A 9mm as a CCW piece?

[GoodOlBoy]

By the way one other thing I should mention. This was started as a ccw thread and why people are against 9mm. I said I don't personally like it, I am not against it. If I KNEW I was going to a gunfight I am not carrying a pistol I am carrying a rifle. It was asked why people don't consider it a "Serious" ccw piece. I never said I didn't consider is serious. In point of fact I don't want to be shot at by a 22 (And yes have had that happen too) much less a 9mm, 45, 500 S&W, or 20mm belt fed machine gun.

GoodOlBoy

[Mr. 16 gauge]

You get a chip on your shoulder about your 9 its not my problem.

No chip on my shoulder, GOB.....sorry if my post came off that way.

Texas LEOs may carry 45s, but most of the nation doesn't....they carry 9s or 40s.

If I was an LEO, and had my choice, I would carry a 4" .357 mag revolver with adj. sights. I remember back in the late 80's reading articles in Time and other 'news' magazines how LEOs were supposedly 'outgunned' because the bad guys had high capacity handguns and the LEOs 'only' had 6 shot revolvers.
Now most LE agencies have gone to automatics since then, and a host of problems have come with it: accidental shootings, charges of too much deadly force (), bullet pass throughs, ect, ect, ect. There is one video on youtube where a female officer has an accidental discharge while her partner is cuffing a suspect on the ground.
We also have all seen the bank robbery shoot out in LA a few years back when the bad guys had body armor & full auto AKs......again, the cry went up (esp. from the antigun crowd) that the police were undergunned because they felt the need to go to gun shops and get AR15s. I guess I'm a little confused, because I've been told that LAPD carries rifled slugs for their shotguns, so why didn't they load up with slugs and try and take out the bgs with a head shot?

I guess the point I'm trying to make (and trying to make in my original post) is that too much emphasis is being focused on equipment (caliber, ammo, ect) and not enough on 'intangibles' such as mind set.

.....and I've heard the stories about the moros in the Phillipines as well. If the pistols didn't stop the MOros, then why did the Krag rifles do the job? Why didn't they break out a host of 1873 Springfields in .45-70? That would have done the job a lot better (if bigger is better). Fact of the matter is: NOBODY reading these posts was there, so nobody can say for sure why the .38s didn't work, but the 45s did. Could it have been another reason (bullet design, for example)? The fact is that people who are using the Moro example are using anecdotal evidence to prove their point. It's like saying that if I take a frog and tell him to jump, and he jumps, and I then take said frog and cut off his legs and tell him to jump, and he doesn't, then I conclude that by cutting off a frogs legs, it makes him deaf. If I can't go back and retest the situation, you can't prove me wrong (or right).
As far as the .357 mag expanding to .45 cal.....My .38 specials in my 2" Detective special expand to 60-62 caliber.....does this make my lowly .38 special 30-33% 'better' than your .45? Of course it doesn't......but based on the data alone (anecdotal), you would have to say so.

Anyway, I didn't mean to start a pissing contest here, so I will sign off on this thread (at least for the time being).......enjoy your .45!