Daily reminder that only wristlets and fags say all pistol calibers are functionally identical

The difference in damage is negligible, which is why shot placement is much more important with pistol calibers and low velocity rounds. What isn’t negligible is capacity. 9mm handguns carry more rounds than a comparably sized .45, and I’d rather have more chances to hit a vital organ.

The price argument has never made sense to me. Practice 9mm is usually $10, .380 and .40 S&W are about $12, and .45 is about $15. That's a difference, sure, but only a dealbreaker if you're
>poor
>shooting thousands of rounds and going to the range consistantly
Given this is Jow Forums I'm leaning towards poor being the excuse. Also it's amazing that people here will spend drop $500 or more on a gun on a whim, then cry about paying 25% more for ammo.

>What isn’t negligible is capacity
Unless you consider how many rounds are realistically expended in self defense.

You never know how many you’ll need. That’s what sucks.

geez just use the caliber and gun you wanna use. the reason the fbi uses 9mm isnt because its the best but because they have to issue a weapon to thousands of agents that have varying skill and strength and they also want cheap

who gives le fuck

Attached: 1557092113370.jpg (600x590, 36K)

>.45fags absolutely SEETHING

As a cop, maybe. But it isn't common for a citizen to expend 15 rounds in self defense, especially for CC.

>I want less ammo in a fight

Nobody has ever said this.

Attached: 1524053899716.jpg (1274x830, 365K)

The whole point of the 9mm fags is that they can achieve better shot placement (the only part that matters) because they can practice more for less or same money. Anyone making any other argument about 9mm being adequate is in full cope mode.

60% more than next to nothing is still irrelevant. If you're gonna go big, go BIG. Pick something that can reach real speeds like 10mm. Anything under that, coroners frequently struggle to identify. A 9mm wound looks a lot like a .45 wound, even if it's slightly smaller you're not doing much less to stop the attacker. Shoot straight instead.

My digs on .40 and .357 Sig are cost per round, wear on parts, and that 12 round magazine.

I really just want more bullets in a mag and to find tests where the round keeps close to FBI requirements in calibrated gel. I'd carry something like GDs or HSTs in .380 if every .380 gun wasn't some midget ass 8+1 pocket rocket. If money were no object, I'd have a FN 5.7 for 20 rounds to a magazine.

It's not that 9mm excels so much as it wins by default from pistol design and my own poverty.

>60% additional damage is negligible...

I have some beachfront property in arizona to sell you.

5.7 is actually not all that effective on human sized targets from what I read, and i also own a 5.7 and shoot it regularly enough. I love it and definitely recommend one if you get the cash for ease of shooting. Little bastard is loud though.

If blue or green tip keep 10"-18", that's all I need. Expansion or frag are just nice to have.

The VAST majority of stops with a handgun are psychological in nature, they are NOT physiological.
I can link the video if anyone wants but there is a seminar on handgun wounds presented by an ER anesthesiologist.
In that seminar he gave a case where an individual shot himself one night in the abdomen while “cleaning” his .357 magnum handgun.
The individual not only lived but was awake eating breakfast early the next morning after emergency surgery.

Duty calibers are small time next to a .357, yet this guy lived. Why? Because he didn’t hit a fucking vital organ.

>tl;dr: shot placement is EVERYTHING. Bigger rounds are great but it’s more important to hit and hit vital areas.

I'll follow you up with all the nightmare events I've found. Jared Reston ate a .45 through the mouth and several others around his vest, got up, shot his attacker several times in the A zone with .40, before he had to physically grab the guy in a headlock and dome him.

Timmothy Grammins got in a gunfight where he fired his Glock .45 33 times, down to his ladt magazine. He hit the attacker 11 times for no apparent effect despite several center mass hits, again before anchoring him and then head shotting him.

Bob Stasch saw his partner empty 6 rounds of 45 long colt (God damn, Chicago PD, what the fuck?) into a suspect with a knife, followed by 5 rounds of .38 spc point blank between the shoulder blades, followed by 2 shots off Stasch's 44 mag to the torso. Guy finally stopped when Stasch blew out his knee. Guy survived for four days before dying of infection.

Fuck handgun rounds.

Oh, forgot to say Reston and Grammins switched to 9mm for capacity. Grammins now carries 140 rounds of ammo like a crazy person, but I get why. Stasch switched to a 9 shot .45 because he still believes in the widest bullet you can get while still having 7+ bullets.

It’s not just that. Recommend a shotgun for home defense and get ready for a bunch of replies joking about Joe Biden and saying that an AR is the only way to go. This, despite the fact that nine .32 caliber holes in someone represents a lot more damage than one .223 caliber hole does, and the fact that shotguns smoke every single other kind of firearm in terms of single-hit incapacitation rates.

The point is that Jow Forums 1) loves tacticool shit, 2) has a severe case of magnumitis, and 3) suffers from inconsistency whenever these things contradict each other.

You're not wrong, but in case you missed it...
> Recommends shotgun over carbine
> Says Jow Forums suffers from magnumitis
Just saying...

Yes, I was pointing out Jow Forums‘s inconsistencies. Thanks for reminding me.

> suffers from inconsistency whenever these things contradict each other.
We are not all one person.
For example, those 9 .32 caliber holes, 00 buck, brings 10% mass than a No 1 Buck loading with 15 pellets of .29 caliber. both are good to 25-30 yards before the spread gets bigger than an IDPA target.
An AR-15 with an M4 barrel, brings 31 rounds, with a 400m range and shooting 5.56mm @ 2.9ft/s. For some people the AR makes sense if they live on more than a couple acres, so they can cover their property and even help their neighbor out. The situation dictates.
> loves tacticool shit
When talking about killing people, you think anyone is going to recommend a muzzle loader or a rapier? Of course tactical shit is going to come up. If there was a magic wand than killed or captured people by just looking at them and saying 'pate of dicks' we would be recommending those too.

Rifles and shotguns have nearly the same incapacitation rate. There is no reason to give up the advantages of an AR for the stoppin powah of a shotgun.

Very cool fren, but .45 still suffers from a lower capacity. If penetration is king, you want more rounds, not less.

>Rifles and shotguns have nearly the same incapacitation rate.
Source?

buckeyefirearms.org/alternate-look-handgun-stopping-power

That link talks about handgun stopping power. The question was about rifle vs. shotgun stopping power.

>This, despite the fact that nine .32 caliber holes in someone represents a lot more damage than one .223 caliber hole does

Funny. My mags hold at least 30. How many 5.56 do you think someone with even a modicum of training can get down range (accurately at HD distances) to your single shotgun shell?

I'm guessing 3-5 at least and with no risk of short stroking the pump and a far faster reload.

There's a graph down in his link that shows, for their data set, similar 80% 1 shot incapacitation rate. This data set is the only one of it's kind I've seen, so it inevitably gets dropped in this threads.

Attached: graph.png (481x288, 14K)

Based. Faggots like act like they'll be firing dozens of rounds and parrot the faster followup talking point. Which is irrelevant since we are talking about tenths of seconds. .40 S&W/357 SIG (they are essentially the same round with different weights) and .45 auto will always be better than 9mm

>357 sig is ++p++ .380
And 5.56 is just really fast .22lr right?

Source: my meta study rectum.

Meta studies are roundly ridiculed in all sciences and are even more suspect (if that's possible) in things with as many variables as shootings.

>Funny. My mags hold at least 30. How many 5.56 do you think someone with even a modicum of training can get down range (accurately at HD distances) to your single shotgun shell?

>I'm guessing 3-5 at least and with no risk of short stroking the pump and a far faster reload.

Most autoloading shotguns hold 5+, without getting into competition guns you can easily go up to 8 or 9. So what kind of split times are we talking here? Both guns fire their first shot at the same time, do you really think you can get 3-5 off before the shotgun fires it's second?

I mean, yeah? Really fucking fast and heavy .22lr is not the damning description a lot of people think it is.

ACP with a 70% incapacitation rate
We have been doing this whole defensive handgun thing wrong going off those numbers alone.

Attached: IMG_5305.jpg (800x600, 130K)

>For example, those 9 .32 caliber holes, 00 buck, brings 10% mass than a No 1 Buck loading with 15 pellets of .29 caliber. both are good to 25-30 yards before the spread gets bigger than an IDPA target.
An AR-15 with an M4 barrel, brings 31 rounds, with a 400m range and shooting 5.56mm @ 2.9ft/s.

Nice shifty stats. The shotgun with 00 buck brings nine pellets *per trigger pull*. Unless you have a full auto in your closet, your AR does not bring 31 rounds per trigger pull - it only brings one. To compare apples to apples, a full magazine of 00 buck from a Mossberg 590, presuming you keep it cruiser ready without one in the chamber (so, 8 rounds with 9 pellets each), puts 72 holes in the target - more than twice what a full magazine from an AR will do.

>Meta studies are roundly ridiculed in all sciences
That study's data aside, did you mean meta-analysis? There's pitfalls, but they are not "roundly ridiculed in all sciences". Not even close. Lord knows several fields could due with more system reviews.

>autoloading shotguns
Nice goalpost move. Nobody here recommends autoloading shotguns for HD because a decent autoloading shotgun is well north of $1k.

Also: no but the third out of an AR will be faster unless you're the same sort of dipshit advocating people use underloaded birdshot for HD.

Bruv, there's a reason Canada outlawed (or so I thought) "mouse" guns, and it has everything to do with where they are relative to the target when it goes off, if you catch my drift.

Here have some opinions from an ammunition scientist and people that use guns for a living.

ballisticmag.com/2015/04/11/45-acp-9mm-experts-answers/

>decent autoloading shotgun is well north of $1k
Not him. Please save the sweeping generalizations. The fucking M2 is not the entry point for auto-loaders. If your 930 has run like a champ with box after box of field loads, it's not magically going to get performance anxiety when it's time.

That's as bad as watching someone shoot a PSA gun for 2000 rounds and then saying it's still going to choke when it matters.

>if you short stroke a pump shotgun after the first 20 minutes golf your first range trip with one
Ouch, bro. I've short stroked before. Not on the regular, but it happens under pressure, like with clays.

Paul Harrell did this already. The difference in time between him being able to put a full mag from an AR downrange and a full mag from a pump shotgun (which again, is more projectiles than two AR mags combined) downrange was minimal. Also, if you short stroke a pump shotgun after the first 20 minutes of your first range trip with one, you’re a certified retard and I’ll cheer when Jamal and Tyrone remove your defective DNA from the gene pool.

So no, your argument is shit.

Short stroking is a training issue, not a hardware issue. If you do it, you need to train more.

>More holes = better

I bet you think women are better than traps too you fucking faggot

Attached: absolutely-disgusting.png (500x522, 115K)

Its a good thing more lead downrange in the same time period isnt the determining factor when it comes to hd firearms then. If it were, there are still AR uppers that can do it better with semi auto actions and better reliability

Nigger, it’s the factor that YOU brought up. Now you’re out moving them goalposts as fast as you can drag them.

>Nice shifty stats.
You have misread that. An AR gives you 31 changes to hit your target at 400m, with one mag. A 20" shotty gives you 8 with the effective range of 30 yards.
The AR platform is a much more versatile. No one is saying a shotgun is ineffective, but its limited range and capacity means it can be out ranged by a 10/22.
Like I said in that post, people who live on any acreage need range. The shotgun does not provide that.

Yeah, silly me, thinking that putting more holes in a bad guy gives you a higher chance of stopping them.

Post the single-shot rifle you keep for home defense.

In fairness you can reach out to 100m with slugs. Wouldn't be my first choice at all but it'll do the job if needed.

>Nobody here recommends autoloading shotguns for HD
Some do.
>because a decent autoloading shotgun is well north of $1k.
Three issues here, one is that there are cheap options available that run fine. Would you not recommend using a quality AR? Would a scar be unsuitable? What about the myriad of other $1500 to $2000+ guns? All unsuitable because they cost too much? Should we use only the cheapest, chinesium AR we can find and that is the only suitable option? And is the 600 dollar difference between the cheap, bargain bin ar and the "quality" shotgun you don't want to get worth your life?

If you're worried about backdrop and overpenetration.

>You have misread that. An AR gives you 31 changes to hit your target at 400m, with one mag. A 20" shotty gives you 8 with the effective range of 30 yards.
No, a 20” shotty gives you 72 chances to hit your target. Again, 8 rounds times 9 pellets = 72. Also, how many 400 yard hallways do you have in your house? For that matter, how many 30 yard hallways do you have in your house? If the answer is “none”, then your point is irrelevant in a home defense scenario.

Im not the user that argued that you could put more projectiles in the air with an AR, im the user who told you its irrelevant

>Nobody has ever said this.
Shoot a Glock and Wesson 45mm and you'll say dif.

Again, post the single shot rifle you use for home defense.

Your daily reminder that due to advances in bullet construction there is minimal risk of overpenetration with many .223 rounds. No more so than a shotgun or handgun

Agreed, but welcome to human existence. Pistol is more my game, I shoot them the most. I've had sweaty hands and a not-perfect support hand that's let me drop a 80% full mag on a run before. I've had my thumb ride the slide release to prevent lock back. I've frozen a trigger before, and ejected a perfectly good round because it thought it was a dud. Down and to the left plagues me on fast strings.

Shit happens, bro. Especially with humans, even with training. How many times you hear "Weird, that's never happened before" in a match?

>unironically arguing that the difference between a shotgun with buckshot and an AR is comparable to the difference between an AR and a single shot rifle
Top brainlet.

They do. It's 2mm. Pistols don't go fast enough to have interesting terminal effects like fragmentation or a temporary cavity that might matter.

How often is that .10" delta going to be the difference between striking a vital organ or artery and not?

So does number of projectiles on target matter, or not? If not, explain why. And explain why a single-shot .308 or two-shot derringer wouldn’t be a perfectly acceptable self-defense option.

That is true, but one acre, if configured in a square, has sides that are 210 ft long, a shot from corner to corner is 296 feet, right around where the slug fails.

So you can see where people with even modest acreage would greatly benefit from an AR.

Home defense does not limit itself to inside your dwelling. People living on 20 acres have all kinds of lines of sight, just like hunting from a stand. Do you use a shotgun hunting from a stand? You are also incorrect, with a shotgun giving you 72 chances to hit. You only get 8 trigger pulls, and patterns are very tight, even with open chokes. See the accompanying picture. At 40 yards, you are going to struggling to hit a target with a cylinder bore and 9 pellets. Shouldn't you be loading bird shot with your line of reasoning?

Attached: chokes.jpg (978x475, 56K)

The number of follow up shots matter, not the number of projectiles.
Fast follow up shots is not the same as 9 projectiles from the same cartridge in a half inch circle and you know it you disingenuous nigger. Go buy a blunderbuss and stuff it with rocks and let us know how it works for you.

>people will pay more for a one time investment but get upset if they have to consistently pay more money
What's your credit card number user?

Man, I love me some good dove breast, but it feels like there's a lot of grumpy old patrol officers pissed that their trusty ol' 870 isn't the patrol or home defense long gun of choice any longer.

Attached: do-you-have-a-moment-to-discuss-marty-robbins.png (500x634, 168K)

Again, I need source on this. Not because I don’t believe you, but I want this to be true so I can switch to an AR for HD with peace of mind.

What's funny is that everyone online fetishizes and fantasizes about what guns and calibers are better, meanwhile Tyrell and Jamal are out there just randomly dumping .22, .25, .32, .38, etc. from shitty guns that are probably older than your dad and they are getting easy kills on other young healthy adults (and little babies playing nintendo, because bullets love to hit the soft spots on they heads) without any problem.
That said 9mm is better than .45 unless you use a 1911, if you do it makes it 104.38% more effective.

>This, despite the fact that nine .32 caliber holes in someone represents a lot more damage than one .223 caliber hole does

That’s not a great comparison though. That .223 is moving twice as fast as those buckshot balls are.

Buckshot isn’t inherently more powerful, per se, but you’re basically magdumping a .32 ACP +P into something all at once. It’s guaranteed to cause a ton of trauma and it increases your chances of striking a vital.

But if I dump a few light grain .223 rounds into something really quick, it’ll have a similar if not better effect.

That being said, debating over which is better than whatever else is fucking retarded. A “good caliber” won’t make up for shitty shooting. An experienced bird hunter protecting himself with an 870 pump and buckshot is likely going to do a lot better than a mallninja who kits out his AR with stupid shit and goes to the range twice a year and does nothing but magdump.

Training > everything else.

Not him. You can google ".223 dry wall" and get a bunch of DIY test results.

how-i-did-it.org/drywall/results.html

>.357 sig is retarded though since it is basically ++p++ .380
>believes in muh big hole but not velocity
Spotted the fake expert
Please dont post that video, its a massive nothing burger and im constantly amazed by people who think its supposed to be authoritative, informative, or even really about the subject of ammo selection as opposed to its actual core subject matter of treating GSWs. The only info in there is literally google tier generalities regurgitated from the works of Fackler and Roberts.
>a lot more damage than one .223 caliber hole does
Troll line. That isn't even close to an honest argument, were talking about .223 not .22lr, the former isn't poking .22" holes in people.
>inb4 muh russian fmj from a 7" barrel
yea, and shotguns don't work so good if you load them with rock salt either.

>Home defense does not limit itself to inside your dwelling
Actually it kinda does. Try explaining to a jury why you shot someone 400 yards away in “self-defense”.
>The number of follow up shots matter, not the number of projectiles
Nope. Statistics show that the average number of shots fired in a citizen-involved self-defense shooting is 2-3. Five shots fired is rare, and ten is almost unheard-of. That means an 8+1 shotgun has way more than the minimum capacity that statistics showed is required for a home defense situation.
>That’s not a great comparison though. That .223 is moving twice as fast as those buckshot balls are.
So? The idea that you’re going to have a home invasion by attackers wearing body armor is pure fantasy. In the real world, that doesn’t actually happen. Which means that both a 00 pellet and a .223 round have more than sufficient power for the task at hand.

Worth noting that the tester experienced massively different results when variable were changed(from one type of drywall to another). While the platitude of properly selected 5.56 tending to penetrate less than common handgun JHPs, FMJs, or heavier weight buck shot like 00 is very much so true it would be a poor decision to expect much real world application from that knowledge with out at the very least knowing with what and how your house is constructed. Personally i have a hard time thinking of any common building materials that i would actually trust with stopping 5.56 that wouldn't also stop a load of 00. The list is pretty much brick, concrete, and cinder blocks AFAIK.

how-i-did-it.org/drywall2/

More tests:
youtube.com/watch?v=63YzAygLtf8
youtube.com/watch?v=PbdmQ5IN2j0
preparedgunowners.com/2016/07/14/why-high-powered-5-56-nato-223-ar-15-ammo-is-safer-for-home-defense-fbi-overpenetration-testing/

>b-but you only NEED 3 rounds on average
Extra capacity is not a drawback and an AR can put those 3 rounds into a target before you can rack the slide of your shotgun

>Try explaining to a jury why you shot someone 400 yards away in “self-defense”
That sounds like a job for a lawyer. Try explaining why you shot someone 30 yards away in self defense.

>Statistics show that the average number of shots fired in a citizen-involved self-defense shooting is 2-3
[Citation Needed]

Capacity in the real world is much less important, considering every test done shows the average number of shots fired in an altercation is THREE.

Citation fucking needed. And let’s say you are right for the sake of your argument, then what will you do if you find yourself outside of the statistical average? Then what?

>rack the slide
Some people use semi-auto shotguns you know.

>using notoriously finicky guns for home defense when there are cheaper alternatives that work better
Its your funeral my man

I'd reload, retard

>[Citation Needed]
It's like you don't even watch Paul Harrell. Let me help you out: youtube.com/watch?v=CiHHgjaR0TI
>an AR can put those 3 rounds into a target before you can rack the slide of your shotgun
LOLno. See above.
>Try explaining why you shot someone 30 yards away in self defense.
Way to miss the fucking point. The point was that 1) shotguns are great for home defense, which typically happens at very short distances, that 2) shooting someone more than maybe 10 yards or so away in self-defense is going to bring up serious legal issues, which will only get worse the farther away they were when you shot them, and that 3) therefore, accuracy out much beyond shotgun range is irrelevant for self-defense in realistic non-WROL situations. My definition of "defending my life" includes NOT spending the next 30 years of it in a jail cell getting butt-pounded by Tyrone.
> That sounds like a job for a lawyer.
Okay, but if possible I'd also like to not be bankrupted by legal fees and spend years of my life in and out of court, even if I do eventually get acquitted. Ask George Zimmerman how pleasant an experience that kind of thing is.

Higher speed means higher drag means more easily destabilized. Lighter weight also means more easily destabilized. Think of stepping into a pool of water vs jumping in.

No, canada banned .25 and .32 handguns because most of the handguns in circulation were of those calibers. By banning those, it banned a maximum amount of firearms, and they could justify it with some bullshit about concealability.

> if you completely ignore velocity and only look at surface area you can make something look more effective.
Someone call the military and tell them to stop using .338 lapula in sniper rifles, because .45 acp has a much larger bullet diameter to act on the flesh, .338 is even worse than 9mm

>honestly believes he can fire a shotgun rack a slide and realign his sights faster than he can fire three rounds from a semi auto intermediate caliber rifle in a self defense situation
Lmao

>”...faster than you can rack a shotgun”
Becomes
>”...faster than you can shoot a shotgun, rack the slide, and realign your sights”
Nice goalpost moving.

Anyhow, again, watch the Harrell video.

>It's like you don't even watch Paul Harrell.
Is he that dude with the flannel?

>Hurrr, jail, Zimmerman, typical situations, lawyer fees, durr.
Put a trip on so people can filter you.

Attached: m16a2-rifle-001.jpg (1200x800, 78K)

>too much of a brainlet to understand that i was implying use for home defense, not literally just the action of racking the slide
I watched the video. The AR was 5x faster, by his own admission

Read his post again dumbass, you just repeated his point

What if I just dual wield my 9mm and .45?