What is your favorite defense semi gun and caliber into or out of a vehicle?

[kcub]

For me it's the HK P2000SK in .357 Sig. It fits in my console and has 10 rounds (with flat mag plate). This smallish gun handles the recoil just fine. I can also carry it in a pocket holster.

The same gun in .40 would be nearly as good but I find .40 to recoil a bit more than .357 Sig.

[HighValleyRanch]

YOU can carry the HK P2000SK in a pocket holster?

Must be huge pockets! And stiff pants to hold up.
Kudo's to you!

[RickP66]

I don't want to carry a different gun depending if I'm in a vehicle or not, so I just stick with 9mm.

[Aguila Blanca]

Colt Officers in .45 ACP

[44caliberkid]

Originally Posted by Aguila Blanca

Colt Officers in .45 ACP

Hey, I like that idea. But I also don’t understand the question. Seems to be a convoluted way to ask, what do you carry? I also don’t leave a firearm in a car. I was at a gun shop one day and a guy came in to get a copy of his receipt for the purchase because the gun had been stolen out of his car. He needed the serial number for the police and the receipt for insurance. After he left the owner said, “I get 3 or 4 of those a week. Your carry piece is supposed to be on you, not in your car.” This was in Mesa, AZ.

[Tom-R2]

I like the 357Sig round as well, I have 3 different pistols that run that (they also have 40S&W barrels). But I also use 9mm and 45acp, and depending on the situation and location, a 380 if I really need something small.

[kcub]

Originally Posted by 44caliberkid

Hey, I like that idea. But I also don’t understand the question. Seems to be a convoluted way to ask, what do you carry? I also don’t leave a firearm in a car. I was at a gun shop one day and a guy came in to get a copy of his receipt for the purchase because the gun had been stolen out of his car. He needed the serial number for the police and the receipt for insurance. After he left the owner said, “I get 3 or 4 of those a week. Your carry piece is supposed to be on you, not in your car.” This was in Mesa, AZ.

For a gun that may be fired into or out of a vehicle you have to possibly penetrate glass or a car door. For me it is not necessarily the same as a carry gun because I carry in a pocket and that is not easily accessible from a belted car seat. Sure, I could take it out of my pocket but I often prefer not to do that in public.

A carry gun that can be used against a felon where there is nothing between you but a few feet of air can be less powerful. But if you want to be well armed against the possibility of a drive by shooting I'd personally want something more than 9mm.

[TunnelRat]

As a function of training courses I’ve taken, I believe my current count of separate car windshields I have shot through is at 21, not including replacement pieces of glass we laid over shot out windshields.

I have seen 9mm go through windshields without much issue, though practically any bullet can have its trajectory shifted from going through laminated safety glass. In one course I took we even shot the same piece of new glass in separate locations with 9mm, 40SW, and 45 ACP. All penetrated, though the POI didn’t always match POA. The more shots fired, the larger the whole in the glass, the less deviation from POA.

Absent the engine, axle, wheels (depending on the wheels), and maybe the A, B, and C pillars, nothing really “stopped” 9mm, and at that point if it did stop 9mm you needed something more powerful than a handgun round to get adequate penetration. There are rounds geared toward penetration including through sheet metal and auto glass.

[Aguila Blanca]

Originally Posted by kcub

For a gun that may be fired into or out of a vehicle you have to possibly penetrate glass or a car door. For me it is not necessarily the same as a carry gun because I carry in a pocket and that is not easily accessible from a belted car seat. Sure, I could take it out of my pocket but I often prefer not to do that in public.

A carry gun that can be used against a felon where there is nothing between you but a few feet of air can be less powerful. But if you want to be well armed against the possibility of a drive by shooting I'd personally want something more than 9mm.

HUH ??? WHAAAAT ???

Are you suggesting that from inside your car you would shoot through the doors or through the glass in self-defense?

[44caliberkid]

Oh ok, I get it now. Thanks Cub

[kcub]

Originally Posted by Aguila Blanca

HUH ??? WHAAAAT ???

Are you suggesting that from inside your car you would shoot through the doors or through the glass in self-defense?

If someone was outside threatening with a gun, yes. IDK, maybe a carjacker?

[kcub]

I know ammo has gotten better but back when police used revolvers most highway patrols opted for .357 over .38 spl and their shootings more frequently involved cars. I think of 9mm and .38 spl being in the same class.

[1972RedNeck]

I keep my SRH 454 Casull in my work truck. Not much a 365 grain hardcast won't penetrate.

[The Happy kaboomer]

Anything 45ACP..............

[TunnelRat]

Originally Posted by kcub

I think of 9mm and .38 spl being in the same class.

When you consider the fact that 38 special for carry purposes is often fired out of say J frame revolvers with 2" barrels or less and that 9mm pistols are generally 3" or more then 38 special is already, imo, starting at a bit of a disadvantage. However, even comparing equivalent barrel lengths, there can be a substantial increase in velocity with 9mm over 38 special. I personally wouldn't consider them the same.

BBTI has a decent run down of velocity as a function of barrel length, though you're not going to get the exact same loading between the two cartridges and they don't have 38 special +P for comparison. Still, worth a look:
http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/9luger.html
http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/38special.html

And then Lucky Gunner has a fairly extensive rundown of ballistics testing of cartridges in terms of penetration in gelatin behind layers of fabric. To me the main advantage with their testing that it's a single source using what seems like a consistent method of testing:
https://www.luckygunner.com/labs/sel...llistic-tests/

Again, in all the cars I have seen shot out of, into, and through, it was rare to see any difference between the handgun cartridges I saw used (rifles and shotguns are a different story). That difference with handgun rounds seemingly only happened when shooting through say a door panel where one round might hit a door mechanism or window motor that another round did not hit, and that differences in the medium translated to differences in penetration far more than the cartridges themselves. Modern cars are to me a lot like modern homes, where you have strong framing with a vapor/environment barrier over that framing. The sheet metal of a door panel generally didn't stop much, to the point where instructors had to emphasize to people that shooting through a door panel (in the event an assailant was using a panel as cover/concealment) is a realistic option.

[TunnelRat]

Originally Posted by Aguila Blanca

Are you suggesting that from inside your car you would shoot through the doors or through the glass in self-defense?

Yes. There are a number of documented instances of ambush scenarios with law enforcement. I'm not as familiar with that happening in a civilian setting, but I don't think of it as out of the realm of possibility.

A car offers you the ability to get away with speed and to me that should be the primary response when possible. That said, while they are fast, cars aren't always what I would call agile. You can get cordoned off in ways that aren't as likely on foot. A car can also be a hell of a kinetic weapon if need be.

In the event you have to return fire there's a question of staying in the car and fighting out of it or bailing immediately (though reality isn't always that binary). In courses I have taken, when we looked at the time necessary to bail out of a car and the number of shots that can be fired at the occupants in that time with a typical semiautomatic pistol, the better approach seemed to be if already under fire to return fire from the car first. That could involve shooting through the windshield or passenger windows (whether up or down). Then if/when there was a lull in the engagement, bail out of the driver or passenger seat to gain mobility. At that point you use the construction of the car to your advantage, i.e. keeping the engine block between you and the attacker, if possible, to have cover and the rest of the car body as concealment.

I spend a lot of time in vehicles, whether for work or recreationally. Given that, fighting in or around vehicles with a handgun is a part of training that I've tried to get as much exposure to as possible.

[RickP66]

Originally Posted by TunnelRat

Yes. There are a number of documented instances of ambush scenarios with law enforcement. I'm not as familiar with that happening in a civilian setting, but I don't think of it as out of the realm of possibility.

Oh, it happened in a civilian setting. Recorded by a dashcam and posted on YouTube. I believe the guy got charged as well, so good luck with that one.

[TunnelRat]

Originally Posted by RickP66

Oh, it happened in a civilian setting. Recorded by a dashcam and posted on YouTube. I believe the guy got charged as well, so good luck with that one.

Would you happen to have a link to the video?

As for the guy getting charged, assuming you’re talking about the driver of the vehicle, just because you can shoot out of a vehicle doesn’t necessarily mean you should, which is to me one of the main points of self defense with a firearm in general. The “standards” of the use of deadly force are still going to apply, that being to stop the imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury to yourself or a third person. Given that you’re in a vehicle, there’s an element of the imminent requirement that comes into play (not to mention states where you have a duty to retreat). Which would be why my first recommendation was to use the car to get away.

[RickP66]

Originally Posted by TunnelRat

Would you happen to have a link to the video?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-8gSGhV0ulo

[TunnelRat]

Originally Posted by RickP66

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-8gSGhV0ulo

I don’t know that this meets my definition of being ambushed at all. The car was in motion and the driver could simply have decelerated, gotten off the road, and called the police, frankly much earlier in that video than the point where he decided to shoot. Thats why I made the point about an imminent threat and how that relates to being in a vehicle. The scenario I described was also taking fire first, which is not the case here. So again to my point above, because you can do a thing doesn’t mean you should, and by that I mean you’re not legally in the right in doing so.

[Tactical Jackalope]

That scenario was awful. I'm in Florida, and I swear we've seen these things on the news several times already since 2020. I don't know if there's a correlation, but people seemingly want to look for any reason to shoot out of/through their windows at the slightest perceived threat. Good God... Increase that threat level threshold.

TR is correct. The broad brush of shooting through a vehicle and the "yes" or "no" is situation-dependent.

[FITASC]

I keep my S&W M&P 2.0 in the truck console as I am usually wearing gym shorts or similar that would only allow a small pocket pistol- but I shoot it better than a LCP