Why isn't the .380 considered a viable self defense round by many, but the .38 special is?

Status
Not open for further replies.
TunnelRat said:
Agent Smith’s Desert Eagle wasn’t gold plated.

While I’m aware that there are examples we can come up with that many of us would find obvious, I think what is being discussed here is a tad more subtle.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
I mean, how many different ways can I say this? "If you're walking around with a gun based on its "cool factor" you're LARPing."

I'll also add that if you pick a different gun everyday based on a whim rather than practicality you're LARPing.

I mean that doesn't seem subtle or ambiguous to me
 
Moonglum said:
I mean, how many different ways can I say this? "If you're walking around with a gun based on its "cool factor" you're LARPing."

I'll also add that if you pick a different gun everyday based on a whim rather than practicality you're LARPing.

I mean that doesn't seem subtle or ambiguous to me
Click to expand...


Well, to begin my response wasn’t directed at you at all, which was why I quoted the other person. So I don’t need you to say it any other ways, because I don’t have any issue with what you said.

I think talking about a person carrying a gold plated Desert Eagle versus a Glock 19 is a bit more obvious than what I was trying to convey in my post.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I consider the .22 LR, the .32 ACP, and the .380 to be viable self-defense rounds.

Viable, however, is very different from optimal.
 
"If you're walking around with a gun based on its "cool factor" you're LARPing."

I'll also add that if you pick a different gun everyday based on a whim rather than practicality you're LARPing.
Click to expand...

And what do you call it when the gun(s) chosen because of a "whim" or the "cool factor" are ALSO effective, and might even be practical???

(and thanks for making me look up "LARP", we used to call it something else...:rolleyes:)

Am I role playing if I carry a Walther PPK in .380? Because James Bond used a PPK? or am I not fantasizing because Bond's PPK was a .32acp not a .380?
Or because my .32 and .380 are not Walther PPKs?

Am I role playing if what I choose, for the reasons I choose, doesn't meet with your approval???

that seems overly judgmental to me.

I think the people who don't think the .380 is a viable self defense round are looking at the century+ track record of the .380, which isn't great, and comparing that with the track record of the .38 Special, which, while not as good as some other rounds IS better than the .380, and not looking at the modern JHP ammo's potential performance.

And, do keep in mind that NO ammo's performance on paper or in ballistic testing is any guarantee that it will perform as desired in every real life situation.
 
Mike Irwin said:
I consider the .22 LR, the .32 ACP, and the .380 to be viable self-defense rounds.

Viable, however, is very different from optimal.
Click to expand...
Kind of a useless thread for information when 90% of the posters "here" are low life Larpers. And People that carry a 380 are a special kind of Larper.
Carry a 38? Yep, LARPer.
Even worse than Covid. And no vaccination can cure it. Most likely will not even survive to the end of the year.
 
Last edited:
44 AMP said:
And what do you call it when the gun(s) chosen because of a "whim" or the "cool factor" are ALSO effective, and might even be practical???
Click to expand...

Yes. It's not about what the gun is its about your reasons for choosing it.

44 AMP said:
Am I role playing if what I choose, for the reasons I choose, doesn't meet with your approval???
Click to expand...

Yup.

44 AMP said:
that seems overly judgmental to me.
Click to expand...

Are you judging me for being judgemental?

44 AMP said:
I think the people who don't think the .380 is a viable self defense round are looking at the century+ track record of the .380, which isn't great, and comparing that with the track record of the .38 Special, which, while not as good as some other rounds IS better than the .380, and not looking at the modern JHP ammo's potential performance.

And, do keep in mind that NO ammo's performance on paper or in ballistic testing is any guarantee that it will perform as desired in every real life situation.
Click to expand...

I never made it about caliber.
 
Last edited:
Carl the Floor Walker said:
Kind of a useless thread for information when 90% of the posters "here" are low life Larpers. And People that carry a 380 are a special kind of Larper.
Carry a 38? Yep, LARPer.
Even worse than Covid. And no vaccination can cure it. Most likely will not even survive to the end of the year.
Click to expand...
I never made it about calibers Bernie
 
I don’t post a lot. But, I read and train about self defense a lot. That has absolutely nothing to do with the op’s post. These discussions sometimes go other directions.

As to the post, the .380 has come a long way since the 1970’s. However, so has the .38. Special. When comparing one caliber to another people make the huge mistake of asking or saying better. There is no “best” caliber for anything. Squirrels, groundhogs, feral hogs, deer, bear and especially warfare. Be it military or in public self defense. You individually must select what you will train with and use. A lot of people use and train with different firearms and calibers. Unless you have physical or economical constraints everyone that regularly carries a firearm for defense should do. Anything well made and trained with in .380 to .45ACP is fine. Trained people with a.380 do better than untrained people with a .45ACP. Thanks
 
My position is that nothing much has changed in pistols since WWI.
What has changed dramatically is ammunition.

For those who forget, Franz Ferdinand was the guy who was assassinated thus starting World War I, not just the name of a really good band. He was killed with a .380 and Stone Age ammo.

.38 Special is no joke either, and never was.

Putting modern ammunition in them over simple cast lead may a significant game changer. Some can argue that a simple wadcutter from a .38 is their choice and I won’t argue.

Marketing. How are you going to sell a product that can last a hundred years if reasonable care is taken of it? You need “improvements”. Bigger, more, heavier, lighter, advertising, make em funny colors, strap fancy electronics on them, find ways to manufacture them cheaper and convince folks the improved profit margin is for their benefit or that a handgun is some sort of fashion accessory everyone must carry at all times, even in the shower. Lately, it seems your pistol needs to carry a whole box of ammo in the magazine to be up to fashion.

I agree, there have been some real improvements in the last 100 years to firearms. Plastics and modern alloys can provide real advantages for me, the shooter, other than reduced cost. Still, I could be just fine in my life with 1911s, blowback .22s and revolvers.

I am not okay with giving up modern bullets. While hard cast has a place in some hunting situations, hollow points work. Really well.

If I was to carry for self defense, my goal isn’t to “stop” my attacker, it’s to make him go away. Put a .380 in to someone, they are not going to be pleased. They’ll go away. That’s all I need.
 
LARP...

Live Action Role Playing?



"Kind of a useless thread for information when 90% of the posters "here" are low life Larpers. And People that carry a 380 are a special kind of Larper.
Carry a 38? Yep, LARPer."

I'm not sure if that's tongue in cheek humor or a serious comment.

If a serious comment, it's one of the silliest over generalizations I've encountered in my years on gun forums, and I've been on gun forums since the early 1990s and have seen a LOT of silly crap.

I've carried a .38 revolver as my primary CCW choice since I started carrying a handgun in 1983.

Why?

Because I shoot them well.
I practice with them.
I know I can hit a potential target with them.
I am confident in my abilities with them.
I am confident if I need to use my revolver (again) to protect myself it will function as intended.
They suit my style of dress.

I don't, and never have, seen the choice of a gun/cartridge combination, to be an indication of one's overall seriousness toward the subject of personal protection.
 
I mean, how many different ways can I say this? "If you're walking around with a gun based on its "cool factor" you're LARPing."
Click to expand...

Most of us carry concealed so I would argue none of us are trying to be cool, in fact, we are trying to find new and better ways to be darn sure no one knows we have a gun, its effective, and comfortable to carry. As far as the gun itself being cool, I mean there are more popular brands (ie glock) that someone might initially buy because its all they know but I don't think that makes anything about the gun or that person lesser than someone else, I mean most of us bought a few guns before we found what really worked for us.
 
Moonglum said:
I never made it about caliber
Click to expand...

You’ve clarified that by LARPing you mean picking a gun based on “cool factor” and earlier you gave the example of a derringer. In this entire thread you were the only person to use the words “cool” (in that context) or “derringer” before 44 AMP asked for clarification on pistols a person might find cool but also meet a person’s defensive requirements. You’ve also stated multiple times, to me and others, that when it comes to LARPing you’re not talking about caliber.

The main topic of this thread is the 380 ACP cartridge. So if what you define as LARPing, picking a gun solely for cool factor, wasn’t part of this thread when you made that original comment and caliber doesn’t matter when it comes to LARPing, why were you talking about LARPing in the first place? When that original comment about LARPing immediately followed a critique of pocket pistols, and especially those in 380, it’s not overly surprising that people are connecting your comment to caliber. It’s that or it was a completely random comment in the context of this thread, by your own definition.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
This thread has become somewhat of a useless exercise of guys snarking/sniping at each other with no new info and no minds being changed. It happens every time a thread is opened on big vs little. Can't we all just get along and close out this thing for a spell ?
 
tarhealcracker said:
This thread has become somewhat of a useless exercise of guys snarking/sniping at each other with no new info and no minds being changed. It happens every time a thread is opened on big vs little. Can't we all just get along and close out this thing for a spell ?
Click to expand...


The thing is this thread isn’t even as generic as big vs little. It’s more nuanced than that and actually more interesting, imo, as a result. I’ve learned more here about both cartridges than I knew before.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I don’t care for .380 for a “serious social” gun. I think in most cases you get lots of downside vs. very little upside vs say a 9x19mm.

I think .38 makes more sense as, for me personally, the platforms make better “pocket guns” if so desired.

I don’t think it is so much about choosing a firearms because “it’s cool” vs carrying ANY firearm because “it’s cool”. I have known folks like this. Might be the most practical firearm known to man ala a Glock 19 etc. but they are simply carrying to make a statement. I don’t, however, feel like that is the norm in my experience but absolutely concede they exist.

Choosing to carry and what to carry and why is a pretty personal choice that comes with a lot of personal responsibility and barring truly dangerous choices I don’t think it’s my place to tell you whether you or right or wrong for your choices, well that and I CERTAINLY do not have the knowledge or experience to tell anybody else squat.

I carry a DA/SA HK pistol in 9 or .40. Not because oooooo HK. Not because of caliber either way, not because it’s the “obvious choice” and you are all damn idiots compared to me. I carry it because I prefer the manual of arms, the size, the feel both held and carried and because I have found it to be reliable, durable and accurate with an adequate mag capacity vs size for me. I also do like the aesthetics but hey I’m a gun guy.

For what it’s worth, while I certainly concede that any bullet is potentially deadly and or fight stopping, I also know pistols kinda suck and I have always sort of had my demarcation line at 9x19mm/.38 +P. Do I think either is a quantum leap over a good .380? No not really but I don’t think the .380 brings enough other factors to the table for it to make my personal cut.

YMMV and I know so very little about so very little so these are only my personal opinions and choices for ME.

Take care, shoot safe
Chris
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top