Is the .45 someone’s compensation for......you know?

[Unregistered]

First, gripping the pistol is accomplished using two hands, in most LE shooting systems. If an adult can not get a good, solid grip with two hands, then there is problem with the system, not the weapon.

Different rounds achieve maximum expansion in different calibers. Some 9x19mm rounds are engineered to expand more rapidly than slower rounds, such as the .45 ACP. The reason for that is because once the projectile leaves the body, it no longer transmits energy and cause damage. Now, the .45 ACP achieves a maximum expansion from a 4-5" bbl pistol of ~.70" to .76". The maximum expansion for the 9x19mm is usually ~ .67" to .72". As you can see, the maximum expansion on the rounds is pretty close, with an approximate 7% greater cross section for the .45 ACP over the 9x19mm. This provides fairly good results, no matter which caliber you use, as long as all other things are equal. Where the frontal cross section of the projectile becomes more critical, in pistol rounds, is when the round does not expand. If the 9x19mm does not expand, it creates a .36" hole in the human body. The .45 ACP makes a .45" hole in the human body. Bigger hole, faster blood loss, faster neutralization of the threat. The 9x19mm attempts to offset this inequity by increasing the ammunition capacity of the pistol.

As you point out, almost any pistol round can kill, under the right circumstances. However, attempting to use this as an argument to justify using smaller caliber rounds for self defense by pistol, ignores the most problematic fact. Unless the Central Nervous System [CNS] sustains a direct hit, disability is not instantaneous. It takes time for blood flow from injury to drop the blood pressure to the point where the subject passes out. It can take as long as 8 seconds for a direct hit, which punctures the heart or the aortic arch, to result in sufficient blood loss to cause unconsciousness. And, during that time, the subject can continue to act and fight. If he has a firearm, he can fire a significant number of shots at you, all of which are potentially deadly. As you point out, shot placement is critical.

Now, the .38spl, 9x19mm, .40S&W, .44Spl, .45 GAP, .45ACP and .45 LC, are all about the same, in defensive effectiveness, when loaded to comparable levels and having comparable bullet designs. So, which you choose is not that important, if one chooses wisely. Smaller and lighter are not always better. The less weight that a pistol has, the more the operator has to use strength to control the weapon in rapid fire. This adversely affects smaller operators such as women. More ammo on board is always better. No one ever complains that they had ammo left over from a firefight. So, smaller, lighter and increased ammo capacity is not always a good thing. Again, it depends upon the operator.

I will not go into the training and logistical aspect of weapon choice by LEAs. That could take a lot longer then we have time for, and tends to make people's eyes cross.

Enjoy the holidays.

Hello range expert nerd.

First off not every shooting involves a two handed grip and a perfect stance. And in reality it usually happens so fast all that goes out the window.

Second, why don’t you read about the percentage of .45’s that fail to mushroom. Bullets don’t always expand the way they are designed to. And people die due to a hit in the brain or in the heart. They will eventually die from a lung shot or liver shot. Most people drop when they get hit and go into shock. And arm and leg shots can be fatal if the main arteries get hit. The difference between what a 9 can do versus a 45 is not substantial.

For the rest of your babble all I heard was blah blah blah. Pistols work best when they fit your hand, are appropriately weighted and balanced, fire consistently and accurately. .38’s driller people, but revolvers were 1800’s tech. 9’s were fine until someone let their pecked make decisions for the agency. That was back in like 2004 when you were in middle school, maybe.

Obviously you’ve never been in a gunfight and have no clue what you’re talking about. Keep reading your magazines and making friends at Reload.

[Unregistered]

lol @ all the Call of Duty nerds comparing pistols like ****s. Who ****ing cares? The Sheriff provides. STFU and use what he gives you.

[Unregistered]

Hello range expert nerd.

First off not every shooting involves a two handed grip and a perfect stance. And in reality it usually happens so fast all that goes out the window.

Second, why don’t you read about the percentage of .45’s that fail to mushroom. Bullets don’t always expand the way they are designed to. And people die due to a hit in the brain or in the heart. They will eventually die from a lung shot or liver shot. Most people drop when they get hit and go into shock. And arm and leg shots can be fatal if the main arteries get hit. The difference between what a 9 can do versus a 45 is not substantial.

For the rest of your babble all I heard was blah blah blah. Pistols work best when they fit your hand, are appropriately weighted and balanced, fire consistently and accurately. .38’s driller people, but revolvers were 1800’s tech. 9’s were fine until someone let their pecked make decisions for the agency. That was back in like 2004 when you were in middle school, maybe.

Obviously you’ve never been in a gunfight and have no clue what you’re talking about. Keep reading your magazines and making friends at Reload.

I do not know what your point is, but I will happily address your points.

Though every shooting situation is different and you can end up shooting one handed and even with the weak hand, in LE firearms training, the bulk of the shooting is done with a two hand grip. In reality, what happens is that the person involved in the shooting usually reverts to their last, best training. If properly trained, the operator will not simply draw his or her weapon and begin blazing away. They will draw and drop into whatever shooting stance they have the most intense training in. This is the whole point of training. If the person fails to do this and it is not a constant decision, then the training was faulty and did not take.

Now, to your second point. First of all, I fail to see what your argument is here. I clearly stated, in both of my previous posts, that the effectiveness of the 9x19mm and .45 ACP rounds were essentially the same, IF all other factors were equal. As a hit to the torso, which does not involve a direct hit to the CNS, relies upon blood loss to achieve incapacitation, the bigger the wound channel, the faster the blood loss and the quicker incapacitation is achieved. So, a bullet, with a larger frontal cross section will cause a bigger hole.

As to rounds which fail to expand, within the human body, there is no real difference between the .45 ACP and the 9x19mm. A round which shows good expansion in ballistic gel will most likely show similar expansion in the human body. There are a number of factors which can retard or even stop the expansion of the bullet. One of the most common is traversing heavy clothing. Penetrating heavy clothing, while not a real problem in Florida, can plug up the cavity on the expanding bullet. In this case, the bullet will not expand and will, in fact, maintain the same frontal cross section it had when it left the barrel. However, this doe not, in anyway, eliminate the fact that, all else being equal, the .45 ACP round maintains a 7% greater frontal cross section than the 9x19mm. Sorry, but reality is.

As to people dying from defensive handgun wounds, that is not the point. The object of the defensive pistol is to stop violent, deadly aggression as quickly as possible. Hits, other than direct hits to the CNS, take a measurable amount of time to guarantee incapacitation of the aggressor. As I noted, a direct hit to the heart or aorta can take as long as 8 seconds to cause unconsciousness in a human being. Research the 1986 FBI shootout in Miami. Platt was hit numerous times, including a side penetration of the right lung, which would have led to his eventual death. He continued to engage the FBI agents, killing two and wounding just about everyone else. He finally retreated to his vehicle, where he was shot in thee neck and head, with a .38 Spl revolver. The point is that people will continue to fight, and rain down death and destruction, even after receiving wounds which will be fatal. If you want to bet your life on the fact that an adversary will immediately go into shock when shot, good luck. One last thing about the Miami shootout. Take a look at the round count, involved. The agents expended 63 rounds. they hit Platt 12 times, including the rounds fired into him after he had retreated to the car. Matix was struck 6 times. That is 18 out of 63 or 24%. The FBI training was either lousy or the agents were incompetent.

Now, I realize that you are 9x19mm fanboy. But, you have put forth NO good reason why the PCSO should use 9mm rather than .45ACP. As you note, both are pretty close in effectiveness. You can stuff 3 or 4 more rounds into the 9mm pistol. But, that only makes a difference in a protracted firefight. The grip diameter, of the 9mm, can be made smaller due to the smaller rounds. But, again, as the dimensions of the rounds involved are not that different, this is a minor point. And, if the muzzle energy of the rounds is at all close, simple physics will show that recoil is also close. Equal reaction, right?

Now, about my bono fides. I came on the job in the mid-70s and was a working LEO for the next three decades. I was trained using a revolver loaded with .38spl rounds. When my agency allowed a switch to semi-autos, in the early 80s, I stepped up to a SIG P220 in .45ACP. I also carried a S&W 6906, in 9mm, as both a backup and when in plain clothes assignments. And, I have been involved in shooting situations, over my career, as well as investigating police involved shootings.

Now, let me make a startling revelation here. Though I like the .45ACP and find the modern 9x19mm round adequate, if I was working the street today, I would lean heavily toward carrying the .357 SIG round. It produces nearly identical ballistic results to the 125gr .357 magnum revolver round. But, it fits easily into a modern semi-auto handgun and the moving parts of such weapons absorb some of the recoil. It is very effective on human targets and has better performance against animal targets than the 9x19mm, the .40S&W and the .45GAP and .45ACP. It is much better at barrier penetration, including automobiles and body armor. IMHO, the .357 SIG is a superior round for LE.

Lastly, your agency has the last word on equipment, period. And, while there is a certain amount of bias involved in the choice of equipment, there are also usually good reasons why the choice was made. Before I retired, my agency decided to switch to the GLOCK G17 and G19 [for plain clothes assignments]. It also decided to issue the handguns, rather than have the employees purchase their own. Now, personally, I do not like the feel of the GLOCK. The grip angle is not comfortable for me. However, I accepted the issued weapon and went out and qualified with it. Such is life.

[Unregistered]

lol @ all the Call of Duty nerds comparing pistols like ****s. Who ****ing cares? The Sheriff provides. STFU and use what he gives you.

Right, just like those faulty Adam Arms rifles.

[Unregistered]

The 21's grip sucks because it is too big for many people, which negatively arrests marksmanship and rate of fire due to increased recoil. It's a no-brainer that it's time to retire the 21 which was showed down our throats by outdated and obsolete thinking from the Phillipine war, WW1 & 2 and the Thompson-LaGrade tests on live animals to test FMJ incapacitation times. Today we have modern and better designed bullets which have been demonstrated to give 9 mm, 40 S&W and 45 ACP virtually the same stoping power.

The only reason to have the 45 ACP is that mythical macho BS that the old geezers were brainwashed with by the army telling them the 45 is one step bellow a bazooka. It's time to get with the modern age policing and switch to 9 mm. The dinosaurs and Rice drunks who picked the 21 are gone so no reason not to make a beneficial change for our members now.

[Unregistered]

I do not know what your point is, but I will happily address your points.

Though every shooting situation is different and you can end up shooting one handed and even with the weak hand, in LE firearms training, the bulk of the shooting is done with a two hand grip. In reality, what happens is that the person involved in the shooting usually reverts to their last, best training. If properly trained, the operator will not simply draw his or her weapon and begin blazing away. They will draw and drop into whatever shooting stance they have the most intense training in. This is the whole point of training. If the person fails to do this and it is not a constant decision, then the training was faulty and did not take.

Now, to your second point. First of all, I fail to see what your argument is here. I clearly stated, in both of my previous posts, that the effectiveness of the 9x19mm and .45 ACP rounds were essentially the same, IF all other factors were equal. As a hit to the torso, which does not involve a direct hit to the CNS, relies upon blood loss to achieve incapacitation, the bigger the wound channel, the faster the blood loss and the quicker incapacitation is achieved. So, a bullet, with a larger frontal cross section will cause a bigger hole.

As to rounds which fail to expand, within the human body, there is no real difference between the .45 ACP and the 9x19mm. A round which shows good expansion in ballistic gel will most likely show similar expansion in the human body. There are a number of factors which can retard or even stop the expansion of the bullet. One of the most common is traversing heavy clothing. Penetrating heavy clothing, while not a real problem in Florida, can plug up the cavity on the expanding bullet. In this case, the bullet will not expand and will, in fact, maintain the same frontal cross section it had when it left the barrel. However, this doe not, in anyway, eliminate the fact that, all else being equal, the .45 ACP round maintains a 7% greater frontal cross section than the 9x19mm. Sorry, but reality is.

As to people dying from defensive handgun wounds, that is not the point. The object of the defensive pistol is to stop violent, deadly aggression as quickly as possible. Hits, other than direct hits to the CNS, take a measurable amount of time to guarantee incapacitation of the aggressor. As I noted, a direct hit to the heart or aorta can take as long as 8 seconds to cause unconsciousness in a human being. Research the 1986 FBI shootout in Miami. Platt was hit numerous times, including a side penetration of the right lung, which would have led to his eventual death. He continued to engage the FBI agents, killing two and wounding just about everyone else. He finally retreated to his vehicle, where he was shot in thee neck and head, with a .38 Spl revolver. The point is that people will continue to fight, and rain down death and destruction, even after receiving wounds which will be fatal. If you want to bet your life on the fact that an adversary will immediately go into shock when shot, good luck. One last thing about the Miami shootout. Take a look at the round count, involved. The agents expended 63 rounds. they hit Platt 12 times, including the rounds fired into him after he had retreated to the car. Matix was struck 6 times. That is 18 out of 63 or 24%. The FBI training was either lousy or the agents were incompetent.

Now, I realize that you are 9x19mm fanboy. But, you have put forth NO good reason why the PCSO should use 9mm rather than .45ACP. As you note, both are pretty close in effectiveness. You can stuff 3 or 4 more rounds into the 9mm pistol. But, that only makes a difference in a protracted firefight. The grip diameter, of the 9mm, can be made smaller due to the smaller rounds. But, again, as the dimensions of the rounds involved are not that different, this is a minor point. And, if the muzzle energy of the rounds is at all close, simple physics will show that recoil is also close. Equal reaction, right?

Now, about my bono fides. I came on the job in the mid-70s and was a working LEO for the next three decades. I was trained using a revolver loaded with .38spl rounds. When my agency allowed a switch to semi-autos, in the early 80s, I stepped up to a SIG P220 in .45ACP. I also carried a S&W 6906, in 9mm, as both a backup and when in plain clothes assignments. And, I have been involved in shooting situations, over my career, as well as investigating police involved shootings.

Now, let me make a startling revelation here. Though I like the .45ACP and find the modern 9x19mm round adequate, if I was working the street today, I would lean heavily toward carrying the .357 SIG round. It produces nearly identical ballistic results to the 125gr .357 magnum revolver round. But, it fits easily into a modern semi-auto handgun and the moving parts of such weapons absorb some of the recoil. It is very effective on human targets and has better performance against animal targets than the 9x19mm, the .40S&W and the .45GAP and .45ACP. It is much better at barrier penetration, including automobiles and body armor. IMHO, the .357 SIG is a superior round for LE.

Lastly, your agency has the last word on equipment, period. And, while there is a certain amount of bias involved in the choice of equipment, there are also usually good reasons why the choice was made. Before I retired, my agency decided to switch to the GLOCK G17 and G19 [for plain clothes assignments]. It also decided to issue the handguns, rather than have the employees purchase their own. Now, personally, I do not like the feel of the GLOCK. The grip angle is not comfortable for me. However, I accepted the issued weapon and went out and qualified with it. Such is life.

"Periodically people write articles claiming things like “the difference between .45 ACP and 9mm is less than .1 inch! That’s less than a 30% difference!” This shows a misunderstanding of the math involved, since the important measurement of a bullet is the frontal area, not the diameter. Frontal area of a bullet is calculated as π times the square of the radius. The radius of a .45 ACP bullet is .225”, and the radus of a 9mm bullet is .1775”. Thus the frontal area of a .45 ACP bullet is approximately .16 square inches and the frontal area of a 9mm bullet is about .10 square inches. That’s a 60% difference. (The way a 30% difference in diameter goes to a 60% difference in area is because area is a square function. Small increases in radius are squared to calculate area.)"

[Unregistered]

"Periodically people write articles claiming things like “the difference between .45 ACP and 9mm is less than .1 inch! That’s less than a 30% difference!” This shows a misunderstanding of the math involved, since the important measurement of a bullet is the frontal area, not the diameter. Frontal area of a bullet is calculated as π times the square of the radius. The radius of a .45 ACP bullet is .225”, and the radus of a 9mm bullet is .1775”. Thus the frontal area of a .45 ACP bullet is approximately .16 square inches and the frontal area of a 9mm bullet is about .10 square inches. That’s a 60% difference. (The way a 30% difference in diameter goes to a 60% difference in area is because area is a square function. Small increases in radius are squared to calculate area.)"

This is correct. The .45 ACP will have approximately 60% greater frontal cross section than a 9x19mm round. And, it will continue to hold to full expansion, all else being equal. This is what I get for not doing the math, before posting. Thank you for the clarification.

[Unregistered]

We used to have an informal hiring rule about height, weight, hence hand size was hardly ever an issue with the Model 64 and Beretta (which also felt like a brick in your hand). Then the agency became "politically correct" and began hiring people who did not meet the old unspoken height/weight standards, and which had smaller hands. But the brick-like 21 was adopted anyway. The correct choice would have been the 19, because of the smaller hands of the people the agency chose to hire. The agency failed to account for the smaller average hand size which put people at risk because they could not get proper control of the pistols.

[Unregistered]

Great. Nerd speak about math they don’t understand and that has nothing to do with reality. Ballistic gel looks similar with 9’s through 45’s. The .357 Sig does seem to be a rip rising rocket. Most people who have been involved in shootouts and combat will take capacity and accuracy over perceived power. The Glock 17 and 45 come with 17 round mags and smaller grips. A lethal hit by a 9 or 45 kill the same. And it’s never first to fire or who fires the most, it’s who hits first. You can fire a weapon more accurately when you can get a proper grip. And I guarantee you that about half this agency can’t properly because it’s too god damn big. Why don’t we qualify from 25 yards anymore? Crappy shooters that’s why. We qualify from 15 yards and in and there are still people who can’t do that!! Training will never bring this subject up. Not while the wicked witch of the west is still here.

[Unregistered]

lol @ all the Call of Duty nerds comparing pistols like ****s. Who ****ing cares? The Sheriff provides. STFU and use what he gives you.

Another one of Bob propagandists rushes to his defense. Thank you for providing nothing of any substance. If Bob issued water pistols you would tells us how great he is and to STFU and use what he gave us. You must be one of those office slugs who carries his star on his belt.