In a very roundabout way, I have returned to 9mm, twice, but neither time was exclusively to 9mm. My first time with 9mm was in 1984-1985, with a pair of HK P7 pistols, for police duty and concealed carry. To conform to PD uniform policy, I had a flap holster made locally. Yes, I said flap holster, very old-school. When my employer went to open-top retention holsters, no such rig existed for the P7. I could have kept using the flap holster, but the retention holster was actually much quicker from which to draw, so I reverted to a sixgun for duty, and subsequently sold most of my firearms during a financial squeeze. I also had an Uzi Carbine at the time. So, finances caused my first 9mm weapons to go away.
My first return to 9mm was with Third Generation S&W pistols, a 3913 and 3953, in the
1990s. I preferred the 3953's DAO, and sold the 3913. I soon added a Kahr 9mm. A close friend has the 3953, for as long as she wants to keep it. These 9mm pistols were used for concealed carry, as I
mostly used revolvers for duty during this time. I soon entered an all-1911 phase, in 1997, for duty
and carry. I eventually traded the K9.
My second return to 9mm happened in July 2012, for orthopedic reasons. My employer has been all-.40 for duty pistols for some time, but the firearms training unit sent a proposal to the chief that 9mm be authorized as an alternative duty pistol cartridge, along with the 9mm counterparts of the current .40 duty pistols. The snappy .40 recoil, combined with the high bore axis of the SIG P229, has recently started to really hurt my aging, aiing right wrist*. I recall .40 Glocks kicking less than the .40 SIG, so I figured I would move to a gentler weapon and a gentler cartridge in one move, and bought a G17.
Well, the chief did not sign the proposal, but I still have the G17. I will still have to use .40 at work, at least until such time as the 9mm proposal may be signed into policy. I still like my revolvers for much concealed carry, and I still favor an all-steel .45 ACP 1911 at times.
Notably, the more gentler-accelerating .45 ACP, fired from an all-steel 1911, does not hurt my wrist, which is why I brought my Les Baer TRS out of a five-year hibernation.
I may well start using a 9mm conversion barrel in my P229 for training, to lessen recoil damage to my wrist. Of course, on duty, the .40 is mandated.
As for the ability of the 9mm to stop bad guys, I feel the difference between the leading service cartridges, in premium, controlled-expansion JHP form, is minimal. From .38 +P and 9mm +P up to .45 ACP, I am, or would be, comfortable enough carrying on the street. The .357 Magnum, in its full-pressure loads, may have a bit of an edge, and when I carry a GP100, it is because of that edge.
To be clear, I do not hate the .40, and liked it before it was mandated in my duty pistols. I tried an S&W Shorty Forty back in its day, and .40 Browning Hi-Powers. Neither proved to be my cup of tea, but the cartrtridge was not at fault.
*The kick of the .40 in the P229 not hurts my right wrist when shooting right-handed, but also when shooting left-handed, when I use the modern thumb-forward support hand technique. It IS good, of course, to be functionally ambidextrous, but the snappy .40 gets me either way.
