For years, debates regarding handgun stopping power have raged and many have their favorite cartridges that are hoped to be panacea for a deadly force encounter. My favorite is the .357 Magnum but that does not mean that I would feel under gunned with a .38 Special, 9mm Luger, or other cartridge that has been relegated by experts and gun shop commandos alike as "marginal". The fact is, nothing is one hundred percent. Sometimes, the best cartridges fail to stop and conversely, those that are looked down upon as inadequate or marginal sometimes do an admirable job.
I firmly believe that you should carry the most powerful handgun possible but I do not believe that accuracy and the ability to deliver rapid, well placed shots should be compromised for the sake of power. Shot placement is critical to stopping an assailant and neither misses nor peripheral hits with a handgun and cartridge combination that you do not shoot well will guarantee an end to an attack. Thus, a pistol chambered for the 9mm Luger cartridge that can be effectively used is far superior to a .40 S&W or.45 ACP that one does not shoot well.
Gun shops and periodicals are filled with advice and the misapplication of good advice can prove fatal for the stubborn and the ignorant. Back in the 1990s, I was conducting a concealed carry class and one participant, who was fairly well off, was determined to have the "best" defensive handgun and ammunition available, in accordance to the advice that he had received. Thus, he had acquired a beautiful, Colt Gold Cup and several boxes of then new, Remington Golden Saber ammunition which had been well reviewed.
Sadly, his Colt would not reliably feed the ammunition that he had chosen. When he was advised to change ammunition, he adamantly stated "this is the best ammunition available and it is what I want to carry." He was unable to explain how ammunition that rendered his pistol a single shot could be considered the "best" and he grudgingly bought ammunition that fed reliably. He then demonstrated that he was sensitive to recoil and that he was not a good shot. Although such deficiencies can be overcome, the fact of the matter was that the pistol and the cartridge for which it was chambered, contrary to reasonable advice, were unsuited to the level of skill and knowledge of the user which rendered them ineffective and far from "best" under the circumstances.
Firearms enthusiasts sometimes make the mistake of assuming that everyone who purchases a firearm will ultimately share their zeal for shooting and for knowledge. This is just not the case and many who carry firearms on a daily basis (even in professional capacities) never develop more than very basic skills and knowledge. For such shooters, control of the firearm (and simplicity of operation) will ensure greater success than optimum stopping power and "marginal" cartridges with low recoil such as the .38 Special and 9mm Luger may well prove more effective for them than more powerful cartridges that are more difficult to master.
I agree completely with what you are saying, it would be better to have a .22 that feeds accurately and you can put 15 rounds into the head or heart area, than a .50AE that you can't keep on the paper, it also makes a huge difference when it is another person threatening or shooting back versus the paper target. I know several people who have been in bad situations where none of their rounds hit the target, but hey were lucky enough that the were able to scare the intruder away, and these are folks who are regular shooters who are considered good shots at the range.
ReplyDeleteYou bring up very good points. As I recall, in most of the gunfights that "Wild Bill" Hickock engaged in, he used Colt Navy Models in .36 caliber which have light recoil and provide roughly the same ballistics as the .38 S&W (which many consider inadequate for defense today). He was successful because he was able to stay cool and shoot accurately under fire (and perhaps he just did not concern himself with the possibility of getting shot). This is a rare talent (and/or mental condition) for contemporary law enforcement shootings (over at least the past couple of decades)indicate that the police miss their target roughly 85% of the time, despite the fact that they receive considerable training and often qualify more than once a year.
ReplyDelete