Maybe the 9mm isn't very effective!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Among a .25, .32, .357, .40 or 10mm, and a .45, I would prefer the one with the longer bbl just because its easier to see where that slug is going to go. I favor at least a 6-8" bbl. Now if its a caliber issue then I would go with the .45......'70 that is. :what: Just one look at that Phelps revolver and he is sure to stop :uhoh: in the name of the law or Queen.
 
This is a very long thread. :eek:
A service pistol/round is far from the hunting calibers such as the .44mag, .454 Casull etc, and a world removed a rifle or shotgun. A service round is nothing more a compromise. For this a person need confidence in their carry pistol/round.

For CCW, I prefer as 4" .357mag in winter, and 5" 1911 in summer. Night stand? I varies. You might even find a .44mag sitting there at times. They are what I am comfortable with, and have confidence in. While these rounds work for me, they will not work for everyone.

It is a proven fact, the service rounds are nothing but a compromise and all of them work at times, and all of the fail at times.
Because of this, a person should carry what they like, and are what the are comfortable using. Since it is a compromise, confidence in the weapon platform and round chosen, should be paramount if they are ever pressed into service.
My unscientific opinion.
 
I haven't read the entire thread, but I am guessing I am missing somthing here...or mebbe all of us are, I am not sure.

I was in the Army when the "transition" was taking place...I qualified with an M-9 and yet, when I got to my duty station in Kitzingen, got issued a 1911...and I loved both of them. I liked the M-9 due to it having a few extra shots...and the 1911 for its larger diameter and what with me being from Texas I liked big stuff (which is why I wanted to be a tanker...but thats another story)...

So now I find myself several years down the road...and I chose the 92FS over the 1911...does this make me un-American? I don't think so...does it mean I am forsaking an excellent American, John Moses Browning? Nope...didn't he make the Browning Hi-Power as well as the design on the 1911?

No, my main point to all this is simply this...

When you go hunting, what is the main thing, other than caliber, that we need to choose? Bullet design/type. Which is why my 92FS has 3 mags with 15 rounds of hydro-shok love in each...and I am sure that a few rounds of those sweeties will take the fight out of anyone intending harm to my loved ones and me.

MTCW
D
 
Perhaps this was posted already, as I did not carefully read each and every post in this thread. But anyway:

This guy, supposedly being a Medical Examiner, only sees the guys who die from there wounds. He also says this:
I absolutely despise a 9mm for defensive situations...and a .380 as well. These are probably the two calibers I see most often on the autopsy table.
(Emphasis added)
With no additional information to indicate how often 9mm projectiles are used as opposed to other sizes, the above statement indicates that people shot with 9mm-size projectiles may be more likely to die than those shot with any other caliber.

Our poster goes on to tell us that he often sees multiple hits with 9mm bullets a opposed to single hits with .40 or .45 bullets. So does that mean that the 9mms require multiple hits, or that the 9mms low recoil and comparatively high capacity allow for multiple hits?

There is simply not enough information containd in Deadmeat2's posts to make any sort of judgement at all.

Also, at autopsy, how does one distinguish between the wound from a 9x18, 9x19, .357 magnum, .357 Sig, and .380ACP?
 
This guy, supposedly being a Medical Examiner, only sees the guys who die from there wounds.

Actually, he's a forensic anthropologist, not an ME. I daresay he'd always be more involved with identification/evidence gathering than a cause of death determination.
 
This has been a great thread....thanks to Xdn00b101 for posting the link to the original thread on the S&W Forum. I have read it all and appreciate the vast experience that Deadmeat2 has taken the time to share with all of us. Some of the skepticism and conflicting viewpoints expressed have been very interesting and some very humorous...there are a lot of Drugstore Cowboys on this and other gun forums that I find to be quite enjoyable to read. Everyone has his own opinion on the best caliber and load. I just happen to agree with Deadmeat2 that the .40 and .45 calibers are two of the best. I have been carrying and shooting for 50 years now and own both 9mm. and .40's and .45's. When I leave home, I always choose the latter to carry. Just my own personal choice. If you prefer the 9mm., that's great...I just hope and pray that neither of us has to ever use them for anything else than a security blanket.:)
 
It's not about preferences or beliefs. It's whether or not someone who is stating a specific conclusion based on specific evidence actually has observed said evidence and has the qualifications to draw the conclusions asserted. Deadmeat2 came off as an ME, who would have somewhat of a basis of knowledge for determining effects of different rounds and determining how said effects differ based on penetration, wound characteristics, etc. Except, he's not an ME. He's a forensic pathologist. He will typically be seeing bodies that need identification or evidence gathered, not the cause of death determined. Some of the critical wound characteristics will no longer be there because the bodies are often partially/totally decomposed. The bodies on the autopsy table Deadmeat2 speaks of will often consist principally of bones. Any data on bullet type will only be determined if the bullet is recovered.

After all that has been discussed on this thread, if you buy his argument, that's great. But understand you are doing so based on not much more than the same anecdotal evidence you get at a gun shop, combined on your own particular prejudices for or against a particular caliber.
 
All things being equal, said BG will bleed out faster from a .45 than a 9mm; given the same shot placement and similar bullet type and style.

If I'm gonna carry, I'm gonna carry the biggest caliber I can shoot effectively, which is the .45 acp.

If I need a pocket gun, its a snub 357 mag in the front pocket, again the biggest caliber I can shoot effectively that fits in my pocket.
 
All things being equal, said BG will bleed out faster from a .45 than a 9mm

Y'know, I keep hearing this touted as the reason for carrying a "bigger" caliber, but, the truth is, it's not exactly correct.

A human body is neither a static nor "constant" thing... A person that has a higher heart rate or blood pressure is probably going to "bleed out" faster from a 9mm wound than someone with lower pressure/heart rate with the exact same wound from a .45 or .50 caliber bullet.

Then there's the size of the person's arteries and veins... Tear through one, and it's only going to "leak" at a given rate, no matter if there's a quarter of an inch of it missing, or two feet. It also doesn't much matter if there's an exit wound, since a person can bleed to death internally just as quickly as they would with blood gushing out on the ground.

The blood volume or capacity of the person being shot is also going to play a pretty big role in how fast he/she drops, as well as things like how quickly their blood clots, how sensitive their brain is to shock, etc.

The bottom line is that none of these variables are apt to be affected much by a couple of hundredths of an inch of projectile diameter... it's going to come down to circumstance, the individual that's being shot and his/her physiology, the location of the wound, and....plain old blind luck.

And as for our wanna-be coroner/forensic pathologist.... all he can really tell you is what rounds where present in the corpses he's viewed, and how many of those rounds there were... I seriously doubt he can tell you how long the person was or was not active after the bullets struck.

So, while this thread and the one that it links to is an interesting read, there's really not much that can be gained from it, as far as a "which is the better caliber" argument goes.



J.C.
 
I asked DM2 twice on the S&W thread why he advocates the 125g .357mag when his whole argument was based on bigger and more massive bullets. (pgs 19&20). Wouldn't his logic prefer 158gr or 180gr bullets?

He neglected to answer both times. Made a general comment something about shooting the messenger....
 
You look at the bullet after you remove it.

The bullets for all of those rounds are the same. (Except the .357, which differs only by two thousands of one inch). I think it would be like trying to determine if an animal was shot with a .300 whisper, .308, .30-06, .300WinMag, or .300WbyMag by looking only at the recovered bullet (if any) and the wound.
 
I don't understand the "bigger is better" thing either...

Wouldn't that make the 44 special a better hunting round than a 308?

If velocity isn't important, then why are rifles so much more effective than handguns?
 
#1 Very few badguys reload

#2 Most major ammo companies have different style/weight bullets for different calibers (except for .38 special & .357 Magnum)

#3 He also has the benefit of the incident reports that will have notes on recovered casings, recovered firearms, etc.
 
Last edited:
Middy...

You're comparing apples and canaries. In any case, if the .308 is going at the same velocity as the .44, the 44 is better.;)

Biker
 
Also, at autopsy, how does one distinguish between the wound from a 9x18, 9x19, .357 magnum, .357 Sig, and .380ACP?
Actually, he finally admitted that: "...you're absolutely right that often the ME can't tell what caliber and/or bullet was recovered at autopsy, and I clearly stated that in one of my earlier posts. "

My emphasis added.
 
Two pieces, MC? In all the reports I've heard, they could only find one piece. Seems like the upper half was desintigrated.

The 9mm will kill someone. The .45 ACP will kill someone. I like the .45 ACP. I like the 9mm. I believe it all comes down to luck and skill, and not the size of the bullet.
 
True enough most part, Deer Hunter, but if the size of the bullet doesn't matter, why not use a .22?

Biker:)
 
I don't know, I think those .224 caliber bullets have killed plenty of people, havn't they? ;)

But I assume you mean a .22 LR rimfire. They've killed many people, and yuo can't ignore that fact. You people that point out that "If the size of the bullet doesn't matter, why not use a .22?" annoy me. You have to aim a .45 just like you have to aim a 9mm. Do you think a limb-shot with a .45 will be more effective than a body mass shot with a 9mm? Don't tell us that bullet size is everything, because it really isn't. Shoot a man in the head or heart with a .22 and he wont go very far. Shoot a man in the leg with a .45 and he'll continue shooting at you.

Shot placement is crucial, because handgun rounds are weak. If these bullets were meant to stop a man in one shot, then all the police would be issued single-shot pistols to save money on bullets. But, they are not. If the guy doesn't go down after one bullet, do you sit there and contemplate how he is not dead, or do you continue fireing?
 
a) Shot placement is *the* most important factor, never said otherwise.

b) All things being equal, a bigger hole is better. Can you argue that this is not true? If a 45 caliber hole is no better than a 9mm hole, why is a 9mm hole better than a 22?

BTW, sorry to annoy you.

Biker;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top