why was the .32*** the prefered SNS TV caliber in the 70s?

[44 AMP]

Even better was Gene Wilders shot at a stick of dynamite from about half a mile in Blazing Saddles.

One of the better "impossible" shots is in the movie The Magnificent Seven.

A small group of bandits attacks the village, and the Seven get them all, but one who lights out at speed to warn the others. One of the seven (Coburn, I think?) takes careful aim with his pistol and shoots the bandit off his horse, just before he makes it to the pass (several hundred yards, I would guess).

One of the peasants praises him, saying "that was the greatest shot I have ever seen!!!" he is answered with "it was a terrible shot! I was aiming at the HORSE!!!" (or something very much like that, been a while since I watched it...)

 

[CDW4ME]

The only way to 100% "quickly incapacitate" with any handgun is a central nervous system shot. Period.
A CNS shot with a .32 is as good as a .45.

100% aint happening.
Making a CNS shot can't be counted on.
Given a non-CNS hit a bigger bullet makes a bigger hole which has more potential to incapacitate quicker than a smaller hole. .32 is not equal (as good as) to 45

 

[kenny53]

http://www.ballistics101.com/32_acp.php.

The 32 doesn't have a lot of poop behind it. But It does make a hole. For the most part foot pounds of energy at the muzzle runs 128-158 FT lbs. I would carry a 32acp over nothing.

Talking about TV and Hollywood, I am always amused by the ability of the good guys with hand guns to win the gun fights with bad guys shooting full auto long guns.

I am pretty sure the first number for FT lbs in the chart is a typo.

 

[Bill DeShivs]

"Incapacitation" occurs because:
Pain from being shot
Fear/shock from being shot
CNS disruption
Blood loss

None of these, except the CNS shot, has the ability to immediately stop-though all of them MAY stop.
Relying on blood loss takes time-minutes. If you have to shoot some one, you don't want to wait MINUTES before they cease hostilities.
The difference in the size of the wound, discounting bullet expansion, between a .25 and a .45 is only 1/10 of an inch-not a lot of difference.

The sight of a gun ceases most hostilities. Shooting someone usually ceases most hostilities from pain/fear/shock. If shooting someone does not stop him by the previously mentioned factors, you have to wait on blood loss. That's a LONG time-especially if they are trying to do you harm.

So-my theory is this: Carry a gun. Any gun. If you have to use it, TRY for a CNS shot(s). If you go about your day in a normal fashion, odds are you won't need your gun. If you are doing work that requires you to put yourself in harm's way-carry the biggest gun you comfortably can. Bigger is better-but not much better.

 

[CDW4ME]

"Incapacitation" occurs because:
Pain from being shot
Fear/shock from being shot
CNS disruption
Blood loss

None of these, except the CNS shot, has the ability to immediately stop-though all of them MAY stop.
Relying on blood loss takes time-minutes. If you have to shoot some one, you don't want to wait MINUTES before they cease hostilities.
The difference in the size of the wound, discounting bullet expansion, between a .25 and a .45 is only 1/10 of an inch-not a lot of difference.

The sight of a gun ceases most hostilities. Shooting someone usually ceases most hostilities from pain/fear/shock. If shooting someone does not stop him by the previously mentioned factors, you have to wait on blood loss. That's a LONG time-especially if they are trying to do you harm.

So-my theory is this: Carry a gun. Any gun. If you have to use it, TRY for a CNS shot(s). If you go about your day in a normal fashion, odds are you won't need your gun. If you are doing work that requires you to put yourself in harm's way-carry the biggest gun you comfortably can. Bigger is better-but not much better.

I do not count on sight of a gun ceasing hostile action.
"Someone usually" is a generalization that could be hazardous to rely on.
I have not "needed" a gun in over 25 years of carrying, ever, including when I was a cop
What if "harms way" comes to you, regardless of occupation?

I don't understand minimal caliber advocacy when so many small firearms are available in 9mm or better, but what you prefer (rationalize) doesn't affect me.

I prefer to bet my life on larger / more powerful bullets and my preference is based on what I've seen firsthand.
Between myself, my wife and my kids I've field dressed 40+ deer - over 30 were killed by me; couple dozen bowkills, muzzleloader, rifle, and even 10mm pistol, nearly all the deer were inside 20 yards and double lung hit (bait and its legal) .
It is an accurate generalization (exceptions of course) to say that given a double lung hit there is an observed positive correlation between size of wound, blood on ground and decreased distance traveled.

Would I prefer a smaller hole in a deer? No.
Would I prefer smaller hole(s) in someone trying to club, slash, stab, shoot me? Absolutely not.

 

[44 AMP]

If shooting someone does not stop him by the previously mentioned factors, you have to wait on blood loss.

You go ahead and wait for blood loss, I'm going to shoot them AGAIN!! And again until they cease to be a threat.

And to be technical, its loss of blood pressure (to the brain) that stops them.
If you take out the main pump, the pressure drops pretty fast. Not instantly, no, but pretty fast. Likewise, the more and bigger the holes, the faster blood drains, the faster the pressure drops.

AND, while the difference in diameter between a .25 and a .45 may only be .2" there is a much larger difference in frontal area.

I like bigger bullets, because if there is even a tiny chance that the "small" difference in caliber could be the difference between a bullet that damages a vital blood vessel or nerve and one that just barely misses it, then to me, its worth having.

 

[Bill DeShivs]

You guys miss my point entirely....
If I thought I would have to shoot someone, I would carry a bazooka!
Since I doubt that I (or you) will have to shoot someone, I prefer to carry a gun that does not weigh a ton, or get in the way of what I'm doing-and that I can easily conceal.
And it sure beats the hell out of not having a gun.

 

[CDW4ME]

You guys miss my point entirely....
If I thought I would have to shoot someone, I would carry a bazooka!
Since I doubt that I (or you) will have to shoot someone, I prefer to carry a gun that does not weigh a ton, or get in the way of what I'm doing-and that I can easily conceal.
And it sure beats the hell out of not having a gun.

No, I get your point; I just don't agree with your caliber preference.
I don't think I'm going to have to shoot someone, hope to God I don't.
You are content to bet your life on lesser calibers.
I have no trouble concealing a pistol in pocket plus another IWB and prefer to bet life on larger / more powerful calibers.

 

[44 AMP]

If I thought I would have to shoot someone, I would carry a bazooka!

The LAW is more compact, but like the bazooka, accuracy is generally minute of tank...

go with the 90mm recoilless rifle, there's a fletchette round for that,

of course, backblast is an issue...

and I do completely agree, any gun beats no gun when you need a gun.