Best 9mm Ammo for Self defence?
- Thread starter vancityguy
- Start date
- Location
- Somewhere on the Hudson Bay Coast
Sounds like its time to go back to basics. In self defense we do not shoot to kill, we shoot to stop a violent action from reaching its conclusion. Under such circumstances the ranges tend to be close and the action tends to be fast. To ensure that a determined attacker is stopped it is desirable that our bullet destroys as much tissue as possible. This is accomplished by maximizing the frontal area (either by caliber choice or by construction) and the velocity of the bullet. Thus, a fighting gun's load should be as effective as possible without excessive recoil that would inhibit rapid follow up shots; should the first shot miss or prove ineffectual for any other reason. A heavily loaded .475 Linebaugh would not be a good self defense choice, not because it isn't a good stopper, but because if your first shot misses it will take a considerable period of time to bring the gun down out of recoil and reacquire the target. It is also possible that you could face more than one assaillant. Neither should the muzzle blast be so loud that it is debilitating to the shooter. Small bores tend to have a sharper report than larger bores, and some .357 magnum loads are particularly bad in this respect.
Anything that can be done to make a small bore more effective can also be applied to a large bore. If the 115 gr 9mm boasts high velocity, then certainly a 185 gr .45 would match it, and be able to disrupt more tissue. Conversely the 9mm is superior to the .22 rimfire, yet the .22 has been used with some success in the self defense roll. The big draw that the 9mm enjoyed for years was the large capacity magazine. In todays world, it seems that 10 rounds is the limit, and truthfully if you can't do it with 10 then you probably can't do it with 30. We seldom need to repel mass formations of hoodlums, and if we did the pistol is clearly not the proper tool.
The Mozambique Technique is often sluffed off as "Two in the chest and one in the head!" This is incorrect. If you are charged by an armed attacker the drill is that you place two round as quickly as possible in the chest which is the largest vital target. If he is not stopped by these two shots you must do something that will go against your natural instincts, but if you are to survive it must be done with deliberate attention to detail. You must pause long enough to put the front sight on his head and fire the last shot with the attention a match shooter would have on a bullseye target, yet shoot quickly enough that he is stopped before he is able to harm you. To do this successfully you must train. Without training you will not survive. And this is the real answer to the question, we fight with our minds, and it is the mind that is our best weapon.
Anything that can be done to make a small bore more effective can also be applied to a large bore. If the 115 gr 9mm boasts high velocity, then certainly a 185 gr .45 would match it, and be able to disrupt more tissue. Conversely the 9mm is superior to the .22 rimfire, yet the .22 has been used with some success in the self defense roll. The big draw that the 9mm enjoyed for years was the large capacity magazine. In todays world, it seems that 10 rounds is the limit, and truthfully if you can't do it with 10 then you probably can't do it with 30. We seldom need to repel mass formations of hoodlums, and if we did the pistol is clearly not the proper tool.
The Mozambique Technique is often sluffed off as "Two in the chest and one in the head!" This is incorrect. If you are charged by an armed attacker the drill is that you place two round as quickly as possible in the chest which is the largest vital target. If he is not stopped by these two shots you must do something that will go against your natural instincts, but if you are to survive it must be done with deliberate attention to detail. You must pause long enough to put the front sight on his head and fire the last shot with the attention a match shooter would have on a bullseye target, yet shoot quickly enough that he is stopped before he is able to harm you. To do this successfully you must train. Without training you will not survive. And this is the real answer to the question, we fight with our minds, and it is the mind that is our best weapon.
Pietro Beretta
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- Ontario (G.T.A.)
If we don't shoot to kill in such a situation, then why are you talking about double taps to the chest and a single to the head??
If we have justification to draw a gun on a person, we have justification to shoot them dead. If you have no justification to shoot, there is no justification to draw.
In a situation where the lives of my family or myself are in enough danger for me to pull the trigger on another person, there's a good chance my mag will be almost empty by the end of the engagement. You shoot until the threat is neutralized, not until you've placed a certain number of shots on target.
"hey now... I shot him three times.... why isn't he following the rules? Why is he still stabbing me?"
DIRTYCLEAN
CGN Regular
- Location
- laval,quebec
the best one is the one in the chamber at the time of crisis.
the second best is the one under it in the mag!
the second best is the one under it in the mag!
[smirk]
[sarcasm]
What? No combinations?
Everybody who's ever shot a charging bear knows that you've got to have at least two different kinds of rounds in your magazine. Bird, buck, slug, right?
Why not apply this to burgler defense?
You know, a couple of ball rounds to slow him down, a generic hollow-point or two to piss him off some, a couple black talons and top the rest off with magically uber +P rounds to finish the job.
[/sarcasm]
[sarcasm]
What? No combinations?
Everybody who's ever shot a charging bear knows that you've got to have at least two different kinds of rounds in your magazine. Bird, buck, slug, right?
Why not apply this to burgler defense?
You know, a couple of ball rounds to slow him down, a generic hollow-point or two to piss him off some, a couple black talons and top the rest off with magically uber +P rounds to finish the job.
[/sarcasm]
- Location
- Somewhere on the Hudson Bay Coast
If your man goes down at the first shot, poses no further threat to you, and survives, that is a success. If he subsequently dies of his wounds but has managed to kill you, that is a failure. Killing him is not the point of the exercise, stopping him and surviving a violent encounter is. If he has brought violence to you, we cannot be concerned about his welfare, the point is that he must be stopped. But we are not out to kill him, we are only interrested in stopping him. If two shots in the chest don't stop him, an additional CNS shot, made at close range, will.
Last edited:
Very true. However, removing the scumbag(s) from society would be the ideal outcome for all involved...Minus the scumbag(s).
TDC
Hey thanks for comparing apples to oranges. Your example is nowhere near comparable to the situation I describe. If I wasn't home I wouldn't have any say as to who enters my home now would I? Hence the need for a secure perimeter when you're AWAY from home. If I were home and fire broke out I would be more than willing to permit access to those who could solve the problem.
TDC
- Location
- Somewhere on the Hudson Bay Coast
"If you didn't intend to kill, then why did you shoot my client's son in the head?"
"um.... because I just wanted him to stop. I didn't mean to kill him."
"What did you think would happen when you shot him in the head?"
I understand the difference between success and failure, thanks. If the guy dies and I live, (a scenario you neglected to mention) that's also a success in my books.
If he lives and poses no more threat to me, regardless if I shot him once or 10 times (hey maybe I needed to reload and hit him 11 times before he dropped his weapon or fell, it makes no difference to me) that's also a success.
I'm just pointing out the fact that if you're shooting someone in the chest or the head, your intention is to cause as much bodily harm to that person as possible. That course of action will quite likely cause the death of whomever you're shooting at. Therefore, you are shooting to KILL.
Based on my years of experience (watching TV) I would say that intent counts for a lot in the legal system. Intending to stop a threat is much different than intending to kill someone.
In the case we're discussing, intent makes no difference in the long run anyway.
If a guy comes into your house and presents a threat that is likely to cause serious bodily harm or death to you or anyone in that house, you have legal authority to use as much force as necessary to stop the threat, up to and including lethal force.
Whether I intended to kill the guy or not, I'm covered by the Criminal Code.
CC Sec 34 (2)(a)
Defence of Person
Every one who is unlawfully assaulted and who causes death or grevious bodily harm in repelling the assault is justified if
(a) he causes it under reasonable apprehension of death or grevious bodily harm from the violence in which the assault was originally made or with which the assailant pursues his purposes.
Just for info, I have a bit of practical experience beyond "Law and Order."
If a guy comes into your house and presents a threat that is likely to cause serious bodily harm or death to you or anyone in that house, you have legal authority to use as much force as necessary to stop the threat, up to and including lethal force.
Whether I intended to kill the guy or not, I'm covered by the Criminal Code.
CC Sec 34 (2)(a)
Defence of Person
Every one who is unlawfully assaulted and who causes death or grevious bodily harm in repelling the assault is justified if
(a) he causes it under reasonable apprehension of death or grevious bodily harm from the violence in which the assault was originally made or with which the assailant pursues his purposes.
Just for info, I have a bit of practical experience beyond "Law and Order."
That's cool. I mentioned the TV thing because I didn't want anyone to get the wrong impression about my sources of info.
I agree.
My argument is that you cannot say you did NOT intend to kill someone after you made two rapid shots to their chest and then made a deliberate and precise shot to their head while under the most stress of your life.
"Two to the chest and one to the head always ensures the target is dead."
Nope, didn't mean to kill him...
I know... I was being sarcastic. It was a bit harsh. My bad.
No prob.
Here is a true story about the time I pulled gun on an intruder.
My wife got home from work around midnight. A party was going full blast next door, so she went in to join the festivities. One of the guys at the party was into the sauce pretty good and decided that my wife’s dancing with him was some kind of invitation for more intimate activity.
My wife came home around 1:00 and crawled into bed. Our bedroom is on the second floor. On the third floor are the bedrooms of our boys and the nanny. Around 2:00 am my wife woke me up and said “There is something going on upstairs!” I could hear the excited voice of our nanny telling someone to get out.
I grabbed a gun and went to the hallway in time to see a stranger coming down the stairs, hopping on one foot, trying to put on his pants. When he saw me and the gun he started to hop the stairs two and three at a time. I had no idea who he was or what was going on, but was satisfied that he was leaving as fast as he could jump.
Later we figured out what happened. Romeo left the party and came to our house, looking for my wife. He went upstairs and crawled into bed with the nanny, thinking it was the woman he had been dancing with. I assume he sobered up quickly when he discovered the woman was a stranger and some guy had a gun.
We can laugh now, but it could have turned out very differently.
My wife got home from work around midnight. A party was going full blast next door, so she went in to join the festivities. One of the guys at the party was into the sauce pretty good and decided that my wife’s dancing with him was some kind of invitation for more intimate activity.
My wife came home around 1:00 and crawled into bed. Our bedroom is on the second floor. On the third floor are the bedrooms of our boys and the nanny. Around 2:00 am my wife woke me up and said “There is something going on upstairs!” I could hear the excited voice of our nanny telling someone to get out.
I grabbed a gun and went to the hallway in time to see a stranger coming down the stairs, hopping on one foot, trying to put on his pants. When he saw me and the gun he started to hop the stairs two and three at a time. I had no idea who he was or what was going on, but was satisfied that he was leaving as fast as he could jump.
Later we figured out what happened. Romeo left the party and came to our house, looking for my wife. He went upstairs and crawled into bed with the nanny, thinking it was the woman he had been dancing with. I assume he sobered up quickly when he discovered the woman was a stranger and some guy had a gun.
We can laugh now, but it could have turned out very differently.
