Concealed Carry with Punch

[Arkie45]

ImageUploadedByTapatalk1367968586.281365.jpg

After many rounds and many days carrying .40, 9mm, 357Sig, and 45acp...
These are my always carry, with these inside:
ImageUploadedByTapatalk1367968782.357044.jpg

NEVER a malfunction with either. Just change the springs every 800 rounds or so to keep them that way.

[chewie146]

Just as a question, would you be able to consider an on-chair carry method? It seems to me, though I don't know what your chair looks like, that you could carry off-body but on the chair somewhere. S&W has even hired the first wheelchair-bound competitive shooter, and there is a company that has a line of competition holsters tailored to chairs. It seems that a larger firearm could be considered as well. I'm not in a wheelchair, though, and won't pretend that I know what I'm talking about. It's just a thought to entertain.

I'd go with a .40 over a .45 just because I have the equipment. I've carried everything from .38 to .45, and I haven't felt undergunned with any of them. .357s are an option, but the blast is nuts. I'd pick a .45 over a .357, as the .357 is roughly equal to the .45 on foot-pounds in hot loads in concealable weapons, but the .45 is a bit less harsh.

I'd find a form that you like, pick a caliber, and then pack in something akin to the following:
http://www.thewilderness.com/?p=catalog&parent=171&pg=1.
http://www.scotworksllc.com/concealedpouch.html

[Plumbnut]

How about a judge loaded with buckshot?

[bt380]

While I really like the sp101 2.25" barrel in 357, it doesn't have the round capacity I would prefer to carry. I want a bazillion rounds without having to reload. But since I can't have that, the 9mm and 40 cal carry between 14-17 rounds pending brand. I own a SR9 and a PX4 40 cal Type F, both in full size. The SR9 with stock grip felt more snappy than the PX4 40 cal using a Hogue HandAll. I was so impressed with the Hogue HandAll that I put it on my SR9 as well. They both shoot comfortably now. The rapid follow up shots are manageable on both guns. I was really surprised with the PX4 follow up shots in 40 cal. Then again, a person who shoots really well will do more damage w/ a 22 short than some of us w/ a 50 cal.

[Skadoosh]

Plumnut wrote:

I'm not going to get into details about the outcomes......I dont think the moderators would like it. But if they will allow it then I would be glad to discuss it with you and the forum.

You cant discuss any conclusions you have reached from your vast experience without going into gory details? Go ahead, give it a try. I am sure the moderators are just as curious about your experiences and conclusions as the rest of us are...

[Brian Pfleuger]

There's no issue with discussing gun shot wounds so long as the discussion remains "professional", in the sense that we do not glorify or take lightly the act of shooting people, even when it had to be done.

[Plumbnut]

Friend of mine I went to school worked at a funeral home that his family owned and still works there today. On many occasions I have visited and have seen the damage done by gunshot wounds first hand. The range shoot at has several surgeons that frequent the pistol range and we have discussed what they see in surgery and the outcomes and situations surrounding various gunshot wounds that they see. based on what I have sen and the discussions with these doctors I personally feel....and along with the Doctors that a .45 does more damage in general than a 9mm does.

I never took pictures(that would be disrespectful for my reasons) or never recorded the doctors conversations so if you want proof I cant provide that to you. And never claimed I could.

There are alot of factors that go into stopping power and stopping power doesn't have to mean death.

Remember than no one said you have to agree. Thats my experiences so make your own mind up for yourself.....ultimately it doesn't matter to me what you decide.

[Tactical Jackalope]

My half brother was shot with a 9mm in the abdomen. It was a FMJ round and it dropped him.

He's 6'4 and 217 pounds.

It went into his abdomen downward into the direction of his pelvis and just exited before it struck his pelvis and it dropped him. The reason it was going downward was due to an incorrect attempt to disarm one of the guys.

He returned fire from the ground and they emptied their entire magazine into the ground around him, thankfully missing. One went down from his return in the exchange. He stayed down. The other fled and was later caught by local PD.

Now... who wants to tell my brother how 9mm (even in FMJ) lacks any power?

[Garycw]

My thoughts on the previous statements is that a 22, even a short can kill or drop something or someone according to shot placement. I've had several friends shot with everything from 22's to shotguns point blank. A person I knew was hit once with a 22LR in the shoulder while driving and the round traveled to a artery in the neck. He drove to a fire station where he later died. Several others have been shot in leg with 22's. and just layed up a day or two. Another was shot point blank with a .357 HP shoved into his stomach and pined against a wall. He had alot of internal damage including losing a spleen. He recovered after a few weeks in hospital. Another with a 12 ga #6 shot 15 feet away and was fine after a week. They can all be deadly with ability to stop with right placement. As far as out and out stopping power if shot with 22 in the arm or leg, short of hitting a artery it's going to sting & burn like the dickens. Hit with the same round, same place with a .45 it may about blow your arm off or shatter a femur. A 9mm will diffidently do alot of damage and your half brother was lucky to survive.As well if it had been a 380, .40,.32,25,22, 38. If I had to be shot somewhere and had a choice of .45,.40,9mm I would chose the 9mm and keep my fingers crossed.

[Tactical Jackalope]

^ Thank you for helping my point tremendously.


Yet the discussion of handgun bullets still surfaces daily.

[Brian Pfleuger]

Trouble is, lots of folks think that personal experience is demonstrative of a larger trend.

The old saying goes, "Anecdote is not the singular of data." Technically inaccurate but the concept is true. Personal experience does not accurately predict outcomes on a large scale.

One person being shot with "X" proves nothing except what happened to that one person. Many others have experiences that directly contradict that one. None are valid on their own.

When you're discussing something with as many variables as getting shot, it takes a LOT of samples to draw any sort of valid conclusion. Very, very few ER/Trauma doctors will see enough in their entire careers to draw valid conclusions. Indeed, very few entire HOSPITALS will see enough gun shot victims in 20 years to draw valid, large scale conclusions.

Alas, there is no convincing folks of this truth.

I know folks that had an unreliable Honda, so they thinks Hondas are junk and folks who had a reliable Saturn who think Saturns are great. I know folks who shot deer with 12ga slugs and even .30-06 rifles who didn't recover the animal and think the cartridge is not enough for deer. I know folks who were in car accidents and told that if they'd worn a seatbelt they'd be dead, so they don't ever wear seatbelts again.

On and on it goes.

[Tactical Jackalope]

That's awesome, especially that last paragraph.

I said my story because I feel the following for proving .45 better than 9mm is larger. Again, I feel.


Love both my .45's and 9mm's. They're so marginal in differences on what they're intended for once they leave the barrel that I don't see a need to pick apart little numbers in that aspect.

However, follow up shots and which holds more bullets is what gets me picking and choosing.

lol again, loved that last paragraph.

[breakingcontact]

magic caliber debate...doesn't it get old?

[Spats McGee]

Originally Posted by breakingcontact

magic caliber debate...doesn't it get old?

Nope. Apparently not.

[csmsss]

There is no magic handgun cartridge which will produce instantaneous stops 100% of the time regardless of where the bullet strikes. Hell, there's no rifle cartridge capable of doing that. And all the anecdotal stories really tell us is that bullets do unpredictable things when they meet human tissue - flesh, fat, muscle and bone. This is especially true in a real gunfight where the parties involved are rarely static and only infrequently presenting an easy hit to the desired center mass area. Some folks are shot within arms' reach or even closer, some are shot from much farther away. Some folks are shot when it's quite warm; others when it's frigid outside. All of these factors influence the human physiology and particularly so when an injury is suffered.

And let us consider, as well, that humans are not all made up of the same stuff in the same way. We are each unique, psychologically speaking, and that informs how we react in a moment of crisis - some folks just immediately fall down and quit the instant they realize they're shot, and others will keep fighting until their heart stops beating and their brains are starved for oxygen. No way to know which is which beforehand. Some folks with non-survivable wounds have stayed in the fight long after other folks with minor wounds went limp.

My point? My point is only to (hopefully) get folks to realize and understand that there is no single answer. Wound ballistics is perhaps the most intractable science of all, because there is no baseline - no absolute basis on which to formulate a provable or disprovable hypothesis of any significance. There is no ethical or legal way to truly and realistically and repeatably simulate a real-world shooting of a living human being.

As a consequence, wound ballistics has diverged into, roughly, two different fields - wound historians who study autopsy reports, medical records, and witness statements, and, on the other hand, the "gel junkies" who draw all their inferences from bullet performance in ballistics gelatin and other simulacra.

So what are we left with? A very imperfect knowledge base and the somber reality that there is no one size fits all solution to the caliber conundrum.

[Palmetto-Pride]

I think we can all agree that overall a 45 has more Potential to do damage than a 9mm anyone who thinks other wise is just not wanting to see and there is no convincing them. I am sure there are hundreds of examples where a 9mm did the trick and hundreds where a 45 did not.

[Brian Pfleuger]

I think we can all agree that overall a 45 has more Potential to do damage than a 9mm anyone who thinks other wise is just not wanting to see and there is no convincing them.

I don't think that's the case at all. In fact, I'd be willing to bet that we CAN'T all agree on that point.

[eldermike]

If you want punch 357 mag model 60 S/W would be my suggestion.

[Seaman]

“I am a wheelchair user interested in concealed carry. As I am always seated I cannot conceal a large gun - but I want a single stack compact with punch. ….I am trying to decide between .40 & .45 and leaning toward the Springfield XDS. Concerned that the XDS in .45 only holds 5 rounds (plus 1, probably 6 plus 1 in .40). Constructive opinions or criticism regarding model or caliber very much appreciated.” [gamorris]

Either an XDs or a compact 45 ACP 1911 from a reputable manufacturer, (ie Colt, Springfield Armory, Kimber, Sig, STI) and since you can’t run, and your gun might jam or be disabled somehow, would suggest a BUG on the ankle, say a Charter Arms 44 Spl, they are not much larger than a J-frame.

Best to you.

[Frank Ettin]

1. Based on my personal experience and my experience as an instructor, I'd prefer .45 ACP over .40 S&W, at least as far as shootability is concerned. The .40 tends to have a sharper, snappier recoil pulse than the .45, and many folks seem to find that less manageable. A 9x19 depending on the mass of the gun, might be more manageable yet.
   
   
2. As far as terminal effectiveness for self defense applications, a larger bullet with good penetration seems to be more useful than "punch."
   
   There are four ways in which shooting someone stops him:
   
   
   1. psychological -- "I'm shot, it hurts, I don't want to get shot any more."
      
      
   2. massive blood loss depriving the muscles and brain of oxygen and thus significantly impairing their ability to function
      
      
   3. breaking major skeletal support structures
      
      
   4. damaging the central nervous system.
   
   Depending on someone just giving up because he's been shot is iffy. Probably most fights are stopped that way, but some aren't; and there are no guarantees.
   
   Breaking major skeletal structures can quickly impair mobility. But if the assailant has a gun, he can still shoot. And it will take a reasonably powerful round to reliably penetrate and break a large bone, like the pelvis.
   
   Hits to the central nervous system are sure and quick, but the CNS presents a small and uncertain target. And sometimes significant penetration will be needed to reach it.
   
   The most common and sure physiological way in which shooting someone stops him is blood loss -- depriving the brain and muscles of oxygen and nutrients, thus impairing the ability of the brain and muscles to function. Blood loss is facilitated by (1) large holes causing tissue damage; (2) getting the holes in the right places to damage major blood vessels or blood bearing organs; and (3) adequate penetration to get those holes into the blood vessels and organs which are fairly deep in the body. The problem is that blood loss takes time. People have continued to fight effectively when gravely, even mortally, wounded. So things that can speed up blood loss, more holes, bigger holes, better placed holes, etc., help.
   
   So as a rule of thumb --
   
   
   • More holes are better than fewer holes.
     
     
   • Larger holes are better than smaller holes.
     
     
   • Holes in the right places are better than holes in the wrong places.
     
     
   • Holes that are deep enough are better than holes that aren't.
     
     
   • There are no magic bullets.
   
   
3. With regard to the issue of psychological stops see
   
   
   • this study by Greg Ellifritz.
     
     As Ellifritz note in his discussion of his "failure to incapacitate" data (emphasis added):

     Originally Posted by Greg Ellifritz

     
     ...Take a look at two numbers: the percentage of people who did not stop (no matter how many rounds were fired into them) and the one-shot-stop percentage. The lower caliber rounds (.22, .25, .32) had a failure rate that was roughly double that of the higher caliber rounds. The one-shot-stop percentage (where I considered all hits, anywhere on the body) trended generally higher as the round gets more powerful. This tells us a couple of things...
     
     In a certain (fairly high) percentage of shootings, people stop their aggressive actions after being hit with one round regardless of caliber or shot placement. These people are likely NOT physically incapacitated by the bullet. They just don't want to be shot anymore and give up! Call it a psychological stop if you will. Any bullet or caliber combination will likely yield similar results in those cases. And fortunately for us, there are a lot of these "psychological stops" occurring. The problem we have is when we don't get a psychological stop. If our attacker fights through the pain and continues to victimize us, we might want a round that causes the most damage possible. In essence, we are relying on a "physical stop" rather than a "psychological" one. In order to physically force someone to stop their violent actions we need to either hit him in the Central Nervous System (brain or upper spine) or cause enough bleeding that he becomes unconscious. The more powerful rounds look to be better at doing this....

   • Also see the FBI paper entitled "Handgun Wounding Factors and Effectiveness", by Urey W. Patrick. Agent Patrick, for example, notes on page 8:

     ...Psychological factors are probably the most important relative to achieving rapid incapacitation from a gunshot wound to the torso. Awareness of the injury..., fear of injury, fear of death, blood or pain; intimidation by the weapon or the act of being shot; or the simple desire to quit can all lead to rapid incapacitation even from minor wounds. However, psychological factors are also the primary cause of incapacitation failures.
     
     The individual may be unaware of the wound and thus have no stimuli to force a reaction. Strong will, survival instinct, or sheer emotion such as rage or hate can keep a grievously wounded individual fighting....

   
   
4. And for some more insight into wound physiology and "stopping power":
   
   
   • Dr. V. J. M. DiMaio (DiMaio, V. J. M., M. D., Gunshot Wounds, Elsevier Science Publishing Company, 1987, pg. 42, as quoted in In Defense of Self and Others..., Patrick, Urey W. and Hall, John C., Carolina Academic Press, 2010, pg. 83):

     In the case of low velocity missles, e. g., pistol bullets, the bullet produces a direct path of destruction with very little lateral extension within the surrounding tissue. Only a small temporary cavity is produced. To cause significant injuries to a structure, a pistol bullet must strike that structure directly. The amount of kinetic energy lost in the tissue by a pistol bullet is insufficient to cause the remote injuries produced by a high-velocity rifle bullet.

   • And further in In Defense of Self and Others... (pp. 83-84, emphasis in original):

     The tissue disruption caused by a handgun bullet is limited to two mechanisms. The first or crush mechanism is the hole that the bullet makes passing through the tissue. The second or stretch mechanism is the temporary wound cavity formed by the tissue being driven outward in a radial direction away from the path of the bullet. Of the two, the crush mechanism is the only handgun wounding mechanism that damages tissue. To cause significant injuries to a structure within the body using a handgun, the bullet must penetrate the structure.

   • And further in In Defense of Self and Others... (pp. 95-96, emphasis in original):

     Kinetic energy does not wound. Temporary cavity does not wound. The much-discussed "shock" of bullet impact is a fable....The critical element in wounding effectiveness is penetration. The bullet must pass through the large blood-bearing organs and be of sufficient diameter to promote rapid bleeding....Given durable and reliable penetration, the only way to increase bullet effectiveness is to increase the severity of the wound by increasing the size of the hole made by the bullet....

   
   
5. Urey Patrick was in the FBI for some 24 years, 12 of which were in the firearms training unit where he rose to the position of Assistant Unit Chief. John Hall is an attorney who spent 32 years in the FBI, including serving as a firearms instructor and a SWAT team member.
   
   
6. Bottom line probably is that 9x19, .40 S&W, and .45 ACP, from reputable manufacturers loaded with quality JHP bullets can all be effective self defense cartridges. Choice might in many cases be a matter of balancing size/concealability against felt recoil/manageability.

[Wreck-n-Crew]

Based on my personal experience and my experience as an instructor, I'd prefer .45 ACP over .40 S&W, at least as far as shootability is concerned. The .40 tends to have a sharper, snappier recoil pulse than the .45, and many folks seem to find that less manageable. A 9x19 depending on the mass of the gun, might be more manageable yet.

That expands a little on my response. more about control ability and shootability than the "punch" because they both are plenty deadly.

[Dashunde]

Now... who wants to tell my brother how 9mm (even in FMJ) lacks any power?

No one is saying 9mm lacks power - heck, I carry a 380 95% of the time - I'm saying it doesn’t have as much power as the larger options.
Shot-for-identical-shot (placement) the bigger more powerful rounds will do more damage. Will that extra damage matter? Thats anyone's guess, but at least the odds are in the shooters favor.
I wouldn’t tell your brother the 9mm lacks power, but I am curious whether or not he feels a little lucky that it wasn’t a .40 or .45?
(^ keep that in the context intended, of course no one feels lucky about being shot, it’s a question of appreciating the lesser of evils)

I think we can all agree that overall a 45 has more Potential to do damage than a 9mm anyone who thinks other wise is just not wanting to see and there is no convincing them.

I agree. Its a denial of basic physics to conclude otherwise in identical first shot circumstances.
Only when secondary variables such as recoil, follow-ups and multiple holes enter into the discussion does 9mm gain some ground.


Folks, this particular thread shouldn’t be a caliber war because the OP's needs are a little different than ours...
I'll parrot him one more time...

Originally Posted by gamorris

I am over 6' & 215 with large hands & plenty strong, so handling recoil is not an issue. I am more concerned with concealment & punch.

He has specifically asked about the XDs in 45 and the Shield in 9mm & 40.
I'm a big fan of the 40, but using his criteria I'd select the XDs 45 first, followed by the Shield in 40 second, mostly because he can load the XDs with 45+p for the first chambered round.
He stands a equal chance of getting a good hit with 9mm, 40 or 45 in his first shot, I believe that 45+p offers him the best chance of stopping his attackers forward progress above the others, except 10mm.
I don't think that any single 9mm in any of its variants, +p+ or otherwise, will inflict as much damage under identical first shot circumstances as a quality 45+p.

[JimmyR]

While we are back on target, I want to bring up the issue of firing from an unsecured wheelchair. How is that going to impact follow up shots?

OP, or someone else who carries from a wheelchair, have you fired a weapon from your chair without the brakes on? What have you fired, and how did they work for you?

[breakingcontact]

Originally Posted by Dashunde

No one is saying 9mm lacks power - heck, I carry a 380 95% of the time - I'm saying it doesn’t have as much power as the larger options.
Shot-for-identical-shot (placement) the bigger more powerful rounds will do more damage. Will that extra damage matter? Thats anyone's guess, but at least the odds are in the shooters favor.
I wouldn’t tell your brother the 9mm lacks power, but I am curious whether or not he feels a little lucky that it wasn’t a .40 or .45?
(^ keep that in the context intended, of course no one feels lucky about being shot, it’s a question of appreciating the lesser of evils)

I agree. Its a denial of basic physics to conclude otherwise in identical first shot circumstances.
Only when secondary variables such as recoil, follow-ups and multiple holes enter into the discussion does 9mm gain some ground.


Folks, this particular thread shouldn’t be a caliber war because the OP's needs are a little different than ours...
I'll parrot him one more time...


He has specifically asked about the XDs in 45 and the Shield in 9mm & 40.
I'm a big fan of the 40, but using his criteria I'd select the XDs 45 first, followed by the Shield in 40 second, mostly because he can load the XDs with 45+p for the first chambered round.
He stands a equal chance of getting a good hit with 9mm, 40 or 45 in his first shot, I believe that 45+p offers him the best chance of stopping his attackers forward progress above the others, except 10mm.
I don't think that any single 9mm in any of its variants, +p+ or otherwise, will inflict as much damage under identical first shot circumstances as a quality 45+p.

So you are really counting on that first shot to deliver a one shot stop?

[Dashunde]

Moved to next page