TASERS are not effective enough for self-defense against an armed opponent

Some police depts like having everyone using the same gun(s) so that they can use the same magazines. In my county, most local police and the sheriff's dept use the same .40 Glock for this contingency.

Whatever the gel blocks or shooting stats say, the .40 is just a more powerful round than the .45 and 9mm. Physics are physics.

I'll use a variety of CC options as I see fit with a .380, 9mm or .40 cal.

 

Well, the 10mm is a more powerful round than the .40; if simple energy was the defining factor of effective stopping of an assailant then we'd all be carrying big magnum revolvers. You can talk physics all you want; the final determining factor is how reliably a modern service pistol round puts down an assailant. In actual street results the .45 is a .40 is a 9mm when each is loaded with the optimum loads; and the 9mm gives higher capacity with less felt recoil and faster shot-to-shot recoveries. In the end, there is no real-world advantage to the .40, and for police who are not serious shooters it degrades their ability to fire effectively. I carried a .40 in the Border Patrol and shot it just fine, but it abused the firearms and we had a number of failures because of it. In the end, the .40 is going to only go down in popularity if current trends continue.

 

There are reasons the FBI is switching back to the 9mm, a good part of that is improvements in modern 9mm ammo.
While I for years preferred and carried .45, I tend to carry 9mm more frequently these days. However, there are times, principally, hiking in the mountains where I carry my HK45c, with .450 SMC 255 gr hard cast loads (I use heavier recoil spring). I can push 185gr jhp to about 1,300 ftp. These loads are probably pretty stout for some, but in my HK, very controllable for me. I don't own a 10mm... the .45/.450 gives me options. But around town, I will likely have one of my 9's for the combination of concealability and capacity.

 

Too subjective.
I arrived at a scene a suspect was punching a uniformed NYPD officer already on the ground, his female partner merely watched, did not draw her sidearm as the perp was near killing her partner a white police officer, his partner and the perp were black.
She called a 10-13 officer down but should have drawn and fired at the perp.
Botom line, I was on modified, later cleared, so I was supposed to not get involved, I ran up onto the sidewalk and took my Maglight and mashed the perp, right then a bunch of uniformed cops showed up, and in tbe confusion, I made a hasty exit.

I was later asked if I knew anything about that incident, and I played dumb.... lol...

 

I just bought a .40 XDS last week, so I am keeping the flame alive.

I hot loads are going to wear on most any gun so I don't use them. None of my dozen guns are museum pieces, but I still don't want to abuse them.

 

If I'm ever in a situation where my gun is drawn and I'm going to pull the trigger, I will not shot to wound as he would probably get pissed off at me and try to kill me. He will get more from me than a double tap.

 

If they break into my house, I will have no problem with the law in Texas. I could put a "We don't call 911" sign with a picture of a gun on my front door and it wouldn't matter.

 

But your lawyer will most assuredly tell you that your intent was to stop the action...not kill the suspect. Now if they die as a result of their failure to stop...that is on them. Shooting a firearm with the intent to wound is not an option because you can only use deadly force to stop an imminent threat of death or great bodily harm and shooting to wound tells a jury that you didn't feel the threat was an imminent threat of death or great bodily harm.

 

I have been in more than one situation having to defend my life and those of others twice with firearms. In each case the distinction of how my actions would be interpreted never entered my mind; I was focused on survival and stopping the attacks. I do not recollect thinking about wounding or killing, but hitting every antagonist as opportunity presented. Both of those situations were in firefights with multiple combatants.
I have been in more than a few altercations in my life, twice knife against knife, but most were in unarmed incidents. Again, as I look back, my recollection in each was to stop an attack, each time I did, I never pressed an attack once the aggressor was stopped, with one exception, when a fellow in New Orleans tried to rob me with a knife when I was walking from Louis Armstrong Park back to Burbon St on night... I took him down, disarmed him and took his knife and wallet (sent to the local police district with a note... before cell phones, else I would have called to have him arrested) Virtually all those situations were before learning the legal distinction of making an affirmative self defense argument. I have often offered, that if you are worried more about your legal position than your or someone else's life in the moment, you aren't in real fear. Also, years after most of these situations, I read of cases where defender turn into an aggressor after an attack is thwarted, ultimately being charged with a crime...it made sense to me; I never saw myself as having the right to dispense justice, but then I have never seen myself or behaved as an aggressor.

 

I carried a .45 for years (Colt Commander), and still do occasionally; but for hiking in the woods I do switch to the 10mm. Better energy and penetration; I carry a Buffalo Bore 220 gr. Hard Cast at 1200 because if I run into a dangerous animal a hollowpoint would fail to penetrate sufficiently; though I do carry a couple of mags of 180 gr. DoubleTap hollowpoints at 1350 in reserve.

All that said, my everyday carry in Urban situations is a 9mm (Col. Cooper would not be happy). Smaller, lighter, more concealable, but with higher capacity.