# better for personal protection



## mmasteve (Jul 5, 2007)

which is better for personal defense and why?


----------



## Mike Barham (Mar 30, 2006)

Ballistically they are fairly similar, with an edge going to 9mm in its +P and +P+ incarnations. But the .38 comes in revolvers, while the 9mm comes mainly in autos. So the question you are really asking is whether we prefer an auto or a revolver.

I strongly prefer autos for defense, and no longer even own any revolvers. However, revolvers are perfectly adequate for defense, and many very skilled shooters prefer them. .38 and 9mm have both been working fine for years, so long as good HP ammo is used.


----------



## JimmySays (Jun 8, 2007)

Whichever one you shoot best. :smt023


----------



## Baldy (Jun 21, 2006)

I shoot revolvers the best but I been shooting them for 45 plus years. I just bought my first bottom feeder about two years ago and I like it a bunch. I carry a auto in my front pocket every waking hour. When I go out I got a revolver on my hip.


----------



## TOF (Sep 7, 2006)

I certainly hope I never need them but do like lots of rounds. My M&P9 carries 17+1 and I can get 17 more in it quicker than a blink. My Taurus 605 snubbie only carries 5 .38's or .357's and takes forever to reload. I happen to shoot both pretty good so that's not an issue.

The best one however is the one you have with you. :mrgreen:

:smt1099


----------



## tony pasley (May 6, 2006)

Baldy I thought your first revolver was an orginal Colt Dragoon.
It is what you handle the best.


----------



## JeffWard (Aug 24, 2007)

I agree... 9mm vs .38 = auto vs. revolver...

The reliability issue formerly associated w/ autos is almost dead. Slight Edge to Revolver...

Most "defensive" 9mm autos chamber 7-19 rounds, vs 5-6 for the .38. Definate edge to auto...

Concealability? Revolvers tend to be shorter, but autos are slimmer. Edge goes to autos here also, since thickness lends more to concealability.

I'd choose the 9mm... if I have to. But with the new .45 autos... WHT?

lol
Jeff


----------



## Wizard1500 (Sep 25, 2007)

I would have to select 38 special. I prefer a 9mm, but looking at it from a different point of view: In the unfortunate event you I ever have to use a weapon in self defense, that lawyers have a field day with semi-autos. It seems like it is much easier to defend (in court) with a revolver than a semi-auto. And for that reason, my carry gun is a Ruger SP101 filled with 38's.


----------



## Mike Barham (Mar 30, 2006)

Wizard1500 said:


> In the unfortunate event you I ever have to use a weapon in self defense, that lawyers have a field day with semi-autos.


That's totally inaccurate. Please cite a _single_ case where a lawyer had a "field day" with the simple fact that the defender used an auto.

Autos are the choice of practically every police department in America, every US federal law enforcement agency, the entire US military, and are recommended by every serious instructor in the country (including Mas Ayoob, who is the one usually cited in silly statements like this). A DA or tort lawyer wouldn't have a leg to stand on if he attacked an auto-toting defender in an otherwise justifiable shooting, and would come out looking like an idiot.

If I ever have to shoot someone on the streets of America, I _hope_ the prosecution tries to say I am a bloodthirsty fiend for carrying a Glock. I won't need my own attorney, Mas Ayoob, or the ghost of Jeff Cooper to make him look like a fool. I'll do it myself by asking him what kind of guns the court security personnel are carrying.


----------



## Guest (Sep 27, 2007)

Upgrade to a .38+p and cobon's is just dandy for me. Just something about the 9 mili-mili's that I just don't cotton to. Perhaps it's from when those idiot's that be, dropped the .45 (1911 a-1) for the Beretta. Bad idea and choice. Just my opinion.


----------



## spacedoggy (May 11, 2006)

Wizard1500 said:


> I would have to select 38 special. I prefer a 9mm, but looking at it from a different point of view: In the unfortunate event you I ever have to use a weapon in self defense, that lawyers have a field day with semi-autos. It seems like it is much easier to defend (in court) with a revolver than a semi-auto. And for that reason, my carry gun is a Ruger SP101 filled with 38's.


Hey Mr Wizard welcome to the site. I'll agree that it might look better that you use a revolver if they were trying to make you look like a gun nut like most of us here. And I do believe that there are semi-auto's that the lefty lawyers would have a field day with like the FN 5.7.. I own one of these but I don't carry it to be on the safe side. I use to carry a glock 26 with a 33 round mag as a backup. I think that could hurt you also. What lawyer would not love to wave up high for the jury to see a little plastic gun with this big bad 33 round magazine. I don't think it would be an issue here in Texas but in Hartford CT I can garrentee you it will from spending three days in what they call GUN Court up there. I was doing case study work last February. Yes they have a court that is named Gun Court due to the volume of gun cases up there. I don't even think they have had a case with a revolver in a long time. I do believe you are safe to use 90% of the semi-auto's on the market today but use what you feel safe with and again welcome to the site.

Sorry for going off topic. I would rather have the 9mm because if I use the 38 that means I had to go for my back up.


----------



## Wizard1500 (Sep 25, 2007)

Mr. Barham, if in fact you are a moderator, and you choose to attack my statment in such a harsh manner, then this is not the forum for me. You are correct in that Mr. Ayoob is the source that I site for my statement (silly as you may think it is). I still choose to carry a revolver, because it is in fact my choice, given to me by the state of FL.

Also, if you are in Afghanistan as your sig states, I wish you all the best and a safe return to your home.

Thanks for the stay on this interesting forum.


----------



## neophyte (Aug 13, 2007)

*site*

Wizard1500: Sir; this site is too good for you to let [1] person get under your skin. Sir; opinion are what they are. I enjoyed [didn't vote] your thinking.
"Mike Barham"; opinions are his: 
Do I agree with either? Doesn't matter!
I do enjoy the different thoughts/thinking. "Provocations" of thought; bring the best from each of us. Keep thinking.


----------



## spacedoggy (May 11, 2006)

Wizard1500 said:


> Mr. Barham, if in fact you are a moderator, and you choose to attack my statment in such a harsh manner, then this is not the forum for me. You are correct in that Mr. Ayoob is the source that I site for my statement (silly as you may think it is). I still choose to carry a revolver, because it is in fact my choice, given to me by the state of FL.
> 
> Also, if you are in Afghanistan as your sig states, I wish you all the best and a safe return to your home.
> 
> Thanks for the stay on this interesting forum.


I hope you reconsider and stay on the forum. I will agree that a moderator should have more interpersonal skills and not be so harsh but you will find many nice people on this forum and with that said we need people like you to stay. 
Mike Please do not take that as an attack on you I hope you look at it as constructive criticism. You bring a lot of good knowledge to the forum and in the past I have taken your harshness as a venting tool for where you are right now. If you want to vent my PM is always open to you.


----------



## Mike Barham (Mar 30, 2006)

If I came across as harsh, I apologize. However, I am a graduate of Massad Ayoob's LFI school, and had the pleasure of dining with him several times during the course. Mas never, ever said that carrying a normal auto would harm your defense in Problem Two. He was, in fact, carrying an auto himself when I took his course (a SIG P226), as was everyone else at the table. The class was heavily weighted toward autos, including a bunch of custom 1911s, and Mas never told anyone that they should reconsider their choice of weapons.

I have no issues with folks who prefer revolvers. I think everyone should carry what they like best. But lets not try to justify our personal choices by claiming as fact things that are simply untrue, or based on false assumptions. That just leads new shooters to make poor choices based on erroneous information.

Thank you for your good wishes. I appreciate it very much.


----------



## spacedoggy (May 11, 2006)

Well put. Mike do you think a court say in Texas might take issue if I used my FN 5.7 to defend myself away from my home. I would still not trust CT but Texas seems to be for the good guy lately. I know how you feel about the gun but am I being to overly careful not to use it????


----------



## stormbringerr (May 22, 2007)

that was some apology. However,he wont be back, i already talked to him.:roll:
he will probably tell everyone he knows over on GT to stay away too.


----------



## Mike Barham (Mar 30, 2006)

spacedoggy said:


> Well put. Mike do you think a court say in Texas might take issue if I used my FN 5.7 to defend myself away from my home. I would still not trust CT but Texas seems to be for the good guy lately. I know how you feel about the gun but am I being to overly careful not to use it????


I'm from CT, too, and I agree with you on that horrid state.

I'm no lawyer, so this is worth what you paid for it, but:

I think you could justify the FiveseveN in court, but it would be more difficult than with something more conventional like a Glock or SIG.

Can you find police departments that issue it? That will help. You could probably even introduce as evidence that department's reasoning for choosing that gun, as long as you knew it _beforehand_.

Why do you carry it? Not to zap through body armor (which would likely be brought up), but perhaps because the light recoil allows you to shoot more accurately, thus making it safer for bystanders? You like the low penetration compared to the typical 9mm and .45, and wanted to keep innocent people safe by not having bullets coming out the bad guy's back? Say that in court - assuming it is the truth.

The FiveseveN is a politically controversial gun, and that might hurt you in court. It might be almost like shooting a bad guy with a Class III weapon, which has been done and successfully defended in court. Mas wrote about one or two such cases where he was involved with the defense. He did say that the defense was tougher than if a more conventional weapon had been used, however.


----------



## Wandering Man (Jul 9, 2006)

Mike Barham said:


> If I came across as harsh, I apologize.


I thought you attacked his opinon, not him. You sounded like you always do. A bit scholastic in your approach, but not necessarily launching a personal attack. It's kinda like listening to someone on a debate team.

You've done the same to others, including Spacedoggy in the past. Spacedoggy seems to understand it is a question of differing opinions, not a devaluing of the other person.

:buttkick:

Just my nosy opinon.

WM


----------



## Rick H (Jul 29, 2007)

mmasteve said:


> which is better for personal defense and why?


Neither!!

20 or so years ago, a local BG was shot 3 times with a 38. He beat the snot of of the Cop that shot him!!

I traded my 38 for a 44 special. I traded my 9mm for a 10mm. My wife traded her 380 for a 357mag. My wife and I don't carry our mouse guns (25's/32's) anymore unless it's the only weapon we can conceal.

These days, if the BG is hyped up on drugs, a small caliber may just make him angrier.

Bigger rounds will do more damage, they have a better chance of putting down the BG even if he is angrier.

As always, just my opinion.


----------



## Mike Barham (Mar 30, 2006)

Rick H said:


> Neither!!
> 
> 20 or so years ago, a local BG was shot 3 times with a 38. He beat the snot of of the Cop that shot him!!
> 
> ...


I'll just point out that defense ammo, in all calibers, has improved dramatically in the last decade or so. The margins between calibers are narrower than they've ever been, certainly _much_ more so than twenty years ago.

Anyway, many people can't shoot magnums and 10mms nearly as well as .38s and 9mms, and a hit with one of the latter beats the hell out of a miss with the former. Heck, I have pretty considerable shooting experience, and would choose a good 9mm over a .357/.44 Special/10mm any day.


----------



## stormbringerr (May 22, 2007)

if i ever(god forbid) run into a BG the size of larry allen that was on dallas offensive line and could bench press 800lbs. i would not want to have anything under a .45


----------



## stormbringerr (May 22, 2007)

on the matter of court security check out this moron trying to take a leos weapon http://www.metacafe.com/watch/468187/man_tries_to_take_a_court_officers_weapon/


----------



## spacedoggy (May 11, 2006)

stormbringerr said:


> on the matter of court security check out this moron trying to take a leos weapon http://www.metacafe.com/watch/468187/man_tries_to_take_a_court_officers_weapon/


FYI Got the Sorry your item was removed from metacafe I wonder if you can download those and I've seen people hear put you tube videos on here without a link?


----------



## john doe. (Aug 26, 2006)

I think bazoka should be added to the selection.


----------



## TOF (Sep 7, 2006)

For any that don't know it, the .38/357 is only .002 inches larger than a 9MM (.357 vs. .355), so same weight projectiles are for all practical purposes equal.

Having run a few .38's and 9MM's through the chronograph recently I have to consider the .38 snubby a mouse gun. Gold Dot 125 gr +P's came out 900 FPS and Winchester White box at 773 FPS avg. Although the 9MM I tested were reloads they were below the lowest charge listed in my load charts.(5.0 gr VV N340) The 9's were in the 1050 FPS range from an M&P9 with 4 1/4 inch barrel. The snubby has a 2 1/2 inch barrel which equates to approx 3 3/4 in an auto given that the chamber is included in barrel dimension specs for auto's.

I had to load the snubby to low end .357 levels to come close to 9MM performance.

I carry my snubby on ocasion but it has .357 loads in it, not .38 Special.

:smt1099


----------



## denfoote (May 7, 2006)

Nine mil.
More boolets!!!!


----------



## LaSalle (Oct 21, 2007)

I will go with the 9mm personally. Like it was said before PD ammo selection is the most important decision in my opinion when carrying. I will take my chances with 147 +P jhp to send 'em back to Jesus.


----------



## TOF (Sep 7, 2006)

tnoisaw said:


> I think bazoka should be added to the selection.


I'm curious. Who's muscles is your avatar wearing this month?? :smt083

:smt1099


----------



## Hokkmike (Oct 22, 2007)

They are about equal but more capacity goes to the auto, hence - my vote is for the 9mm.


----------



## Charlie (May 13, 2006)

Hey MIke, if you can't be kind...........at least be vague.:watching::watching::watching:


----------



## LoneWolf (Jan 2, 2007)

Yup my vote goes towards the 9mm... Guess I just grew up watching Leathel Weapon to much :mrgreen:


----------



## usmcj (Sep 23, 2011)

I don't think caliber becomes relevant until shot placement has been achieved. Even then, differences in actual point of impact, and trajectory through the target/body, can skew comparisons.


----------



## rgrundy (Jul 16, 2011)

When I learned to hunt I was not good at it until I learned how to shoot accurately, then learned how to kill the animal. Same with self defense. Learn how to shoot accurately then learn how to effectively stop your opponent. Caliber makes less difference than you imagine. There is no magic bullet. The 9 or the 38 will work no matter what type of handgun it's packaged in if you know how to operate it.


----------



## jakeleinen1 (Jul 20, 2011)

The only reason the 9mm wins is for other factors

Both a .38 and a 9mm will do fine as a personal protection round however 9mm beats the .38 because ammo is CHEAPER and MORE READILY AVAILABLE. Basically you can go to walmart and holy shit, theres a bunch of 9mm ammo at a low cost

Both are fine calibers tho


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

usmcj said:


> I don't think caliber becomes relevant until shot placement has been achieved...


...And there, in just a very few well-chosen words, is your answer.

It doesn't matter what caliber you shoot, as long as you are cognizant of its limitations and you place your shots well.
Practical accuracy trumps caliber, every time.


----------



## TedDeBearFrmHell (Jul 1, 2011)

glocks dont come in .38 special


----------



## Cat (Apr 12, 2011)

Do you see this post is from 09-18-2007.


----------



## recoilguy (Apr 30, 2009)

jakeleinen1 said:


> The only reason the 9mm wins is for other factors
> 
> Both a .38 and a 9mm will do fine as a personal protection round however 9mm beats the .38 because ammo is CHEAPER and MORE READILY AVAILABLE. Basically you can go to walmart and holy shit, theres a bunch of 9mm ammo at a low cost
> 
> Both are fine calibers tho


I have not seen any personal protection ammo at walmart. Maybe the have it in Iowa City I don't know. Cheap is not a reason for personal protection.

It is an old resurected thread but good points are good points no matter when they were made and silly rambling are such too. Make a good shot as was said in this thread on 09/26/2011 and is still very accurate and credible today..................Practical accuracy trumps caliber, every time.

RCG


----------



## Packard (Aug 24, 2010)

Mike Barham said:


> That's totally inaccurate. Please cite a _single_ case where a lawyer had a "field day" with the simple fact that the defender used an auto.
> 
> Autos are the choice of practically every police department in America, every US federal law enforcement agency, the entire US military, and are recommended by every serious instructor in the country (including Mas Ayoob, who is the one usually cited in silly statements like this). A DA or tort lawyer wouldn't have a leg to stand on if he attacked an auto-toting defender in an otherwise justifiable shooting, and would come out looking like an idiot.
> 
> If I ever have to shoot someone on the streets of America, I _hope_ the prosecution tries to say I am a bloodthirsty fiend for carrying a Glock. I won't need my own attorney, Mas Ayoob, or the ghost of Jeff Cooper to make him look like a fool. I'll do it myself by asking him what kind of guns the court security personnel are carrying.


I don't see this as an attack post. It seems like a passionate debate to me. I will agree that the use of "auto" when we mean "semi-auto" is a bit off-putting for the general non-shooting public. A great number of people who don't shoot don't understand the difference between auto and semi-auto, they don't understand the difference between single action and double action either.

I'm fairly certain that at some time in the past some lawyer said, "You fired your gun at my client and it was fired in single action mode. Was it not? And it is generally recognized that double action is safer from accidental discharge is it not?"

To which the cop says, "Yeah, that's true. But I didn't accidentally shoot the rapist-bastard. I pulled the trigger to shoot the rapist bastard."

Lawyers turn things around in the most convoluted ways sometimes. So it would not surprise me if one did "have a field day" with a semi-auto vs. a revolver.

But what would a lawyer say about my statement? "The neat thing about a revolver is that you can screw the barrel of the gun right into the bastard's eye socket and pull the trigger and it will go 'bang'. You can't say the same for a auto in that same situation."


----------



## usmcj (Sep 23, 2011)

Packard said:


> But what would a lawyer say about my statement? "The neat thing about a revolver is that you can screw the barrel of the gun right into the bastard's eye socket and pull the trigger and it will go 'bang'. You can't say the same for a auto in that same situation."


I don't know what a lawyer would say, but I'd say you were a bit careless, letting the "bastard" get that close to you before you shot him.


----------



## Packard (Aug 24, 2010)

usmcj said:


> I don't know what a lawyer would say, but I'd say you were a bit careless, letting the "bastard" get that close to you before you shot him.


OK, how about this statement:

_The neat thing about a revovler is you can sneak up behind the bastard, screw the barrel into the back of his skull and pull the trigger and you could be sure that there would be a "bang". You could not say the same thing about a semi-auto._

Of course you could say, "The neat thing about a Barrett chambered in .338 Lapua is that you can stand a full mile away and still blow the bastard's brains out. You can't say the same thing about a revolver or a semi-auto pistol."

(Is that far enough away for you?)


----------



## usmcj (Sep 23, 2011)

I have a couple of semi-autos that I could press the front end up against a person's head and not be out of battery. Just because you can get that close doesn't mean it's even close to a smart move. 

By all means, you let 'em get as close, or you get as close as you want... I prefer distance to be on MY side.


----------



## Packard (Aug 24, 2010)

usmcj said:


> I have a couple of semi-autos that I could press the front end up against a person's head and not be out of battery. Just because you can get that close doesn't mean it's even close to a smart move.
> 
> By all means, you let 'em get as close, or you get as close as you want... I prefer distance to be on MY side.


I agree. You want to stay out of knife-wielding distance if you can. But sometimes you cannot. And some autos (obviously not all) will go out of battery if you find you are in that situation.

For example, some monster-sized bad guy runs up and tackles you. You might find yourself in close contact in that situation. Though I don't know if you will be in sufficient danger (if he does not have a weapon) to allow you to shoot him. In New York you need to feel threatened with "deadly physical force" before you can shoot.


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

Packard said:


> ...For example, some monster-sized bad guy runs up and tackles you...


If a "monster-sized bad guy" ran up and tackled me, I'd have to admit that I had suffered a significant lapse of situational awareness.

I might not have seen the rabid mouse which bit my ankle, but I certainly should've been aware of any "monster-sized bad guy" in my vicinity, and of the direction in which he was travelling. (BTW: Your "monster-size bad guy" is a straw man.)


----------



## TedDeBearFrmHell (Jul 1, 2011)

ok, ok .... what if......


----------



## Packard (Aug 24, 2010)

Steve M1911A1 said:


> ...And there, in just a very few well-chosen words, is your answer.
> 
> It doesn't matter what caliber you shoot, as long as you are cognizant of its limitations and you place your shots well.
> Practical accuracy trumps caliber, every time.


An undeniably true statement, but hardly useful in selecting a caliber. The presumption is that the O.P. will practice sufficiently with the caliber he chooses to become proficient.

The difference is more in the weapons than the caliber.

9mm: Semi-auto weapons. Available with high bullet count magazines in full sized weapons, or in 6 to 8 shot magazines in very compact weapons. Ammo is the cheapest of all the service calibers. Some of the weapons are very accurate, easy to shoot and reliable. Some are less than ideally accurate, difficult to shoot and less than reliable.

.38 caliber: Revolvers. 5 to 8 round capacity. From large, easy to shoot, but difficult to conceal weapons, to very small, light weapons that can be difficult to shoot and easy to conceal. Very reliable weapons. All .357 weapons can shoot .38s (except Coonan pistols). This offer a greater versatility than 9mm. The .357 is a proven man-stopper. Ammo is more expensive than 9mm, but way cheaper than other service caliber ammo.

It all boils down to which type of weapon you prefer: auto or revolver.

Autos have the option of greater round counts, quicker reloads, smaller weapons, and generally easier to manage recoil.

Revolvers have a reliability advantage, simplicity in loading and "making safe" the weapon.

In either case, you should learn to shoot the weapon well. Know your ability in aimed fire, slow aimed fire and rapid fire. Practice with practice ammo and also with your personal protection ammo.


----------



## usmcj (Sep 23, 2011)

Packard said:


> An undeniably true statement, but hardly useful in selecting a caliber. The presumption is that the O.P. will practice sufficiently with the caliber he chooses to become proficient.
> 
> The difference is more in the weapons than the caliber.


The difference is being able to hit your intended target, REGARDLESS of the caliber used. Kind of silly to buy and carry a .44 Magnum, if you can't hit anything with it. Improve your technique with a lowly .22, than as your proficiency increases, graduate to larger calibers. You don't build a house starting with the roof... gotta have a foundation first.


----------



## Packard (Aug 24, 2010)

usmcj said:


> The difference is being able to hit your intended target, REGARDLESS of the caliber used. Kind of silly to buy and carry a .44 Magnum, if you can't hit anything with it. Improve your technique with a lowly .22, than as your proficiency increases, graduate to larger calibers. You don't build a house starting with the roof... gotta have a foundation first.


I agree. My first weapon was a S & W model 19, a .357 magnum with a square butt and a 4" barrel.

My first rounds through it were .38 wadcutters. Light loadings that were easy to control. I moved up from wadcutters to full-house .38s after that. There was no +P back then so I went from .38s to .357s.

I still think this is a logical progression for learning to shoot. And a 4" barrel on a .357 magnum makes an excellent house gun, if not an excellent carry gun. It is a bit too heaviy and the square butt prints a bit too much for easy concealment in my opinion. But this progression from wadcutters to full-house .357s is a good way to learn to shoot.

Addendum: I know that in the late 1970s none of the .38 revolvers I saw were rated for +P and I did not learn of that term until sometime later. I just did a Google search and I was unable to learn the year that SAAMI adopted +P designations. So to my knowledge there was no +P ammo back then.

Amplification: I went to the SAAMI website and found published pressures document. According to the document it was first published in 1979. See: http://www.saami.org/specifications_and_information/index.cfm


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

Steve M1911A1 said:


> ...It doesn't matter what caliber you shoot, as long as you are cognizant of its limitations and you place your shots well.
> Practical accuracy trumps caliber, every time.





Packard said:


> An undeniably true statement, but hardly useful in selecting a caliber. The presumption is that the O.P. will practice sufficiently with the caliber he chooses to become proficient...


*Packard*, what part of "cognizant of its limitations and...place your shots well" do you not understand?
You cannot "place your shots well" without extensive practice, and practice is not caliber dependent.
"Cognizant of its limitations" is the caliber-dependent part, and that is more a product of academic study than of physical experience.


----------



## denner (Jun 3, 2011)

Tactics, training and practice coupled with shots in the ten ring far outweigh the differences in 38 Special and 9mm as a self defense round. Either one will do it's job if you do yours.


----------

