Quote:

---

just some observations.first seals would be effective even with 22 rimfires, i believe the feller that shot the hood in the gunshop was using a 45 that guy dropped like a sack of potatos . a one shot stop.if u want to burn a hole in something us a tokarev. ask any german on the western front how his 9mm held up.maybe no one in leo can hit anything cuz u carry too much ammo. i bet 6 rounds of 357 in cool hands trumps 14 in barneys hands, my 1911 runs like a sewing machine my glock is not as smooth, the weaver stance may not be the way to shoot.allow everyone in leo to carry what they want.my 130lb daughter has never complained about the recoil or muzzle rise in any gun i hand her. i beleive its all perception. if u don't like to shoot don't be a cop,push papers somewhere.

---

Not buying the above--SEAL's could probably kill with a .22 but they are not, they chose the 9mm and for a reason..have a friend I train handgun with who was with Seal Team 1 until the late 90's..after which time he did some private contract work along with a brief stint with the (spooks)..think his opinion/advise may have a bit of weight behind it

Secondly, comparing the Glock to a 1911...I'll take that bet..you choose whatever 1911 you want, custom or otherwise..I'll walk into Walmart and grab a Glock off the shelve..bet yours goes down first as to jam or reliability..have read many articles and talked to many in LE that have in excess of 100,000 rounds through their GLock ..never a misfire or jam. And some way way over that number...

I train/workout with LEO every week..one group was recently (actually now about 1 1/2 yrs ago) given Colt 1911's..none of them like them for a duty pistol compared to what else is now available..and YES, I have seen them shoot..that is not the issue..they are not complaining about recoil..moreover the excess weight along with the ammo and limited amount of rounds in the weapon vs what else is available..most cases in today's world, you engage a criminal his firearm will have more than 6 or 8 rounds..and in today's world, they run in groups..Just read an account of a guy firing two warning shots in the air when he spotted two guys trying to steal his car, one spun around and returned fire killing the owner of the car..

http://www.live5news.com/story/36127227/...tealing-his-car

I have 1911's as well...along with pretty much most off the shelve handguns you can currently purchase..and typically shoot weekly....there is no doubt the .45 has more energy..but given the reasons I gave in my previous post, will take one of the high capacity 9's for self defense over the 1911 90% of the time....

In the end, whatever you feel best about and most comfortable with is the one you should use,
As they say, the best handgun is the one you have in your hand when you need one..

--------------------
ALL MEN DIE, BUT FEW MEN TRULY LIVE..

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Interesting article on the 45acp vs 9mm..

Excerpt from article:


“We put our money behind the 9mm round fired by an extremely well-trained marksman carrying a Glock 19,” Mannweiler told Marine Corps Times.

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Interesting article on the 45acp vs 9mm..

Excerpt from article:


“We put our money behind the 9mm round fired by an extremely well-trained marksman carrying a Glock 19,” Mannweiler told Marine Corps Times.

---

G'Day Fella's,

+1.
There's a very old saying that goes; "For the want of a (or multiple) well aimed shot".

I have a IMI Jericho 941 F ("F" for Frame mounted safety), in .40 S&W.
Its a great pistol and calibre and fits my hand like a glove.
I purchased it, primarily for pistol suppressor development but would like to fit a 9x19mm barrel (and mags) to it, and shoot IPSC with it.

Doh!
Homer

---

Remember an instructor telling a group of us once, you can't miss fast enough.. think of that to this day..and that was about 25 years ago..

Found another article that goes with this I believe as the thread is moving around a bit from the virtues of one caliber or another to type/make of the handgun..

https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/fight-100-years-glock-1911-comparison/

Have a great day

Ripp

--------------------
ALL MEN DIE, BUT FEW MEN TRULY LIVE..

Edited by Ripp (09/11/17 01:04 AM)

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

my glock 19 is virtually infallible . but my 1911 still functions smoother. yes it can jam and is heavy, still i have complete confidence in both guns . since the fbi keeps data on about everything i wonder which round has the most kills overall on the street. by thugs, cops and civilians. watchin first 48 the other night and thug 1 was killed by thug 2 with about 8 rounds of 22 automatic.these people kill each other straight away without any training or practice. some my not even know if the gun will shoot. [they love the high point]there must be some mindset to killing in anger that trumps all the training and practice. i believe that maybe a big player in why cops miss and thugs hit. also special forces are trained to kill without thinking or remorse.

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

my glock 19 is virtually infallible . but my 1911 still functions smoother. yes it can jam and is heavy, still i have complete confidence in both guns . since the fbi keeps data on about everything i wonder which round has the most kills overall on the street. by thugs, cops and civilians. watchin first 48 the other night and thug 1 was killed by thug 2 with about 8 rounds of 22 automatic.these people kill each other straight away without any training or practice. some my not even know if the gun will shoot. [they love the high point]there must be some mindset to killing in anger that trumps all the training and practice. i believe that maybe a big player in why cops miss and thugs hit. also special forces are trained to kill without thinking or remorse.

---

Most people can not voluntarily kill another in cold blood. It was found way back that infantry soldiers would deliberately fire to miss, about 4% had a psychopathic streak that allowed them to. Hence the use of human like figures as targets, human shape sacks of straw for bayonet practice, and the propaganda that dehumanized the enemy. The bad guys tend to have a higher rate of psychopathic streaks and find it easy to shoot a person + they tend to shoot effectively at closer ranges and not at longer unless a natural or trained.

---

I have read the same info you state above..

Feeling bad however, the one time I become a member of a small group of people, the term "psychopathic" is attached to it...

Ripp

--------------------
ALL MEN DIE, BUT FEW MEN TRULY LIVE..

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

my glock 19 is virtually infallible . but my 1911 still functions smoother. yes it can jam and is heavy, still i have complete confidence in both guns . since the fbi keeps data on about everything i wonder which round has the most kills overall on the street. by thugs, cops and civilians. watchin first 48 the other night and thug 1 was killed by thug 2 with about 8 rounds of 22 automatic.these people kill each other straight away without any training or practice. some my not even know if the gun will shoot. [they love the high point]there must be some mindset to killing in anger that trumps all the training and practice. i believe that maybe a big player in why cops miss and thugs hit. also special forces are trained to kill without thinking or remorse.

---

Most people can not voluntarily kill another in cold blood. It was found way back that infantry soldiers would deliberately fire to miss, about 4% had a psychopathic streak that allowed them to. Hence the use of human like figures as targets, human shape sacks of straw for bayonet practice, and the propaganda that dehumanized the enemy. The bad guys tend to have a higher rate of psychopathic streaks and find it easy to shoot a person + they tend to shoot effectively at closer ranges and not at longer unless a natural or trained.

---

I have read the same info you state above..

Feeling bad however, the one time I become a member of a small group of people, the term "psychopathic" is attached to it...

Ripp

---

Hot blood vs cold blood makes a big difference.

Eg an intruder in your house threatening you

vs

an intruder who has given up and is cowering on the fllor under your muzzle.

Eg 2 - a person armed and intent on killing you

vs

a person who is walking along a path in the forest, unarmed and you want to shoot and kill them for some reason.

Yes the first two examples are probably very much easier to act on than the second two examples. The first ones might be considered self defence. The second two examples would be considered murder.

Repetition and training makes a big difference. Raise and shoot your target as soon as you obtain the target. If in a threatened situation, do you raise your gun and think of the consequences of firing. I think good self defence training would be, IF you are already being threatened, raise and fire your gun instantly. BUT a person may well have a couple of years and hundred thousand dollars or more of legal court appearances and fees at the best. If the authorities decide to charge and pursue you legally. As they do in many cases.

"I was personally feeling threatened with my life in danger. And/or my family. IU acted unconsciously in fear of my life. The man had broked into my house and was threatening me. I was afraid for my life."

Forget any "castle doctrine" BS. That would get you into a court fast.

--------------------
John aka NitroX

...
Govt get out of our lives NOW!
"I love the smell of cordite in the morning."
"A Sharp spear needs no polish"

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

my glock 19 is virtually infallible . but my 1911 still functions smoother. yes it can jam and is heavy, still i have complete confidence in both guns . since the fbi keeps data on about everything i wonder which round has the most kills overall on the street. by thugs, cops and civilians. watchin first 48 the other night and thug 1 was killed by thug 2 with about 8 rounds of 22 automatic.these people kill each other straight away without any training or practice. some my not even know if the gun will shoot. [they love the high point]there must be some mindset to killing in anger that trumps all the training and practice. i believe that maybe a big player in why cops miss and thugs hit. also special forces are trained to kill without thinking or remorse.

---

Most people can not voluntarily kill another in cold blood. It was found way back that infantry soldiers would deliberately fire to miss, about 4% had a psychopathic streak that allowed them to. Hence the use of human like figures as targets, human shape sacks of straw for bayonet practice, and the propaganda that dehumanized the enemy. The bad guys tend to have a higher rate of psychopathic streaks and find it easy to shoot a person + they tend to shoot effectively at closer ranges and not at longer unless a natural or trained.

---

I have read the same info you state above..

Feeling bad however, the one time I become a member of a small group of people, the term "psychopathic" is attached to it...

Ripp

---

Hot blood vs cold blood makes a big difference.

Eg an intruder in your house threatening you

vs

an intruder who has given up and is cowering on the fllor under your muzzle.

Eg 2 - a person armed and intent on killing you

vs

a person who is walking along a path in the forest, unarmed and you want to shoot and kill them for some reason.

Yes the first two examples are probably very much easier to act on than the second two examples. The first ones might be considered self defence. The second two examples would be considered murder.

Repetition and training makes a big difference. Raise and shoot your target as soon as you obtain the target. If in a threatened situation, do you raise your gun and think of the consequences of firing. I think good self defence training would be, IF you are already being threatened, raise and fire your gun instantly. BUT a person may well have a couple of years and hundred thousand dollars or more of legal court appearances and fees at the best. If the authorities decide to charge and pursue you legally. As they do in many cases.

"I was personally feeling threatened with my life in danger. And/or my family. IU acted unconsciously in fear of my life. The man had broked into my house and was threatening me. I was afraid for my life."

Forget any "castle doctrine" BS. That would get you into a court fast.

---

AGREE
was in a class last week..was given an example of a Japanese man who purchased a little story in the city..kept getting robbed..7 times in one year..so brought a gun to the store..would be robber comes into the store..holding a gun to store owner..store owner was ordered to give all money out of till..store owner reaches like he is getting the money and pulls the handgun..shoots and hits the robber dead center in the chest..walks around the corner of the counter..looks down at the robber.. steps over robber..looking down at him and dumps 3 more rounds into robbers head..ALL ON SURVEILLANCE CAMERA..needless to say the SO is now spending his life in prison..had he stopped with the first shot, which in all likelihood killed him already, he would have been fine most likely..but to then walk over and pump 3 more rounds into his head..might be considered a bit excessive by some..as the very least, shut off the camera..

Ripp

--------------------
ALL MEN DIE, BUT FEW MEN TRULY LIVE..

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

my glock 19 is virtually infallible . but my 1911 still functions smoother. yes it can jam and is heavy, still i have complete confidence in both guns . since the fbi keeps data on about everything i wonder which round has the most kills overall on the street. by thugs, cops and civilians. watchin first 48 the other night and thug 1 was killed by thug 2 with about 8 rounds of 22 automatic.these people kill each other straight away without any training or practice. some my not even know if the gun will shoot. [they love the high point]there must be some mindset to killing in anger that trumps all the training and practice. i believe that maybe a big player in why cops miss and thugs hit. also special forces are trained to kill without thinking or remorse.

---

Most people can not voluntarily kill another in cold blood. It was found way back that infantry soldiers would deliberately fire to miss, about 4% had a psychopathic streak that allowed them to. Hence the use of human like figures as targets, human shape sacks of straw for bayonet practice, and the propaganda that dehumanized the enemy. The bad guys tend to have a higher rate of psychopathic streaks and find it easy to shoot a person + they tend to shoot effectively at closer ranges and not at longer unless a natural or trained.

---

I have read the same info you state above..

Feeling bad however, the one time I become a member of a small group of people, the term "psychopathic" is attached to it...

Ripp

---

Hot blood vs cold blood makes a big difference.

Eg an intruder in your house threatening you

vs

an intruder who has given up and is cowering on the fllor under your muzzle.

Eg 2 - a person armed and intent on killing you

vs

a person who is walking along a path in the forest, unarmed and you want to shoot and kill them for some reason.

Yes the first two examples are probably very much easier to act on than the second two examples. The first ones might be considered self defence. The second two examples would be considered murder.

Repetition and training makes a big difference. Raise and shoot your target as soon as you obtain the target. If in a threatened situation, do you raise your gun and think of the consequences of firing. I think good self defence training would be, IF you are already being threatened, raise and fire your gun instantly. BUT a person may well have a couple of years and hundred thousand dollars or more of legal court appearances and fees at the best. If the authorities decide to charge and pursue you legally. As they do in many cases.

"I was personally feeling threatened with my life in danger. And/or my family. IU acted unconsciously in fear of my life. The man had broked into my house and was threatening me. I was afraid for my life."

Forget any "castle doctrine" BS. That would get you into a court fast.

---

Repetition and the correct training helps. In the 90's some US police forces and security company found some of their officers who had the drop on the crim could not shoot, even when the crim raised a gun and shot. They found there were 2 reasons. 1, The officer was more scared of the official aftermath they would face then dying. 2, They just could not pull the trigger on another human even though they believed they were going to die.

In Aust. if you believe you or another is about to die or suffer serious injury (Use to be called Grievous Bodily Harm) you can take the offenders life. Yes, in most cases you will be charged and face trial unless your legal people can show you were in the right. Most that are charged say the wrong thing to start with and over zealous police do not help.

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

In Aust. if you believe you or another is about to die or suffer serious injury (Use to be called Grievous Bodily Harm) you can take the offenders life. Yes, in most cases you will be charged and face trial unless your legal people can show you were in the right. Most that are charged say the wrong thing to start with and over zealous police do not help.

---

Quote:

---

Most that are charged say the wrong thing to start with and over zealous police do not help.

---

Aint that the truth.

I saw one iunvestment house owner shoot his mouth off big time when a serial drug addict and house breaker broke into his renovation house and was shot and wounded by the defender.

Only wounded so a big sob story of desparation was invented, how it was the first time, etc etc etc.

The houseowner also said, on TV camera "If you break into my house, you leave in a body bag!!!"

Really really stupid.

The TV crews probably were sympathetic and riled him up to get "quality footage".

The guy ended up in court, cost him well over $100,000 in legal fees. I put a $100 to his fighting fund, which raised some $40,000 or so. Stupid comments like that can cost at best, a year or two of great inconvenience, a lot of legal bills, or bankruptcy, even if aquitted.

Far better to keep to the TRUE simple statement.

"I felt endangered for my life. I felt my family were endangered. I got a gun. The man inside my house threatened to kill me. I fired it in self defence. I rang the police. I know what legal representation. "



--------------------
John aka NitroX

...
Govt get out of our lives NOW!
"I love the smell of cordite in the morning."
"A Sharp spear needs no polish"

Edited by NitroX (22/11/17 11:36 PM)

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

To many 9's Homer.
Mine liked 11.9gr. W630 & the Speer 260gr.Jacketed HP. This made 960fps in my 5" Wilson barrel, would shoot into 2" off bags at 50 yards and worked perfectly on a 300pound black bear, shot through both shoulders, about 20 yards range.

I thought it was easy to shoot, but was doing a lot of handgun shooting back then.

Oh yeah- it also liked a 300gr. .45/90 bullet, lubed and sized down to .452", in front of 8.0gr. Blue Dot(not sure on that load - memory and all).
I think it was supposed to be close to 800fps. I didn't chronograph that one. I should have installed a heavier recoil spring for that load as it kicked a good deal more and was a bit hard on the frame, with some battering and a crack that I had to check-drill to stop. That worked and no further damage to the frame, amazingly enough.

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

In Aust. if you believe you or another is about to die or suffer serious injury (Use to be called Grievous Bodily Harm) you can take the offenders life. Yes, in most cases you will be charged and face trial unless your legal people can show you were in the right. Most that are charged say the wrong thing to start with and over zealous police do not help.

---

"In Aust" - blanket comments like that are often incorrect as this one is. Australia is made up of State and Territory jurisdictions. Each has different, common or varying laws and also case law may differ. Case law between states can be advisory but there is no mandatory precedent.

SA for example, used to , and may still do, have both legislative law and also common law, that "if an individual feels endangered, they may act to defend themselves." Case law early on after the legislative change, had three cases where a person shot and killed an offender and was acquitted in all three cases.

Not being a lawyer, not offering legal advice. Also as things change, this may have changed, but not to my knowledge.

Quote:

---

Most that are charged say the wrong thing to start with and over zealous police do not help.

---

Aint that the truth.

I saw one iunvestment house owner shoot his mouth off big time when a serial drug addict and house breaker broke into his renovation house and was shot and wounded by the defender.

Only wounded so a big sob story of desparation was invented, how it was the first time, etc etc etc.

The houseowner also said, on TV camera "If you break into my house, you leave in a body bag!!!"

Really really stupid.

The TV crews probably were sympathetic and riled him up to get "quality footage".

The guy ended up in court, cost him well over $100,000 in legal fees. I put a $100 to his fighting fund, which raised some $40,000 or so. Stupid comments like that can cost at best, a year or two of great inconvenience, a lot of legal bills, or bankruptcy, even if aquitted.

Far better to keep to the TRUE simple statement.

"I felt endangered for my life. I felt my family were endangered. I got a gun. The man inside my house threatened to kill me. I fired it in self defence. I rang the police. I know what legal representation. "

---

John that statement is not incorrect, all jurisdictions in Aust have it in one form or another. If you believe there is an imminent threat to your life or that of another or suffering serious injury then you can defend yourself or them, even to the extent of killing the offender if in your mind that is what is required to stop them and there is no other realistic option. This is the justification that police use to shoot. It is not allowable to say protect property. It might be worded differently but it comes back to that. The term imminent has a wide range of immediacy. The example you have given of SA law is basically saying the same thing.

Hence you may or may not legally have had time to get your gun to use in defence. Yes there are many "What if's" and covering even a small percentage is not possible. The one thing I would encourage all to do is read your State Law in regards to this, then speak with a competent solicitor in this area to explain and clarify things. Why I know this to be the case. Legal advice this is not as it is second hand from my source.

Re the case you mention. There was one in Vic that involved a person in the Vic SSAA organization from memory. One of the sticking points for him was his guns were under his bed and deemed to be too accessible. As in placed there for easy access in case this bloke broke in again. His claim was that he had nowhere in the house where he could store them safely so keep them where anybody after them had to come through him. Very Hazzy memory on my part. Was this the same case?

Post Extras: