Ok guys, you got me there on semantics. I know that linquistically you could read that my writing implied hitting a man in the pinky toe with a 45 is going to stop him completely, and of course that's not what I meant. What I did mean is this.
If you hit a man in the belly or the clavicle, with a 9mm he may be able to hold his form and his momentum long enough to continue to accurately place shots against you. This has been seen in police and military video.
I'm not saying, again, not saying, that hitting a man in the belly or clavicle with a 40 or 45 will automatically stop him immediately, but studies do show, and video evidence does show, that those rounds are more effective one shot stoppers than 9mm.
If the lower cost of 9mm was a side issue, and 9mm were better man stoppers, than 75-80 percent of police would be carrying them. But they aren't. 75-80% of police are carrying .40, or 357 sig, and rarely but occassionally 45.
I'm sure you could find an officer out there still carrying the 38 special he trained with if he's now an elected sherriff somewhere, and that's good for him, but the majority of departments have figured out what is required, and what is the tactical advantage, and that doesn't seem to be 9mm.
