- Messages
- 3,948
- Reactions
- 9,155
@Patrickstar26 many people who are 21 are trying to get their CCCP. So I would say you are doing better than most.
JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
Turning 21 and looking to get my ccp
- Thread Starter Patrickstar26
- Start date
-
- Tags
- concealed carry handgun
Member 53328
- Messages
- 9,059
- Reactions
- 19,929
G17 all day. Er day.
- Messages
- 3,948
- Reactions
- 9,155
The original and also the best IMO. G17 can do it all.
- Messages
- 2,194
- Reactions
- 4,975
I see what you did there, comrade!
- Messages
- 18,744
- Reactions
- 45,458
- Messages
- 1,255
- Reactions
- 2,480
What kinds of handguns do your friends shoot? Sometimes that's a good place to start. The other thing is What is your budget like? No reason to look at Shadow System guns if your budget is a used S&W. DR
- Messages
- 1,035
- Reactions
- 2,398
I get that .380 ain't as powerful etc but according to statistics they have higher 1 shot kill rates than 9mm. In fact 40cal and .380 have the higher 1 shot kill stats according to fbi data. I can't seem to find the article that had fbi data but here is another chart from Buckeye firearm association.
Holy Carp, I missed this thread! So I didn't read every thing. The thought crossed my mind that you should NOT get a carry piece first. You should find a full size gun and learn how to handle that first. Once you have become very familiar, and reasonably accurate, with the full size handgun, THEN get a compact gun for carry and work with that.
- Messages
- 2,194
- Reactions
- 4,975
Good info! Can you share the source article? Should make for an interesting read.
- Messages
- 1,035
- Reactions
- 2,398
Questioning the Effectiveness of the .380 Auto Cartridge | Buckeye Firearms Association
You folks really like your .380 semi-automatic pistols. Two of the top 10 most read articles on my site are about the .380. Every post I’ve written about this caliber has been consumed voraciously. Lots of the email questions I get from readers concern the .380 as well.
- Messages
- 9,115
- Reactions
- 16,641
Don't go .380
Especially if you already have 9mm in the stable.
Especially if you already have 9mm in the stable.
- Messages
- 4,306
- Reactions
- 6,740
And I suggest you buy them one size larger than normal to avoid 'printing'
- Messages
- 1,035
- Reactions
- 2,398
Same author from above article. Suggesting anything above 380 for carrying.
www.activeresponsetraining.net
But my stance is any gun is better than no gun. Just realize the limitations if you do carry a small caliber.
Is the .380 ACP an Adequate Caliber for Defensive Use?
Written by: Greg Ellifritz I received this question (edited for brevity) from a police firearms instructor last week: "A lot of my guys on the department are going with .380 pocket guns
www.activeresponsetraining.net
But my stance is any gun is better than no gun. Just realize the limitations if you do carry a small caliber.
- Messages
- 3,974
- Reactions
- 9,951
Chart is meaningless because it does not show actual numbers of shootings. I don't have a ref either. But I do recall one or more reports of this sort with the real numbers, including those for 44mag. Basically, there were very few shootings for everything except .38sp, .357 mag, and 9mm. The numbers were down there at single digits for most calibers. Fewer than 5 for some. So few that I considered all results meaningless except for .38sp, .357 mag, and 9mm, for which there were serious numberS. More like 50 up. As I recall the chart also included .44 mag, but there were only two shootings. From that people said .357 mag was more effective than .44mag. Ridiculous. In addition, such reports I've seen never report the thing that actually matters, instant incapacitation. They are only reporting whether the shooting victim ultimately dies. W.huch could be the next day. With a lung shot with a .22 the victim will likely bleed out and die later without medical attention but has plenty of time to shoot you or carve you up first. Also, the charts include no info on bullet type. And date back to when effective JHP bullets in calibers under 9mm didn't exist yet, and 9mm JHP bullets were not nearly as effective as they are now. As I recall most or all of the shootings were cop involved, and date back to when cops mostly carried .357s and small .38s for backup and a few had transitioned to 9mm. And only .357mag and .38sp jhps actually opened up with any certainty. Everything else behaved more like round nose ball.
I think you can learn more shooting 1 gal jugs of water with a .380 jhp vs a .9mm +P jhp or a 357. mag jhp than you can from such charts. Then try it with a piece of plywood in front to represent clothing that can plug up hps and make them fail. Or watch the many videos on the internet showing demonstrations of this kind. Nearly all Hickok45 videos include quart jugs of soda among the targets. If the bullet goes into or through the jug barely moving it and just making a couple of neat holes, that represents a lung shot that probably leaves the bad guy plenty of time to kill you before dying. If the jug explodes sending bits of plastic and water spraying ten feet in all directions or tearing the jug in half, its a lot more likely that round will do enough damage to actually stop the bad guy instantly from a chest shot.
A lot of people who have used a .22 or 9mm to shoot small predators such as raccoons (who are after their poultry) end up switching to .45acp or .357mg because the raccoons don't die instantly from a chest shot with a 9mm. They run off, presumably to die later. And at night, with a moving target a brain shot is usually not possible. Its a small target. Some people don't care, as the raccoon ends up dead either way. But plenty of people, myself included, really hate causing unnecessary suffering, even of a predator after their pets or livestock. For years I had a duck flock, and I used a .357 mag on raccoons. Bad enough I had to kill them. At least they collapsed in their tracks and died nearly or actually instantly. One friend of mine with a poultry flock and small predators who gave up on 9mm told me that with .45acp it didn't even matter what ammo he used. Even .45acp ball ammo brought the chest-shot raccoons down instantly. As for using .380 for protecting a poultry flock, maybe it would do no worse than 9mm. No reason to imagine it would do better.
If I had only a .380 to defend myself I'd figure it the same as I figure it for .22. I'd better be able to do brain shots if I want instant incapacitation. However either gun is way better than spitting.
Last Edited:
TLDR Warning Final paragraph would have been enough but I was watching paint dry and you all became the victims of my propensity and proclivity to pontificate profusely.
Masad Ayoob began a study investigating, for lack of a better term, real world terminal ballistics. As far as I know he continues to update those findings. You can find the data referenced in several of his books. Ayoob didn't stop at reading police and coroner's reports. He attended countless autopsies to see for himself. The only bias he presented was indicative of sample size. The only assumptions drawn were the similarity of 38 Super to 357 Magnum with similar projectiles. The only conclusions drawn were that .38 Special is not 357 Magnum and 9mm isn't either. There were other minor assumptions made as well but the above nearly covers it.
Ayoob never succumbed to preconceived beliefs, hearsay, "everybody knows that..." ., or searched for data to support his own conclusions. He just went after the facts.
The 125gr Semi Jacketed Truncated Cone Exposed Lead Flat Point (STCLFP) was, within the confines of observable data a clear leader. First generation hollow points followed closely. Both were at or near 1,300 Ft/Sec.
First generation 9mm hollow points followed admittedly due to their large data sample. Their FMJ siblings nearly fall off the chart, not because of a lack of data but because they don't incapacitate.
One of the assumptions Ayoob made was for the small sample size of the 38 Super. When appropriate hollow points were employed the cartridge performed well. However, most of the data was for FMJ and resembled the 9mm FMJ data.
The 38 Super with hollow point was lumped in with the 9mm and not the 357 Magnum.
Curiously the 45ACP suffers from not only a small sample size but understandably 80 years of mythos at the time of Ayoob's original study. Again first generation hollow points were just coming into vouge and the bulk of the data was for FMJ.
Although the 45ACP "never gets any smaller" it never gets any faster. Heavy clothing alone could reduce its effectiveness. The only reason it beats out the 38 Special is its physical and sample size.
With the huge historical sample size for the .38 Special came the penetration vs expansion observation and the "pass through" allowing two holes for hydraulic fluid to pour out. The difficult distinction here is that effective hollow points for .38 Special velocities had just came into common use and a distinction needed to made between then.
.380ACP was the dividing line between the major and sub calibers. The now nominal distinction between FMJ and hollow points applies. Cross the "T" and "Dot the eye" (sic) become the predominate method of incapacitation.
32 Caliber anything begins the small sample size, near ineffective sub calibers. Cross the "T" and "Dot the eye" are now mandatory for incapacitation with the added "contact discharge wound" becoming a regular occurrence. It seems that the owners of these sub caliber weapons knew their limitations.
.25ACP actually had a statistical presence although not a very effective one. Most incapacitation and fatalities occurred either by way of Cross the "T" and "Dot the eye", contact discharge to the head and neck area, or coincidental contact with vital organs.
Shotguns, understandably, got their own category.
All others were a bunch of one of foreign calibers, black powder balls and bullets and a variety of improvised weapons.
Now my disclaimer. The above is from memory because I no longer have that publication. I did read and re-read it many times over the years. I don't attribute any conclusion to Masad Ayoob but to my own poor memory. Anyone that cares to correct or elaborate is more than welcome.
The second part of my disclaimer is that I've seen far more than the average number of bullet wounds in my life. Still nothing I've seen even begins to compare to Ayoob's near obsessive collection of data.
This leads to expected generalizations.
Carry the largest caliber you are comfortable with. This includes your ability to carry as well as train with and hit what you intend to hit. Too often this can result in difficult to conceal, difficult to manage recoil, and near impossible to control for follow up shots.
Conversely a weapon that is easy to carry and conceal may be near impossible to train with, not have nearly enough grip area for control, and be capacity limited. Anything that identifies as a "micro nine" falls into this category.
Just get a Glock. I'm of two minds here. Amongst the numerical soup that is the ubiquitous polymer pistol(s) there is probably a pistol and caliber that works for anyone. Aside from my personal feelings and experience with Glock I feel that this option has the effect of unintentionally limiting not only a good choice but the best choice.
Sub calibers, 32ACP and below. Just stop. Get some help.
Finally, it doesn't matter what I do. I'm a dinosaur, set in my ways and dedicated to training with my choices. There it is. Make a decision and exhaustively train despite ammunition availability and cost.
Note: .40 Auto was not included because its sample size is still small although growing. Additionally it's effectiveness is buried in confusing and contradictory data.
Large bore and magnum revolvers were excluded because of vanishing small sample size and diminishing effectiveness in comparison to modern high capacity pistols. Their effectiveness is not questioned only because if a projectile from these weapons is accurately placed the results are predictable and devastating.
Masad Ayoob began a study investigating, for lack of a better term, real world terminal ballistics. As far as I know he continues to update those findings. You can find the data referenced in several of his books. Ayoob didn't stop at reading police and coroner's reports. He attended countless autopsies to see for himself. The only bias he presented was indicative of sample size. The only assumptions drawn were the similarity of 38 Super to 357 Magnum with similar projectiles. The only conclusions drawn were that .38 Special is not 357 Magnum and 9mm isn't either. There were other minor assumptions made as well but the above nearly covers it.
Ayoob never succumbed to preconceived beliefs, hearsay, "everybody knows that..." ., or searched for data to support his own conclusions. He just went after the facts.
The 125gr Semi Jacketed Truncated Cone Exposed Lead Flat Point (STCLFP) was, within the confines of observable data a clear leader. First generation hollow points followed closely. Both were at or near 1,300 Ft/Sec.
First generation 9mm hollow points followed admittedly due to their large data sample. Their FMJ siblings nearly fall off the chart, not because of a lack of data but because they don't incapacitate.
One of the assumptions Ayoob made was for the small sample size of the 38 Super. When appropriate hollow points were employed the cartridge performed well. However, most of the data was for FMJ and resembled the 9mm FMJ data.
The 38 Super with hollow point was lumped in with the 9mm and not the 357 Magnum.
Curiously the 45ACP suffers from not only a small sample size but understandably 80 years of mythos at the time of Ayoob's original study. Again first generation hollow points were just coming into vouge and the bulk of the data was for FMJ.
Although the 45ACP "never gets any smaller" it never gets any faster. Heavy clothing alone could reduce its effectiveness. The only reason it beats out the 38 Special is its physical and sample size.
With the huge historical sample size for the .38 Special came the penetration vs expansion observation and the "pass through" allowing two holes for hydraulic fluid to pour out. The difficult distinction here is that effective hollow points for .38 Special velocities had just came into common use and a distinction needed to made between then.
.380ACP was the dividing line between the major and sub calibers. The now nominal distinction between FMJ and hollow points applies. Cross the "T" and "Dot the eye" (sic) become the predominate method of incapacitation.
32 Caliber anything begins the small sample size, near ineffective sub calibers. Cross the "T" and "Dot the eye" are now mandatory for incapacitation with the added "contact discharge wound" becoming a regular occurrence. It seems that the owners of these sub caliber weapons knew their limitations.
.25ACP actually had a statistical presence although not a very effective one. Most incapacitation and fatalities occurred either by way of Cross the "T" and "Dot the eye", contact discharge to the head and neck area, or coincidental contact with vital organs.
Shotguns, understandably, got their own category.
All others were a bunch of one of foreign calibers, black powder balls and bullets and a variety of improvised weapons.
Now my disclaimer. The above is from memory because I no longer have that publication. I did read and re-read it many times over the years. I don't attribute any conclusion to Masad Ayoob but to my own poor memory. Anyone that cares to correct or elaborate is more than welcome.
The second part of my disclaimer is that I've seen far more than the average number of bullet wounds in my life. Still nothing I've seen even begins to compare to Ayoob's near obsessive collection of data.
This leads to expected generalizations.
Carry the largest caliber you are comfortable with. This includes your ability to carry as well as train with and hit what you intend to hit. Too often this can result in difficult to conceal, difficult to manage recoil, and near impossible to control for follow up shots.
Conversely a weapon that is easy to carry and conceal may be near impossible to train with, not have nearly enough grip area for control, and be capacity limited. Anything that identifies as a "micro nine" falls into this category.
Just get a Glock. I'm of two minds here. Amongst the numerical soup that is the ubiquitous polymer pistol(s) there is probably a pistol and caliber that works for anyone. Aside from my personal feelings and experience with Glock I feel that this option has the effect of unintentionally limiting not only a good choice but the best choice.
Sub calibers, 32ACP and below. Just stop. Get some help.
Finally, it doesn't matter what I do. I'm a dinosaur, set in my ways and dedicated to training with my choices. There it is. Make a decision and exhaustively train despite ammunition availability and cost.
Note: .40 Auto was not included because its sample size is still small although growing. Additionally it's effectiveness is buried in confusing and contradictory data.
Large bore and magnum revolvers were excluded because of vanishing small sample size and diminishing effectiveness in comparison to modern high capacity pistols. Their effectiveness is not questioned only because if a projectile from these weapons is accurately placed the results are predictable and devastating.
- Messages
- 5,098
- Reactions
- 9,059
Welcome to our addiction, oh wait, I meant hobby. 
- Messages
- 12,001
- Reactions
- 21,216
I didn't read the whole thing so I don't know if it is your source saying this or you but it makes no sense at all. It is not in the slightest bit impossible and I have done it for years.
This is incorrect. They are not as easy to control as a larger gun but they can be controlled and the more training you do the more proficient you become.
A tiny p365 has significantly more capacity than a full sized 1911. Again incorrect.
- Messages
- 268
- Reactions
- 334
I took a tac med class several years ago. The instructor was a ER Doctor and prior Green Beret medic in the Middle East. He showed some pretty interesting data on wound channels in regards to 9mm, 40 SW and 45acp. It boiled down to none of them were significantly different. So I've never really been concerned about one caliber or the other I would just assume have more bullets to fight my way to a rifle. Rifle being a considerable better man stopper than any pistol caliber.
- Messages
- 12,001
- Reactions
- 21,216
This is exactly what ellifriz's exhaustive study showed. Pistol vs rifle/shotgun there is no comparison and shot placement is by far the most critical factor in pistol usage. I would suggest not using one study only as a source but look at all the studies you can and make your own judgement, ellifritz is just one of them.
Personally I subscribe to Clint smiths' 9mm minimum as shown in an above post (and largely due to the same reason) but everyone has their own preferences.
This video quite dramatically shows the difference between pistol rounds and rifle/shotguns:
30 second video, first two shots 12 gauge. Last shot 9mm.
Full video found here:
Article on ellifritz's study (skip to conclusion at the end if short attention span).
An Alternate Look at Handgun Stopping Power | Buckeye Firearms Association
by Greg Ellifritz I've been interested in firearm stopping power for a very long time. I remember reading Handguns magazine back in the late 1980s when Evan Marshall was writing articles about his stopping power studies. When Marshall's first book came out in 1992, I ordered it immediately...
Last Edited:
- Messages
- 9,115
- Reactions
- 16,641
Bottom line is that .380 cannot blow the lungs out of the body.
You'll need to go with a larger cartridge.
/thread
You'll need to go with a larger cartridge.
/thread
Last Edited:
Similar threads
Upcoming Events
New Classified Ads
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Ruger 10/22 - 60th Anniversary (Brand New) Limited Edition- Started by tenthousand
- Replies: 0
-
-
-