Diversify calibers, or stick with one ?

Not sure if this article has circulated around here yet, but I found it to be an interesting read:

The FBI is Going 9mm: Here Comes the Science | The Loadout Room

FBI Decides On 9mm As Their #1 Choice And Have Tons Of Science Behind Their Decision | Concealed Nation

Now for all the caliber debates that will inevitably ensue.



Two statements stand out:
-- Too much wear on weapons with 40 S&W vs 9mm
-- Killing doesn't matter as long as the threat is stopped.

Some excepts from some interesting posts on the matter:

"If studies find that LEO shots are missing 70-80% of the time, wouldn't it be wiser to invest in training and technologies that will help them shoot better? Maybe consider Trijicon RMR on their pistols?"

----

"Notes: LE Miss 60-70% of their shots because they're shooting at actual moving targets who are also shooting back. I'd like to see some of you try and claim that you could do any better in a situation like that. It's easy enough to hit stationary targets that don't move or shoot back. It's likely infinitely harder once those things change.

With the fact that only 30-40% of rounds hit, it would make sense to have an effective round that offers more capacity. More hits in vital places stop threats. As an example, let's compare Glock capacities in various calibers.

Glock 21 - 13+1 = 14 Round Capacity in a Fullsize .45 | 30% Hits = ~4.2 rounds on target
Glock 22 - 15+1 = 16 Round Capacity in a Fullsize .40 | 30% Hits = ~4.8 rounds on target
Glock 17 - 17+1 = 18 Round Capacity in a Fullsize 9mm | 30% Hits = ~5.4 rounds on target

This means the 9mm is likely to land 11% more shots on target compared to the .40 and 22% more likely to land hits compared to the .45.

Seeing as most modern defensive cartridges perform well enough to stop threats, I'd opt for one with more capacity to stay in the fight longer and land more hits on target, even if it's just 30% of my shots."

----

"Very few organizations, even Federal ones, can afford to fund the kind of training we hobbyists take for granted.

According to Wikipedia, there are about 13000 sworn members of the FBI.Assuming each agent shoots 200 rounds per month of ammo, and providing for a 50% bulk discount to 15 cents per round versus 30 cents retail cost, we have a figure of $30 per month. Per year that comes to $360.00.

Affordable enough for an individual, but multiplied against the agency's staff that means $4,680,000 in ammo expenses alone per year. Where's that money going to come from? Civil rights training? Hiring new agents? Newer leased cars? Benefit cuts?

Us individuals don't mind blowing $300 per week, month, or year on shooting because we like doing it. It is a totally different matter to implement that across an entire agency, especially when the odds of an agent getting into a real life gunfight are so low."

----

"Shot placement, shot placement, shot placement!!!"

In reply:
"Sorry, dude, but that is the mantra of those who have never reviewed the statistics of gunfights. Shot placement is an outstanding goal, but the reality is that most fights don't give the armed civilian time/opportunity to engage in aimed fire. Use what you want, but I hedge my bets by using the largest caliber that meets my concealability requirements while still allowing reasonably rapid controlled fire."

----

"There have been rumors of this study all year, and the "report" was issued in May.

First, while shot placement is imperative, it would appear that lack of shot placement is even more so. A 70% miss rate deserves a detailed study.

The author(s) take issue with the "mythology" of tests over the past 20 years, but when they provide quoted statements, they don't attribute the source. When they do cite data, the reports were issued in 1958, 1987 and 1989.

This treatise does not constitute a policy decision to change FBI weaponry. This is a "thought piece" and not a decision memo."

----

"The real problem with 9mm in CA, NY, MA, CO and other non-free-states is that those citizens cannot benefit from the higher capacity which is an important benefit of the round and an underrated limitation in those Nanny States."

----

"Pick a caliber and a gun with which you can put 90 out of 100 in a 6 inch group, slow fire, and 9 out of 10 in a 10 inch group, rapid fire, at 15 yards and you're GTG for defensive purposes."

----

"Caliber discussions no longer matter.
As with real estate, it's location, location and location!"


----

"Has the decision really been made officially? Does this mean a new shortage of 9mm ammo for civilians???"
In reply:
“It's actually the opposite because more 9mm ammos will be produced due to the FBI giving it more exposure."

Fair Use Source: FBI picks the 9mm - Calguns.net

 

Having a single calibre per type of firearm makes for simplicity of logistics, economy of reloading and practical tactical utility in sharing ammo between group members in a fire-fight.. However, it minimises flexibility and adaptability in taking advantage of windfall supplies gained from scavenging, trading, and "war booty" ammunition and weapons in calibres different to your, or your group's calibre standard.

A workable compromise would be:

1. To have weapons with calibre standards that are common across firearms of the same platform type; with the bulk of one's ammo supplies, together with the necessary reloading capacity for those calibres. These calibres are primarily for self defence, with the secondary capability for hunting / training.

2. To have weapons in secondary calibres primarily for hunting / training, and secondarily for self defence together with having the necessary reloading capability for those calibres.

3. To have the capability of being able to reload ammunition in the broadest range of calibres for weapons that you or your group don't possess, but are reasonably common in your area.

4. To own some weapons that have the ability to exploit sub-calibre inserts / interchangeable barrels / multiple calibre cartridges / projectiles for the widest range of ammo natures etc.

Specific calibre recommendations would probably be location specific in terms of what are the most commonly owned and used weapon / ammo types used and readily available for resupply. A good useful rule of thumb is to use calibres most commonly available to the military and law enforcement in your neck of the woods, and the calibres most commonly used for hunting the kind of wild game that most commonly inhabits your neighbourhood.

The choices in my neck of the woods would be:

Rifle - Self Defence

Primary .308
Secondary .223

Rifles hunting/training

Primary .223
Secondary .357 Magnum
.22 Hornet
.22LR
.22 air rifle
.177 air rifle

Side-arms - Self Defence
Primary .357 Magnum
Secondary .45 Long Colt (calibre common to .410 shotgun)

Side-arms- hunting / training / slaughtering / varminting
Primary .22LR
Secondary .32 ACP
. 22 air rifle

Shotguns
Primary 12 gauge
Secondary 20 gauge
.410 gauge

Preferred ammo and weapon platform types will vary from place to place

 

I didn't think you were allowed to have firearms in your neck of the woods, Chell.

 

I taught security forces use of force and deadly force along with small arms marksmanship training and qualifications for watch standers, security, and for the ribbon/medal course as well. Much of what has already been gone over is quite true. A couple fine points I would like to add. Even if your service organization doesn't have funding for proper training, if you are carrying a weapon on the job for your protection and the protection of others, even if you have to fund it out of your pocket, .... PRACTICE PRACTICE PRACTICE like your life and that of your loved ones depend upon it, because they do. JUST DO IT!!! Second, statistics tell us also most all gunfights between law enforcement and bad guys happen at 25 feet and less. Don't let anyone BS you, SPEED does matter at that distance. The first shot on target by either side usually tips the scales in the side of the shooter delivering that shot. There are usually no second chance winners when it comes to speed. Speed will come with practice unless you are just casually punching bullseyes slow fire. Mix up the targets and the distances, and time yourself. keep a log. In a shoot out, the center of the street and upright is not where you want to be. ALWAYS consider cover and concealment. Shoot utilizing both if possible to include using any handy brace to steady aim. If caught flat footed with out adequate cover at under 30 feet, the first shot fired by a competent shooter will win the encounter. Body armor or not, a center of mass hit even if it doesn't penetrate will distract, disorient, or possibly injure anyway. That quick first shot has to be yours. At that range if you are holding your firearm close to the way you have been taught, and if your MOST IMPORTANT SIGHT, THE FRONT SIGHT is somewhere on center of mass (really, is there anyone who doesn't know what that is? ... ask by PM if necessary) when you squeeze the trigger, you will hit the target. Front sight being exactly the same height as the rear sight and perfectly centered with equal light on each side of the front sight, and perfectly centered on center of mass just does not matter. Get that first shot off first with the front sight on the target and take cover before slowing to take the perfect shot if necessary. JUST DO IT!!! and live to fight another day.

 

Ownership of firearms is legal. It is regulated though, and there are categories of firearms that may not be possessed without special licensing. The firearm calibres noted in my earlier post are all legal to licensed firearm owners.

Gun politics in Australia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

Just teasing you. I have some coworkers that live down your way...

 

No probs...I'm sure that there are also a whole bunch of proscribed firearms that have been squirreled away instead of being handed in as part of the post Port Arthur weapons amnesty.