Duane Thomas's "defensive HG battery".

1674 Views 7 Replies 3 Participants Last post by Magnum88C, Jul 18, 2004

andy

Discussion Starter · Jul 18, 2004

He chose a couple of Combat Commanders, a 38 snub, and a .32, something like the Keltec, I forget exactly what. I told him that if the .38 was "so handy", there was no real need to bother with the .32, and that if the .32 had "adquate" power, there was no reason to bother with the .38.

Also, what's the point of TWO big, heavy 1911's? If had some sense, and used one such for practice and an alloy compact 1911 for carry, be way ahead in the comfort and ease of ccw categories, and still WAY ahead of .38 snub in effectiveness, that's for sure.

3 RADICALLY different "feels" and modes of operation, and 2 of them VERY lacking in durability, so adequate practice with them would soon mean that they were reduced to junk.

Far better to just practice with an alloy 9mm Commander, and .22 unit, and use an SA auto for the ccw gun, pocket carry. If it's a locked breech 380, and it's LOADED correctly, it's more effective on animals than is .45 ball, or 230 gr jhps, from 3.5" barrels. They don't expand at ALL reliably in flesh at the pathetic 750 fps that they demo from such barrels, ya see. So they WASTE 1/3rd or more of their pathetic 270 ft lbs on overpenetration. The 380 can be set up to use ALL of its 320 ft lbs in the torso. While it aint great,it IS better.

If want minimal hassle, and expense, just get a used Kahr, steel framed 9mm compact for practice, carry the polymer framed compact, PM9 9mm. With the right loads in the 9mm, it beats 230 gr .45 jhp's from 4" barrels, in animal tests. No bs about "what happened" in some war (probably never happened at ALL, much less the way the teller CLAIMS it did). Just flesh and blood results. If a bullet doesn't expand in animal flesh, NEITHER with it expand in human flesh.

Save

1 - 4 of 8 Posts

andy

Discussion Starter · #3 · Jul 18, 2004 (Edited by Moderator)

he's fos. The energy MUST be PRESENT, in order to HAVE an effect. The loads he evaluates aint GOT enough energy, nor were they the type to TRANSFER enough of it to matter any. He's dealing with 300 lousy ft lb, NON-expanding ammo.

Expansion and energy DO show a value in how fast shot animals succumb. Men are MANY times more prone to shock than are animals, too. The diff between men and animals goes into MY column, as a benefit, not the reverse. The MORE energy and destruction you can lay on a man, the MORE likely he is to quit. Blood loss is ALWAYS too slow to be of any realistic help, in a sub 2 second type handgun situation. So why BOTHER to study what loads best equate to max blood loss, hmm? It's just STUPID,

Save

andy

Discussion Starter · #5 · Jul 18, 2004 (Edited by Moderator)

LIKE WHAT? The misconception is ALL Fackler's, in that blood loss is WORTH having. It AIN'T, not in a typical civilian self defense shooting. LONG before blood loss can POSSIBLY stop the guy, he will have been able to twist your head around.

Save

andy

Discussion Starter · #7 · Jul 18, 2004 (Edited by Moderator)

Marshall is just a LIAR. NOT EVEN THE 00 BUCK blast is better than 95%. So the only "reason' you have to believe the bs you spread about the 357 Sig is a lousy score of shootings. You can see WELL over 60% effectiveness, in a score of shootings, from the .22 lr and a couple of good chest hits.

Save

1 - 4 of 8 Posts

This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.

Top Contributors this Month