The Verminator
Moderator
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.
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.
No cleverness intended nor possessed.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.
See post #83.See post #82.
We reject the .22 LR because we know better.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.
Hemingway was talking about head shots.“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
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.Ask an experienced man if he'd rather go into a gunfight with a .45 or a .22 LR.
Thompson Lagarde. They shot primarily bovines.First of course there was Thompson-LaGardia.
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.Then there was Marshall and Sanow's material. Finally there was the goat shooting, was it Fackler?
The topic is only complicated if one chooses to believe that a significant effect can be impossible to detect in the real world.This can of worms sure has a lot of worms!
Wait. What?...your claim that there were good studies out there showing that caliber choice makes a significant difference in the outcome of real-world gunfights.
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.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."
The demise of the .40 has some solid reasons.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.
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.