Should the 380 be discouraged as a CCW ?

[The Habernatho]

I think besides the .380 being a marginal caliber, a lot of .380 offerings are belly guns at best because they lack usable sights. In my opinion, there is simply no reason to carry a .380 when I can carry a 9 just as easy in my front pocket. When wearing dress pants, a PM9 is too big, but by the same token so is a P380. I'd like a LWS380 for those occasions, but I personally think I'd be just as well off with a good tactical knife.

[Salty1]

A 380 is better than nothing and better than other calibers on the market, if somebody feels confortable with it then thats their choice and should not be critized for it.

[Texas Dan Mosby]

Meh....

The way I look at it, a threat will be stopped with a firearm in one of two ways:

1. "Mental" stop.
A. Threat see's firearm and stops his threatening action.
1. Threat does NOT want to be shot by firearm and either evades or surrenders.
B. Threat is injured by firearm and stops his threat despite being physically able to continue his threatening action.
2. Threat does NOT want to be shot again and either evades or surrenders.

2. "Physical" stop.
A. Threat is engaged by firearm and physically unable to continue his threat due to injury / death.

ANY firearm is capable of achieving the first.

ANY firearm is capable of achieving the second as well, however, greater power is certainly more efficient at this task in a wider variety of circumstances.

[surprise_i'm_armed]

To frame the discussion in a different fashion, using popular caliber/weight data:

.380 = 95 grains
9mm = 115, 124, 147 grains
.40 = 180 grains
.45 = 230 grains

The above bullet weights aren't all permutations, but represent commonly used ammo.

Now, if you had a .380 @ 95 grains, look at the much smaller fraction of round that
you are going to use against a threat, compared with larger calibers.

To cite the most extreme example, if you compare a .380 to a .45, the .45 will put
242 % more lead into your adversary.

OP: You say you are a small guy, but don't buy the assumption that you must be under-gunned.
As some examples, you could get a Taurus Slim 709, Taurus Slim 740, or Taurus PT-745. These
are single stack firearms in 9MM, .40, and .45, respectively.

The more time that you spend carrying your gun of choice, the smaller it becomes.

SIA

[Beiruty]

Here is fresh review for the new ruger LC9. viewtopic.php?f=23&t=43119" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Visual:

[srothstein]

I think if we discourage anyone from carrying the weapon of their choice, we end up discouraging all. Following the slippery slope to its logical end, if we discourage smaller than the 9mm, then eventually the 9mm become the mouse gun. The 40 guys will then say to discourage the 9mm, and we end up with the 40 being the mouse gun. Then the 45 guys will make fun of the 40 (as if they did not already) and the 40 gets discouraged. Then the 50 guys end up making fun of the 45 guys and we end up with only one caliber.

And if you think this would not happen, compare the sizes of the officer model 1911's to the 380s and micro-nines. The differences are so small as to not be worth arguing about. And history has shown that the market will make whatever we want, basically. Notice how the nine's dropped in popularity when we were all limited to ten round magazines? I would bet the market could make a .50AE that was small enough for pocket carry, if we demanded it. I would hate to shoot it though.

[Beiruty]

I am beliver in 9mm. It is the standard NATO rd for side arms. You can carry whatever you want in whatever caliber you prefer. 9mm works well for me.

[lowonair]

I used to frequent that site. Everyone there thinks nathan is a god. I don't carry a 380 but i'd rather have that than nothing.

[XinTX]

A 380 is better than nothing and better than other calibers on the market, if somebody feels confortable with it then thats their choice and should not be critized for it.

+1. When searching for a potential CCW for the MUCH better half, we tried several calibers, including .45ACP, 9mm, .357, .38, and .380. Given that she's sub 5' small and with a very slight frame, finding something she could comfortably operate took some time. The only semi she could fully operate given her lack of hand strength was a SIG P238. A lot of folks knock it, but it's worked well for her so far. And I'm a lot more comfortable with her having a small caliber that she can use effectively versus one of the "adequate" (in the minds of the Kool-Aid sippers) calibers. A 380 might not be a great caliber, but it sure beats a firm vocal tone and some stern words in deterring a potential threat. I carry a 9mm myself but I love the 45s. So a CC 45 is in my (distant) future. But for her, the .340 with Hornady Critical Defense rounds is enough. Though I need to get her some range time with the little 5 shot .38 Special.

[willieb]

i carried a Sig 238 for several months(loved the little gun) but, then one day i noticed how BIG some of the guys were that could become potential attackers....my thoughts were...how could this little gun stop that guy...he's huge..so I traded the little gun in.....and now carry either a Sig 239 in 40 or a S&W Chiefs Special in 38.....you need to just notice how physically large many people are...especially those whom you might consider threats....Just my thoughts...

You're taking a very realistic approach here.

When someone of the "better a little gun you carry than the big one left at home" school of thought tries to use one of the pea shooters to stop an attack by one of the folks you've been looking at, they run a severe risk of being educated on why trying to stop a big man with a little gun differs very little from not being armed at all. They'll also learn the hard way that the intimidation potential (discouragement factor) of these little guns is close to zero among the kind of folks they're most likely to need to use them against.

In a real fight, there's no little substitute for a big gun. It's a survival tool. The wise man makes the effort to dress around the gun rather than trying to gun around the dress.

[fulano]

More men probably own 380's then women because more men own guns but IMO I think you might find that the 380 is carried by more women then men (as a percentage of women's ccw).

My wife can "shoot" any gun I have but her current weapon of choice is a 380. For years she used a 38 S&W 5 shot wheel gun as her house weapon. After the motorist protection act passed, she went to the range renting/shopping with some buddetts and came home with a PK380. In the past she had no interest in a CHL but now that the little SA is a companion in the car she has been talking CHL.

For me, I'd rather her carry something than to argue about what to carry; a strategy of "being right" don't work between husbands and wives :-)

[G.A. Heath]

For folks who claim they prefer the more powerful .38 special over the .380, I assume your talking about +P loads. The .380 actually matches or outperforms most .38 special non +P loads, now some standard loads might out perform the .380 but the difference really isn't that much.

[Excaliber]

For folks who claim they prefer the more powerful .38 special over the .380, I assume your talking about +P loads. The .380 actually matches or outperforms most .38 special non +P loads, now some standard loads might out perform the .380 but the difference really isn't that much.

There are ballistic advances being made all the time and there may be some gelatin tests somewhere that suggest this, but I haven't seen the 90 to 95 grain .380 projectiles deliver street performance comparable to 135 - 158 grain .38 Special projectiles. Can you provide reference sources we could look at to better understand the comparison?

[G.A. Heath]

Off the top of my head I believe the 90 and 95 grain .380 loads typically deliver around 200 to 205 ft-lbs of energy. The .38 Special typically delivers slightly less than that, with I believe exception of the 110 grain loads which provides around 225 ft-lbs of energy. Typical .380+p loads typically deliver around 230 ft-lbs, if memory serves while, the .38 special +p hits significantly harder somewhere closer to 350 ft-lbs. Now these are just off the top of my head and I would need to consult loading manuals or manufacturers data. All the values I mention should be calculated for the muzzle energy. Normally comparing energy between different calibers is pointless due to bullet diameter, however both cartridges use .35 caliber bullets (.380 is .355 and 38 special is .357) negating any real difference that bullet diameter would play. I do not have access to any loading manuals at the moment to refer to, but any quality loading manual should confirm the data and be more accurate than my memory.

[cheezit]

this is also the same site that says get the heavyist bullet wight you can in any given caliber.
Im not a buyer in to using 200gr. .357 mag rounds. were the 125 gr. has been proven more then any round except maybe 230gr 45.
the 135gr. 1300+fps .40 is one of the better street proven rounds out there
200gr.+p .45 works well too.

as far as the Op being a small guy. I stand 5'6" and about 140 lbs with work boots. I carry iwb anything from glock to a full size 5" 1911. So far a carring a .380 goes its better then a stick and a rock. The biggist issue I had when I had mine was getting it to feed and not jam. The issue was all mine, not the gun noone else that ever used it had the concern. I gave it up and went much bigger.
I still have a .32 that Ill take with me in the sunner when walking the dogs threw the area. The only reason I do that is the number of people that dont belive they shoudl have there dog on a leash.

my .02 anyway