Soundline

The only pistols I’ve used this type of port/compensation on that made a noticeable difference where I’d strongly encourage them have been full-auto pistols.  
 

I have a magna port job on the .300 Weatherby I have.  I don’t especially think it changes much.  It does make the rifle noticeably louder.

As for suppressors/silencers, I think they have their place.  Especially in close quarters combat situations.

On 5/2/2024 at 2:24 PM, frankendat said:

I have never fired a compensated pistol in one of the inferior calibers, is it different? A compensated .45 ACP with (from the factory sub sonic) military hardball, is cumbersome and nose heavy but shoots the same. (A compensated .45 ACP carbine is neither heavy nor cumbersome)

This is the type of compensation I’m referring to.  It definitely makes a difference in follow up shots allowing you to put rounds on target with more accuracy and speed.  They’re an acquired taste though because of the flash that’s visible to the user.  Some people have difficulty reacquiring the sight picture and alignment because of the flash.  It’s only been in my way during transitioning light.  They’re fun to shoot though so I’d recommend trying one.

The school of hard knocks taught me to be reasonable.  Inflexible things break, and there’s nothing worse than having a broken cop or military.  I really think most of our laws need to be like: “You will not kill other humans, except in defense of life, limb, liberty, or property.  Violators will receive a minimum 10 years confinement in prison and a maximum of being hanged.”
 

I know how open that leaves it for attack, so I’d suggest someone else write them, but I think they should be short and concise.  If a law statute cannot be posted to Twitter it’s too long. 
 

What kinda show and tell are you looking for?  I’ll add this, if you’ve never fired a compensated pistol, I’d suggest trying it.  
 

Here’s a pair of Department issued Sigs.  They’re both DAK (double action only) and had malfunctions.  It was under $400 for the pair shipped to me.  Honestly I never found out what the P229’s issue was.  I dislike the .40 S&W DAK P229.  So, I took all that shit off and converted it to a DA/SA.  It’s definitely an exorcise in patients getting all the springs to align, but nothing anyone who drives a Datsun can’t do.

The P226 just needed an ejector spring, so a quick swap and it was back to tossing .40 SW down range like it had before.

17 hours ago, frankendat said:

As an example of your point on maintaining proficiency, I haven’t actively read the laws for over a decade and was surprised, by recent cases regarding police protection. Although, nuisance is everything when it relates to high court juris prudence, the core of police protection appears unchanged. Police DO have a duty to the community, as a whole, they DO NOT have a duty to the individual citizen or group. If someone calls police needing help because thugs are breaking into their home, shouting that they are going to eat all residents inside and dispatch sends all on duty police to another life threatening call, which delays response to the thug break in, and the caller and their family are consumed by cannibal thugs.  The heirs, of the someone who called police and was consumed, have no recourse against the police or the State. It is a fine, but important point of law, which was the law, and I do not see evidence that it has changed. If there is legislation or case law that shows I am in error, then I would be happy to have it.

Nope, you’re correct as far as I can tell.  I disagree with the 11th Circuit in their Hernandez v. Peterson (2019) case involving the Parkland School Shooting in Florida.  This case has been upheld by the Supreme Court.  Summary is that Broward Co Sheriff Deputies waited outside, preventing medics from going in.  I believe officers SHOULD have a duty to act.  Legally, they are not required to do anything in those situations.  The deputies training was terrible, the School Resource Officer was ineffective and should not, in my opinion, have been assigned that beat.  

https://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/files/201914414.pdf

I disagree with specifically the way that Warren v. Dist of Columbia (1981) was handled by the responding officers.  For non-legal nerds the summary is young women living together called the police and said someone had broken into the home and were attacking residents.  Police responded and drove by, one knocked on the door, but no one answered so they left.  The girls called back and no officers were dispatched.  They were then raped and tortured for 14 hours.  I believe the officers should have taken more action, such as checking the windows and doors.  The girls calling the police were hiding on the roof and could have been seen.  The Supreme Court ruled the officer’s had “D.C. Court of Appeals held that police have a general "public duty," but that "no specific legal duty exists" unless there is a special relationship between an officer and an individual, such as a person in custody.“

https://www.findlaw.com/legalblogs/law-and-life/do-the-police-have-an-obligation-to-protect-you/

17 hours ago, frankendat said:

I believed that too. Until, I was given a low level position where I had a chance to enforce policy. Applying the same sentence did simplify the system and I was able to sleep knowing I treated everyone equally, but was it just? After many months I determined it was not. People and situations are comprised of a seemingly infinite number of variables and an inflexible rule will bring injustice.

I understand this as well as I think is possible for me.  There are mitigating circumstances but the way things are being applied now they’ve gone too far towards leniency.  Where men and women sexually assaulting young boys and girls are given no jail time.  I believe there must be a bottom threshold.  I’m using the worst case example here specifically to express how bad things have gotten.  You’re making a very valid point, there’s a vast difference between being fair and being just.  It appears to me that the criminals are granted greater rights than the victims of the crimes in many circumstances.

Here is a recent example:

https://thepostmillennial.com/kentucky-trans-pedophile-receives-no-jail-time-after-pleading-guilty-to-sex-abuse-of-a-baby

17 hours ago, frankendat said:

 

I am glad you have interest in this, as it is something with which I have interest and most lose motivation, when the complexities of moral philosophy and crime and punishment, reveal themselves. 

 

Try to write a law. Review the canons of statutory construction if you want guidance (stay Federal to keep it simple) Once it is written, stare at it, think about it and then find loopholes, attack it. When you think your law is unassailable, post it, or send it to me and I will take a crack at it. 

I’d say the two of us could do as good of a job as anyone currently serving in state or federal office in their first term.

What I’d like you all to take away from this discussion is, train and carry your gun.  Expect to self rescue.  No one is coming so it’s up to us to defend our loved ones.  If the right cop shows up and helps in time, be pleasantly surprised.  But do not rely on others to defend you from evil.

16 hours ago, frankendat said:

First, it should be acknowledged that the police in the United States, when taken as a whole, have been and are a positive. Police transgressions and transgressors, while vulgar and unconscionable are the minority, but this is not an apologetic for the police.  

 

Second, for a number of societal reasons (not all of which are incorrect) there has been reluctance to enforce standards. It is easy to provide examples of injustice when inflexible rules are applied, but there should be, there must be, limits. It is easy to provide examples of injustice when no rules are applied.

 

Americans are fearful of reprisal, the police, as sole enforcer of standards, are summoned for every defiant child and this should not be, is not, the appropriate role for police, however it is likely too late to successfully adjust this societal expectation.

 

Since antiquity it has been acknowledged, to successfully command an individual or an organization one must be respected, in the absence of respect the individual or organization must be feared.

 

I do not know who originally said the following, but it holds true. A man without capacity for violence is not peaceful, he is harmless. Harmless police are worse than useless, because they provide an illusion of security. Harmless police lack respect and are almost feared. Harmless police are not feared for their effectiveness controlling a situation and enforcing rules, it is their ineffectiveness and incompetence which yields fear.

 

For a society to succeed, rules must exist (anthropological fact) and rules must be enforced. I neither disagree nor debate the necessity or importance of non-violent conflict resolution or “alternative” enforcement methodology. However, if the police are summoned, it should be understood (and until recent history was understood) it is their duty to the community and to themselves to control the situation and take action to protect.

If an individual, disregards, fails to comply, or acts in opposition to lawful orders given by a police officer, and they are not placing the officer or the community in imminent harm, then sure, tazer, mace, judo (verbal or otherwise), but If an individual, disregards, fails to comply, or acts in opposition to lawful orders given by a police officer, and they are placing the officer or the community in imminent harm, then the officer should employ the quickest method of threat neutralization with the highest probability of success, which is two shots center mass.

 

The most important job of a police officer is to protect the community and then himself from imminent harm, therefore, the most important skill for a police officer is to accurately discharge his service weapon if it becomes necessary. That is not saying, de-escalation, negotiation etc. are not important, it is saying there is a time when the line must not be crossed and when it is without reprisal, all police are in danger, because they no longer command respect and are “harmless”. Police must have the capacity and ability to successfully employ violence, deadly and otherwise, without it, they’re costumed camp counselors, controlling and commanding nothing and no one leaving everyone to the mercy of evil.

 

(My point is unchanged whether .45, 9mm, or even .22, although .45 is most effective, even better a .45LC double action revolver)

Now I’ll attempt to respond to Frank.  I believe we shouldn’t have sentencing guidelines.  For example I think the law should state “you steal a car, you do 7 years”.  Anyone convicted of the crime does exactly the same sentence.  The punishment should be harsh, but evenly applied.  It should be taught in school as a requirement to pass the 8th grade.  All laws should be written at an 8th grade level.  If ‘ignorance of the law is no excuse’ laws shouldn’t be written in ‘legalese’ so they’re difficult for anyone who hasn’t passed the bar to properly interpret them.  They should be in common language and fairly applied across the entire citizenry. 

Unfortunately the legal precedent has been set that police have no legal duty to protect the population.  I vehemently disagree with the Supreme Court’s ruling on this.  Their stance was basically that an employer cannot force their employees into a potentially life threatening situation.  I disagree because this is a voluntary position, that like the military has an implied responsibility of potentially being killed as part of your routine duties.  To drive this home I had a police Sgt who would show us videos at muster everyday of police officers get killed.  While not the best way to start your shift, those doing this job need to understand that any shift could be your last.

My next opinion is that there should be harsher punishments for police who break the law.  In the car theft example, a policeman should get 8 years.  If you enforce the laws, you should be punished harsher due to the violation of public trust.  The police need to be well funded, well staffed, and well trained.  We had one training day each month to cover legal updates, policy changes, defensive training, firearms, emergency vehicle operation, and all your standard HR training.  If you only train a tool like a firearm one time a year, how good are you?  You’re shit.  Especially since that training was shooting your annual qualification.  With defunding some departments only have one of each of these topics a year.  How proficient with the law can you be if you only read it once a year?  It changes much faster than that.

This lack of training is why you see such sporadic, ineffective, and frankly incompetent policing. How good can you be going hands on in a conflict if you only punch a bag once a year?  How sharp can you stay on search and seizure laws if you last refreshed 9 months ago and your State Supreme Court has new rulings?  How can you avoid losing control of your vehicle in a pursuit in the rain when the last time you were on a skid pad was 12 years ago?  How can you avoid shooting a hostage when you’ve never even shot at simulated hostage targets?
 

Police are responsible for so many different skills, they should be training one full week each month. Hand to hand, vehicle operations, and firearms should be hit at least every other month.  

On 4/24/2024 at 5:52 PM, IZRL said:

 

Recently I asked a friend of mine who's in law enforcement about why the change from 40/45 to 9s. He says that what he heard was that they based it on ease of use. They said that people are more accurate with the 9 (which for me i feel im the opposite). It seems like that's the story with everything in America now days. Lower the bar, so the less capable can reach. Versus forcing people to put some time and effort to reach the minimum standards.

 

I'm no expert by any means, but in my mind if an officer has made the decision to use his side arm. It's not meant to slow the threat down or just injure them.  His intention is to stop the threat immediately. According to the 21 foot rule. On average a man with a knife can cover a distance of 21 feet in 1.5-2 seconds. I don't care how fast your trigger finger is. You're not going to unload a magazine in that time. So stopping a threat immediately or as close to that as possibly is preferable. Who cares what's justifiable in court when I have to choose between my life vs someone else's, IMO.

I actually agree with you.  The decisions made by attorneys and bureaucrats who are not on the front line rarely benefit a community.  I believe that if an officer must use lethal force, then it should be the most effective and induce the least amount of suffering.

On 4/25/2024 at 5:15 AM, datsunfreak said:

 

I think this could be a somewhat myopic view of that situation. 

 

I would counter with "the first priority in being a skilled law enforcement officer maybe shouldn't be how many rounds you can put into a small circle from 40 feet". In fact, I would say it's fairly low on the list of what makes a "good" police officer. 

 

If you had a viable candidate, who is skilled at negotiation, de-escalation, an excellent driver, an excellent fighter, and wicked smart, you would want to flunk them out because they aren't as comfortable/accurate shooting with a 45? I would not. If they are more effective/accurate with a 9mm, let them carry a 9mm. I have shot just about every flavor of ammo there is, but I am most comfortable/accurate with either a 9mm or a 22LR. And I ain't gonna carry no 22LR. 😄

 

And the previous statements about reducing the lethality of what the officer has on his hip makes sense to me. I would rather them be a good shot with a tazer to be honest. 👍

I worked on three homicide cases where a .22 LR was the identified murder weapon.  At close range they can effectively end human life.  When the tragic events of the 1972 Munich Olympics occurred mossad employed .22 LR Beretta’s as their weapons of assassination for those they deemed responsible.  Still doesn’t mean I’d carry one.
 

Tasers are trash and I rarely carried one.  The threshold for use of a taser was nearly the same as the threshold for use of a firearm since they cause death for a variety of reasons.  I also didn’t feel right torturing people into compliance.  

On 4/26/2024 at 5:15 AM, datsunfreak said:

 

Agreed. Which is why I would say give them the tool they have the best chance at being proficient with. 👍

 

 

Correct, most departments have a standard issue side arm that you have no choice in. There are a few cities around here that once you reach a certain milestone in your tenure, you can have more say in what that side arm is. I know at least one officer who carries a 45ACP 1911 because at 10+ years on the job they were allowed to choose their own side arm. He has said that detectives are given more leeway in their choice of weapon as well. 

 

But I would also bet if you want to go to the city's gun range and shoot up their ammo, they only have 9mm.  😄

Often smaller jurisdictions offer wider choices.  In my old department of about 130 sworn officers we had to purchase our own gun off the department approved list.  We could carry in 9mm, .40 S&W, or .45 ACP.  Then if you were a Tactical SWAT Ofc you carried a 1911 from Wilson, Kimber, Colt, Sig, or Nighthawk.  Why? Good question and I have no idea how they came to that, even after talking to the Captain who made the call.  

On 4/18/2024 at 5:57 AM, datsunfreak said:

 

I would love to have one of the USP Compact 9's, but damn are they spendy...

That’s what my sister carried as her personal gun for about 20 years in her contract and work in the alphabet soup agencies.  She left me one when she passed, I still haven’t shot it.

On 4/21/2024 at 3:23 PM, frankendat said:

The military's move was based on a number of factors but stopping power 9mm vs 45 wasn't one of them. But, being a military standard it means ammo and parts are and should remain available and the Beretta makes some fine firearms. I am not a fan of the Glocks, but must admit they have held up well. Your ammo specs are not exact, but then there are so many different kinds I can't keep them straight. One key component that your ammo specs (and most 9mm fans like to omit) is bullet weight. A bullet starts to lose velocity the second it leaves the barrel, so with weapons that depend on bullet velocity e.g. 9mm, 5.56, for the majority of their power, the bullet becomes much less effective as it travels. A bullet never loses weight, so bullets that depend on mass for the majority of their power .45, .308, .338, while they too lose effectiveness as they travel, it is to a much lesser degree. 

Firearm companies like to claim they are on the "cutting edge" but there hasn't been an original caliber or configuration in decades. The swing is from fast light bullets to slow heavy bullets and back again. Notice all these sub sonics that are now popular and what have they "discovered" -- even traveling sub sonic a 220gr .300 Blackout is still traveling near 1000fps carrying over 400 ft lbs of energy at 500 yards (and quietly)

 

This is an absolutely valid point.  It’s part of the Marine Corps justification for reintroduction of the 1911.  Especially in very close range fighting in Afghanistan when they started encountering targets that were purposefully ingesting potentially lethal doses of stimulants to fight more aggressively. The .45 ACP is more effective in this situation than the 9mm.  This has been proven everywhere from postmortem autopsies, government studies, to even entertainment gun content on social media.  

On 4/21/2024 at 11:10 PM, IZRL said:

 

9mm don't make sense to me for law enforcement. 

That’s an easy one, buy 20,000 rounds of training ammo for .45 ACP vs 9mm.  Big departments like DHS might need 200,000 or even 2,000,000 rounds a year for training.  It adds up quickly in a era where agencies are under funded, they cut corners where they can.

Next, as the stated purpose of public security is to “protect and serve”.  Using a round that is claimed by NATO to be designed to ‘wound’ not kill in combat is easier to justify in court. If officers were walking around with .500 S&W Mag handguns it “creates the perception of kill squads”.  
 

The fact of the matter is, single gun shot wounds are rarely fatal in handgun cases.  As an anecdotal piece of evidence, I was shot in the knee with a .44 mag handgun at point blank range.  I still btfo’d the shooter after being shot.  The lethality of a handgun fight increases the more rounds you get on target.  With my Glock 17, I can have up to 33 chances in a single magazine to get you to stop harming someone.  With my 8 rd 1911 magazines I need a full mag and 4 reloads to get to 33.  The other factors include things such as multiple attackers, every time your gun goes dry in a fight for your life, it’s a bad time.
 

After that, the ability for the round to over penetrate in modern construction is taken into account.  The way we were permitted to carry Speer Gold Dot 9mm 147 grain and the 9mm +P 124 grain rounds was because they penetrated less layers of drywall in state testing than even the CCI Blazer 9mm 115 Grain.  I wasn’t present for that test so I don’t know the methodology.

Last one I can think of off the top of my head is some agencies have policies that instruct officers to use their handgun only as a means to fight their way back to their patrol rifle.  Since the weapons are thought of as a package deal, then the agency is counting the lethal force of the 5.56 or 7.62x51.

On 4/22/2024 at 8:04 PM, flatcat19 said:

 

124 or 147 gr JHP leaves quite the hole. 

 

Also, at half the cost of .40 or .45 equivalent. 

 

Half the weight, twice the quantity. 

 

That's where 9mm makes sense. 

 

 

9mm makes since for several of the reasons listed above.  However, Frank is completely correct, .45 ACP is a better ballistic round against human targets.  He’s put a lot of careful research and thought into it and you’ve reached your preferred caliber.  I choose a different caliber after a similarly involved research effort.  If we’re in a full on zombie apocalypse, I’m grabbing a .45 for the reasons he listed above.  

There’s so many changes to the law on a weekly bases, it’s hard to keep up.  Here’s the thing, protect your family.  If the courts judge you unfairly, fuck’em.  I’d rather go to prison than watch a member of my household be killed.  Any judge or juror that finds you guilty is probably someone who eats a snickers upside down to pretend it’s a veiny dick.
 

On a positive note, I dug this out of my backlog for ‘fail to eject magazine’ and ‘fail to fire’.  The firing pin spring was broken and the mag release spring was heavily corroded. She’s back in service now.  HK USP V.1 .40 S&W.  Original purchase date, 1996.

18 minutes ago, datsunfreak said:

 

See the article I posted above. Apparently, in Texas, if said fleeing suspect has a gun, you can shoot them in the back in the name of "stopping future crimes" by said person. 

 

Not 100% relevant to your post, just thought it worth noting.  

This is where knowing your local, state, and federal laws is prime.  However there will be a challenge that goes to the US Supreme Court over this Texas law eventually.  I would prefer to leave my fate out of the hands of that specific group of 9 people.  I’d like anyone who concealed carry do a thought experiment to decide right now, if you’d be ok shooting someone in the back.  That decision needs to be made before hand.  
 

In my own personal lines I’ve drawn the person I’m shooting needs to be posing a substantial and immediate threat to the community.  For instance, I live near a school.  If there’s an active shooter there, I see them with a gun pointed at a kid, I don’t care what the potential civil or criminal penalties are later.  I’ll be tried by 12 before I let a child get carried by six.  To the same point, if someone is robbing a gas station at gun point and I intervene, I wouldn’t hesitate to shoot the criminal in the back.  But if a lone, unarmed burglar is in my home, encounters me and immediately runs out the door, not gonna back shoot them.  Just do yourself a favor and make those decisions before hand.

On 4/10/2024 at 5:28 PM, frankendat said:

I have experienced the "zombie effect" in fights (non firearm and non lethal) I was caught with a left hook and thought I had stumbled, "Why was I on the ground?" I bounced up to resume the attack, a buddy grabbed me in a bear hug. I didn't know why. A few seconds later (maybe milliseconds), without any further contact, I was out. 

 

Since the Fleeing felon doctrine was abolished shooting a fleeing criminal, as a practical matter, is against the law for civilians or police. (I say "as a practical matter" because threading the needle to claim "justification" would be a convoluted and expensive legal nightmare, even if you managed to remain out of prison.  

 

There are very few substantiated stories of individuals surviving (continuing to be in the fight) after center mass .45 hits. The .45 was developed to be and has proven itself in combat to be an effective man stopper. Do you know the story of how and why the .45 came into existence? Comparing "stopping power", in Elmer Keith terms, of the .45 and 9mm the .45 outshines the 9 significantly. (hardball to hardball) the 9mm in some tests beats the .45 in penetration and those with poor aim and weak wrists tout easier second shot and capacity as 9mm selling points. The best argument I heard for a 9mm was a when a friend of mine went to Gunsite and swapped his 1911 over to 9mm. It saved him over 1k in ammo costs (Gunsite does not allow reloads)

 

Now if pistol power is causing you grief, the 1911 carbine with the 16in barrel increases the velocity a couple hundred ft/sec and if you swap to the .460 barrel.... either is a fourth scoop on a 3 scoop sundae, not needed, but can't complain.

*Note: Best barrel length for a 1911 was determined long ago around 11in for max performance from hardball. However, with an 11in barrel the 1911 carbine is an SBR. 

 

While I won’t deny the ballistics of a .45 ACP being better, for me it’s about getting more rounds on target faster.  On average the FBI says it takes 0.32 to 0.37 more 9mm rounds to incapacitate an attacker.  Specifically if you’re using the type of self defense load I carry.  Is the .45 ACP better with one round?  Yes.  But if I can have 17 rounds before a reload and only need one more round to stop someone, now I can theoretically stop more than one bad guy in a single magazine.  I still believe it’s personal preference, and people should shoot the gun and the caliber they’re comfortable with.  I have seen more than one homicide with a .22 LR.

Here’s another factor to consider.  This does not constitute legal advice, if you have questions contact a local attorney to review your laws in the place you live.  I’m in Chelan County, wa as I type this so I’ll address the rules here.  The RAND institute released a study on civil lawsuits post shootings in self defense scenarios that discussed “man killing calibers”.  They defined the term as .40 S&W and higher.  In instances where a qualified defender who had been either not charged or acquitted criminally, the person was still found to be civilly liable for the death.  For instance Kyle Rittenhouse is being sued by the estate of a man he killed in self defense and was criminally charged and acquitted at trial.  
 

One of the things you can do is to acquire self defense insurance to be able to keep your home after defending yourself.  I started carrying that insurance before I became a cop, and it saved my ass.  I was sued for ‘wrongful death’ in a case where a suspect who was actively trying to stab me tragically lost his life.  The case was ruled a justifiable homicide criminally but I was still found civilly liable for the death.  The matter was settled for a court sealed sum, most of which was covered by that insurance.  To give you a bit of background, the deceased had sexually assaulted a 14 year old female in the basement laundry facility of their apartment building.  He assaulted her with a knife after the sexual attack.  He then took a high dose of PCP and attacked myself and another officer with a seven inch bladed knife.  Due to the physical proximity and reaction times I was unable to draw and fire my service weapon.  Instead I went hands on and ended up rendering the perpetrator of a rape and three attempted murders unconscious and he later passed due to the injuries he sustained in that fight.  
 

In civil court it was determined that I should have been aware of this specific brain reaction that occurs when a human brain is struck with “an impact tool”.  In this case, an elbow.  I had a hold of the man’s wrist and was ordering him to drop the knife.  Unfortunately he locked out with his eyes opened as you will sometimes see in the UFC.  As he maintained resistant tension on the knife and did not comply with my lawful order to release the weapon, and my partner was incapacitated I struck the man with elbows until I realized what was happening.  Witnesses said that I struck the man as many as 3-5x with my elbow total.  In my report and my sworn testimony I stated that believe I struck him 7 times.  There was no video that clearly showed the incident because this was before body cams were prevalent.  This incident gives you a feel for how chaotic fights of this nature can be.  Despite not having broken any laws, department policies, or statutes on use of force, I still had to pay.  

There’s another facet here.  If, as you draw, the intruder turns and you shoot them in the back, good luck. WA State has made it clear through civil cases that your “justification” for your lawful use of force ends at producing the weapon. 
 

I was off duty once and I observed an attempted kidnapping of a minor.  As I drew my concealed handgun the kidnapper immediately released the child and fled.  As the reason for drawing my weapon was to stop the kidnapping I was criminally and civilly within my legal rights.  Had I fired the weapon at a fleeing person I do not have criminal or civil justification.  
 

In more than 90% of the over 1,000 cases my dept crime analyst reviewed where civilians drew a firearm, the crime, know legally as the justification of force, was immediately terminated.  Many criminals are cowards.  Once they encounter potentially lethal resistance they retreat.

Also know, handguns suck at terminating human life.  For instance Curtis “50 Cent” Jackson was shot 9 times at close range with a 9mm handgun.  He was incapacitated but survived. There are WW2 cases where opposing forces were shot 7 times with the .45 ACP to no immediate effect.  Do not expect the attacker you’re firing on to immediately go down.  Its nice if it happens because you’re safer, but do not expect it.

An interesting mechanism in human anatomy that’s relevant is when your blood pressure tanks because you have holes in you, you momentarily collapse. If you regain that blood pressure because of gravity, you will regain consciousness. This means someone who is down, can get back up for a brief round two.  We referred to it as the “zombie effect”.  

55 minutes ago, frankendat said:

The HERA is just fun. In a carbine the ACP kick is hardly noticeable, not that the ACP kick is ever a problem (factory loads) but with the HERA quick multiple shots are easy. 

I haven't had the pleasure of officially Cowboy shooting. There are groups in Idaho, but like all things competition, they went too far. I, by nothing but luck, acquired a original  Bohlin Spaghetti Western Hollywood quick draw rig 30 or so years ago. Luck cuts both ways, and I "restored" it because it was all beat up. Cowboy action became a thing, those old original rigs shot up into the thousands, my restored (not "original") not so much. Which is fine, because I like it. If it was worth too much I would have to sell it. Here is similar one both original and much nicer (mine is scuffed and dinged and used)https://www.proxibid.com/lotinformation/81864765/vintage-edw-h-bohlin-inc-hollywood-marked-gun-slinger-quick-draw-rig-made-for-a-4-34-colt-sa

I do not know what it sold for

 

Anyway, I like playing quick draw, but am a little to concerned about shooting my leg to try and be super fast. Then I see these "Cowboy" shooters, who lean way back in special cowboy boots so the gun barely needs to peak out of the holster to fire and they shoot wax bullets which break apart and if any part hits the "sensor" it is a hit. Effectively this gives the pistol a spread like a shotgun. I quick draw with real bullets against full size people targets and only count hits in the kill zone, otherwise you're just a quick noise maker. I guess some lean if it works for you, but not before the draw. Youtube some cowboy quick comps, they look silly. 

I really like that HERA, thanks for introducing me to a new setup.

I’m only interested in competing in full dress up and talking shit in my cowboy character.  I’m going to lose.  But I’d like to see how fast I can pull my .357 Mag Vaquero firing real .357 mags at a target at competition.  I don’t compete to get trophies.  Here’s the thing, I am an undefeated gunfighter.  I was able to save a life that is very dear to me in one of those fights.  She’s a brilliant nurse now and one of my favorite humans. It’s the only recognition I’ll ever want.  I’m blessed, lucky, and grateful.  
 

I might have stayed in competition in modern pistol if there were more attractive ladies.  Single.  Over 40.  That’re mouthy.  And fit.  I don’t feel like I’m asking too much.  Lol

I can’t say that I’ve ever seen the 1911 carbine.  That’s quiet the setup, I bet it’s a heck of a good time at the range.  As far as Pistol Caliber Carbines (PCCs) I’ve shot a bunch of them.  One that was everything I’d hoped it would be was an Israeli Uzi in the carbine configuration.  It’s much easier to control those short, crazy bursts.  If I won the lottery I’d buy one.  Others that I liked were the HK MP5 9mm, Kris’s Vector .45, Sig MCX 9mm, and the CZ Scorpion Evo.  Personal preference is the CZ.  They’re relatively affordable and well made.  To plink with, I think I’d see if Palmetto State has one that’s based on the AR platform that accepts Glock magazines.  I’m adding a pic of the Scorpion in its full sized 9mm version.  It’s from American Rifle Magazine and isn’t mine.

The Governor was a gift, I’m actually not sure what the MSRP is, I just had to do the WA State commie paperwork.  It’s fun to shoot, but I’m not keen on carrying it as a daily.

Competition shooting is a whole different level.  There’s a lot of people doing it as their full-time job.  I’ve shot at a couple Saturday matches and I did well enough but I didn’t have a good time.  I’d much rather just take my steel out in the wilderness and shoot in a small, well disciplined group of people I know.  I will admit though, I’d like to shoot Cowboy Action Shooting once.  

Yep, mine is a remake, nothing original about it except the design style.  It’s not as smooth as the colt, but they’re both good guns.  
 

My original carry gun was a Glock 27 .40 S&W.  I sold it and bought a Glock 26 9mm because getting 9mm ammo was cheap and easy for me in the military.  I carried that gun for about 20 years before.  It was my backup gun as a cop because it uses the same magazines as the Glock 17 duty gun I carried.  My tertiary gun has been the S&W J-Frame .38 Spcl 5 shot for almost 20 years as well.  These are all personal preferences, and the guns I’d grab in the zombie apocalypse.

Had someone today who’s roughly my height and proportions what guns they should consider for “full spectrum”.  I had to think about this but I’d say a Ruger 10/22, Glock 19 9mm, Mossberg 590/500 or Remington 870, AR my preference is FN in 5.56Nato, and a Remington Model 700 in .308 Win.  All easy calibers to get and none are gucci but they get the job done.

Although these are fun.

It’s a .45 ACP.  The other 1911 I have is one of the Auto Ordinance WW2 style remake, also in .45 ACP.  If I feel that I really need to be dangerous and debonair I also have the updated version of the gun that killed Hitler.  It’s the “best” .380 auto I’ve used.  Although I have had a couple encounters where I saw people shot with them repeatedly at close range who were virtually unharmed.  
 

It’s fun to shoot after I put the larger grip on it.  
 

I have had hogue grips in the past, I liked them. That colt 1911 is a blemished gun that was offered through a police discount program.  It’s the cheapest new Colt I’ve ever seen.  The blemishes on it are really minor, apparently it was dropped at the factory.  So I refer to it as my cheap colt.

And to stay on topic here’s my low end Colt 

On 3/23/2024 at 9:44 PM, flatcat19 said:

1301 is very high on my want list. 

Shoot mine and then decide.

I’ve never shot the WC 1911, but I have shot their AR’s and they’re great.  
 

i’m 100% on board with the ‘no drop in’s’.  Just speaking from my experience with Glocks and Mil-Spec AR’s.  1911’s and bolt action rifles magnify that.

7 hours ago, frankendat said:

Not a fan of hi volume, because "spray and pray" is unavoidable, even with experienced shooters. That being said, if you are keeping the horde from your door, the P90 is about as good as you can spray without employing belt fed.

 

Don't know why the land photo posted upside down. That's the truck and the spot I have been parts pulling recently. It is  4.21 Acres with a double wide that needs work, the owner had an offer for 500k and turned it down (500k would be a bargain, but it wasn't an unreasonable offer). 25 min from Eagle, Idaho (shops, restaurants, Home Depot), 45- 60 min (traffic dependent) to downtown Boise. If you have the coin, that's about as good as you can do, in terms of a living in quiet country beauty, but being near all the modern creature comforts. But, like I said, we have been discovered and there is building plenty. The trick would be to buy it and sell it for much more in 5-10, then hopscotch to the next "great" place. Something that is logically and financially sound and I hate the thought of it. 

That does sound like a great place. Unfortunately the VA loans for my income bracket are frozen right now due to an “impending housing value crash”.  Which is why I’m looking at renting.  I’ll buy around where I feel that dip is occurring to maximize the property for my bulldog.  He deserves the best, just ask him.

I love shooting the FN PS90, but it’s not a go to for personal defense.  This will sound like heresy but I’d rather grab an AK than the FN.  However the FN gets more comments at the range.

Anyone else shoot these? The Beretta 1301.

I just saw this, I’m already booked for tomorrow or I’d have brought my WRX just to meet The Bleach.

You didn’t ask… 

23 minutes ago, flatcat19 said:

You didnt tell me you have a P90!?

 

Damn you. Get your ass over here with that thing.

On 3/21/2024 at 6:55 PM, frankendat said:

My rifles are pre-64. The Whelen is a 30-06 opened up to .35 caliber. Before Winchester "offically" released it (maybe a decade back?) We would "Fire form" 30-06 brass.

I have been pulling parts from a broken down D21 in Horseshoe Bend. It is 23 miles from Boise, but most of those miles are at a 7% grade. It's nice there, a bunch of building so I don't know for how long, but I have spent hours there the last two days and it's nice.

If I didn't have to worry about where to work, Horseshoe Bend and Payette, are good choices,  where you could "drive into town" for a concert or something, every now and again. If I didn't have to worry about work and being away from a big city didn't matter then Salmon would be my pick. I like Salmon. There are some even smaller towns for if you really don't mind being away from cities, but I won't be posting those in public. 

I’m incredibly fortunate that the money I made allowed me to retire early.  I’m not rich or anything but I can live comfortably without getting shot again.  I just need to be able to drive to a VA when I need medical care and have a decent butcher shop nearby. The “basics”.  Lol

To stay on topic, this is the most ineffective platforms I have, but I love taking it to the range.

Things are still on the back burner as I look for a new place to move to.  Also, still collecting parts.  She’s safe in storage while all of that happens.

I’m a huge fan of carrying what you’re comfortable shooting and that you find reliable.  Revolvers are an acquired taste, and if they’re not what you like, shoot what’s fun.

What brand of 1911?  I’ve had some great experiences with older Kimber’s and the Colt’s.  
 

Making a good gun is a complicated endeavor that requires strict tolerances. But at least you didn’t have this kinda day.

I spent two seasons hunting up my Priest River, since my hunting grounds are up near mt Abercrombie in the top right corner of WA.  Both seasons in ID I got my deer and had a wonderful time.  That land up there is dense so they were short shots, under 200 yards for one and then about 80 for the second one.  I’ve also never wounded an animal, the Weatherby is dialed in and I’d rather have an empty tag than to take a questionable shot.  I’m not subsistence hunting anymore.  
 

I’ve shot the pre-64’ Winchester 70 in the .30-06, but never the Whelen.  Those old Winchester’s are great rifles.
 

I really do like your state, that area around Boise is cool, but it’s gotten so big. I was there two years ago and hardly recognized it. If I were to relocate there I think I’d do Fruitland.  It seems to be just high enough it wouldn’t get that smoke that settles in the Nampa Valley during Fire season.

4 hours ago, frankendat said:

We can continue to talk range, bullet and load specifications, but you have more actual engagement experience than I have theoretical. I hope that training would see me through, if ever unfortunate enough to be tested, but it is only hope, there is an equal chance I will shit myself. The strongest steel is tested by fire and you have been tested more than anyone I have ever met. 

 

When challenged about long range shooting, I will talk smack, but I know your assessment is correct. There are an insane amount of variables at 1000+yards and most successful, at that distance are "walked" in and/or luck. (Which is why I get frustrated with those who hunt big animals at long range with low weight bullets) Like you, I focus on the fundamentals, my edge is my equipment. It is not the most expensive or the big name, but my father was a master gunsmith and my weapons, especially 1911's and bolt action long guns...shoot. It is sad (to me) with the popularity of long distance shooting and the refinements in manufacturing, high end rifles match the performance of mine and that performance will likely continue to be found at a lower and lower price point. When I was younger, consistent sub moa performance with a large bore was reserved to the hand made double barrel English safari rifle and came at extreme cost. My father studied the techniques of those builders, because acquiring such a rifle was a "lottery win" dream. Cheytac has a range in Idaho and their rifles out perform mine. I don't count the .50 as competition because you can't hunt with it and the weight of the bullets makes them fly too straight --cheating 

 

 

I didn’t think it would go this way, but it’s how my cards played in life.  I’m nothing special from the people I’ve worked with.  I just believe I’m either unusually lucky or blessed.  Perhaps both to still be kicking around.  I met my goals and retired really young.  Now I just need to find a nice place to rent for a few years while I figure out which less commie state to live in after I abandon Washington. 

Cheytac makes some incredible precision rifles, and they price them accordingly.  I really enjoy precision shooting with that little .308.  It’s nothing special but it’s cheap to run.    What do you think of your 338 Lapua?  Is that too heavy of a caliber for hunting?

3 hours ago, datsunfreak said:

 

I might try to convince/force him to tomorrow. 😋

I’m really interested in how it shoots.  When you get a chance I’d be interested to read what you think of it.