What do you think of this quote?

B

bikerbill

New member
Read a great line in a spy book I'm in the middle of reading ... wondering if you agree/disagree with it? I know most folks think bigger is better -- I use a .45 for HD -- but I think he has a point.

"... he knew that the guys who worried the most about muzzle velocity and trigger pressure were guys who'd never shot to kill. Up close, a pistol was a pistol."

The speaker, by the way, is Alex Berenson's uberspy, John Wells.
 
I'll go along with the statement to a point. No you're not setting around thinking about 'muzzle velocity & trigger control" but there is a caviot.

You know your muzzle velocity before you get involved. You know where you gun will hit a different ranges before you start carrying or put your self in a place where you need you gun.

As to "trigger control", that's muscle memory. Something you've developed in hours upon hours of training, its like like breathing and heart beat, you do it automatically. That goes for competition also. I never think about trigger control or breathing when I'm shooting a match. I do when I'm dry firing or practicing.
 
Not buying it. There's a big difference between a 454 Casull and a 22 short mini-revolver.

OTOH, to paraphrase Robert Sheckley in The Game of X:

He pointed his pistol at me and told me to go. It was a Chinese copy of a Bulgarian copy of a Russian Tokarev. It was not the sort of gun that I'd be willing to stake my life on it working. On the other hand, I wasn't willing to stake my life on it not working either, so I went."
 
"Up close, a pistol was a pistol."

That's just absurd. A .25 auto is the same as a .45? Is that writer British?
 
That's just absurd. A .25 auto is the same as a .45?
Click to expand...

Ever stared down the muzzle of a loaded pistol while it is being pointed at you? I have, twice. It really doesn't matter all that much how big the hole is.........dead is dead.

Many people underestimate the destructive power of a .22, .25, or .32 caliber pistol, but I don't see many people lining up to be shot with one to prove how anemic they really are ;)
 
"Alex Berenson was born in New York in 1973 and grew up in Englewood, N.J. After graduating from Yale University in 1994 with degrees in history and economics." (from yahoo search)

I will have to grant the author literary license on this character's attitude.
I do not have to agree with the implication of the fictitious character's belief. Not knowing the context of the quote, I may assume (I know that is dangerous) that the character was thinking that at contact ranges in the hands of a skilled person and used on an unsuspecting target his choice of handgun would get the job done.
 
I do agree with that quote. Up close a pistol is a pistol. Head shot with any calibre at very short range is deadly.

From what i have read, mafia hitmen usually carried small pocket pistols. They would conceal it until the last moment and then draw and fire. Usually when the target was not facing them. From what i understand, the israelis do the same thing with their Beretta 71 22s for several reasons, one being for suppression.
 
but I don't see many people lining up to be shot with one to prove how anemic they really are
Click to expand...

Whenever someone says that, I always ask which would you rather be shot by, a .45 or a .22? (Besides not wanting to be shot, period, of course)
 
I've never been in combat, and hope I'm never forced to it.

That said, I've shot a lot of various critters at various distances. When I did, velocity, caliber, bullet weight, trigger pressure, and so forth were about the last thing on my mind.

Why?

'Cause I'd already done all that sort of thinking before I made the choice of which gun I'd take with me. Without exception, I'd already fired the gun numerous times, had thought out ammunition choices, and had adjusted the trigger if that was needed to suit my preferences.

Now, a fella (or gal) in a military group doesn't usually have a choice. In that case, the authors statement would seem to be true. In other folks' cases, I think it's largely false the way it's presented.

IOW, to a fella in a firefight, a pistol is a pistol to some extent, but to the fella preparing for that firefight, it might very well be an issue.

Daryl
 
Well it's a quote from a book more than likely by a non-gun nut kinda guy. So take it for what it's worth.

But in principle I agree. Handguns are pretty much the weak sisters of the gun world. While obviously there is a big difference between a .22LR and a .44M most folk do tend to put too much emphasis on bigger is better. If you look at the calibers surrounding the 9mm sized bullets it really makes very little difference between them all. 90% plus of the time a hit from a .380, .38sp, 9x18 and 9x19 will all have the same result given comparable bullets used. You could even throw the heralded .357M and .45acp in the mix and results given good bullets and halfway decent shot placement will be about the same as their little brothers. Yes things do change when you get to the extremes like a 22 vs a .454 but even then results are closer than many shooters think.

LK
 
Perhaps...

I would agree under certain circumstances. As for the "would you rather be shot by a .45 or a .22?" I wouldn't want either. Once worked a homicide with a 300# pimp was shot by one of his girls armed with an RG in .22 short. One shot to the heart and he was dead when he fell. This same person had been shot prior with a 12 ga loaded with 00 buck and by a .44mag and had survived. I feel the idea of placement is a strong argument in favor of the "run what you brung" argument of using the weapon at hand and using it skillfully. In this same case an older FBI S/A told me he had observed that untrained female was usually more dangerous because they were instinctive shooters with no bad habits to overcome...they would just naturally point and shoot. Each shooting is very different.
 
Not familiar with the book, but I can't fault the fictional character's comment to any great degree.

Fiction is fiction, anyway.

While I do prefer an author be at least a little familiar with things like firearms and martial arts used in the story line, I also realize that many of them may have never held a firearm nor practiced any form of self defense. I've picked up quite a number of books written by authors I've never read and browsed through them at random, considering a purchase, only to find some really silly comment involving firearms or knives. That's enough to prevent me from buying a book.

If the closest an author ever comes to firearms is reading a gun magazine (or reading gun forums on the internet), maybe the author might want to avoid using those subjects or trying to write about them to any great extent. Many authors manage to write about such things in a general manner, placing the emphasis on the characters and not the weapons.

Then again, when discussing firearms and training I'm known for often saying something to the effect, "It's just a handgun". ;) I prefer to direct the focus of the person with whom I'm working more toward their knowledge, skillset & mindset. A reasonable familiarity & understanding of the safe handling, manipulation and use of the gun being used is needed, obviously, but obsessing on caliber performance and other perceived ballistic attributes shouldn't distract from its usage (accurate shot placement).

Yes, throughout my career at different times I've carried off-duty weapons ranging in caliber from .22LR to .44 Magnum, so I realize that caliber and inherent "power" can vary ... but they're still just handguns once you include shotguns and rifles using defensive ammunition. (The newest handgun hunting calibers & models, such as the .500 S&W Magnum and .460 S&W Magnum, are reaching up into the rifle power range, but they were intended to be used as hunting arm, after all.)

FWIW, I tend to look at consistently demonstrating proper trigger control, even under stress, as being a bit akin to knowing how to properly & effectively form a fist for striking. It's either done right or it's potentially problematic at an inopportune time ...

When I train & practice with my various handguns I'm focusing on my skillset, not any perceived attributes of the caliber. Also, mindset is mindset, and not dependent upon caliber.
 
Last edited:
I wouldn't know. :)

Nope, muzzle velocity is something one may know, but they aren't going to think about it at all.
Also, he said up close. If this spy is going to walk up behind someone and shoot them point blank, I don't think trigger control matters.

Try controlling the trigger when someone's grappling with you...
 
but I don't see many people lining up to be shot with one to prove how anemic they really are
Click to expand...
Well, if your two options are being shot with a .25 and not being shot at all, that makes the choice pretty easy.
However, if your two options are being shot with a .25 and being shot with a .45...likewise, that is what is known as having some skin in the game, and still makes the choice pretty easy.

The fact is, you don't get a choice of which you will be shot (or shot at) with.

The only thing you get to control is what the other guy (you know, the one who's trying to kill you) gets shot with. Now put yourself in his place. What would he rather not be shot with?

Choose accordingly, keeping in mind your own abilities and limitations.. :)
 
All things being equal, a person under stress will shoot a crappy trigger worse than he will shoot a good trigger.

And an awful lot of Marshall and Sanow fans should not agree with the bit on velocity (I am not of the ultra-speed crowd, but there are a lot on TFL who are).

Any tool beats no tool, but the tool that one practices with the most is probably the one that will work the best when stress is up, lizard-brain kicks in, and muscle memory gets its chance to shine.

Presumably, the gun one is most likely to carry should be one that has a lot of, if not the most, practice in order to instill that muscle memory. Its recoil characteristics, POI, balance, and trigger will be factors to some extent, even under stress; differences from what we are used to will also be factors, even under stress.
 
I haven't read the book either, but it seems to me, that by 'up close' the author meant like 6 feet or something. Up close he is right. If the shooter is intent on killing his target and he walks up to the target and shoots him in the kidney or liver then a 22 should do it. For SD against an armed assailant that statement may not hold much water, but I think it does the way he meant it.
 
People miss human size targets at very close range; poor triggers and unfamiliar weapons won't help. Stress plus movement (by both shooter and target) are bad enough, without adding in a crappy trigger or unfamiliar platform.
 
Character's attitude...

"... he knew that the guys who worried the most about muzzle velocity and trigger pressure were guys who'd never shot to kill. Up close, a pistol was a pistol."
Click to expand...

This is the attitude of someone who is going to shoot someone. They are planning on it, and the circumstances in which they will do it. They are "shooting to kill" at "up close", and to them, the precise performance of the tool is irrelvant, so long as it gets the job done.

This is a far cry from the hunter, or defensive pistol shooter. Because we want and need our pistols to preform best for us in a wide range of circumstances, at various ranges, the specific details of things like muzzle velocity and trigger pull are much more important to us.

In other words, if I'm going to stick my pistol in the back of someone's head or in their belly and pull the trigger a couple three times, I don't need a good trigger pull, nor top velocity, nor sights, nor any of the other things we expect from our guns. But if I'm going to do something else, virtually everything else, I want those things, and they do matter to me.
 
44 AMP,

Thanks for showing a different perspective. I'll admit to being guilty of assuming self-defense when I posted earlier. In truth, the way you presented it sounds closer to what the author may have been trying to say.

and IMO, you're statements are correct.

Daryl
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top