TexasCHLforum.com

para driver wrote:I retract my previous question.. training to reload is probably a good thing, as I doubt anyone counts how many rounds they fired under that kind of stress.. was it 2, 5 or 7??? RELOAD...

EXACTLY!

para driver wrote:I retract my previous question.. training to reload is probably a good thing, as I doubt anyone counts how many rounds they fired under that kind of stress.. was it 2, 5 or 7??? RELOAD...

This is precisely why I believe critiquing these things is so important. I hadn't thought much about doing a tactical reload. I concidered the IPDA practice of it silly. After reading the discussion in this thread. I see it from a different perspective. It isn't just the LEO types that add something to these discussions. even though we depend on their input and expertise.

All of this is my personal reason for carrying TWO guns.

para driver wrote:I retract my previous question.. training to reload is probably a good thing, as I doubt anyone counts how many rounds they fired under that kind of stress.. was it 2, 5 or 7??? RELOAD...

"Whaddaya say, punk, do you feel lucky? Well, do you?"

RubenZ wrote:I'd like to find out where the BG was shoot.


I just can't see someone still alive if all shots were in chest area. It just aint gonna happen.

When I worked as a paramedic in Albuquerque, we responded to a shooting call that turned out to be a drug deal gone bad. Guy on the ground had...are you ready for this?...26 9mm slugs in him, including a minimum of 14 that were mid-torso, COM shots.

Story we got was that the shooter RELOADED and fired a second magazine into the guy from a standing directly over him position once he went down.

It was definitely touch and go...he coded once in the ambulance, once in the ER and again in surgery...but ultimately survived.

packina40 wrote:

RubenZ wrote:I'd like to find out where the BG was shoot.


I just can't see someone still alive if all shots were in chest area. It just aint gonna happen.

When I worked as a paramedic in Albuquerque, we responded to a shooting call that turned out to be a drug deal gone bad. Guy on the ground had...are you ready for this?...26 9mm slugs in him, including a minimum of 14 that were mid-torso, COM shots.

Story we got was that the shooter RELOADED and fired a second magazine into the guy from a standing directly over him position once he went down.

It was definitely touch and go...he coded once in the ambulance, once in the ER and again in surgery...but ultimately survived.

That's incredible. 26 9mm shots, 14 mid torso.


Was his nickname Lucky? Or Leaky?:razz:

Would this be a good time to bring up the old argument of 9mm vs .45??

Dan

Imagine the 'pay back' on that one...

The officer did so well with his tactics and shooting, it is hard to give him enough atta boys.
Reminds me of the pistol shooting Sergeant York did in WWI 7 or 8 shots to 7 or 8 kills. (I cant recall the exact number) Excellent tacticts and shooting but one shot to each kill.

The difference was the effectiveness of the cartridge.

As a person concerned with home defense and personal defense I prefer a more powerful cartridge than the .40 cal, which is a cut down 10mm. Made less powerful so that high magazine capacity could be achieved. The high capacity stallwarts had to abandon the 9mm because it was undeniably not getting the job done.

Now as a powerful cartrige proponent I must compromise on the number of shots available to me per handgun. I feel the first one or two shots will decide most issues and I want the most power available that I am able to control.

So to my point of view my original thoughts are still valid, the enemy did not go down until the 9th solid hit because the cartrige was not powerful enough for the given situation.

Every one stay safe and if some one takes offense at my opinion I am sorry. I am just trying to explain how I see things and mean no disrespect.