What was wrong with the Colt 45 “Peacemaker”?
By that time, it had been phased-out in favor of the .38 Long Colt.
Don’t look at me like that. I didn’t do it! 
.357 fan here. I don’t carry.
IMHO…
The 9mm provides firepower with the number of rounds.
The .45 gives you more knock down power. Less rounds though.
In a surprise, home defense type of situation, the 9 mm can give you nearly twice as many shots. If you need that many rounds though, your endangering others. You have to be damn sure you will hit what you’re shooting at, before you pull the trigger.
7 or 8 in a .45 or even 6 in the .357 should be plenty.
On the other hand…If you get into a gun fight, you want as many rounds possible. I prefer the approach that I will hit what I’m shooting at.
Also, look at it this way. Most police shootings have the police killing the person, with many rounds fired. Many, many rounds. They make quite sure they are dead.
If I ever had to shoot someone, I’m going to do my best to kill them, with one shot. I would not want to face the court system in the US that asked ‘why did you shoot him twice?’ The double tap. Police seem to be immune to this.
I’d heard the story about the 1911A, but that Bastion of Truth, the History Channel, says it was the single action .45 that replaced the .38.
Well, my ‘nightstand’ pieces are twin Beretta 92f’s. 9mm’s with lasergrips and surefire weaponlights, a Remmie 870 with fore-end grips and a surefire.
The twins roll with 15 round mags stocked to the top with Federal 147 grain Tactical Hydra-Shok JHP, and the 12 ga is filled with Winchester Ranger Low-Recoil 2 3/4" 8 Pellet 00 Buck.
I will soon be trading in the twins for two of These before you can no longer get your hands on them.
Which, IMO, regarding the OP, will render the question moot.
There’s something that popped into my head after I read this. . . and I do practice it.
If I have a loaded handgun, be it 9mm, .40SW, .380ACP, or .45, there is something to always keep in mind: have that second magazine ready beforehand. Put that sucker right next to your handgun or other magazine.
I’m still sticking with my personal thoughts that one should carry/depend on a weapon they feel most comfortable with, but there’s a little extra insurance in making sure your second magazine is loaded. . .
Take the tactical situations where you will, but it only takes half a second to stuff a second mag in a back pocket or in the band of your underwear. And that’ll makes quite a difference when it comes down to “the number of rounds” (in the 9mm vs. .45 argument).
Tripler
Revolvers? I just got mine two months ago. I’ve not played with ‘speed reloading’ yet.
jmesho, but the best weapon for home defense is a secure locking system. (good deadbolts ect.) the best home defense firearm is a short barreled 12 gauge pump shotgun like this one
:rolleyes: Consider the source. The .45 Colt Single Action Army, the Peacemaker as it is popularly known, came out in 1873 and I’m pretty sure it was the first cartridge revolver adopted by the US military. There was a Colt .38 cartridge in 1872 used in a converted cap and ball pistol but that’s a different kettle of fish than what the army adopted a few years later.
3 probably comes from the Politically Incorrect “Mozambique Drill”; two quick shots to the torso, followed by a more carefully aimed one to the head. Jeff Cooper used to write enthusiastically about this.
As for size/caliber/load: whatever you can fire accurately, in a controlled manner, and without jamming or fouling the weapon. 9mm Para, .357 Rem Mag, .45ACP, 10mm Auto, .40S&W, .38 Spc, .400 Cor-Bon, .356 TSW, .41 AE, 9x22…it’s all good. In a real fight, you aren’t going to be far enough away, or aiming carefully enough that inherent precision of the round is an issue.
Stranger
Jesus, some of you guys sound like your better prepared to star in a John Woo film than to deal with a burgler.
I don’t have anything against gun owners, and I’m well versed in the difference between "ugly-looking’ and “more deadly” but I’d hate to be in your place afterwards if you ever had to use these things.
Stranger
My nightstand pistol is named “Fluffy” for that very reason. If I ever, Og forbid, have to use it, I don’t want the District Attorney enquiring as to why I named my gun “Killer” or some such. Strictly factory loads, too. No handloads.
The gun leaning against the corner near my nightstand is named “Mossberg”.
I didn’t put a short barrel and pistol grip on it because I want the cop to see that I shot the miscreant with a duck gun, not some sexy riot gun.
Has there ever been a GQ about firearms on SDMB that didn’t turn into a GD? :rolleyes:
So you’re saying that leaping through the air upside down while crossdrawing consecutive serial number Desert Eagle pistols and firing both at once* isn’t a sound defensive posture?
Some of the stuff may sound extreme to a non shooter but a lot of it is quite sensible. The weapon light is a high power flashlight that mounts under the barrel. There are attahments to mount them to the front of the trigger guard but many handguns now have a mount under the dustcover specifically for a weapon light. Better to absolutely identify a potential target before deciding to shoot than blasting into a dark room so God can sort them out. Most tactical lights are bright enough to temporarily blind someone. I demonstrate my Surefire by having someone close their eyes and shining it on their face. Most describe it as like looking into the sun. I’m not a big fan of lasers but the laser grips which mount the laser unobrusively next to the shooter’s index finger seem practical.
I’ve never heard anyone other than Jeff Cooper call 2 to body, 1 to head a “Mozambique.” Every instructor I’ve worked with calls it a failure drill. I’m considering getting my instructor certification soon and I plan to teach the non-Woo style.
*…in slow motion while screaming “Noooooo!”
Also: put me in the .45 camp. Not because I have anything against the 9mm (I own one, a Taurus PT99, it’s a great shooter) but because, as Tripler’s pointed out, it’s the caliber/gun I’ve shot the most and feel the most comfortable with.
Besides, I shot several dogs once with a .45. Flipped the suckers head-over-heels, and the poor poochies (who were big, advancing on me, displaying teeth, and growling) did not get back up.
I used to shoot IPSC waybackwhen, so I’m not really contesting the utility (though I personally think a frame-mounted flashlight is a Bad Idea, but that’s a whole 'nother issue.) My point is that it does sound extreme to a non-shooter…which is likely to be the category into which fit the 12 people who may sit in judgement of you should things get In The Sh…. If I were I the jury, I’d know the difference, but Joe Nobody, whose knowledge of firearms comes exclusively from Die Hard 2 (the only movie I’ve ever seen which managed to make more erroneous claims in one line of dialog than Charles Schumer makes in an entire speech[sup]1[/sup]), is likely to believe prosecution claims that you are some kind of wacko terrorist serial killer and you probably eat crushed kittens with your eggs in the morning to boot.
But YMMV, 'specially if you live someplace where the focus of culpability is on the criminals rather than citizens.
- “That punk pulled a Glock 7 on me. You know what that is? It’s a porcelain gun made in Germany. It dosen’t show up on you airport X-ray machines, and it cost more than you make here in a month.”
I count five errors. That’s impressive, even by Hollywood standards.
Stranger
[QUOTE=enipla]
Also, look at it this way. Most police shootings have the police killing the person, with many rounds fired. Many, many rounds. They make quite sure they are dead.
[quote]
In a deadly force situation, you shoot until the threat that justified the shooting is gone, not to kill. Whether you fire once or 41 times is actually somewhat irrelevant, because the real test as to whether a shooting is justified lies with the first bullet. IOW, if the first round fired was justified under that department’s use of force policy, then any subsequent rounds fired were as well. I certainly won’t speak for other LE agencies, but we absolutely do not shoot to kill.
Given that the odds are you’ll miss the first one, this is a bad way to approach a deadly force scenario. As I said earlier, we’ve moved away from the “double tap” mindset. The reason being, we don’t want officers getting into the habit of instictively stopping after 2 shots. Again, you shoot until the threat is over, regardless of how many rounds that may be.
Aw crap…
In a deadly force situation, you shoot until the threat that justified the shooting is gone, not to kill. Whether you fire once or 41 times is actually somewhat irrelevant, because the real test as to whether a shooting is justified lies with the first bullet. IOW, if the first round fired was justified under that department’s use of force policy, then any subsequent rounds fired were as well. I certainly won’t speak for other LE agencies, but we absolutely do not shoot to kill.
Given that the odds are you’ll miss the first one, this is a bad way to approach a deadly force scenario. As I said earlier, we’ve moved away from the “double tap” mindset. The reason being, we don’t want officers getting into the habit of instictively stopping after 2 shots. Again, you shoot until the threat is over, regardless of how many rounds that may be.
As I understand it, “double tap” doesn’t mean you fire twice then put your gun away, rather that you fire in successive groups of two. Sounds solid to me, especially if the target is moving or popping out from behind cover. I know little about shooting, but I do know that acquiring the target takes time, and getting off two shots in that time could be an advantage.
Depending upon your locale, home/self defense shootings may also have to get past the Civil Liability hurdle; what makes sense to cops and the D.A.'s office may not make so much sense to the jury in the civil case when your victim (or your victim’s family) is suing you for damages or even wrongfull death.