9mm or .40 caliber
 

going to be buying a handgun soon, in one of the two mentioned calibers. which do you prefer and why?

For what purpose are you acquiring said handgun? If it's for self defense, I would say 9mm.

If you're going for self defense, go for a .40. It has much more stopping power, but still a nice smooth action (assuming an auto loader). The 9mm is... rather underpowered IMO due to the fact that your aim may not be what it is at the range, and you'll want every shot to count if the need arose.

For target? 9mm, cheaper, less recoil....

Well, for personal protection you don't want the bullets to go THROUGH someone, and then through someone's wall, and into the head of a sleeping child. Let someone shoot you a few times with a 9mm and see if you're still walking around just fine. ;)

Depends on how experienced you are too. The 9mm has less recoil, so it's easier to learn on. If you are looking for self defense reasons and can handle the .40, I'd go for that.

I'll never forget the first time I shot my .40 with a 3.5" barrell. I was anticipating the recoil so much that I was dropping rounds way below target...

what about if theres like 5 guys coming at you?
you would want the bullets to count right? :D

the purpose for the gun is both self/home defense as well as target shooting for enjoyment.

my level of handgun shooting experience is limited, but I have fired the following calibers: .22, .357 magnum, .40, .44 magnum and .45. I had no difficulty with any of these.

I am leaning toward the .40 caliber because a) I prefer the greater stopping power, and b) the nicest handgun I ever fired was a S&W .40 caliber FBI model that a buddy of mine owns. I liked this gun a LOT. great balance, you hardly noticed the heft of the gun.

As I see it, the .40 (generally) has a lot of stopping power without having to have a really heavy frame, such as the larger calibers do. For example, my father-in-law's .44 mag revolver is a really nice gun, but is so damned heavy. After 6 shots, my arms were noticably tired. Not so with my buddy's .40, I could shoot that sucker all day and barely notice.

on the other hand, the ammo for 9mm is likely to be more plentiful and cheaper, Im guessing.

Truthfully, a 9mm loaded with hydra-shoks or gold dots will be just fine as a defensive round.

If you look at the penetration and expansion of some different makes of 9mm and .40 caliber, the numbers are not that far different:

http://www.firearmstactical.com/briefs.htm

What swings it for me is that 9mm is MUCH cheaper to practice with.

To me, someone carrying around a 40 or 50 cal pistol just screams "compensation." Then again, I think that a Derringer is neat. :P To each his own, I suppose.

Try both and go with the one you feel you are more comfortable with or think you can handle more easily under high stress situations.

You had to go there, didn't you... :D


As Lebell pointed out, modern 9mm ammo is perfectly capable of stopping an attacker. Add to that the fact that it is easier to control, has a flatter trajectory, and you can carry more ammunition, and it becomes the clear choice over .40 S&W, IMHO.

If you must have a more powerful round (which I can't imagine you would), look at the 10mm, which mimics the performance of a .41 magnum.

Go for the 9mm, with the right ammo you can have the same stopping power for a fraction of the price, plus without the worry of killing somone in the next house.

Sort of a thread jack, what do real life situations mimic? The denim covered gelatin or the regular gelatin?

The .45 ACP penetration seems kind of scary when shot into denim covered gelatin.

IMHO i would go with the 9mm hands down. I carry my Glock loaded with Federal Hydra-Shocks. I can guarantee you I will bring down a human just the same with those as any kind of .40. And also for practicing 9mm is a lot cheaper. And practice makes perfect.

I've had fairly unimpressive experiences with .40 S&W. Maybe it is just the guns I've put it through, but none of them have ever been anything more than "acceptable" in accuracy. As this list includes a Sig 229 and a S&W Performance Center piece, I don't think it is a quality of pistol issue.

I just wonder if the loads commonly available aren't that great or if the rounds' characteristics are antithetical to the tack-driving accuracy (in comparison) that I seem to be able to pull out of just about every 9mm handgun I've fired. As this list includes everything from Glocks to Hungarian copies of the Browning Hi-power, I don't think I am biased from using very high quality 9mm pistols.

I am also unwilling to call it a recoil issue. I regularly shoot both .357 magnum and .44 magnum and have no trouble with recoil in either one. The differences between recoil and 'kick' between 9mm and .40 S&W are minimal in my eyes.

Then I look at the magazine capacity. Average 9mm holds 15rds and you'll have no trouble getting hi-cap mags for most normal 9mms. Average .40 S&W holds 11rds and you will likely have a tough time getting the hi-caps. As the difference is one round, it is not really worth the trouble to most people. Thus the 9mm has 50% again the capacity for only a slight decrease in terminal efficacy.

Lastly, I look at cost of ammo. The primary factor in determining the outcome of any shot you take under stress is how much practice you have had with the gun you are using prior to the shot. If the ammo for one gun is precipitously mor expensive, this will translate into less time spent on the range.

Bottom line - I say go for the 9mm if you want the efficient choice. The only caveat is that you should, in the end, go for whichever gun/caliber that makes you happiest. You will need to be confident in what you carry should you ever, god forbid, need to use it. All the efficiency in the world cannot beat willingess to commit to an action fully because you are confident that your gear will function as you expect it to.

Good luck, Sion, and let us know which you choose and how well it shoots.

In Maryland a few years back, a criminal stole an ambulance. When the police tried to stop him, he tried to run them over. Some of their 9mm rounds bounced off the windshield. Now the cops are moving to .40. I myself have a Beretta .40. Full sized, same design carried by the military and many police depts, just a larger caliber.

There is a big problem with the Beretta .40 though... they took the 9mm and resized the barrell to handle the .40 round. After you put a thousand or so rounds through the weapon and it loosens up, the larger .40 cal round has a tendency to get stuck on the loading ramp. You'll have to field strip the weapon in order to clear the jam. Not very practical in a live fire situation.

This is why our department got rid of our .40 Berettas...

edit: spelling errors...

.40 S&W has no more ability to penetrate a sloped and curved surface (ie a windshield) than a 9mm. Additonally, windshields, especially on heavier vehicles like ambulances, are fairly tough critters.

Fhqwhgads does bring up one more strike against most .40 S&W. The VAST majority of them are just built-up 9mm standards. Very few manufacturers are bulding .40's from the ground up. H&K did it that way with their USP series, but the majority are still 9mm's that have been beefed up. I don't care for that concept, especially on something as notoriously weak as a Beretta.

9 or 40 S&W
 

I usally practice with 9mm Barretta, 40 H&K USP, and a 1911 45ACP. Don't limit yourself to a 9mm or 40! Do your research on 45ACP or possibly a .357. If you want something accurate look into a 1911 style pistol. They can be pretty pricey.

9mm or .40 S&W
 

I own a Glock 22 and 23 both in .40 S&W have shot out about 12000 rounds in the 23 and about 8000 in the 22 had no problems ever, but prefer the 22 over 23. Note I have also shot with many different hand held weapons before making the choice and read many reports and articles. The 22 takes 15 rounds ( South Africa ) and the 23 13 rounds both carry enough rounds already if you need more, buy the plus 2 mags or the 28 round mag. In the US you might have a 10 round restriction - go for .40 before 9mm in this case. Why did the US army go back to .45 if 9mm is so great??? Why does the FBI use .40S&W and LA Highway Patrol many more... have changed. The fact is .40S&W is the better cal than 9mm it’s been proven. Buying the right tools for the job will help - the gun's make and ammo types. But just take a 9mm round and a .40 and put them next to each other - you decide. Bigger does help. In the G22 the recoil is very acceptable even for a female shooter. People talking about projectiles flying though walls - must be US walls, and 9mm goes though those walls too so.... what’s the point? My Dad's Walter PPK .380 auto has a more uncomfortable recoil than both Glocks. If recoil is a problem with your gun just get a softer recoil spring, this will reduce the recoil you feel. Reload your own rounds for the "cost" effect - you will also learn a lot about the whole concept of ballistics and how things work and it will provide enjoyment. If you going to own a gun it’s worth while to master the full range of aspects associated with it and accepted the full responsibility of owning one!!!!

Then again: any gun is better than no gun.

As far as the cal goes 9mm VS .40S&W - .40S&W wins all-round.

Over penetration is not a problem if you have the right round.

Check Glaser Safety Slugs:
What they are: http://mysite.elixirlabs.com/index.p...2665&page=1981
FAQ: http://mysite.elixirlabs.com/index.p...2665&page=1980

"As far as the cal goes 9mm VS .40S&W - .40S&W wins all-round."

Except in that whole capacity category.

I don't get it? Are you shooting widley in a dense neighborhood? Why is everyone so concerned about a bullet going through walls and stuff??? Just a question. A .22 will go thru drywall with ease. Or does he plan on shooting only in his basement or bomb shelter?
.40 cal is more expensive for shooting. 9mm, being a NATO round is massed produced and is cheaper on the wallet. .45 cal is my choice of carry. The rounds are cheaper than the .40 and no matter what I hit, it's going down! Most Deputies that I know have traded in their .40 cal and gone back to the .45 cal. Don't take this the wrong way, I love my 9mm. It's fun to shoot and rarely gives me any trouble. No matter what you buy, learn it and use it skillfully. You'll be fine.
But of course, this is only my opinion.

Don't listen to this stuff. the .40S&W DOES NOT have much more power than a 9mm. In terms of preformance the two rounds are basically identical. In equalvlant loadings, a .40s&w will have a bullet only very slightly heaver, very slightly slower, and one mm wider. The effect on a human target will not be noticably different. If you don't belive me go to the store, get a box of each, and compare the factory data. The difference in almost noexistent.

9mm ammo is cheaper, you'll be able to practice more. But really, It come's down to whatever works the best for you. Worry about the model of the gun, not between 40 and 9.

357 sig... i just like it

If you haven't made up your mind yet, he has a point with the .357 sig. The recoil and noise will be worse, and the ammo costs more, but you would get a big increase in penatration and still get similar mag capicity and frame size to the 9 or 40. Are you still shopping, or did you get one already?

Over-Penetration
 

These people who are claiming you should go with 9mm instead of .40S&W because of the risk of "shooting through walls," are mistaken, IMO.

The risk of over-penetration with 9mm is significantly HIGHER than with .40 or any of the larger-caliber rounds. Especially if you use ball ammo (not a hollowpoint or softpoint).

The 9mm is an extremely high-velocity round, and there are many documented cases of over-penetration with it. Also, there are a number of rather bizarre horror stories of junkies being hit multiple times with 9mm ball rounds and not stopping.

If you have a 9mm, I wouldn't say that you should take it back or anything, because modern ammunition has greatly made up for the weaknesses of the cartridge. Get some Hydra-Shoks or CorBons for carrying to prevent over-penetration, and learn a double-tap shooting technique.

However if you are in the market, I would strongly steer you towards a .40S&W. It is actually a 10mm bullet (some people call it the "10mm short") and has a greater cross-sectional area and somewhat lower velocity than the 9mm. Historically the .40 evolved out of the 10mm Norma cartridge, which was designed for FBI use but was deemed too powerful and hard to control.

My favorite thing about the .40, though, is that most practice ammo for it has flat-nosed bullets, which more closely simulate hollowpoint ballistics. Plus, they make a neater hole in the paper. :) For carry, I would still spend the extra money for CorBons.

Oh -- and take a defensive shooting class. Even if you don't plan on getting a CCW permit soon, or don't need to take a class to get one where you live, I promise you'll learn something useful.

I have had the the chance to see virtually every pistol caliber in the world seen in action. Lets say post action, meaning I have seen people shot, and had the misfortune of taking care of these GSWs. The most common I have seen is the .22. Kills a lot of people, but I dont carry one. In the case between 9mm vs .40, please shoot me with the 9mm. That extra millimeter makes a difference. The .40 is typically a one shot ordeal, with the 9mm needing more than one shot. Obese people are not penetrated well with the 9mm and I have seen the recepients shot multiple times before the police felt they were no longer a threat. Rarely have I seen someone shot more than once with a .40 before they were incapacitated. All these things depend on the loads however. I bought myself two Glocks in .40 about a year after seeing their "true perfomance". I am not talking about the range, but the holes they make in people. I think the .40 is as controllable as the 9mm and my wife has no trouble shooting a .40 Glock. If you are getting a pistol, be sure to get hydrashocks or Golden saber or some other similar expanding round. Just stay away from the FMJ type rounds which are good for target. I have never seen a 9mm or .40 go all the way thru a torso shot. For your home get a cheap mossberg pump and load it with birdshot. I have seen extremities removed with birdshot at close range and you dont have to worry about it penetrating too many walls in your home before all the kinetic enery is exhausted.

There's one very good reason that 9mm generally has a higher capacity than a .40: it takes a hell of a lot more bullets from a 9mm to stop someone. Since you want it for protection I'm going to assume you'd like 1 shot takedown. Unless you're extremely good with head shots, I'd suggest the .40 for your desired use. Yes, the ammo is a bit more expensive, but you'll only need 1 shot pretty much wherever you hit them.

"There's one very good reason that 9mm generally has a higher capacity than a .40: it takes a hell of a lot more bullets from a 9mm to stop someone."

Yeah, no way it could have anything to do with the fact that the rounds have a smaller diameter and you can thus fit more of them into the same size frame. That'd be silly.

"Since you want it for protection I'm going to assume you'd like 1 shot takedown. Unless you're extremely good with head shots, I'd suggest the .40 for your desired use."

Why would you assume a single shot takedown? Ever looked at how often that happens? Even the police, who are pretty much gonna have more training than you or me (not ability, mind you, but certainly more training) are generally trained to do double-taps. Why? Because one-shot stops are unreliable regardless of caliber.

You are also making the fatal assumption that the primary role of a firearm in a defense scenario is to actually shoot. More often than not, the mere presentation of the gun will stop criminal intent in its' tracks. A 9mm is as good as a .44mag insofar as presence of firearm is concerned. You still have some screwy ideas of ballistics and terminal effectiveness though if you think that 9mm is an utter failure and .40 S&W is the magic pill.

"Yes, the ammo is a bit more expensive, but you'll only need 1 shot pretty much wherever you hit them."

Yup, because Winchester packs fairy magic into every .40 S&W round they sell. Even if you shoot some perps' left hand, he will die on his feet from transmitted shock.

Yeah, I'm being real snarky here. I'm not actively trying to flame but I am pretty tired of people that obviously know jack about ballistics and terminal effectiveness coming in and touting one round over another when said round is minimally different from the other. If you want a true one-shot stopper, better toss that .40 S&W and start carrying a 7.62 NATO, probably the most proven one-shot stopper in history.

Oh, if you're wondering what handgun round actually has a good one-shot record, .357 magnum, hands down. .40S&W is a moderately good round, nothing more, and trying to elevate it to magic pill status is just passing on junk marketing or, worse, patent untruths.

I remember back to when M-16s were being pushed real hard and the M-14s were being confiscated. That what "They" used to say trying convince everyone to give up their 14s.

All that transmitted shock stuff is pure malarkey and only applies if you hit center chest.

As I've probably mentioned enough to bore everyone all to hell and back, you want reasonable one-shot chances, send a Glaser.

M-16 : Lighter, cheaper to produce, ammo is cheaper, less scary for REMF's during required rifle training.
M-14 : Kills bugs dead, can be used as a club if need be, not made by a major toy company
Army: Didja say that the ammo for the M-16 was cheaper? Gimme 765,000 of em.

In the case of these two rifles though, there is a major substantive difference in the terminal performance though, making the discussion of comparative worth by caliber more valid.

Interestingly enough, the Army used the same shoot-em-anywhere-and-they'll-drop argument with the .45acp in the Phillipines. Not saying that the .45acp doesn't perfomer, just that it is interesting that they re-used the argument.

As an aside, Glasers work so well because of complete energy dump. Hollow-points are effective for the same reason. Glasers beat hollow-points because the frangible interior just liquefies what it hits, preventing any sort of return to even partial function in the damaged area. Mag-safe has a similar design using somewhat larger shot and is apparently even more effective in various tests (including the infamous goat test). Neither has any greater one-shot-stop potential than a properly designed hollow-point anywhere other than a trunk hit though.

The lesson here is aim for center mass, know your weapon well (through practice), and use the best load you can with whatever weapon you choose.

(As an aside, I use Federal Hydra-shoks for carry. The only reason I don't use Glasers/Mag-safes is because I will not carry a load that I have not shot extensively, and I just ain't wealthy enough to drop a coupla dollars a shot on practice runs.)

When the FBI tested Glaser safty slugs they found them to produce inadaquate wound channels. And also "energy dump" doesn't mean much, a 9 or 40 has about the same energy as a fast baseball.

Moonduck, I don't generally respond to flamers so I'm going to make this brief.

You can praise the effectiveness of a 9mm over a .40 based on what it says on paper all you want. My opinion on the differences between the rounds comes from actual shooting experience with them, not what it says should happen on paper. I've shot a hell of a lot of rounds through both guns, and my observations lead me to say pick the .40 over the 9mm if you're looking for protection. If you disagree with me fine, that's your opinion, but don't assume someone doesn't know jack about guns because they happen to disagree with you.

I have not used glasers extensively from a handgun, either. Glaser's aren't something you use for everyday carry. It's the sort of round you think about for clearing a room in a sheetrock apartment complex. I have run enough .45 to be comfortable with its performance to 15 yards. Luckily, though, it wasn't on my tab. It's too expensive to ever want to use it as a regular practice round.

The .308 is another story. That stuff is perfect. Fires just like nato hardball. It is a better round if you need to worry about over-penetration. This round won't leave a "target" ;-)

Kurtz:
100% energy dump vs pass-through and energy lost out of the back-side of the target.

Energy dump does mean something. Basic physics tells us that an object that stops entirely is shedding more energy than an object that simply slows a bit and keeps going. Are you arguing that a round that passes through a target does more damage than a ballistically equivalent round that stops in the target?

--

FuriousM:
Reread my post. I did not praise the 9mm over the .40s&w. I said there was insufficient difference for the magic-bullet BS that is constantly spouted about .40s&w. Oddly enough, I happen to own guns in both calibers as well, a Glock 19, an H&K USP in .40, and a S&W Shorty Forty (that I'm trying unsuccessfully to sell). I will take the Glock 19's 15rds of tolerable 9mm over the USP's 10rds (can't be arsed to find LE mags for the minor increase in capacity) of marginally better .40 any day.

I will continue to say that someone doesn't know jack when they assert that two rounds perform radically differently when evidence shows otherwise. If you were arguing the relative merits of .357 magnum over 9mm, or .40 over .380acp, I'd be with you. There are substantive differences. Given the guns in which 9mm, and .40 are chambered, the applications to which they are intended, and the relative performance of each using similar quality load/bullet construction, there is simply not enough difference to justify the hype.

I forgot to add that I was not aware that the FBI tested the Glaser rounds. given their odd standards of necessary penetration and all that, I figured they would stay away from Glasers as a matter of course. I personally see Glasers as a scenario-specific load, useful in areas where pass-through must not occur (nuclear power plants for example).

Is that study posted anywhere? I'd be interested in seeing it and what conclusions it came to. I'd hate to think that I was parroting hype about the Glasers after giving someone hell for parroting hype about .40s&w. :D

Yes, I would argue that the bullet that keeps on going would do more damage, because It would make a bigger hole. The bigger hole would mean more damage. Basic Physics can tell you that the energy being "dumped" from a handgun round is very little, around that of being punched really hard. It is my personal belief that big wound channels are the most important factor in stopping a human target.

http://www.seark.net/~jlove/handgun_wounding.htm

All handgun calibers/cartridges are notoriously weak energy deliverers to the human body in comparison to rifle cartridges. A more important issue is your ability to deliver multiple hits to the center of mass of your opponent in a short period of time. Modern bullet/cartridge design has given us very good ammunition for all big bore calibers. Select the handgun that you make a mental connection with as far as believing in your ability to shoot it accurately and quickly. You will be far more accurate with that handgun than with one selected solely on bore size. But, and here is a big "but", bigger is better. It might be a good idea to pick a firearm "family" and start with a 9 mm for a year or so of shooting and instruction; move on to the same in .40 S&W for a while and then on to the .45 acp. Stop at any level you are comfortable and practice, practice, practice. Any gun is better than no gun.

"God created man, Sam Colt made them equals."

"Yes, I would argue that the bullet that keeps on going would do more damage, because It would make a bigger hole. The bigger hole would mean more damage. Basic Physics can tell you that the energy being "dumped" from a handgun round is very little, around that of being punched really hard. It is my personal belief that big wound channels are the most important factor in stopping a human target."

The important distinction is not how much energy is being dumped, it is that the bullet that dumps all of its' available energy is performing better than one that does not. Now if said round dumps too early and under-penetrates as a result, it underperforms. This is why you do not use light grain loads when hunting boar, for example.

I can see why you would choose to use the article to support your point, though there are some overall concerns that are not touched on. We are not discussing wildly different rounds here, nor are we discussing rounds with overmuch ability to penetrate. Neither the 9mm nor the .40 are punchers. nor is there a significant difference in bore size. Once is 0.36 and the 0.40, producing a difference of 0.04, biologically insignificant. The loads perform similarly as well, having only moderate differences in FPS and grain weights that are not incompatible.

9mm in 115gr has a Muzzle FPS of about 1225 and Energy at that point is 330 or so. 50yd loses about 9%. 9mm in 147gr has a Muzzle FPS of about 990 and energy of 320ft/lbs, with about a 6% fall-off at 50yds. 140gr .40S&W has a muzzle FPS of 1155 and 415ft/lbs, with a whopping 20% fall-off in energy at 50yds. 180gr .40S&W is doing 990fps at the muzzle with 390ft/lbs, and has a bit more than 10% fall-off at 50yds.

(Stats from Winchester and looking at Ball in each grain load when possible)

The point to that is that the rounds are very, very close in terminal performance. I defy anyone to show that a 0.04" increase in diameter is going to affect performance in a significant manner in the current application.

As to the study, the only mention I find of Glasers is an anecdotal bit from Fackler. Fackler is, in fact, footnoted quite a bit in this study. He has always been on the side of large bullets.

Some interesting lines from the article...

"Further, it appears that many people are predisposed to fall down when shot. This phenomenon is independent of caliber, bullet, or hit location, and is beyond the control of the shooter. It can only be proven in the act, not predicted. It requires only two factors to be effected: a shot and cognition of being shot by the target. Lacking either one, people are not at all predisposed to fall down and don't. Given this predisposition, the choice of caliber and bullet is essentially irrelevant."

"Physiologically, no caliber or bullet is certain to incapacitate any individual unless the brain is hit. "

Reading that study, I took away a few items that seemed to be the lessons of the piece.

1) Handguns suck. Use a rifle.
2) Caliber choice is less important than shot placement.
3) Load choice is less important than shot placement.
4) It's all about shot placement, still.
5) When in doubt, choose the bigger gun.

I don't disagree with any of these, but it does not invalidate any of the basic premises I've put forth. The fact that the average handgun round drops as much energy as a baseball argues more in favor of my point. When you have such little energy to impart, every little bit helps. The baseball, 1lb weight dropped from 1ft, and cup of coffe analogies are terribly flawed though. No personally carried non-explosive weapon puts out that much energy when it is measured in such a non-relevant fashion. Guns, knives, swords, etc are all tools designed to concentrate a limited amount of energy in both time and space, inflicting far greater effect than the energy would indiciates simply by making it all hit at once and in a small area.

As an aside, when I carry, it is not light grain loads.

Man it comes down to what you enjoy to shoot. Go to a good dealer he will let you test some calibers..go with what feels good.

Hey, If you check earlier in the thread, I said the exact same think about the 9 and 40 being exceedingly similar. I reread your post, and realized that I just wasn't getting what you were saying. My bad.

To get back to the original poster, I suggest you spend a day (or a week) at the range testing out as many different calibers as you see fit. Using a similar platform (like a Glock) between calibers will also help you.

More important than what caliber you use is what gun you use. Find a pistol that fits your hand properly and you feel comfortable shooting. For me that's a 1911 with Hogue wraparound soft grips. I'm still working on buying it, but the fit in my hand was absolutely amazing. That the 45ACP is a proven round with nearly a century of use is a secondary, but appreciable, addition.

The old saw is; "Why do you carry a .45 acp?" answer, "Because there isn't a .50 acp". Well, there is a .50 S&W now if that is what floats your boat. But, the point has been made several times in this thread that what ever caliber you choose, YOU must be able to shoot it accurately. What has not been emphasized is that because most handguns are weak energy deliverers as compared to rifle and shotguns, the way to make up for that is several followup shots to the center of mass. Those shots must be accurate and quick. Also, BGs come at you more than just one at a time. Controllability, quickness and accuracy of the subsequent shots to the initial shot are musts. Find the handgun that you KNOW that you can do just that and get the best ammo available for it. Don't get lost in the quibble about caliber vs. caliber.

I had to throw my two cents worth in and I would definately say the choice is dependant on your person needs and what works for you. Go to a gun store with an indoor range to try each of them out. I personally prefer a .45 over a 9mm. If you are just learning to shoot or do not like the recoil from a heavier weapon then go with a 10mm or a .40 (damn near the same thing). Sig makes a nice .40 that you can pick up a barrel to easily switch out to a .357 Sig round. I love that idea. Do some research and have fun testing everything they have to offer.

9mm, no doubt. Ammo's cheap (you should be able to find new commercial production for $100/K), there are tons of choices, higher capacity, less recoil, et cetera ad infinitum.

I never cared for the .40. If 9mm isn't enough gun for you, go with the .45. Either 9mm or .45, one or the other, IMHO. No others come close.

My brothers got a Glock 40 cal (I think it's a Glock 22). I enjoy shooting it, but for me, a 9mm does the trick.

From everything I have read over the years, carry the biggest gun that you are the most comfortable with and you can handle the best. Having a gun is better then having no gun. Is some calibers better then others? Yes, depending on the application. Is there a "best" caliber? Depends on who you ask...

Case in point. I carry a Springfild Mico (45 ACP in a 3" barrel) and I am a big guy with lots of years of shooting experience, I can handle this gun. A smaller guy/girl that has not shoot alot might want to think twice, because it is a good possibility is that they can not handle that gun.

So agian my point: carry the biggest gun that you are the most comfortable with and you can handle the best.

Have someone custom make you a 5.56mm hangun from a rifle like in Fallout so everyone will shut the hell up. :P

Both would be ok...

9MM? .40? My life depends on this?
Is .45 an option?

ok first, a rifle for home defense? seriously you have to be kidding me. and a handgun of any caliber is second best, at best. shotguns are the best home defense weapon.

having said that, i'd go for the .40 cal any day. the only major downsides are the recoil, the mag capacity, and the (supposed) price differences in ammo and the actual piece. i own a beretta model 96, and its never done me any wrong as far as any of those factors. i dont need 15 rounds to bring someone down if need be, and for the love of God, if you do need 15, think about another way to spend your money. as far as recoil, its a minor issue, IMO. price varies upon state, AND where you buy it. i live in the south so luckily, we have gun shows. i got 200 rounds of .40 S&W 165GR JHP for 20 bucks. anyone takes more than 2 of those and they deserve to break into my house.


but back to this rifle thing real quick, 4 AM, youre asleep. you hear something, you grab your trusty remington and head down the hallway with all 3 feet of it in front of you... turn around quickly, enter a room tactically, or shoot the perp from "the hip". have fun with that.

but anyway, go to Wal-Mart and buy a shotgun for 200 bucks, save yourself some money and you probably wont miss either. :cool:



oh BTW. total necropost, but i had to say it lol

Halloween was 3 days ago. No zombies allowed. :)

Braaaaiiinnnzzz... braiiiinnzz...

I'm a physician working in a field where I've seen many gunshot injuries over the past 3 years. In my experience there's a vast difference in what various handgun calibers deliver. The first thing that ever surprised me was how poorly a 9mm round is. Patients of mine hit by 9mm often have unfragmented rounds pass through or tunnel through muscle tissue. .45 or .40 tends to cause more dramatic bone and tissue damage and the rounds were more frequently effective in stopping their subject. More of my patients walked away after getting hit by 9mm (or .38) than if they were hit by .45 or .40.

I don't think 9mm is a "bad" round. Just about any firearm caliber is effective with proper shot placement and there's no substitute for training. If I need to rely in 9mm I'd load up on hydra-shoks or the equivalent. In fact that's what I carry in my HK P7M8. But if I had to trust my life to a handgun I'd rely more on my .40 Glock 23 or my .45 Commander than my 9mm handguns.

The 9mm is much cheaper to buy ammo for, and therefore cheaper to practice with- and shot placement trumps caliber any day- beyond that shoot both and pick what you like best..... for me it was the 9mm, as I fee that this will be adequate to support my 12 gauge and assorted .30 cal or larger rifles.....

You should do this regardless of what caliber you carry. From other gun forums (and not the paranoid ARFCOM jackasses) the consensus Ranger SXTs (the evil cop-killer black talons that are now sold under a different name and marked with the non-legally-binding phrase "Law Enforcement Only") chamber reliably, shoot reliably, and expand reliably even after penetrating denim or a heavy jacket.




Also, this

Shot placement is a double edged sword
 

Like many of you, I went round and round in my head about whether to go 9mm or .40 for my carry caliber. At the range, I always love seeing the larger holes the .40 makes... call me a simpleton. :)

The main argument I hear for choosing 9mm is...

"Shot placement is everything. The caliber doesn't matter, where you put it does."

Well, I think that argument does as much to defeat choosing 9mm as it may help it. Very, very few of us are going to get enough training and/or practice to be sure that our shot placement will be spot on. In fact, the statistic for *cops* is 20% accuracy or less. So since we know that placement is important but not something we can 100% count on, why not choose the largest caliber you can handle to cause mondo damage on the shots you *can* connect?

This is precisely why I chose the .40 cal round. Yes it's more expensive. My life is worth it. Besides, I can drop a 9mm conversion barrell in my G23, buy a couple 9mm mags, and start shooting all I want. I'll still carry .40 for daily carry. You can't go up to .40 from a G17/19.

Generally speaking, cops don't practice nearly as much as they should and so usually cant shoot for shit. It has been my experience that the vast majority of police only fire about 40 rounds a year for their idiot-proof annual qual.

-------

IMO, the 9 vs. 40 debate is a bit of an academic circle-jerk. There is no real difference between the two. Both rounds launch a big bullet really fast. In the real world, both rounds inflict about the same amount of damage. For what its worth, the nice big holes you're seeing at the range are a whopping 0.005" (five thousandths of an inch) larger in diameter than a 9mm. Shot placement aside, I would suggest that the biggest factor when it comes to winning a fight is using quality ammunition that expands like it should, not the caliber of your pistol.

Regardless, it sounds like you got yourself a nice gun. Enjoy.

Not another 9mm vs. .40 or .45 debate.
I'll cut to the chase - after years of seeing patients with gun shot wounds of different calibres I will say that I prefer .40 or .45 for personal defense. There is a dramatic difference between the nature of the wounds.

I suppose you can make the case with 9mm hydra-shok or other "safety ammo" (I haven't treated many of those wounds to my recollection) and, in truth, any calibre can kill. I just prefer to put my faith in a .45 - and that much more in .45 hydra-shoks.

Longbough, I am curious, do most wounds you see with 9mm result from hollowpoints or FMJ's? I always wondered if the bad guys/ganstas just grab anything off the shelf or if they know enough to get non-target ammunition.

and then
like a dummy
i actually read this thread
little did i realize
it were a yank thread
(problem?)

holy crap
U.S. Guns Arming Mexican Drug Gangs; Second Amendment to Blame?
Officials: More Than 90 Percent of Weapons Used by Mexico's Drug Gangs Come From the U.S.
U.S. Guns Arming Mexican Drug Gangs; Second Amendment to Blame? - ABC News

can you please stop exporting this paranoia?

How about
you actually
go
behind the statistics
and realize
that the 90% figure
actually
comes from the 90% of traceable guns.

Besides, your
maple syrup
and hockey
aren't
getting harmed
by
our love
for guns
is it?

umm
yes it is
its a fact that whatever happens down there
oozes beyond its borders

mexico being one
yet nay not your fault
so tell me dude
where do you think they come from
cant be the evil empire
supposedly you defeated them
(supposedly they were evil)
rest of the civilised world has controls on dissemination of assault weapons
yet you guys use them for hunting dear
sumthin bout god givin right
and now to peak your curiosity

"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

now realise this will not go well
if you dont have a basic understanding of written english
ya game?

ohh
and the traceable thingy
hello?
what do you think their basing it on?
youre arguing nothing
but thanx just the same

LMAO.

Wow, so you think Yugoslavia, Russia, Romania (which can't even control where their women go--Hello Human Trafficking!) have better controls on their weaponry than the United States?

Jesus dude. Go read a book. Then come back.

---------- Post added at 12:14 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:02 AM ----------

Oh hey. Citation!

Counting Mexico’s Guns | FactCheck.org

You're talkin about millions of fully auto AKs for the taking from S. America, like Colombia, Venezuela or other countries (and only POS single shots from the US). Which one do you think Cartels are buying from?

so where to start with this arrogance?
so superior eh?
this might be fun
"human trafficking in america"

"To report an instance of suspected trafficking, please call the HOTLINE: 1.888.3737.888

2007 U.S. Department of State Trafficking in Persons Report

Attorney General’s Annual Report to Congress on U.S. Government Activities to Combat Trafficking in Persons Fiscal Year 2006 (May 2007)

2006 US Department of State Human Rights Report (Released March 2007) - Includes reporting on human trafficking

Assessment of U.S. Government Efforts to Combat Trafficking in Persons September 2006 (Multi-Department Report)

Report on Activities to Combat Human Trafficking: Fiscal Years 2001 - 2005 (Department of Justice)

The United States of America is principally a transit and destination country for trafficking in persons. It is estimated that 14,500 to 17,500 people, primarily women and children, are trafficked to the U.S. annually. .....
not sure why you needed to change the subject

but what the hell
(oh glorious yank you)

back on track

to buy a gun in texas
- No Waiting Period
- No Registration or Transfer of Registration
- NFA OK
- FTF OK (Unless NFA)
- No Restricted Firearms or Magazine Capacities (NFA Rules Apply)

How to Buy a Gun in Texas - Handgun, Shotgun, or Rifle

Handguns
•Permit to purchase handgun? No.

•Registration of handguns? No.

•Licensing of owners of handguns? No.

No state license is required to possess a rifle, shotgun or handgun.

wish to hear the civilised worlds thoughts on the matter?
or will ya just go with
"we know best"

as you yanks are prone to do?

but back at that morsel i dangled

"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

now realise this will not go well
if you dont have a basic understanding of written english"

so
no takers?
cause ya know ya got it wrong?

good for you dude

Apparently a canuck has a better grasp of our constitution than the Supreme Court. :thumbsup:

And you totally ignored the evidence I showed you regarding the 90%.

And NFA is a pain in the ass to maneuver. Have you ever bought a gun in the US? A pistol? A Rifle? Filled out a 4473? Participated in a background check?

No?

Then shut the hell up and get back in your lane.

Clue: 4473 = De facto registration.

Oh and human Trafficking

I was talking about country of origin, not destination country. And this is regarding AKs and other 'OMG EVIL WEAPONS' that you love to talk about.

Tell me, how does the Yugoslavian, Romanian and Russian export controls regarding firearms work? Those three countries produce a lot of small arms.

And your crappy argument "anything that bleeds beyond the borders" meaning that violence in Mexico somehow affects Canada is hilarious. Nevermind the two countries are at opposite borders.

just saw this dude
(ya got to stop posting as im posting)
Oh hey. Citation!

Counting Mexico’s Guns | FactCheck.org

You're talkin about millions of fully auto AKs for the taking from S. America, like Colombia, Venezuela or other countries (and only POS single shots from the US). Which one do you think Cartels are buying from?


Quote:
Without A "Trace"
In a joint statement presented to the Senate Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on Crimes and Drugs, ATF Assistant Director for Field Operations William Hoover and Anthony Placido, assistant administrator of intelligence with the Drug Enforcement Administration, clarified that the 90 percent figure is true of guns that were submitted and could be traced:
Hoover and Placido, March 17, 2009: Firearms are routinely being transported from the U.S. into Mexico in violation of both U.S. and Mexican law. In fact, according to ATF’s National Tracing Center, 90 percent of the weapons that could be traced were determined to have originated from various sources within the U.S.
And Mexico recovers a lot more guns than it submits to the U.S. In December 2008, Mexican Attorney General Eduardo Medina Mora put the number of recovered crime weapons in the country over the past two years at nearly 29,000, according to USA Today. And figures given by ATF make clear that the agency doesn’t trace nearly all of those.
According to ATF, Mexico submitted 7,743 firearms for tracing in fiscal year 2008 (which ended Oct. 1) and 3,312 guns in fiscal 2007. That adds up to a fraction of the two-year total given by Mexico’s attorney general. He may be referring to a slightly different 24-month period, but that can’t account for more than a part of the discrepancy. The number is growing, and already this year, Mexico has submitted more than 7,500 guns for tracing, according to ATF. But even if all those guns are added in, the total submitted for tracing since the start of fiscal 2007 doesn’t come close to the 29,000 figure that Mexico says it has recovered.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last edited by KirStang; 12-11-2010 at 09:16 PM..

ya really think south america is going to give up weapons?
(like youre hoping iraq will?)
shake your head
single shots from america?
hah ha
silly bugger
and here i thought you were a gun nut
Full-Auto Conversion Plans For Converting Many Firearms to Full Auto

and the rest of it agreed with me
(ya got to find a better way of debating
this aint working for ya)

Actually, your last portion--that single shots are silly--demonstrates the extent of your ignorance. You do know that slam-fires, lack of reset, and negligent discharges are a real threat to toying with fire control mechs right? Not to mention, if you let off a full auto burst at a range, without paperwork, the ATF can pretty much arrest you on the spot.

Sir, your ignorance is astounding. Please enlighten yourself.

dude
you yanks are confused as to what it actually says
no surprise there
what with the lefties righties keeping you in the dark
again
care to tackle it?
ive asked numerous times

now as for the "evidence I showed you regarding the 90%"
you need to reread
cause it aint saying what you proclaim
(matter of fact it says quite the opposite)

case in point
"And your crappy argument "anything that bleeds beyond the borders" meaning that violence in Mexico somehow affects Canada is hilarious"
pretty sure that wasnt what i was saying
but go for it dude
you appear to think youre on a roll

how i love talking to "superior than thou"
unthinking yanks
a chuckle a minute

Ahem. Here it is. Bolded, italicized and underlined for your edification.

Re: 2nd Amendment.

Go read Heller v. District of Columbia (or some shit.)

speaking of ignorance
"You're talkin about millions of fully auto AKs for the taking from S. America, like Colombia, Venezuela or other countries (and only POS single shots from the US). Which one do you think Cartels are buying from?


bummer eh?
care to stick with the subjects?
anytime soon?
or will you continue ducking?
fabricating
to a lowly canuck?
your choice you great deluded american you
and now to let the cat out of the bag
(just cause)
this is what i learnt on
fabrique national 7.62 - Google Search
fabrique national 7.62

(care to use those googlinging fingers?)
or just continue to spew?
crap
(oh and the smg)
Submachine gun - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
pretty cool piece of equipment for the seventies
course that was before your time

Listen. You obviously don't know what you're talking about.

Here in the United States, automatic weapons are regulated by the NFA and are termed 'class III' weapons. There's a lengthy ATF approval process for them, and since new automatic weapons were no longer allowed in 1986, all automatic weapons in the U.S. cost about $15,000.

So, compare that with weapons obtained from anywhere else (55,000,000 AKs in circulation world wide).

And I trained on one of these.
http://www.fnmfg.com/train/m16/m16a2.gif

So quit with your roachboy like logic and typing.

---------- Post added at 02:02 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:01 AM ----------

And:

Your 90% citation is an often misused cite. That was my original point. I can care less if you were Canadian special forces.

oh i heard what you said
though i still doubt you understood what it actually means

"But even if all those guns are added in, the total submitted for tracing since the start of fiscal 2007 doesn’t come close to the 29,000 figure that Mexico says it has recovered.


meaning
theres more than what you thought you were responsible for
see youre looking at it hoping you aint responsible
its that damn english language
once again thats plaguing you
allow me to compress for you

the total submitted
(that havent been determined yet)
operative words here

doesnt come close to
the 29000

so anytime you wish to wake up
no probs there dude
we shant hold it against you
much

Re: 2nd Amendment.

Go read [I]Heller v. District of Columbia

ya mean this one?
Facts
Handgun possession is banned under District of Columbia (D) law. The law prohibits the registration of handguns and makes it a crime to carry an unregistered firearm. Furthermore all lawfully owned firearms must be kept unloaded and dissembled or bound by a trigger lock unless they are being used for lawful recreational activities or located in a place of business.

Dick Heller (P) is a special police officer in the District of Columbia. The District refused Heller’s application to register a handgun he wished to keep in his home. Heller filed this lawsuit in the Federal District Court for the District of Columbia on Second Amendment grounds. Heller sought an injunction against enforcement of the bar on handgun registration, the licensing requirement prohibiting the carrying of a firearm in the home without a license, and the trigger-lock requirement insofar as it prohibits the use of functional firearms within the home.

The District Court dismissed Heller’s complaint.

would you please stop arguing my side?

You having fun there? Completely misinterpreting what i'm writing with a straight face?

You conveniently exclude the term 'FOR TRACING'
Of course, your masterful grasp of the English Language has apparently gotten you very far in life.

Re Heller:

You're reading Heller II. (A District [LOW] Court opinion)

Check out Heller I

District of Columbia v. Heller - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And: What the Supreme Court of the United States said: The prefatory clause did not modify the operative clause--that is, the right to bear arms is the operative clause. (or something like that. Anyway, the interpretation was that the Right to Keep and Bear Arms trumped the 'Militia' part.)

Read the whole thing here: DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA v. HELLER

Anyway, I'm done. Your ignorance is astounding.

m16 piece of crap
spewing out 5.56
only cause they were lighter to carry
and god knows ya needed all the rounds you were physically capable of dragging

"So quit with your roachboy like logic "
oh hang on
i think ive just been complimented

perhaps you dont understand the outside world?
psst
and keep this a secret
we think you guys nuts
paranoid
and delusional
as to your actual worth

and this is what we go on
"only good injun is a dead injun"
yup
from way back when
problem being
'pears ya havent changed your ways
one iota

Thank you for reminding me that the Entire Outside World (tm) consists of Canada.

---------- Post added at 02:24 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:23 AM ----------

And isn't it ironic that a person who claims superiority in the understanding of the English language can't be bothered to actually punctuate and capitalize?

---------- Post added at 02:32 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:24 AM ----------

Oh and one more thing:

I wouldn't have so much problem with you if you weren't so cocksure in your ignorance.

ignorance only comes from those that wish to be ignorant
as in discuss no more
my minds made up
sticking the fingers
upon the middle ear
your choice dude
tho
""A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

in english
has not been sufficiently answered
(though i tried to entice)

oh sure
as whichever has the power down there
interprets
to their liking
those fabulous words
it appears its lost on the public
depending on which side of the fence they sit

now where this came from?
"conveniently exclude the term 'FOR TRACING' "

total submitted for tracing since the start of fiscal 2007 doesn’t come close to the 29,000 figure that Mexico says it has recovered.

oh well
but since i can read ahead

"Thank you for reminding me that the Entire Outside World (tm) consists of Canada.

---------- Post added at 02:24 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:23 AM ----------

And isn't it ironic that a person who claims superiority in the understanding of the English language can't be bothered to actually punctuate and capitalize?

---------- Post added at 02:32 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:24 AM ----------

Oh and one more thing:

I wouldn't have so much problem with you if you weren't so cocksure in your ignorance.

actually dude
i am cocksure in/of my ignorance
tis the reason for relating to brethren of humanity
to try to see their outlook on it all
oh and never claimed anything but
a wish to understand meanings

so does this mean youve sent me to my room?
should i throw a hissy fit now?
or has that been covered?

---------- Post added at 01:16 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:14 AM ----------

so fun the first time
felt i had to
the second

"submitted"
as in have done
yours just cant put a finger to it
(perhaps for a reason)
now they all come with serial numbers
could they be the ones you bought then resold?
how many aks in the us dude?
where did they come from?
during the oppression of veitnam
at anytime your boys numbered in the hundreds of thousands
(ie grease a gook?)

and bringing home a souvenir
or two
was commonplace

or where you thinking they were brand spankin new?

so heres a thought
just to make ya think

Mexican drug cartels' newest weapon: Cold War-era grenades made in U.S.
Washington Post ^ | 7/17/2010 | Nick Miroff and William Booth

Posted on July 17, 2010 3:45:37 PM by Qbert

MEXICO CITY -- Grenades made in the United States and sent to Central America during the Cold War have resurfaced as terrifying new weapons in almost weekly attacks by Mexican drug cartels.

Sent a generation ago to battle communist revolutionaries in the jungles of Central America, U.S. grenades are being diverted from dusty old armories and sold to criminal mafias, who are using them to destabilize the Mexican government and terrorize civilians, according to U.S. and Mexican law enforcement officials.

The redeployment of U.S.-made grenades by Mexican drug lords underscores the increasingly intertwined nature of the conflict, as President Felipe Calderón sends his soldiers out to confront gangs armed with a deadly combination of brand-new military-style assault rifles purchased in the United States and munitions left over from the Cold War.

Mexican drug cartels' newest weapon: Cold War-era grenades made in U.S.

or not
your choice

As long as you are somewhat staying within the formalities of please and thank you, may I kindly request that you please peruse the following: http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/tilted-...tml#post465806
It really is quite self-explanatory. Thank you so much!

The forum referenced as "Tilted Politics" as referred to in the above-mentioned link can be found here: http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/tilted-politics/

Perhaps
you might find
the self-serving response
which you have posted
to be more congenial
to your pursuits there
as opposed to in this section
where you may come across
...to some...
as being a troll
or flame-bait.
Not that you
would ever be a part
of said behavior. (my apologies:behaviour.)

Both my semi-auto pistols are .40
My semi-auto rifle is .40

Never saw the need for 9 if I could get a .40

Now, when I want to have fun I pull out the 44 magnum ;)

---

-+-{Important TFP Staff Message}-+- Please stick to the rules of Tilted Weapons. Failure to do so will result in negative actions.

Between the .40 and 9mm for general target practice, I prefer the 9mm. In my experience, minimal recoil, cheap to shoot, readily available. A 9mm loaded with personal defense type ammunition remains my standard for concealed carry/what I carry in my vehicle. It is compact, it is cheap enough to practice with, it is fun to shoot, and between two loaded magazines I have in the neighborhood of 30 rounds of ammunition at my disposal. Much more I would hopefully ever need, God forbid I ever were to be in a situation where I needed to use it.

I've got a love/hate relationship with the .40's. I've owned a handful, and maybe I just haven't found the one I like. Somehow I always have a lot of .40 ammunition on hand after getting rid of one, and instead of being smart and giving it away, I keep it on hand, knowing I will buy another one eventually. I like the idea of the stopping power and velocity. I don't really like the recoil. it is much "sharper/" violent than I personally care for. All of that being said, I've got a 9mm that I love to shoot, and it is one of those firearms that will forever be my concealed carry equipment. I also have a new to me .40 that I have yet to shoot, and it even smaller than my 9mm standby. The difference being double the magazine capacity on the 9mm, and as it turns out, my particular model is sort of difficult to find magazines for.

.45 acp all the way :D

WOW, quite a lot of comment...so here again is my .02.
9mm loaded with any of the self defense rounds is all you need, and it is a nice caliber to just go to the range and shoot.
40 cal is a bit much..but you should go to a range where you can rent both and see how you feel.
I will say this and probably get "flamed" for it, the chances that you are going to need to use a gun to protect yourself is very slim, then again better to have it than not.
Whatever you choose, if you intend to "carry" look into compact weapons...my everyday carry is a Sig Saur P238 which is a .38 short... and carries very easily..even in a pocket holster
I have been carrying for 40 years and have NEVER HAD TO UNHOLSTER MY WEAPON.
BUT, that said...I'm feeling more threatened every day....

I'm noticing more and more Floridians here every day.

I have a lot of .45s, primarily because one of my first purchases was a 1911. However, for every day shooting, the 9mm is much more plentiful and costs about 2/3rds .45ACP. I decided to go with 9mm primarily for logistics reasons. A properly loaded 9mm should suit my needs well enough. Besides, I did not like how snappy the .40 S&W 'felt' in my hands.

Dude, not to flame or anything, but I don't know about you, but I've been threatened (life threatened with gun or knife) about 5 or 6 times in my short (26 years old) life. So far I've only been carrying on one occassion and I wish I had my gun with me the other times. I guess its just statistics. Danger seems to follow me (I know that sounds cliche...but the amount of gang wars, fights, and bullshit I've been put into the middle of...)

edit: oh just to explain, since I'll probably be asked, the other 5 times I relied on reflex, speed, and awareness. I've been in two fights, nearly 2 others that would have been lethal but they backed off. The 2 fights I was in I was skilled enough not to be touched, and simply laughed at them until they walked away. And of course the other incident I had a gun and he didn't...guess who ran away..

Are you training to be a cage fighter?

Originally Posted by Zeraph
edit: oh just to explain, since I'll probably be asked, the other 5 times I relied on reflex, speed, and awareness. I've been in two fights, nearly 2 others that would have been lethal but they backed off. The 2 fights I was in I was skilled enough not to be touched, and simply laughed at them until they walked away. And of course the other incident I had a gun and he didn't...guess who ran away..


Read more: http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/tilted-...m-40-caliber-3
.html#ixzz18ZS2HBEv

Well, at approximately 3 times your age, and, I've been "carrying" for about 40 years,
I guess I'm just lucky never to have needed to use a gun or my fists.
Brooklyn and Fort lauderdale must be very safe

C'mon, kids... let's take the politics and ninja talk somewhere else. We all know that StrangeFamous would punk both of you bitches.

Back on topic: Modern 9mm loads are more than suitable for self defense. Also relevant, given the caliber debate: READ ME

Guy gets into "Oh shit!" CCW situation. Caliber doesn't matter as long as it's a 9/40/45. Capacity and ease of use seem to matter.

Can't tell if this is a joke or not, cause I think you already know. I've been into martial arts since I was a kid (like 10 years old). I enjoy it because its a path for me for personal enlightenmeant.

---------- Post added at 10:15 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:14 AM ----------

page not found

Prefer 9mm for several reasons, .40 is cool too.