Is the 380ACP "really" an adequate self defense gun?
- Thread starter fisherman
- Start date
- Status
Glenn E. Meyer
New member
Here's a 380 article that is positive:
https://www.personaldefensenetwork.com/article/when-does-a-380-beat-a-9mm/
https://www.personaldefensenetwork.com/article/when-does-a-380-beat-a-9mm/
I'm perfectly happy with .my G26 9mm or even my 357 GP100 for SD...
However, a couple years ago, there were Beretta 84's available, Israeli surplus, cheap.
It was always a bucketist gun, so I bought one, with no thought of putting it to serious use
I changed my mind after I shot it...
My Beretta 84F just seems to fit my hand perfectly. It points like my finger, is very accurate, and has been 100% reliable. 14 round capacity.
I load it with Underwood +P XTP's, and I feel pretty well armed with it.
However, a couple years ago, there were Beretta 84's available, Israeli surplus, cheap.
It was always a bucketist gun, so I bought one, with no thought of putting it to serious use
I changed my mind after I shot it...
My Beretta 84F just seems to fit my hand perfectly. It points like my finger, is very accurate, and has been 100% reliable. 14 round capacity.
I load it with Underwood +P XTP's, and I feel pretty well armed with it.
If you're considering a Taurus for your daughter...there are better choices. My daughters Taurus TCP didn't survive its first range visit, and took almost 16 weeks to get back from Taurus. Her S&W Bodyguard was ammo picky. She now has a Remington RM380 which has been 100% reliable with everything she's fed it, and a Beretta Nano 9mm which she loves.
1. I didn't say you said that it had "zero value". I didn't try to restate your comment at all.
2. Your questions are all good ones--demonstrating that you understand what is necessary to validate an assertion. Let's keep in mind that you made the initial claim about the value of expanding ammunition and therefore the burden of proof is yours.
It's not at all proper to make an assertion without providing any attempt to validate it but then demand proof from anyone who questions it.
So what methodology and data points did you use to arrive at the assertion you made about the value of expanding ammunition?
IMO, the primary value is different from what most people think it is. I think that the primary value is in unmistakably notifying the shootee that they have been shot; the wound channel effects being secondary.
A bullet wound is a combination of blunt trauma and a penetrating wound. A low-energy non-expanding handgun bullet is nearly exclusively a penetrating wound with very little blunt trauma effect. A high-energy round that expands explosively or fragments leans more heavily towards blunt trauma effect with little penetrating wound.
The thing is that you can stick an ice pick in a person who's very busy trying not to get shot and they might not notice until later. But hit them with a baseball bat and they're going to be immediately aware of the insult.
IMO, you want both. You want the penetration so that you can get deep enough to cause serious injury in case that's what is required to stop the attack. But you also want the person to know they've been hit because that can be a tremendous impetus for changing their motivation from attack to a desire for medical treatment. If I had to choose, I'd prefer to err on the side of penetration--but I can get both with the mainstream service pistol calibers. It's only when we get down into the pocket pistol calibers that you have to start compromising.
Right. This is where "notification" is important. Short of a CNS hit that drops the attacker instantly, you're going to need the attacker to DECIDE to stop attacking, and knowing they've been hit is a strong motivator for rational humans. Waiting for someone to bleed out, even from an untreatably fatal handgun wound can take way too long--as the FBI found out in Miami.
Bill DeShivs
New member
For the umpteenth time-
The ONLY sure 100% immediate stop is a central nervous system shot. Period.
Anything else is wishful thinking. It takes minutes for someone to bleed out-even with a heart shot. Minutes is not what you want your attacker to have.
Any shot other than a CNS shot MIGHT provide an immediate stop from: surprise, fear, pain or shock.
But if the crazy 300 lb. meth crazed biker is coming at you, you'd better make the CNS shot- and it really won't matter if it's with a .25 acp or a .500 Linebaugh. The bigger caliber won't make him any deader.
The ONLY sure 100% immediate stop is a central nervous system shot. Period.
Anything else is wishful thinking. It takes minutes for someone to bleed out-even with a heart shot. Minutes is not what you want your attacker to have.
Any shot other than a CNS shot MIGHT provide an immediate stop from: surprise, fear, pain or shock.
But if the crazy 300 lb. meth crazed biker is coming at you, you'd better make the CNS shot- and it really won't matter if it's with a .25 acp or a .500 Linebaugh. The bigger caliber won't make him any deader.
John, I'm going to have to think about that a little while longer, but I think that you are right.
There are a few things that I have talked about for years. First is how poor a round ball works as a bullet. Sectional density is what you need for deep penetration and a round ball is about as bad as bullet can get. But if you press too hard for SD, or BC, you get a needle. A ball is going to expend it's energy quickly through friction and displacement/destruction of tissues, The needle will expend it just by wearing itself out.
We can use the same weight of bullet at the same velocity, and get the same energy level, but if we fire it as a two inch long pencil thin needle we will get a surgically clean 1/4" hole. 3,000 fps with something like that in a 500 grain bullet might go through an elephant butt to tusk without stopping. I'd really rather fire a 500 grain round ball, because all of the resistance would as you said feel like a hammer. A very big hammer.
I can't explain the exact circumstances anymore, but there was a workplace accident here a few years back. A guy had a machine opened and he had about sixteen inches of 1/8" steel wire stock punched through his abdomen and out of his shoulder. Barely noticed it.
If he had actually been hit by the carrier, a half inch chuck, he'd have noticed it, right? Like being hit by a hammer.
We throw around the ideas of energy expenditure and fixate on the KE available, but how that energy is expended and used is so important. We want that energy to tear, crush, displace, and if possible convert directly to pain and death.
An idea that just came to me is simple. there is no mathematical or scientific correlation or connection between a bullet's energy and the amount of damage it will do, right? The shape and form of the bullet can alter that effect drastically.
Likewise there is no scientific or mathematical connection between that bullet and injury or death. any round can bumble it's way through a body and cause no lasting harm.
Lastly, there's no connection at all between the qualities of the bullet and weapon and the results when it is fired. You have to have that last step, getting it where it belongs.
Hope that made sense, it's late, i'm tired, and I want to go to bed.
There are a few things that I have talked about for years. First is how poor a round ball works as a bullet. Sectional density is what you need for deep penetration and a round ball is about as bad as bullet can get. But if you press too hard for SD, or BC, you get a needle. A ball is going to expend it's energy quickly through friction and displacement/destruction of tissues, The needle will expend it just by wearing itself out.
We can use the same weight of bullet at the same velocity, and get the same energy level, but if we fire it as a two inch long pencil thin needle we will get a surgically clean 1/4" hole. 3,000 fps with something like that in a 500 grain bullet might go through an elephant butt to tusk without stopping. I'd really rather fire a 500 grain round ball, because all of the resistance would as you said feel like a hammer. A very big hammer.
I can't explain the exact circumstances anymore, but there was a workplace accident here a few years back. A guy had a machine opened and he had about sixteen inches of 1/8" steel wire stock punched through his abdomen and out of his shoulder. Barely noticed it.
If he had actually been hit by the carrier, a half inch chuck, he'd have noticed it, right? Like being hit by a hammer.
We throw around the ideas of energy expenditure and fixate on the KE available, but how that energy is expended and used is so important. We want that energy to tear, crush, displace, and if possible convert directly to pain and death.
An idea that just came to me is simple. there is no mathematical or scientific correlation or connection between a bullet's energy and the amount of damage it will do, right? The shape and form of the bullet can alter that effect drastically.
Likewise there is no scientific or mathematical connection between that bullet and injury or death. any round can bumble it's way through a body and cause no lasting harm.
Lastly, there's no connection at all between the qualities of the bullet and weapon and the results when it is fired. You have to have that last step, getting it where it belongs.
Hope that made sense, it's late, i'm tired, and I want to go to bed.
There is a direct relationship between a projectile's kinetic energy and the amount of work it has the potential to do on the target medium.
In other words, physics says that the potential of a projectile to do damage to something it hits is measured by its kinetic energy.
Things are simpler when a non-deforming projectile hits a target that can't stretch but can only break or deform or tear, but when a projectile that can deform (like an expanding bullet) hits a target that can stretch in addition to breaking, tearing or deforming (like the human body) it can get very complicated.
The shape of the bullet and how it behaves on impact determines how much of that energy is expended on the target medium and how it is expended and that can make a huge difference in whether or not a projectile "lives up" to its full potential and whether the damage done helps us achieve our goals.
And of course, where a bullet hits makes an even more important difference. A single tiny, slow-moving non-expanding pistol bullet that hits exactly in the right spot can stop an attack instantly while several large caliber expanding rifle rounds that hit nothing important could have no practical effect at all.
Likewise, the mindset of the attacker is an important factor that has nothing at all to do with the physics of bullets.
Understanding kinetic energy helps to understand the overall problem a little bit better, but it's far too complicated a problem to boil down to a single number, or even a few numbers. There are a lot of factors that relate to whether a bullet stops an attack, and some of the most important ones have nothing at all to do with physics.
Imagine that we all lived in a world where the density of water varied randomly over a wide range and we needed to determine if an object would float in water. We could measure all kinds of things about the object and we could gain some insight into the problem, but ultimately, the randomness of the density of water would limit our ability to come up with a solid answer except when we went to extremes that got us outside possible range of water density variation. That's kind of where we are now. We have some insights into things that contribute, but ultimately there is a lot of randomness and unless we go to extremes it's very difficult to make accurate predictions.
First, you show me where I made any such statement....or even implied it
Waiting on that cite ^ I'll say it ain't happening; prove me wrong please
My point has been stated clearly and concisely several times already in this thread (as well as others), maybe you should go back and re-read it a few times.
See above
In my experience some people expend a lot of emotion trying to justify their chosen caliber due to lack of actual experience as well an insecurity in their own skills and ability. Rather than admit it, they wrap themselves up in gel 'tests' and fractions of inches ;-)In my experience some people expend a lot of effort trying to justify carrying a marginal caliber like 380 when the reality is they are unwilling (or unable due to work) to dress around something bigger than a small pocket gun, rather than admit it they rationalize the caliber.
Here's my take... having never owned or even shot a .380 caliber pistol. I have held one, a Ruger LCP with the red trigger, pocket carried every waking moment by my father in law.
In a tiny pistol such as the LCP, they are excellent for deep concealment. In a larger pistol, like the S&W EZ, they apparently tame recoil for inexperienced shooters, or people with small hands, or older adults who have lost hand strength. As to stopping power, who knows. A good shot is a good shot.
Do I want one, no. Will I get one, yes. Most likely a version of the LCP. I have tried jogging with my Glock 43 in a belly band. It works, but is not good for my back or stride. It throws me off a bit and tightens up my back.
So, I'll probably try the LCP or LCP II, shoot it enough to function check, and try it out with the belly band or pocket carry for jogging (don't know if pocket carry jogging will work). Then, only shoot it a couple of times per year as long as I can maintain hitting a silhouette at 7 yards or less.
To me the .380 is a trade off, but for me and my specific carry situation while jogging, it may be a very good option.
In a tiny pistol such as the LCP, they are excellent for deep concealment. In a larger pistol, like the S&W EZ, they apparently tame recoil for inexperienced shooters, or people with small hands, or older adults who have lost hand strength. As to stopping power, who knows. A good shot is a good shot.
Do I want one, no. Will I get one, yes. Most likely a version of the LCP. I have tried jogging with my Glock 43 in a belly band. It works, but is not good for my back or stride. It throws me off a bit and tightens up my back.
So, I'll probably try the LCP or LCP II, shoot it enough to function check, and try it out with the belly band or pocket carry for jogging (don't know if pocket carry jogging will work). Then, only shoot it a couple of times per year as long as I can maintain hitting a silhouette at 7 yards or less.
To me the .380 is a trade off, but for me and my specific carry situation while jogging, it may be a very good option.
OR shooting or carrying a larger caliber gun just isn't possible. I cannot shoot small 9mm w/o pain in my wrist and thumb. So...not gonna spend the $$$ to carry something I won't shoot, and then not carry cuz it hurts or I'm not comfy with it.
For a variety of reasons I cannot carry a larger anything..guns that I can shoot w/o pain, but so large, I cannot carry them..regardless of the weather or clothing.
So, many of us find that 'sweet spot'..a gun and caliber that's fun/easy to shoot(=shooting it=comfy with it=carry it), easy to carry...and effective based on research...BUT I 'rationalize' not one thing..I look at the reality of it and make my decision..BUT if ya think I'm being a girlie man for carrying that girlie .380..so what..you do what you want to do. I will too.
For nanny1 right above..yes, go shoot that LCP..I owned one and it was a literal PITH(PainInTheHand) for me to shoot..sold it. Glock 42 is a great compromise, IMHO..smaller than -43, .380, great shooter.
Attachments
Given equal shot placement, bigger holes are beter
Summary: You have no handgun data, just opinion.
If you are content with "adequate" rather than better, you don't have to justify the choice to me.
I've killed over 30 deer, which you reduced to the one killed with a handgun. This thread aint about broadheads so thats not relevant, but I have more hunting experience than most which was ignored.
10mm was discredited as not a typical service caliber, and its not; but the generalization that handgun calibers only destroy tissue the bullet touches, needs the disclaimer "typical" cause I posted pics showing otherwise. And 10mm is experiencing a resurgence in popularity, several makers offering 1911's in 10mm, Glock has a couple, Springfield.
Discredit gel because its not tissue, right.
Do the doctors that "can't tell a difference" have any comparison pics for layperson review, nope; just the anecdotal generalization of they perform about the same. Doctors are focused on saving the patient, not documenting wound differences, duh.
The 155 10mm XTP tore a hole of 1 1/4'' so does a Slick Trick Griz 1 1/4'' four blade, wicked wound (pictured).
Based on my 30+ deer, over 10 my wife killed and a couple others my boys shot I've got my own generalization:
Given equal shot placement a bigger hole is better.
Summary: You have no handgun data, just opinion.
If you are content with "adequate" rather than better, you don't have to justify the choice to me.
I've killed over 30 deer, which you reduced to the one killed with a handgun. This thread aint about broadheads so thats not relevant, but I have more hunting experience than most which was ignored.
10mm was discredited as not a typical service caliber, and its not; but the generalization that handgun calibers only destroy tissue the bullet touches, needs the disclaimer "typical" cause I posted pics showing otherwise. And 10mm is experiencing a resurgence in popularity, several makers offering 1911's in 10mm, Glock has a couple, Springfield.
Discredit gel because its not tissue, right.
Do the doctors that "can't tell a difference" have any comparison pics for layperson review, nope; just the anecdotal generalization of they perform about the same. Doctors are focused on saving the patient, not documenting wound differences, duh.
The 155 10mm XTP tore a hole of 1 1/4'' so does a Slick Trick Griz 1 1/4'' four blade, wicked wound (pictured).
Based on my 30+ deer, over 10 my wife killed and a couple others my boys shot I've got my own generalization
: Given equal shot placement a bigger hole is better.
Attachments
But you clearly implied it.
Let's keep in mind that I stated my personal opinion, presented my sphere of experience, and that at no time has anyone asked for 'proof' of specifics. Had they done so I would state "I have none other than my own experience and observations spread over the last half century, take it or leave it". Then I would likely invite them to show me otherwise.
Well except for the fact that I did no such thing. I presented my opinion and experience, and instead of asking me direct questions or details, you dismissively referenced an unknown panel of 3rd party 'experts'. I'm more than happy to discuss my own experiences and welcome any questions....but they first have to be asked.
None, I wasn't conducting a 'study'.
On the other hand, I have been paying close attention for the last half century.
In my experience (interesting how the word 'experience' seems to scare people today, especially if it goes against their feelings) the 3P's as I call them ALWAYS trump expansion and caliber.
(again I'm limiting my scope to the most common SD handgun calibers)
A properly placed bullet, regardless of type, ALWAYS trumps an improperly placed expanded bullet. Any bullet, regardless of type, that penetrates vitals ALWAYS trumps an expanded bullet that falls short. I've yet to experience the opposite, but am more than willing to listen if someone can provide any experience to the contrary.
Now, regarding properly placed bullets, I have yet to see a consistent notable difference between the most commonly used SD calibers -or- bullets types. This applies to both humans and critters. A heart shot to a hog with a 380fmj produces in my experience (there's that dirty word again) the same end result as a heart shot with 9/40/45 using expanding ammunition.
I've seen shots where they went down immediately, thrashed a bit and bled out, and others where they ran a few hundred yards before dropping. Opened them up and found perfect heart shots. The caliber and bullet type didn't seem to matter, huge expanded 45....ran 50 yards, 9mm fmj.....dropped on the spot. Then the next go-round, huge expanded 9mm.....dropped on the spot, expanded 45......ran 50 yards. And so on, and so, and so on. No rhyme, no reason.
The point being that even with perfectly placed shots, the immediate result can vary WILDLY regardless of caliber -or- bullet type. I've seen the exact same apply to humans.
The only constant I've found across the entire human spectrum is that those who were confidant having been well Practiced, produced properly Placed shots, that Penetrated deeply enough, ended their fight faster and more decisively regardless of caliber.....
Than those who were not well practiced, didn't place their shots properly, or who's shots failed to penetrate enough to hit the good stuff.....regardless of caliber, how much their ammo cost, or the fancyness of the box it came in.
I have to cut my reply short as I've got to fly out to Colorado and pick some family up, then get them back here. Feel free to chew on my response if ya like, I'll try to get back to this later today.
That's right, john,
Like you I was referring to the human body and to the projectile itself. The projectile may use all of the potential on the target and may not, and if it does use up all of that potential it may not even be useful.Some of it is even going to be converted into heat.
And the statements of randomness are also spot on. Random may be too mild a word, I jump to absolute chaos with millions of possible outcomes, and the best that can be done is throw a lot of energy at a target and hope that the energy has a positive effect on the target rather than being lost.
It helps if we are throwing that energy at the target in the form of kinetic energy stored in a solid, hard object that does physical damage. pumping a few zillion joules of energy at us in the form of sunlight isn't as harmful as it might seem.
Like you I was referring to the human body and to the projectile itself. The projectile may use all of the potential on the target and may not, and if it does use up all of that potential it may not even be useful.Some of it is even going to be converted into heat.
And the statements of randomness are also spot on. Random may be too mild a word, I jump to absolute chaos with millions of possible outcomes, and the best that can be done is throw a lot of energy at a target and hope that the energy has a positive effect on the target rather than being lost.
It helps if we are throwing that energy at the target in the form of kinetic energy stored in a solid, hard object that does physical damage. pumping a few zillion joules of energy at us in the form of sunlight isn't as harmful as it might seem.
The problem is that despite our best attempt at making the perfect cranio-ocular hit, we may not be ABLE to place the bullet exactly thru that window to get CNS disruption. He may be lowering his head in the charge, requiring us to shoot the forehead or even the top of the head.
That requires penetration the 380 may not give us. Causing the bullet to fail to GET into the CNS.
That is my only reservation about the less powerful calibers (380, 32, 25).
LACK OF PENETRATION is the problem.
Shooting at a moving target is a lot different and more difficult than shooting at a stationary one. I recommend a pistol with a decent capacity, good trigger, and easy to pick up sights. I know a lot of people may not be near a outdoor range with moving paper/steel targets, so practice ar whatever range you can, at multiple distances, as often as you can.
Carl the Floor Walker
Moderator
A 380 hitting at the top of the head or forehead? OUCH! Shot placement with any gun will be up to the shooter. Training is so important no matter what the caliber. There are many drills to do with a pocket gun. I train most often with steel plates, but do other drills as well. Here is JUST one drill.
Place two or three or four targets on a standard range target. Now draw from Holster or pickup from table and as fast as possible, go from one target to the other. The goal is under 3 sec. from the time you draw to center mass. Mix the targets up, one to the top, two to the bottom etc. Double taps, or single shots, again as fast as you can. Just standard point and shoot.
I never or seldom ever shoot Pocket guns like a target gun, just a waste of ammo IMO.
We have a few members at the club I belong to that can really do some serious shooting with these small guns.
8 yds with Beretta Pico
On the same day as this target, a range buddy asked me to try out the ARX ammo. Loaded six rounds and quickly shot. About a 1 sec interval
Last edited:
OUCH is not the goal!!
A incapacitating hit is. Ouch may or may not work to stop the attack. Dont think “well, that would stop me”.
You are not attacking people while using bath salts as an intoxicant. You are not an enraged 280# ‘roid monster off his meds
Ouch only works on compliant people. Thats why pain compliance techniques only work on non fighting people.
- Status