Shane45

The tests apparently did not come to that conclusion. I believe it was the 124gr loading that matched 357sig.

IIRC the testing done by the FBI came to the conclusion that the 357sig offered nothing over the 9mm. They performed somewhat identically in all tests.

...unless that difference is the difference between the BG putting one in your noggin or not.

Real estate. Less real estate in a T1 so I dont want obstructions. In addition I think its not to bad for a com shot using the t1 as a rear ghost ring if I had to. With the M3/4 I have enough real estate that the obstruction doesnt bother me at all. No right or wrong IMO, just preference. The fact of the matter is that for all the years I have been a proponent for the aimpoint, my aging eyes are disagreeing with my position so Im running a S&B short dot on my primary rifle at this time.

I should add for clarity that with full size aimpoints my front and rear are fixed, with a micro my rear is folding.

AGREED!

If you cant tolerate having your statements questioned, why do you post your opinions? I have a strong suspicion you acuse everyone all day long with trying to argue with you.

Depends on the optic. Full size like an M3/4 lower 1/3. But if its a T1 Micro, I prefer true cowitt.

And now to poke a little fun, this is how every dept rolls right? :D http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9LsVWYS0mp4

(refering to my own previous post) But this is where 2 BG or 3 BG comes in to play. Assume for a second it takes you 4 to 5 shots to get 2 hits. Thats 8+ shots for 2 bad guys. Low on ammo if a third comes your way before you can reload. And this is where the 9 becomes the answer if that is a real concern.

Rutgers, I would say that from my research that is mostly true but the edge does seem to go to the 45. So at what point is there a diminished return on capacity? What Im saying is that if Im going to get two shots in on the BG, Id rather they were .45's. I know that shootability is going to come up All I can say on that is I have an HK45CT and a P30 in 9, both LEM triggers. My fastest time on a plate rack with each is IDENTICAL! Roughly 12 yards, 5 8" plates. 4.2 seconds. I'm not a steel shooter, I just performed the test to see if I shot one better than the other. But Im in the 3.8's with a 1911 :D

Shawn, how much time do you think you have? I dont think most engagement go the route of standing toe to toe doing mag dumps....

Shawn there is no attack, what I believe to be the flaw in yuor logic is that everyone here is talking abuot how they feel about defending their lives with a 9 or a 40 or 45. Your statement that carbines are so prolific that worries over what caliber is in your pistol is not as big a worry. Clearly logic would dictate that that is only true if all officers are carrying a carbine as a primary. Which we all know they are not. So the logic is flawed. Your logic is like sayingbecause some cars have airbags its no longer a concern if I wear a seatbelt in any car. Your logic implies you get to pick and choose your engagement and choose not to engage if you dont have a rifle.

Now to get back on track to a good old 9 vs 45 debate. Capacity vs alleged superior performace. Here is my thinking on the subject which is OPEN to change as I personally consider the merits of each. The reason I said a 2 BG gun or a 3 BG gun is that I think time has to be considered. You need a CNS shot or to inflict a lot of Hydraulic leakage to be effective. But just how long is someone going to stand there and let you shoot them? How good a shot are you under high stress? This is why most of the time if yuo ask me, I would indeed side with .45. Having chatted with a guy on a dept that has a higher rate of actual shootings then normal, he tells me that the .45ACP HST +P's are extremely effective and that the recovered diameter hovers near 1". So my logic is I simply may only get a few hits on that hostile moving target. And 9 or 11 rounds is likely enough to engage 2 BG's. But what if there are 3? Time and mikes, you may very well find yourself at slide lock after 2 BG's. But of course this opens the debate on the amount of time it takes to engage 3. It gets to be a stretch for sure. But since the discussion is therotical, its fodder for debate and speculation. I had previously held the position that a protracted gunfight for a civilian is an extreme unlikelyhood. I believe it still is, but like I said the Kenyan mall and the NYC incident to name a few, make it worth while to reconsider.

Shawn, I think what makes it so hard to communicate with you is you are so illogical. Where is the logic in the effectiveness of a pistol cartridge based on the availability of a single rifle somewhere in the department. When exactly was it large calibers where not available? the 1600's?

Shawn, stop trying to backpedal. You subtended that since just about every officer has a carbine there is less need for a large caliber pistol. Two bonafieds are telling you your wrong and now your trying to squirm in several directions. If you would stop trying to portray yourself as some kind of guru, which you clearly are not, you would have SO much less trouble on the forum. Do you even understand the platoon comment or do you think you can call time out and wait for one of the guys issued a long gun or do you get to run back and get one in the middle of an engagement?

In case you were wondering, that sound was your point collapsing in on itself...

There he is, good ol Shawn out of his lane again....but he did watch an episode of cops once!

There are no magic bullets. Also worthy of consideration is if you can feed said 10mm and stay on an effective training schedule?

Well aware of the high cap 45 offerings but IMO they are a little rough to CCW. In terms of rank and file duty weapon, they may be a problem for the small handed.

As we all know statistics dont tell a complete story. For example lets assume that the vast majority of deaths by .22 are suicides, it doesnt really speak to its effectiveness in armed conflict unless your adversary always lets you put your pistol in their mouth right? I'd be fine if the FBI did move to 9. I was never a fan of the .40. As civies we dont have a lot of the political, 1 size fits many etc etc issues the caliber and pistol selection process holds for departments. I just dont see any advantage for the .40. Im sure we all agree shot placement is king. But what else should we consider? Its a near lottery ticket level of chance we will be engaged in a gunfight. But what would you want on your side if you were the unlucky ticket holder? For me it comes down to do I want a 2 bad guy gun or a 3 bad guy gun? An 8+1 .45 is probably in the 2 BG catagory where a 15+1 is surely in the 3 BG catagory. But I suspect when you start entering into the 15+ round catagory, a civilian is going to run out of time long before they run out of ammo 99.9% of the time. My views on the subject was that a 2bg gun/caliber was sufficient. But the Kenyan Mall and the NYC biker incidents make a good case for capacity.

Actual shooting statistics....

The move to 9 seems to be gaining momentum for sure. Seems a number of dept's are making the switch. The only touch of concern I would have for LE is intermediate barriers such as car doors and auto glass. As good as the 9 has gotten, from everything I have read, it still falls behind in this catagory.

Sonny is not the founder of the Hells Angels, he was the founder of the Oakland chapter.

Funny how the only sheriff that survives is the one with Cancer lol.