# Lifestyles & Discussion > Personal Security & Defense >  Help me pick a gun to buy!

## bwlibertyman

This is my first gun purchase.  I've decided that I want to get a small hand gun.  I'm going to get a revolver.  I want it for protection/defense for those just in case situations.  Is there a big difference in brands besides price?  I went to the local gun shop.  I'm leaning towards getting a 38 spl. Is that a good decision? I asked if there was a big difference in the 38 and the 357 and the guy said yes.  I think he was talking about recoil.  I imagine using this gun when I'm getting mugged.  So is there a big difference when a guy is less than 5-10 feet away from you.  I also plan on shooting either knee caps or shoulders.  I saw an episode of NCIS where a guy was shot in the shoulder.  He said he did it because there are some arteries/veins there that are unrepairable. I think that'd be pretty nice for someone that tries to mug someone else.

So what are your suggestions?  He had some rugers and some tauruses.  I guess first off 38 or 357? I'm set on a revolver. I'm looking for something small. Then I guess brand. Does it matter? I assume the more expensive the gun the better quality. I'm want something dependable.  This is my first gun so I don't plan on breaking the bank. I'd go up to 750 at the max. What do you guys think?

----------


## oyarde

You can pick up a two barrel derringer in .410 for about $400 . They make 000 buck , the barells are rifled and you can shoot a deer slug out of it . Very small , can be carried in a pocket.

----------


## AFPVet

Can't go wrong with a good 'ole Glock .45. Also with regard to shot placement... shoot center mass or the hip. You want to shoot the biggest target because when your adrenaline is pumping, your only going to be able to hit the biggest parts—even at close range. Disregard what they say on television... it's television. 

I would highly encourage you to sign up for a firearms course which does stress fire training, safety/laws and self defense/retention techniques.

----------


## oyarde

Check with AF , he is familiar with the Taurus . Not sure what the price range is on those , but I suspect it should be way under your $750 ...

----------


## oyarde

Check with Pericles , there is a .45 manufactuer in Illinois ? I think these are cheaper than most , but it is an auto , not a revolver . If it is your first weapon , a revolver is not a bad choice .

----------


## Bern

My $.02:

Avoid .410.  If you are serious about protecting yourself, you should get a more serious payload.

If you are brand new to shooting guns, get yourself a .22LR pistol and a membership at your local gun range.  .22LR is cheap so you won't feel guilty about practicing.  It also has very little recoil, so you (hopefully) aren't going to learn bad habits out of the gate.  Practice shooting.  Get proficient with your .22LR.

Then you will be in a much better position to try out more powerful calibers and find something that you can be comfortable and proficient with.

That said, .357 revolvers can shoot .38spl ammo.  They are heavier guns, so less recoil.  Suggest you go to a range where you can rent some guns and try them out.

----------


## oyarde

I agree that anything in .22 would be good for someone to become accustomed to shooting . Low cost .

----------


## Pericles

If you are set on a revolver - .357 is a good choice. Can't tell you much more, because I'm not a revolver guy, but you need the right choice for you. I would suggest to try before you buy if you can, so you get some feel for the weapon. At less than 10 feet (a typical self defense anti mugger situation), it is really hard not to get a hit somewhere. Trying to shoot to wound is not realistic - shoot to negate the attack. If the attacker survives, he just had a lucky day.

----------


## Acala

.38 special is okay.  .357 is better.  But remember, the lighter the revolver, the heavier the felt recoil.  .357 in a small, light revolver is not pleasant to shoot.  And if you want to hit anything, you are going to need to shoot your gun at the range a lot.  If your gun hurts to shoot, you will not want to practice with it and that is bad.  You will be surprised how hard it is to hit anything with a handgun at first.  You will be much better off with a .38 special you have mastered than a .357 you have not.

Pericles is right about not trying to shoot to wound.  Handguns are inherently difficult to shoot accurately - short sight radius, unstable platform, subject to flinching and other shooter error.  Add the stress of a violent encounter and a target that is probably not going to just stand there while you take aim and you will be lucky to place a bullet ANYWHERE on your attacker.  Forget trying to hit him in the shoulder or knee.  Shoot center of mass.  And keep shooting center of mass until the threat stops.

With your price range you can get an excellent revolver.  I don't have a strong opinion one brand or model over another because I also am not really a revolver man.

----------


## Verrater

The first thing you should do is take a class in self defense with a firearm and/or a concealed carry weapons course. Do a little research to find the best most qualified individual in your area. When you are taking the class listen and don't be afraid to ask questions. Here is some ccw information for Indiana. http://www.usacarry.com/indiana_conc...formation.html

As others have said most .357 revolvers can shoot .38 spl. I am more inclined recommend something like a Glock 19 or a Sig for a first gun, but it is your choice in the end. As far as a carry gun I'd be more likely to recommend a Sig 239, a Kahr PM9, or a Glock 26. Try them all, or whatever you like, if at all possible. Most ranges allow you to rent firearms.

Double Action Only (DAO) revolvers are inherently hard to shoot accurately, so please remember to practice, practice with all firearms for that matter. I carry a Sig p238 as I can carry it comfortably every single day. Having a gun at home when you are being mugged on the street won't do you any good. Get something you know you won't mind having on your person all day long and get a good IWB or pocket holster.




> I also plan on shooting either knee caps or shoulders. I saw an episode of NCIS where a guy was shot in the shoulder. He said he did it because there are some arteries/veins there that are unrepairable. I think that'd be pretty nice for someone that tries to mug someone else.


I say this for your benefit, you should only pull your gun when you are in fear for your life and only fire it if you plan to kill your attacker. Don't carry a gun if you are not at least somewhat prepared to take someone else's life. I don't say this to sound like a jerk. Just to let you know, you can endanger others if you do not plan to act to the fullest extent and in turn can cause yourself a lot of grief.

If you find yourself in a situation where you think you can deter someone without lethal force (firearm), buy a can of pepper spray. Vexor is about the best i know of, though you'll probably need an LE friend to help you acquire it as us "mundanes" aren't special enough to purchase it. Fox Labs is also good stuff. Don't knock pepper spray either, it is great stuff. Having been hit with it myself, i doubt anything i was doing that was threatening I'd be able to continue with any effectiveness.


Never, "shoot to wound", that is a sure fire ticket to going to prison, and a costly civil suit. 
For reference most agree that the thoracic triangle or the triangle with the "8s" is the best place to try to put your shots.

----------


## bwlibertyman

A lot of good information. Thank you.

----------


## AFPVet

> For reference most agree that the thoracic triangle or the triangle with the "8s" is the best place to try to put your shots.


This is center mass on the target. Ideally, center mass is the best to hit; however, when deadly force is exercised, anything is game—sometimes, the hip region is the best—since it is the body's transmission—this could be a better area to hit if someone was closing the distance with a knife. The bottom line is that we do not shoot to wound... we shoot to stop! The goal is stopping the threat from causing grave injury to yourself or others.

----------


## Napoleon's Shadow

When in doubt, go with all American hero Burt Gummer!

----------


## Mahkato

Taser?

----------


## pcosmar

LOL

Seriously, some good advice given already.
Any name brand revolver will be as dependable as another. Try several and find one that fits your hand. Then get a LOT of practice until you are proficient with it.

----------


## cjm

> Don't carry a gun if you are not at least somewhat prepared to take someone else's life. I don't say this to sound like a jerk. Just to let you know, you can endanger others if you do not plan to act to the fullest extent and in turn can cause yourself a lot of grief.


+rep.  I applaud anyone who explores the idea of arming himself and potentially carrying on a daily basis, but this is serious business, please treat is as such.

----------


## AFPVet

This is why I suggested a good training program. No one just jumps into a car when they turn 16... why should they buy and carry a firearm if they haven't received training?

----------


## XTreat

Center mass is where you aim. Wounding shots are more likely to miss and less likely to produce the preferred result which is neutralizing the threat.

----------


## Tarzan

I cannot second this enough! Verrater is dead on (pun intended).




> The first thing you should do is take a class in self defense with a firearm and/or a concealed carry weapons course. Do a little research to find the best most qualified individual in your area. When you are taking the class listen and don't be afraid to ask questions.
> 
> I say this for your benefit, you should only pull your gun when you are in fear for your life and only fire it if you plan to kill your attacker. Don't carry a gun if you are not at least somewhat prepared to take someone else's life. I don't say this to sound like a jerk. Just to let you know, you can endanger others if you do not plan to act to the fullest extent and in turn can cause yourself a lot of grief.


Don't even bother to own a gun for personal defense unless you are willing to use deadly force. Your firing pattern should be "bang, bang... pause, bang". Beyond that, several folks have made some very good suggestions. You really should try out a number of weapons to see what works for you. It needs to be of the proper size to suit your 'transportation' needs. You also need to consider the size of the weapon regarding your personal ergonomics... don't get one with grips that are too short... and for heavens sake, don't hold it sideways when shooting.

My personal favorite for a revolver is the Smith & Wesson 357 Mag model 686 (I like the combat grips). It is a little pricey at the upper range. I would recommend considering an automatic as well. For power I would suggest an auto using 357 Sig ammunition. Glock has a model 32 and is nicely priced and is well sized. Glock also has a model 33 but I find it too small... though this fit your needs.

Personally, I am not much of a Glock fan and, like Verrater, use the Sig 229 (mine is the 357 Sig) though it is outside the price range you mentioned.

----------


## XTreat

Nobody has really discussed double vs. single action. I am a 1911 guy and I prefer a compact .45. The main thing I like is you can carry it with the hammer cocked but it has a mechanical safety as opposed to the long trigger travel and tigger safety on glocks and other weapons like them. However once that safety is clicked off it only takes a slight breeze to drop the hammer.

The truth is you should fire a variety of handguns before choosing what you want to go with.

----------


## osan

> This is my first gun purchase.  I've decided that I want to get a small hand gun.  I'm going to get a revolver.  I want it for protection/defense for those just in case situations.  Is there a big difference in brands besides price?  I went to the local gun shop.  I'm leaning towards getting a 38 spl. Is that a good decision? I asked if there was a big difference in the 38 and the 357 and the guy said yes.  I think he was talking about recoil.  I imagine using this gun when I'm getting mugged.  So is there a big difference when a guy is less than 5-10 feet away from you.  I also plan on shooting either knee caps or shoulders.  I saw an episode of NCIS where a guy was shot in the shoulder.  He said he did it because there are some arteries/veins there that are unrepairable. I think that'd be pretty nice for someone that tries to mug someone else.


A few things.  First, you may be "planning" on shooting knees and shoulders, but when the ability to take your next breath is in immediate and serious question you will not be planning anything.  You will be reacting.  If you do not have training to react properly, you may be gravely injured or killed.  You must, therefore, dispense with these naive notions of planning.  That said, the reasonable tactic is to shoot center of mass as this is the largest area into which to place bullets.

Another point regarding shooting another human being whose apparent intentions toward you include grave bodily injury at the least: you never shoot to wound  You shoot to remove your assailant's ability to continue the prosecution of his attack.  This often involves shot placement that results in death for the attacker.  Shooting someone in self defense will do you no good if, after having shot him, he gets really pissed with you for having killed him and returns the favor with his last breaths, aided by a whole lot of adrenalin and utterly focused, single-minded determination.

Next, and always do as you please of course, I might nevertheless recommend you not take your information on such issues from the idiot box.




> So what are your suggestions?  He had some rugers and some tauruses.  I guess first off 38 or 357? I'm set on a revolver. I'm looking for something small. Then I guess brand. Does it matter? I assume the more expensive the gun the better quality. I'm want something dependable.  This is my first gun so I don't plan on breaking the bank. I'd go up to 750 at the max. What do you guys think?


I am not sure about the Rugers - I have never shot one - but they seem a little pricey for what they are, just my perception.  Taurus has reputation problems regarding the quality of the steels they use in their pistols.  This has been confirmed to me by several gunsmiths in whose opinions I trust on such questions.

For my money, Smith & Wesson is the better choice where wheel guns are concerned.  They make several small frame revolvers from which to choose.  IMO, one ought not go with anything less than the very best that can be afforded when one's life may depend on the quality of the instrument.  I also greatly prefer .357 magnum to .38 special.  It is a lot more powerful, and this goes back to the point about the virtues of actually stopping an attack without equivocation.

----------


## Anti Federalist

> This is my first gun purchase.  I've decided that I want to get a small hand gun.  I'm going to get a revolver.  I want it for protection/defense for those just in case situations.  Is there a big difference in brands besides price?  I went to the local gun shop.  I'm leaning towards getting a 38 spl. Is that a good decision? I asked if there was a big difference in the 38 and the 357 and the guy said yes.  I think he was talking about recoil.  I imagine using this gun when I'm getting mugged.  So is there a big difference when a guy is less than 5-10 feet away from you.  *I also plan on shooting either knee caps or shoulders.  I saw an episode of NCIS where a guy was shot in the shoulder.  He said he did it because there are some arteries/veins there that are unrepairable. I think that'd be pretty nice for someone that tries to mug someone else*.


Get the bolded out of your head right away, for the reasons already mentioned.





> So what are your suggestions?  He had some rugers and some tauruses.  I guess first off 38 or 357? I'm set on a revolver. I'm looking for something small. Then I guess brand. Does it matter? I assume the more expensive the gun the better quality. I'm want something dependable.  This is my first gun so I don't plan on breaking the bank. I'd go up to 750 at the max. What do you guys think?


A 4 inch barrel Taurus or SW .357 revolver will do just fine. I own both and they are "bulletproof".

You should be able to get in under that $750 as well.

----------


## dejavu22

Seeing as it is your first gun it is probably better to go with something run of the mill to cut down on ammo cost when you take it out to get used to shooting it regularly.  IMO you cant go wrong with a Glock.  I have actually been thinking about getting a new toy myself and was considering an SW-500 mag but money is a little tight for toys like that.

As for the other issue... i own several but do not carry regularly.  I know how, and if i feel its necessary i can, for now i do not.

----------


## bwlibertyman

I'd like to add that I would rather disarm and assailant than to kill one but I understand those choices aren't always clear.

----------


## osan

> I'd like to add that I would rather disarm and assailant than to kill one but I understand those choices aren't always clear.


Your mindset is dangerously out of tune here.  Practically speaking, you should want no such thing.

In the martial arts there is the concept of "mai ai", or "combat interval".  In any fight you always want to operate at the largest interval (space) between you and your opponent.  Disarming an assailant necessitates closing the interval to well within arm's reach.  Anyone willfully allowing this to occur is not operating in a sound manner.  Armies use guns and other similar weaponry because they allow for action at distance.

I will respectfully recommend you dispense with such notions as disarming potentially dangerous opponents.  Disarming them after having completely incapacitated them may be OK, but anything prior is rankly crazy.  All else equal, the best thing to do after plugging an attacker is to hoof it the hell out of the area immediately, if not sooner.  You cannot always be certain of the effectiveness of your counter and a cardinal rule of martial combat is to never give an enemy the opportunity to hit you again.  You may also not know whether he has friends in the area.  Shoot him, see him drop, and evacuate instantly.  Worry about police and the law after securing your safety.

----------


## psi2941

BRO I LEARNED THE HARD WAY! GET A .22LR AS UR FIRST GUN. OR GET A SIG P229 AND GET THE CONVERSION KIT. so you can change your gun to .22lr to (what ever cal you choose 9mm, .40sw, and .357).
my first gun was a .40 SW springfield XDm, great gun but its just collecting dust because it cost an arm and a leg to take it too the range. Long story short, then i bought these guns in order, PX4 Storm, AK-47, AR-15, Mossberg 500 (Shotgun), Sig 522. that last gun, is a .22LR and i shot more bullets on that gun then all other guns combined. 
A .22LR bullets may cost 20-30 dollars per 500 bullets
.40 SW bullets cost 16-25 dollars per 50 bullets
.223 (rifle round) cost around 8-12 dollars per 20 bullets

----------


## Acala

> I'd like to add that I would rather disarm and assailant than to kill one but I understand those choices aren't always clear.


Nobody in their right mind wants to kill another person.  So here is what you do to avoid it: 

1. avoid as much as possible any situation that seems to increase the probability that you will have an altercation. 

2. learn to be mindful of what is going on around you.  What is happening down the street?  What is that noise?  Why is the door that I locked now open?  Etc.

3. Master your own emotional responses so anger does not lead you into danger

4. Put the value of your property into perspective - are you ready to kill to stop a thief from taking your crummy car?

5. Secure your perimeter in a way that lets potential assailants know they will not be catching you off guard.

6. Get comfortable with the idea of running away.

If all the above fails, and you are attacked and have no way to escape, use whatever force is available to you to STOP the attack without any concern for the consequences to your attacker.  You have done everything you could to avoid it.  The consequences to the attacker are HIS fault, not yours.  When the attack is on, your restraints are off.

----------


## bwlibertyman

I assumed that to stop an attacker you didn't need to kill him but I guess to be 100% sure it's the only way.

Next question.  How important is it to register the gun? How likely is it that the government would round up all registered gun owners and take their guns or throw them in jail or torture them until they give up all other likely gun owners that haven't registered?  Is this a big deal or not?

----------


## AFPVet

> I assumed that to stop an attacker you didn't need to kill him but I guess to be 100% sure it's the only way.
> 
> Next question.  How important is it to register the gun? How likely is it that the government would round up all registered gun owners and take their guns or throw them in jail or torture them until they give up all other likely gun owners that haven't registered?  Is this a big deal or not?


You're in my state man... we don't register firearms lol.

----------


## bwlibertyman

I'm a n00b. I assumed when you bought a gun at a gun shop that you had to register it.  Stated differently I assume when they do the background check they keep records notify someone that so and so has just bought a gun from me.

Now I do know that you don't have to have a registered gun to get the concealed carry permit. So is that accurate?

----------


## oyarde

> You're in my state man... we don't register firearms lol.


You do not need to Hoosier !

----------


## oyarde

> I'm a n00b. I assumed when you bought a gun at a gun shop that you had to register it.  Stated differently I assume when they do the background check they keep records notify someone that so and so has just bought a gun from me.
> 
> Now I do know that you don't have to have a registered gun to get the concealed carry permit. So is that accurate?


No , you just apply for the permit . THat BS is just about getting the money from you .

----------


## AFPVet

> I'm a n00b. I assumed when you bought a gun at a gun shop that you had to register it.  Stated differently I assume when they do the background check they keep records notify someone that so and so has just bought a gun from me.
> 
> Now I do know that you don't have to have a registered gun to get the concealed carry permit. So is that accurate?


In Indiana, private sales are cool. Also, we do not have concealed licenses, we have "License to Carry Handgun". You can carry open or concealed with a LTCH. If your not a felon or anything, you can walk out the door with one. For the permit, just go to a police station or sheriff's department and it takes just a few minutes. 

The weird thing was that even though I was a law enforcement officer, I still needed a gun permit lol... department policy.

----------


## oyarde

You only need the permit for handguns . It is expensive .

----------


## AFPVet

> You only need the permit for handguns . It is expensive .


I got the lifetime... freaking $100.

----------


## oyarde

> I got the lifetime... freaking $100.


I know , and if you exclude property taxes and gasoline a hundred dollars still buys quite a bit . That is alot of groceries.

----------


## oyarde

BWLibertyman , I am not a revolver guy , I only own one and do not use it. It is a pre ww1 .32 and I do not even have any ammo for it . Belonged to my Great Uncle . Anytime after 4th of July weekend , I will be at home in Southern Indiana , if your interested , some Sunday afternoon I will get out my Belgian Browning 12 guage and teach you how to shoot some clay pidgeons in the back yard . When I was in high school I had a nine shot .22 revolver and a .38 revolver , If I had kept them , would have been perfect for you to give it a try .

----------


## Acala

> I assumed that to stop an attacker you didn't need to kill him but I guess to be 100% sure it's the only way.


You DON'T shoot to KILL!!!!!  You shoot to STOP the ATTACK!  That means you aim at center of mass (because that is what you are most likely to hit and you must hit to stop) and you shoot until the person stops attacking.  then you stop shooting.  At that point you have achieved your goal of stopping the attack.  Whether the attacker lives or dies is between him, the EMTs, and God.

----------


## rp4prez

This is on my list of things I need to do.  First go to the range and try out several different guns.  Buy one then take the training class with it.  I'm really interested in have a few guns for the SHTF like Katrina scenarios.  As a result I'll need a safe place to store the gun and the ammo.  Question is do I buy a safe or what?  How to store the gun(s) after you buy them is my question.

----------


## AFPVet

> This is on my list of things I need to do.  First go to the range and try out several different guns.  Buy one then take the training class with it.  I'm really interested in have a few guns for the SHTF like Katrina scenarios.  As a result I'll need a safe place to store the gun and the ammo.  Question is do I buy a safe or what?  How to store the gun(s) after you buy them is my question.


Get a safe for all of the stuff you don't care about. Thieves go for vaults first. Store them in good cases... sometimes hiding them in plain sight is best. Making the weapons look like they are something they are not is a good idea. Not to get too specific, but storing the weapon case inside of a guitar case or something may give you an idea

----------


## brandon

> I assumed that to stop an attacker you didn't need to kill him but I guess to be 100% sure it's the only way.



You don't shoot to kill. As has already been said several times in this thread, you shoot to stop the attack. If the attacker is a deranged sociopath high on PCP, then you will probably need to continue firing until he is dead. On the other hand, if your attacker is a more civil fellow, one shot may be enough to stop him.

----------


## Pericles

> I assumed that to stop an attacker you didn't need to kill him but I guess to be 100% sure it's the only way.


The decision is not entirely yours, as you did not initiate the threat to life. We no longer live in the type of society in which upon being accosted, you might reply-

I'm terribly sorry, but as we have not been properly introduced, so I can no longer speak to your request for my money, or to do as you will with my life, or my daughter. Furthermore, I feel it necessary to inform you, that should you persist in this rather unreasonable behaviour, I shall be forced to notify the proper authorities.

Introducing a firearm into the interaction means that the situation has escalated to the point that you have concluded that the life of you and / or your family is at risk. At that point, it is no longer the time to be nice.

----------


## GunnyFreedom

re: "shooting to wound"

question:  if someone is running towards you from 15 feet away, at full tilt with the intent to do you harm, how long will it take him to clear that distance?

(about 2 seconds)

question:  if someone is 15 feet away with a firearm and an intent to do you harm, they will NOT be shooting to wound, how long will it take for them to point and shoot vs your trying to aim for the shoulder or the knee you are looking for?

(they will be on target at minimum a full second before you are)

So yeah, clear that notion from your head right away and don't bring it back again.  If you are ever, somehow by some miracle, in a situation where shooting to wound somehow IS a viable option, then you will be well beyond the "planning ahead" stage anyway, and your reaction will not be instinctive, but semi-rational.  If you try to plan to wound, then you will be dead.  That is not a guess.  If events are somehow moving slowly enough, and the unique situation is strange enough to actually allow a wounding shot, not only would your case be highly unusual, but you would necessarily have had plenty of time to reason it out _after_ the commitment to violence has already been made, and the effect of adrenaline has been ongoing long enough to compensate.

Point is, while it does happen in real life, it is so rare as to be akin to hitting the lottery.  You don't plan ahead to hit the lottery.

----------


## AFPVet

> You don't shoot to kill. As has already been said several times in this thread, you shoot to stop the attack. If the attacker is a deranged sociopath high on PCP, then you will probably need to continue firing until he is dead. On the other hand, if your attacker is a more civil fellow, one shot may be enough to stop him.


If the subject does not cease action after COM hits, it's time for a CNS hit.

----------


## oyarde

> re: "shooting to wound"
> 
> question:  if someone is running towards you from 15 feet away, at full tilt with the intent to do you harm, how long will it take him to clear that distance?
> 
> (about 2 seconds)
> 
> question:  if someone is 15 feet away with a firearm and an intent to do you harm, they will NOT be shooting to wound, how long will it take for them to point and shoot vs your trying to aim for the shoulder or the knee you are looking for?
> 
> (they will be on target at minimum a full second before you are)
> ...


Yes , and that would be one "very fast" two seconds...

----------


## bwlibertyman

I think you guys are getting hung up on something that is a bit removed from the topic.  If someone attacks you should you do anything in your power to disarm or stop him? Yes.  I was commenting that if I had the choice to kill or to disarm the assailant that I would choose the latter.  Does this mean that I will point the gun at his feet and most likely miss? I would assume no.

I understand that if this confrontation ever happens that a lethal shot is not only very likely but probably needed depending on the situation of course.

Do any of you disagree that you would rather kill your attacker when there "is" a chance to merely disarm him?  I know this might not be the only choice but with the assumption that that choice is there I think that is what I would do.

Now is this all hypothetical "I don't want to kill people if I don't have to"? Probably.

Again, I was merely pointing out that if the option was there I would take it.  I am very aware that that option might not be there.

I think this might clear some things up.  I think.

----------


## osan

> I think you guys are getting hung up on something that is a bit removed from the topic. If someone attacks you should you do anything in your power to disarm or stop him? Yes. I was commenting that if I had the choice to kill or to disarm the assailant that I would choose the latter. Does this mean that I will point the gun at his feet and most likely miss? I would assume no.
> 
> I understand that if this confrontation ever happens that a lethal shot is not only very likely but probably needed depending on the situation of course.
> 
> Do any of you disagree that you would rather kill your attacker when there "is" a chance to merely disarm him? I know this might not be the only choice but with the assumption that that choice is there I think that is what I would do.
> 
> Now is this all hypothetical "I don't want to kill people if I don't have to"? Probably.
> 
> Again, I was merely pointing out that if the option was there I would take it. I am very aware that that option might not be there.
> ...


Points well taken, but be aware that we )or at least I) don't know enough about you, your experiences, etc. to know how to take what you wrote.  Since we are mostly looking after one anothers' backs, we respond by pointing out possibly dangerous flaws in one's expressed thoughts.  We would greatly prefer the good guys not go and get themselves ghosted or worse.  It is a crazy world.

----------


## Acala

> I think you guys are getting hung up on something that is a bit removed from the topic.  If someone attacks you should you do anything in your power to disarm or stop him? Yes.  I was commenting that if I had the choice to kill or to disarm the assailant that I would choose the latter.  Does this mean that I will point the gun at his feet and most likely miss? I would assume no.
> 
> I understand that if this confrontation ever happens that a lethal shot is not only very likely but probably needed depending on the situation of course.
> 
> Do any of you disagree that you would rather kill your attacker when there "is" a chance to merely disarm him?  I know this might not be the only choice but with the assumption that that choice is there I think that is what I would do.
> 
> Now is this all hypothetical "I don't want to kill people if I don't have to"? Probably.
> 
> Again, I was merely pointing out that if the option was there I would take it.  I am very aware that that option might not be there.
> ...


I think that when you mentioned targeting specific body parts in an attempt to shoot less lethally, you triggered some deep concern.  You cannot plan to shoot an attacker non-lethally.  Period.  It is a tactically unsound and dangerous idea.  You MUST plan, and practice to shoot to stop the attack.  And that means center of mass or head (in the case of body armor).  Not the shoulder.  Not the hand.  Not the knee.  You will be lucky to hit your attacker AT ALL even when aiming at the center of mass.  If you have not done any shooting with a handgun, you are in for an awakening as to just how hard it is to hit anything.  And when you start to think you are getting good, try a moving target.  It is common for cops to shoot dozens of rounds at a suspect and miss him entirely.  And I can assure you they are not shooting to wound.

Will you kill your attacker by shooting center of mass or head?  Maybe.  A surprising percentage of people survive gunshot wounds.  

Now you seem to be asking the hypothetical question if we would disarm an attacker rather than shoot him if given a chance.  Of course the answer is yes.  But the probability that you will be given that choice is so small as to be insignificant.  And this arose in the context of a very practical question about buying a gun.  So you got very practical advice.  Shoot to stop the attack.  And that means shoot in a way that you are likely to hit your attacker and hit in a way that stops him from attacking you.  Center of mass and if that doesn't work or there is body armor involved, head.  He isn't going to like it.  He might die as a result.  That is his problem.  If you shoot and miss, it is YOUR problem.      

Sorry to be hitting you over the head with this, but it is really important.

----------


## bwlibertyman

I want to say thank you again for the advice. I agree with what you guys are saying and I understand it more now.

----------


## PaulineDisciple

Lots of good advice in this thread and I think although the comments may have turned off topic, I think that they are right on topic of having the proper mindset for the purpose of your firearm purchase. Some of the comments may have sounded condescending but I didn’t take them that way and I don’t think they were intended to be condescending.

Ok, now back to the purchase itself. Forgive me if I read through this thread too quickly and I missed it but I didn’t see any mention of buying a hammerless revolver. If concealment is a factor, hammerless may be the way to go. Depending on your method of concealment, a hammerless revolver will more than likely reduce the time it takes to remove it from a concealed position. I am currently in a similar situation as you wanting to buy a handgun for self defense purposes but I already have a 357 revolver, it is just too big and heavy to try to conceal and the hammer acts as a snagging point so if you are dead set on a revolver, I would get one in a snubbed 357 that is hammerless or you could “bob” the hammer, which means cut off the thumb lever and round it off, either way, I think this is what you want.

Here is a good choice for a hammerless;
http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/w...layErrorView_Y
http://www.snubnose.info/docs/m640.htm

and here is a good choice for a small standard revolver;
http://www.ruger.com/products/sp101/

and I have always liked the Walther PPK’s for a good concealed firearm but its not a revolver;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Walther_PPK_1848.jpg

----------


## Acala

> Lots of good advice in this thread and I think although the comments may have turned off topic, I think that they are right on topic of having the proper mindset for the purpose of your firearm purchase. Some of the comments may have sounded condescending but I didn’t take them that way and I don’t think they were intended to be condescending.
> 
> Ok, now back to the purchase itself. Forgive me if I read through this thread too quickly and I missed it but I didn’t see any mention of buying a hammerless revolver. If concealment is a factor, hammerless may be the way to go. Depending on your method of concealment, a hammerless revolver will more than likely reduce the time it takes to remove it from a concealed position. I am currently in a similar situation as you wanting to buy a handgun for self defense purposes but I already have a 357 revolver, it is just too big and heavy to try to conceal and the hammer acts as a snagging point so if you are dead set on a revolver, I would get one in a snubbed 357 that is hammerless or you could “bob” the hammer, which means cut off the thumb lever and round it off, either way, I think this is what you want.
> 
> Here is a good choice for a hammerless;
> http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/w...layErrorView_Y
> http://www.snubnose.info/docs/m640.htm
> 
> and here is a good choice for a small standard revolver;
> ...


Yes.  The downside is that you are stuck shooting double action only.  But that is probably not a big deal as you should be practicing defensive revolver shooting double action anyway.

The shrouded hammer revolver has even one more advantage than the hammerless - it can be fired repeatedly while the revolver is inside a purse or coat pocket without having anything block the hammer.  This might be a very useful option especially for a woman.  It would, for example, allow her to walk to her car with one hand on the gun but still in her purse and, if need be, fire right through the side of the purse.  It is such a great tactic, I might start carrying a purse just so I can use it!

Oh, here's another option to consider - laser aiming device.  I put crimson trace grips on my 1911 and they are really nifty!  Not so great in bright light conditions, but in a home defense situation I think they are awesome.

----------


## PaulineDisciple

Speaking of man purses,

don’t use a purse like this;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TXwRLaEM0Gs

and this one is too big;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pUJ36nFdOyg

Here’s one that’s just right;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QzRqk...embedded#at=19

----------


## newyearsrevolution08

357/38 special revolver by s&w
then
12 gauge mossberg 500
then either
.308 or .556/223 battle rifle

then get all the ammo you can and you will be set

----------


## AFPVet

> 357/38 special revolver by s&w
> then
> 12 gauge mossberg 500
> then either
> .308 or .556/223 battle rifle
> 
> then get all the ammo you can and you will be set


...don't like 870's? Mossberg's good too, but there's nothing wrong with a Remington 870  Revolvers are ok... the only problem is that they are a bit different than shooting an auto. If you don't cock the hammer each time, your rounds are going to be slightly off POI due to the rotating cylinder. Battle rifles are a good thing to have... I agree. I would suggest either .308, 7.62X39 Russian, or .223/5.56 NATO chamberings.

----------


## Verrater

> I think you guys are getting hung up on something that is a bit removed from the topic.  If someone attacks you, should you do anything in your power to disarm or stop him? Yes.  I was commenting that if I had the choice to kill or to disarm the assailant that I would choose the latter.  Does this mean that I will point the gun at his feet and most likely miss? I would assume no.



I'm confused as to your statement, if you would clarify I would appreciate it.

If you had the choice to let him put down his knife, club, bat, etc. I personally would find that great, anytime you can prevent a death is great, but take your personal safety into consideration before the attacker. However, if you try to disarm someone wielding a gun, while you are carrying a gun, you are endangering not only yourself, but others. But that, is of course, just my opinion.

----------


## bwlibertyman

I'm talking about 2 scenarios.

1 where there is the option to disarm and not kill.

The other where a body shot to a bodily organ is necessary.

If the first option presents itself I would rather disarm than automatically kill.

If the second option presents itself then obviously there's no other choice.

----------


## newyearsrevolution08

The only time I would use force in a situation like that is when it is called for it and I don't really have time to rationalize whether I need to pull the trigger or not. If its you are me, I am going to do whatever I can to make sure I am still standing to defend myself, my family and my home.

Revolvers are great weapons because even if YOU  can't load it or if you were hurt, loading and shooting a revolver is FAR EASIER than anyone trying to learn how to eject a clip, load and relock that puppy.

Revolvers and shotguns are the self defenses best friends. Simple, one load at a time if needed, jamming is next to non existent in both applications as well. I like the rem 870's but have always loved the action of the moss 500's

----------


## oyarde

> My $.02:
> 
> Avoid .410.  If you are serious about protecting yourself, you should get a more serious payload.
> 
> If you are brand new to shooting guns, get yourself a .22LR pistol and a membership at your local gun range.  .22LR is cheap so you won't feel guilty about practicing.  It also has very little recoil, so you (hopefully) aren't going to learn bad habits out of the gate.  Practice shooting.  Get proficient with your .22LR.
> 
> Then you will be in a much better position to try out more powerful calibers and find something that you can be comfortable and proficient with.
> 
> That said, .357 revolvers can shoot .38spl ammo.  They are heavier guns, so less recoil.  Suggest you go to a range where you can rent some guns and try them out.


I picked up some nifty .410 rounds yesterday loaded with discs and buck , pretty pricey at $12 for ten .

----------


## nolies1776

Ruger SP101 w/ 3" barrel...

----------


## chudrockz

http://s649.photobucket.com/albums/u...F.jpg&newest=1

----------


## Kalashnikov Josh

To each his own,I preffer either the Browning Hi-Power or any of the worthy clones ( http://world.guns.ru/handguns/hg/be/...ning-hp-e.html ) or something Sig Sauer.CZ is good too.

9x19 Parabellum,of course.

I'm an advocate of high capacity.You can fit more 9mm in a given mag size than any of the other popular fighting calibers.

To address the revolver side of the coin-revolvers are just on the right side of being obsolete in the realm of interpersonal combat and self defense.Besides hunting,nostalgia,and folks who like to tote massive hand cannons like the .44 magnum,semiautomatics give nothing up to revolvers these days.Reliability,capacity,accuracy,concealability,  power- all of this can be had with a good semiautomatic.

Why were revolvers invented?
To increase the capacity of a firearm,among other things,but this was the big issue.When the revolver hit the battlefield- it was a game changer,mostly because of this.
Do we generally see people carrying single shot weapons for self defense or in combat?
No?
So why were semiauto handguns invented?
To increase firepower over revolvers.

In some peoples perspective (including mine) the tiny .380 pocket rockets like the KelTec P3AT,when used with a good cartridge like something along the lines of Remington's Golden Sabre 102gr or Buffalo Bore's +P 100gr Hard Cast Flat Nose gives the old .38 snubbie a run for its money by having better concealability,almost equal ballistics when compared to the standard .38 Special loads you'd carry in a snub,and easier reloads being mag fed.It also starts you out with one more round than the snub if you carry with one in the chamber.
You want REALLY concealable?
Get one of those.

Some people think that a revolver is easier to learn on for a beginner.I disagree.You should learn on what your going to own and use most,whether it be a revolver or a semiautomatic.Semiautomatics are no more complex than a double action revolver to learn to use.
Semiautos may be prone to a few more easy to remedy issues like stovepiping and such,but these problems are easily fixed and even more easily avoidable if you put in the time to find what ammo works best in your gun.The general manual of arms might be a little more involved with malfunction clearances that revolvers don't have,but if your revolver malfunctions to the point of being nonfunctional there are no quick remedies- its time for a gunsmith.


Besides all that,if your not going to put in time with either revolver or semiautomatic,get a pump action shotgun.Handguns in general take alot of time to learn to use well,pump shotguns are much more forgiving of a lack of training.
If you go this route,nothing but a 12 gauge will do.Get a proper stock,no silly folders or Hollyweird pistol grips,and load it with buckshot,preferably #1 buck or 00.
You will still have to learn to use the shotgun,but you wont have to spend nearly as much time before your proficient enough to truly "own" it.

Back to handguns-

 There are several excellent choices in your price range and the one I'd like to recommend is this-

http://www.springfield-armory.com/xd.php?model=2

This is as good as small gets,and you can find them for anywhere from 400-600 bucks I believe.

The one I favor is in 9x19-

http://www.springfield-armory.com/xd.php?version=59

So thats 13+1 rounds in something small and with better power than .38 Special.

As for ballistics and caliber selection-

forgetaboutit.

Any caliber from .22 to .50 will kill a man dead.
Just put your gun on target and pull the trigger till the problem is solved.

Shoot 'em to the ground.

I'm not an advocate of the voodoo gun magazine science and hype of 'stopping power'.I know of one story where a cop pulled over a guy,got into it with him, shot him several times center mass with .357 magnum loads -the "best man stoppers ever(TM)",and was subsequently killed when the guy got in a round of .22 short from a single action derringer under his armpit where his vest didnt protect him- which punctured something vital in his chest (heart itself or a major artery,I forget).
http://www.odmp.org/officer/420-troo...-hunter-coates

The guy who was shot with the super man stopping uber rounds?

Fully recovered and doing life in prison.

The only thing you ABSOLUTELY NEED AND MUST HAVE in any weapon is the power and cartridge design to ensure PENETRATION.Some hollowpoints in some calibers are absolutely notorious for failing to provide adequate penetration,and some cartridges in more powerful calibers will surprise you as well.
This is because mushrooming -what a hollowpoint does- acts like a parachute and slows the projectile drastically,thus severely limiting what you need -PENETRATION.
I'm not saying hollowpoints are worthless, only that you need to make a CAREFUL selection- and on the contrary hollowpoints provide several advantages over round nosed ball (full metal jacket).

You want the right bullet design for the caliber,and it takes some research to come to that decision.

This is how you reach vital organs,which by their nature when damaged or destroyed "stop" a person by making it physiologically IMPOSSIBLE for them to continue; either by hypovolemic shock or out right damage to the CNS,you want to STOP them-not rely on them to decide to quit or some magic effect being shot is supposed to have because your using the biggest meanest man stopper around.

As was the case with Trooper Mark Coates,the .22 that nicked his aorta was worth more than the 5 rounds of .357 magnum that missed his enemies vitals -and failed to "stop" him otherwise.

The guy your shooting doesn't know what your shooting at him with,and he probably doesn't care,so he wont  know hes supposed to bow down to the uber man stopper,but he will fall if hes hit in the right place(s) with even the lowly .25 ACP.

Shot placement,in a fight- is not a guarantee,no matter how good you are at the range or even in a high speed tact-i-cool drill at the local wanna-be gunfighter academy.
Mark Coates,a former Marine,hit his man 5 times with some very powerful stuff in the most-advocated target 'center of mass',but got very bad results.

NOTHING is a guarantee in a fight for your life.

This is why you want high capacity.Revolvers,likes Coates' .357- have only 6 rounds.Contrast that with that Springfeild XD up in the post.

Put lead on target till the target becomes a non-issue.

Nuff said.

----------


## AFPVet

If you want penetration, use heavy bullets. I would suggest a .45 or a 10mm auto with 180 grain full powered loads for the 10mil and 230 grain loads for the .45. My personal preference is the Glock 20 with full powered 10mm 180gr double tap loads—the speed of the .357 with heavy bullets! If it's good enough for Ted Nugent to carry, it's good enough for me

----------


## Kalashnikov Josh

You can also get really good penetration with 7.62x25 tokarev.with a light little 85grain bullet.

Buffalo Bore loads a +P+ 9x19 147 grain JHP that does, if i remember correctly,1190 fps from a 4 inch barrel.

I like 10mm too....

Actually,I like just about all guns and calibers!

----------


## brushfire

> Ruger SP101 w/ 3" barrel...


^ If I was to only have 1 revolver, that'd be it.

It shoots well, is durable, it can handle any load, is heavy enough to tame recoil, has nice factory grips, and is small enough to conceal.

The 3 inch variety gives a little more sight radius.  The trigger is rough, but there is iowan's book of knowledge (ibok) that will help you smooth everything out.

IMO its the best revolver on the market and budsgunshop has them for $464 otd.  Just add your ffl for total cost.

good luck

----------


## GunnyFreedom

This is what I use for primary point defense:



Smith & Wesson Tactical .40, as resold by the Atlanta Police Department, and equipped from the factory with tritium dot night sites.

I preferred the M&P .40  (would have even more preferred a 10mm but unusual calibres are bad if TSHTF one day)

----------


## Kalashnikov Josh

> unusual calibres are bad if TSHTF one day


Another reason to like 9x19(or at least have a gun chambered for it)- its available worldwide.

----------


## GunnyFreedom

> Another reason to like 9x19(or at least have a gun chambered for it)- its available worldwide.


Since law enforcement went gaga for the .40 it's prolific enough in the US not to worry about it's availability in the PAW.  Add to that reloading equipment and I'm golden.  I like that it has significantly more punch than the 9mm.  Mind you punch without shot placement is useless.  Tho I think I got shot placement covered.

----------


## Kalashnikov Josh

> Since law enforcement went gaga for the .40 it's prolific enough in the US not to worry about it's availability in the PAW.  Add to that reloading equipment and I'm golden.  I like that it has significantly more punch than the 9mm.  Mind you punch without shot placement is useless.  Tho I think I got shot placement covered.


Sounds like you got it all figgured out lol.

I'm not trying to be too contentious here but-

Am I correct in assuming -and without touching off the common debate about it- that you will mostly find 9x19 in US military ammo supplies,due to the adoption of the M9 pistol back in 1985 as the standard military sidearm,and the M11 in 1989?(I wonder if you could still even find some .45ACP there too?And I know they're starting to use .40 as well...)

Would it be safe to also assume that in a SHTF scenario where military,national guard,etc,what have you- participating in martial law "securing the homeland" or whatever,a good majority of them would be armed with 9mm pistols?

Also,as it is the NATO standard,as well as being adopted by several of the former WARSAW pact nations,would it be safe to assume that if you were in another country,9mm Para would be available in the same fashion?

Of course,I'm not trying to suggest that 9mm is "superior" to any other cartridge,only that it would be more available worldwide.This may or may not be important to some folks.AND - I could be wrong about some of these things.

I like 9x19 and favor it above other pistol cartridges,but that does not make it "the best" anything.

Personally I believe that 9x19 Parabellum has achieved worldwide prominence because "The 9x19mm cartridge comes close to perfectly balancing cost per round, weapon magazine capacity, controllable recoil and terminal effectiveness, as any handgun cartridge yet invented."( http://www.brassfetcher.com/index_files/Page1794.htm ).

I'm not a 'fanboy' of the 9mm and enjoy handguns in many different calibers,however-based on its strengths and qualities,if I could only own one handgun,it would be in 9x19 para and it would definitely be a high capacity design(capacity being one of the strengths of 9x19).

But then,this is all just my dumba$$ opinion,and we all know whats thats worth......

I do highly recommend that anyone choosing to become a new gun owner consider a good quality semiautomatic 9mm pistol as their first gun.They're reliable,effective,and for a new shooter,would probably be less intimidating than what some of the more seasoned guys like to use recoil wise.If its to be your only gun,you wont have any problem finding ammo if TSHTF.

That S&W Military and Police model Gunny likes comes with a 17 round mag capacity in 9mm!(and it aint a Glock- whats NOT to love about THAT!)

But it all boils down to personal preference,in the end.

If bwlibertyman is dead set on what he wants,my opinion and the expression of it (albeit LONG WINDED,sorry) can be totally ignored and I'm fine with that.

Once read a post that a ER doctor or someone said that "Shot-placement is king. Adequate penetration is queen. Everything else is angels dancing on the heads of pins".

I like that saying.But with one caveat-

Sidearm choices are as personal as a mans taste in women (or a womans taste in men).

----------


## GunnyFreedom

Have to run to session, will try and say more later.  Yes, 9mm is more ubiquitous than .40, but the military lean more towards 9mm and the police lean more towards .40 cal.  My concern in a SHTF situation is that military stores will be neigh on impossibly to acquire.  Not only do you have the NAP to consider (and the NAP would probably have citizens fighting the pol more than the mil), but Mil tends to police their wounded and their magazines etc.  The police are a bit less disciplined on that front.  All in all both are good choices, but I've settled on the .40 as a compromise from my preferred 10mm which is not widely available.

----------


## osan

> Another reason to like 9x19(or at least have a gun chambered for it)- its available worldwide.


It is anemic.  A well loaded 40 Smith can be pushed to just under 1600 fps safely, something you cannot get from 9 Para.  The difference between this and 1100 fps in a 9 is very large.  In self defense situation you want to deliver as much energy into the target as possible because you may not get a second shot.

----------


## AFPVet

> It is anemic.  A well loaded 40 Smith can be pushed to just under 1600 fps safely, something you cannot get from 9 Para.  The difference between this and 1100 fps in a 9 is very large.  In self defense situation you want to deliver as much energy into the target as possible because you may not get a second shot.


To see what all of the calibers can do when pushed to their safe max, look up Double Tap ammo  Mike makes even the little 9mm into something which would work. I've stock piled up on Mike's 10mm... so I'm good to go

----------


## osan

> To see what all of the calibers can do when pushed to their safe max, look up Double Tap ammo  Mike makes even the little 9mm into something which would work. I've stock piled up on Mike's 10mm... so I'm good to go


Not sayign you cannot make a 9 work, but a 40 will always be superior, all else equal.  It hits a lot harder... not that I would want to be on the wrong end of any gun.

----------


## AFPVet

> Not saying you cannot make a 9 work, but a 40 will always be superior, all else equal.  It hits a lot harder... not that I would want to be on the wrong end of any gun.


True enough! Personally, I'm a .45 and 10mm guy... but the best firearm is the one in your hand when you need it

----------


## osan

> True enough! Personally, I'm a .45 and 10mm guy... but the best firearm is the one in your hand when you need it


Agreed.

For my money, .45 is king along with 38 Super, and 357.  All good stuff.

----------


## Kalashnikov Josh

> It is anemic.  A well loaded 40 Smith can be pushed to just under 1600 fps safely, something you cannot get from 9 Para.  The difference between this and 1100 fps in a 9 is very large.  In self defense situation you want to deliver as much energy into the target as possible because you may not get a second shot.


9x19 Parabellum is not "anemic".Were not talking about 8×22mm Nambu here.

9x19 is plenty powerful enough to push a chunk of lead deep enough to reach vitals,with the added benefit that its also got enough energy to do that while expanding a hollow point that will increase its efficiency in damaging those vitals.
With some TRULY "anemic" handgun rounds,like the above mentioned Nambu,you'd be lucky to get adequate penetration even in FMJ.


_(ALL of the above rounds get 12 inches of penetration,the FBI standard.)_

Speaking of handgun rounds,the whole 'energy deposit' thing only becomes important when you start pushing 2200-2300fps and above,which is rifle ballistics; which is where the temporary cavity caused by a bullet actually stretches fast enough to damage tissue- with your common handgun calibers like 9mm,.40,10mm,and .45acp,this is a non-issue.
Compared to rifles,ALL handguns are "anemic".
What your bullet actually hits and damages is what does the job with most handgun rounds(unless your shooting a REALLY big monster of a handgun).

_
(10mm Winchester Silvertip round next to a .416 Rigby)_

Then we get to the weight issue.I've heard the arguments about being hit with a needle vs. a bowling ball and so forth.Not so much.......
Something you measure in GRAINS being used against something you measure in HUNDREDS OF POUNDS is yet another non issue.
The only real advantage a bigger handgun bullet has,is in diameter.Either JHP or FMJ, this is measurable in fractions of an inch.Its really not a big difference.
Just ask your significant other.



For me,the 9mm,being more than capable of doing the same job of reaching and imparting damage to the vitals of a human adversary as any of the other popular handgun calibers, has the advantage in faster follow up shots due to lower recoil impulse and higher capacity for a given magazine size.

I'd rather be able to fire MORE bullets FASTER and increase my chances of getting MORE hits,FASTER,than rely on a few fractions of an inch and a magical "one shot stop" based on "hydrostatic shock" or the energy deposit of a handgun cartridge.

but thats just me.

Your certainly free to come to your own conclusions.

----------


## osan

> 9x19 Parabellum is not "anemic".Were not talking about 8×22mm Nambu here.


Actually, it is when compared with other rounds and where real world results are considered.

For example, one of my father's shooting buddies had a liquor store in Brooklyn.  One evening a large-ish guy on drugs came in to rob him.  Poor dumb bastard announced the robbery from the door, whereas the register was all the way at the back of the store.  Owner pulls a HiPower, gives warning, then fires at the oncoming stranger.  He dumped 33 rounds into the center of mass before the guy dropped.  A 38 Super, 357, 10mm, .45 ACP, or similar probably would have dropped him with two or three hits.  His large mass prevented enough penetration to hit vitals apparently until enough of a channel was opened (he was a very good marksman) to allow a round "in", so to speak.

Now, you may say that this was an extraordinary situation and you would be correct.  However, you never know when your situation will draw the short straw.  In such situations you do not want to be caught short the way he was.  He told me he started $#@!ting his pants when he had to reload because he had only one spare mag.  He traded way up after that incident.  Smart move.




> 9x19 is plenty powerful enough to push a chunk of lead deep enough to reach vitals,with the added benefit that its also got enough energy to do that while expanding a hollow point that will increase its efficiency in damaging those vitals.


As reality shows, this is not always the case.  Why go 9Para when you can do a double-stack 38 Super on a 1911 frame?  It has far and away greater power - just about that of 357 when loaded properly.  If capacity is your thing, 38 SuperAuto is the perfect round.

Crazy $#@! happens far more often than you might think.  My friend Mike is a very accomplished IPSC/IDPA marksman.  In college he managed a coroners lab in FL and saw a LOT of gunshot cadavers.  Each had a story and some of them were truly nutty in terms of guys getting shot again and again, yet kept coming despite placements that should have killed them outright.  Where situations call for the discharge of a weapon in the direction of another human being, along with placement, power is absolutely king.  You cannot have too much of it, but you certainly can have less than you need.  Playing the odds with these sorts of situation is putting your life in the hands of fate.  I don't trust fate quite that much.





> Compared to rifles,ALL handguns are "anemic".


Carrying a rifle everywhere you go would become a real drag.  Wielding a rifle in tight quarters can be dicey enough to get you killed.  Wielding a rifle small enough to be maneuverable likely means a barrel so short that most of the power virtues of a rifle cartridge are left on the cutting room floor.

I have lugged light rifles all day long (ar15) and it sucks.  I've lugged shotguns all over my mountain.  Sucks.  I carry a pistol everywhere I go and even that gets noticeable at times.  Carrying a firearm under normally peaceful conditions

What your bullet actually hits and damages is what does the job with most handgun rounds(unless your shooting a REALLY big monster of a handgun).





> The only real advantage a bigger handgun bullet has,is in diameter.Either JHP or FMJ, this is measurable in fractions of an inch.Its really not a big difference.



For a given bore size, heavier == greater penetration, all else equal.  Greater mass means greater sectional density.




> For me,the 9mm,being more than capable of doing the same job of reaching and imparting damage to the vitals of a human adversary as any of the other popular handgun calibers, has the advantage in faster follow up shots due to lower recoil impulse and higher capacity for a given magazine size.


Human results vary wildly.  What drops Joe, fails with Steve.  That aside, humans are not the only things against which one may be called upon to defend himself.  Are you familiar with, for example, wild boar?  A 9mm Para won't even slow one down.  About all you could hope for would be a righteous head shot with 357 or 44 magnum.  Even then you are likely to end up dead, but the general point holds.  Dogs are a good example.  Rabid animals are another.  They will do things you would not believe possible.  Have you ever seen a rabbit stand up and walk like a man?  Rabies.




> I'd rather be able to fire MORE bullets FASTER and increase my chances of getting MORE hits,FASTER,than rely on a few fractions of an inch and a magical "one shot stop" based on "hydrostatic shock" or the energy deposit of a handgun cartridge.


If this is your preference, that is OK, but there is no substitute for shot placement, which requires good skills and a cool head.  Practice makes perfect.

In the real world, the chances of you ever needing to draw your weapon are fairly low, though I have had to do it twice.  The chances that you will need to discharge your weapon are even slimmer.  That you would need more than six rounds... nearly zero... but $#@! does happen, so if you feel more secure with lots of bullets on hand, knock yourself out.

It's all good.

----------


## Kalashnikov Josh

> Actually, it is when compared with other rounds and where real world results are considered.


I still beg to differ.9mm Parabellum will do the same thing that all the other calibers you mention do.12+ inches of penetration AND mushrooming is MORE than enough to do the job,given the bullet actually hits something vital.If a single round does not,then dump on the guy.
Shoot 'em to the ground.

One person might get shot AT and quit,because he is afraid.Another person might be super hyped up on adrenaline,drugs,fanaticism- or a mix of all of the above,and it'll take alot of fighting -irregardless of the particular calibers involved- to put them down,absent a solid CNS hit.

You should be prepared to make a serious fight any time you have to draw your piece,and not think "this'll be easy,I've got the super whammo big boy gun death ray zapper".........

I believe I'm adequately prepared for that with a high capacity 9mm.




> He dumped 33 rounds into the center of mass before the guy dropped.  A 38 Super, 357, 10mm, .45 ACP, or similar probably would have dropped him with two or three hits.  His large mass prevented enough penetration to hit vitals apparently until enough of a channel was opened (he was a very good marksman) to allow a round "in", so to speak.


Its the same kind of "extraordinary situation" that I pointed out when I began posting in this thread,where Trooper Mark Hunter Coates,a former Marine,chose his handgun and cartridge based on all the "stopping power" hype- he chose a .357 magnum and I believe some very hot and heavy JHP's......5 shots into the center mass of his killer did nothing to  stop the man from delivering the mortal wound to Coates with a .22 Short from one of those little mini revolvers.......Coates' killer was also quite large.

I believe that ALL shooting incidents are "extraordinary situations" and that you could draw the short straw DESPITE having even a 12 gauge loaded with buckshot vs. the other guy's Raven .25ACP.




> Now, you may say that this was an extraordinary situation and you would be correct.  However, you never know when your situation will draw the short straw.  In such situations you do not want to be caught short the way he was.  He told me he started $#@!ting his pants when he had to reload because he had only one spare mag.  He traded way up after that incident.  Smart move.


As I said- $h!t happens.All we can do is prepare and hope for the best.
I wonder what Mark Coates would "trade" his 6 shot revolver for if he were still alive?
Perhaps a high capacity semiauto,so that when his first 5 shots failed to do anything he'd still have 10+ shots to work with?





> As reality shows, this is not always the case.  Why go 9Para when you can do a double-stack 38 Super on a 1911 frame?  It has far and away greater power - just about that of 357 when loaded properly.  If capacity is your thing, 38 SuperAuto is the perfect round.


Power in handguns being a relative term,as I've already demonstrated,AND you can still fit more 9x19 in a given mag than something bigger.AND you can touch off repeat shots faster,as the recoil impulse is lower.

Thats why 9x19 Para.




> Crazy $#@! happens far more often than you might think.  My friend Mike is a very accomplished IPSC/IDPA marksman.  In college he managed a coroners lab in FL and saw a LOT of gunshot cadavers.  Each had a story and some of them were truly nutty in terms of guys getting shot again and again, yet kept coming despite placements that should have killed them outright.  Where situations call for the discharge of a weapon in the direction of another human being, along with placement, power is absolutely king.  You cannot have too much of it, but you certainly can have less than you need.  Playing the odds with these sorts of situation is putting your life in the hands of fate.  I don't trust fate quite that much.


"Shot-placement is king. Adequate penetration is queen. Everything else is angels dancing on the heads of pins."
This was also said by a medical professional.Some guy called Erich,google it its all over the web.

Its almost like masturbation without the payoff when you compare the energy and size of handgun rounds.They all do pretty much the same thing.Selecting one that will penetrate and mushroom adequately is enough.
The 9mm bullet that punctures the abdominal aorta will stop a man where as the .44 magnum round that passes thru the bowel and leaves without doing any actual damage to the cardio/vascular system to cause hypovolemic shock or hitting the CNS is not a guarantee.





> Carrying a rifle everywhere you go would become a real drag.  Wielding a rifle in tight quarters can be dicey enough to get you killed.  Wielding a rifle small enough to be maneuverable likely means a barrel so short that most of the power virtues of a rifle cartridge are left on the cutting room floor.


Right.But thats all besides the point,which was-

Rifle ballistics are where we get to talk about how the energy of a projectile has as much impact as what that projectile actually hits.The energy of rifle bullets stretches the temporary cavity of a GSW violently enough to do real damage.

Handgun ballistics are not in the same arena.
They simply do not have the energy to impart any actual damage beyond what they actually physically hit.


Of course,this isnt an absolute(nothing is).Some organs,like the liver,it doesn't take much to make them stretch and rupture.but again- a rifle round will most definitely do this alot better,and there really wouldn't be much difference in such damage between handgun calibers.

Its simply not worth relying on this mechanism with any handgun in any popular defensive caliber.




> For a given bore size, heavier == greater penetration, all else equal.  Greater mass means greater sectional density.


Tell that to the 7.62x25 Tokarev.I guarantee you that caliber will hold its own against and even out penetrate 9mm,.40,38 super,.45,.357 magnum,etc.
And thats with a tiny 85 grain bullet,who's LACK OF sectional density,.30 caliber diameter,and extremely high velocity make it the absolute penetration king of combat handgun calibers.

Too bad they don't make pistols chambered in that round with hicap mags.....





> Human results vary wildly.  What drops Joe, fails with Steve.  That aside, humans are not the only things against which one may be called upon to defend himself.  Are you familiar with, for example, wild boar?  A 9mm Para won't even slow one down.  About all you could hope for would be a righteous head shot with 357 or 44 magnum.  Even then you are likely to end up dead, but the general point holds.  Dogs are a good example.  Rabid animals are another.  They will do things you would not believe possible.  Have you ever seen a rabbit stand up and walk like a man?  Rabies.


I'll fully agree with you on the human results issue,the fact is,gunfights are unpredictable.
So where you believe you stack your odds with a bigger,more "powerful" handgun,I believe I stack my odds with less recoil impulse resulting in faster time on target and higher capacity.
both ideologies have worked and both have failed- not because of the handgun or the caliber,but because of either the individual using the weapon or that bastid Mr.Murphy,or a mixture of both.

It happens.

As to animals,I was looking at this in the pure perspective of human self defense and combat issues.But I'm sure that if you put a good load of 9x19 that is proven to penetrate more than 12" of human flesh into the skull of an angry boar,it'll stop it.
As long as it penetrates the skull and does damage to the brain.
Rather have my shotgun or AK,but I'd say that about ANY shooting situation.




> If this is your preference, that is OK, but there is no substitute for shot placement, which requires good skills and a cool head.  Practice makes perfect.


Absolutely.we can agree on that.
But even then I doubt sincerely that while bullets are flying past us,were going to have a 'cool head'.Thats why placement gets iffy,and thats why I say "shoot 'em to the ground" with the bonus of a high capacity weapon giving you enough lead to make swiss cheese out of 'em.
If I'm lucky,I won't end up like your friend in the store.
Crapping his pants and trying a reload under stress.

Your argument for the problem would be- "make bigger holes with every shot" or something along the lines of "hit 'em harder with every shot",right?
And hope you don't end up like Coates,who probably left this world shocked that his super uber powerful magnum did nothing to stop the guy who liked him with a .22 short.




> In the real world, the chances of you ever needing to draw your weapon are fairly low, though I have had to do it twice.  The chances that you will need to discharge your weapon are even slimmer.  That you would need more than six rounds... nearly zero... but $#@! does happen, so if you feel more secure with lots of bullets on hand, knock yourself out.


Yep.I feel better with more bullets on hand,but it doesn't stop me from carrying a standard capacity auto at times.

People stop when just being shown a weapon.Others fight and kill their adversary after taking grievous injury themselves.

BOTH ideas- making bigger holes,or having higher capacity,are valid in their own right and kept in perspective-and that perspective is one of personal choice.

I merely suggested to the OP in this thread that he would be better off,IMHO,with a high capacity subcompact 9mm pistol rather than a revolver,because I believe the 9mm would suit the purposes of a new shooter better being that it has limited recoil and the general ease of reloading a semiautomatic over a revolver,would do more and be better for him than a revolver.
I wasn't angling for the age old caliber war.

But as it is,its still entirely up to him.

If a revolver makes him happy,then I'm happy for him.




> It's all good.

----------


## AFPVet

For some interesting education, look up the old live animal tests done back in the day.... This being said, pick the weapon you can most comfortably shoot. As for me, it's either the .45 or the 10mm. Animal tests are accurate due to the fact that the animal has the will to survive—much like a doped up meth head. If the bullet does a good job dropping an animal, it will do a good job with a human. I would suppose that wild boar would be the best since it would simulate human flesh the best. What does Ted Nugent use to dispatch wild boar? The 10mm. Conversely, I still think that a heavy .45 would do just as well though at close range.

----------


## Kalashnikov Josh

Anyone here seen this yet:




> SPRINGFIELD ARMORY 
>  RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT DIVISION 
>  MEMORANDUM REPORT SA-MR 20-2100 
> 
>  L O Spaulding/lv 
> 
>  24 August 1948 
> 
>  SUBJECT: 
> ...


I have some 124gr ball known to go 1300-1350 from a pistol........tell you what,if I'm "stuck with" a pistol as my only gun,and it comes down to a combat situation....I'm glad my pistol would be chambered for 9mm Para........

----------


## AFPVet

> Anyone here seen this yet:
> 
> 
> 
> I have some 124gr ball known to go 1300-1350 from a pistol........


Yep... this was the tests used to select the 9mm for the military. However, the effective range for the .45 in a real world event is around 21 feet (combat distance.) Beyond that, you need a 10mm. While the .45 will still work past 21 feet, it starts to lose a lot of gas and the trajectory arc's.

----------


## Kalashnikov Josh

> Yep... this was the tests used to select the 9mm for the military. However, the effective range for the .45 in a real world event is around 21 feet (combat distance.) Beyond that, you need a 10mm. The .45 is not traveling fast enough to be as effective past 21 feet... while it will still work, it starts to loose a lot of gas.


I'm sure .40 or like you said 10mm would do better than that.

However,9x19 still has its merits in many depts..........its a VERY highly efficient cartridge.

----------


## tmg19103

The OP mentioned the purchase was for home defense. As a first firearm I'd get a shotgun. You can get a defender type shotgun (short barrel, pistol grip if you like, extended magazine tube) for $300. 

A pump shotgun is about as easy to use as a revolver, and my guess is the OP mentioned a revolver over a pistol because he is new to firearms and wanted something that was simple to use.

Now, if you ever intend to carry concealed in the future, pistols are more comfortable due to being more slender.

I'd get the inexpensive shotgun now, and then take a handgun self-defense course and decide if revolver or pistol is the way you want to go after that.

I have many a firearm - rifles, shotguns and semi-auto pistols, but only one revolver, a .44 magnum I got used for $250 just for some fun at the range. That's about all it is good for given its size, weight and barrel length. 

I keep all my firearms unloaded in a large safe, but in my bedroom in a quick access safe is a loaded (with one in the pipe) Glock 35 with 15+1 Golden Saber .40 S&W hollow points.

I'll take the 16 the Glock gives me to the 6 a revolver gives me any day.

----------


## tmg19103

> Anyone here seen this yet:
> 
> 
> 
> I have some 124gr ball known to go 1300-1350 from a pistol........tell you what,if I'm "stuck with" a pistol as my only gun,and it comes down to a combat situation....I'm glad my pistol would be chambered for 9mm Para........


A 124 grain +P 9mm has great velocity (and is an excellent round), but at close range I'd take a .45 ACP at 850 fps. It will have better knock down power and the slower velocity of the larger piece of lead will cause the it to bounce around off bones and cause more damage as opposed to a a high velocity round going clean through.

180 grain .40 S&W is one way to get the best of both worlds.

----------


## Kalashnikov Josh

> A 124 grain +P 9mm has great velocity (and is an excellent round), but at close range I'd take a .45 ACP at 850 fps. It will have better knock down power and the slower velocity of the larger piece of lead will cause the it to bounce around off bones and cause more damage as opposed to a a high velocity round going clean through.
> 
> 180 grain .40 S&W is one way to get the best of both worlds.


I generally agree with everything you've posted,but one more time-

Handgun rounds do not have "knockdown power",they do not impart physical damage by any other mechanism other than what the bullet physically hits.
They simply do not play in the same ball park as rifle rounds.

Period.

The randomness of a shooting incident will vary,and when a .45ACP will go right thru a person,the 9mm might 'bounce'....its all a matter of chance.

That being said,.45 acp is just as good as 9x19 Para,.40 S&W,.357 Magnum etc at what it does.

Pick your favorite and learn to use it well.(Variety truly is the spice of life!)

----------


## AFPVet

> I generally agree with everything you've posted,but one more time-
> 
> Handgun rounds do not have "knockdown power",they do not impart physical damage by any other mechanism other than what the bullet physically hits.
> They simply do not play in the same ball park as rifle rounds.
> 
> Period.
> 
> The randomness of a shooting incident will vary,and when a .45ACP will go right thru a person,the 9mm might 'bounce'....its all a matter of chance.
> 
> ...


This!

----------


## tmg19103

> I generally agree with everything you've posted,but one more time-
> 
> Handgun rounds do not have "knockdown power",they do not impart physical damage by any other mechanism other than what the bullet physically hits.
> They simply do not play in the same ball park as rifle rounds.
> 
> Period.
> 
> The randomness of a shooting incident will vary,and when a .45ACP will go right thru a person,the 9mm might 'bounce'....its all a matter of chance.
> 
> ...


I don't disagree with what you are saying, though certain rounds in certain circumstances will favor doing one thing over another, though there certainly are no guarantees on what will happen.

The OP wants a firearm for home defense.

The problem with a rifle is their bullets going through walls in apartment complexes and down streets from single family homes if you have to defend yourself, while pistols and shotguns have a lesser likelihood of accidentally harming others outside your dwelling. 

Ultimately, it boils down to what you are most comfortable with and shoot best, and I would not say a rifle has no place in home defense. You just have to be more careful of flyers.

----------


## Kalashnikov Josh

Right.I agree.

For home defense-I think the OP would be better off with a pump action 12 gauge shotgun.

If he's dead set on a handgun,I recommend a semiautomatic 9mm.

But he'll get what he wants.

HOPEFULLY he'll share and tell us all about it when he does!

----------


## osan

> I generally agree with everything you've posted,but one more time-
> 
> Handgun rounds do not have "knockdown power",they do not impart physical damage by any other mechanism other than what the bullet physically hits.


D00d, this is is simply not true.  ALL rounds produce a temporary cavity.  This is a matter of the physics and cannot be avoided.  The only difference lies in how much.  Any bullet striking flesh is going to generate a shock wave, which in turn produces the TSC.  This is true for ALL projectiles hitting such a target. A BB gun will have a very small one and a .44 Mag will have a relatively large one.  Shoot an intruder with a 375 H&H and the TSC will be far and away larger still.




> Pick your favorite and learn to use it well.(Variety truly is the spice of life!


Sound advice.

----------


## tmg19103

Good points by all.

While I have rifles, shotguns and a revolver like I said, what I shoot most are pistols and shotguns in IDPA/IPSC and trap, skeet and sporting clays.

My rifles get the least amount of use, though it is the best thing to have in case of civil unrest and possible combat scenarios.

While my primary competition pistol is a 1911 (.45 ACP and .38 super), here is the G35 I keep handy for home defense in action.

Can't have this much fun with a rifle, IMHO.

http://youtu.be/TDP2Qb7FPms

----------


## VBRonPaulFan

When I spoke to a guy that owned a local gun shop near me about a pistol for home defense - he recommended a good old fashioned pump action shotgun. The reason was simple - you want to avoid shooting an intruder if possible. If you shoot someone, when the cops show up they take the gun for evidence. You may not get it back for a couple of years. If you hear someone break in, you simply get your shotgun, and pump it once to let whoever is breaking in that you mean business. If that doesn't scare them out, it's hard to miss someone with a shotty.

----------


## AFPVet

> When I spoke to a guy that owned a local gun shop near me about a pistol for home defense - he recommended a good old fashioned pump action shotgun. The reason was simple - you want to avoid shooting an intruder if possible. If you shoot someone, when the cops show up they take the gun for evidence. You may not get it back for a couple of years. If you hear someone break in, you simply get your shotgun, and pump it once to let whoever is breaking in that you mean business. If that doesn't scare them out, it's hard to miss someone with a shotty.


Yep... for home defense, it's hard to argue with a home cannon like the shotgun

----------


## brushfire

> Yep... for home defense, it's hard to argue with a home cannon like the shotgun


Its a popular choice, but truth be known - the shot pattern on an 18.5" with buck is going to be < 2" in diameter, in close quarters.

Another misconception is that the shot will not penetrate a wall, or not be lethal if it does.  Anything that will be powerful enough to stop an attacker, will be powerful enough to penetrate drywall and injure or kill folks on the other side.  Always know your backstop.

Personally, I think the handgun is the best tool for home defense, but opinions will vary.

----------


## AFPVet

> Its a popular choice, but truth be known - the shot pattern on an 18.5" with buck is going to be < 2" in diameter, in close quarters.
> 
> Another misconception is that the shot will not penetrate a wall, or not be lethal if it does.  Anything that will be powerful enough to stop an attacker, will be powerful enough to penetrate drywall and injure or kill folks on the other side.  Always know your backstop.
> 
> Personally, I think the handgun is the best tool for home defense, but opinions will vary.


Agreed. There have been many test reports involving the truth about shotgun penetration and pattern. There are a lot of misconception about the various shotgun loads and chokes. Really, the barrel length of a shotgun is of less concern since the propellant is burned up at <14 inches; however, the choke is what is important with the shot pattern. 

Well... the best home defense tool is subjective depending on where you live though too. Out in the middle of nowhere, the best home defense tool might be an AR-10  

Now back to the author's post... with all of the caliber options thrown out there, the compromise between all of them would be the .40 S&W in the flavor of the Glock 22.

----------


## Kalashnikov Josh

> D00d, this is is simply not true.  ALL rounds produce a temporary cavity.  This is a matter of the physics and cannot be avoided.  The only difference lies in how much.  Any bullet striking flesh is going to generate a shock wave, which in turn produces the TSC.  This is true for ALL projectiles hitting such a target. A BB gun will have a very small one and a .44 Mag will have a relatively large one.  Shoot an intruder with a 375 H&H and the TSC will be far and away larger still.


Brother,all due respect,but as I pointed out the TSC of a handgun round,unless its a handgun that propels its projectiles at and above the velocity of a rifle round,lacks the energy to actually be a wounding mechanism.
While "the shock cavity" is a fact,you'll get no argument from me on that,and bigger more powerful rounds do in fact produce bigger TSC phenomena- there is a cut-off point for when the TSC is actually productive in producing wounding- which is the ultimate factor in putting an opponent down.

You can even see the differing profiles of shock cavity in gelatin in the pictures I posted.

But because of many factors,mainly the elasticity of human tissue and the energy of the projectiles' momentum,most handgun rounds cannot be relied upon to do any damage with the temporary shock cavity.

Instead,they damage pretty much what they physically hit.

Think of Glaser Safety Slugs- a round designed entirely around the principle of using the energy of the projectile to effect a "stop".

DISMAL failure,and their only use is as a 'first one or two rounds out' load to try to 'discourage' further aggression when your concerned about over-penetration in your house or whatever.

Now contrast this with the Miami FBI shootout where,ironically as pertaining to this discussion,a 115gr JHP 9x19 bullet was blamed for failure to penetrate and destroy the heart of one of the suspects.

http://www.firearmstactical.com/briefs7.htm

This is why the 10mm was born.

Far from proving the argument against the 9 para,however,this proves that penetration,and what the bullet actually hits,is much more important,indeed- it is the only thing that actually matters,next to achieving skill at arms(for placement),in combat handgunnery.

This is also where the "12 inch rule" was born.

So in effect-

ANY caliber that can penetrate 12 inches or more with a given load,will do the job.Even the lowly .22 short,as seen in my previous example in prior posts.

With handguns,expansion is icing on the cake,and if you choose a caliber that has issues satisfying the "12 inch rule" as well as expanding,like the little .380 I'm wearing right now,the default is to choose penetration over expansion.This means having to settle for ball loads or maybe finding "something special"=

http://www.buffalobore.com/index.php...t_detail&p=127

I have absolutely no worries about trusting the combination of a keltec P3AT size pistol and that particular load with my life.It will penetrate,the flat nose will crush rather than 'slip thru' tissue like FMJ is sometimes said to do,and I believe it would perform better than that lousy 115gr 9 para load the FBI man had in his pistol the day of the infamous Miami Shootout.
If I do what I can to ensure as good placement as possible,and I also play hard with the mentality of "shooting them to the ground",this combination will work.

Same with any kind of handgun/ammo combination- which,by the way,is a MUCH more important thing to be talking about than mere caliber alone.Seriously,the internet would be a better place if people talked about caliber in terms of what loads perform best with a given claiber rather than just having caliber wars that have no real use or bearing on the reality of combat handgunning.

Even the 10mm can be "loaded to fail".Think again- Glaser Safety Slug.

Placement and penetration are the absolute rules to adhere to.

The TSC of a handgun round just does not come into play.

Unless,of course,your handgun is chambered in a rifle round like your .375 H&H.

----------


## Kalashnikov Josh

> Personally, I think the handgun is the best tool for home defense, but opinions will vary.


A shotgun has the disadvantages of being harder to maneuver around the house with.

But nothing puts em down like a solid hit with 00 buck.If that doesn't work,your dealing with a very rare,very serious problem.

Shotguns also increase the hit probability because of launching multiple projectiles,making them a better choice for close quarters fighting in the dark and by people with limited firearms experience and training.

They have been renowned as a tool for blunting offensive action since the days when the blunderbuss was used to stop boarding parties on wooden wind driven ships.Shotguns are so effective at blunting mass attacks that when used in the trenches of WW1,the Germans,who liked to use mustard gas,actually complained about the shotgun -the Winchester 1897- being a weapon that inflicted cruel and inhumane damage.
They even went so far as to say they would execute as war criminals American soldiers captured while in possession of either a shotgun or shotgun shells.
I cant recall if that actually ever became an issue- I believe the petition to outlaw shotguns in combat was denied.

In my humble opinion,shotguns,as proven by their record,are one of,if not the,most deadliest of close combat weapons.

As for penetration- yes,a load of 00 buck will penetrate SEVERAL layers of drywall,but because of the spherical and extremely lightweight nature of the projectiles being ballistically very inefficient they lose energy rapidly and surprisingly enough will not penetrate like a ball round from your favorite handgun.

http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/bot3.htm

However,they will still do the job quite nicely.

http://www.brassfetcher.com/index_files/Page541.htm

But why not have both a handgun and a shotgun ready for home defense?

All you need to make sure you have is a handgun rig that you can put on even in your underpants- like a shoulder rig,and a sling on your shotgun so you have something to use to transition to your handgun.

Best of both worlds always beats just the one!

----------


## chudrockz

How bout my Winchester 1300 rifled barrel 12 gauge. Sabot slug to the chest of bad guy. That do the trick?

----------


## osan

> A shotgun has the disadvantages of being harder to maneuver around the house with.


unless it has a 9" barrel 




> But nothing puts em down like a solid hit with 00 buck.


000? 

A slug will seriously ruin one's day even with a vest.  May not kill you but it is going to hurt and slow you down.




> Shotguns also increase the hit probability because of launching multiple projectiles,making them a better choice for close quarters fighting in the dark and by people with limited firearms experience and training.


Agreed, but it should be pointed out that, contrary to popular legend, shotguns must be aimed like any other weapon in order to provide a reasonable likelihood of a good hit.  This is particularly true in close quarters such as are found within a typical dwelling.  From 20 or 50 feet away, even with a cylinder bore the shot is going to spread very little - probably not more than 2-3 inches.  While a whole lot larger an area than a .45, it is still not that difficult to miss a target especially under combat stress.

The best solution is training.  As much of it as you can manage.  

Closing one's eyes and thinking of England whilst pulling the trigger is not the recommended procedure for defending oneself with any weapon, shotguns included.

----------


## cucucachu0000

Just shoot at the torso, even then you'll be lucky to hit anything. I have a taurus model 66 its a great all steel .357 revolver. It shoots .38 sp and sp+ which is more powerful, you can shoot that first to get used before moving to .357. Its a well built gun I got it for its versatility it shoots 2 size calibers, a well built revolver so its gonna shoot every time, and if u hit someone in the head whith this thing you might put a hole in his head bigger than the bullet will. However I live in NJ and can't walk around with it. Its strictly for home protection, it being small enough to carry wasn't an option. I got the 4 inch which is hard to conceal. You may want a 38 sp with a 2 inch to carry. But find one rated for the sp+ or sp++ for more power. And take a class you have to be real careful with these things.

----------


## oyarde

Right next to my favorite 12 , I keep a couple of #4's , a 00 buck , three slugs and some flechettes .

----------


## AFPVet

The caliber wars are going to end with the advent railgun pistols and rifles

----------


## Verrater

> The caliber wars are going to end with the advent railgun pistols and rifles


doubtful

----------


## AZ Libertarian

Fancy-schmancy comes LATER.

For $750 you can get TWO S & W .38 revolvers - one with 4" barrel, and one with a 2" barrel (for your boot) - PLUS AMMO, and still have money left over...

----------


## AFPVet

> doubtful


Well... I suppose you could have arguments about the amount of power which the railgun uses... but still... it's a freaking railgun! LOL. The only thing more powerful than a railgun is a particle disruptor

----------


## brushfire

> Out in the middle of nowhere, the best home defense tool might be an AR-10


When shooting through walls is your intention - even the cinder block variety LOL

AR308/10  | cover = concealment

----------


## osan

> Just shoot at the torso, even then you'll be lucky to hit anything. I have a taurus model 66 its a great all steel .357 revolver. It shoots .38 sp and sp+ which is more powerful, you can shoot that first to get used before moving to .357. Its a well built gun I got it for its versatility it shoots 2 size calibers, a well built revolver so its gonna shoot every time, and if u hit someone in the head whith this thing you might put a hole in his head bigger than the bullet will. However I live in NJ and can't walk around with it. Its strictly for home protection, it being small enough to carry wasn't an option. I got the 4 inch which is hard to conceal. You may want a 38 sp with a 2 inch to carry. But find one rated for the sp+ or sp++ for more power. And take a class you have to be real careful with these things.


I do not mean to rain on your parade, but the Taurus guns have a reputation for using steels of questionable quality.  I have one anecdotal experience to support this when a customer brought one in that had half the cylinder blown away.  Factory ammo.

That aside, as compared with Smiths, the Tauruses have very heavy triggers (even factory Smith triggers are too stiff).  If you buy a Taurus, IMO you should shuttle it off to a competent smith right away.  Besides being very heavy, I have found some triggers rough and others far too creepy for my likes.  YMMV, of course, but for me trigger quality is of utmost importance for good marksmanship, especially under circumstances of combat stress.

Another problem I have seen with Taurus more than Smiths is spotty timing.  Some may not consider this significant.  When your life is hanging on the performance of the weapon, I believe all aspects of operational quality are important.

----------


## Kalashnikov Josh

> unless it has a 9" barrel


Not everyone has paid the infringement tax,and that means a restriction to 18".A stupid "law",to be sure.
But a "law" they will murder unarmed women holding infant children to "enforce",nonetheless.




> 000? 
> 
> A slug will seriously ruin one's day even with a vest.  May not kill you but it is going to hurt and slow you down.


I like 000 but it comes in 3" shells with any meaningful (IMHO) payload,I find that 2 3/4" shells run faster.I like speed and will choose it all day over something that *might* give a marginal and relatively immeasurable edge in size.
And as for the slug and bodyarmor issue- depends on the armor.Soft body armor,usually kevlar,is rated not only in what it 'stops',but also in the blunt force trauma it can acceptably pass to its backstop- the person wearing it.
Someone in a light,concealable level 2 or 2A will be in bad shape from a solid hit with,say,a Brenneke Black Magic Magnum.Personally,I prefer Brenneke KO,and I'm pretty certain that if I'm using my shotgun against armored thugs rather than my AK,it'll put a hurting on them if they're not wearing something like an Interceptor.

For that,we come back to buckshot.Its my personal supposition,not a proven fact,but just a little 'armchair daydream',if you will,that buckshot,with its wider shot spread than rifle or pistol calibers,would be more effective at "shooting around" the armor,because that usually means having to shoot at smaller target areas like the head and neck.
So ultimately-I load my shotgun with buckshot,  2 3/4" 00 shells with 12 pellets.Thats my favorite.
Slugs,in my opinion, are for using a shotgun to reach out to where your buckshot falls short.




> Agreed, but it should be pointed out that, contrary to popular legend, shotguns must be aimed like any other weapon in order to provide a reasonable likelihood of a good hit.  This is particularly true in close quarters such as are found within a typical dwelling.  From 20 or 50 feet away, even with a cylinder bore the shot is going to spread very little - probably not more than 2-3 inches.  While a whole lot larger an area than a .45, it is still not that difficult to miss a target especially under combat stress.


Yes,thanks to hollyweird,that always does bear mention.However,shotguns do not need the same kind of precise aiming as rifles or pistols.They do need to be 'pointed' at the target,they do not go off and hit the whole room.
2-3 inch spread is quite a margin of error over a single chunk of lead that is measurable in fractions of an inch.
So it is safe to say that someone could be more effective with a shotgun in a fast,close range gunfight,and even with minimal training.
If you can't or won't learn to use any weapon sufficiently it simply wont serve you well when the time comes,Shotguns by their nature are more forgiving of a lower level of skill,so you could invest less time in training with a shotgun and still be able to get the job done.





> The best solution is training.  As much of it as you can manage.


And that also depends- entirely on the training environment.

Some places are pretty good,some are nothing better than the McDojo black belt mills you can find in the local strip mall.

Watching video of what some of these people are doing and teaching makes me laugh.Seriously.
An example-twisting back and forth to "check their surroundings" every time they shoot their gun is probably the silliest $#@! I've seen in a long time.Standing stock still so you can accomplish this nifty little feat,rather than having headed for cover while firing is the epitome of ludicrous.

Ever hear of peripheral vision and using your other senses?

And doing it from BEHIND cover?

This is a bit like setting a 'black belt' loose on the streets to defend all thats good in the world because he can break a couple pieces of balsa wood with his feet.Its a skill as useless as tits on a bull.

Anyway........




> Closing one's eyes and thinking of England whilst pulling the trigger is not the recommended procedure for defending oneself with any weapon, shotguns included.


Thats a gimme.
Shotguns are good for novice shooters and people who want a gun for home defense because compared to handguns they offer more contact with the shooters body,thus making them more easily aimed,they offer a very forgiving-of-poor accuracy shot spread,which is in fact only about as much as Osan pointed out,but still thats plenty forgiving compared to the single projectiles of rifles and handguns.

A pump action gun or even a double barrel consists of simple,easy to use mechanisms that are dependable and reliable.

All this boils down to having to learn less to be able to use it well.

Add the cherry on top that in the terminal ballistics arena your no longer discussing the merits of a few grains or a fraction of an inch and the elusive 'one shot stop' derived by 'energy dump' or whatever-
And you've got something that will launch 9 or more pellets around the same diameter as some handgun calibers (although not the same size) with one shot,you've got something that is known worldwide for its devastating ability to do its job-

I'd feel comfortable suggesting the OP get a shotgun over a handgun.

----------


## AFPVet

> Not everyone has paid the infringement tax,and that means a restriction to 18".A stupid law,to be sure.
> But a law they will murder unarmed women holding infant children to "enforce",nonetheless.
> 
> 
> 
> I like 000 but it comes in 3" shells with any meaningful (IMHO) payload,I find that 2 3/4" shells run faster.I like speed and will choose it all day over something that *might* give a marginal and relatively immeasurable edge in size.
> And as for the slug and bodyarmor issue- depends on the armor.Soft body armor,usually kevlar,is rated not only in what it 'stops',but also in the blunt force trauma it can acceptably pass to its backstop- the person wearing it.
> Someone in a light,concealable level 2 or 2A will be in bad shape from a solid hit with,say,a Brenneke Black Magic Magnum.Personally,I prefer Brenneke KO,and I'm pretty certain that if I'm using my shotgun against armored thugs rather than my AK,it'll put a hurting on them if they're not wearing something like an Interceptor.
> 
> ...


To go along with this, I would suggest some reduced recoil 00 buck loads since in close quarters, not much is gained by high velocity 000 buckshot... unless there is a black bear in your family room

----------


## Toureg89

if i could start my collection over, i would have started with a Glock 20 (10mm) for 500$, and then would have bought 200$ 40SW barrel conversion, and for 700$, you get a pistol that uses the same upper and lower frames, and same magazine, too shoot 2 calibers: one that is powerful, and one that is cheap and plentiful.

----------

