If i hear it one more time!!!!

[bestbod85]

OKAY THATS IT!.... yet again today I was talking to a security officer who seemed very knowlegable about firearms and such. the conversation led to what I carry for a duty weapon ( I have the liberty to choose my own from an approved list) so I told him " a glock 17 9mm) and he said ( CRINGE) " wow you'd be better off throwing rocks"!!!!. That was it, he was like the third person this month to say this to me, so I let him have it. I told him I had chosen 9mm because of various reasons. higher capacity, lower recoil, cheaper to practice with, effective with HP ammo and even more so with +p ammo. I told him that I could put more rounds on target accuratly in less time than I can with his .45 - to this he said well, if you have to shoot more than twice you should not be in a gun fight - WHAT? - I told him I carry IN CASE of a gun fight, not because i want to be in one. He also said that shooting faster is not better - I told him I agreed, however putting more rounds on target in a shorter period of time is ( 9mm has much faster and accurate follow up shots - for me anyway). later on in the conversation we are talking about practice drill, so I tell him that i spend a fair amount of time on my personal range - practicing moving and shooting and shooting from a barricade. to this he said " you shouldn't be shooting while moving" I said WHAT??? he said yeah you should be either moving or shooting but not both at the same time. so I told him for arguments sake that I agree and said that if I'm in a gun fight that we should strive to just stand stationary and shoot OR run in another direction towards cover and he said Yeah that's what you should be doing. then I brought up a good point - ok so what happens when the gun fight your in suddenly dictates that you need to move from your enemies line of fire and shoot him in order to stop the threat as quickly as possible. If you have never practiced that then how can you expect that you will be any good at it? _ I AM NOT BASHING THE .45- I own several but prefer higher cap 9mm for duty

I like options. I like having more rounds in my weapon IN CASE i need them. I practice to move and shoot IN CASE i need to. I guess I find it unintelligent to assume everything will go as planned in a gun fight and also that the only round suitable for self defense is a .45, it's just crazy talk! does anyone else get my point? should I stop practicing certain things and upgrade to the almighty .45? anyone elses experiences and training guidelines are appreciated, whats your opinion on these matters!

[MLeake]

... why do bother arguing with people like that?

Might as well argue with a lake or a mountain. You'd have better scenery, that way, and about the same chance of winning.

[James K]

The .45 has good points, and I agree that a big bullet is usually better, but it is not magic.

Two comments that always have me wincing are: "a hit anywhere in the body from a .45 will instantly kill or totally disable an enemy." This is usually followed by "the 9mm penetrates better but the bullet just goes through without stopping the enemy." Sure. Like a mosquito bite; tough guys don't even notice.

As to shooting while moving, one object is to force the enemy to keep his head down. It is a good technique to practice, but most ranges prohibit it and other valuable techniques in the name of safety. At least you and your friend agree on taking cover. Most of the gunzine gurus are shown standing erect, feet at the prescribed angle, while shooting at a target. If the target were able to shoot back, those guys' writing careers would be very short.

Jim

[wun_8_seven]

you're better off throwing rocks..........................................



i kid i kid

[comn-cents]

Doesn’t matter what anyone says, if you can't hit the threat with a bullet it sure doesn't matter what bullet you are using. I'm with you, I'd take a 9mm over a 45 for the reasons you stated. I like the "not shooting while your moving bit." You may shoot yourself in the leg. don't want that.
Some people are clueless and believe everything they hear or at least the first thing they hear.

[Brian Pfleuger]

You're right, he's not.

It's pretty much that simple.


Also, this is a good reason why you should always verify and re-verify anything someone tells you. There is a lot of crap info that comes from people who are "otherwise very intelligent."

[orionengnr]

Different people have different opinions. Many are valid. This is not a hobby for the thin-skinned.

Nobody has the answer. If there were an absolute answer, we'd all acknowledge it and act accordingly.

On second thought, some still would argue just for the fun of it

[greghalliday]

That guy is dumb as a post.

He really needs to get some training. One of the first things my shooting buddy taught me was how to move while firing. He has been taught this rigorously at all the schools: Gunsite, Front Sight, etc.

[GeauxTide]

Spelling and grammar work wonders in getting your point across. I agree with you about the superiority of the 45acp, if I have the correct interpretation......

[MLeake]

... sorry to tell you, but you're batting at or just over .500....

You're dead on about my take on the merits of spelling and grammar, and of the avoidance of text message spelling that usually (but not always) singles out the writer as a teen or immature 20something.

However, my point about arguing with a lake or mountain wasn't an endorsement of the .45, but rather my statement that some people "know" too much to be able to process any information or viewpoints that don't agree with their own preconceptions. The futility of the argument wasn't about the caliber comparison, it was about the security guard acquaintance's mindset; nothing will change that type of mind, so why waste the effort?

FWIW, I prefer .45acp over 9mm, especially if limited to FMJ, but will concede that JHP ammo gets pretty close in performance. However, I am able to prefer .45acp because I shoot it as well as I shoot 9mm; if I shot the 9mm noticeably better, then I'd say I would be better off tactically using the 9mm.

With handgun ammo, even more than with rifle ammo, you want hits to vital areas. Peripheral hits are iffy with rifle and shotgun, and very iffy with handguns. If you can't reliably hit vital spots with your caliber of choice, it might be that you would benefit from backing off on the power levels.

If effective SD were all about "power," we'd see a lot more .44 magnums used in CCW mode. However, most of us can't shoot a .44 with much speed and accuracy, after that first round (IE follow up shots are a challenge, and quick ones are out of the question for most of us - I include myself in that majority, and I'm fairly big and fairly strong).

So the .45acp is really a compromise, itself. For many of us, it's an excellent compromise, but that doesn't make it ideal for everybody.

Cheers,

M

[overkill556x45]

You're all wrong. A hit from a .45ACP, much like a 7.62x51 NATO, will reduce your opponent to a pile of ashes--even if you hit them in the pinky finger. The 9mm, just like the 5.56x45, will only anger an attacker and has never killed anything or anyone ever, nor will they.

Furthermore, anyone who says they have ever hit a bull's eye with a Glock is lying. Because they are made with a plastic frame, they are physically incapable of hitting targets. Even if you align the sights correctly and squeeze the trigger just right, the ghost of John Moses Browning will deflect the bullet in flight and make it miss by a wide margin.

By combining the previous facts, I surmise that a Glock in 9x19mm would not function at all. It would most likely lack the power to break through a paper target, supposing John Browning's ghost allows your bullet to fly straight.

(I've had this argument ad nauseum with my friends. Had to let my snark swim free on this one.)

[bestbod85]

Thanks for the responses. It's nice to know I'm not crazy - at some point today i was thinking " wow the sheriff's dept really taught me wrong?" and then I snapped out of it and figured I'd double check with you guys.

Mleake - thanks for your posts, very true about not arguing about it with these people. I agree, I just could not hear it one more time and NOT set him straight!.

also I agree with you that if you can fire the .45 .44 or 357 just as fast and accurate as I do the 9mm then by all means bigger is better in that circumstance. thats just not me, I trained and went through the academy with my glock 22 .40 cal and did very well, but when I bought a 9mm my speed and accuracy went way up and so did my " combat effectivness" on the qualification course.

everyones different and i respect others opinions and choices when they actually have a logical and legimate reason for choosing one over the other, whether that means caliber, tactics or even firearms.

[bestbod85]

Overkill - wow too funny

[G-man 26]

Knock, Knock.
Who's there?
Land snark...

I love it! Ah I remember the days of working security with guys who know everything about LE, weapons, and would be a real cop if they wanted to, but they are just waiting to see what the future holds. You know, the guys that are too good for the local PD? Sounds like you could be keeping better company. Remember, don't wrestle with the pigs, you just get dirty, and the pigs like it! No pun intended.

[MLeake]

Not to start another caliber war, and I'm not going to address "stopping power."

However, just some observations from having shot different frames in different calibers:

I find that for me, 9mm and .45 handguns of comparable size handle pretty similarly. While the .45 has a stronger overall recoil impulse, the quicker, snappier nature of the 9mm's recoil brings it into the same ballpark when it comes to my speed at getting sights back on target.

I find that .40S&W, having similar recall power to the .45, but a snappier impulse, is the slowest of the three for me to get back on target. It's not bad, but it's still slower for me than either 9mm or .45acp.

Last, I'd say my fastest centerfire pistol for multiple target drills is my DW CBOB .45; it's hard to beat a 1911 trigger for speed.

OTOH, with its virtual lack of any perceptible recoil, my S&W .22 revolver is probably my fastest, assuming I don't have to actually knock targets over with it.

[koolminx]

You're all wrong. A hit from a .45ACP, much like a 7.62x51 NATO, will reduce your opponent to a pile of ashes--even if you hit them in the pinky finger. The 9mm, just like the 5.56x45, will only anger an attacker and has never killed anything or anyone ever, nor will they.

Furthermore, anyone who says they have ever hit a bull's eye with a Glock is lying. Because they are made with a plastic frame, they are physically incapable of hitting targets. Even if you align the sights correctly and squeeze the trigger just right, the ghost of John Moses Browning will deflect the bullet in flight and make it miss by a wide margin.

By combining the previous facts, I surmise that a Glock in 9x19mm would not function at all. It would most likely lack the power to break through a paper target, supposing John Browning's ghost allows your bullet to fly straight.

HAHAHHAAHAAAA! That's the best post I've read all day and that covers 5 different forums of 5 different natures

I don't shoot a .45 or a 9mm except for fun. I carry a S&W 22A .22 LR and can someone with it while sitting, standing, running or walking....

I simply cannot hit anything with my S&W CS45, nor my nephew's 9mm. I practiced a lot until all the local ammo supply dried up, but I still can't hit anything.

The correct weapon to use is the one you are most comfortable and accurate with, bar none. Regardless of caliber, because it's like what's his name said, if you can't hit it, it don't matter what you shoot.

[SAIGAFISH]

you should of told him to stick out his foot to see if it hurts

[GlockJockey]

if you can't hit the threat with a bullet it sure doesn't matter what bullet you are using.

One of the best things I've heard for ages. Well put.

[Christchild]

Sounds like that "Security Officer" needs to turn in his "Badge".

[diablo508]

XD-9 sub-compact and a XDM 9mm only 2 pistols I own or need!

9mm has done just fine on deployments as well..in real situations in afgan and Iraq ....not "what if" scenarios

[Pbearperry]

I was never a fan of the 9mm,however,there is a lot better ammo for it now than before.Good premium self defense 9mm ammo in the right area will do the job.If you can hit the target with more confidense with the 9mm,go for it and you will be served.

[Willie Lowman]

Voted: Funniest active thread on TFL

[raftman]

These kinds of people's choice will always be a better choice than yours, because it's theirs.

Once had a fella sneer at my CZ-82 and P64, said "You may as well be using a water gun." Told 'em, "I dunno man, ask anyone with half a brain or more which they'd rather be shot with."

[Christchild]

Yea Willie!

Sounds like a Great place to live!

[Kyo]

I don't have a problem with opinions as long as people don't try to put them on me. I know what my facts are.
The 45 is bigger than the 9mm. The 45 is heavier than the 9mm in grain weight. It's slower, heavier bullet reduces chance of over penetration.
The 9mm is a light faster round. A 9mm gun will mostly likely have a higher capacity than a 45(unless you in a 10 round limit state, bleh!) in stock configurations. The 9mm has very controllable recoil which makes targeting easier. The 9 is easier to shoot for some, and not for others.

From my experience, I shoot a 45 just as well or better than a 9, so I carry a 45. The recoil to me is about the same, but the 40 is more than both and I don't like its snap at all.- These are opinions. Up top are facts. Accept the facts, disregard the opinions of others.