Was at my local gun shop a few months ago talking calibers, and one of the salesmen (a moonlighting LEO) was packing a Walther PPK. I asked him why he was carrying such a wimpy caliber instead of the Sig P220 the store owner was armed with. He replied that the .380 was more effective than the "gun rags" suggest and that, in fact, more LEOs are killed in the line of duty by .380s than any other handgun cartridge. Numerous heads nodded in agreement at this factoid. Now, if this is true, then it seems to me that the .380 is sufficient for the cause at hand: close range "in your face" defense against an aggressor. Seems to me that if you can empty a magazine swiftly and accurately, while under stress, into a six inch circle at 30 feet or less then you can hit a perp in the face or center mass of the chest and accomplish what you have to, particularly if you choose a good load. Personally, I would not want to get hit between the eyes with .380 hardball or a 90 grain Federal Hydrashok. Now I ask this for a reason, because I have a wonderfully ergonomic, light, snag free Sig P232 that is more portable in more situations than my Colt CCO. Thoughts? War stories? Thanks.