PDA

View Full Version : Why not carry the .22 and .25acp as a primary defense gun?


threegun
June 10, 2008, 12:17 PM
The following incident took place here in Hillsborough County Saturday. A man named Jorge Bello went to the home of his estranged wife and shot her to death along with her new boyfriend and a female friend. He then fled in his truck before being stopped by three HCSO deputies. The following describes the shootout.

Three deputies ordered Bello out of his truck, but he opened a sliding rear window and fired at a deputy's cruiser, sheriff's spokesman J.D. Callaway said.

The deputies fired back, and Bello opened his passenger door and continued firing. Deputy Arturo "Art" Lence, 53, was hit in the lower torso. The bullet exited through his back, and he fell to the ground.

Deputy Raymond Wilson, 56, was hit in the left forearm and crawled to a ditch on the west side of the road for safety. Bello walked over to Wilson and tried to wrestle the deputy's firearm from him, Callaway said.

That's when Deputy Malachi McCoy ran up and shot the gunman in the head, killing him, Callaway said.

When the bullets were counted, investigators said deputies had fired more than 50 rounds. They think Bello was hit multiple times before McCoy fired the fatal shot.

Deputies believe Bello fired at least 13 shots, Callaway said.



Bello was hit multiple times with a larger caliber and still was able to fight. Now imagine the same determination from a bad guy who has chosen you as his victim. Imagine trying to stop them with the puniest of handgun calibers.

alistaire
June 10, 2008, 12:33 PM
Eight rounds of 22lr are better than a sharp stick, but not as good as 9 16" rounds from an Iowa class battleship.

Your point?

ConfuseUs
June 10, 2008, 12:52 PM
Yeah, a .22 in hand beats a .45 at home in the safe. You can't always conceal/open carry the firepower you'd like to have with you.

Bello was hit multiple times with a larger caliber and still was able to fight. Now imagine the same determination from a bad guy who has chosen you as his victim. Imagine trying to stop them with the puniest of handgun calibers.

Shot placement is king. If you can't hit with a .45 or .40 or even 9mm, but can with a small caliber like .22, what is the value of the larger caliber?

MrClean
June 10, 2008, 01:01 PM
Not sure what the 'debate' really is here.... :)
But after going through some training with the ATF & FBI recently I was even shocked as to how much someone can do after being 'hit'. Even with big calibers, full of adrenaline and any other 'artificial adrenaline', it's not like TV. They don't drop all the time after two to the chest or elsewhere.

With that being said.... a .22 in that special 2" zone around the head will drop them every time. Would I carry one? Nah... not unless it was all I had at the time or I HAD to have something that small.

Side note: Placement Placement Placement. One round accurately fired a second or two slower is MUCH more effective than 10 fired at MachII speed. You are responsible for every shot. If you don't know where they are going, who is to say civilians/innocents aren't in danger from your fire.

<stepping off soap box> :D

Hard Ball
June 10, 2008, 01:21 PM
I would be willing to carry a .22lr (and have) but not a .25ACP.

LeadFistExpress
June 10, 2008, 01:28 PM
They think Bello was hit multiple times before McCoy fired the fatal shot.

It does say that the BG was hit multiple times, but it does not state that they were all well placed shots, or even that any of them were well places shots. This, in my mind, does not point to the ineffectiveness of larger calibers, but to the ineffectiveness of the officers' marksmanship. Granted, they were being shot at and that cannot be anything like aiming at a target at a range and firing well placed shots. I do not know if I could hit anything either if I am being shot at, but I sincerely hope I can.

I have seen multiple posts on this forum that most law enforcement officers are not gun people and most are not good shots. I can say from my experience that this is true. When I was a correctional officer, most of those that I went to the range with to qualify were not good shots. They shot well enough to qualify, but I would not want to see them in action. I assume that police shoot more often than COs, but I do not know.

Keltyke
June 10, 2008, 02:23 PM
First rule of a gunfight - Bring A Gun!

A .22 in your pocket in the alley is better than that .44 mag. on the table at home.

Given proper shot placement, a .22 or .25 can be as deadly as a .45. Practice!

If all you can handle or conceal is a small gun of this type - go for it.

If it's the size more than the recoil, look at the palm-size .32s and .380s on the market.

I'd rather carry a .22 than the .25. I believe the ballistics are better.

threegun
June 10, 2008, 02:45 PM
Of course any gun is better than no gun and hits with a 22lr are better than misses with a 50bmg. The problem is almost any larger caliber is better than the 22 and hits with bigger are usually better than hits with a 22.

Most folks are capable of concealing larger. Still many who feel a need to carry voluntarily carry the puniest. A cartridge that limps by vs one capable of stopping a serious attacker under the dynamics of a real life and death struggle. The example I posted was just to help expose the lack of stopping power with the bigger calibers in an effort to show how inadequate the micro calibers would be.

Side note: Placement Placement Placement. One round accurately fired a second or two slower is MUCH more effective than 10 fired at MachII speed. You are responsible for every shot. If you don't know where they are going, who is to say civilians/innocents aren't in danger from your fire.

Hits to rounds fired ratios suggest that precision accuracy is virtually non existent in a shoot out. This means that good hits are hard to get. It makes more sense IMO to maximize each hit in terms of penetration and bone smashing ability given this phenomenon.

This is not a pure bigger is better thing because stats show that there is very little difference between the bigger handgun calibers. However all of the bigger calibers are capable of consistently penetrating a torso and smashing bones when encountered.

It does say that the BG was hit multiple times, but it does not state that they were all well placed shots, or even that any of them were well places shots. This, in my mind, does not point to the ineffectiveness of larger calibers, but to the ineffectiveness of the officers' marksmanship. Granted, they were being shot at and that cannot be anything like aiming at a target at a range and firing well placed shots. I do not know if I could hit anything either if I am being shot at, but I sincerely hope I can.

His wounds could have come after the bullets had passed through the vehicles outer shell as the shoot out began with Bello in the cab. All reports say he exited the vehicle and wrestled for deputy Wilson's gun. Bello must have fired all of his 14 shots from the cab and thus taken the larger volume of officer fire from it as well.

threegun
June 10, 2008, 02:50 PM
First rule of a gunfight - Bring A Gun!

A .22 in your pocket in the alley is better than that .44 mag. on the table at home.

Given proper shot placement, a .22 or .25 can be as deadly as a .45. Practice!

If all you can handle or conceal is a small gun of this type - go for it.

If it's the size more than the recoil, look at the palm-size .32s and .380s on the market.

I'd rather carry a .22 than the .25. I believe the ballistics are better.


Is the .22 better than the 38 special in the alley?

Is proper shot placement harder to get when being attacked?

Keltyke
June 10, 2008, 02:54 PM
The example I posted was just to help expose the lack of stopping
power with the bigger calibers in an effort to show how inadequate the micro
calibers would be.

And of course, there's the story of a wife who was killed by a bullet fired from her husband's .22 while he was using it to drill a hole (that's right!) for mounting a TV dish to the wall. Went through the inside wall and outside siding - killed her dead. One shot.

And we've all heard the stories of a BG shot with a .40 or ,.45 and living to kill the cop who shot him.

Keltyke
June 10, 2008, 02:58 PM
Is the .22 better than the 38 special in the alley?

Is proper shot placement harder to get when being attacked?

What asinine questions. Let me clarify what I said:

A .22 is better than nothing.

Proper shot placement can be good or bad with ANY caliber, especially in a tactical situation. Practice, practice, practice!

threegun
June 10, 2008, 03:34 PM
Keltyke, Those are extremes. We all have heard of these.

In the event of one of those extremes (getting a bad guy who refuses to stop) what is the tactic taught by the big schools for stopping someone?

Are the 22's and 25's capable of significantly damaging the pelvic girdle? Would equal hits from bigger cause more damage?

Everyone has the right to carry what they want. I'm just pointing our the negatives in carrying the smallest.

Keltyke
June 10, 2008, 04:16 PM
Everyone has the right to carry what they want. I'm just pointing our the negatives in carrying the smallest.

GIVEN THE CHOICE: I'd rather not carry anything smaller than a 9mm. I'm just pointing out the negatives in carrying NOTHING vs carrying SOMETHING, even if it's a mouse gun.

LanceOregon
June 10, 2008, 04:21 PM
It is too bad that some people feel a need to lash out at others, when their life falls apart. This guy Jorge Orlando Bello Garcia was real sick from diabetes, and was no longer able to work at his job as a truck driver. His house then got foreclosed on. And then his wife decided to divorce him.

So he lashed out at the only thing that was easy to attack, his estranged wife. I think that these sort of scenarios must be among the most dangerous that police face. It took a bullet to the brain to finally stop Bello Garcia. He did not care about living, he just wanted to lash out at others.

It is too bad officers were not able to deploy shotguns or M4 carbines in this shootout. Bello Garcia's pickup was described as being peppered with bullet holes. More accurate gunfire would have been much easier to obtain with a long gun.

.

threegun
June 10, 2008, 04:46 PM
What asinine questions. Let me clarify what I said:

A .22 is better than nothing.


I understood what you said. Only the severely mental individual would argue that the smallest of calibers isn't better than nothing.

"Better than nothing" is just not acceptable when my life is on the line. It is used to justify inadequacies of all sorts.

IMO the only use a 22 or 25 has is as a backup or when nothing bigger is possible.

threegun
June 10, 2008, 05:24 PM
Lance, I saw the truckhttp://www2.tbo.com/content/2008/jun/07/deputies-investigate-tampa-shooting/ it was riddled pretty good. The officers especially wilson, who lost a good chunk of his forearm, kept it together enough to survive. Mccoy was able to get a head shot under this stress which is commendable.

Bello was able to get two hits on separate targets in 14 shots despite over 50 rounds being launched at him. This goes to show just how the pressure of life and death struggles change shooting ability. Bello seemed to be asking to die meaning no pressure. The officers wanted to live and accuracy suffered.

Deaf Smith
June 10, 2008, 10:19 PM
Why is it better to get something other than a .22?

My wife used to work in the OR room at a major hospital that was in, uh, a crappy place.

She as been in CVICU, CVOR, OR, Truma I, and even director of CV nursing.

Well she told me long time ago that people shot with low powered rounds like .22, .25, .32 most of the time walked in talking! As the round's power increased, more were carried in (like 9mm, .38, .357, .45s)

The ONLY ones that just about always were carried in were shotgun wounds.

Unless you have a physical problem that makes the .22, or .25, the only real firearm choice, I'd get something bigger.

FLA2760
June 10, 2008, 10:29 PM
It is a shame that this POS did not just eat his gun before engaging the deputies; like so many of these criminal losers do after they do crap like this. Rant over

LanceOregon
June 11, 2008, 03:10 AM
Why is it better to get something other than a .22?

Well, in the case of this shooting in Florida that threegun mentioned, I see in the link that he just posted that the criminal was armed with a .45

I sure would hate to find myself up against someone with a .45, and then realize that I only had a .22 in my hand. I would feel pretty stupid at that point.

.

Bill DeShivs
June 11, 2008, 03:40 AM
You mean, the guy with the biggest gun wins?

Keltyke
June 11, 2008, 06:21 AM
"IMO the only use a 22 or 25 has is as a backup or when nothing bigger is possible."

Now we're on the same page. I've already stated that, if possible, I personally don't carry anything smaller than a .38 spcl. or (preferably) a 9mm. I have a compact .40 on order.

A lot of mouseguns are being made in .380 and 9mm, so there is less reason to carry anything smaller. My wife has trouble handling the recoil of a mousegun in .380 or 9mm, so she carries a .32 auto. She's good with it. Ya do that ya gotta do.

Erik
June 11, 2008, 02:40 PM
"Why not carry the .22 and .25acp as a primary defense gun?"

The standard answer is "because there are better options." The standard outlier arguments are brought up but this, but that... fine. If they represent a given person's situation that should be taken into account. But for most there are better options.

LanceOregon
June 11, 2008, 03:29 PM
You mean, the guy with the biggest gun wins?

I'm saying that a man with a .45 would have an edge over someone armed with a .22

Just how big of an edge it would be, is debatable. But I think that most would agree that the person with the .22 would be disadvantaged by their gun selection.

Of course, there are many, many factors that play into any confrontation. If the gun used was the sole factor in a gun battle, then the lady ( Jeanne Assam ) that stopped the shooter at the New Life Church in Colorado should have lost that fight. For that shooter had a Bushmaster AR-15, a .40 S&W Beretta 96, and a Springfield XD 9mm. He also had an AK-47, but he left that gun in his car, and did not take it into the church.

But she was pretty well armed too, with a 9mm Beretta 92 FS. While she scored no truly fatal hits, she hit him twice in the same thigh, causing him to bleed severely. And then she shot him in the wrist, disabling one of his hands. At that point, he decided to end it all, and used his other hand to shoot himself in the head.

One would normally have expected him to come out on top in the gunfight, as he had been using the Bushmaster. But he didn't.

But what if Jeanne Assam had instead been carrying only a little pocket Beretta .25 Auto? Would the outcome have likely been the same??


.

Hard Ball
June 11, 2008, 04:47 PM
There is some extensive actual test data.

During World War Two the British Special Operation Executive (the SOE) conducted an extensive series of tests of all currently (1942) available handguns to decide what they should arm their agents sent on missions to the occupied countries to kill key German officials and collaborators.
The SOE concluded that a .22 Long Rifle automatic piatol was the best weapon. Their firing technique was to fire 10 rounds into the intended victims upper chest cavity. Agents who did this in the field reported that their victims almost always died very rapidly and were seldom able to cry out or shoot back. That translates into stopping power as well as lethality.ys died very rapidly and were seldom able to cry out or shoot back.

Note that " Agents who did this in the field reported that their victims almost always died very rapidly and were seldom able to cry out or shoot back."

That was stopping power as well as lethality.

JollyRoger
June 11, 2008, 06:18 PM
agents sent on missions to the occupied countries to kill key German officials and collaborators.

Not to dispute the lethality of a .22, but these were assassinations, not self defense situations. Imagine you are walking along and somebody zips you with 10 .22 rounds in the chest. You probably don't have a lot of time to get worked up before the panic sets in, or shock. Different situation entirely when the adrenaline and endorphins are already flowing.

Remember, the reason .25's and pocket .22's got popular in the first place (pre-1960's or so) is because the metallurgy was not advanced enough to handle high-pressure cartridges in small packages. Hence the rise of the .25, .32's and .380's. Now you can stuff more power into smaller packages, so why not take advantage of it.

relee
June 11, 2008, 07:26 PM
Any LEO will tell you that the call they dread most is responding to domestic violence. Normal people can suddenly do crazy things. As the economic situation in this country deterioriates I expect we will see more of the "suicide by cop" scenarios being played out...

Stevie-Ray
June 11, 2008, 07:34 PM
I'm of the camp of the .380 minimum, though I regularly carry a .32 ACP. I really needed a pocket gun, but when I got my P32, there was no such thing as a P3AT. Now that Ruger has introduced the LCP, I fully intend to purchase one. Soon, the .380 will be my minimum, at last. I also believe that any gun is better than no gun, and have carried, on occasion, a PT22. I could hit what I aimed at, and I didn't really feel vastly undergunned with a full load of Yellow Jackets. But even that wasn't "pocket" enough for me, and though the lowly .32 is no .380, I feel it's close, and better than the .25 or the .22, even in their best loadings. I doubt my P32 will go up for sale, it's served me well, and will no doubt take it's rightful place in a tiny corner of the safe, and shot maybe once a year.

Deaf Smith
June 11, 2008, 09:09 PM
Hard Ball,

The SOE usually was either doing an assination, taking out a guard, or striking first (and if possible without warning.) And they did not use hide out pocket guns like a Kel-Tec or Raven or Beretta 950, etc....

Also most SD and police shootings start with the cops and good guys reacting to an attack, not preemptive strikes.

Also add the idea of winchestering your .22 at one person does not leave you with any ammo to combat a second attacker (not to mention today bullet proof vest are more common.)

I'm sure 10 shots at very close range is fatial. But....

Dwight55
June 11, 2008, 09:27 PM
The original question asks about using a .22 or .25 for the primary defense gun: Erik answered it best I think.

"Why not carry the .22 and .25acp as a primary defense gun?

"The standard answer is "because there are better options. . . . . for most there are better options."
__________________

The .25 is notorious for not having enough power to do much but noisily exit a too short barrel, . . . and the .22 is equally notorious for ammo that goes click instead of bang.

Having said that, . . . and being a dyed in the wool 1911 carrier, . . . I still would not feel undergunned in a 1 on 1 or 2 on 1 defensive scenario if I had my son's Browning Buckmark. It holds 10 in the mag, . . . and I can put all 10 of em (if no misfires are present) in the 9 in paper plate at 21 feet in something like 4 seconds. I actually get much better overall scores with this gun than my 1911.

The person who would carry the .22 or .25 just has to know their limitations, including an almost dire necessity to put em all in the snot locker, . . . carry a spare mag at least, . . . be proficient at clearing misfires quickly, . . .

Personally, . . . if someone drew a Browning Buckmark or a Ruger on me, . . . I would be seriously careful of what I did, . . . knowing the lethality of 10 each .22 Long Rifle rounds.

May God bless,
Dwight

Chui
June 11, 2008, 10:30 PM
"Yeah, a .22 in hand beats a .45 at home in the safe. You can't always conceal/open carry the firepower you'd like to have with you."

Yada, yada, yada. First rule is bring enough gun. if you don't you may very well "deserve" the potential outcome...

I wish people would drop that stupid notion. It's YOUR life so pack the damned gun.

Tell yourself: Self :D, you will get into a fight today that will require that you actually fire your weapon. After you've done this then and only then open your safe and choose.

threegun
June 11, 2008, 10:45 PM
Chui, You took the words right out of my mouth.


Dwight, Snot locker might not be available. That 9inch plate at the range vs during the gun fight........could be harder to hit.

Mikeyboy
June 12, 2008, 12:53 PM
An old cop I met told me a funny story.

He is working in a bad urban area and gets a call of armed men trying to break into house. He arrives and finds a little old lady in her livingroom standing over two dead guys. She was packing a POS .25 pocket gun and took out two guys with a single shot each.

On the flip side there are multiple stories of people shaking off hits from a .45 or a .44.

Moral of the story, .22 and .25 are lethal and having a 4 in front of the caliber does not mean you carry a death ray.

seeker_two
June 12, 2008, 01:23 PM
The SOE usually was either doing an assination, taking out a guard, or striking first (and if possible without warning.) And they did not use hide out pocket guns like a Kel-Tec or Raven or Beretta 950, etc....

Correct. The .22's used by SOE were usually High Standard HD's or Colt Woodsman pistols with about 3" to 4" of barrel before the bullet engaged the supressor. That extra barrel helps the .22lr generate a lot more energy and velocity than the typical 2" Minx/Bobcat barrel. If you want something comparable, you should carry a Buckmark or a Ruger Mk. II or III with a bull barrel. But, for the size & weight, you can carry something more effective.

Another thing, for a long time, .22lr bullets came in two types: bare lead and copper-washed lead. The big advantage .25ACP and .22WMR had over .22lr was that the first two had actual jacket bullets. Today, you can get jacketed .22lr bullets. But all other ammo has advanced, too.

Nowadays, .32ACP or .32H&R Mag is the floor for SD loads....although a good .22WMR is pretty impressive, too... :cool:

Deaf Smith
June 12, 2008, 03:54 PM
Moral of the story, .22 and .25 are lethal and having a 4 in front of the caliber does not mean you carry a death ray.

There is no death ray except... a death ray.

Nice to have a powerfull handgun, but people have stood and fought after being hit with 12 guage slugs, buckshot, 30-06, and I have no doubt a few hit with .50 BMG or ever bigger.

Still, I prefer something more than a mousegun.

Chui
June 12, 2008, 06:18 PM
Since everyone knows that people have survived all manner of hits from all manners of calibers, including .223 JHP, .308 JHP and 12 gauge Brenneke slugs why in HELL would you CHOOSE to "go hunting" with a god... awful "mouse gun"??? Whiskey Tango Foxtrot!!! :rolleyes:

threegun
June 13, 2008, 05:09 AM
Because that little old lady instantly stopped 2 men with a 25acp.

Me I understand that the bad guy will be moving, canting, bobbing, and weaving. Getting that perfect shot might not be possible.

Extremes can be listed from both sides but they are still not the norm. When the dust settles and the smoke clears handguns with cartridges heavy enough to penetrate deep and smash bone will be on top.

When that terrible day arrives for the unlucky WP holder to actually have to use the cw I promise all will be wishing for more power. The guys who already carry as potent a handgun as is available and concealable will only be able to wish for a long gun.

Hard Ball
June 13, 2008, 11:30 AM
"Also add the idea of winchestering your .22 at one person does not leave you with any ammo to combat a second attacker "

Don't worry. My pistol was a .22lr PPK/s 10 shot Interarms version and i carried two spare 10 round magazines.

Chui
June 13, 2008, 11:29 PM
Extremes can be listed from both sides but they are still not the norm.

I don't care for "the norm". I own a firearm due to "extremes". I've never been robbed or assaulted or had a home invasion. All of those are "extremes" for me and having enough gun, knife, martial arts, dog to deal with these "extremes" makes me CALM or much more calm than not. Besides, in the extreme case you will have to drop the hammer and I, for one, don't want a freakin' .22LR, .25 ACP, .32 ACP, .380, or .38 Special to defend my hide. And why should I when there's 9mm and .45 ACP readily available?

We agree that at the end of the day the cartridge must be able to offer sufficient penetration (and expansion).

"Those who traverse the planet with a only mouse gun on his person better make damned sure that the planet is only infested with mice." From bad Jeff Cooper to me in a dream...

Keltyke
June 14, 2008, 07:50 AM
And why should I when there's 9mm and .45 ACP readily available?

You forgot .40, 10mm, .44 mag, and .454. :)

Chui
June 14, 2008, 10:05 AM
I could use the .40 S&W in an M&P or HK full size. The rest of them overpenetrate and if you're being shot at they are horrible for shot recovery.

You forgot .357 Sig which is like a LOUD +P 9mm with more flash.

I'll take the .44 Magnum while in the woods, though.

Clark
June 14, 2008, 12:43 PM
I have experimented with killing roosters and animals with different .22LR ammo.
I have experimented with increasing the power of 25acp through +P++ handloads.

Quickshock ammo with pre fragmented bullets works the best for 22LR. See attached photo.
They have now licensed this design to CCI.

I can actually get 25acp to kick hard with hot handloads. Too hot and the primer falls out and the case gets stuck in the chamber [there is no extractor].

Still, the Kel-Tec P3AT .380 weighs 10 ounces loaded, and so there is no real reason to carry a 22 or 25, as they are typiically no lighter. An NAA revolver may be 4 ounces, but the 10 ounce Kel-Tec...I can't feel it right now in my pocket.

Chui
June 14, 2008, 03:04 PM
I'm "sorry". Actually, I'm NOT.

Bring enough f$#*) gun or stay home. Period.

:barf:

What the Hell has happened to our society that a man cannot "comfortably" carry a loaded pistol?

:confused:

.300H&H
June 15, 2008, 02:14 AM
Overpenetration and noise issues...can make the .22/.25acp more apealing.
If I'm in an apartment/condo where all that's separating me from a neighbor - is a couple of layers of sheetrock, I don't want a .357mag.or .40S&W or a 9mm. Also, when a firearm is fired indoors the noise and muzzle flash are magnified.


I had a Beretta 21a that I sold - and it was a kind of love/hate pistol ie. I really liked the concealbility and the way it fit in my hand. It was a very convenient firearm and fun to shoot. However, I hated the lack of confidence I had when carrying it ie. it seemed to work flawlessly with one brand of ammo - but it jammed with everything else...and I always had to wonder whether it would work flawlessly in a real crisis or just reintroduce me to Murphy's Law. :rolleyes:


I kinda like the little .32's and would like to see more .32 revolvers. I think the .25acp could be improved. I love the size and feel of the Beretta Tomcat .32acp - but I have no confidence in the gun ie. too many reports of reliability problems.' It's a shame ie. I have come close to buying one quite a few times...but just couldn't trust them.

threegun
June 19, 2008, 08:57 AM
Noise shouldn't be a factor in choosing a self defense weapon. Damage to the ear occurs at DB levels over 85db. The lowly 22lr from a handgun chimes in at 134db. Damage is occurring with it from every shot.


CENTERFIRE RIFLE DATA

.223, 55GR. Commercial load 18 " barrel 155.5dB
.243 in 22" barrel 155.9dB
.30-30 in 20" barrel 156.0dB
7mm Magnum in 20" barrel 157.5dB
.308 in 24" barrel 156.2dB
.30-06 in 24" barrel 158.5dB
.30-06 in 18 " barrel 163.2dB
.375 18" barrel with muzzle brake 170 dB


CENTERFIRE PISTOL DATA

.25 ACP 155.0 dB
.32 LONG 152.4 dB
.32 ACP 153.5 dB
.380 157.7 dB
9mm 159.8 dB
.38 S&W 153.5 dB
.38 Spl 156.3 dB
.357 Magnum 164.3 dB
.41 Magnum 163.2 dB
.44 Spl 155.9 dB
.45 ACP 157.0 dB
.45 COLT 154.7 dB

Recall that sounds over 85-90 dB can lead to permanent hearing damage without hearing protection. As can be seen from Table 2, even firing a .22LR (134 dB) has the potential of causing permanent, irreversible, inner ear damage.



They all hurt your inner ear. So since we are only going to use a gun without hearing protection to defend ourselves from death or great bodily injury a few db's aren't going to change much.

Clark
June 19, 2008, 09:21 AM
There are much more important things in determining ear damage than the difference between cartridges; the effective reflection of the environment and the ear's state at the time. That is why the Eskimos went deaf, as they were shooting at water after waiting in silence.

Also, the measurement from cartridge to cartridge is going to be repeatable in a relative way, being a function of muzzle pressure and bore+chamber volume, but the absolute measurement is very difficult to control. When someone writes down 155.0 db re ubar, that may be one data point from one set up, but to get 4 digits of replicate able resolution, that would be one elaborate test set up in the lab, certainly not at the range.

dogngun
June 19, 2008, 09:35 AM
Over the years, I have found 4 very easy to carry handguns, small, easily carried in a jeans pocket, or coat pocket. 2 are .22's, one is an old .25, and one a .32 ACP. I can shoot any of them very accurately, all can be carried in a "ready" state, and all are very reliable. I sometimes carry one of them as a second gun tyo a .45, but occasionally they are primary, although the .25 seldom is.
The .22 auto is a S&W 2214, the .22 revolver is an old High Standard Sentinel 9 shot (with 2 HKS speedloaders), the .25 is a very old Italian Tanfoglio, the .32 is an FEG.

I enjoy shooting them, and I practice with them as much as with my big guns, also practice with them in the off hand. It might be only a .25, but 7 rounds in 1 1/2" will slow someone down.

mar

R1145
June 19, 2008, 12:07 PM
Everything is a trade-off: Weight, bulk, power, capacity vs. concealment, blast, cost, availability, etc.

If I were facing an unarmed opponent, a "mouse-gun" would be a definite advantage, whereas I might feel vulnerable with that same weapon going up against a guy with a full-powered handgun. Now, think about having that full-powered handgun on a field of battle where everyone else has rifles. What about taking on a tank with a rifle? You get my drift.

You use what you have. If you have the luxury of choice, you rationally analyze the risk, and choose accordingly.

A fairly dangerous man of my acquaintance would carry one of those tiny NAA .22 revolvers when off duty, when it was hot and he was wearing shorts. This guy could probably beat up most people, and I guess he figured the mouse-gun would take care of those he couldn't. If the opponent were armed, you probably wouldn't have much more than an even chance regardless of whether you were armed or not, without reloads, armor, etc, and who wants to schlep that stuff to the mall...?

That said, I agree there are better choices for me personally than .22 or .25 "mouse-guns". I carry a .38+P J-frame, mostly, and I know I'd be SOL if I got caught in a multiple armed opponent, take-over robbery-type situation.

You makes your choices and takes your chances.

Doyle
June 19, 2008, 02:49 PM
"Why not carry the .22 and .25acp as a primary defense gun?"

You might as well carry around a load of throwing rocks in your pocket. You'll get about the same amount of protection and you don't need a CCW for the rocks.

Hobie
June 19, 2008, 03:32 PM
I saw a classic statement in another topic on another forum.... "it beats harsh words." That is the ONLY reason I'd carry a .22 or .25 ACP and indeed has been the only reason I've done so.

Wildalaska
June 19, 2008, 03:35 PM
I dont go into harms way, so a itty bitty pocket .32 suits me jest fine....I may even switch to a .22 cuz its smaller :)

WildfreetshirtforwhoeverinsertsmyfavoritelineaboutthissubjectintothisdiscussionAlaska ™

PT111
June 19, 2008, 03:47 PM
You might as well carry around a load of throwing rocks in your pocket. You'll get about the same amount of protection and you don't need a CCW for the rocks.

But you will need big pockets to handle those rocks. A .22/.25 isn't my preference but it sure beats nothing and I would not hesitate one bit to carry one if needed. I had a close friend that was killed by one shot from a .22.

dadofsix
June 19, 2008, 03:58 PM
Please correct me if I am wrong, but shouldn't strategies change when using a mouse gun?

When using a larger caliber pistol it makes sense to shoot to COM. But when shooting a mouse gun, that strategy may not even slow down a determined attacker. If, however, when forced to use a mouse gun, you aim at the pelvic girdle do you not have a greater capacity to slow or end an attacker's charge on you? I am reminded of articles involving charging grizzly bears where the goal is to shoot to shoulders to stop the animal's ability to advance before trying to kill it. Why wouldn't the same reasoning apply in this situation?

<><Peace

Rifleman 173
June 19, 2008, 04:14 PM
If the other guy is armed in ANY way, shape or form then you need to be able to overpower him very quickly with bigger and better guns. In other words, one of the officers should of been using a shotgun or a rifle. The rifle should have been at least a .30 caliber or bigger, like a lever action .44 magnum saddle carbine or even a 45-70. We can second guess all day as to what is right or wrong as far as this situation is concerned but having studied a number of police involved shootings as a range officer, time and again I see where an officer tried to use his handgun when a rifle or shotgun would have been of better use to him/them. In a couple of weeks I have a new group of officers that I will be teaching about using firearms and how to shoot them. Again, the one main thing that I WILL impress on them is to rely on the police rifle or shotgun as their PRIMARY firearm and use their pistols as back-ups to the shoulder-mounted guns. This situation just re-inforces how wimpy pistols can be to me.

Clark
June 19, 2008, 06:34 PM
There are lots of opinions about stopping power.

I have shot lots of animals and watched them die.

What a difference between Quickshock and Eagle hollow point 22lr ammo!

Above 2000 fps, there is shock wave that turns flesh to mush. Those shot by the DC sniper with a 223 died.
80% of those attacked with a handgun survive.
As Elmer Keith says, you can eat right up to the hole.

I have a friend who killed a perp with a 25acp after being screwed with a samurai sword back in 2000
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.guns/browse_frm/thread/ad9c4c4f2d947982/ac1ed830f7f7e266?hl=en&lnk=st&q=#ac1ed830f7f7e266

My current strategy is to use 25acp pistols for demonstrating double charges as a first step in a work up with drastically low SAAMI registered pressures, carry a 380 in my shirt pocket for low threat neighborhoods, and carry a 45 in bad neighborhoods. If I find myself in trouble, I will put a half dozen 45 cal holes through his lungs and then out run him.

Bill DeShivs
June 19, 2008, 06:47 PM
"You might as well carry around a load of throwing rocks in your pocket. You'll get about the same amount of protection and you don't need a CCW for the rocks."

Another irresponsible statement. Some kid might read that and shoot his friend, thinking that it won't hurt him any more than a rock. Think before you post, please.

Deaf Smith
June 19, 2008, 09:39 PM
Bill,

Cain killed Able with a rock. Think about that before you post.

Chui
June 19, 2008, 09:42 PM
"into harms way"

There's no way in Hades to predict when and where things may fall apart.

PT111
June 20, 2008, 07:35 AM
Bill,

Cain killed Able with a rock. Think about that before you post.

Also David killed the Goliath with a rock but I am much more accurate with a .22 than with a sling and it is much faster reloading.

bikerbill
June 20, 2008, 08:09 AM
I carry a Taurus PT25 when I walk my dog, because I'm usually in a pair of shorts and a tank top when nature calls him and changing into something that will let me carry a bigger gun isn't likely ... it's more for varmints than for bad guys, since my neighborhood hasn't seen a crime worse than mailbox bashing for years ... But it would never be my primary SD gun, I have a 9mm, .357 or .45 for that duty ... a .25 isn't much, but it will do the job on a skunk or snake if I need it to ...

Deaf Smith
June 20, 2008, 07:54 PM
Also David killed the Goliath with a rock but I am much more accurate with a .22 than with a sling and it is much faster reloading.

Don't have to reload a rock if it's in your hands. And I'm pretty accurate with a rock that way.

.300H&H
June 21, 2008, 02:31 AM
I could quickly pop off 7 rounds from my little .22 Beretta Bobcat...and I can't imagine anyone standing on the receiving end within 10 ft. who could withstand such a nasty unloading. Imagine 7 quick .22/.25 acp shots at close range to one's torso. That's nasty and very lethal. It might not be the optimum primary weapon...but it's still a powerful form of self-defense.

threegun
June 21, 2008, 04:55 PM
.300H&H, Getting those 7 torso hits against a fighting & moving target while under the stress of a life and death situation according to statistics is very difficult. Here in lies the problem with micro calibers. Bad guys turn, bob, weave, run, charge, and many many more unexpected maneuvers that are very difficult to predict much less practice for. Your frontal torso view might suddenly disappear into an arm and side with the slightest of bad guy movement. Now you have half the size target and twice the required penetration to get to vitals.

Theoretically 7 rapid hits to the torso is going to cause a serious problem for the BG as will precision hits. They are just statistically hard to achieve reliably given the variables.

natjohnb
June 21, 2008, 04:57 PM
As WildAlaska has said before, and I agree with, the .32(or any decent mouse) is more than enough for the average citizen in everyday, average situations...and small caliber hits to the face at arms length will do a lot of damage(Ken, I'll take a 3X, thank you;))

Not that there is anything wrong with a bigger cal. either, it's just not mandatory for the average CCW'er

PT111
June 21, 2008, 05:23 PM
Quote:
Also David killed the Goliath with a rock but I am much more accurate with a .22 than with a sling and it is much faster reloading.

Don't have to reload a rock if it's in your hands. And I'm pretty accurate with a rock that way.

I really hope I don't get so close to the BG that I can hit him in the head with the rock still in my hand. Of course if you are that close you can always pistol whup him. :D

Sportdog
June 21, 2008, 10:56 PM
That"s what I've been carrying since I registered the gun yesterday. It is a very old five shot H&R revolver that belonged to my mother's deceased uncle and she gave it to me. I am well aware of the limitations of this pistol but it will have to do until I can turn loose the coin for something better. I have a Browning 7 shot semi 380 but it is too heavy to suit me for pocket carry and I have yet to find a holster that has what I want off the rack. Once sweatshirt weather gets here I should have a nice Blackhawk holster for my Beretta 92FS and that's what I'll carry. Since I have spent 57 years of my life unarmed, that little 32 S&W I consider a big improvement!:D

Hook686
June 21, 2008, 11:35 PM
From a book used in California for CCW class study:

Not Looking to Die

by A. Grant Macomber



INTRODUCTION

by Bill Sansom

The first bullet crashed through the door and hit me just above my belt buckle. It ripped through my abdomen, shattered my right hip at the joint, and careened down my leg bone, blasting my leg muscles into a jellied, bloodshot pulp. The impact of the .44 Mag. 240 gr. jacketed hollow point blew me off the three-step trailer house porch. I slammed against the side of a parked car and slid in a heap in six inches of new-fallen snow.

I had somehow managed to draw my Smith & Wesson .357 as the bullet hurled me through the air. But my arm was pinned under my stunned and broken body, the revolver still clenched tightly in my fist. The maniac who shot me stepped calmly out onto the porch. “I told you cops to leave me alone,” he snarled.

He slowly thumbed back the hammer of his single action six gun. The soft clicking of the revolving cylinder echoed off the walls of the tightly packed trailers in the frigid December dawn. He squinted down his outstretched arm at the Deputy Sheriff star on my jacket.

The second shot punched into my chest, disintegrating a two-inch piece of rib bone, searing a white hot railroad spike of fire through my left lung, dislocating my shoulder. The force of the bullet lifted me and skidded me a foot backwards. It also freed my pinned gun hand. My first two shots bracketed the third button down on his faded red union suit.

His third shot ricocheted off the frozen ground between my splayed out legs. The mushroomed slug tore out a swath of muscle and severed an artery just above my left knee.

My third 158 gr. jacketed hollow point caught him in his right elbow, spinning him backwards into his trailer. I kept pulling the trigger until there was nothing left but the snap of my firing pin falling on spent casings.

I heard the man thrashing around inside the trailer house, and I did not know how badly he was hit or even if he was hit. I attempted to reload my Model 19 S&W using two six-shot dump boxes on my gun belt. All the rounds fell out and rolled off my body into the snow. I was stunned and badly broken up by the bullets that had hit me. I could not raise my left arm or even lift my head up. I opened the cylinder of my six-shot revolver and with my right arm reached over as far as I could and shook the empty casings out. Then I lay the gun on my chest and felt around in the snow until I luckily found one live round. I poked the round into the cylinder and rolled the cylinder on my chest until it would put the round under my firing pin when cocked. I cocked my pistol and waited.

The man came crawling out of his trailer doorway and glared down at me lying on my back in the snow, his .44 magnum revolver cocked and clenched in his right fist. I lifted my revolver, took careful aim – and shot him through the temple.

The reason that I remember all this so clearly is that the incident has been played over almost every night these last twenty-four years in my dreams. I will never again be the second guy shooting.

I had been shooting 50 rounds a week of handloads just before that incident. I had a portable silhouette target that I carried in the trunk of my patrol car, and I would drive out into the brush and shoot some rounds from every conceivable position except flat on my back. My service revolver became an extension of my arm, and I could hit a bullseye five out of six out to 15 yards, draw and fire.

A handgun should never be used as a deterrent, but, if needed, it should be drawn and fired immediately, and always used to kill - not to wound or frighten your attacker. I can tell you several stories about misused handguns, and the grief the users suffered because of their lack of resolve.

Nobody knows if they are capable of killing another human being - until they do. Some people, maybe you are one of them, think a concealed weapons permit is an insurance policy against being mugged, raped, robbed, or embarrassed in front of your loved ones. Your license to carry a concealed weapon will give you a false sense of security. You are now armed. You may even think you are dangerous. In reality, the permit is likely to increase your chances of becoming a victim of a violent act. Announcing, "I’ve got a gun," is one of the quickest ways that I know of to get yourself killed.

You are a responsible, law abiding citizen. You are probably a business or professional person. You have a family, own a home. You are educated, reliable, and conscientious. You are not a law enforcement officer, private investigator, or a security guard. They are already licensed to carry a weapon; and they are also trained to know when and how to use it. You, on the other hand, have a concealed weapon permit because you are either afraid, or you are looking for trouble. There are no other reasons for a civilian to have a concealed weapon.

After you get the permit, your weapon will most likely remain under your car seat, in your desk drawer, or in the bottom of your purse. There will not be a round in the chamber. It may even be completely unloaded, the bullets hidden in some other place – for safety. You may have last shot the weapon two months, six months, a year ago, or when you shot it to qualify for your permit. But now you are unafraid because you have a possibly loaded gun – somewhere. Suddenly, the trouble you were looking out for is looking at you – while you are looking for your gun. There is only one place to have a concealed weapon: on your body. There is only one way to handle a weapon: often. And there is only one way to react to trouble: instinctively.

Just having a gun is not enough to protect you or your loved ones. You must know how to use a gun. You must be able to recognize danger in time to react immediately and lethally. You must prepare yourself beforehand, mentally and emotionally, to take another human life, and to face the legal and psychological consequences of your decision, so that you will not have to think about it in the split second that you will have to live or die.

This book is filled with real-life situations, where a gun was not enough, where it had to be mixed with blood and courage to stop a determined, often deranged, attacker. Read this book carefully. Put yourself into the shoes of those who stood fast, who faced the ultimate test of bravery. And lie in the street for awhile with those who lost their lives -- even though they were armed.


Bill Sansom
Saint Regis, Montana


http://www.handloads.com/articles/default.asp?id=18


Sometimes a .22 is not enough. Sometimes three hits with a .44 magnum, or .357 magnum are not enough. All things considered, I'd rather be holding the magnum.

Bill DeShivs
June 22, 2008, 12:52 AM
Figures it would be used in California!
Bullet impacts don't "blow you off steps, spin you around, or move your body a foot in the snow."
I'm sure it must have seemed that way, but physics says otherwise.

.300H&H
June 22, 2008, 02:44 AM
Anecdotal... I know of a shooting some years ago that went like this: A drug dealer in a housing project was approached by a 'customer' <another thug>and as they were exchanging a $20 bill/crack, the 'customer' whipped out a .22 mouse and with one quick shot to the dealers head... instantly ended the dealer's life. Nasty. I'll agree the little .22 mouseguns...aren't the optimum choice...but they can be very lethal.


Whenever I practiced/plinked with my .22 Bobcat, it was hard in a sense 'not' to pop off almost the entire magazine ie. it's a gun that's so easy to control...it begs for rapid multishots... It's a gun for close quarters, to be pulled out quickly and easily from total concealment. It's not a gun to be used in a gunfight where one is trying to suppress fire , shoot through, or knock down something. Its easy concealment, however, gives it a great tactical viability.


Personally I think a .38 snubbie is hard to beat - and is the most practical self defense handgun. However, a mouse .22 is a lot better than nothing.
One thing I don't like about the little mouse .22's - is that they can jam, and I see a lot of'em<moreso in years past than today ie. there seems to be more avid women shooters today> given to women and newbie shooters...as a primary selfdefense gun. A lot of these shooters never really practiced using the guns...and seemed to just stash them away...and I would be concerned about their being able to really use the guns effectively in a real selfdefense situation.

.300H&H
June 22, 2008, 02:54 AM
Anecdotal... I know of a shooting some years ago that went like this: A drug dealer in a housing project was approached by a 'customer' <another thug>and as they were exchanging a $20 bill/crack, the 'customer' whipped out a .22 mouse and with one quick shot to the dealers head... instantly ended the dealer's life. Nasty. I'll agree the little .22 mouseguns...aren't the optimum choice...but they can be very lethal.


Whenever I practiced/plinked with my .22 Bobcat, it was hard in a sense 'not' to pop off almost the entire magazine ie. it's a gun that's so easy to control...it begs for rapid multishots... It's a gun for close quarters, to be pulled out quickly and easily from total concealment. It's not a gun to be used in a gunfight where one is trying to suppress fire , shoot through, or knock down something. Its easy concealment, however, gives it a great tactical viability.


Personally I think a .38 snubbie is hard to beat - and is the most practical self defense handgun. However, a mouse .22 is a lot better than nothing.
One thing I don't like about the little mouse .22's - is that they can jam, and I see a lot of'em<moreso in years past than today ie. there seems to be more avid women shooters today> given to women and newbie shooters...as a primary selfdefense gun. A lot of these shooters never really practiced using the guns...and seemed to just stash them away...and I would be concerned about their being able to really use the guns effectively in a real selfdefense situation.

threegun
June 22, 2008, 08:46 AM
Assassination (as in your drug dealer story) is much different than self defense especially when behind in the reactionary curve.

However, a mouse .22 is a lot better than nothing.


This just sounds so sad considering my life or the life of my children could be at stake. I deserve better....they surely deserve better, even if it is harder to hide.

I make the sacrifice of learning tactics, practicing them, practicing with my firearm, and going through the trouble of getting permitted only to carry something that is "a lot better than nothing". Carrying a weapon which isn't consistently capable of doing what needs to be done to stop a bad guy given the dynamics of a self defense situation is akin to a father doing his job half arsed IMO.

One thing is resorting to a mouse as the only option available. Its totally another to voluntarily choose them as primary when bigger is available....IMO.

Hard Ball
June 22, 2008, 09:43 AM
"I could quickly pop off 7 rounds from my little .22 Beretta Bobcat...and I can't imagine anyone standing on the receiving end within 10 ft. who could withstand such a nasty unloading. Imagine 7 quick .22/.25 acp shots at close range to one's torso. That's nasty and very lethal. It might not be the optimum primary weapon...but it's still a powerful form of self-defense."

Thats the real world. Ask a coroner what .22lr com wounds are really like.

Chui
June 22, 2008, 11:53 AM
We all know that ALL firearms are lethal. :confused:

Head shots do NOT make up a large percentage of intial hits in a dynamic situation. :rolleyes:

Geesh!

Remind me to not eat any more cheese lest I become comfortable with the mickey mouse genre of handguns... :p

Hook686
June 22, 2008, 01:44 PM
On the other hand ... I recall a few years ago the shooting death of Trooper Mark Coates. He was involved in a traffic stop. The BG pulled a .25 habdgun and the trooper took one hit. He emptied his .357 magnum revolver into the BG. Today that BG sits in prison, while many morn the loss of Trooper Mark Coates.

One hit with a .25 results in death .. six hits with a .357 magnum produces only injury. I do not even try to understand it.

Chui
June 22, 2008, 03:13 PM
"I do not even try to understand it."
It's easy. It's all about placement.

Creature
June 22, 2008, 03:14 PM
You, on the other hand, have a concealed weapon permit because you are either afraid, or you are looking for trouble. There are no other reasons for a civilian to have a concealed weapon.

Lost me right there...

threegun
June 22, 2008, 05:24 PM
Lost me right there...

And hooked the peoples republic Kalifornia at that point.

Deaf Smith
June 22, 2008, 09:30 PM
I really hope I don't get so close to the BG that I can hit him in the head with the rock still in my hand. Of course if you are that close you can always pistol whup him.

With a .25? Just be carefull it don't break or go off in your hand when you do that.

Stevie-Ray
June 22, 2008, 09:53 PM
After you get the permit, your weapon will most likely remain under your car seat, in your desk drawer, or in the bottom of your purse. There will not be a round in the chamber. It may even be completely unloaded, the bullets hidden in some other place – for safety.That's about the silliest damn thing I've ever heard. Based on what? I personally know only about a dozen CPL holders, and NONE would lend themselves to backing up this particular statistic. Most likely? Conjecture at its purest.

.300H&H
June 23, 2008, 12:02 AM
Some years ago<many years ago> I was dating a lady...and as the passenger in her car - a 1972 Vette -<gosh, do I remember the car more fondly?:rolleyes:> I noticed a Beretta .25acp sticking out of the glove box... She remarked that it was there to 'scare off possible bad guys'. She had never actually fired the gun, but 'knew how to load it...' It was a bit chilling ie. she treated it like a kind of 'toy' and seemed to assume that it was a simple little thing to use... She had no experience with any firearms. It had been given to her as a 'gift' by a relative.


One problem with Mouse guns, is that I think they don't get the respect they deserve; they aren't toys - and they require more proficiency to use than a revolver or bigger semiautos. With a Mouse gun, one should frequently practice shooting it, and know how to 'clear it' of possible jams - and gain a significant level of skill. Yet, I would bet that Mouse guns suffer from getting the least amount of respect and proficiency of use. A big chunk of the stats in regard to the poor performance of .22/.25acp's might simply be a reflection of the unskillful use of the weapons rather than the actual weapons. One sad remark sometimes heard in the aftermath of a shooting<i'm thinking primarily of domestic situations> is :'It was just a .22.' - as if folks think that there's a special law that categorizes a little .22 as not being so serious...


Tactical proficiency will almost always trump caliber size. I think people are a little smarter these days, but the Mouse gun could still benefit from a bigger dose of respect and training. I've seen Mouseguns being one of the most dangerous little items for some people to own...and I do believe that the .22 caliber is responsible for the most gunshot wounds of any caliber<i know it was some years back...>

Creature
June 23, 2008, 09:09 AM
One problem with Mouse guns, is that I think they don't get the respect they deserve;

Right up until it is pointed right at your face. I have no problem carrying a mouse gun.

Chui
June 23, 2008, 05:38 PM
"I could quickly pop off 7 rounds from my little .22 Beretta Bobcat... and I can't imagine anyone standing on the receiving end within 10 ft. who could withstand such a nasty unloading. Imagine 7 quick .22/.25 acp shots at close range to one's torso. That's nasty and very lethal. It might not be the optimum primary weapon... but it's still a powerful form of self-defense."

I could introduce you to one from my old childhood neighborhood. He was shot a couple a miles from the neighborhood standing in line to eat at a takeout restaurant. Some guy skipped him in line and he protested. I think he may have hit the guy -it's been approaching 30 years ago. I do recall that he was hit exactly seven times in the torso at point blank (i.e., conversational range) range. He lives to this day with no complications. It was "hit or miss" for a few days afterward, however. He was nicknamed "Twenty Mule" after bouncing back from that ordeal. Real nice fella. YOU can ask him yourself what he felt and what he thought. I'll answer: "I wish the hell I had my 9mm cause I'd a shot his..."

I know of another one - this time a woman who was shot seven times with a .25 caliber semi-automatic in the upper torso, neck and face. She, too, walks, smiles and is none the worse for wear minus scars from the surgery.

The first guy was a muscular, athletic man in his day and at the time of the shooting - kinda like a NCAA defensive back. The woman was not overly anything. Kinda short, built like a 400 meter sprinter. Not overtly muscular or anthing. She'd tell you that it hurt but she was able to fight off the idiot and get to the phone to dial 911.

IF A PERSON IS HIGHLY MOTIVATED YOU'VE JUST GOTTEN THEIR ATTENTION. IF THEY ARE CLOSE ENOUGH TO YOU & SUITABLY AGGRESSIVE THEY'LL GRAB YOU. AND IF THEY ARE SUITABLY ARMED IT'S NOW THEIR TURN... :D

I'll pass...

Chui
June 23, 2008, 05:45 PM
There are much more important things in determining ear damage than the difference between cartridges; the effective reflection of the environment and the ear's state at the time. That is why the Eskimos went deaf, as they were shooting at water after waiting in silence.

Also, the measurement from cartridge to cartridge is going to be repeatable in a relative way, being a function of muzzle pressure and bore+chamber volume, but the absolute measurement is very difficult to control. When someone writes down 155.0 db re ubar, that may be one data point from one set up, but to get 4 digits of replicate able resolution, that would be one elaborate test set up in the lab, certainly not at the range.

Uh, you're incorrect. I've worked in Sound Quality for the last nine years and in Vibrations for 15. They are extremely repeatable. By the way, decibels are not linear they are a log function. Every 6 dB is a doubling of sound pressure. A .22LR will damage your ears. Some of it is repairable but continued exposure is doom.

I don't know where you're reaching to/from on the Eskimo, thingie. ;)

Chui
June 23, 2008, 05:53 PM
When using a larger caliber pistol it makes sense to shoot to COM. But when shooting a mouse gun, that strategy may not even slow down a determined attacker. If, however, when forced to use a mouse gun, you aim at the pelvic girdle do you not have a greater capacity to slow or end an attacker's charge on you? I am reminded of articles involving charging grizzly bears where the goal is to shoot to shoulders to stop the animal's ability to advance before trying to kill it. Why wouldn't the same reasoning apply in this situation?

You're being entirely facetious, right? :confused:

Iff (if and only if) :p

If you aren't then I'm wholly at a loss to respond...

Chui
June 23, 2008, 05:59 PM
I saw a classic statement in another topic on another forum... "it beats harsh words."
True that. :cool:

One problem with Mouse guns, is that I think they don't get the respect they deserve; Right up until it is pointed right at your face.
Ditto.

However, when/if you and the Goblin/Zombie "do the dance" HE will lead and YOU will follow. No mice stinger for me... It leaves far too much to chance.

Chui
June 23, 2008, 06:03 PM
"Bahhhh, baaaaah. After you get the permit, baah, baaah, your weapon will most likely remain under your car seat, in your desk drawer, or in the bottom of your purse. Bahh. There will not be a round in the chamber. Bahh. It may even be completely unloaded, the bullets hidden in some other place – for safety. bah, bah, bah. munch, munch, munch. baa, baaa, baaaa..."

Anyone hear anything? :p

I've got a sudden taste for mutton.

Double Naught Spy
June 23, 2008, 09:32 PM
Why not carry the .22 and .25acp as a primary defense gun?

For the same reason deer, elk, bison, and bear hunters don't carry .22lr and .25 acp for hunting. They are not known for making quick and effective stops on larger, dangerous animals.

.300H&H
June 24, 2008, 01:59 AM
Yawning... Tactical proficiency trumps 'caliber' ie. if a .22/.25acp is all you're carrying...then it is your primary defense gun...and then one has to use the appropriate tactics that go along with it... :rolleyes:

Double Naught Spy
June 24, 2008, 09:21 AM
Yawning... Tactical proficiency trumps 'caliber' ie. if a .22/.25acp is all you're carrying...then it is your primary defense gun...and then one has to use the appropriate tactics that go along with it...

Uh-huh. Who offers those tactical courses in .22/.25acp self defense? I would be glad to take it!

Chui
June 24, 2008, 05:44 PM
Well, if the referenceis .223 Remington/5.56 NATO you may be on to something. Otherwise,...

Good LUCK :rolleyes:

.300H&H
June 25, 2008, 02:05 AM
http://www.mouseguns.com/tactics/seltac.htm


Part of the problem is that some folks get a kind of noble-but-skewed notion
about self-defense ie. they've got a nice Glock or HK or 1911...and they practice well. Heck, they can hit the bullseye from 25yds. quite consistantly.
They get a lot of well meaning + feedback from other shooters at the range,
and they've taken a few classes too. They get a bit confident...and fantasize about using their .40 S&W to save the day at their workplace or the local mall from some crazed rampaging 300 lb. biker...


Yet, in reality the self-defense situations they are likely to run into in public - are likely to be a quick and ugly close quarters sort of situation in which the perpetrator tries to get the jump on them in a kind of desparate ambush or blitz attack. You don't want a weapon that the perp can see and try to rob from you.


Your BUG/Mousegun is thus your primary civilian weapon. Can you use it effectively? So what if you can hit bullseyes at 25yds. at the range with a Glock; can you in a high adrenalin frightening moment, pull out a mousegun and use it reliably against a perp. who is less than 5ft. away...against a perp who might already have a hand on you...or have knocked you down?


The mousegun is designed to save your bacon. It's not a range gun or a gun to be used in a 'gunfight.' It's designed instead for the self defense situations a civilian is most likely to encounter in public. Its deep concealment is a virtue. Its controllability is a virtue. It lacks firepower - but it has capacity and it's designed for close quarters use.:cool:

Nnobby45
June 25, 2008, 03:17 AM
Yet, in reality the self-defense situations they are likely to run into in public - are likely to be a quick and ugly close quarters sort of situation.......


The closer the range, the more important it is to incapacitate Bubba quickly, since the closer the range, the easier it is for Bubba to kill you and the less skill he needs to do it.

Carry your mouse gun if you wish, and get what satisfaction you can out of knowing that Bubba might well bleed to death in an hour or so, or even die of severe abdominable infection a week later--and may suffer (yes!!) more than you did before you died.

People far more knowledgeable than you and I recommend filing off the front sight of your primary mousegun and applying plenty of lube to the outside surface. Need you really ask why?:D

Double Naught Spy
June 25, 2008, 07:00 AM
So just more theory, .300H&H but nothing helpful? No tactics and training courses for the use of the .22/.25 acp in self defense?

If the .22/.25 acp is so good for use as a primary defense gun, you gotta wonder why there aren't more of such courses. Heck, I have to wonder why there aren't any such courses! After all, there would apparently be a market...

threegun
June 25, 2008, 07:49 AM
Yet, in reality the self-defense situations they are likely to run into in public - are likely to be a quick and ugly close quarters sort of situation in which the perpetrator tries to get the jump on them in a kind of desparate ambush or blitz attack. You don't want a weapon that the perp can see and try to rob from you.


Exactly!! (minus the last sentence). Reality is what has the folks who refuse to carry mouse guns, thinking they way they do. Getting those 7 torso hits after/while being "ambushed or blitzed" is not going to be the same as at the range on a b-21. Something as subtle as a slight dipping of the shoulder not only blades the torso (giving half the target) but it forces the bullet to penetrate much more deeply and through bone..............something not well suited for the 25 or 22.

Anyone can and should become proficient with whatever gun they carry and learn tactics to increase survival. Trying to make up for the deficiencies of a cartridge through special tactics is impossible. All one can do is taylor them to a particular weapon and hope the incident stays within those tactics. This is true for the larger calibers as well. The mouse gun just puts you at the very bottom of the ladder.

BTW Here in Florida we are not allowed to carry a CW in a manor that someone could see it. The firearm much be concealed from ordinary view. If my bad guy sees it will only be when I pull it........hopefully to late for them.

Some argue that since the odds of being attacked by a determined attacker are slim that the 22/25 will do. I argue that Murphy will see to it that I am attacked by the worst of the worst and leaving so much caliber on the table is simply not an option.

threegun
June 25, 2008, 07:59 AM
There are no courses because there are no professionals advocating the mouse gun as a primary carry gun. Folks who have a higher level of tactical firearm education and promotes a mouse gun as primary don't flourish in the business.

It would be akin to an economics professor saying that the price goes up when demand goes down.

PT111
June 25, 2008, 08:12 AM
It would be akin to an economics professor saying that the price goes up when demand goes down.

In actual tests of limited markets stranger things than that have happened. In one test for a generic drug they artificially manipulated the price and found that when the price fell below a certain point they could not sell it. However when the raised the price well beyond the normal selling price it increased demand greatly. People are affected by their perceived cost/benefit ratio rather than actually being dependent on the supply/demand formula.

If you have a taste test between two similar products such as Coke and Pepsi 86% of all people will choose the one in their dominant hand regardless of which one it is.

threegun
June 25, 2008, 08:27 AM
The law of supply and demand is 99.999 percent law then......because until your post I had not heard of another.

Look at oil. Demand is more than supply right now by a million barrels a day. Prices are way up. Back in the day OPEC would cut supply to raise the price.

A more recent and recognizable example would be the playstation 3 units. Demand was so high that folks would buy them retail and sell them for triple.

In our hobby just look at the Seecamp before competitors flooded the market with copy's. Used guns would sell for more than a new one. The demand was greater than the supply.

.300H&H
June 25, 2008, 10:55 AM
The tactics concerning mouseguns are basically the same as for carrying any BUG... Concealment is a virtue, and while some folks argue that larger guns can be concealed, I would suggest that I mean deep perfect comfortable concealment.


Self-defense does not begin and end with the firearm. Frankly, if somebody is mugged at close quarters, they might not be in a position to respond with any firearm at all. If the bad guy is holding a knife to one's throat or a gun to one's head - the caliber chambered in one's holstered glock...is a bit moot...and if the bad guy takes away one's glock, well, that's all the more ugly too. I would want a concealed gun to be as unobtrusive,secret and easy to whip out as a set of car keys or a wallet.


Also, consider the law and the locations of possible confrontations. Do you really want to be shooting at a range beyond 7ft. ? The mouse gun is for close quarters self defense - to get you out of trouble. It's not a gun that a LEO would wear when approaching a drug suspect for a possible arrest; it is however a gun that might be in one's pocket when walking the dog. Considering that some folks have an old can of pepper spray or tear gas as their primary self defense, the mousgun is a powerhouse in comparison.


Oh well, there are a lot of choices for primary carry. Size doesn't always matter. A lot of Cool Cats carry Mouseguns. :D You just don't see'em. It's kinda like a secret society.

rampage841512
June 25, 2008, 12:41 PM
If you want to kill an attacker put big holes in their chest or head. Or both. The bigger the hole, the faster they are going to bleed out, or the more damage the object making the hole is going to do on it's trip inside.

Even with good shot placement, a .22 is not going to perform as good as a larger caliber.

David Armstrong
June 25, 2008, 01:05 PM
Extremes can be listed from both sides but they are still not the norm. When the dust settles and the smoke clears handguns with cartridges heavy enough to penetrate deep and smash bone will be on top.
Actually the norm is any gun that works in any caliber you have. The need for the effectiveness of the larger calibers is as extreme as the deathray effect from the minor calibers. What many in this argument seem unable or unwilling to understand is that the greater effectiveness of the larger claiber is almost never a factor in the outcome of the fight. It is nice to have, but not really necessary. Sort of like having a car that goes 200 mph---nice to have, but it really doesn't make much difference when it comes to going to the store to buy milk.

David Armstrong
June 25, 2008, 01:16 PM
For the same reason deer, elk, bison, and bear hunters don't carry .22lr and .25 acp for hunting. They are not known for making quick and effective stops on larger, dangerous animals.
Ummm, not to belabor the obvious, but I believe we can say the same thing for .38, 9mm, .45, etc.

David Armstrong
June 25, 2008, 01:23 PM
Uh-huh. Who offers those tactical courses in .22/.25acp self defense? I would be glad to take it!
They are usually part of a broader BUG-type of class, of which there are many. Also, many instructors allow the smaller calibers into their main handgun class.

Heck, I have to wonder why there aren't any such courses! After all, there would apparently be a market...
IIRC, the BUG class (maximum .38 2")at a major LE convention always gets a waiting list.

PT111
June 25, 2008, 03:30 PM
The law of supply and demand is 99.999 percent law then......because until your post I had not heard of another.

It is somewhat related to the supply/demand curve but the pricing of very few items is based strictly on it. Supply/demand actually only works properly in a true competetive environment and the only one in the US used to be agriculture. Now that the small farmer has been bought out that no longer applies.

Any good marketing person will look at the market at what people are willing to pay for an item and adjust their production to that market which is somewhat following the demand. The main thing to remember is that selling price has no real bearing on manufacturing cost. For instance several years ago I went shopping for a new TV. GE at that time had three models that I was looking at. The difference between the three was the price and the features on the remote control. The difference between each one was $35 and the price of the remotes by themselves ranged from $20 to $40 so the maximum difference between the three remotes was $20 but $75 between the TV's. I found out that all three TV's were the exact same and the only difference was the remote which would work on any of the three. Therefore by buying the higher priced remote individually and the cheaper TV I could save $35 and have an extra remote. However the dealer told me that the higer priced TV was the best seller by far. :)

If Hi-Point were to double the price of their pistols they would be much better received and sales would probably drop only a little. The Taurus is similar and if Glock would have introduced their guns at half the price they presently are XD would be ruling the market. Is a Seecamp really worth 3 times as much as a LCP?

Chui
June 25, 2008, 06:01 PM
You don't want a weapon that the perp can see and try to rob from you.


Your BUG/Mousegun is thus your primary civilian weapon. Can you use it effectively? So what if you can hit bullseyes at 25yds. at the range with a Glock; can you in a high adrenalin frightening moment, pull out a mousegun and use it reliably against a perp. who is less than 5ft. away...against a perp who might already have a hand on you...or have knocked you down?


The mousegun is designed to save your bacon. It's not a range gun or a gun to be used in a 'gunfight.' It's designed instead for the self defense situations a civilian is most likely to encounter in public. Its deep concealment is a virtue. Its controllability is a virtue. It lacks firepower - but it has capacity and it's designed for close quarters use.

Bwahahahahaha!

What utter hilarity! Mousegun is designed to "save your bacon" not to be "used in a gunfight"...

That'll look damned good on a T-shirt! :D

Erik
June 25, 2008, 06:03 PM
"IIRC, the BUG class (maximum .38 2")at a major LE convention always gets a waiting list."

I'd wager that you are correct. Of course I'd also wager the maximum and minimum BUGs are identical for most attendees.

---

.300,
If I understand you correctly you are arguing that because of the realities of violent attacks smaller pistols of smaller calibers are preferable to larger ones? As in it would be better in-fight to produce a Seecamp .32 acp than a 1911A1 .45acp. Is that correct?

Chui
June 25, 2008, 06:03 PM
The BUG class (maximum .38 2")at a major LE convention always gets a waiting list.
And what does this prove outside of the fact that young, healthy supposedly gun savvy guys are doing something odd if they rely upon Hel-Tecs as their primary when off duty? Hell, I know cops who don't carry off duty... :confused:

threegun
June 25, 2008, 07:32 PM
What many in this argument seem unable or unwilling to understand is that the greater effectiveness of the larger caliber is almost never a factor in the outcome of the fight. It is nice to have, but not really necessary.

"Almost never" is the same thing that can be said for how often civilians will need a concealed weapon. What many in this argument seem unable or unwilling to understand is that the act of carrying a firearm in and of itself is to protect against a highly unlikely event. Still we carry. For many they prepare for the rare need only to fall short in choosing which caliber to carry.

Sort of like having a car that goes 200 mph---nice to have, but it really doesn't make much difference when it comes to going to the store to buy milk.

If this was just about getting milk faster I would agree that the bug is ok. Since it is about life and death, "almost never" still leaves open that possibility that caliber could be the deciding factor in survival.

Against a determined attacker a mouse simply lacks what it takes to stop the attack. Not a single one of you pro mouse gun guys would choose that weapon if you knew in advance that you would face a determined attacker and only had handguns to choose from.

threegun
June 25, 2008, 07:48 PM
PT, If Glocks stopped selling (demand went down) they would be forced to lower prices. Just as they raised them when demand exploded in the 80's. They went from 300 to 500 pretty fast. They far out paced inflation. They were only able to do it because the demand was high enough to support the increase.

If Hi-point doubled their price folks would buy a better gun. Almost every Hi-point I have ever sold was purchased because the customer couldn't afford better. Hi-point would joint the list of middle of the road guns thus ending their reign as king of the junk guns.

PT111
June 25, 2008, 08:56 PM
threegun - I know what youa re saying and that is why I hated econ quizes so much. It was always choose the most correct answer out of five and all five were correct just the professor liked one better than the others. I had many discussions where we woudl wind up getting credit for more than one answer because when it comes to economics no one knows what will happen when prices are raised or lowered.

The best exanple of that is several years ago Amazon.com announced that they had lost $50 million one quarter and did not expect to have a break even quarter for at least five more years. The price of their stock doubled on that announcement. :eek:

Any store owner will tell you that customers will not even look at a 10% off sale. You have to go at least 15% for people to even notice. Yet every year here in SC people go absolute crazy over the tax free weekend which is only 6-8%. Go figure.:confused:

.300H&H
June 26, 2008, 01:23 AM
Yeah Erik, to a certain degree that's what I'm advocating ie. a seecamp can be more practical than a 1911...in certain circumstances. In my previous posts I've even stated that I prefer a .38 snubbie. The main thing I'm advocating - is that tactics are very important and that mouseguns can be lethal and useful tools of selfdefense. A 1911 would of course offer greater 1shot lethality,and it's definitly a better pistol than a mousegun in terms of stopping a burglar or any situation in which one has the jump on the perpetrator - but, in close quarters where the perp has the initial jump on someone, the mousegun comes into play because it's deeply concealed...and can<if one is lucky and/or seizes the right moment>pull it out and use it rapidly at close range. One technique<generalizing> is to take a defensive stance and double tap, and continue to double tap as one moves to safety. If there's a gunfight in the next room or down the lane - the mousegun stays put and is not used. It's a BUG - not a gunfight weapon.


A lot of self defense situations are going to occur in bad situations. Perps tend to surprise people on purpose. If a seasoned inmate familiar with using a shiv and all sorts of street violence comes after somebody,it's likely to be after he's sneakily gotten up close and personal. I saw a show recently of people who were advocating 'open carry' - and they had lots of nice high capacity semiautos...but they were also using holsters that were designed to prevent 'takeaways' - so when the Perp attacks, the gun is almost useless because it's can't be quickly drawn.


Primary weapon? Well, any weapon one has - if it's one's only weapon - become then the primary weapon. Mouseguns deserve more respect by both users and receivers :rolleyes:because despite their smallness, they can be quite lethal. There's quite a few times where one simply needs something that can be deeply concealed...but ironically I bet more folks neglect to practice with their mousegun than all their other guns. Ironically the mousegun probably requires the most practice to use effectively. I don't advocate open carry under most circumstances; I prefer well-concealed carry. Quiet as a mouse.:cool:

threegun
June 26, 2008, 07:01 AM
.300, If there's a gunfight in the next room or down the lane - the mouse gun stays put and is not used. It's a BUG - not a gunfight weapon.

Why wouldn't the 1911 stay concealed with a gunfight in the next room? A handgun in general isn't what I would prefer in a gunfight. Just as a bug gun isn't what any of us would prefer in a life and death attack. Why prepare for the attack by carrying only to carry a gun you wouldn't dream of grabbing if you knew the attack was coming?

but, in close quarters where the perp has the initial jump on someone, the mouse gun comes into play because it's deeply concealed...and can<if one is lucky and/or seizes the right moment>pull it out and use it rapidly at close range.

Why can a mouse gun be pulled from concealment while under attack yet a 1911 cannot? Prudent CW carriers practice accessing their weapon. This notion of "deep concealment" is bogus. Concealed is concealed. For me "deep" concealment is a gun so placed as to completely remove any sign of it period. They are usually very difficult to access and virtually impossible to access while under attack. Normal concealment, fanny pack, ankle holster, hidden waist carry, pockets, purses, shoulder holsters, etc. can be used for most small and medium handguns and a few full sized handguns not just bugs. They generally allow easy access while hiding the firearm from ordinary view.


One technique<generalizing> is to take a defensive stance and double tap, and continue to double tap as one moves to safety

Why can't tactics designed to enhance the mouse guns effectiveness be applied to the 1911? How do tactics increase the penetrative and bone smashing abilities of a cartridge?


A lot of self defense situations are going to occur in bad situations. Perps tend to surprise people on purpose. If a seasoned inmate familiar with using a shiv and all sorts of street violence comes after somebody,it's likely to be after he's sneakily gotten up close and personal.

Situational awareness is mandatory no matter what platform you carry. Your quote only strengthens my beliefs in that if I have failed to give myself advanced warning of pending danger and in fact have allowed that danger to get on top of me, do I want a caliber on the very weakest end of the spectrum at that moment? My gun is hidden so it should be just as much a surprise to the BG as a mouse.

A snubbie can even be fired from a pocket/purse (shrouded hammer models) without having to remove it. It has the power to reach the vitals yet remains easy to carry. There really are very few reasons to carry a bug as primary. With todays firearms ease of carry shouldn't be one of them.

threegun
June 26, 2008, 07:16 AM
Handgun calibers are terrible man stoppers despite every single one of them being 100 percent lethal. We know that there are only three ways to cause a bad guy to comply.

#1 is a hit to the brain or upper spinal cord. (very hard to achieve given the dynamics of a shootout)

#2 is the bad guy giving up because of pain or fear of being shot. (not reliable because everybody reacts differently and of course drugs)

#3 is blood loss. (this effects everyone and can be caused by hits to the large parts of the body..........easiest to achieve)

The mouse gun doesn't get much respect because it causes the least of what is needed to stop a bad guy. That simply isn't acceptable for my safety or that of my family.

Chui
June 26, 2008, 06:34 PM
"...but, in close quarters where the perp has the initial jump on someone, the mousegun comes into play because it's deeply concealed...and can <if one is lucky and/or seizes the right moment> pull it out and use it rapidly at close range. One technique <generalizing> is to take a defensive stance and double tap, and continue to double tap as one moves to safety. If there's a gunfight in the next room or down the lane - the mousegun stays put and is not used. It's a BUG - not a gunfight weapon."

This is UTTER NONSENSE... :barf:

You THINK a "mouse" can be shot better than ANY full-size 9mm or .45 ACP pistol at ANY distance?? You're crack, dude. Absolutely barking mad.

Try IDPAing with your mouse and then ask to re-run with a service-sized pistol and compare scores. This was done in Handguns magazine last year and you know what the results were? If you think this is all you need stay home.

I can (and YOU can) shoot better under ALL circumstances with an M&P over a LCP, Helt-Tec or any other "micropistol" or snub-nosed J-Frame or equivalent.



:rolleyes::confused::barf::(

Double Naught Spy
June 26, 2008, 11:35 PM
Chui, I would not say he was on crack, but would say that you are correct -because people show a notorious lack of proficiency with their BUGs. They don't spend the time with their bugs to be proficient or not to be as proficient as they are with their primary guns.

David Armstrong said,
[QUOTE]They [classes for .22/.25acp] are usually part of a broader BUG-type of class, of which there are many. Also, many instructors allow the smaller calibers into their main handgun class./QUOTE]

I understand there are BUG classes, but not .22/.25 acp classes per se. BUGs come in a variety of sizes and shapes. My preferred BUG is a Kahr PM9, but it has considerable capabilities above my .22 revolver, so application and expectations of each is going to vary.

Bill DeShivs
June 27, 2008, 01:01 AM
Here's something Chui and all the "over .40" crowd don't understand-
Some of us don't WANT a 1911 strapped to our side all day! I can carry my little Keltec and never know it's there until I slip my hand in my pocket. I can also have my hand on my gun, ready to draw, at any time. Bet you can't do that with your 1911! After 10 years of carrying it, i can pretty much shoot it as well as, or better than, most folks can shoot a full sized gun.
You see, some of us have already "been there, done that" with the big guns, and actually made a conscious decision that a small gun would be our primary weapon. I don't need to dress around my gun-it's simply there.
If I ever have to use it, I'm sure I'll wish it was a .45-but I'll damn sure have a gun, without all the hoopla that you guys have to go through.
I even keep a "backup" 9mm close by in the car!

.300H&H
June 27, 2008, 01:33 AM
Primary carry is situational. A 12ga. Persuader shotgun might be very effective...and if a Burglar is breaking into my house...I'd probably reach for the shotgun...but it's a pain to open carry a shotgun all day...and as I walk through the parking garage to my car, it just doesn't feel comfortable slung over my shoulder...although I'm sure it's superior to a 9mm in regard to stopping power. There are times when a fat 1911 .45 is a good carry. If I was pulling over people on the highway handing out tickets all day...I might like one strapped on my side... There is also a place for a mouse gun! The mouse gun also has its niche. Again, I'd just argue that all these weapons deserve respect and tactical preparedness/training.


During WW2, Churchill's bodyguard carried a .32. He could shoot a head-sized target at 50 paces with it quite quickly and readily. Bloom where you're planted...and if planted with a mouse gun, the challenge is to know how to effectively use it.

Bill DeShivs
June 27, 2008, 01:58 AM
BTW- I own at least a half-dozen .45s, and more 9mms.

Chui
June 27, 2008, 05:49 AM
Here's something Chui and all the "over .40" crowd don't understand-

Some of us don't WANT a 1911 strapped to our side all day! I can carry my little Keltec and never know it's there until I slip my hand in my pocket. I can also have my hand on my gun, ready to draw, at any time. Bet you can't do that with your 1911! After 10 years of carrying it, i can pretty much shoot it as well as, or better than, most folks can shoot a full sized gun.

You see, some of us have already "been there, done that" with the big guns, and actually made a conscious decision that a small gun would be our primary weapon. I don't need to dress around my gun - it's simply there.

If I ever have to use it, I'm sure I'll wish it was a .45-but I'll damn sure have a gun, without all the hoopla that you guys have to go through.

I even keep a "backup" 9mm close by in the car!

First of all, Bill, 9mm is just fine. I don't care for .40 S&W. The 1911 is THIN so it conceals better than all other full-size pistols.

I have no issues with my 1911 or M&P9 or P7M8, either. I use a proper belt. All of my belts are "proper" - even my dress belts. Check out Galco. I prefer IWB. They are comfortable. Wearing slacks and a jacket is easy. Wearing shorts with a tucked T-shirt and a loose fitting cover shirt is easy. Fall is easy. Winter is easy. The only time I have to even think a little bit is if it's over 90 degrees and humid.

I've no need to keep my hand on my pistol but I'l bet you our draw times are very similar. And I'm surely not a "most shooter" so running a course of fire would not likely be all that close. But then if we switched guns you'd do far better than I.

Here is the issue: if you know you needed a pistol you'd choose something else. So why carry something you would not wish to have with you in an emergency? :confused: You've made a conscious choice to carry an inferior tool. As long as you're okay with all of it's limitations. And the limitations are substantial regardless of caliber.

P.S.

I don't leave weapons unattended. Ever.

CajunBass
June 27, 2008, 06:32 AM
Ok. So let me see if I got this right. A big gun is better than a small gun? Is that about the gist of it? Thank you. I'd have never figured that out on my own. :rolleyes:

Cain killed Able with a rock. Think about that before you post.

Someone may have pointed this out, I didn't read all the replies, but actually the Bible doesn't say how Cain killed Able. It just says he did. (Gen 4:8 (NKJV) Now Cain talked with Able his brother; and it came to pass, when they were in the field, that Cain rose up against Able his brother and killed him.) It's reasonable to assume that he used a rock, or a stick, but it's not stated.

You, on the other hand, have a concealed weapon permit because you are either afraid, or you are looking for trouble. There are no other reasons for a civilian to have a concealed weapon.

This is about as silly a statement as I've ever read.

But this one is close.

You might as well carry around a load of throwing rocks in your pocket. You'll get about the same amount of protection and you don't need a CCW for the rocks.

dadofsix
June 27, 2008, 10:21 AM
When using a larger caliber pistol it makes sense to shoot to COM. But when shooting a mouse gun, that strategy may not even slow down a determined attacker. If, however, when forced to use a mouse gun, you aim at the pelvic girdle do you not have a greater capacity to slow or end an attacker's charge on you? I am reminded of articles involving charging grizzly bears where the goal is to shoot to shoulders to stop the animal's ability to advance before trying to kill it. Why wouldn't the same reasoning apply in this situation?

You're being entirely facetious, right?

Iff (if and only if)

If you aren't then I'm wholly at a loss to respond...

Chui, if you are going to use my quote to somehow show how sophisticated and knowledgeable you are at my expense please quote my entire question. I prefaced my query with a "Please correct me if I am wrong, but shouldn't tactics change when using a mousegun."

At 53, I've learned that there is a lot I don't know about the world. I've come to find that asking questions is a good way to learn. I encourage it in my children and in others. The query I posed was (or so I thought) a legitimate attempt to educate myself relying on the combined knowledge of the folks who post here to provide their insights.

I asked a very similar question on another thread in this forum. The responses were thoughtful and enlightening. I learned there that the strategy I was asking about was a poor idea because hip shots are not sufficiently incapacitating.

I'm sorry that the best you could do was to respond with mockery.

But hey, have a nice day anyway.

<><Peace

Chui
June 27, 2008, 11:11 AM
Chui, if you are going to use my quote to somehow show how sophisticated and knowledgeable you are at my expense please quote my entire question. I prefaced my query with a "Please correct me if I am wrong, but shouldn't tactics change when using a mousegun."

At 53, I've learned that there is a lot I don't know about the world. I've come to find that asking questions is a good way to learn. I encourage it in my children and in others. The query I posed was (or so I thought) a legitimate attempt to educate myself relying on the combined knowledge of the folks who post here to provide their insights.

I asked a very similar question on another thread in this forum. The responses were thoughtful and enlightening. I learned there that the strategy I was asking about was a poor idea because hip shots are not sufficiently incapacitating.

I'm sorry that the best you could do was to respond with mockery.

But hey, have a nice day anyway.

You, like me and most every other human, will shoot center of mass. That's how we are wired. You, like me and most every other human will experience time distortion, tunnel vision, reduced levels of fine motor control, elevated heart rate due to adrenaline, adopting an modified isocolese shooting position if you're out in the open, etc., etc., ad nauseam.

One should consider training the way we are most likely to respond... That, sir, was my point. Unless you do a significant amount of training to overcome your natural "wired" responses you may find yourself reverting to something you're "not familiar" with...

I know where you're coming from: impede the person's mobility, but if the person has a firearm he can still fire in your direction incapacitating you. I *believe* that if I'm able to land shots and the person reacts to being shot I could then begin to use my cognitive ability and do whatever. Other than that I'm kinda confident it will bea :

Look, FLINCH!, draw, point, shoot affair with only combat levels of accuracy not a fist sized group.

ASSUMING the individual is not already on me, that is.

So to answer your question I don't believe having a different tactic for a diffrent gun is viable for most of us who don't train fastidiously and properly daily or weekly.

Train the way Human Instincts will Predict. If you can excel in this you'll probably be fine. If things continue for a mag change and there is a lull you can perhaps introduce other aspects/levels/techniques and I hope that we all would.

Draw, Extend, SHOOT!

Others may perceive other things and that's okay, too. I'd like to hear them, think about them, try them in some drills and draw my own conclusions.

MLeake
June 27, 2008, 12:28 PM
There is really only one reason I could think of that would justify a .22LR as primary: it's all the shooter can handle.

Now, before I get flamed by the "then you need to practice more" crowd, please realize that I do practice, and that my carries are either a 9mm P239, .357 SP101, or .45 C3; my other service grade pistols and revolvers are too bulky for concealment without a jacket, and I can't think of a reason other than hunting to carry my .44mag.

However, I am thinking more in terms of somebody like my mother, who is in her mid-late 60's and has fairly poor hand strength. Practice will help her skill, but in her case it isn't likely to help her with recoil control (due to physical pain), or with racking the slide on the autos (due to lack of strength in her grip). For her, a .22LR revolver is probably optimal (for CCW purposes, anyway, otherwise it would be a 20 gauge...)

A .22 that she can both carry and shoot is much better than a 9mm or .45 with a slide she can't work, or a .357 with recoil she can't handle, or a .38 that's too heavy or bulky for her.

Cheers,

M

Bill DeShivs
June 27, 2008, 01:14 PM
A 1911 is not particularly thin. It just seems thin because the gun is so big. My P32 is "considerably" thinner!
I have spent a lifetime looking for the "perfect" carry gun (for me.) Everything is a compromise. I know how to carry a .45, and have done so extensively. Then it was a 2" .38, then a Star Starfire .380. Along the way I probably carried most common guns for a while.
I work in a very bad area-lots of crime and racial tension. My pocket gun is always there to get me out of a fix. I'm very confident I can do the job with it.
Most weapons classes are taught by law officers. Their mindset is much different than necessary for civilian carry. Unfortunately, there are few qualified to teach the art of civilian carry-hence we have people strapping on huge guns because the former cop told them little bullets just bounce off people! ;)
Think about this: if everyone carried a little .32 in their pocket, the world would be a much nicer place!

dadofsix
June 27, 2008, 01:22 PM
Chui, thanks for your response. I agree with most of your last post.

!. If the BG is armed with a firearm then immobilizing him pales into insignificance. In that scenario, COM and head shots are the only thing that makes sense.

2. When the SHTF, we will revert to what we have trained unconsciously. I guess that's why they call it training.

What I was getting at in my original post, and explained very poorly I might add, is a situation in which the BG is holding a knife or some other weapon that requires proximity to be of use. If the BG is closing, COM hits with a mousegun may not slow him quickly enough to prevent serious or life-threatening injuries to you. That is why I asked whether a change of tactics (necessitating, of course, a change in training) might be useful to consider. Several folks with a medical background have advised that, while an gunshot injury from a small caliber weapon to the hip would be painful, in their opinion, it would not be incapacitating or injure the BG sufficiently to consider the tactic as an alternative to COM shots. That's good enough for me until and unless someone with greater knowledge chimes in with a contrary opinion.

<><Peace

Bill DeShivs
June 27, 2008, 01:54 PM
98% (my estimate) will cease the attack if someone is shooting at them, 1% will cease the attack if hit with any bullet.
The other insane, zombie 1% probably wouldn't be stopped with any caliber without a CNS hit.

PT111
June 27, 2008, 03:16 PM
98% (my estimate) will cease the attack if someone is shooting at them, 1% will cease the attack if hit with any bullet.
The other insane, zombie 1% probably wouldn't be stopped with any caliber without a CNS hit.

I am not sure about those percentages but I would say that your ideas are right on. If someone sees your .22 revolver and gets hit with a .22 bullet but keeps coming, you need to consider retreat as a viable option.

David Armstrong
June 27, 2008, 04:45 PM
I'd wager that you are correct. Of course I'd also wager the maximum and minimum BUGs are identical for most attendees.
I don't know if I'd agree. While the 2" snub is the predominant weapon there is usually a fair cross-section of others.

And what does this prove .....
It proves exactly what the quoted material addressed, that there is a market for this type of training. Sorry if that zoomed right over your head while you were ranting about other stuff with no relevance.

David Armstrong
June 27, 2008, 04:57 PM
"Almost never" is the same thing that can be said for how often civilians will need a concealed weapon.
No, thta is not true, and we've gone over this before. For you to continue to say so is dishonest. The lifetime chance of using a firearm for defensive purposes is far from "almost never." It is rare, but that then should give you some idea of how truly rare the caliber difference matters, which is "almost never."
For many they prepare for the rare need only to fall short in choosing which caliber to carry.
Again, it is a matter of compromise. You have compromised in your chice of carry, others may consider different isues and come to different compromises.
Against a determined attacker a mouse simply lacks what it takes to stop the attack.
As do most handguns, which is OK because so few BGs fit into that category.
Not a single one of you pro mouse gun guys would choose that weapon if you knew in advance that you would face a determined attacker and only had handguns to choose from.
When you anti-small gun folks all start carrying around N-Frame Smiths with 6" tubes in .44 Magnum caliber, its just so much hot air. You are just desperately trying to justify YOUR choice in spite of the history of failure to stop incidents present in the .40 caliber, and the .45, and the 9mm, and so on.

David Armstrong
June 27, 2008, 05:04 PM
I understand there are BUG classes, but not .22/.25 acp classes per se.
True, just as there are not .38 classes per se, or 9mm classes per se and so on.
My preferred BUG is a Kahr PM9, but it has considerable capabilities above my .22 revolver, so application and expectations of each is going to vary.
Exactly, and that is the key, IMO. BUGs usually dictate different tactics and applications thaan full size service guns. Revolvers usually dictate different tactics and applications than do autoloaders. .22 rounds can also dictate different tactics or applications than larger calibers. But to ignore all the evidence of the successful use of mouseguns for personal defense over the years, as some here are trying to do, is just ludicrous, IMO.

David Armstrong
June 27, 2008, 05:13 PM
You see, some of us have already "been there, done that" with the big guns, and actually made a conscious decision that a small gun would be our primary weapon.
Excellent point, Bill, and one I've noticed over the years. Given a choice, the more experienced shooters seem to gravitate to the smaller guns, while those with the least experience gravitate to the bigger guns. Certainly there are a number of exceptions, but that is a dynamic that seems to have held true for at least the 30 years I've been doing this stuff.
My pocket gun is always there to get me out of a fix. I'm very confident I can do the job with it.
I think that might be a key difference in the thinking, Bill. Some seem to have confidence in themselves, others seem to place their confidence in their equipment, and seem to feel they can't accomplish the task without that particualr equipment.

Wildalaska
June 27, 2008, 05:29 PM
Funny, when I got my CCW in NY way back in the 80s, it was always 1911s or P7s, and occasional Model 19 or 28...

Then it slowly wended its way to Browning High Powers, Model 60s...then a TPH....or a baby Browning

Now its all the way back up to a Seecamp, although I gaze lustfully at NAA .22 mags....

Must be I have more confidence in my ability and technique, don't need a big gun anymore or a substitute thereof....:p:D


WildcanishootyouinthefaceAlaska ™

PS....the last time I drew down with the Seecamp it was just as I alwys practice....center of face :) Screw that center of mass crap.....:);)

allenomics
June 27, 2008, 07:35 PM
RFK's killer used a .22.

Chui
June 27, 2008, 10:17 PM
Chui, thanks for your response. I agree with most of your last post.

1. If the BG is armed with a firearm then immobilizing him pales into insignificance. In that scenario, COM and head shots are the only thing that makes sense.

2. When the SHTF, we will revert to what we have trained unconsciously. I guess that's why they call it training.

What I was getting at in my original post, and explained very poorly I might add, is a situation in which the BG is holding a knife or some other weapon that requires proximity to be of use. If the BG is closing, COM hits with a mousegun may not slow him quickly enough to prevent serious or life-threatening injuries to you. That is why I asked whether a change of tactics (necessitating, of course, a change in training) might be useful to consider. Several folks with a medical background have advised that, while an gunshot injury from a small caliber weapon to the hip would be painful, in their opinion, it would not be incapacitating or injure the BG sufficiently to consider the tactic as an alternative to COM shots. That's good enough for me until and unless someone with greater knowledge chimes in with a contrary opinion.

If a goblin is rapidly closing with a knife you have few options other than "surgical" speed shooting while simultaneously moving off his line of motion if possible.

There is a website (I cannot for the life of me recall it now but the google search of "NDIA, weapons symposium" should get you close) in which they discuss lethality of small arms and CNS shots are not common and neither are head shots in close proximity fighting. Multiple hits center of mass seems to be "the norm". The mechanism of death is rapid blood loss.

Within 20 feet or so it's unlikely that you'd be able to successfully draw, move and shoot without getting cut which places you in the "oh ****, I've GOT to stop the bleeding" category. I'm a bit spooked at the concept of a knife entering a confrontation (as many people are) and if I cannot "beat feet" getting rapid, solid hits in the upper torso MAY get the job done without me bleeding. Iff the threat is coming slowly enough or from far enough away the initial target would be upper torso, if he slowed but was still coming then I, too, would think, "PELVIC GIRDLE". It simply would not be my first choice and Nature has seemed to program us to strike towards head and torso (which is probably why when startled we bring our hands up to cover our face...) Interesting subject.

Chui
June 27, 2008, 10:23 PM
Some seem to have confidence in themselves, others seem to place their confidence in their equipment, and seem to feel they can't accomplish the task without that particualr equipment...

Would you strap that "rat stinger" on your hip if you knew that you'd have to use it TONIGHT??? H3ll no, you wouldn't.

You can "philosophize" with vague Freud (fraud?) references but you and I know damned well that you hit better with a larger framed gun than a Kel-Tec P3AT. If that isn't the case it would be all the rage in IPSC, IDPA and advocated by all armed professionals the world over. Here's a hint: They don't. :rolleyes: And if you KNEW that the likelyhood was extremely high that you'd have to actually use whatever you carried you'd probably choose something a bit better than a BACKUP Gun - that is what they are called for a reason. Yes, it's better than nothing, but since when is "nothing" an option??

Stevie-Ray
June 27, 2008, 11:38 PM
There is really only one reason I could think of that would justify a .22LR as primary: it's all the shooter can handle.Extremely good point. My Pt-22 was bought with the wife in mind. Being a tip-up made it easy to load without having to rack the slide. Alas, even the simplicity of this gun was too much for the wife's destroyed hands. My thought was "better than no gun" as has been stated. Should someone try to shame me to my face in that I was wrong in thinking I could trust my wife's life to a "mere mousegun," I'd slap him silly.

Bill DeShivs
June 28, 2008, 01:03 AM
Chui-
Do you live somewhere that has zombies?
As I said before- anyone who keeps coming after being shot at (or shot) is obviously insane, and nothing besides a CNS shot would put them down immediately.
Apparently, you are spooked by more than knives-if you think a crazed assassin bent on your destruction (at the cost of his own life) is after you.
Yes, we ALL realize that a bigger gun is better. We simply no longer feel the need to carry a big gun. We would rather be comfortable and go about our lives armed. You carry your big "rig" all you want. One day you just might say, "You know, those old guys were on to something."

.300H&H
June 28, 2008, 02:05 AM
Quite a few bad guys have been known to carry mouseguns. A lot of ugly street crimes/assaults have been carried out with little .22/.25acps. One of the most important aspects of the mousegun, is its concealability. In a self-defense situation, its extreme concealability is likewise the main attribute of its effectiveness.


The range is going to be very close ie. less than 5ft - and maybe less than 1ft. away. Think about 7 shots from a .22 delivered into the torso at a range of about 2ft. Maybe they'll survive? Bullet failure can occur with larger calibres too ie. a .357 mag at close range might miss a vital spot, not open up...and could also be problematic to control via blast/recoil.


There are factual stories of soldiers on the battlefield having
.50cal. rounds go through them...but still living to effectively fight on quite a bit. There's no 'magic bullet.' I'm not saying that the .22/.25acp is the best round - but I would say it can be quite effective. Personally, I prefer a .38, but there are times when a smaller mousegun...is nice to have too. It's not just better than nothing - but a lot better than nothing.

PT111
June 28, 2008, 08:18 AM
In our local paper this morning is an article about a woman getting life in prison fro killing her husband with a .22 pistol. I just posted the link for verification. :)

Also remember that the little 4 year old girl that used her grandmothers .32 to put a bullet clean through herself. Last I hear she is doing fine. :D

Mouseguns can and do kill. I don't think anyone who says that they prefer a box of rocks to a mousegun is willing to back that up with being shot by one.

http://www.scnow.com/scp/news/local/pee_dee/article/lee_county_woman_gets_life_in_prison_for_christmas_day_murder/9855/

JollyRoger
June 28, 2008, 09:10 AM
And if you KNEW that the likelyhood was extremely high that you'd have to actually use whatever you carried you'd probably choose something a bit better than a BACKUP Gun - that is what they are called for a reason. Yes, it's better than nothing, but since when is "nothing" an option??

Unless you're active military in a combat zone or law enforcement, the vast likelihood is that you are not going to be confronted with a life-or-death armed response situation. If in fact you KNEW you were going to be in such a situation, you would be a fool not to be equipped with a vest and long gun at a minimum. Oh, but that's not practical to carry such equipment in your daily trips to the store, back and forth to work, etc. Even the most forthright advocates of service-size weapons here are making a COMPROMISE. Those of us who have been carrying off duty, or as CCW for 20+ years know that unless we're someplace we really shouldn't be, the likelihood of encountering a crazed killer hopped up on PCP is close to zero. For many, carrying concealed is just a little insurance in case you actually do hit the lottery and encounter a really bad situation.

I've interrogated or otherwise interviewed violent offenders for a long time, and the almost universal response to having guns pointed at them and/or fired at them is to leave if possible or take cover if they can't reasonably get away , due to volume of fire. They may return fire while running, or attempt to return fire from cover, but none has ever advanced into oncoming fire, and none has ever made mention of caliber or scoffed at little guns: they just know they are being shot at, and want to get away from it.

DAWGTRAXX
June 28, 2008, 09:58 AM
deleted

Wildalaska
June 28, 2008, 10:25 AM
Yes, we ALL realize that a bigger gun is better. We simply no longer feel the need to carry a big gun. We would rather be comfortable and go about our lives armed. You carry your big "rig" all you want. One day you just might say, "You know, those old guys were on to something."

Comfort...Im all about that :) If bigger is better I'll grab my M1A

Plus 1 billion:D

WildsmallisgoodAlaska TM

PS I put the 44 away and now carry a 38 S&W Webley in the glove box, simply so when confronted by a "goblin" (tee hee, how cute) I can go into my Michael Caine mode and scream FAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHRRRRR.

I can't afford a 455 :p

PT111
June 28, 2008, 10:46 AM
And if you KNEW that the likelyhood was extremely high that you'd have to actually use whatever you carried you'd probably choose something a bit better than a BACKUP Gun - that is what they are called for a reason. Yes, it's better than nothing, but since when is "nothing" an option??

I would do my darnest to avoid that situation. If I couldn't then I would rely on more than just one .40 caliber for protection.

amd6547
June 28, 2008, 10:48 AM
I often carry a Beretta 21 25auto, with a MecGar mag that holds 9 rounds, giving me a total of 10. It is reliable, and can rapid fire all 10 rounds in a very short period of time. If I ever have to use it, the bad guy will not know I have it till it is in his face, and all 10 are coming at him. After that, he better be watching for MY big pocket knife.

David Armstrong
June 28, 2008, 02:44 PM
Would you strap that "rat stinger" on your hip if you knew that you'd have to use it TONIGHT??? H3ll no, you wouldn't.
If I knew I was going to have to use it tonight, I (A): wouldn’t strap on any handgun as a first choice; and (B): wouldn’t go where I know I was going to have to use it. If I knew that I was going to go about my usual activities for the day, yes, I would (and frequently do) grab a small gun, often a .22, and feel quite comfortable with my ability to handle whatever is likely to pop up.
You can "philosophize" with vague Freud (fraud?) references but you and I know damned well that you hit better with a larger framed gun than a Kel-Tec P3AT.
So what? That is the issue. How much “better” do you need to hit? Will the BG leave you alone faster if you hit him better? Not likely.
If that isn't the case it would be all the rage in IPSC, IDPA and advocated by all armed professionals the world over.
You know, that might be a pretty good example. I don’t know very many IPSC and IDPA folks that use their competition guns for carry. That might be because so many folks realize there is a difference between what is needed to score lots of points in a game and what is adequate for DGU incidents. In fact, IDPA developed a whole subcategory of the game jsut for BUGs due to popular request. And there are a whole lot of armed professionals that carry small guns the world over in various situations.
And if you KNEW that the likelyhood was extremely high that you'd have to actually use whatever you carried you'd probably choose something a bit better than a BACKUP Gun
But that is not the case. Reality is that the likelihood is extremely high that you WILL NOT have to use what you are actually carrying. And that is the difference. Professionals tend to base decisions on probabilities, amateurs tend to base decisions on possibilities.

Chui
June 29, 2008, 11:02 AM
Chui-
Do you live somewhere that has zombies?

"28 Days Later" and "28 Weeks Later" type? One would like to think no. Check your newspaper and CNN, however, and they mysteriously appear (at least in major cities and the surrounding suburbs, thereof).

Question: Do you think the bastards who organized, planned and executed the OKC bombing, WTC I, Columbine, September 11th, VaTech, etc. as zombies? Did you FULLY EXPECT ANYTHING OF THE MAGNITUDE OF WTC II TO OCCUR IN THE USA IN YOUR LIFETIME? If you think or answer, "no", then you're in the norm. But they happened. And more will come.

As I said before - anyone who keeps coming after being shot at (or shot) is obviously insane, and nothing besides a CNS shot would put them down immediately.

Apparently, you cannot shoot quickly or ever witnessed a shooting. It happens very quickly and in the thread aboubt being shot some report they did not feel a lot of pain immediately. Should be a lesson in that for you...

Apparently, you are spooked by more than knives - if you think a crazed assassin bent on your destruction (at the cost of his own life) is after you.
Yes, we ALL realize that a bigger gun is better. We simply no longer feel the need to carry a big gun. We would rather be comfortable and go about our lives armed. You carry your big "rig" all you want. One day you just might say, "You know, those old guys were on to something."

"Spooked" would be an inoperative word. "Concerned" would be a much better descriptor. You pull a knife in a quarrel and you're oh, so damned close to being shot until you drop it... You see, I know what a knife can do as I've trained a bit to use them. I've also seen first hand what they can do and I want no part of that and if you're wise you'd concur.

It's good to see that you DO recognize that what you carry is less than ideal. I wasn't aware of this by reading many posts here. "Comfort" is relative. What one laughs at crushes another. I'm quite comfortable with what I carry daily and I'm extremely comfortable and proficient with it's use if it comes to it.

The only time I'll switch to something very small and more difficult to fight with will be when I can no longer carry what I do with any comfort. As long as I'm able I will go no smaller than a P30, Glock 19 or M&P9.

You know, [IDPA] might be a pretty good example. I don’t know very many IPSC and IDPA folks that use their competition guns for carry. That might be because so many folks realize there is a difference between what is needed to score lots of points in a game and what is adequate for DGU incidents. In fact, IDPA developed a whole subcategory of the game just for BUGs due to popular request. And there are a whole lot of armed professionals that carry small guns the world over in various situations.

Absolutely. They KNOW that they hit better with full-size pistols. My question is why don't they carry what they compete with? The same with those who show up at Defensive Shooting Classes with firearms they'll never have on them... Why? Several reasons: they aren't comfortable shooting over 700 rounds or more, obviously; they are SLOW to reload and they are VERY DIFFICULT to hit well with at speed (and any distance). I'd like to take several BUG classes, drills and shoot a few BUG IDPA practices & matches before I'd feel comfortable with one.

Admittedly, there are circumstances where a 340PD would be well worth having. But when those circumstances arrive I'm under no illusion about my ability to hit very well and quickly with it as compared to any mid-sized semiautomatic pistol. So being aware of one's limitations (I'm under no illusion that adherents of "micropistols" and J-Frames as primary feel that they can shoot as well with, say, a Glock 17, M&P9, 1911, P226...).

I just refuse to buy into the "I cannot conceal a mid-size or full-size pistol" for most people. Why? I work at a gunstore as a hobby (they're close friends of mine) and when I sell a pistol no more than 5% take the advice to purchase a "gun belt" and a decent holster. They wear whatever thin belt they have, they want the cheap nylon holsters and they aren't willing to alter their dress to accomodate the pistol or revolver. Many are not open to even discuss altering their dress. It's pathetic, but there it is. Modern-day Americans - Wimpus Americanus. So my vociferous defense of nothing less than mid-size and irreverence for the "comfortable" argument is based upon about 100 cases of pure ignorance. That's not to say that anyone participating in this online conversation fits that bill but statistics will say that some here have not tried good equipment to see if it fits them well. You should.

Bill DeShivs
June 29, 2008, 01:03 PM
Chui
I shoot pretty well, pretty quickly. I have seen shootings and I know a little bit about knives. I certainly don't need to prove myself to you.
The WTC attacks have little to do with self defense. If they bring the war to me I have more than enough "big guns" for the job.
Maybe the people you have sold guns to know something you don't. You don't need a "duty belt" for most carry. You should be glad they are gun owners, rather than condescending toward them. You seem typical of the gun shop commandos that turn people off to "gun people." I have seen hundreds like you- you think you know more than anyone else-regardless of their situation. It is YOU sir, that is the ignorant one.

brentfoto
June 29, 2008, 01:52 PM
.22 over the .25.

.22WMR over the .22LR.

NAA mini-magnum revolver in .22WMR by far over the .22LR mini-revolver.

.22WMR as primary and only SD weapon over .22LR or .25ACP. You'll always carry it if push comes to shove..

Of course, I prefer a snub in .38+P, or a 9, but I think .22WMR is adequate. Just learn to shoot it accurately.

I refuse to carry a large handgun concealed. Carry for me, by choice, is in a front pocket only. The chances of justifiably needing to display or use the weapon, for the average citizen in relatively 'good' surrounds, is so 'miniscule' as to justify carrying a .22LR, or even .25ACP, if you are so inclined, and nothing else.

brentfoto
June 29, 2008, 02:02 PM
Wildalaska Funny, when I got my CCW in NY way back in the 80s, it was always 1911s or P7s, and occasional Model 19 or 28...

Then it slowly wended its way to Browning High Powers, Model 60s...then a TPH....or a baby Browning

Now its all the way back up to a Seecamp, although I gaze lustfully at NAA .22 mags....

Must be I have more confidence in my ability and technique, don't need a big gun anymore or a substitute thereof....


WildcanishootyouinthefaceAlaska ™

PS....the last time I drew down with the Seecamp it was just as I alwys practice....center of face Screw that center of mass crap.....
2008-06-27 03:13


I love my NAA mini-mag. Don't count on it, though, for defense purposes beyond 3-7 yards, if that much, unless you practice thoroughly with it. Wonderful gun!

My advise is to get that over the .22LR version-don't even bother with that. If any indication, check gello tests:

.22LR
http://brassfetcher.com/22minis.html

.22WMR
http://brassfetcher.com/NAAminiRevolver22Magnum.html

Wildalaska
June 29, 2008, 07:59 PM
Modern-day Americans - Wimpus Americanus.

As opposed to internet Rambois Commandonenis:D

I love guys wearing Glock 17s with a BUG and two reloads in an town where there hasn't been a crime since 1948.

Bill said the rest.


WildicarryagentlemansgunAlaska TM

B. Lahey
June 29, 2008, 08:22 PM
WildicarryagentlemansgunAlaska TM

So do I. A deep blue-black Browning HP with highly figured walnut grips handcrafted by a Norwegian wood master. It's comfortable to carry so I carry it. Maybe when I get old and lumpy it will be harder to carry, but for now it's fine.:)

GNLaFrance
June 29, 2008, 08:29 PM
And of course, there's the story of a wife who was killed by a bullet fired from her husband's .22 while he was using it to drill a hole (that's right!) for mounting a TV dish to the wall. Went through the inside wall and outside siding - killed her dead. One shot.

http://i106.photobucket.com/albums/m274/Darkfold_2006/Emoticons/sceptic.gif I'm not suggesting you made this up, but I tend to be very skeptical of stories like this. In this case, I have a reason to be suspicious: Why was he mounting a satellite dish inside the house? Or was he outside and she was inside?

mikejonestkd
June 29, 2008, 08:34 PM
La France,

its a true story, i remember it making the news a while back, yes, he shot through the house and it still had enough left to kill his wife.

back on topic - carry something that is comfortable so you won't leave it at home and a get a gun that you are confident with. Caliber is not a primary consideration.

PT111
June 29, 2008, 09:10 PM
I love guys wearing Glock 17s with a BUG and two reloads in an town where there hasn't been a crime since 1948.

If there hasn't been a crime since 1948 then they are due for one and better carry two BUGs and three reloads. :)

I see we have a fairly new member if he doesn't know about using the gun to mount the TV dish.

Chui
June 29, 2008, 10:14 PM
I shoot pretty well, pretty quickly. I have seen shootings and I know a little bit about knives. I certainly don't need to prove myself to you.
The WTC attacks have little to do with self defense. If they bring the war to me I have more than enough "big guns" for the job.

Maybe the people you have sold guns to know something you don't. You don't need a "duty belt" for most carry. You should be glad they are gun owners, rather than condescending toward them. You seem typical of the gun shop commandos that turn people off to "gun people." I have seen hundreds like you- you think you know more than anyone else-regardless of their situation. It is YOU sir, that is the ignorant one.

Gimme a break, dude. Where did I ask you to "prove yourself to me?" :confused: Furthermore, I deny any responsibility for your safety so if you're good at what you do then great. You've truly lost me on that... At any rate maybe you live in "Pleasantville" where there is never any personal crime. Some of us don't. And many of the persons I interface with at the gun store live in "hell holes"...

The WTC attacks unmasked much about the mindless tendency of many; namely "it cannot happen here" syndrome... It's very germane to this conversation. It may be a reach for some but depending on your view of what transpired we were totally unprepared. That is the point. Many (on both sides of this little "debate") haven't truly thought about their safety much.

No, they don't "know something I don't". Don't expose yourself, please. Perhaps what you've experienced is EXACTLY what you describe. What I do is something wholly different, but in your omniscience you know ALL about how I approach customers... :rolleyes:

And, no, I don't know more than anyone about their situation (only a fool wouldn't ask them now would they prior to assisting them picking out a firearm :rolleyes: ). You may need to drop the assuming about something/someone you know precious little about.

Bill DeShivs
June 29, 2008, 10:43 PM
I live in a nice suburb.
I work at the largest jail/justice complex in the south. It's in Memphis-one of the murder and crime capitals of the country, thank you. I have seen tanks on Main Street (1968), and martial law/National Guard troops several times during riots. Gang thugs are everywhere. I have experienced things you can't imagine. I am COMPLETELY prepared for most anything. I simply carry a .32 as my primary gun. I keep others handy at all times.
Your gun customers, like you, will have to figure it out for themselves. Good equipment makes carrying a big gun more comfortable, but not as comfortable as my .32.

Chui
June 30, 2008, 01:37 AM
I live in a nice suburb.

I work at the largest jail/justice complex in the south. It's in Memphis-one of the murder and crime capitals of the country, thank you. I have seen tanks on Main Street (1968), and martial law/National Guard troops several times during riots. Gang thugs are everywhere. I have experienced things you can't imagine. I am COMPLETELY prepared for most anything. I simply carry a .32 as my primary gun. I keep others handy at all times.

Your gun customers, like you, will have to figure it out for themselves. Good equipment makes carrying a big gun more comfortable, but not as comfortable as my .32.

I, too, live in a very "nice" suburb but Hades isn't far away at all and it's in every direction you choose to look. Detroit Metro aint no nirvana and there are plenty of places outside of Detroit that are fast becoming dangerous due to the economic climate in the state of Michigan. Sales are up despite the economy; from my very limited perspective it's not the "repeat purchaser" when the economy was better. It's the new purchaser or someone who is not considered a "shooter". CPL classes are also filled 1 to 1.5 months in advance. No matter what they purchase (I only advise them to rent the model or something similar before they purchase) I always inform them that a good belt and holster is required.

We agree - everyone will have to come to his/her own level of preparedness responsibility and comfort.

.300H&H
June 30, 2008, 02:33 AM
:rolleyes: There's I think a false sense of security that get's inadvertantly
promoted, when people focus so much on 'caliber size' and 'the percentage of one-stop kills...' The .357 mag. gets a sterling reputation for being a true manstopper ie. a 125gr.hollowpoint .357 gets the reputation of almost being a kind of super bullet. In reality ,however, the .357mag. is far from being a magic bullet - and in a snubbie, it's a bit brutal in regard to recoil and muzzle blast.


What gets overlooked in a lot of discussions about caliber effectiveness - is the reality of self defense. It's easy to demonstrate how one might eliminate a target with the right weapon and caliber, but the very hard part of the equation is being able to demonstrate how someone is going to be able to actually grab a weapon and use it effectively in a self defense situation.


I can shoot targets at the range all day, but in the real world when my attacker has surprised me a bit...and he's only 5 ft. away from me - I need self-defense skills that revolve more around my ability to come up quickly with a concealed weapon rather than the tactics that just revolve around the size of the bullet chambered.


The .25acp and good tactical skills trumps a .357mag. and poor tactical skills. If the bad guy see's the print of my full-size auto or my midsized revolver and takes it away from me - it does me no good. The tiny gun in my pocket might be the best weapon to have. If I can use it with skill, then it might make sense to carry it frequently.


The .25acp is not my nightstand gun, and it's not the gun I take in the great outdoors. The .25acp , however, is the little gun that I am carrying when you think I'm not carrying anything at all. Yeah, when I'm dressed like that cop in short pants on RENO 911, the .25acp is what's in my pocket.:D

MLeake
June 30, 2008, 03:34 PM
"Yeah, when I'm dressed like that cop in short pants on RENO 911, the .25acp is what's in my pocket."

Um, thanks for that mental image... I hadn't had any nightmares recently...

GNLaFrance
June 30, 2008, 04:19 PM
La France,

its a true story, i remember it making the news a while back, yes, he shot through the house and it still had enough left to kill his wife.

But my question was, why was he mounting the satellite dish inside the house? My TV satellite dish is out in the back yard. I don't think it would work as well if it were in the house.

I think one of two things:

1.) The story got garbled; he was outside and his wife was inside, or

2.) He wasn't trying to mount the dish inside, he was trying to make a hole for the cable, and was too lazy to get out the drill.

I think 2.) makes more sense.

threegun
June 30, 2008, 05:34 PM
If I ever have to use it, I'm sure I'll wish it was a .45-but I'll damn sure have a gun, without all the hoopla that you guys have to go through.


Why would you wish for a bigger caliber?

threegun
June 30, 2008, 05:58 PM
No, thta is not true, and we've gone over this before. For you to continue to say so is dishonest. The lifetime chance of using a firearm for defensive purposes is far from "almost never." It is rare, but that then should give you some idea of how truly rare the caliber difference matters, which is "almost never."


Dishonest? Like saying almost never is different than "rare". Like over looking my point that the civilian use of a concealed weapon is extremely low yet folks like us still carry. Like advocating a caliber you know is simply not capable of consistently causing the damage needed to stop an assault especially under the pressure of an armed conflict. Who's being dishonest here David?

By your own words you know a civilian gun use event is "rare". Still you carry. I prepare for both rare and very rare. Seems much less a gap than needing the gun to begin with. You OTOH prepare for rare but not very rare....that seems hypocritical. Especially when the difference is only a few ounces away.

Wildalaska
June 30, 2008, 06:19 PM
I'll carry a bigger gun on a the rare "if "when folks who say "you need one" wear lightning rods on their head :)

WildthatsrareAlaska TM

I don't need any gun. I chose to carry one on an if basis. I chose to be comfortable when I do it. I carry one based on probablities. My probabilities don't require a 1911....but if Im walking in the park, my probablities would require a shotgun but I will chose a 44....life is all about choices

David Armstrong
June 30, 2008, 06:42 PM
My question is why don't they carry what they compete with?
Because they realize that there is little, if anything, that will make a difference in a DGU the big gun can do that the smaller gun won't also do.
I just refuse to buy into the "I cannot conceal a mid-size or full-size pistol" for most people.
Again, so what? For most it has nothing to do with "I cannot" and everything to do with "why should I". I carried an N-frame S&W for quite a while, and a 1911 for a long time. I can conceal them just fine if I want to carry them. But I don't. Most people don't. Most people are quite comfortable carrying a gun that will adequately serve their needs, and see no need to discomfort themselves for something that is rarer in their life than being struck by lightening.
But when those circumstances arrive I'm under no illusion about my ability to hit very well and quickly with it as compared to any mid-sized semiautomatic pistol.
It's nice that you recognize your own limitations. However, once again, it is not about comparison, it is about what is needed to do the job.
It's pathetic, but there it is. Modern-day Americans - Wimpus Americanus.
What is perhaps more pathetic is this idea you have that unless everyone follows your dictates and dresses how you want them to and carries what you want them to they are somehow less of a man. Sounds a whole lot like you have a number of unresolved issues, and the concerns for a big gun might be a symptom of them.

David Armstrong
June 30, 2008, 07:02 PM
Dishonest? Like saying almost never is different than "rare".
Yes, dishonest. And "rare" is quite different than almost never, at least in the context of DGU incidents. 1 in 200 is rare, 1 in 2,000,000,000 is almost never.
Like over looking my point that the civilian use of a concealed weapon is extremely low yet folks like us still carry.
Didn't overlook at at all. In fact, I addressed it directly by pointing out that the lifetime chance of a DGU was very different (much higher probability) than the likelihood of caliber making a difference in the outcome.
Like advocating a caliber you know is simply not capable of consistently causing the damage needed to stop an assault especially under the pressure of an armed conflict.
Once again you are making things up. I have not advocated any such thing. I have said that this nonsense about all the damage needed to stop an assault is just that, nonsense.
Who's being dishonest here David?
Uh, you. That is what I keep pointing out.
By your own words you know a civilian gun use event is "rare". Still you carry.
Yes. I also know that deadly car wrecks are also rare, but I continue to drive.
Seems much less a gap than needing the gun to begin with.
Yeah, I know. We've discussed this apparent inability of you to understand basic concepts of probability and relative likelihoods of occurrence before. That statement shows that you haven't changed in that regard.
You OTOH prepare for rare but not very rare....that seems hypocritical. Especially when the difference is only a few ounces away.
LOL!! This from a man who admits to carrying what many consider a compromise gun in a compromise caliber! The same could be said of you, my friend. FWIW I'd suggest there is a much greater difference in ounces between my Beretta 21 or my Airweight Smith and say, a loaded Glock 23, and a loaded Glock 23 and a Glock 22, or a Glock 21. Gosh, how hypocritical of you!

PT111
June 30, 2008, 07:06 PM
I'll carry a bigger gun on a the rare "if "when folks who say "you need one" wear lightning rods on their head

I have never actually needed my pistol but still carry a P3AT. However I have been hit by lightning 4 times but don't wear a lightning rod. Maybe I need to examine my priorities. :confused:

45Marlin carbine
June 30, 2008, 07:32 PM
I carried a Hi-Standard .22Mag double-derringer for a few years. I know fellers that have .25acp semi's they sometimes carry. but a .32acp isn't much larger and has more 'punch'. that's what I have now along with a Mak. both I practice with every so often, but not as often as I'd like (or likely need to).

Capt Charlie
June 30, 2008, 07:53 PM
It's hard to believe that this thread generated 165 posts, but then, caliber wars appear to be never-ending anyhow ;).

At any rate, it's been going 'round and 'round the mulberry bush for some time now, and now it's starting... just starting, mind you, to take a downward turn.

All threads have a life span, and this one's bordering on geriatric. Still, at 165 posts, I have to hand it to you guys for keeping it relatively civil. So, let's say good night to this one while we're still on the high road, and let it be remembered as one of the few this size that remained so :cool:.

Closed.