The Firing Line Forums - View Single Post

dahermit · September 27, 2012, 08:37 AM

Although self-protection with the .380 is the issue with this post. I wonder why when I think in terms of a very close body shot with a handgun on a deer, my mind shouts: Whoa!...on anything smaller than a .38 Super. For those who say that a .380 is adequate for shooting a human in self-protection, how is it that shooting a deer with the the same round would be somehow inadequate (assuming that they would say that)? Unless of course, a deer has some magical physiological property of being immune to weaker handgun cartridges. Or, is it alright to only injure and maim a human where it is not alright to injure and maim a deer? Do you see where I am going here?

September 27, 2012, 08:37 AM	#44
dahermit Senior Member Join Date: October 28, 2006 Location: South Central Michigan...near Posts: 6,501	Although self-protection with the .380 is the issue with this post. I wonder why when I think in terms of a very close body shot with a handgun on a deer, my mind shouts: Whoa!...on anything smaller than a .38 Super. For those who say that a .380 is adequate for shooting a human in self-protection, how is it that shooting a deer with the the same round would be somehow inadequate (assuming that they would say that)? Unless of course, a deer has some magical physiological property of being immune to weaker handgun cartridges. Or, is it alright to only injure and maim a human where it is not alright to injure and maim a deer? Do you see where I am going here?