TexasCHLforum.com

Soccerdad1995 wrote:

The Annoyed Man wrote:How about people who call anything not .45 ACP a ‘mouse caliber’, but won’t step in front of one.

.........

Point taken on 9mm vs .45, though. Personally, I carry both. Generally, it is based more on whether I like a particular model of gun, since most of my gun choices only come in one caliber. The only cases where I have made a choice are with my 1911's and my Shield. In both cases, the trade off was between losing one round of capacity for the bigger bullet, and I personally chose the bigger bullet.

And that is a perfectly valid response. It’s a statement of personal preference, without being advocacy that says “my choice is the best for everyone, and if you’re not carrying it, your SD picture is somehow deficient.” BTW, I like my .45s, but for me, the other factor besides capacity was weight. For instance, my XDM45 Compact 3.8, with the shorter 9+1 round magazine inserted, with 230 grain +P JHPs on board, PLUS one 13 round backup magazine, weighs considerably more on my belt than my Glock 17 with a 19+1 round mag in the gun and a single 19 round backup mag. There’s no combination of XDM 13 round backup mags that doesn’t weigh more than an equal number of G17 19 round backup mags. And to try and equal the 9mm for capacity, the .45 becomes too much to carry. Now, I do own a 5” 1911 for carry, but again, it’s a steel framed gun (Springfield Loaded model), and it has even fewer rounds of capacity, but it is still heavy. Add more rounds, it gets even worse. And the worse it gets, the more it hurts.

Back in the day, this might not have bothered me so much. But the older I get, the worse off my back is, and I have since acquired a torn posterior tibialis tendon in my left ankle/foot, and an old medial meniscus injury in my right knee is finally begging to go under the knife. I’ll be talking to my foot doctor on Friday about surgery on that foot/ankle to fuse the bones of my foot and re-anchor the tendon to the bone. All of that is to say that I can no longer carry as much weight on my belt as I used to. It causes me too much pain - either in my back or my legs, sometimes both. For me, my requirements are lighter weight AND higher capacity, not one or the other, which is why I finally settled on 9mm Glocks. Another factor I didn’t mention above is that 9mm Glocks are what my wife carries. She’s not really a “gun person”, even though she carries. It was important to me that she be familiar with the operating system of the guns I carry, in case something should happen to me and she should have to pick up my gun and get to work with it. Although I keep both a G43 and a G17 handy (both ends of the model range), I typically carry a G19 or a G26 these days.......and both of them have had +2 mag extenders added to all their magazines. So now, even the G26 is a 12+1 round gun with 12 round backup mags. That seems to work for me. I like that G26.

Anyway, now that I’m on Medicare, maybe I’ll be able to afford having some of these ailments taken care of......not to mention getting my cataracts removed so that I don’t chip the paint on anyone’s car if I have to unlimber me gat.

Abraham wrote:Fiction writers who introduce their favorite musical particulars in their plots with the implicit understanding you'll see their musical superiority preference and agree - that yeah man, this writer is smokin cool because he digs...Charlie Parker, or some other jazz musician or Ella or who gives a darn? Musical taste does not denote great intelligence. Art in its various forms is just that. Various forms.

No your choices don't make you outstanding.

Musical preference is widely ranging with zero coolness points. Ever. What you like is what you like. It has nothing to do with I.Q. or even...taste.

One of my most brilliant friends (now dead) absolutely loved yodeling.

There's nothing right/wrong/cool or uncool with musical taste.

What you don't get to claim is: I'm cool because I like this music...nah,

Same for other forms or art.

What he said. ^^

LOL.

Edited to add..... I apologize for taking the thread off topic......which might ALSO be something annoying that some people say.

surprise_i'm_armed wrote:Advocates of mouse caliber guns who admonish others that "it's all about shot placement."
No thanks, I'll stick with my .45 for my primary EDC.

SIA

Oooooo...... the gauntlet has been thrown down!

How about people who call anything not .45 ACP a ‘mouse caliber’, but won’t step in front of one.

Even when I carried .45s (haven’t for a couple of years now), I accepted that shot placement was king.....after surrendering to some logic disproving my belief at the time that .45 ACP gave me a “margin of error” not available in smaller calibers. But here’s the deal..... Nobody who carries a gun in public can afford to be anything less than a reliably decent shooter just because his caliber begins with “4”. A hit to the descending aorta with a .22LR will produce near instantaneous incapacitation followed by rapid death most of the time..... and this is from my personal experience. A .45 caliber hole in that organ won’t increase the speed of incapacitation or onset of death. But it’s a hard target to hit, when the perp is on the move......as is any individual organ target regardless of caliber fired.

When I started carrying high capacity mous......Er.......9mm handguns, it wasn’t because I thought I might have to shoot 1 subject more times with a smaller caliber, it was because the increasing possibility of acts of terrorism perpetrated by multiple attackers - particularly against churches, which affects my weekly existence - increased my feeling that I needed to be able to shoot more than one person without having to pause for a reload as soon. But I never thought for a minute when I made that change over to 9mm that a modern properly designed +P 9mm hollowpoint would be any less effective than a .45 hollowpoint. Lately, it turns out that more than a few law enforcement agencies agree with my assessment, and instead of “up-calibering” their officers from .40 S&W to .45 ACP (in terms of caliber dimensions), they have “down-calibered” them from .40 S&W to 9mm, and issued higher performance modern +P ammo for them.

Now, that is NOT advocacy for a smaller round, because advocacy for a thing contains the implied statement that it is a superior choice to the other thing. I don’t believe that 9mm is a superior cartridge to .45 ACP. Nor do I believe that .45 ACP is a superior cartridge to 9mm. I believe that they are different expressions of the same thing - the ability to launch a projectile of sufficient weight and diameter at a rapid enough velocity to put the kibosh on shenanigans. Everybody has their own definition of what “sufficient” means, but the reality is that, world wide, pistol calibers other than .45 ACP have accounted for more lives taken than .45 has. And in the U.S. alone, it was my experience while working in an ER that .22 LR took the most lives of all. .22 LR is a “widow maker” caliber.....it just sometimes (but not always) takes its sweet time to put someone down. I suspect that .380 ACP is the bottom margin when it comes to “stopping” power continuum, but strictly based on advancements made in the last 3 or 4 years to that cartridge, because it did not used to be so. Even so, and others may not share this opinion, my personal experience with .380s has been a lack of mechanical reliability. If the gun won’t feed reliably, it’s not a good choice, regardless of caliber, and neither of the two .380s I’ve owned would feed reliably.......a Colt Government, and a Keltech P3AT. Maybe it was the way I was gripping them? Who knows? What I do know is that they don’t work for me, so I don’t carry them and no longer own one. Consequently, my personal choice at the bottom of the continuum is .38 special, and my revolvers are .357 magnums for the specific reason that I have a choice between 3 cartridges in those guns: .38 Special, .38 Special +P, and .357 magnum. Even so, I am NOT volunteering to step in front of a .380, and I am not advocating against it.....or against .45 ACP or any other caliber. I’m merely explaining MY reasons for MY choices.

You can call that advocacy, or you can call it what it is - an explanation of the reasoning behind a personal choice. At no point in this post have I implied that you should NOT carry .45, or that you SHOULD carry 9mm. Nor have I called anything smaller than .45 a “mouse gun”, or anything beginning with “4” a “cannon”. And if you don’t like this reply, remember.....you broached the subject.

My list is exceedingly long.... too long to post here. This is why I am “The Annoyed Man”.