# Round effectiveness and concealed carry weapons



## phyrpowr (Aug 30, 2009)

Andy said:


> Walther ppk! Perfect.
> 
> Gilchrist, Andy Gilchrist!


too little pocket for so much gun (for too little caliber) My AMT Backup might fit just right though


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

Too little calibre?!

"Walther PPK. 7.65 mil with a delivery like a brick through a plate glass window. Takes a Brausch silencer with very little reduction in muzzle velocity. The American CIA swear by them."

:icon_smile_big:


----------



## Flanderian (Apr 30, 2008)

Jovan said:


> Too little calibre?!
> 
> "Walther PPK. 7.65 mil with a delivery like a brick through a plate glass window. Takes a Brausch silencer with very little reduction in muzzle velocity. The American CIA swear by them."
> 
> :icon_smile_big:


Also available in 380 ACP. Same caliber as a standard .38, and roughly the same as 9mm. The difficulty is that the cartridge is short and therefore does not produce very much velocity or muzzle energy. The weapons chambered for it are intended to take advantage of the smaller size and lower power of the cartridge. Typically they are smaller (For concealed carry) and offer minimal recoil and muzzle blast. A lively debate can be had as to whether this cartridge is very much worse or better than others intended for similar purposes, with many preferring .22's.

The Walther PPK is a high quality pistol manufactured to exacting standards. I fired one a little over 40 years ago and found it very nice. I've always particularly liked the trigger feel of Walther pistols, and the PPK was no exception. Though of small size, it fits the hand well and is easy to shoot.


----------



## Oldsarge (Feb 20, 2011)

And so long as you are at close range and aim for the base of the ear, it works just fine. Now if some large, angry type with an ax handle was coming at you at full speed, you could have a serious problem.


----------



## sbdivemaster (Nov 13, 2011)

Andy said:


> Walther ppk! Perfect.


I was thinking a Kahr P9, but a Bond Derringer - chambered for 45 Colt/.410 - would be a better fit. heh


----------



## midatlantic (Feb 17, 2012)

I want a jacket that will let me carry my machete inside of it. Guns are for wimps and the don't stop zombies as easily as a large blade.


----------



## Bjorn (May 2, 2010)

Always double tap...


----------



## CuffDaddy (Feb 26, 2009)

midatlantic said:


> I want a jacket that will let me carry my machete inside of it. Guns are for wimps and the don't stop zombies as easily as a large blade.


Bah. "Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side."


----------



## CuffDaddy (Feb 26, 2009)

Oldsarge said:


> And so long as you are at close range and aim for the base of the ear, it works just fine. Now if some large, angry type with an ax handle was coming at you at full speed, you could have a serious problem.


Was it Jeff Cooper who commented about a .25 ACP, "If you shot someone with that and they found out about it, they'd probably be very upset"? Or something to that effect...


----------



## Oldsarge (Feb 20, 2011)

CuffDaddy said:


> Was it Jeff Cooper who commented about a .25 ACP, "If you shot someone with that and they found out about it, they'd probably be very upset"? Or something to that effect...


Sounds like him. After all, there are _reasons_ why the .45 ACP was the U.S. Army sidearm for over fifty years.


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

Funny enough, .25 was the calibre of Bond's previous pistol according the novel. Though the movie makes a number of mistakes...

https://www.imfdb.org/wiki/Dr._No

WaterlooSunset: There are some who feel ticket pockets are inappropriate on city suits due to their country heritage. I disagree, given the number of concessions we've made to country clothing in the last decade, but alas.


----------



## CuffDaddy (Feb 26, 2009)

Jovan said:


> Funny enough, .25 was the calibre of Bond's previous pistol according the novel. Though the movie makes a number of mistakes...


Yeah, I actually knew that. Unfortunately, one of the mistakes is showing a .380 cartridge being a devastatingly effective combat round!


----------



## andy b. (Mar 18, 2010)

Oldsarge said:


> Sounds like him. After all, there are _reasons_ why the .45 ACP was the U.S. Army sidearm for over fifty years.


Yes, because no one made a .46. 

Andy B.


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

CuffDaddy said:


> Yeah, I actually knew that. Unfortunately, one of the mistakes is showing a .380 cartridge being a devastatingly effective combat round!


In the movie, it was presented as a .32/7.65mm "PPK" when in reality it was a .380 PP. In comparison to the .25, it's better...


----------



## midatlantic (Feb 17, 2012)

CuffDaddy said:


> Bah. "Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side."


Yeah, and after your first two shots miss due to adrenaline, my machete will be stuck half way into your neck or shooting arm. Too bad carry and conceal laws don't cover blades....do they?:icon_smile:


----------



## Oldsarge (Feb 20, 2011)

midatlantic said:


> Yeah, and after your first two shots miss due to adrenaline, my machete will be stuck half way into your neck or shooting arm. Too bad carry and conceal laws don't cover blades....do they?:icon_smile:


In California they do. No blade may be carried concealed if its more that 3.5" in length.


----------



## midatlantic (Feb 17, 2012)

Oldsarge said:


> In California they do. No blade may be carried concealed if its more that 3.5" in length.


Most states have that. I meant a conceal law that let's you get a permit to carry something bigger.


----------



## RM Bantista (May 30, 2009)

midatlantic said:


> Most states have that. I meant a conceal law that let's you get a permit to carry something bigger.


I don't know of any that allow this, but in several, open carry is permitted. Not CA. In NM you may, provided that everyone knows you are wearing a knife pistol or sword. It isn't legal to carry concealed without a permit for handguns or knives beyond a 3.5" blade. If there is a clip showing it is legal. Of course federal restrictions also apply. Other states have other rules.
In CA, it is legal to carry blades as long as no one knows that you have one and it is concealed. Go figure.
YMMV,
rudy
as calibers go, I do like the German 9.0 mm in the long Luger round and the .45 acp for handguns, hard to dispute a 1911A by a good gunsmith. Long rifles are a whole other subject and depend on the problem at hand. Shot guns as well. Depends. (Side note: if you reach for a sword, you will be dead before it is fully deployed. Haven't had to do so, but I know stuff.)
I'm not the only one who does.


----------



## midatlantic (Feb 17, 2012)

RM Bantista said:


> Side note: if you reach for a sword, you will be dead before it is fully deployed. Haven't had to do so, but I know stuff.)
> I'm not the only one who does.


It all depends. Of course, weapons arguments are often silly arguments. But ... I've heard several self-defense trainers say that a person with a knife can pull it out, close the distance on an opponent and stab them before the opponent can pull a gun, aim, and shoot. I believe 6 to 10 feet is the distance, IRRC, in these stories. Of course, these claims are of the "I read somewhere about a study" nonsense, but an instructor I had said he believed it to be very true. Police will shoot you (or at you) if you pull a knife even at some distance. Of course, one could study this with some fake weapons, maybe a magic marker for the knife and put a white t-shirt on...if the "knife" gets one or two marks on you before you can pull the triger....it could be over...or at least over for both of you.


----------



## AuStyle (Dec 7, 2011)

midatlantic said:


> It all depends. Of course, weapons arguments are often silly arguments. But ... I've heard several self-defense trainers say that a person with a knife can pull it out, close the distance on an opponent and stab them before the opponent can pull a gun, aim, and shoot. I believe 6 to 10 feet is the distance, IRRC, in these stories. Of course, these claims are of the "I read somewhere about a study" nonsense, but an instructor I had said he believed it to be very true. Police will shoot you (or at you) if you pull a knife even at some distance. Of course, one could study this with some fake weapons, maybe a magic marker for the knife and put a white t-shirt on...if the "knife" gets one or two marks on you before you can pull the triger....it could be over...or at least over for both of you.


In my martial arts training we train for taking down someone from 21ft pulling a concealed weapon. The idea being if you suspect them of having a concealed weapon and are going to use it, the moment they go to reach for it you can cover the 21ft disable them before they have had time to fully draw the weapon (this is for knives, guns, and clubs). This only works if you are ready to respond however, hence why police will draw weapons a long distance from the suspect as once your weapons is drawn you can respond almost instantly, you must remember that anything under 21ft can easily be covered in a second or less by someone at full bolt.


----------



## CuffDaddy (Feb 26, 2009)

midatlantic said:


> Yeah, and after your first two shots miss due to adrenaline, my machete will be stuck half way into your neck or shooting arm. Too bad carry and conceal laws don't cover blades....do they?:icon_smile:


Oh. That explains why the US Army and Marines have stopped issuing sidearms and give all their officers swords instead.


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

^^
LOL. I cannot speak for the Army or the Marine Corps, but the USAF didn't give me an officers saber until I retired after 30+ years...and even then they mounted it on a hunk of walnut planking. Now just what in the hell is an aging curmudgen supposed to do with a 30" pig sticker? I think I would have rather had the cash...with that I could have bought another pair of shoes! :crazy:


----------



## Flanderian (Apr 30, 2008)

eagle2250 said:


> Now just what in the hell is an aging curmudgen supposed to do with a 30" pig sticker?


The Thanksgiving turkey?


----------



## Flanderian (Apr 30, 2008)

AuStyle said:


> In my martial arts training we train for taking down someone from 21ft pulling a concealed weapon. The idea being if you suspect them of having a concealed weapon and are going to use it, the moment they go to reach for it you can cover the 21ft disable them before they have had time to fully draw the weapon (this is for knives, guns, and clubs). This only works if you are ready to respond however, hence why police will draw weapons a long distance from the suspect as once your weapons is drawn you can respond almost instantly, you must remember that anything under 21ft can easily be covered in a second or less by someone at full bolt.


If I were still etiher young or fit, and had a 21 foot head start, I wouldn't be sticking around to learn what the bad guy had under his coat.


----------



## Checkerboard 13 (Oct 6, 2009)

CuffDaddy said:


> Oh. That explains why the US Army and Marines have stopped issuing sidearms and give all their officers swords instead.


A friend of mine was a tunnel rat in Vietnam. His .45 remained holstered at all times. 
The 'rats who survived to tell about it, all used a blade. The muzzle flash and report of a pistol shot would make one an instant target in that environment.


----------



## CuffDaddy (Feb 26, 2009)

Good thing to keep in mind if I'm ever belly-crawling through a tunnel or culvert within a few yards of dozens of soldiers armed with fully-automatic kalashnikovs. I'm hoping to avoid that situation, personally.


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

I thought sidearms were only officially issued to officers and snipers anyway?

Check13: None of them used the "Hush Puppy"?


----------



## Checkerboard 13 (Oct 6, 2009)

Jovan said:


> I thought sidearms were only officially issued to officers and snipers anyway?


No room in those holes to use a rifle... not to mention the fact that it would impede travel. 
The .45 was there for backup, but he did his job the only way that would allow him a chance to get back home: quickly and quietly... with a blade.


----------



## Oldsarge (Feb 20, 2011)

During that conflict, what was 'officially issued' and what you went to war with often differed somewhat. The M16 was cordially (or perhaps not so cordially) despised by those who had to carry it, especially the early models. If you could get something more reliable, you did.

Of course, over the years the stupid black rifle has been improved. Not, to my mind, enough for it to have become the icon of 'with it-ness' among gunstore commandos, though. I carried that rotter for 29 years, on and off. Believe me, had I ever found myself in a firefight the first thing I'd have reached for was the PRC-25. "Get me an air strike, and I wan' it NOW!!"


----------



## Flanderian (Apr 30, 2008)

Oldsarge said:


> During that conflict, what was 'officially issued' and what you went to war with often differed somewhat. The M16 was cordially (or perhaps not so cordially) despised by those who had to carry it, especially the early models. If you could get something more reliable, you did.
> 
> Of course, over the years the stupid black rifle has been improved. Not, to my mind, enough for it to have become the icon of 'with it-ness' among gunstore commandos, though. I carried that rotter for 29 years, on and off. Believe me, had I ever found myself in a firefight the first thing I'd have reached for was the PRC-25. "Get me an air strike, and I wan' it NOW!!"


Being a U.S.A.F. veteran, they had the good sense to keep us away from firearms except once a year when we had to requalify. I had to qualify four times during my four year enlistment, the first with the M16 in basic. And then thrice at my permanent duty station. The first time there I had to qualify with a broken down M-1 Carbine. What a piece of junk! Would jam after every couple of rounds and sprayed lead anywhere. (Sadly our armorer was rarely sober, and a lack of maintenance no doubt contributed to their problems.) My last two years I shot the M16 and qualified at expert both times without a jam. (Note to all: It wasn't all that hard to qualify at expert in the U.S.A.F. and we never fired on full auto.)

I liked the M16, found it very easy to shoot and accurate. And it never jammed on me. Perhaps it had been de-bugged by then, or perhaps its demons didn't manifest themselves in semi-auto.


----------



## Oldsarge (Feb 20, 2011)

You weren't dragging them through triple-canopy jungle. The real problem with the M-16 was keeping it clean. If you had the good fortune to have genuine Colts and kept them clean, you were fine. But keeping an M-16 clean up country was a chore to try the patience of a saint. Experienced grunts just made it a habit to clean the damned thing every rest break. On the range, no problemo but this was supposed to be a _battle_ rifle?


----------



## Flanderian (Apr 30, 2008)

Oldsarge said:


> You weren't dragging them through triple-canopy jungle.


Yes, and you're right, that is a defining issue pertaining to the primary infantry weapon.


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

Oldsarge said:


> During that conflict, what was 'officially issued' and what you went to war with often differed somewhat. The M16 was cordially (or perhaps not so cordially) despised by those who had to carry it, especially the early models. If you could get something more reliable, you did.
> 
> Of course, over the years the stupid black rifle has been improved. Not, to my mind, enough for it to have become the icon of 'with it-ness' among gunstore commandos, though. I carried that rotter for 29 years, on and off. Believe me, had I ever found myself in a firefight the first thing I'd have reached for was the PRC-25. "Get me an air strike, and I wan' it NOW!!"


Every veteran I've talked to in every military branch hates that ****ing thing, even the newer ones who have seen Desert Storm, Afghanistan, and Operation Iraqi Freedom and are using the so-called "improved" rifles. Is it any wonder they've been trying to replace it for decades now? Something tells me Colt wins out every time because they are the lowest bidder, which is a sad state of affairs. Surely they could at least purchase those HK416 drop-in receivers to improve reliability. (The Marines found a loophole to purchase entire rifles, good on them.) If it takes other manufacturers to fix your mistakes when you've been supplying weapons to a country's military for half a century... something is seriously wrong.



Flanderian said:


> Being a U.S.A.F. veteran, they had the good sense to keep us away from firearms except once a year when we had to requalify. I had to qualify four times during my four year enlistment, the first with the M16 in basic. And then thrice at my permanent duty station. The first time there I had to qualify with a broken down M-1 Carbine. What a piece of junk! Would jam after every couple of rounds and sprayed lead anywhere. (Sadly our armorer was rarely sober, and a lack of maintenance no doubt contributed to their problems.) My last two years I shot the M16 and qualified at expert both times without a jam. (Note to all: It wasn't all that hard to qualify at expert in the U.S.A.F. and we never fired on full auto.)
> 
> I liked the M16, found it very easy to shoot and accurate. And it never jammed on me. Perhaps it had been de-bugged by then, or perhaps its demons didn't manifest themselves in semi-auto.


As said below, performance on a range and performance in combat hell are two different things. Direct gas impingement is fine if you're shooting paper targets and cleaning the thing after each day at the range. I've fired the AR-15 and it's a great target rifle, but little more.



Oldsarge said:


> You weren't dragging them through triple-canopy jungle. The real problem with the M-16 was keeping it clean. If you had the good fortune to have genuine Colts and kept them clean, you were fine. But keeping an M-16 clean up country was a chore to try the patience of a saint. Experienced grunts just made it a habit to clean the damned thing every rest break. On the range, no problemo but this was supposed to be a _battle_ rifle?


Indeed. The great thing about HK's designs is that you can just run water through them to rinse out the dirt, sand, and mud, then be ready to go. That's what a battle rifle should be.


----------



## RM Bantista (May 30, 2009)

AuStyle said:


> In my martial arts training we train for taking down someone from 21ft pulling a concealed weapon. The idea being if you suspect them of having a concealed weapon and are going to use it, the moment they go to reach for it you can cover the 21ft disable them before they have had time to fully draw the weapon (this is for knives, guns, and clubs). This only works if you are ready to respond however, hence why police will draw weapons a long distance from the suspect as once your weapons is drawn you can respond almost instantly, you must remember that anything under 21ft can easily be covered in a second or less by someone at full bolt.


Your training is correct and this is why police seem so quick to fire to people who don't know the reality of staying alive on the street up close and personal. Tasers sometimes work; sometimes not. Bean bag shotguns work pretty well, but who carries one on an everyday walk in the park? Same with net guns. Some forces have them. But as a civilian walking around streets where people have died for little or no reason, it is not an available option. With a knife of, really, almost any length, one may disuade an assault by whomever. Those with poor impulse control and access to weapons they probabably should not have and would not have if they were obtained through proper channels, may only respond to direct action at the moment. One wishes to avoid these situations, but they are not impossible. 'I have the solution', as the television program suggests. And I have practiced for years with my brothers, my wife, my children. We may not be assaulted without consequence. But we are peaceful people who treasure the lives of others as well as our own.
Regards, ladies and gentlemen,
peace, shalom, salaam, paz, 安...
rudy


----------



## midatlantic (Feb 17, 2012)

CuffDaddy said:


> Oh. That explains why the US Army and Marines have stopped issuing sidearms and give all their officers swords instead.


Off on surprise and on setting. But otherwise you are correct.


----------



## Oldsarge (Feb 20, 2011)

I am surprised that on a forum devoted to stylish dress no one has mentioned that quintessential gentleman's accessory, the walking stick. While costume-y and perhaps a bit foppish for the youthful, once a man's hair begins to silver it adds an air of urbanity and sophistication unmatched by any other item in the ensemble. Add to that fact that it can, be turned into a weapon of astonishing effectiveness. And it is absolutely, positively, unequivocally legal everywhere in the world and you have the perfect solution to personal protection anywhere but a war zone. If I didn't live in such a placid suburb, I would have a variety. In time I will, anyhow.


----------



## midatlantic (Feb 17, 2012)

Oldsarge said:


> I am surprised that on a forum devoted to stylish dress no one has mentioned that quintessential gentleman's accessory, the walking stick. While costume-y and perhaps a bit foppish for the youthful, once a man's hair begins to silver it adds an air of urbanity and sophistication unmatched by any other item in the ensemble. Add to that fact that it can, be turned into a weapon of astonishing effectiveness. And it is absolutely, positively, unequivocally legal everywhere in the world and you have the perfect solution to personal protection anywhere but a war zone. If I didn't live in such a placid suburb, I would have a variety. In time I will, anyhow.


Yes, there are lots of kinds of stick fighting and I think some people have developed some tricks to use with the cane [Opps, I now see that the cane fighting was in your link. Thanks!]. Could be handy for the elderly and those who have disabilities. I recall seeing a man who had some fairly prominent physical disabilities in a neighborhood back during the high crime years in the late 1980s who carried a small bat with him. I imagine he had been mugged once too often. Carrying a cane in many situations seems odd, perhaps an umbrella would do it. Even a short umbrella could be very effective. In self-defense they demonstrated how tightly rolling up a magazine can make it an extremely effective weapon, almost like a "2 by 4." Rolled paper (cardboard) has been used by some architects to hold up incredible weights for experimental or emergency design projects. I recall seeing such a designed used after an earthquake in Japan to create a temporary but amazing cathedral for a catholic church.


----------



## RM Bantista (May 30, 2009)

Oldsarge said:


> I am surprised that on a forum devoted to stylish dress no one has mentioned that quintessential gentleman's accessory, the walking stick. While costume-y and perhaps a bit foppish for the youthful, once a man's hair begins to silver it adds an air of urbanity and sophistication unmatched by any other item in the ensemble. Add to that fact that it can, be turned into a weapon of astonishing effectiveness. And it is absolutely, positively, unequivocally legal everywhere in the world and you have the perfect solution to personal protection anywhere but a war zone. If I didn't live in such a placid suburb, I would have a variety. In time I will, anyhow.


Oldsarge,
I do think this has been covered in older threads for both walking sticks and umbrellas, though I may be mistaken about that, as it has been discussed in many places and different fora for years. There are indeed a number of arts for sticks and others for umbrellas, which are very seriously studied by some people, and there have always been such systems for defense of life. In my own case, Sticks and umbrellas are sometimes carried, and no one seems threatened by them, though they may be very effective in the hands of an adept.
Good point though.
Regards,
rudy


----------



## thunderw21 (Sep 21, 2008)

While the .380 is easy to carry with a suit, it is right on the lower edge of acceptable defense rounds IMO. The 1911 .45 is always nice but if I'm wearing a nice suit I prefer a 9mm Hipower. Got to love having 14+1 rounds of 9mm in a classic handgun.


----------



## Flanderian (Apr 30, 2008)

thunderw21 said:


> While the .380 is easy to carry with a suit, it is right on the lower edge of acceptable defense rounds IMO. The 1911 .45 is always nice but if I'm wearing a nice suit I prefer a 9mm Hipower. Got to love having 14+1 rounds of 9mm in a classic handgun.


Owned one, and *hated *it! Purchased it in 1968 after much study in which it was praised as one of the finest semi-auto pistols ever made. It was a beautifully made *military* handgun lovingly crafted at Fabrique Nationale. With it I could flawlessly spray 13 rounds in the general direction of my target. Kicked like a mule! Very hard to get following rapid fire shots back on target. Fixed non-adjustable sights, and too big for my hand, which is a size large.

I'm not Annie Oakley, but by comparison when I fired my friend's cheapo S&W Model 8 (Yes, it was that long ago.) they all ended up in the black. The Smith didn't kick half as much, which I attribute to its grip and shape, making following shots much easier to place. The valuable lesson learned is that the best pistol, or rifle, is the one you can shoot best. Specs don't mean much if you can't hit your target.

Edit: The disparity between light loads like the 380 ACP, and more robust rounds such as 9MM or .45 can be addressed to a degree by choice of ammunition. One excellent performer has historically been Glaser -

A big difference between this and even JHP.


----------



## thunderw21 (Sep 21, 2008)

Flanderian said:


> Owned one, and *hated *it! Purchased it in 1968 after much study in which it was praised as one of the finest semi-auto pistols ever made. It was a beautifully made *military* handgun lovingly crafted at Fabrique Nationale. With it I could flawlessly spray 13 rounds in the general direction of my target. Kicked like a mule! Very hard to get following rapid fire shots back on target. Fixed non-adjustable sights, and too big for my hand, which is a size large...


That's unfortunate, they're great firearms. I love mine and it is as accurate as can be, though it is a Hungarian copy meant for the civilian market and not a military sidearm so the fit and finish may be to blame for the differing experiences.

Finding reliable magazines for it, on the other hand, has been giving me some trouble.


----------



## Regillus (Mar 15, 2011)

Myself I like the Glock 29 10mm with the standard 10-shot mag. for concealed carry. I have big hands so it's size isn't a problem. I like a cartridge with some power, so I just can't go for .380s.


----------



## hardline_42 (Jan 20, 2010)

Flanderian said:


> Owned one, and *hated *it! Purchased it in 1968 after much study in which it was praised as one of the finest semi-auto pistols ever made. It was a beautifully made *military* handgun lovingly crafted at Fabrique Nationale. With it I could flawlessly spray 13 rounds in the general direction of my target. Kicked like a mule! Very hard to get following rapid fire shots back on target. Fixed non-adjustable sights, and too big for my hand, which is a size large.


I had a Hi-Power in .40 with a 9mm conversion barrel and it was a dream to shoot. It retained the heavier frame and slide of the .40 which cut down significantly on felt recoil. And the HP is just a sexy-looking hunk of metal. It almost displaced the 1911 as my favorite pistol. Almost.


----------



## CuffDaddy (Feb 26, 2009)

midatlantic said:


> Off on surprise and on setting. But otherwise you are correct.


I'm not sure what this means. If your point is that a surprise attack with an edged weapon is likely to end badly for the target, I don't disagree.

I'll agree that if you surprise me with a drawn machete from 7 yards, I have a holstered firearm, you move immediately and competently to attack me, etc., I am unlikely to survive. The same would be true if you surprised me at 7 yards with a drawn combat-caliber pistol and I have a sheathed edged weapon, except that my odds are even worse. * This isn't an argument in favor of edged weapons, it's an argument in favor of not getting surprised*! If you assume equal levels of readiness and at least "good" levels of competence, the simple fact is that firearms offer an advantage to blades in about 99% of circumstances. As reflected by the fact that militaries and police forces around the world equip their members with firearms.


----------



## CuffDaddy (Feb 26, 2009)

Regillus said:


> Myself I like the Glock 29 10mm with the standard 10-shot mag. for concealed carry. I have big hands so it's size isn't a problem. I like a cartridge with some power, so I just can't go for .380s.


I'm no fan of the combat tupperware, but I'm with you on the 10mm. One of my favorite rounds to shoot.


----------



## Earl of Ormonde (Sep 5, 2008)

Best rifle: 7.62 mm SLR
Worst rifle I ever used in service: Armalite as we called them. M16 to you.

Best pistol I ever used, both in an out of service: Browning GP 35, 9mm parabellum.
Worst pistol: A Colt 45 derivative, I think it was Spanish. 

Best revolver: S & W 38, 4" barrel
Worst revolver: Ruger 44 Magnum


----------



## Tilton (Nov 27, 2011)

I carry a variety of CCW's depending on my mood and what I'm wearing. My everyday carry is a KelTec .380. It is the lightest, slimmest, and most concealable non-derringer I have ever used. I can hit black at 25 yards with it, and I'm not too worried about "knock down power" because if you draw a CCW on someone, you need to be 100% ready to kill them or 100% ready to go to jail and a .380 will do the former just fine. 

I also have a Taurus .357 snubnose that my father bought when he lived in Uruguay and Brazil in the late 70's/early 80's. Unlike the Taurus' of today, this is a fine weapon. This is generally my "bedside" gun in a small lockbox in my nightstand with a digital lock.

The third CCW is an H&K USP Compact in 9mm. This was my first handgun. It is fairly bulky as a double stack. I do not carry it very often at all. Shoots plenty well but it won't eat the cheap ammo a Glock or S&W will. Kind of a pain. Worth it? Yes.

Finally, a I have a Ruger Alaskan in .454 Casull. It is awesomely terrifying and only comes out to play when I head out on our land in the mountains to fly fish. There are lots of black bears up there and they always seem to have cubs with them.


----------



## TheGreatTwizz (Oct 27, 2010)

sbdivemaster said:


> I was thinking a Kahr P9, but a Bond Derringer - chambered for 45 Colt/.410 - would be a better fit. heh


Is that the Kahr that is a polymer frame? That thing hurts my hand more than my 18" pistol grip mossberg 500.

I'm with Tilton on this statement: "if you draw a CCW on someone, you need to be 100% ready to kill them or 100% ready to go to jail and a .380 will do the former just fine." CCW is for self-defense, and I'm not pulling a CCW to 'disable' someone, nor am I firing just one shot. I also don't carry a CCW to get into a firefight. It is for protection in an emergency situation, and, that said, a .32 or .380 that you are comfortable with and can handle will always do the trick. That said, for CCW when I can tolerate something larger than a pocket .32 or .380 is a S&W M+P 9mm subcompact. What a terrific gun.

For home defense, I'll stick with my AR-15 and Mossberg.


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

CuffDaddy said:


> I'm no fan of the combat tupperware, but I'm with you on the 10mm. One of my favorite rounds to shoot.


Let me show you what the "combat tupperware" can withstand, which is far more than anyone would actually subject their pistol to...


----------



## Regillus (Mar 15, 2011)

Has anyone fired the 454 Casull? What was it like?


----------



## andy b. (Mar 18, 2010)

Regillus said:


> Has anyone fired the 454 Casull? What was it like?


A friend of mine has a Taurus Raging Bull in 454 Casull. Here is what you want to do. Have a friend of yours bring over a baseball bat. A good wooden one, not aluminum. Then hold your arm outstretched in front of you with your hand wide open and your palm facing to one side or the other. Then have your friend swing the bat like he's attempting to hit a fastball over the left field fence and hit you right in the center of your palm. 

Well, it isn't quite that bad, but it certainly lets you know you've fired it. You can also use 45 Colt ammo in the Raging Bull (or any firearm chambered for the 454 Casull), and I can fire the 45 Colt all day. After six rounds of 454, I told my friend I didn't need to do any more stress testing on my hand. Now before you think I have an aversion to large calibers, I have a Desert Eagle in 50 AE that I enjoy shooting, and one of my favorite handguns is a stainless Ruger Super Blackhawk with a 10" barrel that I consider a real puppydog to shoot with full-power .44 Mag loads. I don't mind recoil, but the 454 was unpleasant.

Andy B.


----------



## Tilton (Nov 27, 2011)

I bought two boxes of 300gr with the gun (not cheap, close to $2/rnd). The gun has a less than 20 rounds through it in 2-3 years - one box is unopened. It is a lot of gun, but as long as you know what sort of recoil to expect, it's controllable. 6 rounds and you've had plenty, though. I've let a couple buddies shoot a round or two through it. I went to college with a guy that hunts pigs in GA with a Taurus something or other with a long barrel in .454 Casull. 

I don't shoot pistols often. Once or twice a year to be sure I'm still on point. I don't hunt with them and I don't particularly enjoy going to a firing range. Shotguns are another story; I have to be able to fold up those ducks in the winter.


----------



## Tilton (Nov 27, 2011)

andy b. said:


> A friend of mine has a Taurus Raging Bull in 454 Casull. Here is what you want to do. Have a friend of yours bring over a baseball bat. A good wooden one, not aluminum. Then hold your arm outstretched in front of you with your hand wide open and your palm facing to one side or the other. Then have your friend swing the bat like he's attempting to hit a fastball over the left field fence and hit you right in the center of your palm.
> 
> Well, it isn't quite that bad, but it certainly lets you know you've fired it. You can also use 45 Colt ammo in the Raging Bull (or any firearm chambered for the 454 Casull), and I can fire the 45 Colt all day. After six rounds of 454, I told my friend I didn't need to do any more stress testing on my hand. Now before you think I have an aversion to large calibers, I have a Desert Eagle in 50 AE that I enjoy shooting, and one of my favorite handguns is a stainless Ruger Super Blackhawk with a 10" barrel that I consider a real puppydog to shoot with full-power .44 Mag loads. I don't mind recoil, but the 454 was unpleasant.
> 
> Andy B.


I've shot the Taurus .454 before. The Ruger Alaskan is MUCH more comfortable to shoot, even with a 2.5" barrel compared to at least an 8" barrel on the Taurus I shot. The grip does much for the recoil.


----------



## edhillpr (Apr 19, 2007)

For CCW I carry the .40 Glock 23 constantly. For self-defense it's loaded with hollow point +P. For home defense I prefer the Saiga .223, which is patterned after the Kalashnikov AK-74. I practice every few months to maintain my skills.


----------



## CuffDaddy (Feb 26, 2009)

Jovan said:


> Let me show you what the "combat tupperware" can withstand, which is far more than anyone would actually subject their pistol to...


Oh, I'm quite familiar with the various Glock torture tests. The engineering of Glocks is terrific. I just don't like them.


----------



## Hitch (Apr 25, 2012)

I'm very happy with my XD40 .


----------



## dks202 (Jun 20, 2008)

don't leave home without it... I "have" to carry a gun by department policy. I rarely do. It's an old joke... If I need a gun I hit the brakes real hard, if I need my police radio I hit the brakes twice. ( they're under the seat)..


----------



## Tilton (Nov 27, 2011)

edhillpr said:


> For CCW I carry the .40 Glock 23 constantly. For self-defense it's loaded with hollow point +P. For home defense I prefer the Saiga .223, which is patterned after the Kalashnikov AK-74. I practice every few months to maintain my skills.


Hm... you prefer the 5.45 in the Saiga over the 7.62? I have a Saiga in 7.62 and much prefer it for brute force compared to a 5.45. If you see a Saiga in 12ga buy it! I had one for a while and they stopped importing them. Profited $700 on the sale. Shortly after, they started importing them again (haha, jokes on the sucker at the gun show).


----------



## Earl of Ormonde (Sep 5, 2008)

Jovan said:


> Every veteran I've talked to in every military branch hates that ****ing thing,


Even those of us who got to use it in the UK armed forces hated it.


----------



## hardline_42 (Jan 20, 2010)

Tilton said:


> Hm... you prefer the 5.45 in the Saiga over the 7.62? I have a Saiga in 7.62 and much prefer it for brute force compared to a 5.45. If you see a Saiga in 12ga buy it! I had one for a while and they stopped importing them. Profited $700 on the sale. Shortly after, they started importing them again (haha, jokes on the sucker at the gun show).


Here's another vote for the Saiga .223 as a primary HD rifle. And that's 5.56 not 5.45 (though, the 5.45 has it's place for sheer availability of cheap, corrosive ammo for plinking). Everyone's HD scenario is different, but for suburban and urban locations, a .223 round is plenty effective but overpenetrates less than the 7.62x39. And, with the .223 in a survival situation, you can scavenge ammo from all the folks who've abandoned their jammed AR-15s out of frustration.:biggrin:


----------



## Wildblue (Oct 11, 2009)

I chose a S&W .357 as my carry weapon. Sits right in the "sweet spot" for my needs. Many CCW's are just too small, which is not a big problem, other than it just kicks in my hand and I can't get a full grip on it. So I specified I have to have something all three lower fingers on my shooting hand can sit on the grip. Other pistols that satisfy this need are just WAY too big and heavy to be a realistic CCW. (remember, the best CCW you can get is one you actually carry!)

Also, since it's a .357, I can load it with .38 if I choose, and even bear .357 ammo to take with me when I go hiking and camping out in the Alaska bush. Shoots nice, good build construction, and reasonably accurate for a pistol without putting a 5" barrel on it and killing the CCW capability. Chose the revolver for the "never fail" mechanics as a CCW. If I deliberately enter a tactical environment, though, I'll bring my Glock as my primary weapon, and the revolver as the backup. Happy for me.


----------



## McPatrickClan (Jun 5, 2012)

It's important to remember that the gun you do have is always better than the one you don't


----------



## RM Bantista (May 30, 2009)

Earl of Ormonde said:


> Best rifle: 7.62 mm SLR
> Worst rifle I ever used in service: Armalite as we called them. M16 to you.
> 
> Best pistol I ever used, both in an out of service: Browning GP 35, 9mm parabellum.
> ...


Ladies and Gentlemen,
One knows, one knows: this is not a new post, therefore, my apologies, and One is far from an expert, but one finds oneself in some significant agreement with the foregoing remarks.
regards to you gentlemen, and particular respect to those who have served under arms.
Thank you for your service,
rudy


----------



## bllusc (Aug 19, 2011)

In my experience as a police officer, and having attended numerous shootings as a responder and detective, the .45 acp is the most effective round I have ever seen used. The old one shot, one kill is pretty truthful. 9MM not so much, I watched as they put a lead laden drug dealer onto a stretcher with a chest full of holes. He lived. Another fellow shot point blank in the throat just under the adams apple with a .380. He lived, although in the trauma room when they intubated him, they hit the jugular and the arterial spray was magnificient. I ducked, the doctor beside me didnt. He had to change his clothes....

Anyway I carry a .40 cal Sig. I would prefer the trusty 1911 but thats too much gun for some of our sister cops and the Government police force I work for supplies us our pistols.

Brian


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

bllusc said:


> He lived, although in the trauma room when they intubated him, they hit the jugular and *the arterial spray was magnificient*.


Hands down one of the most disturbing posts I've read here, both in content and the description of someone else's blood as "magnificent".


----------



## bllusc (Aug 19, 2011)

*Poor choice of words*

Magnificent as in a powerful display of the strength of the heart. I'm sorry if it appeared that I may have been gloating. I went into the house alone, gun drawn and dragged that man out by myself after sealing his wound with Saran wrap and a tea towel that I found in the kitchen. Later we learned that the assailant had fled. Im happy to report that man lived as well.


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

Ah, okay... I would hope a fellow Canadian wouldn't be that bloodthirsty! :icon_smile_big:


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

^^LOL!
....might we assume you are not a big fan of the Twilight book/movie series? And what's with this "fellow Canadian" stuff? You've been with us (in the USA) for quite awhile now and we liked you so well, we adopted you and now consider you to be a 'by-gawd American!'


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

That's _Canadian-_American to you, sir! I could actually move there tomorrow on a whim if I wanted. Dual citizenship is a great thing.


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

^^LOL.
Well that's all well and good but if the creators of the South Park animated TV series were correct in one of their earlier episodes) and we someday find ourselves at war with Canada, just whose team will you be playing for mister!


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

Neither. I'll seek asylum in the UK and watch you two duke it out from across the Atlantic. :devil:


----------



## bllusc (Aug 19, 2011)

War between us would be unsuccessful. We would change all of our roadsigns to French in order to confuse you and I would be prevented from shopping at O'Connells. I can't bear to think on it. Besides, we hashed it out in the War of 1812 and we are still arguing about who won that one. 

Brian


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

^^LOL.
Not to worry. The fishing is so much better in Canada, I just cannot imagine we would ever consider participation in a conflict that would threaten our access to your lakes!


----------



## Apatheticviews (Mar 21, 2010)

bllusc said:


> War between us would be unsuccessful. We would change all of our roadsigns to French in order to confuse you and I would be prevented from shopping at O'Connells. I can't bear to think on it. Besides, we hashed it out in the War of 1812 and we are still arguing about who won that one.
> 
> Brian


They burned down our White House! Never Forget! Never Forgive!


----------



## Apatheticviews (Mar 21, 2010)

Jovan said:


> Hands down one of the most disturbing posts I've read here, both in content and the description of someone else's blood as "magnificent".


It's like referring to Hitler as a great man. It's correct in a *strict* sense, but very very disturbing.


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

Apatheticviews said:


> They burned down our White House! Never Forget! Never Forgive!


Which led to a restoration that made it what it is today. 

The white paint story is apocryphal, however. "The President's House/Mansion/Palace" was also informally known as The White House as early as 1811, three years before the burning. Theodore Roosevelt solidified the new name in 1901.


----------



## bllusc (Aug 19, 2011)

Toronto was burned by American troops first. The British troops that attacked and burned Washington, including the White House were veterans from the Spanish Peninsula and had been fighting Napoleon's Armies. No Canadians actually participated in that action. Our involvement was along the St. Lawrence River and Great Lakes, defending our territory from US Invasion. Ironically, the folks yearning for war the most were from Kentucky, a ways from the border, whereas native New Yorkers really didnt want to fight as they were going up against neighbours, trading partners, and in some cases family as the border was very porous back then. Sorry for delving into history, I like to study it. 

Brian


----------



## Apatheticviews (Mar 21, 2010)

bllusc said:


> Toronto was burned by American troops first. The British troops that attacked and burned Washington, including the White House were veterans from the Spanish Peninsula and had been fighting Napoleon's Armies. No Canadians actually participated in that action. Our involvement was along the St. Lawrence River and Great Lakes, defending our territory from US Invasion. Ironically, the folks yearning for war the most were from Kentucky, a ways from the border, whereas native New Yorkers really didnt want to fight as they were going up against neighbours, trading partners, and in some cases family as the border was very porous back then. Sorry for delving into history, I like to study it.
> 
> Brian


Preemptive strike!!


----------



## bllusc (Aug 19, 2011)

LOL Brian


----------

