Ammo For Sale

« « Been there, done that | Home | Reality just took a giant dump on “the narrative” » »

Your caliber sucks!

The FBI slaughters some sacred cows:

While some law enforcement agencies have transitioned to larger calibers from the 9mm Luger in recent years, they do so at the expense of reduced magazine capacity, more felt recoil, and given adequate projectile selection, no discernible increase in terminal performance.

Likely not true since they ganked a well-known photo around here from 2009. And the only source seems to be that website and people stealing it. But it amused me.

24 Responses to “Your caliber sucks!”

  1. Duncan Says:

    Thank you for accusing us of stealing and untruths, even though you know nothing of who we are. Did you even read my opening paragraphs on how I obtained the information. Our followers are well aware I work for the Gov and have access to this type of information. I fully disclosed the picture was very old and most are familiar with it. In fact I got it from and stated it was for visual reference only and had nothing to do with the information.

  2. SayUncle Says:

    I have my doubts.

  3. Duncan Says:

    Having doubts is fine, but everyone knows that photo and accusations are uncalled for just because you disagree with the content. I am simply passing on the information for others to see and think about.

  4. SayUncle Says:

    Accusations? And I’m on record as supporting the content because I think 9 mm is the business.

  5. Duncan Says:

    “Likely not true since they ganked a well-known photo around here from 2009. And the only source seems to be that website and people stealing it. But it amused me”.

  6. Discobob Says:

    Gary Roberts has been using that picture for years. He says the gel shots were taken by Doug Carr.

  7. Paul Kisling Says:

    Didn’t they crop the 10mm part out???

  8. Deaf Smith Says:

    Look, I have no doubt a .45 JHP causes more damage than a 9mm JHP. And the .357 SIG, .40 S&W, .357 Magnum, etc.. all do. Just plain common sense.

    Now is the 9mm a bad round? Not with a good JHP. Is it the best in the world? Heck NO.

    Oh, and I do pack a Glock 26 in 9mm! But if ISIS hit the fan, I’d prefer my Glock 31 in .357 Sig with some Double Tap screamers.

    As for the FBI/DIA/DoD/CIA/NSA/KGusedtoG/etc… I don’t care. With the way they spy on us maybe they shouldn’t have any at all.

  9. SPQR Says:

    Uncle, the drama llama says I don’t need to visit this “looserounds” website again.

  10. Scott Connors Says:

    We may be able to stuff more 9mm into a magazine than we can .45 ACP, but if you happen to live behind enemy lines you’re going to be limited to ten rounds. The choice then becomes, do we carry a smaller pistol or do we carry the ten biggest rounds that we can?

  11. Sid Says:

    I read it. It has some valid points.

    But the FBI has to chose a suitable caliber and bullet design for the FBI. I chose a suitable caliber and bullet design for me. The US military (hamstrung by the Geneva Convention) can only chose a caliber because bullet design is mandated by international treaty. “Modern Law Enforcement” is not applicable to all applications. Learn from all sources, evaluate all the valid information, and then make an informed choice.

  12. Patrick Says:

    Our President just yesterday praised a cleric who issues a fatwa against our military forces, and a poor unfortunate woman just got beheaded in Oklahoma by a ‘misunderstood community activist’ who tried to convert everyone to Islam.

    And someone wants to take issue with Uncle’s half-tongue-in-cheek jab at reviving the 9mm v .45 debate?

    Priorities, people. You got better things to get panties twisted over than this shit.

  13. Sigivald Says:

    Sid said: can only chose a caliber because bullet design is mandated by international treaty

    Well, we could (and should, honestly), just repudiate that part of the Fourth Hague Declaration, as meaningless and irrelevant and based on a moral panic superstition about “dum dum rounds” (which, IIRC, were meant to fragment rather than expand, in the first place).

    It, after all, kills someone no more dead, nor more painfully, to shoot them with a perfectly “legal” tumbling or fragmenting 5.56mm rifle round than with a “wicked, illegal” expanding 9mm pistol round.

  14. Sid Says:

    Sigivald, not disagreeing.

    My overall point is that the FBI has parameters for chosing a caliber. That does not make it a universal better choice.

    As a soldier, I agree with abandoning a treaty that limits bullet design.

  15. McThag Says:

    It’d be easy to repudiate. We’re not actually signatories to it. We’ve been abiding by it, but aren’t bound by it.

  16. DG Says:

    OK. So riddle me this:

    Why not carry pistols chambered in .22 WMR then?

    They have the 12+” of penetration, much less recoil than a 9×19 and you could carry umpteen more rounds than even a 9×19?

    This is where these advocates for 9×19 always fail for me. They claim there is no substantial difference. Well, when one looks at the ballistic results from a .22 WMR in gel… we’re seeing pretty good results by their criteria as well. Yet somehow, the FBI and various cop agencies advocating 9×19 never seem to want to finish putting their bodies where their mouths are shooting.

    From my perspective, I don’t care what the FBI says. They’re just another pack of unaccountable federal employees who couldn’t find their plush posteriors with either one of their hands.

  17. Sid Says:

    I just wish the FBI would admit that they knee-jerked us all into the existence of the 10mm. After the Miami shootout, they embarked (at our expense) on a design program to find a caliber that would perform better. The problem was that the caliber was never the problem. A bullet has to hit a critical area or cause enough blood loss quickly.

    And I am an advocate of allowing soldiers to purchase their sidearms in whatever caliber they chose. .22WMR with 30 rounds in the magazine that can be shot accurately is no problem for me.

  18. Matthew Carberry Says:


    Yep. If the FBI hadn’t taken the wrong lessons from Miami the 10mm would have stayed a boutique cartridge and the .40 S&W would never have existed.

    No .40 case, no .357 Sig. Folks wanting those ballistics would be shooting 9mm+P+ or digging up .38 Supers.

    To give the FBI their due, without them we’d all still be using rounds developed a century ago.

  19. AJ187 Says:

    Funny, most people on here would never listen to government for advice. In fact they’re proud of it, but if it validates their bullet choice….

  20. Mike V. Says:

    I think by now it is generally recognized that bullet design and shot placement are more important than caliber. Over the last 40 years, the biggest strides in ammunition have been in bullet design and understanding the velocities needed to get reliable expansion.

  21. Geodkyt Says:

    Sigivald —

    I support keeping FMJ pistol rounds (and likely rifle rounds) for standard military combat use for one simple reason:

    Excellent penetration at an acceptable cost when you’re buying in lots of “metric butt tonnes”.

    Drilling through a chest pack of AK mags is tougher than punching through a hoodie. And in almost ALL military applications, the Big Picture calls for maximum chance of an effective wound, even if the “stopping power” is delayed. For military use, “attrition” is a valid plan – even if we had magic stun guns that guaranteed 100% short range stops, but left the enemy soldier alive to reenter the battlefield tomorrow, it would be a net loss. Whereas, a bullet that doesn;t necessarily stop a determined soldier in the next thirty seconds, but DOES cause him to die in a day or two or take weeks in recovery is a net win.

    And of course, when facing what the old military manuals call “civilized opponants”, generally speaking, any solid wound, even if not immediately disabling or seriously life threatening, tends to make the enemy retreat and seek medical attention, unless he is facing a “savage opponant” who will kill any wounded he can get (in which case the “civiliaed” solider often turns into the Hulk).

  22. Geodkyt Says:

    Keep in mind that the Hague Conventions were NOT written to cover fighting “savages” — they were written to cover battle between “civilized” nations of roughly equal and similar values.

  23. mikee Says:

    So I’ve read all the comments above and still have no idea if my Lee Enfield in 303 British will be laughed at by the guys at the range, or admired with awe.

    But this was about pistol calibers, right? So I got no complaint.

  24. Stretch Says:

    Well, guess I’ll retire my .38S&W Police Positive and go with one of those new flanged Walthers they’re talkin’ ’bout.