Interesting video on........Size!

I always sort of held a similar philosophy. It’s not my job nor is it my desire to hurt or kill another being. I’d just assume let bygones be bygones and go separate ways so to speak.

My only goal is to stop potential harm to me and mine and if all that requires is harsh language awesome. If all it requires is the presence of a weapon not as awesome but still winning in my book. If a few rounds simply let me and mine break contact so be it.

I don’t remember who said this or what board I read it on, so apologies if you are here, but someone once said something to the effect of “The first shot is the starter pistol for the fat mans tactical retreat.” And I don’t disagree.

The problem does however arise when you plug Conan the speech impaired in the forehead with a .25 acp and he gives you that look that indicates he has an ouchy now and is angry. It’s then that that mouse gun starts loosing its luster.

I saw that a while ago, and I didn't buy it then. It's saying the primary method by which someone would use a gun to stop an attack is to scare away the attacker. That MIGHT work, but it might not. If it doesn't you still have to put him down, and do so before he can harm you. That puts us back where we started, needing a gun/round combination that can quickly incapacitate an attacker.

Hmmm... "Break contact". So... If your goal is to break contact, does caliber and pistol size even matter? Could I break contact with a Desert Eagle just a well as with an NAA in .22 short? The point being made here is you shoot your assailant in the hope that he will flee. Could that happen? Maybe. But equally likely is the chance your attacker is enraged, doped up or deranged and your plink with the .25 may fail to "break contact". I think it is wiser to plan for (realistically) a worse case scenario than it is to hope for the best outcome with a small caliber gun. And given the recent improvement in ammo, gun design and capacity, easily carried small pistols in .380 and 9mm are readily available.
All that said, I believe the concept of "break contact" is fallacy.

A relative who is LEO says that once a person starts to get a couple or three bullets in them -- *any* bullets -- they begin to reconsider their decisions and actions.

Data courtesy of Greg Ellifritz.

Ex Navy SEAL Don Shipley carries a .22 Magnum for personal SD when he's out busting phoneys.

#1 rule of a gunfight / shooting - have a gun.

A bunch of BS! A jihadist with a machete on a suicide mission isn't going to "break contact" until dead.

quote:

Originally posted by striker1:
A relative who is LEO says that once a person starts to get a couple or three bullets in them -- *any* bullets -- they begin to reconsider their decisions and actions.

That's often true. But it's not guaranteed. For example, while someone in their right mind might choose to give up and end their attack after the pain and shock of the first few hits regardless of caliber, if you are dealing with someone high on drugs or suffering from mental issues, or a fanatical attacker hell-bent on causing mayhem until they die, you very likely would need actual physical incapacitation through disrupting their central nervous system or causing sufficient loss of blood before your attackers is forced to give up the fight and the threat is ended.

Otherwise, everyone would simply be carrying around .22s and training to plug bad guys in the shoulder, like the leftists want us to.

quote:

Originally posted by Fla. Jim:
Data courtesy of Greg Ellifritz.

Caliber: 10mm
One Shot Stop Percentage: 110%
Number of Shots to Incapacitate: 0.5

Plus the "Boom of Doom" will fill bad guys with fear and dread.

quote:

Originally posted by striker1:
A relative who is LEO says that once a person starts to get a couple or three bullets in them -- *any* bullets -- they begin to reconsider their decisions and actions.

All of them except for the ones who don't!

I do agree that "mission" drives gear selection and tactics and there is a big difference in the missions of LE, military and civilians.

Even though a break in contact is the goal, it is more often than not, the criminal who chooses to break contact. Well, we have zero control over the choices made by criminals. We can only control our own thoughts, decisions and actions.

So, we need to in my opinion, always train for the worse-case scenario of the criminal(s) not giving up until incapacitated. Then, if they break contact sooner (or we get an opportunity to do so), then that is "easy" and they (or you) can leave and it's over.

Besides, to continue the analogy he brought up...breaking contact in the military does require lots of "gear." If you just get up and run away, you will get routed. What you need to do is have one element lay down heavy suppressive fire, throw anything you have at them (grenades, smoke, CS, indirect fire) and move out. Then pick up support for the other element to move.

So, to break criminal contact by choosing a smaller (in flash, blast, power and capacity) gun to "throw" at them to create an opportunity to get away (or intimidate them into quitting) doesn't make sense to me.

If it is all you have or will carry, great, way better than nothing.

Edit: I've never thought any of the main calibers matter (given a high quality HP): 9mm, .40, 45, .357 SIG, .38SPL +P etc. Pick one. Even .380 now with the better performing loads that get to 12" and also expand. I can't justify anything smaller though unless it is that or nothing.

Well I guess I never thought the goal in a lethal force situation was to make the bad guy run away. That would seem a rational course of action for rational assailants. But can we depend on violent individuals to be rational? Within my humble experience, we cannot. But, I learn something every day, and the bad guy running away would be a success, if me and mine survive unscathed. Would that expectation or mindset cause some discombobulation in a lethal force situation if the assailant doesn't "break contact"/run away? Perhaps, as in Russia, citizens should only be allowed to possess rubber bullet pistols? I mean, I heard those rubber bullets really hurt, and any rational aggressor would certainly want to "break contact" and run off, wouldn't they?

quote:

Originally posted by Fenris:
Caliber: 10mm
One Shot Stop Percentage: 110%
Number of Shots to Incapacitate: 0.5

Aaaaand now you're OK to break contact.

quote:

Originally posted by Fla. Jim:
Data courtesy of Greg Ellifritz.

What is the source for this?

quote:

What is the source for this?

Um, "Greg Ellifritz"?

This guy

I am not a fan, nor an advocate. Just pointing out Fla. Jim included the source in his post.

quote:

Originally posted by ruger357:

quote:

Originally posted by Fla. Jim:
Data courtesy of Greg Ellifritz.

What is the source for this?

I would also question the info behind that chart. The conclusion from that at face value would be, the wimpier the gun, the quicker the stop, and that defies logic.

I am sure it’s sample size.

9,40, 45 likely have a far larger sample size then the others. If only 5 folks were plugged with a .32 and 4 of them stopped what they were doing it’s in the noise vs. 500 folks shot by 9mm.