The I LOVE THIS GUN Thread

[live2offroad]

Originally Posted by P B G

Yes. But my viewpoint is this in reverse.

A .45 never shrinks therefore your first shot is a devestating one.

A .380 is less so. And you do have a few more rounds available. So if required additional shots can be made for more devestation, if required.

I suppose I feel as if it is not ideal to have a goal be immediate complete devestation.

Uh.. I don't know where you live, but here wounding is a BAD idea. You'll get sued. Shoot once, shoot to kill, and be in the right when you do it. Thinking of a firearm as some sort of "less than lethal" tool is not sensible at all..

-Peter

[KSJEEPER]

Originally Posted by Wannabee

I actually agree with you guys as far as bigger is better , why wound when you can maime ! Having never been shot , with an arrow but that doesnt count here , I am only assuming that any foriegn object entering your body at high speed has got to be bad.
I was a Marine , 0331 machinegunner . I am a big fan of large caliber weapons , the bigger the better , hell , i would love to walk around with my old M60E3 , but the liberals would all faint.

Hey , I was one of those too... only we swapped to the 240g when I was an 0331. As a liberal, I didn't faint when I carried the E3? Or even the M2 receiver, for that matter

[GoGo Gadget]

Originally Posted by MiamiMotorcyclist

Bersa Thunder 380 plus. 15+1 rounds.l

huh, who da thunk it. Not sure if I would trust m y life to Bersa. I will admit to being a gun snob to an extent.

Originally Posted by Wannabee

I wonder how many people that argue the caliber point have ever been shot themselves ? Not starting an arguement , but the way I look at it , someone attacks you , you pop two rounds from a .380 or whatever , they are now in a flight situation.

Maybe. Look back at my earlier post about the two ways to stop an aggressor. Psychologically, and physiologically.

The caliber argument comes into play with the minority that require a physical stop.

[KSJEEPER]

I believe that the 'carry a giant gun, always' vs the 'carry what is comfortable, a 380 is better than no gun' has nearly surpassed dino vs synthetic in terms of the dead horse taking a beating... Poor, poor dead horse...

[KSJEEPER]

Originally Posted by GoGo Gadget

huh, who da thunk it. Not sure if I would trust m y life to Bersa. I will admit to being a gun snob to an extent.




Maybe. Look back at my earlier post about the two ways to stop an aggressor. Psychologically, and physiologically.

The caliber argument comes into play with the minority that require a physical stop.

I know several folks with Bersas, flawless functionality. Most seem to think they are an improved upon Walther PPK. I don't think their cheapness translates into lack of bang-bang.

[EvilGenius]

Back to the show!

[FPGT72]

Originally Posted by EvilGenius

Not when you're on drugs or a huge adrenaline dump.

There are recorded cases of folks being shot point blank or near with large caliber handguns in the head and vital organs who continued to fight for several more minutes.

One of the reasons that military went to the .45 was the problems it had with the 38 in the philippines. People wacked out of their minds and the 38 just going through them. A nice fat SLOW 45 will put you down.

All that said I would not want to be shot with a 380 that is for sure, and in a SHTF type deal I would want something that I could hit what I aim at more then once.

If you are small a 45 is just out of the question...I know many that will not practice with their choice of carry weapon because "it hurts" to shoot it....well that is just wrong.

The wife carries a 380 with a laser...she can hit playing cards at 25 yards three shots back to back. That is what you need to do....in a SHTF and you are all jazzed I figure she would be able to hit a man sized target at 25yards....god forbid it ever happen.

Bottom line is that 45 does you no good if you don't carry it, or if it takes you 20 secs to get it out, or if you never practice with it.

[Boondoggle]

Originally Posted by EvilGenius

Back to the show!

an anvil?


Yosimete Sam to the white courtesy phone!

[HardCase]

Originally Posted by FPGT72

One of the reasons that military went to the .45 was the problems it had with the 38 in the philippines. People wacked out of their minds and the 38 just going through them. A nice fat SLOW 45 will put you down.

All that said I would not want to be shot with a 380 that is for sure, and in a SHTF type deal I would want something that I could hit what I aim at more then once.

If you are small a 45 is just out of the question...I know many that will not practice with their choice of carry weapon because "it hurts" to shoot it....well that is just wrong.

The wife carries a 380 with a laser...she can hit playing cards at 25 yards three shots back to back. That is what you need to do....in a SHTF and you are all jazzed I figure she would be able to hit a man sized target at 25yards....god forbid it ever happen.

Bottom line is that 45 does you no good if you don't carry it, or if it takes you 20 secs to get it out, or if you never practice with it.

Yeah, during the Phillipine Insurrection I believe that the Moro rebels were often hopped up on some sort of stimulant and just didn't go down as easily to the 38s being issued primarily to American officers at the time, resulting in several (not all that many) headless officers due to machete blows. So the Army scrounged up a number of old Single Action Army Colt 45 revolvers and distributed them, and that certainly played a role in returning officially to a larger caliber which was counter to the trend at the time of going to smaller, higher velocity, calibers after the advent of smokeless powder just a few years earlier.

I'm always puzzled about the reputed recoil of the 45ACP. It certainly depends on the size of the gun, etc., but to me a 38, 9mm, 40, 45Colt and 45ACP all have a similar "feel" on recoil. They just sort of hop in your hand and then settle back down. I can "feel" a difference when I step up to, say, 357 or 10mm or anything bigger. But one day I was shooting with a girlfriend who was banging away happily with 38s in her SP101 and asked to fire my 1911. It was a full-size all steel gun, standard hard-ball loads, and she fired one shot, went "whoa!" and handed it back to me saying that it kicked too much. I didn't think it kicked any more than her little Ruger, but guess her perceptions were different, and I can definitely say that recoil is partly about perception.

[Squily]

When I used to carry, I carried various things from a 357 Ruger, to a CZ75 to the 1911-double stack.

In the end I preferred the 45. Fully loaded with 16 rounds (+ spare mag), it was heavier than the CZ (18 rounds + spare mag), but lighter than the Ruger 357 (18 rounds- 6 + two speed loaders). But it was also my competition pistol and I felt more "at peace" with it as I shot it the most and knew exatly what it could and could not do. I wouldn't say it was better, as a 357 has much better penetration and will probably take out an assailant behind cover, but I just felt more at home with it. Incidentally, I had two jams on separate occasions with the CZ, which was a major consideration when I swopped. Darnest thing, cause it would work perfectly on the range, but when the heat was on... Never had any hassles with the 45 though

I also watched a documentary way-back-when that swayed my opinion to the 45 above the wonder-9. I think it was called Dangerous wounds. It dealt with permanent cavities and hydro-shock. Had real-life case studies and also dealt with ballistic gelotine (which incidentally is not the same as hitting a body- so even if a projectile mushrooms perfectly in gelotine, it's not to say it will when you shoot someone) The short and the long of it- a permanent cavity will stop an assailant, hydroshock will kill him in a few hours. Thus the bigger the permanent cavity (i.e. the projectile), the larger the chance of hitting something vital and stopping the assailant. Which would you prefer?

Lastly- I know the 45 has inferior penetration to 357 and 40 S&W, but at least you won't have over penetration and its pretty safe to use "in a crowd"

My opinion at least

[RogueClimber]

Originally Posted by Squily

Lastly- I know the 45 has inferior penetration to 357 and 40 S&W, but at least you won't have over penetration and its pretty safe to use "in a crowd"

My opinion at least

It always seems only the bad guys have the luck to worry about over penetration... The good guys always seem to fire a ton of rounds and miss everything and the bad guy fires one round that somehow finds the underarm hole of the good guys vest.

And I love this gun:

[EvilGenius]

Originally Posted by RogueClimber

It always seems only the bad guys have the luck to worry about over penetration... The good guys always seem to fire a ton of rounds and miss everything and the bad guy fires one round that somehow finds the underarm hole of the good guys vest.

And I love this gun:

[FPGT72]

Originally Posted by HardCase

Yeah, during the Phillipine Insurrection I believe that the Moro rebels were often hopped up on some sort of stimulant and just didn't go down as easily to the 38s being issued primarily to American officers at the time, resulting in several (not all that many) headless officers due to machete blows. So the Army scrounged up a number of old Single Action Army Colt 45 revolvers and distributed them, and that certainly played a role in returning officially to a larger caliber which was counter to the trend at the time of going to smaller, higher velocity, calibers after the advent of smokeless powder just a few years earlier.

I'm always puzzled about the reputed recoil of the 45ACP. It certainly depends on the size of the gun, etc., but to me a 38, 9mm, 40, 45Colt and 45ACP all have a similar "feel" on recoil. They just sort of hop in your hand and then settle back down. I can "feel" a difference when I step up to, say, 357 or 10mm or anything bigger. But one day I was shooting with a girlfriend who was banging away happily with 38s in her SP101 and asked to fire my 1911. It was a full-size all steel gun, standard hard-ball loads, and she fired one shot, went "whoa!" and handed it back to me saying that it kicked too much. I didn't think it kicked any more than her little Ruger, but guess her perceptions were different, and I can definitely say that recoil is partly about perception.

I have noticed that it seems to be females that have the problem as well. My wife will shoot the 92fs, (about as big 9mm as you can get) but as far as any other 9mm or anything else in the ball park she does not want anything to do with it.

I have a neighbor that is about as 180 from my wife as you can get, my wife 100 lbs soaking wet with winter clothes on, my neighbor a big gal (not fat just a bigger lady) around 6' and 200 or so lbs I would guess. She did not like anything larger...and went with a 380 like my wife had.

[KSJEEPER]

Originally Posted by FPGT72

One of the reasons that military went to the .45 was the problems it had with the 38 in the philippines. People wacked out of their minds and the 38 just going through them. A nice fat SLOW 45 will put you down.

All that said I would not want to be shot with a 380 that is for sure, and in a SHTF type deal I would want something that I could hit what I aim at more then once.

If you are small a 45 is just out of the question...I know many that will not practice with their choice of carry weapon because "it hurts" to shoot it....well that is just wrong.

The wife carries a 380 with a laser...she can hit playing cards at 25 yards three shots back to back. That is what you need to do....in a SHTF and you are all jazzed I figure she would be able to hit a man sized target at 25yards....god forbid it ever happen.

Bottom line is that 45 does you no good if you don't carry it, or if it takes you 20 secs to get it out, or if you never practice with it.

Yeah, isn't there a super rare Smith revolver from those days, with a trigger designed for 2 short Filipino fingers? Long trigger and big open trigger guard? Seems I remember seeing that the Filipinos fighting with us, weren't given 1911's but rather the revolvers. And that their fingers were short enough to struggle with the long DA pull. Thus, the fix was a trigger / guard long enough to get the first two fingers on.

[Sniper X]

Originally Posted by KSJEEPER

I know several folks with Bersas, flawless functionality. Most seem to think they are an improved upon Walther PPK. I don't think their cheapness translates into lack of bang-bang.

I have one and it has never failed me or the previous Chicken who owned it. Great little gun.