Since there's a push on for small carry pistols and everybody seems to want to buy them for carrying (not much for shooting, but a lot for carrying), there appears to be a feeling running through the Intardweb that the 9mm, .40 and .45 are all the same, with all kinds of gun store BS sayings to go along with defending the little guns.
Consider this: if all you could have, if the only option available was eight rounds, would you want them to be 9mm or .45? Not all the same.
Posts
New Blog
8 years ago
5 comments:
what about an argument centered around a slightly different premise - If i want to carry a pistol that can carry 17+1 rounds of 9mm vs a pistol that carries 10+1 of .45? - i know its kind of like the chicken/egg routine, and i dont know that there is a "right" answer. (hint: the "right" answer is a 1911)
The answer will end up being right-ish, depending on the platform. One reason I carry a 9mm is that I have 32 of them with me right now, between two mags and the chamber. Statistics say I won't need 'em all, but what if I end up in a fight that doesn't conform to the statistics? I attempt to account for the edges, not just the center. YMMV.
I don't have any 9mm, my ammo investment drives what goes in my hand- and shoulder-guns and it's all old-school: .45acp, some .38spl and .45long-colt, .223 and .30-06 for rifles, and a case of .22WRF for the critter-gun...
very interesting, thanks
Great post over once again. Thank you:)
Post a Comment