better for personal protection

For any that don't know it, the .38/357 is only .002 inches larger than a 9MM (.357 vs. .355), so same weight projectiles are for all practical purposes equal.

Having run a few .38's and 9MM's through the chronograph recently I have to consider the .38 snubby a mouse gun. Gold Dot 125 gr +P's came out 900 FPS and Winchester White box at 773 FPS avg. Although the 9MM I tested were reloads they were below the lowest charge listed in my load charts.(5.0 gr VV N340) The 9's were in the 1050 FPS range from an M&P9 with 4 1/4 inch barrel. The snubby has a 2 1/2 inch barrel which equates to approx 3 3/4 in an auto given that the chamber is included in barrel dimension specs for auto's.

I had to load the snubby to low end .357 levels to come close to 9MM performance.

I carry my snubby on ocasion but it has .357 loads in it, not .38 Special.

:smt1099

Nine mil.
More boolets!!!!

I will go with the 9mm personally. Like it was said before PD ammo selection is the most important decision in my opinion when carrying. I will take my chances with 147 +P jhp to send 'em back to Jesus.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tnoisaw

I think bazoka should be added to the selection.

---

I'm curious. Who's muscles is your avatar wearing this month?? :smt083

:smt1099

They are about equal but more capacity goes to the auto, hence - my vote is for the 9mm.

Hey MIke, if you can't be kind...........at least be vague.:watching::watching::watching:

Yup my vote goes towards the 9mm... Guess I just grew up watching Leathel Weapon to much :mrgreen:

I don't think caliber becomes relevant until shot placement has been achieved. Even then, differences in actual point of impact, and trajectory through the target/body, can skew comparisons.

When I learned to hunt I was not good at it until I learned how to shoot accurately, then learned how to kill the animal. Same with self defense. Learn how to shoot accurately then learn how to effectively stop your opponent. Caliber makes less difference than you imagine. There is no magic bullet. The 9 or the 38 will work no matter what type of handgun it's packaged in if you know how to operate it.

The only reason the 9mm wins is for other factors

Both a .38 and a 9mm will do fine as a personal protection round however 9mm beats the .38 because ammo is CHEAPER and MORE READILY AVAILABLE. Basically you can go to walmart and holy shit, theres a bunch of 9mm ammo at a low cost

Both are fine calibers tho

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by usmcj

I don't think caliber becomes relevant until shot placement has been achieved...

---

...And there, in just a very few well-chosen words, is your answer.

It doesn't matter what caliber you shoot, as long as you are cognizant of its limitations and you place your shots well.
Practical accuracy trumps caliber, every time.

glocks dont come in .38 special

Do you see this post is from 09-18-2007.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jakeleinen1

The only reason the 9mm wins is for other factors

Both a .38 and a 9mm will do fine as a personal protection round however 9mm beats the .38 because ammo is CHEAPER and MORE READILY AVAILABLE. Basically you can go to walmart and holy shit, theres a bunch of 9mm ammo at a low cost

Both are fine calibers tho

---

I have not seen any personal protection ammo at walmart. Maybe the have it in Iowa City I don't know. Cheap is not a reason for personal protection.

It is an old resurected thread but good points are good points no matter when they were made and silly rambling are such too. Make a good shot as was said in this thread on 09/26/2011 and is still very accurate and credible today..................Practical accuracy trumps caliber, every time.

RCG

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mike Barham

That's totally inaccurate. Please cite a single case where a lawyer had a "field day" with the simple fact that the defender used an auto.

Autos are the choice of practically every police department in America, every US federal law enforcement agency, the entire US military, and are recommended by every serious instructor in the country (including Mas Ayoob, who is the one usually cited in silly statements like this). A DA or tort lawyer wouldn't have a leg to stand on if he attacked an auto-toting defender in an otherwise justifiable shooting, and would come out looking like an idiot.

If I ever have to shoot someone on the streets of America, I hope the prosecution tries to say I am a bloodthirsty fiend for carrying a Glock. I won't need my own attorney, Mas Ayoob, or the ghost of Jeff Cooper to make him look like a fool. I'll do it myself by asking him what kind of guns the court security personnel are carrying.

---

I don't see this as an attack post. It seems like a passionate debate to me. I will agree that the use of "auto" when we mean "semi-auto" is a bit off-putting for the general non-shooting public. A great number of people who don't shoot don't understand the difference between auto and semi-auto, they don't understand the difference between single action and double action either.

I'm fairly certain that at some time in the past some lawyer said, "You fired your gun at my client and it was fired in single action mode. Was it not? And it is generally recognized that double action is safer from accidental discharge is it not?"

To which the cop says, "Yeah, that's true. But I didn't accidentally shoot the rapist-bastard. I pulled the trigger to shoot the rapist bastard."

Lawyers turn things around in the most convoluted ways sometimes. So it would not surprise me if one did "have a field day" with a semi-auto vs. a revolver.

But what would a lawyer say about my statement? "The neat thing about a revolver is that you can screw the barrel of the gun right into the bastard's eye socket and pull the trigger and it will go 'bang'. You can't say the same for a auto in that same situation."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Packard

But what would a lawyer say about my statement? "The neat thing about a revolver is that you can screw the barrel of the gun right into the bastard's eye socket and pull the trigger and it will go 'bang'. You can't say the same for a auto in that same situation."

---

I don't know what a lawyer would say, but I'd say you were a bit careless, letting the "bastard" get that close to you before you shot him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by usmcj

I don't know what a lawyer would say, but I'd say you were a bit careless, letting the "bastard" get that close to you before you shot him.

---

OK, how about this statement:

The neat thing about a revovler is you can sneak up behind the bastard, screw the barrel into the back of his skull and pull the trigger and you could be sure that there would be a "bang". You could not say the same thing about a semi-auto.

Of course you could say, "The neat thing about a Barrett chambered in .338 Lapua is that you can stand a full mile away and still blow the bastard's brains out. You can't say the same thing about a revolver or a semi-auto pistol."

(Is that far enough away for you?)

I have a couple of semi-autos that I could press the front end up against a person's head and not be out of battery. Just because you can get that close doesn't mean it's even close to a smart move.

By all means, you let 'em get as close, or you get as close as you want... I prefer distance to be on MY side.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by usmcj

I have a couple of semi-autos that I could press the front end up against a person's head and not be out of battery. Just because you can get that close doesn't mean it's even close to a smart move.

By all means, you let 'em get as close, or you get as close as you want... I prefer distance to be on MY side.

---

I agree. You want to stay out of knife-wielding distance if you can. But sometimes you cannot. And some autos (obviously not all) will go out of battery if you find you are in that situation.

For example, some monster-sized bad guy runs up and tackles you. You might find yourself in close contact in that situation. Though I don't know if you will be in sufficient danger (if he does not have a weapon) to allow you to shoot him. In New York you need to feel threatened with "deadly physical force" before you can shoot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Packard

...For example, some monster-sized bad guy runs up and tackles you...

---

If a "monster-sized bad guy" ran up and tackled me, I'd have to admit that I had suffered a significant lapse of situational awareness.

I might not have seen the rabid mouse which bit my ankle, but I certainly should've been aware of any "monster-sized bad guy" in my vicinity, and of the direction in which he was travelling. (BTW: Your "monster-size bad guy" is a straw man.)

ok, ok .... what if......

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Steve M1911A1

...And there, in just a very few well-chosen words, is your answer.

It doesn't matter what caliber you shoot, as long as you are cognizant of its limitations and you place your shots well.
Practical accuracy trumps caliber, every time.

---

An undeniably true statement, but hardly useful in selecting a caliber. The presumption is that the O.P. will practice sufficiently with the caliber he chooses to become proficient.

The difference is more in the weapons than the caliber.

9mm: Semi-auto weapons. Available with high bullet count magazines in full sized weapons, or in 6 to 8 shot magazines in very compact weapons. Ammo is the cheapest of all the service calibers. Some of the weapons are very accurate, easy to shoot and reliable. Some are less than ideally accurate, difficult to shoot and less than reliable.

.38 caliber: Revolvers. 5 to 8 round capacity. From large, easy to shoot, but difficult to conceal weapons, to very small, light weapons that can be difficult to shoot and easy to conceal. Very reliable weapons. All .357 weapons can shoot .38s (except Coonan pistols). This offer a greater versatility than 9mm. The .357 is a proven man-stopper. Ammo is more expensive than 9mm, but way cheaper than other service caliber ammo.

It all boils down to which type of weapon you prefer: auto or revolver.

Autos have the option of greater round counts, quicker reloads, smaller weapons, and generally easier to manage recoil.

Revolvers have a reliability advantage, simplicity in loading and "making safe" the weapon.

In either case, you should learn to shoot the weapon well. Know your ability in aimed fire, slow aimed fire and rapid fire. Practice with practice ammo and also with your personal protection ammo.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Packard

An undeniably true statement, but hardly useful in selecting a caliber. The presumption is that the O.P. will practice sufficiently with the caliber he chooses to become proficient.

The difference is more in the weapons than the caliber.

---

The difference is being able to hit your intended target, REGARDLESS of the caliber used. Kind of silly to buy and carry a .44 Magnum, if you can't hit anything with it. Improve your technique with a lowly .22, than as your proficiency increases, graduate to larger calibers. You don't build a house starting with the roof... gotta have a foundation first.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by usmcj

The difference is being able to hit your intended target, REGARDLESS of the caliber used. Kind of silly to buy and carry a .44 Magnum, if you can't hit anything with it. Improve your technique with a lowly .22, than as your proficiency increases, graduate to larger calibers. You don't build a house starting with the roof... gotta have a foundation first.

---

I agree. My first weapon was a S & W model 19, a .357 magnum with a square butt and a 4" barrel.

My first rounds through it were .38 wadcutters. Light loadings that were easy to control. I moved up from wadcutters to full-house .38s after that. There was no +P back then so I went from .38s to .357s.

I still think this is a logical progression for learning to shoot. And a 4" barrel on a .357 magnum makes an excellent house gun, if not an excellent carry gun. It is a bit too heaviy and the square butt prints a bit too much for easy concealment in my opinion. But this progression from wadcutters to full-house .357s is a good way to learn to shoot.

Addendum: I know that in the late 1970s none of the .38 revolvers I saw were rated for +P and I did not learn of that term until sometime later. I just did a Google search and I was unable to learn the year that SAAMI adopted +P designations. So to my knowledge there was no +P ammo back then.

Amplification: I went to the SAAMI website and found published pressures document. According to the document it was first published in 1979. See: http://www.saami.org/specifications_...tion/index.cfm

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Steve M1911A1

...It doesn't matter what caliber you shoot, as long as you are cognizant of its limitations and you place your shots well.
Practical accuracy trumps caliber, every time.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Packard

An undeniably true statement, but hardly useful in selecting a caliber. The presumption is that the O.P. will practice sufficiently with the caliber he chooses to become proficient...

---

Packard, what part of "cognizant of its limitations and...place your shots well" do you not understand?
You cannot "place your shots well" without extensive practice, and practice is not caliber dependent.
"Cognizant of its limitations" is the caliber-dependent part, and that is more a product of academic study than of physical experience.