What can a .380 do?

Originally posted by JR MacBeth
reply to post by BigDave-AR

 

Agreed, good old revolvers don't get the respect they deserve. .38 Special is a great back-up, even though my primary is almost malf-proof (.45 Glock). Fact is, ANY pistol can malfunction, but especially automatics, which are more sensitive. The revolver can generally be made to work, almost no matter what. If your life was on the line, the last thing you would want to do is fool with a pistol that malfed. Instead, pull out your back-up (revolver), and carry on. Fix your malf later, when the fire-fight is over.

JR

I agree even though my main carry gun (Springfield XD Sub Compact 3" .40 S&W) is an excellent reliable weapon that I have put MANY rounds through with extremely few FTE's or FTF's I feel much safer having my Rossi .38+ P 5 shot wheel gun as a backup. It only takes one time for an automatic to malfunction in a self defense situation to put your life in serious jeopardy and I'm all for redundancy.

the380 and the 38 are quite different .comparing these to i prefer the former because it is excellent in power

I was not trying to say that the .380 and .38 Special were the same I was just stating that many people overlook the advantages of the .38 these days. As far as comparing them I think the .38 comes out on top in almost any situation, if you compare ballistics from comparable barrel lengths (this is were most people go wrong when comparing the rounds most .380 ballistics data is based of European style .380s such as the Walther's and Bersa's which usually have a 3.5" barrel and will try to compare to ballistics data for .38s based mainly off of 2" snub nose barrels which makes a huge difference) the .38 especially with new +P rounds specifically designed to get the maximum velocity and energy out of a snub-nose will perform far better than the new micro .380s like the Ruger LCP and Keltecs, and will be greatly less prone to failures and will not care what ammo you feed it and can handle much more neglect.

Originally posted by FarArcher
reply to post by getreadyalready

 

(1) All my conceal carry handguns have laser sights and where that dot lights up, that's where the round is going...

(2) One may note that ballistic vests rarely cover the "doo-dads" area.

(3) Center mass is good if someone can't shoot for ****, and you're hoping that if you get a round off in that general area, even if you're 'off' you will still hopefully hit something.

(4)...with the laser one never has to worry about "aiming" or trying to get a good sight picture lined up. Which can expose your head and significantly slow down your reaction time...

#1 & #4 As I stated earlier, I'm not crazy about lazer sights. My wife loves them, but she can also shoot well without them. If you use them, and like them, all well and good, BUT don't depend overly much on them To let your skills at proper aiming using proper technique, and getting that good sight picture perish would be a mistake. What if your batteries went dead? What if in the heat of the moment you damaged the sight? What if your finger slipped off the activator button? What if...? Ad Infintum. If you can aim with iron sights it doesn't take much adaptation to just sight down the barrel if you had to. Dependance on a fancy sight is asking for trouble in my opinion. How are you going to see where your lazer dot is without exposing your head too? The world's fastest shooters use iron sights so I don't buy the reaction time angle. You still have to find the dot in your sight picture. Also, where the dot is, is not always where the round is going to hit. It is usually a close approximation as to where the round is going. The lazer's coherent light travels in an exact straight line. Your bullet will not. Range, atmospheric interference, shooting technique, and spin drift will all affect the actual point of impact. Neither a lazer nor any other sight can't accomodate for such things, only an experienced shooter who knows his weapon can. So even with a lazer you had still better worry about aiming if you want to hit your mark. I've seen people miss atrociously whilst showing off a lazer sight.

#2 True. Body armor rarely covers the thighs, and never the groin because of body mechanics. However when was the last time a 7-11 was knocked off by thugs in body armor?

#3 Last time I checked my hips were actually a little narrower than my chest as I am a male. Females may have this ratio reversed, but the difference isn't that much. The lower abdomen, and pelvic floor may contain some rather large vessels, but they also contain a lot of squishy junk that can slow a bullet down, and even though tearing this stuff up will eventually cause death, it will not be immediate. The femoral arteries that derive from the aorta are about 3/8" at this point, and exsanguination would take about 3 minutes. Plenty of time to fire back, and take you with me. The aorta at the arch, and descending thoracic region(in the chest) is 3/4" - 1" in diameter, and if severed the drop in cerebral perfusion would be almost immediate because the cranial arteries derive from the aortic arch. No time to fire back. Death would occur within seconds. Even if the cardiac structures were missed a punctured lung would incapacitate in about 5-20 seconds. Owing to oxygen demand at the time of the insult. Enough time to fire back, maybe, but at reduced efficiency, and only once or twice. Not taking psychological impact into account. The thorax is pretty much totally filled with vital structures. Even a glance to the extreme lateral aspect will probably cause a sucking chest wound, and collapse a lung, and gain you more than enough time to get the next round centered.

In conclusion. I'll stick with tritium tipped iron sights, and shoot for center body mass. 2 to the chest 1 to the head, repeat....

reply to post by Binder

You have no idea of what I'm talking about. First of all, your finger can't "slip" off an imagined switch. Catch up on technology and have a look at what we're talking about here.

I've been in shootouts in the dark, and I can tell you that you won't be getting a sight picture in the dark. So what will YOU do now? Screw the batteries. At some time a person has to pull his head out of his fourth point of contact and THINK. Is the laser getting weak? Do I need to be thinking about changing the batteries?

You DO know that the laser is only on when you squeeze the grip tightly as in "about to shoot?"

One other thing, and maybe I didn't fully clarify that.

I was speaking of BONE MASS.

BONE MASS.

I've been hit with a through and through and didn't even know it until an hour or two later, but I guarantee you, not ONE single person hit in a bone continues unaware.

All those little foot-pounds of energy? That's right! Most is absorbed by the BONE, so an anatomical modeling procedure isn't really necessary.

I just mentioned that there is some critical plumbing in the pelvic region - right alongside the most concentrated, largest bone mass in a body.

I don't care if a person has a narrow butt - you hit pretty much dead center in the pelvic area, and you're going to hit a bone.

You shoot someone in the chest, and it's lie a 50/50 going in, and 50/50 going out. Shoot a bit low, and you can get a through and through.

Everyone, and I mean everyone shot in the pelvis - immediately went down and down hard in lots of pain. Lots and lots of incapacitating pain.

But hey. Your meat - shoot them where you want to.

My normal carry, a Kimber Ultra CDP II has CT laser sights, and tritium sights as well, so don't feel like your tritium sights are something unique.

I'll take mine and you take yours, in the dark, and I'll take you. I won't have to expose diddly squat, while you're going to either be shooting off-hand with no sight picture, or your head will be exposed in order to get your eye lined up with the sights.

In the meantime, I'll put one right through that eye.

That fast.

Never really been in a shootout in the pitch dark, have you?

reply to post by FarArcher


Kinda doubting the veracity of your claim that you've been in many firefights in the dark. For one I wouldn't be using a pistol. In a serious tactical situation a pistol is for making sure the enemy doesn't get you if your primary weapon no longer functions, and escape is impossible. Also I wouldn't be relying on strictly iron sights, tritium or no. Even if you waited until ready to fire to illuminate your laser sight it would be a dead give away of your position, and I'd have a perfect target. You'd only get 1 shot if, big if, you could train your dot in the dark before I could fire. I'd only need 1 shot, and it wouldn't miss. Paper covers rock, rock smashes scissors, scissors cut paper, thermo beats a laser sight. Training trumps them all.

The smell of BS is heavy in the air...... Anyway,both guys make some good points which should be considered. Having more than one sighting option is usually a plus,so there is nothing wrong with having a laser sight. As stated though,a laser sight can fail or malfunction and your back to iron sights. Good tritium sights will allow you to form a good sight picture in low light conditions, not sure how that can be disputed. As for the laser allowing you to stay concealed and make accurate shots, how do you plan to do this? Do you have a little periscope mounted to your forehead to allow you to see over obstacles? You still have to see the dot to know where your shooting. I think a good flashlight might be as useful,if not more so,than a laser sight.
As far as where to shoot, both will work. The pelvic shot definitley has been shown to be very effective, but then so has the centre mass shot. Bullets through hearts,lungs,major arteries and organs usually kill in short order,especially if proper bullets/calibers are used. Through and through is fine,although maybe not ideal in a populated setting. If collateral damage is not a concern, I think total penetration is better. It's also the largest target and provides the best chance of getting a hit, which is why I believe it should be the first choice. Fact is, most people don't shoot terribly accurately in a gunfight,even if those people are top shooters on the range.

Ill stick with my .44 special. it's compact and I KNOW it will do the job.

reply to post by Binder

Binder, you still don't get it. You've never used a laser and quite simply, don't know what you're talking about.

Never, not once, in the dark will you get a shot off at me, and I don't give a damn if you fire at the laser or not.

You and so many other pseudo-experts have never figured out one of the more critical elements of combat - the angles.

As far as whether I've been in lots of firefights at night? You better believe it, as that's what we did. I much prefer a shotgun, but one can't always have a frigging shotgun, can one?

Is a pistol ideal? What kind of idiot would ask such a question or make such a suggestion.

The best weapon is the one you have.

reply to post by Binder

Thermo beats lasers?

Seriously?

Do you mean "thermal?"

One minute you're talking about your tritium sights, and now it's somehow flipped to thermO. How does that thermal sight work out on your pistol, genius?

Please post a photo. I'm sure we'd all like to see that.

The most disturbing and most important thing I find that is rarely if ever discussed in a thread on most any forum in which weapon and target placement is discussed no matter the caliber or type of weapon is this:
Shoot-NoShoot Target identification; it would be a terrible tragedy that you had practiced for a stressful firefight while maintaining target acquisition, yet failed to identify the target that would actually be hit.

Say you step into the hallway to confront an invader, you identify the intruder, raise your weapon to fire, at just that moment your little one runs out into the hallway to see what the ruckus is all about: Did you train for that instance? Will you be able to control that trigger pull and release it prior to actual fire, or will you fire and hit your little one instead of your intended target due to uncontrollable circumstances?

I really recommend using some of the techniques described for high stress situations, I also recommend "A-ZOOM snap cap ammo" for trigger control for a Shoot-NoShoot Target identification situation, these come in many calibers including shotgun. Remember when the situation has caused you to make that decision to pull that trigger, you are ultimately responsible for where that round may end up; Lets be sure that it ends up in the intended target.

Practice, Practice, Practice, target acquisition, target placement and trigger control, it may not just be your life on the line.

On Topic; the .380 does make an excellent close range defense weapon anything less than the range of the .380 is pretty much in the knife and hand range anyway.

reply to post by Pappa_Bear

Good points, PappaBear, but most times the intruder/aggressor is in plain sight and coming on. I would imagine the target identification considerations you mention to be most useful to law enforcement.

I'm not law enforcement, and I'll not likely find myself in the bulk of the situations law enforcement finds themselves in. They have a pretty high standard of responsibility in some really bad situations.

Me? My past experience was mostly in meeting engagements or in performing ambushes, mostly at night.

My future engagements, God forbid, will likely be straightforward without any children or innocents in the vicinity.

Well yes the .380 is nice but, can anyone name ANY type of firearm that is not lethal at close range in the right hands??? In the survival game the best gun in the world is the one you have ammo for.

A Smith & Wesson .380 with attached laser sight...Great weapon great price tag, ammo is a little expensive but with a laser you get great shot accuracy...

Also, if you ever curious what caliber bullet and the damage it does....check out this site. It shows basically every caliber and shot damage into ballistic gel.

brassfetcher.com...

reply to post by butcherguy


.22 LR is awesome. The first deer i ever killed was with a .22 LR. Carotid artery about 2 inches down from the mandible. she dropped immediately and did not kick once.