9mm vs .40
- Thread starter wolfman90
- Start date
- Status
BevrFevr
Member
If I was really worried I would shoot nothing smaller than a .357 mag. but 9 and 45 is what you should be looking for. 40 is fine i suppose but it is expensive. 9 and 45 have been through several wars and continue to be to this day. there is 9 or 45 in most gun owning homes out there in case you may ever need to borrow some from a friend.
40 however is the only caliber of ammo on the shelves around here. I guess because the whole freaking world has not been awakened to its ability to kill just by saying its name. seems the whole of the free world owns and uses 9 and 45 though. I wonder why?
I say G19 all the way!
40 however is the only caliber of ammo on the shelves around here. I guess because the whole freaking world has not been awakened to its ability to kill just by saying its name. seems the whole of the free world owns and uses 9 and 45 though. I wonder why?
I say G19 all the way!
RobMoore
Member
If you knew the process by which police weapons and ammunition are chosen, you'd take less stock in using it as litmus test for what you should carry.
razorback2003
Member
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2008
- Messages
- 1,231
Don't Follow Police Weapons
Police weapons are often chosen for political reasons and often because most police officers are not dedicated shooters. At one time, many police departments required MONTHLY qualifications for all police officers. This was standard practice and if you did not show up, you would lose pay. These same departments often allowed/required their officers to buy their own handguns and could carry with what they qualified with. You want to carry a 44 Special revolver or 1911 45 ACP...FINE..as long as you can qualify with it.
The standard now seems to be that as long as these guys can qualify twice a year...that is good enough. Departments have dumbed down the standards for firearms qualification in order to pass everyone. Thus, many departments do not allow police to carry whatever they want anymore. You see handguns with rediculously heavy triggers...such as Glocks with the NY2 12lb triggers and Sigs with DAO triggers. How can anyone hit anything with such a heavy trigger on top of only qualifying twice a year? About the only practice these guns see is right before the twice a year qualification.
The truth is...many police cannot control a Glock 40 cal handgun (or sometimes really any handgun for that matter). Some would be better served by either an all steel 9mm to cut down on recoil OR if they can't hack handling an autopistol...and yes i've seen it at the public ranges before qualification....some should be given a good revolver. A revolver is better for those who don't want to devote the time to learn the more complicated semi auto.
Police weapons are often chosen for political reasons and often because most police officers are not dedicated shooters. At one time, many police departments required MONTHLY qualifications for all police officers. This was standard practice and if you did not show up, you would lose pay. These same departments often allowed/required their officers to buy their own handguns and could carry with what they qualified with. You want to carry a 44 Special revolver or 1911 45 ACP...FINE..as long as you can qualify with it.
The standard now seems to be that as long as these guys can qualify twice a year...that is good enough. Departments have dumbed down the standards for firearms qualification in order to pass everyone. Thus, many departments do not allow police to carry whatever they want anymore. You see handguns with rediculously heavy triggers...such as Glocks with the NY2 12lb triggers and Sigs with DAO triggers. How can anyone hit anything with such a heavy trigger on top of only qualifying twice a year? About the only practice these guns see is right before the twice a year qualification.
The truth is...many police cannot control a Glock 40 cal handgun (or sometimes really any handgun for that matter). Some would be better served by either an all steel 9mm to cut down on recoil OR if they can't hack handling an autopistol...and yes i've seen it at the public ranges before qualification....some should be given a good revolver. A revolver is better for those who don't want to devote the time to learn the more complicated semi auto.
easyg
Member
Either one will work, but I recommend the .40S&W.
You get a bigger and heavier slug than the 9mm but without sacrificing grip size or much capacity.
You get a bigger and heavier slug than the 9mm but without sacrificing grip size or much capacity.
Expertowgunner
Member
Ive always been a 9mm and 45 fan but the 40 just makes more sense to me. higher cap than 45 but in certain loads outperforms the 45., better ballistics for self defense and has great penetration. for a cop id want it to be my carry gun as it will penetrate objects better and put down a lsd crazed man. Ive got family in military and law enforcement and all seem to think the 9mm is just not a adequate round for defense. how about shooting a assailant 13 times with 9mm hydroshocks with no result sound or shooting a afghan militant 8 times with a m9 and didnt die and ended up killing one of my cousins buds because of it. 40 or 45 is my favourite and recoil has never been a issue for me (6ft. 240 lbs hold the record for dead lift at my high school and 2nd in bench press lol)
DougDubya
Member
Twelve pounds is delightful compared to the 20-lb triggers found on old Walther PPK's or Mauser HSc's. It's not the weight, anyway, it's the grit and mush in a Glock trigger.
SJ78
Member
I think the 9mm is a better all around caliber . It's cheaper to shoot and with the right ammo is fine . If hp's didnt exist i would agree the 40 is better for self defense . I think the military should switch to the 40 because they cant use hp's. But their are so many good 9mm defense rounds i would take the 9 . Just my opinion .
- Status
