marshallartist
Marksman
I believe its more shot placement than caliber. IMHO ANY gun is better than none when you need one!
Sgt. Chavez use to say "It's where you hit 'em, not what you hit 'em with.".
I believe its more shot placement than caliber. IMHO ANY gun is better than none when you need one!
caliber is the bullet diameter. Under the "bigger caliber is better" theory, a 9mm is better than a 5.56 or even a 7.62 And that's just silly.
So what I'm kind of getting from all the "it doesn't matter what caliber you carry" replies is that we should just switch out all of our soldiers & cops handguns for .22LRs?
Just think how much money we could save &, since there is statistically no difference in the stopping power between the 9mm or .45 & the .22, then it shouldn't make one bit of difference to our guys & gals in blue & green.
caliber is the bullet diameter. Under the "bigger caliber is better" theory, a 9mm is better than a 5.56 or even a 7.62 And that's just silly.
The article speciffically states that the data does not take into account barriers such as clothing. That means it also doesn't take into account body armor car doors or windshields.. all of which police/military encounter.
3 9mms, 3 .22lrs or 3 .45acps to the chest...doesnt matter...you're going to die. /
Fine. Then a 50 caliber cap and ball pistol with black powder is better than a 45? It's a "bigger caliber."
Or what about a bullseye 45 ACP running at 700 FPS? Its a "bigger caliber" than a 9mm+P HST, so it is better?
And I suppose that 9mm Luger is just as effective as 9x25 Dillon or 357 Sig, or maybe even 357 Magnum. The first 3 all shoot a .355" caliber bullet, and the magnum shoots .357" Only 3 thousandths of an inch difference, so it should only be about the same, maybe just a tiny bit better right?
As for rifles and a "bigger caliber is better," I'll take a 308 or an eve smaller 270 WSM over the much "bigger caliber" 44-40 WInchester, any day of the week.
Again, caliber is nothing more than bullet diameter (for those that need it spelled out )
f they all had similar velocities, penetration & expansion then I'd say they should all perform about equally, yes.
....
ALL ELSE BEING EQUAL (meaning muzzle velocity, weight, bullet design, penetration, expansion ratio, shot placement & any other variable you want to take into account other than caliber) the larger the caliber, the better. That statement is still true.
ALL ELSE BEING EQUAL (meaning muzzle velocity, weight, bullet design, penetration, expansion ratio, shot placement & any other variable you want to take into account other than caliber) the larger the caliber, the better. That statement is still true.
You are right theoretically but to get all things equal pragmatically for individual shooters is where "ALL ELSE BEING EQUAL" breaks down. Its like all those equations that hold true in a vacuum. A feather WILL fall at the same rate as a shell casing, but we don't ever encounter real life vacuums all that much in day to day life. And when it comes to real life applicability where I am trying to stop an attacker, "ALL THINGS BEING EQUAL" won't determine my choice of caliber for me. Its more important to recognize where things AREN'T equal and choose the caliber that fits me to compensate for those factors; recoil sensitivity, reaction to noise, muzzle blast and eyesight, is it comfortable enough for every day carry etc things that physiologically and psychologically will make things UNEQUAL on an individual level THEN when someone evaluates the handgun stopping power using me as the foundation for their study and finds that by adding me to the equation a .32 has more stopping power than a .45 that will be what matters to me in the dark alley at midnight.
All I'm saying is that to make the statement that "a .22LR is just as good as a 9mm is just as good as a .357magnum is just as good as a .45ACP so you might as well only ever carry a .22" is just silly & is not recommended by ANY legitimate self-defense firearms instructor or anyone else who has ANY COMMON SENSE at all.