Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Handguns One shot stops.....

if a 500BPE launching 570 grain bullets doesnt cause major hydrostatic shock at 2000fps a 40 grain 223 bullet at the same speed aint going to.........

Mark is never, ever, ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever gonna listen to anything that contradicts what he's already thinking.

That is for sure and certain.

Now, on a related note:

safariman, you recently posed a question about "insurance" to protect you from litigation should you ever be involved in a shoot. Here's what you should know:

Everything in your history and everything you have ever posted here or anywhere else will be subject to discovery and WILL be used to paint a picture of you should you ever be involved in a shoot. Think about that.

If you've ever had any financial difficulties, that will come out and it will be used to question your responsibility. If you've ever had troubles with your licenses and business practices, it will be used to question your veracity and your ethics. If you've ever been on any medications or narcotics, it will come out and be used to question your state of mind. From those alone, I think you should seriously consider whether even contemplating a "shoot" is something you should do. Much less post about it (repeatedly).

Every one of your posts on this forum and elsewhere will be used to "get inside your mind". You used to post about hunting, a lot. Now, all you post about are carry weapons, defensive shoot possibilities, "one shot stop", penetrating and defeating body armor, and SHTF scenarios. The significant shift in your post history will be used to question whether you have mental fixation issues on this stuff and whether, perhaps, you put yourself in a situation you shouldn't have been in in the first place because you WANTED the shoot to happen.

You really ought not be as concerned about whether the new TCM round can cause the type of damage on human as you're used to seeing in game animals stuck with real high velocity rounds, at least not publicly. That kind of fascination and fixation will be used to paint a picture of you that you're not going to like. Add to that all the comments you've made about shooting dogs, or nearly "having to shoot" dogs, and you're going to come across as a "quick draw"; someone itching for a "fight" or a "shoot". Put in your most recent concept of loading one "penetrator" round and one expanding, alternating, as you describe will be something that comes up and it's not going to look good. Everything you've posted here and elsewhere will come up.

If you want to do yourself a huge favor: shut up. If you're ever in the situations you seem fixated on in recent times, everything you have said and are saying will come down on you like a ton of bricks.

You're fixated on "new, shiny, FAST (well, not really fast)" and fantasizing about whether it'd do the damage you think is necessary against a human if you had to use it. You're willing to risk your life and safety, and that of people around you, on an unproven round (with the TCM), or hot-rodding handloads that are likely overpressure and certainly more than what's generally available over the counter. All of this, and you're openly discussing whether "it's enough", in combination with the rest of your history, in contemplation of a "shoot".

If you doubt me, ask anyone you know that has ever been involved in a shoot and see whether or not that kind of information came up at all. Talk to the cops here; they'll tell you. All you're doing right now is digging yourself a hole that, should you ever find yourself in it, you will have one helluva time getting back out of.

My advice? Shut up. If you're going to carry, carry something very plain jane and that does NOT scream "tactical" or "uber" or anything else. A J-frame or K-frame revolver in .357 with FACTORY loads; a vanilla as possible, and pray you're never in a situation to use it. No, it's not "uber", and it's not "new", and it's not "shiny", and it's not anything special at all. That is entirely the point and something you, given all the rest of the above and your history, might really want to consider.

Then again, I don't expect you to listen to any advice except that which supports a position you've already decided to take.

The use of shotguns and rifles in even police shootings is rare ad generally occurs only on calls where we deploy by policy with the long gun. Bank alarms, robberies in progress and active shooter incidents.

Among the general public, defensive long gun deployments are even rarer. They almost universally occur during residence burglaries where the resident is home and has some advance warning that they have been invaded. I've seen a couple where nothing more tactical than a bird gun with field loads was used, quite handily, to flip off the 'threat' switch.

Clint is a good guy who brings a lot of knowledge and experience to his classes. He also makes his living keeping paying customers entertained, so he spouts off stuff occasionally that make no sense to me and apparently, a few others. That "fight your way to a rifle" thing is irrelevant to the guy walking across the theatre parking lot who is confronted by an armed robber. You better seize the first opportunity & use what you got to drive that OODA loop like a dragster.

Another is "Two is One, One is none." One is what the Average Joe is likely to have on him. What you don't have on you doesn't exist. So choose one good serious sidearm and become proficient with that.

also do know ive shot enough sub 60 pound critters with mild 22 caliber rounds to KNOW it aint gonna be a reliable one shot fight stopper on man size critters.....anyone thats shot alot of yotes should know that lil fact.....hell ive been surprised how much a big jackrabbit can suck up when its adrenalin is up....

just cause its fired out of a handgun dont make it magic......

While I would much rather end a problem with the first shot, if that wasn't happening for any reason and a rifle was an option, I'd generally opt for the rifle. Very short ranges being possible exceptions, longer ranges favoring the rifle choice.

Good grief people....Of course a rifle is a better choice. A small nuke would be a better one. But that doesn't mean that "fighting to a rifle" isn't a nonsensical catch phrase.

Preferring a rifle, choosing a rifle, knowing that a rifle is better DOES NOT EQUAL fighting to a rifle with the pistol in your hand.

But nobody can understand that, so the catch phrase lives on.



"Using a pistol to fight your way to a rifle" is engaging in a gunfight, then continuously gunfighting your way to a different location (however near or far), then holstering your pistol-retrieving a rifle-charging a rifle (the whole time still being engaged in a gunfight) and then re-engaging in the ongoing gunfight. The catch phrase has nothing at all to do with simply preferring or wishing you had a rifle.

I responded to somebody, guess it got deleted.

Blue is spot on.

As near as I can deduce the phrase was used decades ago.
This is what Clint said;

"The handgun would not be my choice of weapon if I knew I was going to a fight. I’d choose a rifle, a shotgun, an RPG or an atomic bomb instead."

Spot on!

Only if I could set off the nuke 1,000 times without cleaning it to make sure it would go bang every time.

I cannot fathom the insanity, unless a pistol hits a major blood vessel or vital organ its not that effective. IIRC 80% of those shot once with a pistol live to tell about it. I cannot find the surgeon seminar right now.

Let me throw something else in here. I've seen a number of justified defense shootings over the years. From a LE and prosecutorial perspective, nobody gave a flip about what gun or ammo was used. It was a justifiable self defense shooting or it wasn't. End of story.

And no prosecutor is going to have any influence on you, much less 'crucify' you, unless you get charged with a crime. If that happens you've got a lot bigger problems than what gun or ammo you used.

Now if you get sued, any number of factors may or may not get introduced. But many states now have provisions in the Defense laws that prohibit any kind of civil suit when a person acts within the parameters of that law. Sort of renders a whole lot of book salesman scare tactics obsolete now, don't it?

Sarge,

Look at the OP's history; here and in real life. One charge, and a prosecutor will have a field day with him. One opening and a civil attorney will make that field day look like a walk in the park.

Hell, let him cap "an unarmed black teenager" and he's a damn fed poster child against concealed carry.

He uses no logic or rationale, listens to no advice, and fantasizes about the most ridiculous schit. That's just the tip of the iceberg.

True, the odds of him ever being in a situation to actually HAVE to use deadly force are remote. Yet, he's quick drawing on dogs on a regular basis, and eventually he's going to do something stupid. If you think the ass-shot bear incident was a complete clusterphuck, just imagine how FUBAR any "shoot" involving him would be.

I posted what I did, both times, in hopes that he has any smarts at all.

Wouldn't know. Never been scared by a book salesman...

I know nothing of the OP and the above was not directed at you or anyone in particular, 4rager. Just thought it might be germane to the discussion.

Understood completely, Sarge. No slight intended. But, as I am sure you know, context is everything. You weren't "wrong" in any way, and your post was and is completely pertinent.

Claiborne has posted pix of the piles of pill bottles he eats out of, admitted he's either in a ALOC or a world of hurt most of the time, and has been found by a state reg board to be a conning, lying, self serving POS.

And now he has some fantasy about being a world saving night fighter..

I used to think Ringman was going to be the first from here to be on the national news, but now I don't know..