Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Also, 9mm is tremendously useless with FMJ bullets, (still not stoked at the idea of getting shot at or shooting someone even with 9mm fmj or 22) but there are many other forms of bullets that inflict significant damages on tissues. Those are the ones used for self defense.

9mm fmj are not even useful to pierce through armour in my experience as a 9mm Makarov fmj bullet failed to penetrate my self welded 5mm steel tube I use as a target pole. I doubt it'd pull off enough energy to fracture a bulletproof.plate.

warhead01 wrote:I do like the idea of not having to hit a target more than twice.

There are numerous instances of people taking 10+ hits of .45ACP and staying mobile. No caliber can guarantee results. Shot placement matters most.

Maréchal des Logis Walter wrote: 9mm fmj are not even useful to pierce through armour in my experience as a 9mm Makarov fmj bullet

9mm Mak is a lighter, slower bullet than 9x19 with only around two-thirds the kinetic energy despite same bullet diameter. In military loadings, 9x19 NATO has about double the energy. Bit apples and oranges. Just saying.

Either way, hollowpoints are ideal for defensive use. 9mm might not have such a bad reputation if Hague Convention signatories/observers weren't constrained to FMJ.

9mm is fine if you use a real self-defense round. Some +P hollow/soft points will do just fine. If recoil is a issue, try using a heavier gun. Get something metal framed instead of polymer. More weight = less recoil.

.45 ACP is of course king in my eyes, but 9mm or .40 is also acceptable.

A lot of people who are nervous first time shooters gravitate towards the smallest pistol with the lightest caliber because they're worried about recoil. But the truth is a tiny .380 pistol might have more felt recoil than something heftier due to its low weight. I honestly think my 1911 has softer recoil than my Glock 40.

-I don't think too highly of DAO guns in general and that goes double for really cheap ones. You'll shoot a striker fired gun better, a DA/SA even better than that, and single action (like your .22) the best.

-If you are buying just one gun with the intent to carry it, I'd say get a mid sized/compact model like a Glock 19 or Commander sized 1911 rather than a full sized handgun (Glock 17, 1911 govt model, Beretta 92 etc) or micro compact. Full sized guns are more limited in concealed carry options and micro compacts are harder to shoot (you can mitigate that if the micro gun has magazines with grip extensions, like the S&W Shield Plus).

-Regarding saving for a really "good" gun, $1600 is an odd price point that will get you most guns outside of high end 19/2011s. At this price point you are paying for the name for some guns. Did you have something sepcific in mind for this price? Most good mid sized guns are in the $6-1100 range, with metal 1911 or DA/SA guns being on the top end of that and striker guns on the lower. Don't buy a Kimber as your one and only carry gun.

-A Commander sized 1911 would be the perfect carry gun for you but the price is high for these even from the budget 1911 brands, more than what a good striker gun would cost.

-Don't carry a .22 unless thats all you have. I've said a lot on this subject upthread and don't want to be a broken record.

-All magazine fed rimfires will have the issues you describe.

-As your dad likes deals/projects he might like PSA. They sell decent/acceptable budget guns and offer crazy package deals like these:

https://palmettostatearmory.com/psa-pa-15-16-nitride-m4-carbine-5-56-nato-moe-rifle-odg-psa-dagger-compact-swr-9mm-pistol-sniper-green.html

https://palmettostatearmory.com/psa-dagger-compact-9mm-pistol-with-extreme-carry-cut-doctor-slide-non-threaded-barrel-with-10-15rd-mags-and-bag-black.html

Both of those guns have some of the most after market parts available (the Dagger is a Glock clone). You could tool up both of them over time into pretty high end firearms as a project, if you wanted. Alternately you could get an AR lower receiver from a better brand for the roller mark, but its still just a serialized piece of aluminum.
PSA is based in the south and might have a store in driving distance for you otherwise you'll have your purchases transferred to your local gun shop like the rest of us (ask them first).

-You are on the right track doing a lot of research before making your purchases. Keep going. Take individual experiences/reviews/etc with a grain of salt.

Desert Island Dakka

A poser by An Ignorant Tit.

Premise is Because Reasons, you’ve become stranded upon a deserted Island, which has indigenous game.

Because Same Reasons, you had the foresight to pack up to three guns, and a reasonable amount of ammo for each. Let’s say two boxes for every one shooter. And because you have Marvellous Foresight, related to Said Reasons? Those can be split as you like between the three guns.

What’s your pick, and why?

Me? Knowing eff all about guns? I think something Fairly Basic all round. Some kind of rifle, for precision. Double barrelled shotgun for ease of maintenance, and either a robust handgun or robust revolver for scaring off anything that looks like it might try to do me in.

In terms of ammo? I feel I’d want to lean into birdshot type shells for the shotgun. Or whatever gives a decent spread to make up for my lack of accuracy. Rifle? Sorry I just don’t know my bore from a boar, but maybe a dozen rounds or so for it. Everything else is handgun/revolver ammo.

Yes I expect more in depth and less stupid answers from the rest of you, because whilst we’re all idiots in our own way, I’m particularly idiotic and ignorant on this

What island? How long for? What game?

I'd take a supressed .45 caliber lever gun with hard cast lead rounds. 44Magnum, .45Colt.

Hard hitting enough to kill almost any game, not too destructive against something small.



You could use it for almost everything.

To be fair, I have got no hunting background for now, nor am I too versed in matters of survival and crisis loadout. So Im a bit at loss to answer.

But I hope I'll get to hunt in the near future, as when I become a civilian again in 2 weeks time I'll go back home and get in touch with my neibourgh who manages local hunts!

You’re asking questions I can’t answer 🤣🤣🤣

Maréchal, despite being someone actually familiar with shooters, “whatever you reckon might be cool” is still an acceptable answer!

If for coolness? Then, my saiga 103 because I like it a lot, a MAS36 as longer ranged weapon because I have to be a damned chauvinist at all possible time including end of the world or desert island. Finally, some sort of 22 for very small stuff and, to be fair, overall very good precision in it's distance frame. So my TOZ 78m.

On a serious note, there used to be an argument for SKS and it's caliber to be exceptionnal survival guns, but as i'm poorly versed on the matter I've got no opinion.

And on a not at all serious note, maréchal des logis is in fact a sergeant in some branches of the french army... And I happen to be one, in fact!

Maréchal on the other hand is a Marshall, highest rank, even above generals, as it is maybe in the US and so on as well. So you're actually all promoting me and I thank you for that

A break-action over-under 12 gauge with #5 bird shot. 2 boxes would be 40 shells.

A Type 56 SKS(which has a bayonet). 2 boxes of jacketed softpoints would be 80 rounds(going to cheat with Tula as the manufacturer instead of the more typical 20 round boxes)

And just to be a double dipping git, a sawed off double barrel with 2 more boxes of #5 birdshot.

Desert islands are usually quite dense jungles, so you're not going to be taking long range shots at anything so iron sights would be plenty to take down any small deer or pigs which you manage to spot. The reason for a break action over a pump is to reduce moving parts and minimize the chance of the guns degrading. But the salt air is going to be hellacious on them. SKS is accurate and relatively simple as well, and also has a bayonet for extra utility.

The spread of shotguns is a bit exaggerated in media. You can definitely still miss with them. Bird shot spreads the most, and even it is much tighter than you'd think. Think 6-8 inches at 50 ft and rapidly tightening as you get closer. Of course if you had a cluster of sea birds hanging around something on the beach you could probably get several with a single shot. Though birds are smart and you might find them simply avoiding the island for a while after that.

Hunting pigs and deer will give the most food, but once you've burned the 7.62x39 you will be down to hunting birds. You could swap out for slugs or buckshot to increase your milage of course.

 Maréchal des Logis Walter wrote:
9mm fmj are not even useful to pierce through armour in my experience as a 9mm Makarov fmj bullet failed to penetrate my self welded 5mm steel tube I use as a target pole. I doubt it'd pull off enough energy to fracture a bulletproof.plate.

If the dude trying to rob me has the money for high-end body armor, why does he need the $20 I have in my wallet?

Lots of good points, but I have some quibbles. Let's start on a positive note, though: the M9 has terrible ergonomics. I like Berettas, but I hate shooting the M9. I mean, it's better than a Glock, but that's not saying much.

As for caliber, I will repeat that shot placement is king. People are actually quite fragile, and if you make the little holes in the right places, they fall down.

Obviously, ballistic performance matters, but I feel Americans in particular fixate on this because it gives us something to talk about. We love big guns. We make rifle caliber handguns because we have a near-masochistic love of painful recoil.

But in the real world, even .25 ACP will prove lethal. It mimics .22LR performance but is more reliable. For people with small, weak hands, it is an excellent choice.

I'm pretty big on .32 ACP to be honest. Someone upthread talked about felt recoil in .380, and in many cases, a small .380 will kick just as hard as a 9mm. However, many .380 frames were also designed for .32 ACP, and if you can find one of those, the overall feel and control is phenomenal. FMJ .32 will get decent penetration, has very low recoil in the right frame, and is quick to recover. My daughters love it and they destroy targets with it.

Commissar von Toussaint wrote:

 Maréchal des Logis Walter wrote:
9mm fmj are not even useful to pierce through armour in my experience as a 9mm Makarov fmj bullet failed to penetrate my self welded 5mm steel tube I use as a target pole. I doubt it'd pull off enough energy to fracture a bulletproof.plate.

If the dude trying to rob me has the money for high-end body armor, why does he need the $20 I have in my wallet?

Lots of good points, but I have some quibbles. Let's start on a positive note, though: the M9 has terrible ergonomics. I like Berettas, but I hate shooting the M9. I mean, it's better than a Glock, but that's not saying much.

As for caliber, I will repeat that shot placement is king. People are actually quite fragile, and if you make the little holes in the right places, they fall down.

Obviously, ballistic performance matters, but I feel Americans in particular fixate on this because it gives us something to talk about. We love big guns. We make rifle caliber handguns because we have a near-masochistic love of painful recoil.

But in the real world, even .25 ACP will prove lethal. It mimics .22LR performance but is more reliable. For people with small, weak hands, it is an excellent choice.

I'm pretty big on .32 ACP to be honest. Someone upthread talked about felt recoil in .380, and in many cases, a small .380 will kick just as hard as a 9mm. However, many .380 frames were also designed for .32 ACP, and if you can find one of those, the overall feel and control is phenomenal. FMJ .32 will get decent penetration, has very low recoil in the right frame, and is quick to recover. My daughters love it and they destroy targets with it.

I couldn’t agree with you more, that shot placement is key. You can have the most bad ass weapon on earth but if you don’t train with it, it ain’t gona matter. That being said at least google the ballistics of the type of bullet you are going to carry so you have a little idea what it will do if you decide to use it.

Training is very key of course. It's also important to remember that in a real situation the best you can hope for is center mass. You're not going to calmly put one in the heart or in the head in a real situation. Its going to be " Oh "

IE: Banking on your fine motor skills in a real situation is a bad idea and should not be relied upon to make up for any shortcomings the choice of caliber might make. It is a variable you have control over, so making it as much in your favor as possible is the best choice.

Do you trust yourself to have good enough aim to make .25 or .32 ACP immediately stop the threat?

First point, I looked up the energies of 9 para and 9 mak, I must say, while I knew the latter to be weaker I underestimated it by a margin, so I stand corrected.

I couldn't agree more than shoot placement is king but I'm being realistic. While I'm by no means a bad shooter, in an actual firefoght of agression, I won't tell you I'll keep calm enough to actual make THE shot that matter.

Maybe this is also a military trope but from people's experience on mission and parts of the training, we're told to maximise first volley to gain initiative, by spewing a hail of rapid shots before returning to more carefully aimed ones...
As you Americans can actually carry and have got actual data and experience on it, I'll take your word on it anyway.

Still, some calibers are probably better than others, even if all a lethal.

Btw, James Reeves released a video were he talks about how the jurors gender and the weapon you used to defend yourself influences the verdict. Was kind interesting so I'm putting the link. It's not absurd in France either and has got a history of being true to, at least from second hand experience from 2 friends who where sued for cases involving guns.

https://youtu.be/GlIamnGDA-M?feature=shared

 Grey Templar wrote:
Do you trust yourself to have good enough aim to make .25 or .32 ACP immediately stop the threat?

Alternatively, do you trust yourself to get an incapacitating hit with your one shot of .45 out of a tiny concealable gun that doesn't have the mass to absorb recoil? Or would you have a lower-recoil caliber that lets you get your subsequent shots on target faster?

And yeah, I'll grant that a larger caliber out of a full-size pistol is great but in most cases where a civilian is going to have that full-size pistol available they could have a rifle or shotgun instead, and in that case the choice is obvious.

I tend to carry a Glock 26 (9mm). When looking for a carry gun I also fired a Glock 36 (same size, .45). I was accurate with both, but found I was getting off 3 good shots on the 9mm to about 2 on the .45. The 9mm also holds 11 (one in chamber) vs 6 (if I recall correctly on the .45). I decided the more shots + quicker follow ups was more important to me than the .45. Of course I mitigate the stopping power delta by using good self defense rounds.

 Grey Templar wrote:
Do you trust yourself to have good enough aim to make .25 or .32 ACP immediately stop the threat?

If that's what you train with, yes. I dislike the advice to use the biggest caliber you can handle because it encourages people to take on what might be too much gun out of fear that the most comfortable caliber won't work.

I've seen the results of this approach: less motivation to practice, shorter practice sessions, less overall competence.

When people find the right size and fit, they have more motivation, put more rounds through the weapon, and have more confidence and competence.

There's also the issue of "program compliance" as Paul Harrell likes to say. Size and weight matter, and a nice, compact .32 is a lot easier to hide and a lot less burdensome than a full-sized 1911.

If strapping on is uncomfortable, or time-consuming, there's less chance you will do it. I think many people have multiple postures, and while all my guns have long since been lost in freak canoe and pontoon boat accidents, when I was still in the National Guard, my carry rig was in fact a full-sized polymer pistol which resided comfortably under my uniform blouse. The riggers belt rendered it comfortable, and if anyone wanted to go after a guy in military uniform, I figured I'd probably have a military arm to defend myself.

But in civvies, I'm just a face in a crowd, and a snubbie that is smaller than my cell phone is something that I can carry without a second thought with lots of different clothing options.

And for that reason, I'm a big fan of .32 Magnum, because you get the best of all worlds - light, small frame, low recoil, .38+P power and six shots.

Okay, not all worlds - that ammo is freaking expensive. But at least .32 Long isn't bad, and you can practice with that.

Didn't even now that round existed, I never encountered it

 Maréchal des Logis Walter wrote:
Didn't even now that round existed, I never encountered it

It was created in the 1980s by revolver manufacturer Harrington and Richardson in partnership with Federal ammunition. That's why it's proper name is .32 H&R Magnum. For decades, the US was awash with small, inexpensive revolvers chambered for .32 Long, which I think still has a following in Europe for target shooting. At least I see auctions for high-end German guns chambered in it.

Anyway, .32 Magnum followed the same procedure as the other revolver "wildcat" cartridges - you add some powder because the straight-wall case can take it, and then make the frame a little more robust and now you've got more dakka.

Because it has a smaller diameter, one can use standard J-frame revolver blanks designed for .38 special loads because the smaller hole mean more structural strength to withstand the higher pressure. Thus, if you set the two revolvers next to each other, they are pretty much identical. That's very much by design, similar to how FN 1910s, Browning pocket hammerless, Walter PP and PPK all could be made in .32 or .380.

It never caught on, though it seems to be seeing a bit of a revival thanks to youtubers discovering it.

There is an even beefier .32 revolver round, .327 Federal Magnum, which uses the same principle to add even more powder to achieve .357 Magnum level velocities. This is achieved by using .357 frames but drilling them to .32. I've not shot one, but I'm not interested because the weight of a .357 snubbie is too much to interest me.

These revolvers are backwards compatible, btw. So a .327 Federal revolver can fire .32 H&R Mag, .32 Long and .32 Short. The .32 H&R Mag can fire .32 Long and .32 Short as well, etc.

For many years, .32 Long was a standard police caliber in the US. Teddy Roosevelt famously ordered NYPD to turn in their .38s and use .32s because they were more accurate with them.

that's educative, thanks, i'll take a look at french market for them out of curiosity and report back


Automatically Appended Next Post:
So after a very quick research, turns out it's considered an exotic caliber in France, with apparently few people even knowing it exists. Ammunition is available at 1 gunsmith (armurerie auxerre) but guns were nowhere to be found safe importing them yourself.

Mostly, there were none on naturabuy, which is our main internet platform for trading gun and all the related on the internet. When you can't find something there, it has got to be pretty rare!

So at least in m part of europe - didn't really fired up (sorry, tried my best at this pun).

 ThePaintingOwl wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
Do you trust yourself to have good enough aim to make .25 or .32 ACP immediately stop the threat?

Alternatively, do you trust yourself to get an incapacitating hit with your one shot of .45 out of a tiny concealable gun that doesn't have the mass to absorb recoil? Or would you have a lower-recoil caliber that lets you get your subsequent shots on target faster?

And yeah, I'll grant that a larger caliber out of a full-size pistol is great but in most cases where a civilian is going to have that full-size pistol available they could have a rifle or shotgun instead, and in that case the choice is obvious.

I CC a full size 1911.

They're actually quite concealable. More than a Glock IMO due to being slimmer.

 Grey Templar wrote:

 ThePaintingOwl wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
Do you trust yourself to have good enough aim to make .25 or .32 ACP immediately stop the threat?

Alternatively, do you trust yourself to get an incapacitating hit with your one shot of .45 out of a tiny concealable gun that doesn't have the mass to absorb recoil? Or would you have a lower-recoil caliber that lets you get your subsequent shots on target faster?

And yeah, I'll grant that a larger caliber out of a full-size pistol is great but in most cases where a civilian is going to have that full-size pistol available they could have a rifle or shotgun instead, and in that case the choice is obvious.

I CC a full size 1911.

They're actually quite concealable. More than a Glock IMO due to being slimmer.

Now I want to ask how tall you are or if you think that matters. I'm 5'8" and I thought it might be too difficult to carry a full sized. How do you do it what do you recommend and what do you not recommend. I own a behind the back holster, wasn't an expensive one and i thought that might work. it's not uncomfortable at all but I'm not sure how much it prints. Rock Island Armory stuff for the most part would be very affordable for me. I've bookmarked a few but I'm still looking around.


This thread has been very good.

Small of the back or if wearing a jacket an under the arm holster(benefit of also having 2 spare mags on the opposite shoulder). The latter is far more comfortable, but only works in cooler weather.

I'm 6', so not a small dude, but I don't think that really would affect how I would carry it. If I was smaller the issue would be getting my hands around the 1911, not concealing it.

Still always on the lookout for something better. Conceptually, I would like some sort of pocket insert that just takes up a pocket in my pants. Maybe even some kind of double pocket where I can have my wallet in the outside pouch while the 1911 is in the inner one. Maybe I should teach myself to sew and make it myself.

I also have my Glock on my ccw, but its .5" thicker and just feels fatter and more obvious. Plus the whole no external safety while its riding around in your pants. I don't know how anyone appendix carries those things.

Grey templar, what do you think about open carry and is it legal where you live?

The gun belt I just got is amazing. Once it's set it doesn't move. It's amazing. I hope it lasts.

Truth be told I only discovered the small of the back holster because of the show the Blacklist. I t occurred to me Red rides around in cars like a lot so it might be comfortable. If I continue with that I expect I'll have to buy a better one or different pants. Seems like it needs either one more loop at the center of the holster or I need more belt loops. Haven't tried it with the gun belt yet.

 ThePaintingOwl wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
Do you trust yourself to have good enough aim to make .25 or .32 ACP immediately stop the threat?

Alternatively, do you trust yourself to get an incapacitating hit with your one shot of .45 out of a tiny concealable gun that doesn't have the mass to absorb recoil? Or would you have a lower-recoil caliber that lets you get your subsequent shots on target faster?

And yeah, I'll grant that a larger caliber out of a full-size pistol is great but in most cases where a civilian is going to have that full-size pistol available they could have a rifle or shotgun instead, and in that case the choice is obvious.

Why would it be obvious? Pistols exist for a reason- they are convenient sidearms. A rifle or shotgun is not a sidearm. It is like saying why would anyone wear a sword when they could carry a spear?* Because you can't wear a spear and still do your day-to-day stuff. Same applies to a rifle or shotgun, can't easily wear them and do other things (like drive a truck).

*When walking around town. Obviously someone can wear a sword and carry a spear, but that applies to pistols and rifles too.

I guess you can carry your shotgun around attached to its sling but wouldn't you look like a weirdo?

 Maréchal des Logis Walter wrote:
Grey templar, what do you think about open carry and is it legal where you live?

No, but I wish it was. There is also a possibility that it will be legal in the very near future depending on how a certain court case pans out.

Open Carry does make you a potential target if someone is planning on something nefarious and notices you, however that can be mitigated by being discrete. But if a good number of people are open carrying in an area regularly, then that is a major disincentive for someone to do something. But beyond that I think it should be legal just on principle, open or concealed shouldn't make a difference legally speaking. If you aren't harassing or doing something else illegal with it then nobody should care what or how you are carrying.

Of course I wouldn't carry a rifle around at all times. But I might stuff a small one in my truck. It's nice to just have it as an option.

To avoid getting to far down the rabbit hole of Politics, I'll just leave it by saying society would be far better if carrying weapons was seen as normal and was normalized. If even just 10% of people in public spaces were carrying, either concealed or open, the world would be a safer place.

 Haighus wrote:
Why would it be obvious? Pistols exist for a reason- they are convenient sidearms. A rifle or shotgun is not a sidearm. It is like saying why would anyone wear a sword when they could carry a spear?* Because you can't wear a spear and still do your day-to-day stuff. Same applies to a rifle or shotgun, can't easily wear them and do other things (like drive a truck).

*When walking around town. Obviously someone can wear a sword and carry a spear, but that applies to pistols and rifles too.

Important point: that comment was about a full-size pistol vs. a rifle/shotgun. IOW, a heavy, bulky, difficult to conceal weapon that as a civilian you're unlikely to be carrying outside of your home or certain wilderness activities. And in those situations you can also have a rifle or shotgun, either of which is a far better choice than the pistol. If you're carrying a weapon in your day-to-day activities it's probably going to have to be a compact pistol where you don't have the mass to shrug off recoil and accuracy concerns.

Interesting.

Even conceal carry is illegal in France, as I already said, and thus, to prevent people making up the excuse of transportation to the rangew you are obliged to neutralise you gun for transportation and conceal it. Technically, you can be sued for walking the 100m from park place to range with the rifle outside of its case and visible.

The only civilian exception is hunting, during the hunt.

Licenses to carry guns are very rare privileges mostly granted to either politicians or police informers. People who consider themselves at risk, in fact. I don't think average policemen are allowed to carry outside of service, that'd be worth a check.

Not that unlike Serbia, gunsmith won't be allowed to carry a gun even though they sell dangerous and potentially very attractive merch.

Personal opinion, I wouldn't care that people ran around with their gun, I mean, in a sense, you see what there up too then.

That's more or less how law works here.

I also agree with ARPAC's proposals for strictly regulated cc, not in the sense that few licenses should be given out, but in that it should be necessary to evaluate the shotters ability and mental health regularly. I know my compatriots and don't trust them to carry unchecked.