Do you feel the 9mm is an ineffective duty weapon?

**Terminator** · 03-14-08, 05:59 AM

**keith720** · 03-14-08, 06:05 AM

I feel that with the right ammunition and good shot placement it is effective for it's intended purpose.

**bayern** · 03-14-08, 11:52 AM

Not if you shoot straight

**Code6** · 03-14-08, 12:16 PM

The 9mm is most definitely an effective duty weapon. However, I prefer a weapon that creates a much larger hole.

**jmur5074** · 03-14-08, 12:18 PM

Originally Posted by Code6

The 9mm is most definitely an effective duty weapon. However, I prefer a weapon that creates a much larger hole.

I agree.

**dadyswat** · 03-14-08, 12:26 PM

As was once said by a old Border Patrol agent "Well there's something to the pointing of it".

**oldtrooper** · 03-14-08, 12:43 PM

I voted yes but ten-fifteen years ago I would have said no. The 9mm ammunition has improved dramatically in that time. We do however carry Glock 21's with Federal Hydra Shok and have since 95.

**LawnMM** · 03-14-08, 01:00 PM

With modern hollowpoint ammunition .45 and 9mm perform almost the same. Back in the days of ball ammo in duty weapons I'd have said no.

**MacLean** · 03-14-08, 01:32 PM

If you put the hole in the right spot and use quality ammo, the 9mm is effective.

**gozling** · 03-14-08, 01:45 PM

i would rather not be outgunned on the street

give me more power than they have please.
lol

i hate to say this.. but yeah putting a 9mm shot in the head or directly in the heart is effective...
but anywhere else really... if they are pissed off... they are still coming...(i only say that from expirience). I would rather have a gun that does way more damage than the 9mm...
like a darn 44 magnum bear hunting gun LOL.. j/k

**TXPO710** · 03-14-08, 02:06 PM

I said no, but it deserves clarification. As has been stated, shot placement counts for much, but how many know officers that only go shooting when they have to? Are these guys gonna be able to get the shot while running, in the dark, and diving for cover? I just feel better with the big ole' .45 and if a good shot with a 9 is leathal, then a good shot with a .45 has to be twice as lethal, right???

**dadyswat** · 03-14-08, 03:31 PM

The ones that only shoot when they have to are the very ones that would a major problem controlling a 45 and God only knows where their shot placement would be.

**MacLean** · 03-14-08, 03:44 PM

Originally Posted by gozling

i would rather not be outgunned on the street

give me more power than they have please.
lol

i hate to say this.. but yeah putting a 9mm shot in the head or directly in the heart is effective...
but anywhere else really... if they are pissed off... they are still coming...(i only say that from expirience). I would rather have a gun that does way more damage than the 9mm...
like a darn 44 magnum bear hunting gun LOL.. j/k

Gozling, you shot someone with a 9mm and saw a failure to stop?

**k-9max** · 03-14-08, 03:46 PM

Originally Posted by maclean

Gozling, you shot someone with a 9mm and saw a failure to stop?

i think she spoke about it, in the thread where the guy got one in the gut for biting someones nose off.

**MacLean** · 03-14-08, 03:46 PM

Originally Posted by k-9max

i think she spoke about it, in the thread where the guy got one in the gut for biting someones nose off.

Ahh, thank you.

**kjlaw** · 03-14-08, 04:57 PM

I feel like a 9mm is better than nothing but I would prefer the bigger bullet.

**aviator090** · 03-14-08, 06:54 PM

If you were about to go and fight the streets, and you had a choice and bullshit defense for your service weapon aside lol (if it is a 9mm) then you really wish you had the 40 or 45....

No question about it the purpose of most departments using the 9mm is because it is CHEAP! Also the city mayor and all those folks who really shouldn't make a damn don't like the idea of the officer carrying the bigger caliber as it tends to have some negative backlash out of the "smaller" activist groups...

So the question, is it effective? Yes any gun is effective if used properly... But the better question is, "IS IT THE BEST CHOICE FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT?" ....... The 9mm in my eyes is better served as a backup weapon or for very specific environments. When the man comes at you juiced up on PCP , Deliver him a Hornady .45 +P Hollow point round to the chest and you will see a big difference!
Scoring an accurate shot with a 9mm to be as effective as a .45 grazing the bad guy and knocking him on his ass, well it’s a no brainer…

Just my thoughts

**CT209** · 03-15-08, 03:31 AM

One thing about the 9-mil is that a lot of people can fire it faster than they can shoot a .45 or other heavier caliber. The result is more rounds on target.

Maybe one 9-mil won't stop someone as fast as a .45, but faster recovery time between shots would mean an average person can hit the target with more than one.

If you can't give the best, at least give the most.

I see a lot of departments go to a 45 or even a 40. They end up dropping the bullet weight so the officers can shoot better due to the problems of handling the heavier recoil. It can have a negating effect to the whole reason of switching to the bigger gun.

Not that I want to argue ballistics which is worse than arguing about religion or politics.

**Trojan 42** · 03-15-08, 04:22 AM

9mm is all we had (have). Never seen it fail to stop a threat. True it may have taken several shots, but then nobody usually fires just the once. I've had .223 need several shots to put a subject down.

**E-man** · 03-15-08, 09:25 PM

I watched a video of a Trooper who got into a close range shootout with a meth head. He shot the meth head about 4-5 times with his 40 or maybe 45 cal. Not sure.
Trooper got shot ONCE with a .22cal and bled internally until he died on his dash cam.
D@$khead lived,
Trooper died