http://blog.rtba.co/dallas-store-manager-shoots-5-armed-robbers-police-arrive-74-minutes-later/ Click for video. Police are there to protect you, 74 minutes after the fact. Firearms are your own self-reliance, and self-preservation. Oppose all new gun control laws, recall those who promote them.
With that many robbers a revolver may not be enough. I'll bet he ponders getting a firearm that takes those nasty hi capacity magazines. A win for the good guys.
I love revolvers, but we aren't talking about combat here. The overwhelming majority of thieves, regardless if they are armed and outnumber you, will scurry away the instant they are met by armed resistance. They are looking for an easy payday. But I do agree with the OP.
This guy will probably go the same route that the cop who hit his perp 14 times with a .45 did. The cop switched to carrying a Glock 17, in 9mm, with 145 rounds of ammo that he carries all of the time. The Glock 17, 19 and 26 can all accept the 33 round magazine that was designed for the full auto Glock 18. I think Beretta has their own version of a similar capacity, and maybe S&W and Springfield. I never use my 33 round magazines, but it's better to have and not need....
Would you happen to have a link to that story? I have a couple friends who believe the .45 ACP is a magically one shot stopper.
I looked around in my usual haunts, and couldn't find it. Don't remember where it happened either. Your friends are victims of a very old myth. I used to be a lot more interested in participating in that discussion, but it gets old when the facts have little effect on opinions. I might suggest some research, but I've been reading "stuff" for decades, and doing a lot of my own testing on inanimate objects. Good sites to look for practical comparisons are "box o' truth" and "brassfetcher". A good read for the basic stuff is here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stopping_power It's interesting to consider how power factor is figured for IDPA and IPSC competition, where it just comes down to the energy of a given load. Although the Marshall and Sanow report has come under a lot of negative scrutiny, I still take it as a good indicator of "ballpark figures". According to their results, after reviewing data from actual emergency rooms all across the country, the one load that accounted for more "one shot stops" (not necessarily kills) than any other was a 125 gr. bullet with roughly 500 ft./lbs. energy. At the time of the report (early 90's), that meant a .357 Mag. with a 4" barrel, firing a 125 gr. bullet @ around 1,400 fps. There really is no "magic bullet", and in the final analysis, I don't want to be shot with anything!
I remember seeing the story somewhere, but I cannot remember where. Yeah, I get tired of the myths about caliber or gun X. The .45 ACP isn't magical: The story we are referring to is a good example, and other pistol caliber perform just as well or better than the .45 ACP. The .40S&W is one of them as most of the loads deliver more ftlbs. of energy than the .45. And that .05" of bullet won't make a damn difference. The .30 cal anything is not magical: .30" bullets may be popular, but an Appeal to Popularity is hardly indicative of absolute supremacy. I find it funny when people say "Well, the AK is better because it is .30 caliber" and are absolutely speechless when I mention the 7.62x39 has some 125 more ftlbs of energy than the 5.56 NATO. Not much. Less than 10% difference. The AK is not absolutely reliable: Mine have jammed. The AR is not prone to jamming: If I shoot brass cased ammo, not a single problem. I do not see anyone lining up for live target testing of the 9mm or 5.56 NATO. And you are right, Box O' Truth is fantastic.
The best gun for defense is the one you know how to use and carry routinely. The best caliber is the one said gun is chambered in.
There ya' go. This usually ends up being the bottom line in any discussion of "the best gun/caliber". I see that a good number of people who CC will pack a popular caliber between 9 and .45 during cold months, when they have a jacket to cover the waist band, but switch to a smaller framed .380 in warmer months, to keep from printing. Well, when the time does come to defend someone, having either one is much better than carrying a sharp stick. The one time when I did have to level off on a man, the most important thing was that he knew for sure that I was "dead" serious. The gun was a Ruger P-85. The load used a Hornady 124 gr. XTP, which I had chronographed at an avg. 1,485 fps. My stance was the same that I had grown accustomed to for 25 yard accuracy fire, and my aim remained fixed on his heart. It bothers me a LOT when I read these guys who swear that you should never draw your gun unless you're about to fire. I believe the statistics will bear me out in my claim that most of the time, it isn't necessary to put a bullet in a man. ALL of the time, it IS necessary to make sure he knows that you will if he forces you to it. There have been several times when I've had one or more morons shooting at me. Shooting back, but deliberately missing was enough to make them run. You can do that out in the sticks, but in town, it would be a bunch more tricky. I don't claim to know if or how a man is judged when this life is over, but something deep inside tells me that it makes a huge difference, whether you ever killed another human being or not.
Big surprise! I found that story here: http://www.policeone.com/patrol-issues/articles/6199620-Why-one-cop-carries-145-rounds-of-ammo-on-the-job/
