Can we stop

[Stinger]

...using this as an argument?

Rant on...

"Well if xxx is such an ineffective defense round, why don't you go downrange and take a few?'

...or anything similar?


There is no logic to that statement. The fact that someone will not allow you to shoot them with your caliber of choice does not mean your choice is correct (or wrong, either).

Will you stand downrange while I throw rocks at you? Or golfballs, or marbles, or wrenches, or ....................

Of course not. Does that mean that marbles are an effective defensive round?

ARRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHH!

Rant off...

Stinger

 

[dasmi]

Seriously!
"You use a <insert catridge> for defense? Are you serious? You idiot! You're going to get killed!"

UGH just shut up! How about I shoot it at you, and then we'll talk :banghead:

 

[one45auto]

I agree that caliber wars are a waste of time. So long as you can put the bullets where they're supposed to go, most anything will suffice. It's accuracy that counts most.

 

[Nitram68]

I suppose ineffective is a wrong word then. Switch the wording to 'more' or 'less effective'. 105 howitzer is more effective than the wrench being thrown... not to say I wouldn't be afraid of the wrench as it is effective just not very….

 

[Henry Bowman]

The most effective caliber available is the one you have with you at the time.

 

[ProactiveReactionary]

I agree that caliber wars are a waste of time. So long as you can put the bullets where they're supposed to go, most anything will suffice. It's accuracy that counts most.

i've argued this with my friend. he's dead set on getting a .45. i asked him why and he told me it would make sure anyone breaking into his house would go DOWN. ok thats fine but i told him it wouldnt matter if he missed. he said he wouldnt. there is no way of knowing if you're going to hit or not, you can guess and think you will and will yourself to do it and if you've trained plenty with the weapon, not just standing up at the range but putting yourself in situations that are stressful like someone breaking into your home there is no way to guarantee you're going to hit the burglar.

yes the .45 WILL do the job but it takes far more than just the caliber of the gun to "git r done!". after debating with him about this for about 10-15 minutes he dismissed my views as being anti and was rather angry.

i was also telling him he might not want to get a hand cannon thats going to send rounds through walls into other people's apartments and possibly hurt other people. i could tell him to get a shotgun for that but he would still dismiss me as being an anti or "ignorant" of guns in general.

The most effective caliber available is the one you have with you at the time.

i would add to that, the most effective one is the one you have and hits the target. if it doesnt hit it can be a .22 or a .500 for all it matters.



mostly what caliber to get is an opinion, opinions or neither wrong or right, they are just personal thoughts and none trumps my own in my own life.

 

[Bear Gulch]

It is differences of opinions that make horse races (and write lots of gun articles).

 

[Standing Wolf]

[SMIRK] Aw, but caliber wars are so much fun! [/SMIRK]

 

[Old Fud]

back to the topic - - - -

The request was "Can we stop using that one particular argument".
It was NOT "what is the best stopper?"

I agree we should quit using the Line,
"Oh, yeah, so whyn't ya stand downrange and let me pump a couple of these 'puny' rounds into ya, huh, huh???"

It's a really dumb line.

It proves nothing except that whoever said it has nothing sensible to offer, has his mind completely closed and the only reason anybody would continue talking to him is that they enjoy debating with a fence-post.

Grump for the day.
Thanks for letting me air it. I feel LOTS better now.

Fud

 

[Gewehr98]

Hell, this old crab-ass thinks it works just fine.

There is no logic to that statement.

So you're not willing to absorb a few rounds of whatever you think is ineffective in stopping an attack? You don't think it'll get the job done, but you're so afraid of dying or leaking badly that you'd rather not volunteer to be the example. Sounds like a double standard to me.

BTW, in case anybody missed the fact, the round that killed judge Lefkow's mother and husband in Chicago a couple weeks ago was a .22 rimfire.

 

[Stevie-Ray]

I suppose ineffective is a wrong word then. Switch the wording to 'more' or 'less effective'. 105 howitzer is more effective than the wrench being thrown... not to say I wouldn't be afraid of the wrench as it is effective just not very

I would be glad to stand down range of somebody throwing wrenches at me if I could shoot a howitzer back at them.

i've argued this with my friend. he's dead set on getting a .45. i asked him why and he told me it would make sure anyone breaking into his house would go DOWN. ok thats fine but i told him it wouldnt matter if he missed. he said he wouldnt

Sounds almost like the people that argue that a 12 ga shottie is the only weapon of choice for HD because you can't miss.

 

[Spreadfire Arms]

i do a gun show every weekend practically and i've noticed there really are alot of people with different opinions.

some are self-proclaimed experts. there are some people who tell others that they can go get a Class III "license" and then they can go own a transferable Glock 18 or HK G36.

some claim to be former Navy SEALs and other spec-ops guys. i had a guy in San Antonio, TX claim to be an LAPD captain (yes Los Angeles PD). however that guy has been going to the gun show in San Antonio for about six months now. i'm surprised LAPD hasn't noticed he's been gone for so long.

this past weekend i had a US Air Force weapons sergeant talking to me about 55 gr. vs. 62 gr. bullets in the M16 weapons system when a good ol' boy came on by and told the weapons sgt., "boy... [yes the weapons sgt. was African American].... just get yourself a chrome lined barrel and you don't need to worry." i suppose chrome lining renders rate of twist a non-issue. the weapons sgt. looked confused, i just told him, "you'll meet alot of those at the gun show."

we also had a guy come up to the table and tell us for about an hour how he couldn't figure out how this Olympic AR-15 that belonged to his friend did not cycle correctly. he claimed he worked on the gun in the dark at an outdoor rifle range. yet he was able to do about 50-60 different checks, from looking for stress fractures to checking if the bolt carrier key was aligned correctly to checking the extractor, etc etc etc. i mean the kind of stuff you wouldn't normally do in those conditions: outdoor, night, holding a flashlight, etc.

there's also a bunch of people who comment that every 9mm round is ineffective, but then comment 2 minutes later about how great an MP5 is, which is chambered in 9mm.

then there is the one guy who told me that my M249SAW sucks. i just smiled and walked away but in my head i wondered, "So, do you have anything better?"

then one guy decided to call me "KIM" evidently because I look Korean or something......

 

[JohnKSa]

It's not the BEST argument out there, but it is a good reminder that NOBODY wants to get shot with ANY gun.

Since firearm self-defense tends to be more about deterrent than it is about terminal effectiveness, the argument has validity, however distasteful it may be to some. After all, in the vast majority (well over 90%) of defensive gun uses, the assailant doesn't even get shot. The mere THOUGHT of getting shot is more than enough to stop the criminal activity.

And, in the few situations where shooting the assailant becomes a necessity, it's rarely required that the defender kill or even disable the attacker. Getting shot tends to work a marvelous change in a person's priorities.

So, it may not be an argument that is well-liked, but it is supported by statistics and based on real-world experience.

The people who like to focus on one-stop-shot statistics and gelatin studies often completely ignore the deterrent effect of firearms and concentrate entirely on terminal ballistics. I think that's why so many hate this argument--it makes them to stop and remember reality for awhile.

 

[GRB]

Actually the argument (telling someone why not go down range and take a few) has a lot going for it. Someone can harangue, and moan and groan all about how theirs is bigger and delivers more than yours, or how theirs is smaller yet it is the motion of the ocean, or that size really does matter - and when it comes right down to it, I do not think they would be all that willing to take a few well placed shots from 22 CB caps let alone a .25 Auto! Such logic does go toward support for the quote that:

The most effective caliber available is the one you have with you at the time.

Sure some calibers may be better than others, but sometimes even a wrench is better than a Howitzer because while the guy who wants to stand downrange from me with a Howitzer is trying to figure out how to shoot me with it at 25 yards, I will be charging and swinging. Of course if he also has a .25 Auto, I may be in trouble.


All the best,
Glenn B

 

[Lonestar.45]

"i would add to that, the most effective one is the one you have and hits the target. if it doesnt hit it can be a .22 or a .500 for all it matters."

Amen to that, Proactivereactive. I frequent the 1911 board a lot, and I get tired of constantly hearing how one can carry and conceal a full sized 1911 in a Speedo, and how if you aren't carrying a full-sized all day, every day, 24/7, well, then you might as well be unarmed. Of course, you've got to have the tactical light, spare mag, latest tactical knife, light rail, laser, and special kryptonite hollow points tucked away in your front shirt pocket, or you'll be in big big trouble when the bad guy arrives.

 

[fistful]

"boy... [yes the weapons sgt. was African American].... just get yourself a chrome lined barrel..."

So, was he a racist or just careless in addressing the Sgt. in a manner common among whites and blacks in the South?


Regarding Mr. LAPD, is it possible he is LAPD, but on some special assignment or detail with another LE organization? Or am I just demonstrating my ignorance of law enforcement?

 

[Stinger]

Caliber wars are fine and dandy, so long as you put things into context. They can be fun sometimes, but are more often than not, tedious at best.

Glenn Bartley and Gewehr98, I'm sorry, but the argument doesn't float. There is no logic in it whatsoever. I respect your opinions, but fail to see the logic at all.

There is simply no double standard involved. It is a dumb argument, nay, it isn't even an argument at all. It is merely something some people do to seem smart, fluff-up their post count, or prove to others how little thought they put into their point of view. I understand that any gun is better than no gun, but that is not what this thread is about.

Sure, I am not standing downrange of a 22 rimfire, or a 25acp, or a 32acp, or whatever other caliber. That doesn't prove or disprove the effectiveness of any caliber. I am not standing downrange of any firearm, airgun, tool, rock, chair, pencil, or anything else. Maybe I'm a sissy

Sure, I think there is a minimum defensive caliber that I would carry, but that is not what this thread is about. I am just tired of people saying "go stand downrange," because it is a stupid argument.

Regards,

Stinger

 

[Chicken D]

If we stop using that argument, then we should also stop using the "PROVEN MAN STOPPER".

Almost every thread you read about .45's somebody had to chime in with, "well, I carry a 1911 cuz it's a proven man stopper."

Name me one round, one single round. that hasn't killed at least one person.

 

[The Rabbi]

Name me one round, one single round. that hasn't killed at least one person.

Smith's .460XVR. Not that I'd want to stand downrange from one.

Well, the basic premise of the argument (mine works better than yours) is stupid so the rejoinder to it (stand downrange) is going to be stupid too.
Let's face it: most gun discussions are stupid. The issues are laid out and the arguments have been made back and forth in some cases for close to 100 years (revo vs auto). It gives people something to talk about and occasionally you can learn stuff from and about them in the process.

 

[P95Carry]

Just remembered - the shooting at the church ceremony other day was IIRC ... 22 rounds of 9mm ... 11 hit, 7 deaths.

The debate will always continue however and yeah - still folks will still ''challenge'' others to ''go stand in front of one'' .... but it would be good to see that less often... I see Stinger's point.

 

[spartacus2002]

PROVEN MAN STOPPER

 

[mtnbkr]

I wouldn't stand downrange of a rubberband gun if I didn't have to, but that doesn't mean it's an effective manstopper. A very silly response to a silly argument. Some people have to justify carrying so much iron and the other extreme has to offset their nagging doubt.

Me, I carry whatever works for me that day. Larger is better, but not if you've left it at home because it won't fit your speedo (though Skunkape had some good ideas).

Chris

 

[Stevie-Ray]

Aww, thanks a heap, Spartacus, there goes my lunch!

 

[Bear Gulch]

Apparently we can't.

 

[ceetee]

Personally, I don't see what the big hullaballoo is about. It's just a more descriptive, interesting way to say, "Yeah, but having a <insert bullet type here> is better than having nothing..."