TGO David

Not enough time to do the hats. May have some stickers. Still not 100% on the date; was meaning to get back with you but apparently you've already decided to schedule and announce. I know for a fact that I'm on call the weekend preceding this. Not sure yet about the weekend of the 5th.

If the ban hammer gets dropped it's because of what you continue to do.

Here's a thought... you could stop plugging the shop you work for considering that I've already booted JWP for doing it every chance he could get.

Ok, odd. They claim to have sent me one too but I never saw it. Then again it may have been in one of the envelopes they send every so often that I just throw in the trash. Maybe I should open these things more often.

I've disabled that plugin. It does seem to be faster as a result.

And for the record, there's not a single person on TGO that I wouldn't sit down and have a beer with no matter how much we may have disagreed with something on the forum. It's just that some of you, I'd bust the bottle on the table afterward and stab ya in the face. Just kidding. I bring my Battlemug™ when I'm expecting to have to roll like that.

Oh... well, disregard last post.

No one gets out of here alive!!!

Continuing with those thoughts, let's discuss why penetration is more important than expansion or caliber size. All too often we read comments on gun forums and hear comments in real-life discussions about the perils of "over penetration" in self-defense shootings and ultimately the conversation turns toward the notion that a mythical sweet-spot exists wherein a cartridge provides adequate penetration yet not too much. When you consider the dynamics of a self-defense encounter (the distance at which the shooting may take place, the way that the body of the individual receiving fire may be angled, intermediate barriers between them and the shooter, the anatomy of the individual being shot at, etc.) then it becomes obvious that it is quite literally impossible to load a cartridge that will provide just enough penetration for every single instance. As illustrated in my preceding post, the temporary cavity effects and permanent tissue damaging effects of handgun cartridges make them poor performers when compared to the incapacitation qualities of rifle calibers. While a subject shot with a handgun caliber may indeed bleed out from a minor would given time, a self-defense shooting requires quicker incapacitation of the subject resulting in a more immediate elimination of the threat. Barring mortal injury to the central nervous system (CNS) via the bullets fired, the most effective means of dealing with the threat is to use a cartridge capable of penetrating deep enough into the subject so as to reach the large blood-bearing vessels and organs in the torso. Failing this, rapid physiological incapacity of the threat is unlikely. In comparison, if a bullet completely penetrates and exits the subject, the bullet will have had enough penetration to reach the critical organs and vessels and will more likely have caused hemorrhaging sufficient to induce hypovolemic shock in the subject. Second to CNS trauma, this is the only reliable means of incapacitating the subject. This bears out two points: 1. Shot placement is critical in any self-defense shooting, not only because of the liability attached to each bullet fired, but but also because failing to deliver shots accurately to the areas most likely to incapacitate the subject will result in that subject remaining a threat. 2. Penetration is king when choosing self-defense cartridges. If you have to choose between penetration and expansion, choose the former.

While at first blush I was tempted to place this into the Ammunition and Reloading forum, it seems to me that this is in actuality the better place for it. Often the subject of "stopping power" in a handgun comes up on other forums and in physical conversations. To be blunt, the notion of "stopping power" from a service / self-defense handgun cartridge as it is envisioned by the general public is non-existent and therefore should not be the primary factor when choosing a handgun for self-defense. It is my opinion and that of many others who know far more about the subjects than I do that you should chiefly choose a carry handgun based on how well you shoot it, how likely you are to carry it due to comfort / size / weight of the firearm, and how reliable the firearm will be. Without passing grades in these three areas, a handgun is in my opinion completely unsuitable for carry. You will see from the chart below that when comparing well-designed defensive ammunition, there are minimal differences in penetration depths and in temporary cavity effects. This photo was provided by Doug Carr. As you increase the diameter and mass of the bullet from 9mm / 357SIG, to .40SW, to .45ACP, more tissue will be crushed resulting in a larger permanent cavity. Also it should be noted that the larger bullets typical offer improved performance through "intermediate" barriers (clothing, vehicle and building construction, etc.). However it should also be noted that for some people, the benefits of the larger calibers is offset by the fact that a larger caliber typically begets a larger weapon frame which begets decreased ergonomics for the shooter depending on their physique. The photo provided above makes it obvious that NONE of the common service pistol calibers generate temporary wound cavities of sufficient size that it would cause significant permanent tissue damage. Refer to “Handgun Wounding Factors and Effectiveness” produced by the FBI FTU, as this remains the single best discussion of the wound ballistic requirements of handguns used for self-defense -- it is available at: http://www.amazon.co...94498334&sr=8-1 So too is the notion of "expansion" or recovered diameter used to support the preference for larger caliber handguns. As seen in the photo above, the bullets recovered from ballistic gelatin show that modern defensive cartridges in the different calibers exhibit similar expansion diameters. Keeping in mind that it is not the size of the hole going in that is as important as the depth of penetration and the amount of bleeding caused within that affects the effectiveness of the bullet, one can see that choosing a handgun solely on the basis of caliber ignores far more important factors. Primarily, you should choose the handgun for carry that: You are most likely to carry rather than leave at home You shoot the most accurately Offers the best reliability Summary: Caliber used as the basis for choosing a defensive handgun is, within reason, bull$#!%. All modern service calibers provided comparable performance and all of them offer generally poor incapacitation ability when compared to rifle calibers. Therefore, choose the gun that you shoot best, that you're most likely to have with you at all times, and that won't fail to operate when you need it the most. Source of much of the data contained within this thread: DocGKR on M4Carbine.net

Wow... this thread smells. Handgun self-defense loads - High Drag Low Speed /done

Simply not true. The Glock 19 has seen a lot of use in Iraq among the contractors. Further it is the most ubiquitous 9mm police sidearm around the globe, at least according to Glock's own marketing propaganda ... which in this case I would tend to believe. As for the finger grooves, those are sadly an answer to a question that only Glock seemed to have heard anyone ask. I understand the reason why they are there, I just do not believe that they were truly necessary.

Yep... I see the love is still flowing back and forth in the thread. I'm going to need some coffee.

True story.

I don't mind disabling it entirely if folks here aren't using it.

I live too close to work and my vehicle practically ruins my ability to call in for snow. I didn't really think either of those decisions through.

Jesus... I leave for a few hours and my name's getting thrown around like Jamie's fist, and Guy Ina Speedo is running around talking about shooting me. Does that qualify as intent? I'll have to revisit all of this tomorrow after I've had a few hours to sleep off all of the badassery I've committed today.

Thank you for your permission to continue doing what I believe is best for the forum.

This is a banner day because I get to tell not one but two people that they are an idiot. And in this case, you're an idiot. I never said that I didn't care or didn't think such a thing could happen. You're just itching to jump to a conclusion and make an assumption based off of the fact that you really want to argue with me. The nonsense you post on TGO is about half an ounce more valuable than the drivel posted by other trolls looking for reactions. Surely there are venues more accepting of the excrement you're shoveling.

I can delete your account if you'd rather that course of action. Strel gets enough crap when he's actually being an idiot. There's no sense dicking up a thread where he's actually being somewhat... normal.

There but by the grace of God go you.

I have zero delusions about this. In a self-defense shooting you have a very good chance of getting hurt yourself as well by acting. But there are worse fates.

As I've said before, and has been pounded into my head by people smarter and better at this than me, a moving target is harder to hit than the guy standing there doing nothing. Introducing movement screws up the other guy's OODA Loop and gives you precious seconds that might allow you to draw your gun and bring not only equilibrium to the situation but potentially sway it into your favor. WWPO'HD??? Dodge, duck, dip, dive and dodge! The five D's of dodgeball... words to live by. Move your ass!

Dude. You're making me want to sponsor a TGO force-on-force simmunitions class sometime soon just so that I can light you up and put a rest to some of the oddball ideas you have.

Hey... I'm a broke-ass, small SUV driving, gun loving, small house owning moderate conservative... so I'm middle of the road enough that by your logic I should almost agree with you on things. It would seem, therefore, that it's not as much about demographics as it is about geography. As in where your head's at.