Mas Ayoob Is 45 Auto Obsolete?

[TGS]

Apropos of nothing I think Claude Werner makes some valid points about civilian shootings and caliber. A cop or soldier will have different expectations about a successful shooting. The former will be trying to destroy the enemy and the latter is trying to take someone into custody. If the person they shoot runs off and escapes that's a fail, but that result would be nearly ideal for an armed citizen. Mostly I will be seeking to break contact, not kill or detain my assailant. It would probably be a bad idea to equip patrol officers with .32 ACP guns but that doesn't automatically make them a no-go for civilian CCW.

It's not the 60s and 70s....we can't shoot people just to effectuate an arrest anymore.

While a police officer shooting someone can legally be framed as a seizure, in actual practice an officer is almost always shooting solely to prevent the imminent loss of their life, or that of someone else. Detention isn't the driving goal at that point......not dying is my goal. If I get into a shooting and they get away, and I'm alive, that's not a loss.

(skip to 2:45)

One thing I'll note- and repeat because it seems to be getting ignored- is that I'm specifically discussing private citizen shootings and not police and specifically suggesting that they may be two very different animals.

I think we understand the point, and it's not the first time most of here have had that idea presented.

Truth be told, most police shootings would still work out okay if we were armed with Colt 1903s or Walther PPs, too. The difference is that as a profession we've tried to plan for the worst case scenario and mitigate deficiencies that we can control; one of those being terminal ballistics performance. We don't have a practice of relying on hope (i.e. psychological stop, which we can't control or predict), and then finding justifications for objectively inferior practices.

When I carry a 380, I don't carry it and pick a justification to make me feel better about my choice where I can predict that shootings will only go one way (in my favor) if it happens. I carry it because I'm not willing to put up with being burdened with a handgun of greater capability at that specific time, and I'm cognizant that my choice in doing so is based around comfort instead of capability. My choice to carry a lesser gun doesn't change the reality of what objective standards that gun needs to perform to during a shooting; this is a very common logical fallacy on gun forums.

[Phaedrus]

When I carry a 380, I don't carry it and pick a justification to make me feel better about my choice where I can predict that shootings will only go one way (in my favor) if it happens. I carry it because I'm not willing to put up with being burdened with a handgun of greater capability at that specific time, and I'm cognizant that my choice in doing so is based around comfort instead of capability. My choice to carry a lesser gun doesn't change the reality of what objective standards that gun needs to perform to during a shooting; this is a very common logical fallacy on gun forums.

It kind of sounds like you're still running on hope, both that your .380 will be enough and that you can achieve a physiological stop with a handgun before you assailant kills or injures you. And it might work out for you. The smallest gun I've ever carried in my life is a Ruger LCR and I generally prefer to carry more. So fortunately the fallacy of consequences doesn't seem to be at play here, or at least not on my side. Yet I think the notion of an "objective standard" is kind of a myth. None of the arms we typical CCW are completely reliable at "stopping" people, everything we carry is on a sliding scale. And just as you sometimes can't be inconvienced to carry a "proper gunfighting gun" many folks carry mouseguns for various reasons. Some can't hide anything bigger, some can't tolerate recoil. Just note that you're not a special case or exception.

So it comes back to the level of risk one is willing to accept. Sometimes you carry a gun you recognize as borderline inadequate because you look at the risk vs the discomfort of carrying something bigger. And presumably you understand that your choice to carry a lesser gun doesn't change the reality of what objective standards that gun needs to perform. Why is it logical when you do it but a logical fallacy when someone else does it?

Truth be told, most police shootings would still work out okay if we were armed with Colt 1903s or Walther PPs, too. The difference is that as a profession we've tried to plan for the worst case scenario and mitigate deficiencies that we can control; one of those being terminal ballistics performance. We don't have a practice of relying on hope (i.e. psychological stop, which we can't control or predict), and then finding justifications for objectively inferior practices.

As has already been pointed out in the infamous FBI shootout agents were armed with 9mms, .357 Mags and at least one shotgun. Poor marksmanship and tactics were a big part of the loss of those men, but at the time the FBI tried to hang the results on the "failure" of a single round of Winchester ammo. That day, and against those men, they could have used more. Of course, perhaps half the cops around the world don't even carry guns (outside of the USA) so a Colt 1903 would be quite the weapon there.

But it remains true that even in the Miami shootout and the equally infamous Hollywood shootout, the perps made tremendous efforts to escape. However, LE is tasked with preventing that. I hope you can understand that a private citizen protecting herself need not stand there in front of a blazing Mini-14 seeking victory or death where LE might. That's one reason why someone might carry the same mousegun you sometimes do. Circling back to Werner, he claims that criminals (in his experience and based on his statistics) tend retreat when confronted by armed resistance. Countless pro-writers have cited this fact re active shooter situations.

So while one can't count on a criminal's reluctance to be shot, it would also be obtuse not to acknowledge the frequency that it happens.

[Ed L]

I'm not saying that Werner is right nor wrong, just that it's not based on a theory but rather his observations of the real world.

In reading Werner's writings for at least 15 years, I've noticed that he often goes overboard in portraying the criminal as an incompetent, undedicated fraidy-cat. He bases a lot of his observations on things he reads in the NRA Magazine Armed Citizen column and other places that only record successes. They don't list accounts accounts of civilians who wound up on the loosing end.

Those violent criminals who the police deal are the same violent criminals who victimize, injure and kill citizens. They are the same violent criminals who exercise violence on each other when they get mad. There are certainly less determined criminals out there, but you don't get to choose who might try to victimize you or how they react when met with resistance. Someone offering resistance will likely piss them off, and might result in a violent response.

[Ed L]

Truth be told, most police shootings would still work out okay if we were armed with Colt 1903s or Walther PPs, too. The difference is that as a profession we've tried to plan for the worst case scenario and mitigate deficiencies that we can control; one of those being terminal ballistics performance. We don't have a practice of relying on hope (i.e. psychological stop, which we can't control or predict), and then finding justifications for objectively inferior practices.

I don't know if we are having two different conversations here, but I read enough about police shootings that took multiple rounds of high performance 9mm/.40/.45 ammo. I can't imagine those same shootings with .32s or .380s.

In Tom Givens' students 60+ shootings most only required a small number of rounds--like 3-4. But some went to slide lock or required 8-11 rounds.

https://rangemaster.com/wp-content/u...Newsletter.pdf

On page 5 Tom writes: "Our shooting incidents typically involve a small number of shots (three and four rounds). However, we have had a few shootings that require more rounds. I can recall students shooting requiring eight, 11, or 12 rounds. None of our students have had to reload during a fight, although I can think of three that went to slidelock. Fortunately, no further firing was required at that point."

I would absolutely urge you to buy his book Concealed Carry Class in the paper form so that you can page through it back and forth as you will likely want to do. It is much easier to do this in a hard copy than in electronic form. I think it is the best book written on defensive handgun training , use, and predatory criminal behavior and how that will play out in the civilian encounter.

https://www.amazon.com/Concealed-Car...=UTF8&qid=&sr=

*edited this post while crossposting,

[Phaedrus]

Tom Givens is the expert I perhaps value the most. You're right, I have to get his book! Hopefully down the road I can take a course from him. I guess this whole discussion has sorta gone off the rails but again, I am a fan of carrying a real gun. Since wrecking my right shoulder the only gun I've been able to set up for weak hand carry is my .38 Special LCRx, not ideal but whaddaya gonna do? Right now I can't buckle a gun belt (or tie my shoes for that matter) but I have a belly band for LH use and I have a system for getting it on me. Maybe 5 x 158gr +P won't get it done but hopefully I'll live long enough to be able to use my right hand again.

I do advocate going with a 9mm, but I recall Mark Moritz first rule of gunfighting is, "Have a gun." IIRC the only students of Mr. Givens that died in their gunfights didn't have a gun at the time. The mechanics of wounding are agnostic- they are what they are regardless of how we feel about it. That said, a certain segment of folks will always carry .25 ACP, various .32s or .380 Autos. They are not ideal but I still think the evidence has shown that they're better than not having a gun. And I'm not being facetious. Unless I'm reading the stats wrong resisting with even a mouse gun is generally more successful than using a knife, a fist or harsh language. So while I don't want to overstate the case for small guns I think they're a good option if the other option is not carrying a gun at all.

And as for the OP, I think the .45 ACP has been "obsolete" for quite a while in the sense of it not being the most practical choice, but no I don't want to stand in front of one.

[Ed L]

When I carry a 380, I don't carry it and pick a justification to make me feel better about my choice where I can predict that shootings will only go one way (in my favor) if it happens. I carry it because I'm not willing to put up with being burdened with a handgun of greater capability at that specific time, and I'm cognizant that my choice in doing so is based around comfort instead of capability. My choice to carry a lesser gun doesn't change the reality of what objective standards that gun needs to perform to during a shooting; this is a very common logical fallacy on gun forums.

It kind of sounds like you're still running on hope, both that your .380 will be enough and that you can achieve a physiological stop with a handgun before you assailant kills or injures you. And it might work out for you.

I think what TGS means is that he recognizes that a .380 is far from ideal and that he isn't counting on criminals running away at the sight of it; but the situation limits him to a very small gun.

[Phaedrus]

A lot of folks' situation leaves them stuck with small guns. That was one of the main points.

[Ed L]

Tom Givens is the expert I perhaps value the most. You're right, I have to get his book! Hopefully down the road I can take a course from him. I guess this whole discussion has sorta gone off the rails but again, I am a fan of carrying a real gun. Since wrecking my right shoulder the only gun I've been able to set up for weak hand carry is my .38 Special LCRx, not ideal but whaddaya gonna do? Right now I can't buckle a gun belt (or tie my shoes for that matter) but I have a belly band for LH use and I have a system for getting it on me. Maybe 5 x 158gr +P won't get it done but hopefully I'll live long enough to be able to use my right hand again.

Sorry to hear about your shoulder. I am facing hand surgery in the near future. In your situation, I would go with .38 factory wadcutter for ease of use and recoil control and quicker follow-up shots and not worry about +P. it is more far more important for the gun to be shootable as accurately as possible and controlable--especially if you are doing it with your weak hand, than it is to have a better performing load. Whatever additional expansion you might get with a hollowpoint is not worth the tradeoff in shootability, accuracy, shot to shot recovery.

I do advocate going with a 9mm, but I recall Mark Moritz first rule of gunfighting is, "Have a gun." IIRC the only students of Mr. Givens that died in their gunfights didn't have a gun at the time. The mechanics of wounding are agnostic- they are what they are regardless of how we feel about it. That said, a certain segment of folks will always carry .25 ACP, various .32s or .380 Autos. They are not ideal but I still think the evidence has shown that they're better than not having a gun. And I'm not being facetious. Unless I'm reading the stats wrong resisting with even a mouse gun is generally more successful than using a knife, a fist or harsh language. So while I don't want to overstate the case for small guns I think they're a good option if the other option is not carrying a gun at all.

This goes back to what *I think* TGS was meaning. People should try to do the best that they can within their limitations: like required wardrobe imposed limitations, physical limitations, legal limitations, financial limitations, etc. As long as you don't try to pretend that the less capable gun is just as capable, or that criminals are just going to run away so it doesn't matter.

[newyork]

I remember it used to be that guys would go to 45 if limited to 10rds. That or a smaller 9mm. Has this thought process gone away for most and neutered mag 9mm guns is now the general consensus for wise gun choice even in a ban state?

[Phaedrus]

I don't have a ton of options for ammo with the .38 Special. With the Great Panic of 2020/2021 there's nothing in that cal locally and even online I'm not seeing a ton. When I injured the shoulder I didn't have a lot of variety for .38 since I don't use the gun a lot. I've got a good amount of Remington 158gr +P and some 158gr +P hard cast from Underwood. In Montana any sidearm I have could potentially be pressed into service against a bear or big cat. Granted, even a hot .38 Special would be comically underpowered for a 900 lb Grizzly I want to give myself at least a plausible ability to penetrate the skull. Probably a full wadcutter could work well against a human if necessary.

I saw the surgeon yesterday and he told me to get out of the arm brace now, very carefully. Still gotta wear it to sleep in. But I'm getting a bit of function and the PT guy thinks I'll get the full use of it eventually. Depending on low that takes I'll maybe spring for a good quality LH rig for one of my HKs. It won't be too long and I should be able to manipulate a belt buckle. Already I can rack the slide which is the bigger concern; shooting with my left is something I do practice.

Overall we all probably agree more than we disagree but the forum format kind of emphasizes argument more sometimes.