don't think modern .380 is effective?

[pythagorean]

Back in 1972 my dad and I had to run out into the pasture with a Colt New Frontier .22 rimfire pistol (my dad) and a Winchester 1906 pump rifle loaded with Long Rifle HPs to kill two dogs attacking our livestock in a corral area.

The .22 rifle downed and grounded one dog and the New Frontier shot a bullet through the mouth of the other dog sideways and that dog went running.

The deputies were called by us and they had to shoot the downed dog with their .357s because it was still alive. We stopped shooting as soon as the threat was gone.

Anyway, it is always a terrible thing to have to shoot a dog--there is a strong feeling against having to do so for obvious reasons.

The dogs belonged to our neighbor and that did not set too well for neighborly relations but we had no choice.

These dogs were hot and attacking (they were German Shepherds) our pig (hog) and we could not use intermediate force of any type.

Now I see the discussion has centered around the topic, Is the .380 effective?

Of course it's effective and there are GOOD REASONS why even an experienced handgunner would choose something less than a .45 or 9mm to carry with him.

Wouldn't you have reason to carry a smaller caliber yourself? Of course you would. It could be because of what you are wearing or doing or where you are or anything.

There is no ONE good caliber/handgun choice to carry ALL THE TIME.

[spodwo]

All three rounds have several loadings with stopping power in the 90th percentile. That's centerfire rifle territory

You are drinking the koolaid of statistics. You are looking at numbers of actual shootings - and of ALL the shootings on the planet with a .45 - the numbers on that website are statistically insignificant. Specifically - you are comparing a very few shootings in the greater scheme of things. In one instance of the "90 percent one stop shot" you are only looking at 10 shootings which have been analyzed. 9 one stop shots out of 10 is just not statistically significant. And there are plenty of .45 ACP bullet loads that fall into the 60% percentile on that website and shootings....

The .308, in all shooting instances and in all bullet/manufacturer variances, shows 95% to 98% one stop shot. So I pose this question: Based on this website - is the .308 cartridge REALLY only 3%-5% better than a .45 in "stopping power"?

Uh no - it's a LOT better!

Me and my HK91 and a bad guy at 50 yards with his .45...only a 3% difference? I think not...and at less than 25 yards - I would still rather have that .308 or a shotgun with 00 buck.

A pistol cartridge is the last line of defense just before knives, pointed sticks, and fists.

In looking at the "stopping power" tables on that website - the .25 Automatic shows 1 shot stopping power at 25%. A 38 special with a 158 gr round nose lead bullet at 50%. Does that mean it is only about half as good as a rifle cartridge? Or that two shots from a .38 special at 50% is better than one shot of a .308?

It's simple math: velocity times bullet weight...rifles have a muzzle velocit of 2 to 3 times that of a pistol and they come out of barrels 4 to 6 times longer.

The pistol is a "close quarters" weapon. The pistol is a self defense weapon. Some calibers are better than others but frankly - none come close to the thump of a rifle cartridge. Even the maligned 223 cranks out some serious energy and 20-30 rounds in a 16 inch M4 outranks an 8 shot .45...by a lot...

There is a reason individual soldiers carry rifles, and not pistols, as their main weapon into wars - because of the "stopping power" , range, and accuracy capabilities.

[dec41971]

All these arguments about caliber are ridiculous. Trust me when I tell you no bad guy will stand there infront of anything over a .22; Heck even a .22, and there are very good reasons for that. I have yet to see a documented case of anyone who got nailed (not glazed or short through soft tissue - wouldn't matter if it was a .45 would it?) with a .38, .380 etc and just shook it off and kept up the attack. Not with a 9mm either. Who cares what Ayoob says, we all know what 99% will do faced with a barrel of a gun in their face. Advance ignoring it is not one of the reactions. Go figure!

[HKFan9]

Dec you logic is very very very flawed... good luck...

It is one thing to say a attacker will flee if you draw a firearm and he does not have one... but if he DOES have one, he has the same choice you did... FIGHT or FLIGHT. He can either kill you... or run... and generally people breaking the law don't have much concern about committing murder... not a gamble I would want to take with my life.

I don't think anyone is saying the .380 or even the .22 is not lethal.... or can be lethal... it certainly can be. What we are saying is it might not be affective at stopping an attack immediately, then again most handgun calibers aren't... so why limit yourself to an even smaller one?

There have been many documented cases of people being shot by police officers and still keeping up the attack.

There are no good reasons for carrying a .380, they are simply a fad. The ammo is weaker and more expensive, not to mention sometimes hard to get. You can get a 9mm or a .40 in relatively the same package. The .380's generally have a poor grip, no sights, and the ammo availability and price do not foster proper training habits. I know people will gripe and get upset... but to each his own, my life is more valuable to me.

[dreamweaver]

I have yet to see a documented case of anyone who got nailed (not glazed or short through soft tissue - wouldn't matter if it was a .45 would it?) with a .38, .380 etc and just shook it off and kept up the attack. Not with a 9mm either.

actually, there is a security camera video of a guy in a train station with a 9mm that had shot a passenger. a witness to this tried to disarm the guy and was shot multiple times yet continued the "attack". he later died at the scene.
and this guy was NOT on drugs of any kind. strictly adrenalin.
image if he was hopped up on meth!

[woodguru]

The bottom line is that those who have confidence and familiarity with whatever they are carrying will do just fine with it. Most important is the ability to read situations well and know when whatever gun you have needs to be in your hand.

Those who are worried about size are probably also pretty concerned about the idea of shooting someone, they probably need all the extra juice they can get.

99% of the defense of a carry gun is going to be in it's deterrent factor. You are going to let the other person know you have a gun and that fact alone is going to do the job. I dealt in a rough trade with very rough people, it was the fact everyone knew I carried and wasn't afraid to use it that kept me safe. There wasn't anyone I ever knew of who would have said "he's carrying a .22, that's no big deal". No, what was said behind my back by guys talking was more like, "he carries a .22, that's a professional's weapon". Nobody with bigger guns was willing to even think they had an edge because their gun was bigger. The only edge is if someone else's gun is out and yours isn't, it ain't about size.

There have been multiple people posting like the debate about a .380 is about a shootout between a .380 and a 9mm. If I have my .380 in someone's face or was forced to pull it out they are already dead, no if ands or buts. It sounds like some of the armchair warriors are going to pull their gun and let the other guy pull theirs at which time they are going to have a gunfight. If they are in a situation where a BG has a gun out chances are you are going to get shot, it isn't about the size of the gun, it's the proficiency of the shooter. If you do get a chance to get your gun out because said BG is a bad shot or whatever it isn't going to be about caliber it will come down to how well you can shoot under deadly pressure.

In the case of the original poster shooting dogs and Yotes, .380 worked well, so would the other calibers, if the .380 hadn't worked well for him neither would larger calibers, possibly larger more accurate guns would though.

Now I carry a .380 but it's a larger and very accurate one, the Beretta model 86, I also have a size matching Beretta model 87 .22 that I am just as confident with. The advantage with the .22 is that you can shoot two or three more shots accurately than you can with a gun that has recoil. Most people who are good shots would wreak havoc on a pack of dogs with a target .22 like the Beretta and an extra magazine.

You all who think they are mouse guns can carry whatever you want and think you need to have to cover all the imaginary bad guy scenarios. I know what my threats are, and will competently handle them with confidence with mouse guns that will do the job perfectly adequately. For me a .380 is 100% adequate for pest and vermin control, more importantly it has served as the deterrent that kept me from having to actually shoot someone, which I would hate to do.

I just have to add that I've always had a tough time stomaching "Ayoob for the defense", he runs the ultimate Bad Guy la la land scenarios and the firepower necessary to overcome them. Yeah, whatever.

[mavracer]

The bottom line is that those who have confidence and familiarity with whatever they are carrying will do just fine with it. Most important is the ability to read situations well and know when whatever gun you have needs to be in your hand.

That is a great statement well worthy of a copy and paste and reread.

[woodguru]

Thanks Mav.

[AZAK]

it ain't about size.

Except when it is.

We are not all going to be surgically perfect shots if jumped in an alley, punched in the face, hit over the head, or just plain startled. There are BGs that don't just stand still at 7 yards with circles printed on their t-shirts.

If someone comes running toward me screaming and slashing with a knife, I am not going to bet the farm that I will produce results like my targets look like at the range.

Just for those reasons, give me a cartridge that allows for a bit more latitude if I am not hitting the X.

I believe that the goal is to stop the threat as quickly as possible; I love shooting .22lr, but my carry cartridges are .45 auto and 10mm auto because I shoot them the best and they afford a degree of "latitude" when realistically considering carrying concealed and self defense.

YMMV

[HKFan9]

So you don't take Ayoobs commentary as valid even tho he deals with REAL scenarios for a living, but you live in a "rough and tough" place and you post on the internet so your point is automatically valid?

I forget which gun rag it was but the latest issue has Ayoob talking about a guy who fired his S&W M&P 9mm 9 times to stop a bad guy (who already had a Colt 1911 drawn). The man landed 8 out of the 9 shots, mostly center mass, and the bad guy fell to the ground finally. The ammo was stated at being gold dots non +P I believe.

So with a .45 1911 in hand it took 8 hits from 9mm hollow points to drop. I'm glad you might feel safe with a .380 but I don't. Although I respect your choice of choosing the Beretta, instead of one of the tiny mouse guns with barely any grip or sights.

Personally however. I don't see the point in carrying a .380 that is bigger and heavier than some of the 9mm's and .40's out there, let alone ammo costs. If recoil is the issue if you are older I could understand, but with the LCP and others... it has almost more felt recoil than some 9mm's.

[TMackey]

I forget which gun rag it was but the latest issue has Ayoob talking about a guy who fired his S&W M&P 9mm 9 times to stop a bad guy (who already had a Colt 1911 drawn). The man landed 8 out of the 9 shots, mostly center mass, and the bad guy fell to the ground finally. The ammo was stated at being gold dots non +P I believe.

Definitive evidence that a person with a smaller caliber who is capable, can beat a BG with a bigger caliber who is not capable.

[AZAK]

Definitive evidence that a person with a smaller caliber who is capable, can beat a BG with a bigger caliber who is not capable.

And are you comfortable, given this example, having to shoot an armed target 9 times before the threat is abated? (Knowing that the target can also shoot at you during your 9 shot "turn".)

[TMackey]

I would not feel undergunned with a 9mm. I carried one on a daily basis as an LEO. Anyone who says otherwise doesn't know what he is talking about.

Yes that even includes "the experts".

I don't think some of you would feel safe with a .50 cal Barrett.

[AZAK]

I would not feel undergunned with a 9mm. I carried one on a daily basis as an LEO. Anyone who says otherwise doesn't know what he is talking about.

Yes that even includes "the experts".

I, for one, would not presume to tell you what you are comfortable with.

As for the rest of your comments:
Is it possible that there is a reason that many law enforcement agencies don't provide for duty carry .22lr, .380 auto, .38 special, or 9mm? And that there has been a shift to .40 S&W and .45 auto for some/many.

There is a reason that someone is considered an "expert" in a given field; not everyone will agree with an expert, even other experts; however, to disagree with anyone who disagrees with you, even the "experts", unless you are talking purely about personal preference, is rather contradictory qualifying yourself as an "expert-expert".

[mavracer]

And are you comfortable, given this example, having to shoot an armed target 9 times before the threat is abated? (Knowing that the target can also shoot at you during your 9 shot "turn".)

not really comfortable with the time it'd take to get off one shot but that's one of the biggest reasons to avoid gunfights.Besides if 9 rounds is what it takes, it may take 9 no matter what caliber your using.

[mavracer]

There is a reason that someone is considered an "expert" in a given field; not everyone will agree with an expert, even other experts; however, to disagree with anyone who disagrees with you, even the "experts", unless you are talking purely about personal preference, is rather contradictory qualifying yourself as an "expert-expert".

Many experts concider the 9mm very adequate that must make you an expert-expert

[AZAK]

not really comfortable with the time it'd take to get off one shot but that's one of the biggest reasons to avoid gunfights.Besides if 9 rounds is what it takes, it may take 9 no matter what caliber your using.

In total agreement with avoiding completely. But, if there is a chance that cartridge selection may improve my odds, I am going to take it.

And it is not just about cartridge. It is about being proficient with the selected platform and cartridge. For some, it may be a Ruger 22/45 in .22lr because that is all that they can handle accurately and consistently. For others it may be the .380 auto in "insert gun model here", while it might be a .45 auto out of a 1911 or a Glock or ...

I personally shoot .45 auto and 10mm auto out of 1911s more accurately and faster than other platforms and cartridges that I would consider for SD. Because this is what I shoot well, does not make it the "best choice" for everyone else.

YMSV (You Mileage Should Vary)

[AZAK]

Many experts concider the 9mm very adequate that must make you an expert-expert

I am an expert only in what I do well with. I am not telling anyone else what they should do.

Anyone who says otherwise doesn't know what he is talking about.

Yes that even includes "the experts".

That is what I was referring to, dismissing out of hand anyone who disagrees with one's choice.

[TMackey]

I am by no means an expert, but when someone says that a 9mm ain't enough gun, I have to question their judgment.

[AZAK]

Do you question the LE communities moving towards cartridges like the .40 S&W, the .45 auto, and the .357 sig?

A 9mm caliber will make a hole. A 9mm (short or auto) caliber will stop aggression. My personal concern is, how quickly? (All other things being equal.)

For me, I believe that in my hands I have better options. So, I personally take those options.

Again,
YMSV

[JohnKSa]

But, if there is a chance that cartridge selection may improve my odds, I am going to take it.

Cartridge selection can certainly improve your odds. But you need to consider more than just terminal performance if you really want to improve your odds.

Terminal performance is just one aspect of how cartridge selection can change a person's odds in a gunfight and the fact that it has been so hotly debated for so many years is actually pretty good evidence that there's not a cut & dried answer. If there were the debate would be hard to sustain.

There are many other aspects that should be considered--some which can definitely have a more significant effect than terminal performance.

I personally shoot .45 auto and 10mm auto out of 1911s more accurately and faster than other platforms and cartridges that I would consider for SD.

It's very difficult to support an assertion like this. Muzzle flip and recoil are clearly and undebatably deleterious to shooting speed and/or accuracy. That's why the practical shooting sports have minimum power factor limits and/or penalties for those shooting with cartridges having lower power factors to prevent people from gaining an unfair advantage by competing with cartridges that produce less recoil and therefore allow competitors to shoot more rapidly/accurately than they would be able to with heavier recoiling cartridges.

For what it's worth, I'm not saying that .45ACP and 10mm are bad choices for self-defense. My nightstand gun is a 10mm. I'm just saying that I don't try to convince myself that I can shoot it as fast/accurately as I could shoot a 9mm out of a similar platform.

[TMackey]

Do you question the LE communities moving towards cartridges like the .40 S&W, the .45 auto, and the .357 sig?

Nope. They are free to do what they want. Just like you and I. That doesn't mean that 9mm is ineffective.

[woodguru]

You misinterpreted something because I think I make it pretty clear that it's a matter of personal comfort zone and choice. I object more than anything to the concept that a cartridge like the .380 would be considered marginal for my personal defense, it might be marginal for your defense but then you would be using it differently than I do, I have, can, and will get the job done with a .22 if that's what I'm carrying for a specific reason.

Many people carry for different reasons and threat potentials, and I would never try to tell them what is right for their personal skills and expected threats.

The .380 I carry does everything I need it to do very well, I can shoot a 5 inch group at 55 yards consistantly, this allows me to know it's very very unlikely I would make a bad shot at under 15 feet.

I tried to speak for those who carry a .380 with confidence, for them it will do the job they ask of it. I have practiced hostage shots where I hit small exposed areas around the person being held (target silhouette), and I have shot through car doors to get a better feel for the residual power bullets have after going through the door. I know firsthand that if you want to shoot someone through auto glass it takes an immediate followup through the shattered area made by the first shot to get a better hit through. I had my reasons for needing to know these things.

I have to admit one thing here, people asking for advice probably need to be steered toward the heavier side of adequate. Those not asking for the advice don't need it, they will carry what works for them. I have had many people ask me for advice about what gun for personal defense, my answer has generally been not to buy a gun for that, that they didn't have the right mentality to use it. I guess I just react to the general stereoptype that a .380 is marginal or inadequate when it's the smaller inadequate sized guns that are what's being referred to, not the caliber.

My wife has a veterinary clinic on a busy street in Sacramento, but she parks in the back where it has a more isolated feel than I am comfortable with at seven or eight o'clock at night. Jeanne is not a gun kind of person so I have given her several of my high wattage tactical flashlights that would fry someone's eyeballs out and have told her what it is she is looking to accomplish with the few seconds that blinding someone might buy her. I personally feel that trying to encourage anyone not super gun friendly to use one for defense is a huge mistake.

[AZAK]

It's very difficult to support an assertion like this.

Are you questioning my personal preference for a platform, cartridge, loads, and abilities when I am personally sharing my preference in combinations that:

I would consider for SD

Sure, I can be faster and more accurate with a .22lr; however, I personally do not choose to carry my Ruger MKII 22/45 for SD, I don't consider this as a possibility for myself.

I have found, after decades of shooting many different platforms and cartridge and loads, that I shoot 1911s in .45 auto and 10mm auto more accurately and more quickly than other combinations in what I would personally consider for self defense.

I live in Alaska, therefore the 10mm auto in 1911 works better in my opinion for a "woods gun" (we have bears and moose) than say a .44 mag in a revolver. I can get more lead downrange more accurately and quicker with a Delta Elite than a Smith and Wesson 29. And the DE is, again for me, more accurate and quicker than a Glock 20 or 29; I know from shooting them for years. For me 9mm auto is not even a consideration for SD, let alone a .380 auto. (I have also advocated bear spray for years; even on this forum.)

I also find the fact that LE agencies have been moving away from the 9mm auto and toward "more powerful" cartridges for years as an argument that is compelling.

And once again,
YMSV

[Ballenxj]

WOW! This thread has taken an interesting turn.
Since it has been brought up though, YES, I would feel comfortable with a .22 as a self defense weapon. It's all about shot placement. And before anybody says it (again), I realize the smaller calibers are "not" going to knock the bad guy A$$ over tea kettle. Now if I thought the possibility of being attacked was more likely, yeah, I'd probably prefer to have my Mossberg 500 loaded with buckshot as my primary weapon.
There are just too many situations where carrying a large pistol are not practical in the real world.
-Bruce