Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Handguns Bob Stash vs Tim Gramins Philosphy

I believe I was reading post here in the Handgun forum about Bob Stash from Chicago PD and Tim Gramins police office involved in shoots seem to have come to different philosophy's after their shoot out.

Bob Stash has philosophy of using the biggest bullet you can shoot accurate with him being fan of 45acp. and likes the single stack Sig P220

Whereas Tim Gramins started off with Glock 21 in 45acp but after his shoot out and almost run out of bullets, he switch to 9mm due to capacity with extra magazines.


Interesting in regards to their different philosophies drawn from their experience.


Was curious where members here stand in their opinion? Carry the biggest round (45acp) you can shoot accurately with some reduction in capacity or are you in the 9mm high capacity camp?


This is probably a load and controversial topic but hoping to keep it somewhat civil and give your opinion as why you choose what you did. Thanks for humoring this question!

I read where nationally LEO connect with the intended target with 20 to 30 percent of the rounds they fire after laying down a line of fire.
The higher round count of a 9MM makes sense then. Now whether that helps the publics safety is another question.
Sometime back didnt some San Francisco LEO's fire 66 rounds at a perp and he turned himself in the next day wirhout any wounds?
Maybe some of those 30 round magazines need to be carried.
I think I saw Michelek have some 27 or 30 rounders for his M&P CORE 9MM on YouTube.

Perhaps some background information will help this discussion.

youtube video regarding Bob Stash.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yd3v_fssabI&t=2266s



And Tim Gramin

http://www.policeone.com/police-her...p-carries-145-rounds-of-ammo-on-the-job/

I'm a lower recoil/higher capacity fan. I'm still wondering why the 5.7 isn't taking over the LE community.

Great subject. I am surprised more haven't chimed in.

I’d love one for a walking woodchuck pistol.

Hassan killed 13 and wounded 32 people with the 5.7 all that were shot Center of Mass died.

I don’t believe that, within reason, it matters what you use as long as you can shoot it fast and accurately and you have some knowledge of how to hurt a person...and you have the resolve to do so. Caliber is probably the least important factor in the equation.

? Hassan?

Ft. Hood work place violence

I split the difference and carry a Para-Ordinance P45-14. Or, a S&W M&P in 40S&W.

Actually, I basically agree with the previous poster who put accurate and determined at the head of the list. I've talked to a few who have been in gunfights and that seemed to be the determining factors. A larger bullet and more of them may be helpful but they are superfluous if one does not hit the target.

I carry a single stack 45ACP. The only time I toss a 2nd mag in my pocket is if I’m headed to a shopping mall. The only time I go to a shopping mall is to return clothes my wife bought online from Nordstrom.

I’m subscribe to bigger is better and accuracy matters in a gunfight; not just making bang-bang noise...😎

further reading regards Hassan and the 5.7, all that were not hit center mass were too incapacitated to mount any type of resistance towards him. 3 Soldiers tried to attack him, two were killed COM, one was incapacitated unable to complete the attack. Female cop had her wrist shattered and femur shattered. The price is ridiculous at $1300 for a plastic pistol.

Please show me the hole to piss in obama's mouth for that statement.

It's essentially the old 9mm vs. .45 discussion that takes place monthly.

I don't consider myself to be that old, but there was once a country called Rhodesia that had a problem with blacks wanting the whites to move out. It involved a lot of insurgency agains the white government. An incident occurred which I believe the late Dave Arnold wrote about, involving a Rhodesian officer who was wounded in an armored personnel carrier and forced to defend himself with a Browning Hi-Power. In the end he survived. His kill count was 13, all head shots. In the interest of accurate reporting, the shots involved black "terrorist insurgents" sticking their heads around the opening of the carrier to try and shoot the officer, so the distances weren't that great.

Still, an impressive number. One hopes the officer didn't expend his whole ammunition supply in the adventure...

I like my .45acp. But those times when I'm carrying my 9mm, I kinda like that too.

I currently carry a .45 along with the rest of my coworkers, but am open to change. I’d like higher capacity, but if I can’t hit with the first 11 rounds, will having 5-9 more matter? Three of the more interesting shoots that I have some personal knowledge of leaves me uncertain if caliber would have mattered. One partner shot a charging moose three times while it went over the top of him, two in the sinuses one in the chest. He swears by the 45.

Another buddy won the medal of valor for an off duty fight he got into with his 9mm. I think he shot the whole mag at the bad guy but only managed to disable the dudes gun while shooting through the windshield. He still carries 9mm

A coworker killed a guy who ambushed him and a deputy by shooting bad guy in the head at point blank range with his 45. i don’t think caliber mattered there and he still shoots a 45.

I love gun and ballistics talk but the data has so many variables it’s hard to draw a conclusion that caliber matters, in which case I’d like to have capacity. However, I sure like the idea of using larger rounds, but I can’t point to a study that says it matters.

I’ve read the Marshall and Sanow stuff and this other fun study:

https://www.buckeyefirearms.org/alternate-look-handgun-stopping-power

So I dunno, maybe I’ll go with a 40 eventually

Ammo in 9mm is the best we’ve ever experienced. The best 45 +P loads are slightly more effective than the best 9mm loads in my experience. The wound channel being larger with the 45 and penetration being a wash. The best 9mm loads today are better than the worst 45 loads.

In today’s world I’m starting to believe the higher magazine capacity of the 9mm with the best loads is an advantage that is important in ones consideration of which to carry. There is never a down side to more ammo.

You could split the difference with the .40 S&W, and carry a Model 22, which carries 16 rounds of a load that's at least as effective as .45 ACP, and (in terms of capacity) comes short of it's 9mm equivalent (the Model 17) by only two rounds.

Personally, I carry the Model 17, even though I have a Model 21 and a Model 22. My reasons are 1) that extra two or three rounds in a chambering that's highly effective, but mostly because 2) the recoil is quite easy to manage, shot to shot, without the need to put thousands of rounds down range in weekly live fire practice.

Compelling story. Thanks.

Some recent studies have found that when multiple rounds land solidly on the torso and/or head, the stopping power difference between .380 ACP through all service rounds up through 45 ACP is statistically insignificant. Food for thought. In which case, if true, assuming you expect to land more than one shot to the torso and/or head, it might make the best sense to carry a full sized, double stack, 9mm with some extended length backup mags vs any handgun chambered in a round that doesn't permit as high an onboard capacity.