I agree that 9mm has improved over the years and is now a very good handgun defensive round, but what about compared to the .40 when it comes to vehicle penetration?

That's the argument that seems to make the most sense from some who advocate staying with the .40. Since a decent percentage of our officer involved shootings at my agency have involved shooting into vehicles (although we don't have that many OIS's overall) it seems like a legitimate point that the .40 has more retained weight/velocity, and therefore better penetration, after having to go through safety glass, laminated windshields or side windows, and vehicle body panels. There's also the argument made that the .40 deflects or deviates less when going through an angled windshield, thereby making it more likely to impact where it's intended. I don't think anybody is claiming the .40 will punch through engine blocks or anything goofy like that, just that it will be more effective than a 9mm when it impacts the suspect after having to first go through those light barriers.

So, for patrol officers who may be as likely to get into a shooting involving a vehicle as they are inside a residence or some other scenario, what say you? If most of the officers are capable with the .40 and maybe only marginally slower on follow-up shots, should an agency stay with it primarily and only use 9mm as an alternative for those who aren't comfortable with managing the recoil in order to provide an enhanced capability around vehicles?  Or is the more manageable recoil, slightly higher capacity, and quicker time back on target for additional shots more important? If it were up to you individually what would you choose given those parameters?

Whooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!

I believe they are switching to G35s

You know that automobiles are over 120 years old and the ones made today are a whole helluva lot better than the first ones right? You think .460 Rowland should be a duty round? Lemme see what your split times at 25 yards look like bruh

Yes.

And 1911s?

EXCELLENT choice, IMO.

Ask Old_Painless. He fishes about $20 out of his ass pocket every so often and runs his own tests and generally gets pretty much what the FBI does with their million dollar specialists.

In fact you cheap bastards ought to take up a collection and buy that man a white lab coat. He deserves one.

With a Boltface Logo on the back.

Anyone can create a test to see what an expanded bullet looks like. Old_Painless has great posts and I enjoy them. But, the FBI testing is methodical, consistent, and scientifically done. They do ballistics testing in a manner that you can count on their results as highly reliable correlation to real performance in the real world.

The FBI does not publicly release their data and only releases it to LE. I'm sure many LE officers have in turn released the data to non LE people but if you think the fun stuff Old_Painless does is anything like the testing the FBI does, then you have no idea what the FBI test data and methodology is.

This post should not be interpreted as in any way derogatory toward Old_Painless.

As I have stated, I am not impressed with most of the FBI agents who do criminal investigations. But, the FBI employees who do research and scientific testing are second to none.

He's a gem, isn't he?

.38/.45 Clerke

It's a nice round, played with it a bit back in the 80's. I may still have the dies around here somewhere, if I find them I may order up another barrel. As I remember there was someone resizing 95 gr .380 bullets that would scream out of a 5" barrel, but you had to be careful or they would burn up on reentry .

If the FBI recommends it run far far away.

Please explain.

At least I went 9mm in 2012 before it was cool. Does that make me a trend setter?

Seriously though...when I started my current department I had to provide my own gun. I already had a Glock 17 so I just went with that. I did my research and also from personal experience of carrying .40 for years at my old department...I stuck with the 9mm instead of switching once I had a few pay checks in the bank for reasons stated many times already. More shots. Easier to shoot though my scores with .40 were the same as with 9mm. Always great. But 9mm is definitely more enjoyable to shoot. Cheaper to shoot which means when practice ammo comes out of my pocket I can shoot more often. Modern 9mm ballistics are great...I don't feel under gunned at all. So in a nutshell I just feel as if not more confident carry a 9mm than I ever did with a .40. On a side note...WV State Police (I work /live in WV) recently all went 9mm with the Glock 17. Not saying that's a good reason to switch. Just putting that out there just because.

9mm works well enough and is cheap enough for the masses. Logistics rule the day. I carry an issued G17 but wouldn’t if I could choose my own.

I shoot often enough and have tested my accuracy and split times across caliber and manufacturers.

Springfield Professional for the win!

Attached File

Well geez...what do you expect putting a $3k gun up against a $500 gun? I'd certainly be a little more than pissed if my custom built $3,000 lead slinger couldn't outperform a mass produced $500 toolbox grade weapon. But at the same time...it's more important who's hands either of those guns are in than it is what gun is in those hands.

You should educate yourself on the 5.7 before you use it in your argument.

And as already stated, the fbi is very good at data collection and dumping money into studies. There are many reasons they came up with the 9mm decision, and every single one of them has merit. People act like switching calibers "so more people can qualify" is a bad thing. If you have been in the job half a minute you know there are extremely weak shooters of both sexes who benefit from a lower recoiling round, thats a fact of government work. And have you stopped to think that if the 5'6" 120lb female can shoot better with 9mm... maybe that would make you even better also? Put yourself on a shot timer with both rounds and give it an honest assessment.
Your .40 is not going to kill anybody any faster than a 9mm

Call me crazy but I'd rather my backup actually be able to hit the target than have a caliber that punches a bigger hole but the shooter can't hit the broadside of a barn with it. The most devastating lethal knock down capable caliber is worthless if you can't hit what you're aiming at.

Once a department buys duty ammo in 5.7 they won't be able to afford training ammo.

With the new small grip pistols like Glock is releasing in 9 mm, there is no reason why anyone who is qualified to be a cop can't shoot a 9 mm accurately.