9mm Sucks B@lls > Give 'em back the .45

[edro]

Originally posted by: 308nato
Hackworth's letter to Congress


The 9mm round is for shooting poodles.

Um, the difference between the 9mm and the .45 is like 2.54mm. You are telling me that a hunk of lead that is 2.54mm less in size will not kill someone? Also, what do you suggest the police use as a weapon? I think the Smith 5906 and the Beretta 92 (Primarily used by most police officers) are both very capable of stopping a human. I am not a cop, but I do have common sense.

 

[MichaelD]

Originally posted by: Tominator

Originally posted by: Ladies Man
whos bright idea was it to give them 9mm in the first place??

NATO and logistical problems. If all NATO members use the same bullets the supply and transportation of ammo is greatly simplified.

Logistics wins wars...or loses them.

Tom is correct. Logistics is everything. BUT, the .45 ACP round is vastly superior to the 9mm round. Like comparing a whiffle ball bat to a wooden baseball bat; both will hurt you, but one will hurt you a whole lot more.

 

[Beau]

Originally posted by: MichaelD

Originally posted by: Tominator

Originally posted by: Ladies Man
whos bright idea was it to give them 9mm in the first place??

NATO and logistical problems. If all NATO members use the same bullets the supply and transportation of ammo is greatly simplified.

Logistics wins wars...or loses them.

Tom is correct. Logistics is everything. BUT, the .45 ACP round is vastly superior to the 9mm round. Like comparing a whiffle ball bat to a wooden baseball bat; both will hurt you, but one will hurt you a whole lot more.

Okay, to prove that, let me shoot you in the head with each and you tell me which one hurst more. I'll start with the 9mm.

 

[308nato]

Originally posted by: edro13

Originally posted by: 308nato
Hackworth's letter to Congress


The 9mm round is for shooting poodles.

Um, the difference between the 9mm and the .45 is like 2.54mm. You are telling me that a hunk of lead that is 2.54mm less in size will not kill someone? Also, what do you suggest the police use as a weapon? I think the Smith 5906 and the Beretta 92 (Primarily used by most police officers) are both very capable of stopping a human. I am not a cop, but I do have common sense.

Common sense would tell you that both rounds are equally lethal. The science of ballistics is where the differences are shown. That and many decades of "real world" examples of the differing characteristics.

 

[smp]

Originally posted by: Citrix

Originally posted by: smp Here comes the gangbang .... WTF am I blabbering about? Are you asking me to blabber some more then? Cause I can ... you sure you want me to? Cause I will. I don't care about 308nato or whoever likes guns, fine you like guns, way to go I don't care. It's that article that I have a problem with. I find it racist. If you don't, then fine but I'm entitled to my own goddamn opinion and if I think it's fvckin racist and you disagree I don't give a damn.

Go hug a tree and pet a bear... If you saw a racist comment in that artical then you have a serious serious problem. You are the only one in here using racist slurs. Open the Yellow pages and look up Psychotherapists i think you might need to use thier services.

Always the same sh!t .. I say something and people call me a liberal when they don't have a fvckin clue. The common argument among your type is go hug a tree or whatever, it's always the same. The article paints 'the enemy' as being non-human .. when you read that article you aren't reading about humans, you are reading about rabid dogs that foam at the mouth and are bent on killing in the name of Allah ... to me it's rasict and objectifying, to you it's not ... that's fine, I don't hate people for disagreeing with me, unlike you. Go ahead and hate me though I don't fvckin care.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Under the duress of combat hitting someone in the head with a handgun is no small feat according to my family (my father is a decorated WWII combat vet and my bro the same in Nam). I'm also told the ammo used in the military 9mm overpenetrates and that hitting someone jacked up on something with mulitple shots that aren't instantly lethal will not stop them from shooting back.

 

[PsychoAndy]

Hell, give them some Para-Ordinance P14-45's. Almost as many rounds as a M9 and more powerful.

 

[Scipionix]

9x19 Winchester 115gr.STHP 1225 fps 383 lb/ft 8" penetration in 10% gel
9x19 Cor-Bon +P 115gr.JHP 1321 fps 454 lb/ft 14.2"

.45ACP Federal 185gr.JHP 1001 fps 411 lb/ft 13.6"
.45ACP Cor-bon +P 185gr.JHP 1150 fps 544 lb/ft 11.3"

If you're interested, also look at

.45 ACP
9x19 (Luger)

 

[schmedy]

Always the same sh!t .. I say something and people call me a liberal when they don't have a fvckin clue.

Hmm you think if you hear it so much MAYBE, just MAYBE it's you. It is not like everyone is making up general things about people, these are facts of what some enemies did to the troops in war. Also if you want to be technical another example would be the people in Somilia while I was there, the "lovely nice sweet peace loving people" there were give drugs, but that too is a racist remark.
You are an idiot.

 

[Soulbane]

IMHO,

I like 9mm but if I had my choice in combat I would go for a .45 every time.

.45 just has more stopping potential. What if you don't have the time to get off the extra shot you need from the 9mm to make up the difference from the .45?


Also, Ive talked to a cop before at a firing range when 9mm were first replacing .45's. He was very unsatisfied with the 9mm because the bullets just didn't pack the punch of the .45. He mentioned an example of the 9mm round bouncing off car hoods, while a .45 would go through and hit the engine.

 

[BP]

If and only if they were allowed to use hollowpoints, I'd say the 9mm, because the difference in one shot stops is only a couple of % and you have a 15 shot clip.

FMJ's are a different story, there's about a 20-30% difference between the two.

 

[Scipionix]

Originally posted by: Soulbane
IMHO,

I like 9mm but if I had my choice in combat I would go for a .45 every time.

.45 just has more stopping potential. What if you don't have the time to get off the extra shot you need from the 9mm to make up the difference from the .45?


Also, Ive talked to a cop before at a firing range when 9mm were first replacing .45's. He was very unsatisfied with the 9mm because the bullets just didn't pack the punch of the .45. He mentioned an example of the 9mm round bouncing off car hoods, while a .45 would go through and hit the engine.

I've never fired either in combat, but the ballistics don't seem to reveal that the .45 has anything more than a slight advantage over the 9mm, and both have similar "one-shot stop" percentages with similary ammunition types. Both have >90% stops with the best available catridges, in the 80s with light JHP bullets, and in the 60s with heavy FMJ loads.

Of course you hear from the people who don't like something because the rest have no reason to complain. I wonder how many cops and soldiers who switched from .45 to 9mm like the 9mm better? Even so, we all know how much people hate changing to newfangled things. Is there any good data on 9mm v. .45ACP effectiveness?

What really needs to be done is to get rid of those century-old prohibitions on "dum-dum" bullets in combat and give our troops decent man-stopping cartridges.

 

[Scipionix]

Originally posted by: BP
If and only if they were allowed to use hollowpoints, I'd say the 9mm, because the difference in one shot stops is only a couple of % and you have a 15 shot clip.

FMJ's are a different story, there's about a 20-30% difference between the two.

"The truth revealed by the 15 year Marshall-Sanow study of thousands of actual shootings is that standard 230 grain .45 ball ammunition is about 62.89% effective, and 9x19 115 grain ball ammunition is 62.26% effective in achieving a one shot stop."

From the article on the 9x19 cartridge posted above.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

I wonder how many cops and soldiers who switched from .45 to 9mm like the 9mm better? Even so, we all know how much people hate changing to newfangled things.

I think you are forgetting that you are talking to computer people with very fast upgrade cycles

 

[308nato]

What really needs to be done is to get rid of those century-old prohibitions on "dum-dum" bullets in combat and give our troops decent man-stopping cartridges.

Good point. "Please don't shoot us with hollowpoints". "Use the flamethrower".

Kind of silly you could be charged at the Hague for using BlackTalon's but bayoneting them in the spleen once or twice followed up with a full mag of ball in the chest at PBR is hunky-dory.

 

[Scipionix]

Originally posted by: 308nato
Good point. "Please don't shoot us with hollowpoints". "Use the flamethrower".

Kind of silly you could be charged at the Hague for using BlackTalon's but bayoneting them in the spleen once or twice followed up with a full mag of ball in the chest at PBR is hunky-dory.

Yep, just make sure the bayonet is not pyramidal

 

[smp]

Originally posted by: schmedy

Always the same sh!t .. I say something and people call me a liberal when they don't have a fvckin clue.

Hmm you think if you hear it so much MAYBE, just MAYBE it's you. It is not like everyone is making up general things about people, these are facts of what some enemies did to the troops in war. Also if you want to be technical another example would be the people in Somilia while I was there, the "lovely nice sweet peace loving people" there were give drugs, but that too is a racist remark. You are an idiot.

The article paints 'the enemy' as being non-human .. when you read that article you aren't reading about humans, you are reading about rabid dogs that foam at the mouth and are bent on killing in the name of Allah ... to me it's rasict and objectifying, to you it's not ... that's fine, I don't hate people for disagreeing with me, unlike you. Go ahead and hate me though I don't fvckin care.

Nobodies world view is the "right" view. Not your's, not mine, not the liberal's or the conservative's. You can hate me all you want for thinking differently than you, but there is a word to describe that as well. I don't agree, that's fine, I'm not calling people names and claiming moral authority on anything. That is my take on the article, and I didn't try to force my view on anyone. I got bashed for having a different view than the majority and that is what pisses me off. Why do you care what I think? Why does it bother you? What bothers me about people like you is your sheer intolerance of people who disagree with you. I don't care if you disagree with me, why should you care if I disagree with you?

I never said anything about combat and what I know and don't know about it. I was commenting on the article itself and the writing style of the article. I will be the first to say that I have no combat experience and don't know sh!t when it comes to discussing which fire arm would be better at taking someone out. This;
The article paints 'the enemy' as being non-human .. when you read that article you aren't reading about humans, you are reading about rabid dogs that foam at the mouth and are bent on killing in the name of Allah ... to me it's rasict and objectifying, to you it's not is what I'm talking about, why are you so offended?
.... I'm not trying to force anyone to agree with me. You can disagree all you want but calling me an idiot is uncalled for and paints you as an intolerant, prejudiced son of a b!tch. This is an open forum and I can speak my mind if I feel like it. My opinion needs no argument because it is merely "my opinion" and nothing more.

 

[MrBond]

hehehe The truth is that if you are a good shot, on bullet from a 9mm will do the same thing as one from a .45 -- kill/mame/whatever your enemy.

There's a difference between being a good shot, and being a good shot when there's an enemy soldier running at you with a bayonetted weapon. I'm a pretty good shot with a pistol, but even I don't profess to be able to hit a moving target in the head when it counts. Thats why I have a 45. I can aim for the center of mass and put an attacker down in less shots then it'd take with a 9mm.

 

[308nato]

Originally posted by: Scipionix

Originally posted by: 308nato
Good point. "Please don't shoot us with hollowpoints". "Use the flamethrower".

Kind of silly you could be charged at the Hague for using BlackTalon's but bayoneting them in the spleen once or twice followed up with a full mag of ball in the chest at PBR is hunky-dory.

Yep, just make sure the bayonet is not pyramidal

Those get stuck in the bone to easy anyway. Absolutely worthless for eating peas off of as well.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

You can disagree all you want but calling me an idiot is uncalled for and paints you as an intolerant, prejudiced son of a b!tch.

Perhaps you are painting each other in the wrong light? Now stop it and kiss and make up

 

[Lucky]

can someone quote to me exactly what is racist?

 

[UltraQuiet]

Originally posted by: Scipionix

Originally posted by: Soulbane
IMHO,

I like 9mm but if I had my choice in combat I would go for a .45 every time.

.45 just has more stopping potential. What if you don't have the time to get off the extra shot you need from the 9mm to make up the difference from the .45?


Also, Ive talked to a cop before at a firing range when 9mm were first replacing .45's. He was very unsatisfied with the 9mm because the bullets just didn't pack the punch of the .45. He mentioned an example of the 9mm round bouncing off car hoods, while a .45 would go through and hit the engine.

I've never fired either in combat, but the ballistics don't seem to reveal that the .45 has anything more than a slight advantage over the 9mm, and both have similar "one-shot stop" percentages with similary ammunition types. Both have >90% stops with the best available catridges, in the 80s with light JHP bullets, and in the 60s with heavy FMJ loads.

Of course you hear from the people who don't like something because the rest have no reason to complain. I wonder how many cops and soldiers who switched from .45 to 9mm like the 9mm better? Even so, we all know how much people hate changing to newfangled things. Is there any good data on 9mm v. .45ACP effectiveness?

What really needs to be done is to get rid of those century-old prohibitions on "dum-dum" bullets in combat and give our troops decent man-stopping cartridges.

I would be one of those who like the 9mm better. I am simply more comfortable with it. However I have never been in combat and have only had to draw a weapon twice, never had to shoot anyone so my "comfort" may change if the weapon were ineffective.

I think Col. Hackworth is a muckraking POS.

smp- It has always been necessary to "dehumanize" the enemy in order to be an effective soldier/sailor/marine. It is necessary for just about everyone in the service to prepare themselves for killing in this manner. This may seem offensive to you but it is a necessary tool that you must have. Reb, Yank, Jap, Commie and other not so nice labels have always been used in this manner. Hesitation in any kind of warfare (sub, aerial, ground, etc.) will probably be lethal and remembering that the ship, sub or cave complex is full of people may cause hesitation. My experience with talking to people who have had to "pull the trigger" is that this remembrance comes soon enough.

 

[smp]

smp- It has always been necessary to "dehumanize" the enemy in order to be an effective soldier/sailor/marine. It is necessary for just about everyone in the service to prepare themselves for killing in this manner. This may seem offensive to you but it is a necessary tool that you must have. Reb, Yank, Jap, Commie and other not so nice labels have always been used in this manner. Hesitation in any kind of warfare (sub, aerial, ground, etc.) will probably be lethal and remembering that the ship, sub or cave complex is full of people may cause hesitation. My experience with talking to people who have had to "pull the trigger" is that this remembrance comes soon enough.

Thank you

 

[Scipionix]

Originally posted by: 308nato
Those get stuck in the bone to easy anyway. Absolutely worthless for eating peas off of as well.

Eating peas is probably the more important use. I didn't think anyone actually used bayonets in combat. They're supposedly used more for intimidation than for actual fighting, something about how most men don't have the temperment to plunge a blade in another man's guts.

 

[smp]

Originally posted by: Lucky
can someone quote to me exactly what is racist?

rac·ism Pronunciation Key (rszm)
n.
The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others.
Discrimination or prejudice based on race.

The bolded part is pretty much what I was reading in that article.