'it's not a combat round. it's a self-defense round. '

S

Shotgun693

New member
The title of this came from a reply about Glaser Safety Slugs on this site. I'm not trying to start a fight but am interested in opinions.
What do you consider the difference, if any, in a 'Combat Round' and a 'Self Defense Round'?
I don't see any difference. I live in a mostly rural area and if, 'God Forbid', I ever had to defend myself at home, I'm not at all worried about over penetration.

BTW, I did not id the original poster as I didn't ask his permission to quote him.
 
Whether I am in combat (and I have been in combat), or whether I am in a self defense situation (and I have been in one), my goal is the same....

to make my target stop whatever he or she is doing....immediately!!!


I'm not at all worried about over penetration.
Click to expand...
Over-penetration is not good whether in combat or a self defense situation.
It needlessly endangers non-targets, and it fails to dump all of the round's energy in to the target.

There's just no good reason for over-penetration.
 
Even though we did not sign the Geneva and Hague conventions we for the most part abide by them. That means except for some "Open Tip Match" rounds and a few other types being fielded right now for combat it's FMJ rounds. Except for states that don't allow them (and some exotic ammo) the bulk of self defense rounds are are JHP's. And with the best JHP's they are usually the best choice.
 
Over-penetration is not good whether in combat or a self defense situation.
It needlessly endangers non-targets, and it fails to dump all of the round's energy in to the target.

There's just no good reason for over-penetration
Click to expand...
In general, over-penetration is not a concern. Missing what you are aiming at and hitting an innocent is a far greater concern, and that is a concern regardless of which ammo you are shooting.
 
Labeling something "combat" is almost as nebulous as labeling something "tactical": He who jargons mostest and bestest wins.

Done with my rant. The original poster was probably making a distinction regarding a round designed to provide barrier penetration as well as adequate stopping power and medium range, as would be used by law enforcement dealing with situations in which subjects might attempt to use cover, or would be engaging at ranges beyond normal self-defense scenarios, as opposed to Glasers. The argument would be that Glasers would be used at relatively close range at targets not using cover. Therefore the limited penetration, and inability of a pre-fragmented shell to penetrate cover would not be a drawback.

I'm not inclined to buy this argument, btw. Glasers may have their place, but a very limited one, IMHO.
 
I don't consider Military Action the only combat. I've been in some pretty good shootings at work, LEO. Luckily the places where I worked never signed a treaty. Lord I love hollow points.
I would rather have a little over penetration vs not enough.
 
"Combat", any round specifically designed for use by a military unit in warfare.
"Self Defense", any round designed to be sold to civilian LE or general public for use in self defense situations.
"Self Defense Combat Round", any round carried by Gecko45.
 
I'm just guessing here that the term "Combat" may signify to people on a jury that Glaser advocates getting involved in shooting people.

The term "self-defense" connotes any shooting was a "last ditch" option the shooter was forced into doing to save his / her life.

Glaser is covering their behind with the terminology they use. I may be wrong on this, but we've all seen how anti-gun people & lawyers love to go after anything relating to our firearms & ammo.
 
If you get into a fight, whether you are defending yourself or attacking another, it is still combat on both sides.

Is it an offensive round? heck yes, they offend me. Is it defensive? Why not? clean catfish with them if that is what you want to do.

Please. Don't bandy around silly arguments like this. Defensive, offensive, if it is fired at another armed person, it is a combat round. If it is fired at an unarmed person, it is a killing round.

Words need to be honest or we make ourselves into liars.
 
To me a combat round is military issue.

I don't know how the word combat got twisted around so much. Anyone who served in the military knows what combat means. Too many video games, too much hype in gun magazines and people trying to make a buck with their training centers - misuing the term IMO.

I never saw combat during my time in the military, but anyone who served at least knows what it is.
 
Today, 10:52 PM #10
briandg
Senior Member


Join Date: May 4, 2010
Posts: 1,092 If you get into a fight, whether you are defending yourself or attacking another, it is still combat on both sides.

Is it an offensive round? heck yes, they offend me. Is it defensive? Why not? clean catfish with them if that is what you want to do.

Please. Don't bandy around silly arguments like this. Defensive, offensive, if it is fired at another armed person, it is a combat round. If it is fired at an unarmed person, it is a killing round.

Words need to be honest or we make ourselves into liars.
Click to expand...

I agree with you.

Just so we're clear, what I wrote in my post was a "guess' on why they labeled it as they did. I was not agreeing with them.
 
I agree with you.

Just so we're clear, what I wrote in my post was a "guess' on why they labeled it as they did. I was not agreeing with them.
Click to expand...

Nothing coming back at you at all.

Just general commentary on the subject and content of the whole thread.
 
There's just no good reason for over-penetration.
Click to expand...

Except to ensure adequate penetration under all (or at least most) circumstances.

IMO a combat pistol needs a lot more penetration than does a self-defense pistol.
 
Combat can include self-defense, but self-defense does not include all combat.

Combat is a more general term.

On the penetration issue:
Choosing a cartridge that will likely under penetrate is much worse than picking one that is likely to over penetrate. Glasers with the #6 shot size only penetrate bare gelatin about 5". I want 15" of gelatin penetration or more.
 
Last edited:
To me "combat rounds" are 99% fmj while "self defense" rounds are typically jhp, lswc, soft point and sometimes even ballistic tip such as hornady critical defense.
 
The term "combat round" is baffling. I don't think I've ever seen it before in this particular context.

Typically, it seems to be used to refer to military calibers, and typically rifle calibers at that. They tend to have FMJ bullets due to the Hague convention and the like, which generally reduces their effectiveness.

A "self defense" round is a premium JHP typically fired from a pistol, or some kind of buckshot or maybe a shotgun slug.
 
"Self Defense Combat Round", any round carried by Gecko45
Click to expand...
LEAVE GECKO45 ALOOOONE!

Frankly, I don't see a difference. Self-defense is combat. I'm using deadly force on another human being. That's pretty...um, combative.

As far as ammunition selection, I disregard the jargon. I'm still using the same two loads that were well-regarded ten years ago.

Come to think of it, how old are Glasers now? 20 years? 30?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top