.380 ACP the Red Haired Stepchild?

[trackskippy]

And IMHO I can get more holes in the right places with my G42, faster, than someone shooting a micro 9. I mentioned earlier in this thread of an article where gun mag writers themselves were 50% less accurate shooting a micro 9 than with a .380.

Whos to say whos better with what?

You say youre better with your 42, but whos fault is it youre not as good with say a 43? As I said before, I had both of those, and really saw no noticeable difference in shooting them, and I shot both a good bit too.

Now shooting my 43 against my Seecamp? Thats a bit of a different story, as is the usual results between the two, when you consider the whole broad spectrum of what you might encounter, and not just one scenario you might expect to get. I consider my Seecamp a contact +/- type gun, where I would have no troubles making head shots at 25 yards with the 42 or 43.

People who shoot regularly are going to do better than people who dont too. If someone with one of the smaller 9's shoots it all the time, and someone with a 380 doesn't, how do you suppose things will go there?

And people shooting things they arent familiar with is a whole other critter altogether. Saying this guy didnt do well with something they normally dont shoot really means nothing.

Who decided on 12"? You're saying a perp who just got shot in the arm is going to continue the attack? That isn't what happened in the video I posted, see #69 in this thread. That does count as some kind of evidence.

Just out of curiosity, how much reading up on and understanding of all of this have you actually done? 12" of penetration in certified gel has been the minimum requirement for as long as I can remember, and 12" to 18" is I believe the FBI standard.

You seem to be missing the point of things here too as to why you want the penetration. Its not that the person being shot will stop and run off because they were shot in the arm, its because the round may need to penetrate both the arm (meat and bone) and the body (meat and bone) to reach critical points.

Actual living bodies have different depths of things that need to be penetrated and from various angles of attack. People are not just flat paper you shoot at when youre at the range. Part of this package is knowing human anatomy, so you know where to shoot and why you are shooting there, and from various angles, and not just head on COM.

Lucky Gunner is a good place to get a good visual on things as far as what has reasonable penetration and what doesn't, and they cover a lot of different loads. I think if you look, the bulk of the 380's they tested, didnt, or barely made the 12" minimum.

Its not perfect, nothing is, but its at least a reasonable, more or less apples-to-apples type comparison of things.

And thats just the ammo aspect of things. It doesnt take into account the shooters actual capabilities and skills, especially once you go beyond just basic target type shooting. You may be a bug hole bullseye target shooter at the range, when you take your time and focus on shooting that way, but how are you what you have to do things under stress, and draw, move and shoot as you go?


As far as carrying what you want? By all means, carry what you want, its your choice, and you dont have to justify it, do what you want. As long as you dont inadvertently shoot me or anyone close to me in a panic because you couldnt bother to be competent with it, I really couldn't care less.

Its just when you start claiming things that are generally not the accepted norm (based on certified type docs' and experience, etc.) and citing things that really are nothing more than an article in a gun mag, or someone with no actual certifications and experience "did their own study", etc, well, youre going to get some push back on that, like you did here.

 

[Paul7]

Whos to say whos better with what?

You say youre better with your 42, but whos fault is it youre not as good with say a 43? As I said before, I had both of those, and really saw no noticeable difference in shooting them, and I shot both a good bit too.

Good for you, the article I mentioned even gun guy writers shot them differently, maybe you're better than them, but I doubt it.

Now shooting my 43 against my Seecamp? Thats a bit of a different story, as is the usual results between the two, when you consider the whole broad spectrum of what you might encounter, and not just one scenario you might expect to get. I consider my Seecamp a contact +/- type gun, where I would have no troubles making head shots at 25 yards with the 42 or 43.

People who shoot regularly are going to do better than people who dont too. If someone with one of the smaller 9's shoots it all the time, and someone with a 380 doesn't, how do you suppose things will go there?

Red herring, where have I said don't practice? You really need to stop bringing that up.

And people shooting things they arent familiar with is a whole other critter altogether. Saying this guy didnt do well with something they normally dont shoot really means nothing.

Again, not advocating that.

Just out of curiosity, how much reading up on and understanding of all of this have you actually done? 12" of penetration in certified gel has been the minimum requirement for as long as I can remember, and 12" to 18" is I believe the FBI standard.

So my requirements are the same as the FBI's? Are they the same as the US Army's too?

You seem to be missing the point of things here too as to why you want the penetration. Its not that the person being shot will stop and run off because they were shot in the arm, its because the round may need to penetrate both the arm (meat and bone) and the body (meat and bone) to reach critical points.

Actual living bodies have different depths of things that need to be penetrated and from various angles of attack. People are not just flat paper you shoot at when youre at the range. Part of this package is knowing human anatomy, so you know where to shoot and why you are shooting there, and from various angles, and not just head on COM.

Lucky Gunner is a good place to get a good visual on things as far as what has reasonable penetration and what doesn't, and they cover a lot of different loads. I think if you look, the bulk of the 380's they tested, didnt, or barely made the 12" minimum.

Its not perfect, nothing is, but its at least a reasonable, more or less apples-to-apples type comparison of things.

And thats just the ammo aspect of things. It doesnt take into account the shooters actual capabilities and skills, especially once you go beyond just basic target type shooting. You may be a bug hole bullseye target shooter at the range, when you take your time and focus on shooting that way, but how are you what you have to do things under stress, and draw, move and shoot as you go?


As far as carrying what you want? By all means, carry what you want, its your choice, and you dont have to justify it, do what you want. As long as you dont inadvertently shoot me or anyone close to me in a panic because you couldnt bother to be competent with it, I really couldn't care less.

Its just when you start claiming things that are generally not the accepted norm (based on certified type docs' and experience, etc.) and citing things that really are nothing more than an article in a gun mag, or someone with no actual certifications and experience "did their own study", etc, well, youre going to get some push back on that, like you did here.

I prefer to call it evidence, not pushback, but whatever. Nice talking with you, I'm sure you'll do fine in a SD situation.

 

[MrShooter]

I shot my little pocket Taurus today and was quite surprised when it went clean through a treated 4x4 from 7 yds. Just regular critical defense rounds, not even +p.

 

[trackskippy]

Good for you, the article I mentioned even gun guy writers shot them differently, maybe you're better than them, but I doubt it.

You seem hung up on this. Do you even understand what I was getting at?

Red herring, where have I said don't practice? You really need to stop bringing that up.

No, I dont actually. Why? Does it touch a nerve?

You keep talking like all you need to do, is have one round of 380 and hit someone with it, and everything stops. And youre basing it on one article on the internet that says its better than everything else?

Again, not advocating that.

Well, what were or are you getting at here?

So my requirements are the same as the FBI's? Are they the same as the US Army's too?

Well, if Im going to base things on something, Id prefer to do it with something that was done by professionals and were trained in doing what they are testing and have the education and certifications to back it.

So yea, their requirements are, or should be the bse for our requirements, unless maybe youre only shooting things that dont relate to what is considered the "norm" when it comes to all this.

I prefer to call it evidence, not pushback, but whatever. Nice talking with you, I'm sure you'll do fine in a SD situation.

Youre so called "evidence" is basically one magazine article. And yea, I believe you will continue to get push back on that, if you keep insisting, its relevant "data".

 

[Leon tP]

Well, that was an interesting article but I'm not moved in the least. I'll keep doing what I've been doing.


I won't be using a 32 acp anytime soon, no matter what this data suggests.



Nope, not buying into it. A mouse gun is still a mouse gun.


https://www.buckeyefirearms.org/alternate-look-handgun-stopping-power

In a certain (fairly high) percentage of shootings, people stop their aggressive actions after being hit with one round regardless of caliber or shot placement. These people are likely NOT physically incapacitated by the bullet. They just don't want to be shot anymore and give up! Call it a psychological stop if you will. Any bullet or caliber combination will likely yield similar results in those cases. And fortunately for us, there are a lot of these "psychological stops" occurring. The problem we have is when we don't get a psychological stop. If our attacker fights through the pain and continues to victimize us, we might want a round that causes the most damage possible. In essence, we are relying on a "physical stop" rather than a "psychological" one. In order to physically force someone to stop their violent actions we need to either hit him in the Central Nervous System (brain or upper spine) or cause enough bleeding that he becomes unconscious. The more powerful rounds look to be better at doing this.

Yeah, I just don't feel comfortable with the idea that Mr. Bad Guy should know that when he's been shot, he needs to give up. I'd rather put him on his butt and he has no choice.

It would seem the author has issues with this to.

...
If you want to be prepared to deal with someone who won't give up so easily, or you want to be able to have good performance even after shooting through an intermediate barrier, I would skip carrying the "mouse gun" .22s, .25s and .32s.

Don't get me wrong, I'll use a 380 if that's what I have but it's far from my first choice... and a tiny micro? Only if there's no other option.

So... you do you and I'll do me, and the world keeps turning.

 

[WisBorn]

How about the video on CCW cartridges.

 

[buck460XVR]

So... you do you and I'll do me, and the world keeps turning.

^^^Exactly. Why I said 3 pages ago.......

Caliber is not nearly as important as proficiency and situational awareness, and going bigger is not going to make up for the lack of either. Use what you have confidence in, are proficient with and are comfortable carrying. Don't matter what others think....ain't their life you are trying to save.

This is just 6 pages of another "caliber war". Like the rest, it will never be won, only fought until one of the Mods closes it. Most of the content in this thread has been composed by two folks trying to make their point. We get it already. Making the last post before the Mod closes the thread will not make you the winner. Can we just agree to disagree and move on? Maybe someone else wants to come along and contribute something interesting before this thread gets closed.........

 

[21H40]

How about the video on CCW cartridges.

He didn't look at 10mm, so all of his "facts" are crap!

Interesting video. I wish people like Ellifritz would send their data through groups that specialize in data analysis, though. There are ways to use math to make better correlations - and avoid false ones - that most of us mere mortals just can't do with a spreadsheet.

 

[Paul7]

You seem hung up on this. Do you even understand what I was getting at?

That is a valid point I'm bringing up that you have yet to address. It's just physics, a .357 snubbie for example will be harder to shoot than a .380, no matter how much you practice. I don't know too many who want to put 100 rounds through the .357 snubbie at one sitting anyway.

No, I dont actually. Why? Does it touch a nerve?

If anyone here was advocating not practicing you might have a point. If only you addressed points brought up instead of constant Red Herrings.

You keep talking like all you need to do, is have one round of 380 and hit someone with it, and everything stops.

Never said that, making things up doesn't help your cause.

And youre basing it on one article on the internet that says its better than everything else?

One article, based on hundreds of real world SD situations (as opposed to internet speculation), that says the .380 does about as well as anything else in civilian SD instances.

So yea, their requirements are, or should be the bse for our requirements, unless maybe youre only shooting things that dont relate to what is considered the "norm" when it comes to all this.

The norm for civilian SD is said to be 3 shots, 3', 3 seconds, as opposed to police and military norms.

Youre so called "evidence" is basically one magazine article. And yea, I believe you will continue to get push back on that, if you keep insisting, its relevant "data".

Let's see, an article summing up hundreds of SD events vs. your speculation, easy choice.

 

[trackskippy]

That is a valid point I'm bringing up that you have yet to address. It's just physics, a .357 snubbie for example will be harder to shoot than a .380, no matter how much you practice. I don't know too many who want to put 100 rounds through the .357 snubbie at one sitting anyway.

First off, it all depends on the gun and the shooter. If you dont regularly shoot 357 out of a smaller revolver, sure, its likely going to be an issue. Same thing can be said for your 380. If you do it all the time, its not.

And I shoot 100 rounds and sometimes more at an outing out of a couple of different 357mag snubbies, a couple of times a month. Never found it to be a problem. Id much rather shoot them than my 38 Airweight J frames, which I also shoot a couple of times a month.

If anyone here was advocating not practicing you might have a point. If only you addressed points brought up instead of constant Red Herrings.

Its all a part of things here, they arent mutually exclusive. You can have the deadliest round in the world, but if you cant put it where it needs to go, and make it work, its not going to do you any good, no matter how much you keep telling us its better than anything else.

As Ive said numerous times here, a 380 can and will work, as long as you can make things work. But you do have to be realistic about your skills too.

Never said that, making things up doesn't help your cause.

Whos making anything up? Youre the one who keeps telling us that the 380 is some sort of magic bullet, and all based on one questionable article read and now seem to think is the bible on handgun caliber performance in human bodies.

One article, based on hundreds of real world SD situations (as opposed to internet speculation), that says the .380 does about as well as anything else in civilian SD instances.

Yea, one very questionable article.

I guess all the other data collected by federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies, ammo makers, etc, and all the time and money spent there over the decades, is all just BS. But that one article you read has all the good info as to how well the different calibers and bullet types perform in the human body. Got ya!

The norm for civilian SD is said to be 3 shots, 3', 3 seconds, as opposed to police and military norms.

According to who? The internet? Another gun mag article?

What happens when you dont get your so-called "norm" ? Are you prepared for that? You do understand what percentages are and how they work, right?

Let's see, an article summing up hundreds of SD events vs. your speculation, easy choice.

Im not the one speculating here.

I prefer to look at and consider the data collected by those who have the education and accreditation and are paid to do it for a living. Not some gun writer who does a little test for an article in a gun mag or internet article.

Theres really no point in going on here. You obviously dont want to go any further investigating things here, and Im tired of being muddy wrassling with the pig. So you go ahead and be happy with what youve read and learned in you r article and live by it. Im goona go get a shower and go for a bike ride.

 

[Paul7]

Yea, one very questionable article.

LOL, so facts on hundreds of SD events are questionable, but your opinion is not? How many SD events have you been involved in? Know of any perps hit in the vitals with a .380 who kept up the attack? I didn't think so.....

Theres really no point in going on here. You obviously dont want to go any further investigating things here, and Im tired of being muddy wrassling with the pig.

I was going to say myself, it has been like wrestling with a pig, the only result is you get dirty and the pig likes it.

I'd suggest you just get a .44 mag and quit compromising with that puny 9mm.....

 

[trackskippy]

No, dont know anyone shot with a .380. I do know a couple of people who have been shot with rifle calibers and they kept fighting after being shot. I suppose those boys should count their lucky stars it wasnt a .380, eh?

Ive got a couple of 44's. Why? Whats the problem with them now? Wait, dont tell me your boys article says the 380's better than them too!

 

[Paul7]

No, dont know anyone shot with a .380.

Thread over.

 

[WheelGunMan]

It's to bad.. this was a interesting thread for a while until all the infighting started.

 

[tubeshooter]

It was?


Because to me it looks like the wheels were falling off by the end of page 2...

 

[dogtown tom]

I shot my little pocket Taurus today and was quite surprised when it went clean through a treated 4x4 from 7 yds. Just regular critical defense rounds, not even +p.

But people aren't made of 4x4's.
But 4x4's are actually 3.5"x 3.5".
But the FBI has never published results of shooting through wood.
Is that 4x4 calibrated?
Is it ballistic wood?
Don't come on here and tell us its pine.
You say its "treated"........but was it PAINTED?

 

[jar]

Today's Red Headed Stepchild was my Ruger Security 380 with a ten round magazine and carried in a Ruger embossed Mitch Rosen Independent IWB.

 

[CDW4ME]

Know of any perps hit in the vitals with a .380 who kept up the attack? I didn't think so.....

There are videos of people being shot with at least 9mm and not being quickly incapacitated:
https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/do-examples-incidents-matter-to-you.902897/
Add to that others that have happened since I put that little collection together.
Those examples were advocating capacity, attackers taking 5-6 hits and not being quickly incapacitated, when somebody has their mind made up, examples don't matter though. One person advocating a snub for carry honestly said it wouldn't matter if was a dozen examples; I liked the honesty.
About a year ago I gave up on trying to encourage people to do better if they are happy with a 38 snub or 380 I'm like "doesn't affect me".

I do address what is posted, things like sayings, "Wouldn't want to get shot with it" (duh) or questionable data like 32 acp having better incapacitation potential than 45.
What is the response? "Well THAT part of the data seems off, but the part that supports what I think is valid". Basically.

I had somebody using that (your) data to rationalize carrying a snub; I said the data shows that with two attackers you are out of ammo.
Two hits to incapacitate on average, but factor the misses (hit ratio) and 5 shots is potentially deficient for two attackers.
They told me not to use the data like THAT basically.

As @trackskippy sees the person posting such probably won't change their mind but others reading the thread may be more receptive.
Oh no, can't have that; the call for shut it down has already been invoked.

 

[21H40]

There are videos of people being shot with at least 9mm and not being quickly incapacitated:
https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/do-examples-incidents-matter-to-you.902897/
Add to that others that have happened since I put that little collection together.

Thanks for linking the thread. Interesting concept, but I only accept information that confirms my beliefs. And I cancel you for introducing said information.
*whoosh* the sound of my magic cancelling powers!

To think that we could use this forum to spread ideas and wisdom, I guess spreading ignorance is almost the same thing.

 

[MrShooter]

But people aren't made of 4x4's.
But 4x4's are actually 3.5"x 3.5".
But the FBI has never published results of shooting through wood.
Is that 4x4 calibrated?
Is it ballistic wood?
Don't come on here and tell us its pine.
You say its "treated"........but was it PAINTED?

???????????
Sorry I wasted both our time writing this almighty guru.

 

[dogtown tom]

???????????

Humor.
If you read these kind of threads you'll see references to various tests used by various LE/MIL/Gov agencies that attempt to show penetration and expansion of various bullets from various cartridge's and getting various results.

Testing was spurred by the infamous FBI Miami Shootout where the FBI concluded the firearms they carried and the cartridges were insufficient.

The most common testing medium is gelatin. Once it was realized plain ol' Jello wasn't the same and didn't have a standard composition, they began using "ballistic gelatin" prepared under a stricter recipe than Sunday dessert. Some pick apart gelatin based tests as "they ain't gots no bones like a human!". This led to shooting pigs. Which opened up a can of worms. So.......in the early 90's it was determined goats were a better testing medium...............and the "Strasbourg Goat Test" was published: http://www.largrizzly.net/images/shooting/tests.pdf?i=1 After you read that, understand that its either a super top secret, 007 level, CIA/NSA double secret level study .....OR......its an awesome hoax. Being that literally no one in scientific study wants to be anonymous, its a hoax.

Which leads to "Box O' Truth":https://www.theboxotruth.com/threads/the-box-o-truth-1-the-original-box-o-truth.278/ one of the most entertaining shooting websites ever, with testing done with sheetrock.

So...TONGUE IN CHEEK, I replied to your testing medium of 4x4's. That attempt at humor apparently went far over your head.

Sorry I wasted both our time writing this almighty guru.

You didn't waste my time, I thoroughly enjoyed writing it.

 

[CDW4ME]

Thanks for linking the thread. Interesting concept, but I only accept information that confirms my beliefs. And I cancel you for introducing said information.
*whoosh* the sound of my magic cancelling powers!

To think that we could use this forum to spread ideas and wisdom, I guess spreading ignorance is almost the same thing.

I had another thought about the data that has been referenced many times in this thread.
https://www.buckeyefirearms.org/alternate-look-handgun-stopping-power

Speed of incapacitation.
In the Marshall & Sanow "Stopping Power" books (I had all three) a "stop" was counted up to 10 seconds.
I didn't see a incapacitation cut time listed in the study linked.
In the Strasbourg Goat Test a 45 or 357 Mag HP might have a incapacitation time of 4 seconds whereas poorer performers 10 or more (as I recall).
There is a heck of a difference in 4 seconds versus 9 and either gets counted as incapacitation.
380 incapacitates whatever % of the time but how quickly and versus 9mm or 45 HP?

 

[Brubz]

I'm the op of this thread so obviously I'm not anti .380 but it occurs to me that if you score a hit on an attacker with any caliber it's going to greatly reduce the chances that they're going to continue the attack. their brain is going to be wired to "I've been shot" not I need to jump back up empty my magazine then reload and continue to fight with bleeding holes in me. that's sort of thing happens in the movies. Just my take on this

 

[trackskippy]

Any hit on the other guy is a good hit for you. Doesnt always mean its going to stop things, but, its still better than a miss. It would be better if you hit things that actually stop things too.

Some people dont seem to understand too that, people are often shot, and dont even realize that they have been shot, "yet" anyway, and can still continue to pursue things as if they werent. So again, just because you hit them, really doesnt mean squat, until they are actually stopped.


One more time..... all handgun calibers suck as man stoppers. The only sure way to make sure things work, regardless of the magical caliber you carry, is to "shoot them to the ground", and keep shooting until they cease and desist. That should be your mentality and mantra.

And that even works with the .380's, assuming you have the skills to make the necessary hits, and/or enough onboard ammo to solve the problem.

 

[jar]

Today the Redheaded Stepchild of my heart is my RIA BBR 380.

Carried c&l in an Alessi pocket holster.