Best caliber for self defense

[The Verminator]

Just ask an experienced man if he'd rather go into a gunfight with a .45 or a .22 LR.

That ends the debate.

[JohnKSa]

That ends the debate.

--Posted in the middle of an ongoing debate.

Nothing has ended the debate--it continues, and not just on this thread or on this forum. The debate continues, and a little thought will reveal that, if there were conclusive evidence of a winner, it would not continue.

Just ask an experienced man...

First of all, my comments are about comparing the traditional service pistol calibers and the other calibers that fit into that general performance class. Clearly if one departs too far from that general range of performance, then caliber differences start to matter, although, even then, the differences can be less important than people typically assume.

As far as opinions go, there is shortage of opinions. Educated ones, experienced ones, all kinds. But you explicitly mentioned studies.

If caliber choice is having a significant (i.e. meaningful) effect on the outcome of real world gunfights, it should be possible to see that effect. By definition, if it is significant/meaningful, it is also detectable.

If it is undetectable, then how could it possibly be meaningful or significant?

So...

Where are the "good studies" that show the significant/meaningful difference in the outcome of real-world gunfights based on caliber differences in the service pistol performance class?

[74A95]

Originally Posted by The Verminator

Just ask an experienced man if he'd rather go into a gunfight with a .45 or a .22 LR.

That ends the debate.

I have to agree with John. You said there are plenty of good studies around that give us good information. Please share those studies with us.

[JohnKSa]

I'm not trying to browbeat anyone. If studies like that exist, I want to see them--everyone does. If they do not, then their absence should give pause to those who think that there's clear evidence that caliber differences (within the general performance range of the service pistol calibers) make a difference in gunfight outcomes.

[Frank Ettin]

Originally Posted by JohnKSa

...I would love to see something that, based on the outcome of real-world shootings, points to a clear winner out of the service pistol performance class....

And, as far as I've seen so far, none of the available studies really provides anything like a definitive answer. And most likely there will never be one.

There are most likely too many variables that can contribute to the outcome of a defensive gun use (DGU), while the sample sizes are tiny. The largest sample in Ellifritz' study (9mm Luger) involved fewer than 500 incidents. Samples for a number of cartridges were fewer than 100.

Based on Ellifritz' and Agent Patrick's analysis, if your assailant is psychologically disposed to quit if shot, it won't matter what you shoot him with. But if your assailant is not thus inclined to give up, Ellifitz at least suggests that certain cartridges are more likely to yield a better outcome than others.

[The Verminator]

Originally Posted by JohnKSa

Nothing has ended the debate

So........after all that..........you haven't mentioned that you asked the experienced man if he'd rather get into a gunfight carrying a .22 or a 45.

Did you?

Because that would end the debate.

[74A95]

Originally Posted by The Verminator

So........after all that..........you haven't mentioned that you asked the experienced man if he'd rather get into a gunfight carrying a .22 or a 45.

Did you?

Because that would end the debate.

So, you've got nothing, and the only thing you can do is try to be "clever". That's all we need to know.

[The Verminator]

Originally Posted by 74A95

So, you've got nothing, and the only thing you can do is try to be "clever". That's all we need to know.

No cleverness intended nor possessed.

Just a simple statement.

Ask an experienced man if he'd rather go into a gunfight with a .45 or a .22 LR.

You'd rather not talk about that.

That's all we need to know.

[74A95]

Originally Posted by The Verminator

No cleverness intended nor possessed.

Just a simple statement.

Ask an experienced man if he'd rather go into a gunfight with a .45 or a .22 LR.

You'd rather not talk about that.

That's all we need to know.

See post #82.

[The Verminator]

Originally Posted by 74A95

See post #82.

See post #83.

[Metric]

Thought experiment:

You're going to be shot by someone from 7 yards away -- far enough that we don't know exactly where the hits will be on your body. The shooter will be under stress and pressure.

Under those conditions, would you rather take one hit from .45acp, or two hits from .22LR?

IMO, there is an argument that two hits from 22 would be considerably more dangerous. The question is whether one of those shots goes through something vital -- the size of the hole isn't nearly as important.

Personally, I did some shooting with both 45acp and 22lr yesterday. At combat distance, I can get hits pretty fast with 45acp. But with with a good 22, the speed is simply at another level.

I'm not saying that everyone should convert to 22lr, I just think we've underestimated it dramatically.

[The Verminator]

Originally Posted by Metric

Thought experiment:

You're going to be shot by someone from 7 yards away -- far enough that we don't know exactly where the hits will be on your body. The shooter will be under stress and pressure.

Under those conditions, would you rather take one hit from .45acp, or two hits from .22LR?

IMO, there is an argument that two hits from 22 would be considerably more dangerous. The question is whether one of those shots goes through something vital -- the size of the hole isn't nearly as important.

Personally, I did some shooting with both 45acp and 22lr yesterday. At combat distance, I can get hits pretty fast with 45acp. But with with a good 22, the speed is simply at another level.

I'm not saying that everyone should convert to 22lr, I just think we've underestimated it dramatically.

We reject the .22 LR because we know better.

At least those of us who have long experience with just how little damage it does.

[Metric]

“The rifle and the pistol are still the equalizer when one man is more of a man than another, and if…he is really smart…he will get a permit to carry one and then drop around to Abercrombie and Fitch and buy himself a .22 caliber Colt automatic pistol, "Woodsman model", with a five-inch barrel and a box of shells.
...
Now standing in one corner of a boxing ring with a .22 caliber Colt automatic pistol, shooting a bullet weighing only 40 grains and with a striking energy of 51 foot pounds at 25 feet from the muzzle, I will guarantee to kill either Gene Tunney or Joe Louis before they get to me from the opposite corner. This is the smallest caliber pistol cartridge made; but it is also one of the most accurate and easy to hit with, since the pistol has no recoil. I have killed many horses with it, cripples and bear baits, with a single shot, and what will kill a horse will kill a man. I have hit six dueling silhouettes in the head with it at regulation distance in five seconds. It was this type of pistol that Millen boys’ colleague, Abe Faber, did all his killings with." -- Ernest Hemingway

[The Verminator]

Originally Posted by Metric

“The rifle and the pistol are still the equalizer when one man is more of a man than another, and if…he is really smart…he will get a permit to carry one and then drop around to Abercrombie and Fitch and buy himself a .22 caliber Colt automatic pistol, "Woodsman model", with a five-inch barrel and a box of shells.
...
Now standing in one corner of a boxing ring with a .22 caliber Colt automatic pistol, shooting a bullet weighing only 40 grains and with a striking energy of 51 foot pounds at 25 feet from the muzzle, I will guarantee to kill either Gene Tunney or Joe Louis before they get to me from the opposite corner. This is the smallest caliber pistol cartridge made; but it is also one of the most accurate and easy to hit with, since the pistol has no recoil. I have killed many horses with it, cripples and bear baits, with a single shot, and what will kill a horse will kill a man. I have hit six dueling silhouettes in the head with it at regulation distance in five seconds. It was this type of pistol that Millen boys’ colleague, Abe Faber, did all his killings with." -- Ernest Hemingway

Hemingway was talking about head shots.

I agree with him..........IF you want to bet your life on a head shot.

And what if your adversary is farther than the distance across a boxing ring?

You won't get anybody to trade their .45 for a .22 LR in that situation.

[Pumpkin]

Wow!
This can of worms sure has a lot of worms!

[44 AMP]

Regardless of which calibers you are considering , you're better off with a gun you can use effectively than one you can't.

For some people, this does mean a .22. Is it the "best" choice for everyone? No. Is anything the best choice for everyone?? Not decisively, "as the studies show..." .

Sometimes the .22 is the choice of experienced individuals. Rare, but I've known people who have done that. Some of them have been exceptional shooters, capable of doing things with a .22 that literally had to be seen, to be believed.

But, that's not most people.

I'm also aware of a situation where a master class shooter on the range was involved in a short range (16 feet) shootout with a bad guy, both shooters emptied their guns without a SINGLE hit. That particular incident ended well enough, because the bad guy dropped his empty gun and surrendered.

Only hits count, and only hits in the right place MATTER, and that usually matters more than what the hits are with.

[bamaranger]

I've not read all posts, but came in on the tail end of this "studies" business.

I can think of several studies regards stopping power and effectiveness. First of course there was Thompson-LaGardia. Then I believe Hatcher. The next I'm aware of was "computer man" and I'm not sure where that came from, but it was widely published and discussed when I was in academy. Then there was Marshall and Sanow's material. Finally there was the goat shooting, was it Fackler?

We kick this stuff around all the time. I see the .40 as a compromise cartridge between 9mm and .45, which of course is just where it sits. Not quite the capacity of a 9mm, but a slightly more powerful cartridge. The .45 delivers a very convincing big bore heavy slug, but at the cost of capacity in some models. We all know this of course. The .40 is supposedly in decline, I think because the FBI has once again told us the 9mm s enough, but also largely for economic and supply issues for agencies.

Carry what you want, it'll be your fight if it comes. Practice and have your head in the game beforehand.

[JohnKSa]

Ask an experienced man if he'd rather go into a gunfight with a .45 or a .22 LR.

This is an attempt to deflect attention from your claim that there were good studies out there showing that caliber choice makes a significant difference in the outcome of real-world gunfights.

After we clear that up, we can move on to other types of "evidence".

First of course there was Thompson-LaGardia.

Thompson Lagarde. They shot primarily bovines.

Then there was Marshall and Sanow's material. Finally there was the goat shooting, was it Fackler?

M&S were less than rigorous in their data collection and analysis techniques and their results are generally considered to have been totally discredited. The Strasbourg Goat study can't be proven to have ever even taken place.

In any event, with the exception of M&S, none of those had anything to do with looking at gunfight outcomes.

This can of worms sure has a lot of worms!

The topic is only complicated if one chooses to believe that a significant effect can be impossible to detect in the real world.

[Metric]

Somewhat related. Interview (from a few days ago) of the Alaskan guide who killed an 800-900 pound brown bear that charged his clients on a fishing trip: https://youtu.be/UANI6U-SL4o?t=313

Describes the event, and why he used a 9mm that day, and not a 44mag+. The whole calculation involving convenience, speed, accuracy, and penetration seems surprisingly familiar. "Where you hit 'em is the most important thing."

[jetinteriorguy]

I know this is purely anecdotal, but a number of years ago at my daughter’s first wedding,I was visiting with her new husband’s uncle. The wedding was being held at his house in the Blue Ridge in southwestern VA. He was telling me how one day when he came out of the back door he saw a bear trying to get into one of his bird feeders. He grabbed a .22 rifle he kept inside the door, pointed it in what he thought was the general direction of the bear and shot off a round just to scare it off. The bear flopped over stone dead. Moral, don’t underestimate what a .22 can do.

[The Verminator]

Originally Posted by JohnKSa

...your claim that there were good studies out there showing that caliber choice makes a significant difference in the outcome of real-world gunfights.

Wait. What?

Where in the world did I ever say that " there were good studies out there showing that caliber choice makes a significant difference in the outcome of real-world gunfights." (?)

Please clear up how that rumor got started.

[The Verminator]

Originally Posted by Metric

Somewhat related. Interview (from a few days ago) of the Alaskan guide who killed an 800-900 pound brown bear that charged his clients on a fishing trip: https://youtu.be/UANI6U-SL4o?t=313

Describes the event, and why he used a 9mm that day, and not a 44mag+. The whole calculation involving convenience, speed, accuracy, and penetration seems surprisingly familiar. "Where you hit 'em is the most important thing."

Let's not forget the most important parts of this bear story. I've heard it in the past and if memory serves--this is how it went.

He was using specially made Buffalo Bore ammo that was tested to have sufficient penetration for bear problems.

The bear in question was obliging enough to stand still very close by and allow him to shoot it several times right behind the shoulder.

Then it was obliging enough to wander off and die.

So........not exactly a blanket approval for the average 9mm on bear.

[The Verminator]

Originally Posted by bamaranger

I see the .40 as a compromise cartridge between 9mm and .45, which of course is just where it sits. Not quite the capacity of a 9mm, but a slightly more powerful cartridge. The .45 delivers a very convincing big bore heavy slug, but at the cost of capacity in some models. We all know this of course. The .40 is supposedly in decline, I think because the FBI has once again told us the 9mm s enough, but also largely for economic and supply issues for agencies.

The demise of the .40 has some solid reasons.

The FBI (and their experience is mirrored by other cop organizations) found that they were getting more and more women among their ranks)........and that changed things.

The .40 (a wonderful round) was causing complaints about recoil.

The .40 (wonderful though it clearly is) does have a sharp recoil (a bit more unpleasant than the .45 due to pressures and velocity involved).

Yes, women were complaining (some men complained too.......but quietly--not wanting to seem to be effeminate).

At the same time, the improvements in bullet construction were making the 9mm look better and better as a police round.

And the 9mm did carry more rounds, which was a growing concern in a time when teams of terrorists were showing up with AK47s and such.

So.........wiser heads prevailed.

All in all, a logical and probably sound and practical decision.

[The Verminator]

Originally Posted by 44 AMP

Regardless of which calibers you are considering , you're better off with a gun you can use effectively than one you can't.

For some people, this does mean a .22.

Oh, I'm not saying that we couldn't find an experienced man who would CHOOSE to go into a gunfight with a .22LR instead of a .45............I'm just saying that such men are scarcer than hen's teeth.

Maybe because a lot of them are dead.

[cslinger]

Ahhh it’s nice to see there are constants in this life even in these challenging times. Death, taxes, and caliber arguments.

I only have a couple thoughts.

1-“the experienced man” takes ANY center fire round over a rimfire. Reliability trumps all. As to comparing .22 to ANY martial caliber, that’s just silly.

2-To answer the OP. In simple terms .40 provides better “numbers” and is a quite good defensive caliber. .45 is, however, more fun and certainly proven effective enough. I’d never sell a good 9mm for either of those two but if adding. Get the HK in .45. They are just a great platform, fun to shoot, hell for stout and have their fair share of gun geek cred.

3-It was said above and all would do well to hear it again. “There is NO magic bullet”. If you want to start erring towards one shot stop start thinking in gauge not caliber and even then don’t be surprised if one shot isn’t “magic”.

I return you all to the internet of 1999.