gun discharge in cockpit.

On Mar 29, 9:55 am, "Maxwell" luv^2^fly^99@^cox.^net wrote:

No, what really matters is your medication. Now go take it.

Maybe you won't notice that the only reason I reply to your posts is
to bait you into a reply.

Each time you expose what we all suspect -- That you are completely
and hopelessly stupid.



Dan Mc

On Mar 29, 9:57 am, Jay Maynard
wrote:

The goal of using lethal force in self-defense is to end the attack. More
power is going to help that cause much more effectively than multiple
rounds. Yes, the "one-shot stop" is often a myth, but why handicap yourself?

That's fine. If your mission profile requires a cannon, drag around a
cannon.

But don't confuse "more power" with "stopping power" cause it just
ain't so.

And if you have a drugged up prep in your house why confront him with
a handgun when a shotgun is available?

This bears repeating -- a handgun is the least effective, least
powerful firearm in the civilian arsenal. The only reaosn we have
handguns is for the portability, period.

If you are in defensive mode (such as in your house), you should be
reaching for a shotgun, with the handgun as backup.

Why not a rifle? Penetration, blast, and long barrel.



Dan Mc

"Dan" wrote in message news:01050cb1-2bf4- a handgun
when a shotgun is available?

This bears repeating -- a handgun is the least effective, least
powerful firearm in the civilian arsenal. The only reaosn we have
handguns is for the portability, period.


No, it bears repeating, Dan is a clueless twit on the subject.

"Dan" wrote in message
...
On Mar 29, 9:55 am, "Maxwell" luv^2^fly^99@^cox.^net wrote:

No, what really matters is your medication. Now go take it.

Maybe you won't notice that the only reason I reply to your posts is
to bait you into a reply.

Each time you expose what we all suspect -- That you are completely
and hopelessly stupid.


Someday you will grow up and learn, you're the one dropping your pants here.

Dan wrote:
On Mar 28, 8:15 pm, Matt Whiting wrote:
No, central ... Tioga County. Erie is NW PA.

Oops... thought you said NW but I see I read wrong.

That's beautiful country -- and some good hunting and fishing!

That's a fact. And the people here know how to shoot. And some of us
also know how to fly! :-)

Maxwell wrote:
"Jay Maynard" wrote in message
...
On 2008-03-29, Dan wrote:
You're such a genius -- Please do tell the significant differences
between the two calibers.
One need look no farther than the IPSC power factor calculation.
Typically,
it's around 120 to 125 for 9mm Parabellum, and upwards of 170 for .40 S&W.
I'll happily trade one or two rounds for that kind of increase in power.
To
me, .40 S&W represents the best tradeoff between power and capacity.

My thoughts exactly. If I didn't have a close friend the keeps me in .45
reloads, I would carry .40s. But I have seen too many training films and
police reports of someone taking as many as 4 rounds "center mass" from a
9mm, and just keep charging, and that just doesn't happen with a 40 or 45.

That's where I live the .44 mag. Even a perp with body armor will feel
significant pain from a handloaded .44 placed properly. A 9mm will
probably sting a little...

Dan wrote:
On Mar 29, 9:26 am, Jay Maynard
wrote:

One need look no farther than the IPSC power factor calculation. Typically,
it's around 120 to 125 for 9mm Parabellum, and upwards of 170 for .40 S&W.
I'll happily trade one or two rounds for that kind of increase in power. To
me, .40 S&W represents the best tradeoff between power and capacity.

You are confusing "power" with "ability to stop an assailant."

If all we wanted was "power," a 20 lb sledgehammer swung rapidly would
do quite nicely.

But sledgehammers are hard to conceal, don't provide very quick follow
ups, and have a very limited range.

The IPSC is biased towards the .45, thus the "power factor"
requirement. That's fine -- they can set any parameters they want --
IPSC is a game -- but don't take that requirement as an absolute
definition of effectiveness.

It isn't.

Read the FBI report which argues this point quite well:
http://www.firearmstactical.com/pdf/fbi-hwfe.pdf

Sadly, the 9mm has proven its effectiveness on many, many occasions.
The V Tech shooter killed 32 people with a .22-caliber Walther P22 and
a 9 mm semi-automatic Glock 19.

What drove the FBI, DEA, ICE, SF, and other LE and Military
communities to bigger, faster cartridges was the requirement to shoot
through glass, car doors, etc and to take down perps high on PCP,
Meth, etc.

If those situations are in your mission profile, get something big and
fast.

But MOST civilians don't have this threat as part of their normal
lives.

Thus what really matters is your mission profile -- your own
capabilities, your exposure, your risks, your local jursidiction
requirements, etc.

Define that, THEN make your choice of weapon.

I agree. I chose a .44 Mag backup up by my little .45 Government Model.
:-)

Jay Maynard wrote:
On 2008-03-29, Dan wrote:
What drove the FBI, DEA, ICE, SF, and other LE and Military
communities to bigger, faster cartridges was the requirement to shoot
through glass, car doors, etc and to take down perps high on PCP,
Meth, etc.

If those situations are in your mission profile, get something big and
fast.

I spent 17 years in volunteer EMS. I dealt with plenty of folks high on
stuff, enough to last me a lifetime. I know what they're capable of. If I'm
trying to defend myself against the risks of a perp in my house, why would I
want to run the risk that he's going to be hopped up on something? Why make
that compromise?

The goal of using lethal force in self-defense is to end the attack. More
power is going to help that cause much more effectively than multiple
rounds. Yes, the "one-shot stop" is often a myth, but why handicap yourself?

It is only a myth if you don't use enough gun. Very few can take a .44
mag and keep on charging. Maybe with body armor, but even then I
suspect it will get their attention.

Dan schrieb:

The fundamental rules for safe gun handling a

Bottom line -- only point it at things you don't mind killing.


or even better: stay away from weapons.

#m

Martin Hotze wrote:
Dan schrieb:

The fundamental rules for safe gun handling a

Bottom line -- only point it at things you don't mind killing.


or even better: stay away from weapons.

In your case, I agree you should.