 OCT.

Hard to believe that we've been saying the same stuff for four pages. Some have certainly been repeating themselves for a while now.

Guys, face it: You'll NEVER be able to convince everyone in the world of your own innate rightness. Sometimes, you simply must accept the fact that saying the same thing over and over won't persuade ALL the others of the fallacy of their reasoning. Take heart, though - - You are NOT a missionary with a sacred duty to force others into your favored position. ( )

The futility of this procedure is demonstrated by the abundance of the 9mm vs. .45, Glock vs. 1911, autoloader vs. revolver, .30’06 vs. .270, Ford vs. Chevy, ad nauseum. I’ll leave this one open for a little longer, and then close it down. Surprise me, please. Someone write something both NEW and on-topic.


Johnny

 

[nero45acp]

I usually carry a S&W 432PD (.32 H&R Magnum) or a Polish P64 (9x18 Mak), but I also wanted something even smaller, and in DA/SA too. So I just bought this on GB:

http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=116674764

I realize that the .25ACP is at best a marginal cartridge, but the actual weapon is only one tool in one's self defense arsenal. Equally important are situational awareness, personal fitness, and attitude/determination. Besides, my money, my life, my choice...


nero(also uses a M1 Carbine as a HD rifle, and we all know that the .30 carbine bounces of winter jackets...)

 

[hhb]

.25 acp

My passion is small handguns, and I have most of the good ones. I spotted a Colt Junior .25acp in the red box with the papers and tool this week. I could tell it was pre-1967 because the warranty card didn't have a zip code on the mailing address. We worked out a deal, and I went home to get the cash, and blogged it, and found there was a recall on the Colt Junior in the serial number range of the one I found. Fires if dropped. I backed out of the deal, but promised I'd find something else to buy from him.

 

[PAPACHUCK]

Buy what YOU like.

Carry what YOU want.

Understand the pros/cons of YOUR decision.

Your greatest weapon is between YOUR ears.

Buy your 25. You'll buy other guns later if you like shooting.

 

[Johnny Guest]

Well, THAT didn't work out very well, did it?

Nope, nothing really new and on-topic showed up. What is bothersome is that several entries were made which were argumentative and non-contributory. Some bordered on being personal attacks. I've deleted these from public view.

Please take notice: If you see you've had an entry deleted, let this be your personal warning that this sort of posting is NOT "taking The High Road," and will not be tolerated.

In any case, the thread has run its course and is now CLOSED.