Well, since the utility of PCC for serious use has been raised, when my agency steadfastly refused to issue me a long gun, I gave some thought to a CZ EVO Scorpion pistol. We were only authorized pistols as personal weapons at the time, and in 9mm, 40 or 45. Since the Scorpion is a pistol, I figured with a side-folding brace and some 30-round magazines, it would be better to have in a backpack than just spare magazines for my G19.
I was saved by a change in regime which led to issuance of an MP5KN then an M4. Now we're authorized personally owned 5.56mm rifles on duty, and I have no need for a PCC.
Now I have to keep telling myself I DON'T need a 8ish inch 300 BO pistol - just because...
What's your point? Why does that matter?
The ability to make one bulk purchase of ammo that works for a variety of weapons instead of multiple caliber offerings. Plus, if I'm going to put a can on it why spend the $$ for something like .300BLK when the ranges at which I would be employing this weapon would be well within the acceptable terminal performance envelope of the .45. I could load this with the same 230gr ammo I load my pistol with and have a nice package.
I don't disagree. However, given the operational environment I find myself in a PCC affords me a lot of benefits.
I'm going to look into the NFA aspect of this more closely and see exactly what I can and can't do. That may dictate my decision. If I can't SBR or put a can on it then a 16 in 5.56 or 6.8 would probably make more sense.
Last edited by Hot Cereal; 10-13-2018 at 11:46 PM.
Well correct verbiage is the hallmark of professional discourse.
No service caliber handgun offers the terminal performance capability of well-designed center fire rifle ammunition or a good shotgun load.
The service caliber handgun loads used in PCC's tend to offer greater over-penetration hazards, worse barrier ability, and less terminal performance capability than good centerfire rifle and shotgun loads, so I am failing to see the advantages of a PCC as defensive weapon.
I loved my MP5, but I'll take a Mk18, M4, or 6720 for serious use any day of the week...
Last edited by DocGKR; 10-14-2018 at 01:35 AM.
Facts matter...Feelings Can Lie
I'm less professional because I used the universally and commonly understood and accepted colloquial term .45 ACP instead of .45 AUTO? Gary, that seems a little snide to me.
Not going to argue that, I agree. However, like I said previously, a PCC offers me a logistical benefit over a center fire rifle. This is not a duty weapon. It is a home defense/truck gun.
Since only 25-30% of the rounds fired during contact actually hit their intended target I think completely missing is more of a hazard than over-penetration. This was never intended to be a caliber debate. I said that in the original post. I appreciate your research and knowledge, however that is not what this thread is about.
At this stage of the game I wouldn't bother with an SBR. Just roll the dice that they don't come out with ANOTHER decision letter and they let sleeping dogs lie.
I’m obviously not Doc, but over penetrating is not just a concern with rounds hitting a bad guy. All those misses you referenced go somewhere. They can over penetrate instead of stopping in a wall or other medium. If I choose to ignore modern ballistics and select a less effective and less safe weapon for HD, and a miss goes through a wall striking a loved one... I’d be inconsolable. Tactical teams dropped MP5’s for M4’s even though the M4 is typically longer.
As a LEO you should be aware that more bad guys are wearing armor these days than in the past. A 45 caliber long arm won’t stop someone wearing even old level II armor.
If all that’s available during an attack is a PCC then use what you have. But to purposely choose one over better options... logistics and ammo purchases aren’t that complicated for one person or home in my experience. You aren’t buying for an agency. I want a 9mm PCC so I can train on M4 controls at steel matches - not to protect loved ones. It’s not 1999 any more.