Whatever bro... There is a Marine that now goes to Columbia University that was shot 11 times by 7.62x39 (AK-47), who is doing just fine now... 7.62x39 is MUCH more powerful than .45...

There is no magic bullet, FBI ballistic experts even admit that when it comes to handgun calibers, "stopping power" is a myth. What matters is shot placement. A badly placed shot from a .45 is just as ineffective as a badly placed shot from a 9mm or .40. In that same study from the FBI, hundreds of 9mm bullet wounds were studied. They concluded that not a single one of the wounds would have been more fatal or more likely to cause incapacitation if it were a .45 instead of a 9mm.

Yes, there have been complaints from our armed forces that 9mm is underpowered, but they use the FMJ crap... A good hollow point 9mm round is just as effective as a good .45 round.

FYI, your "insufficient" round is the caliber of choice for the Navy SEAL's submachine gun as well as their pistol... Same goes for Army Special Forces, DEVGRU, 1st SFOD-Delta, and MARSOC... but of course they have no idea what they are doing or talking about, right?

 

Agreed. Ammo wars are fun but not very useful. Absolute truths? Rimfire ammo is less reliable so avoid that in a self defense gun. But if you pay too much mind to ammo theories and you'll want to carry around a shotgun. One-shot handgun stop record? 357 magnum. But the 9 is more easily controlled out of a lighter handgun and less likely to kill your neighbor after you miss. Even the 40 has more snap to it so follow-up shot placement can suffer.

 

Bullet size and speed do play a factor in stopping power but I can PROMISE you that a "MagSafe" 9mm round or comparable maker will give you a catastrophic damage path and the stopping power of something much greater than its caliber.

best carry caliber IMHO is .45 though. I don't personally have one yet but its biggest/best bang for the size and dollar.

 

a badly placed shot from a .45 will cause more internal damage, and create a more damaging exit wound that a badly placed shot from a 9mm. The reason a study would conclude that a 9mm and a .45 are equally not fatal is because they are talking about 1 bullet. Bullet wounds dont typically kill people. Large amounts of internal shock to organs kills people. So, yes a single center mass shot from a 9mm or a .45 probably wont kill someone. But, 3 center mass shots from a .45 will probably kill someone, while 3 center mass shots from a 9mm would be a little more questionable.

If the military complains from the 9mm being under powered in a FMJ, why did they not complain of the .45 being under powered in a FMJ, if the rounds are equally effective?

Your last paragraph is funny, it really shows how little you understand about how bullets affect a body on impact. I would venture to say that you have had little to no training on the subject. As said before, people die from mass amounts of repeated trauma to their internals. This is why many special forces units using sub machine guns are ok with using a small round like a 9mm. It gives you the ability to shoot someone at a rate of 800 rounds per minute, causing sever trauma in a very short time. Because of how little the 9mm is, it allows a gun to cycle faster, with less recoil, letting the shooter accurately deliver several rounds to its target.

Now, even with your little amount of knowledge, I think you can understand that a navy seal with a sub machine gun chambered in 9mm, is very different than a new shooter using a 9mm handgun with 10 rounds in it.

Here you can see that a .45 delivers a greater shock internally than a 9mm. While it may be true that a 9mm with an advanced round can do the same damage that a .45 can do, a .45 with an advanced round can do even more.




Sorry to go a little off topic OP, I didnt want you thinking the quoted post was accurate and basing any decisions off of it.

 

just remember that if you open carry in CA, your firearm has to be unloaded...try asking here: Keeping cali safe facebook page

 

right back at you... And I love how you are so informed as to what I know about firearms/ballistics/trauma...

Your retarded comment #1: Navy SEALS and other military units that use the MP5 (9mm submachine gun), don't shoot 800 rounds per minute... They are trained to do one of two things, double tap and follow up with a cranio-ocular shot if the double tap doesn't put them down (exact same thing they do with handguns), or a 3 round burst center mass... They don't use full-auto and unload a mag into someone...

Your retarded comment #2: The size of the round has nothing to do with "allowing the gun to cycle faster".

Your retarded comment 3#: Yes, the temporary cavity created by the .45 in your picture looks impressive, but handgun calibers/velocities are much too slow to cause damage to organs that are effected by the temporary cavity (the temporary cavity lasts 5-10 milliseconds... Here is some info about that:

"Temporary cavitation can also cause the tearing of tissues if a very large amount of force is involved. The tensile strength of muscle ranges roughly from 1 to 4 MPa (145 to 580 lbf/in²), and minimal damage will result if the pressure exerted by the temporary cavitation is below this. Gelatin and other less elastic media have much lower tensile strengths, thus they exhibit more damage after being struck with the same amount of force. At typical handgun velocities, bullets will create temporary cavities with much less than 1 MPa of pressure, and thus are incapable of causing damage to elastic tissues which they do not directly contact."

The reason a tiny .223 is much more powerful than a larger 9mm, .40, or .45 is because of the velocity that the bullet travels at. At "rifle speeds", the cellular structure of the surrounding tissue "temporary cavity" is actually destroyed. At "rifle speeds", bullets can also create remote hydrostatic shock wounds (cause brain hemorrhaging).

Anyways, keep talking out of your ass and calling me an idiot, pretending you have a PhD, when you are the one who knows very little on the subject.

 

Another ammo war

With the new bullet designs I feel very safe carrying a 9mm, .40 or .45. Often times I pocket carry my .380 Ruger LCP because it can slip in a front pocket of my shorts in the summer... better than nothing.

Too many times I have friends that want by the best "manstopper" round only to buy a .45, stick it on their nightstand and NEVER go to the range with me. Last time I dragged one of these guys out he couldn't hit sh*t beyond the typical 21 feet. Also, my recommendation for a home protection gun that never leaves the house isn't a handgun. They also never listen to that advice.

 

And few people put reliability, minimum FTF's, where it should be (#1). My Colt series 70 45 ACP was never 100% reliable with anything other than plain ball ammo, even after some ramp & throat smithing. I know modern designs are more tolerant but make sure you test your defensive weapon extensively with your chosen ammo before betting your life on it.

My Walther P99 in 9 mm is 99.9% reliable (literally has a history of about 1 in a 1,000 rounds stovepiped, and only with crappy ammo) and I still feel better reaching for a S&W 686+ in the GunVault, loaded with SXT 38 Spl +P (my best accuracy in a defensive round), because it has a 100.0% record.

 

If you're in California, http://calguns.net is your answer.

 

I'd recommend a 9mm, simply because ammo is significantly cheaper, which means more range time/practice. I barely get out to the range enough myself, and I have a 9mm. It's def not cheap to practice with a .45 if it's your only gun.