There's nothing wrong with you preferring the .40 over the 9mm, but you keep posting that photo over and over again like it actually proves the .40 is far better ballistically. If a round's purpose was to make the largest wound channel in gelatin, then yes, the .40 would be much better than the 9mm. But the purpose of the .40 is to put an attacker down in as few shots as possible. And in actual real-world shootings the .40 has proven to be only slightly more effective shot-for-shot than the 9mm. This is not something I've come up with on my own, this is the consensus of firearms experts the world over.
You can state your preference for the .40 and I won't argue with you. But when you say that photo proves the .40 is far better than the 9mm, or when you say "shootability" isn't an issue because your larger Glock .40 shoots better than your smaller Kahr 9mm, you're just using ridiculous arguments.
0331: "Accuracy by volume."