Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Handguns FBI 9MM:FOR THE WIMMINS....

While that may be true, there is a difference in the public perception between a suspect being shot 8 times vs. 2 times. The general non shooting public doesn't understand the dynamic and complex situation shooting an armed violent homicidal bad guy presents to the good guys. Movies and media have made the ignorant general public think good guys should shoot the gun out of their hands or wing them in the shoulder. But not shoot them eight times, that's just not right! Blah, blah... I have personal experience in such a situation and it's a tough sell to make that granny on the jury understand the realities of gunfights. Hell, you can read the same deal right here on the Fire from the cop haters.

I don't think every officer should be packing full house 10mms because of that. In fact, that is the argument for the 9mm. Accuracy counts! Only accurate hits contribute to the good. If it's easier to get the troops to manage the 9mm then that extra millimeter of the .40 doesn't matter one percentage point of stopping power.

If you want to see if you can shoot a 9mm faster than a 40, get a timer. Shoot under time constraints. 95 percent will see a difference. If you don't see a difference, pat yourself on the back. A good shooter will shoot well with whatever you hand him.

His point was in his opinion, it was not worth it to change the entire department's inventory on what was ostensibly picking flyshit out of pepper.

Personally it’s a non issue.

Recoil and "wimmins" shooters are a small part of why many departments are switching to 9mm.

I don’t buy into the increased stress / short service life thing . Never seen a credible , valid study to back it. This is only my opinion . Besides statistically the number of us that will shoot one into the ground is very low . Still a metric ton of guys using 40 in competition (read: massive round counts ) to make major .

That is his point. So why go through the expense?

That is his point. So why go through the expense?

Increased stress and shorter service life is a real thing. If you've never seen it that's only because you don't have enough experience with what you're talking about.

Yes, some people are still using .40 in competition. No, it's not a metric ton of them. And not that many at all compared to competition in general. They're the minority. And of those who use them in competition, very, very few will ever fire "massive round counts" and of those, they're not using plastic frame pistols to do it, and of those they're not using factory .40 either.

In short, you're wrong about a lot.

Hand me pa pa government model 1911 in a 45 auto, covid 19 face mask, and keep a 6 foot buffer.

I shot a bone stock g22 in tournaments this winter . Had no issue stacking double taps on top of each other while running , and saw no growth in times

That might mean you're not shooting very fast.

.40 just doesn’t factor in for me. 9mm is good enough. .45 is best.

That is his point. So why go through the expense?

Most larger departments transition duty weapons on a regular or semi-regular basis anyway.

If they were using the .40 before they're going to move to the 9mm in the future.

The damage a .40 can inflict to polymer frames is very real. Anybody that says otherwise doesn't know what they're talking about. It is very hard on guns.