Yankee Marshall: .45 ACP Sucks for Self-Defense. Relatively Speaking.

This little gem from YouTuber Yankee Marshall has racked-up 100k views since it was posted during the waning moments of 2016. And why not? YM is a funny dude and caliber wars are click bait catnip. That said, it’s never a good idea to insult your audience.

YM dissing viewers who have their Depends in a twist, those wearing special helmets, or who masturbate to cat videos isn’t likely to endear him to anyone other than Kimberly-Clark’s physically and mentally challenged employees. Assuming they don’t carry a .45. And have internet access.

As for the Marshall’s arguments, .40 caliber ammo may make deeper holes in your target than .45’s, but which round offers a better chance at accurate shot placement? (Hint: the less snappy of the two.) As for YM’s inability to assign advantages to the .45 caliber round, how about this: it’s not .40. Other than that…. And this from a guy who carries a Cabot .45 caliber 1911.

comments

  1. avatar pwrserge says:

    I made my point quite clear on the video itself. The .45ACP brings to the table a gigantic slug that punches big holes. The .40S&W tries to do too many things at once and winds up doing them all poorly.

    1. avatar Geoff PR says:

      And one can’t discount the psychological impact of seeing that sewer-pipe sized barrel pointed at you and the attacker possibly reconsidering their decision in pressing the attack…

    2. avatar Journey3 says:

      All True. .45 are old when big was the only thing going for a handgun.

      My preference is the 10mm for such things. Here’s a great new write up about the 10 that pretty funny too.

      http://survivalcache.com/the-unappreciated-10-mm-auto/

      But jump to the .44 mag and Dirty Harry was right.

    3. avatar Accur81 says:

      The .40 Smith, in loads like the 180 grain Winchester Ranger RA40T JHP, does quite well through barriers such as automotive glass at an offset angle. So well, in fact, that instructors at a certain school have an open challenge to see if your pet JHP can “beat” it. While there are .45 ACP loads that can do as well, they lack the capacity that the .40 has.

      The .40 is in fact a damn good caliber. So is the 9mm and .45 ACP, depending on your purpose.

      But I still get a kick out of the “.40 sucks” crowd. It makes it easier for me to stock up on a great round.

      1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

        Accur81 gets it.

        I carry .40 S&W with 180 grain bullets because I want the ability to go straight through automotive glass even when the bullet strikes at oblique angles. I also want good penetration through other intermediate barriers — including FAT if my attacker happens to be obese.

        What do I give up? I only get 15 rounds in my magazine versus 17 rounds of 9 mm parabellum. I’ll take 15 rounds with HEAVY bullets that exhibit exceptional barrier penetration every time.

        As for the snappy recoil thing? For whatever reason, it doesn’t affect me because I shoot .40 S&W just as fast and accurate as 9 mm parabellum.

        And before anyone screams, “Glock 21s hold 13 rounds of .45 ACP!”, their chunky grip and aggressive grip angle do not work for me.

      2. avatar Vhyrus says:

        Most of my handguns, including all of my carry guns, are 9mm, but my zombie apocalypse/go to war handgun is a 40 for that very reason. I lose 2 or 3 rounds but I gain barrier penetration. Seems like a fair trade to me.

      3. avatar tdiinva (now in wisconsin) says:

        This video made me take a second look at .40 caliber because the Marshal.carries a 1911 sized revolver with a 3″ barrel — at least he did until he discovered the Sig P320. I started going through ballistics tables at lo and behold you can exceed the performance of .357 from a short barrel with a full sized .40 caliber pistol like an XD/m or G-22 both of which are smaller than lighter than a S&W 527 or 686. If penetration is a critical factor for you then .40 would be the way to go.

        Since there are even some 45 ACP +P loadings that are more powerful when shot out of a 5″ barrel than any concealable.357 it is not cost effective for me to go down the .40 road however it does give me an excuse to buy a full size P320 if I decide to spend the money anyway.

        The existance of rounds like the Hornady Critical Duty 220 grain +P undercuts his argument. The 38 Special is actually the worst round. It combines a low velocity light weight round that has zero hard barrier capabilty with a hard to shoot, inefficiently sized revolver platform. And you can stick a Beretta Nano in same pocket where an LC380 goes.

        1. avatar Binder says:

          I’m sorry, but I’m sick and tried of people thinking a micro 9 is as easy to carry in the pocket as a micro 380. My cw380 is way more comfortable as a pocket gun than a cm9. Given a choice, I would rather hang even the 380 off the belt in a holster.

        2. avatar Andrew Lias says:

          Calling BS on .45 ACP +P being more powerful than .357 magnum. What’s the pressure of +P .45 ACP?

          “concealable” .357 vs 5″ 1911 is an apples and oranges comparison, as is +P .45 vs .357 that’s not loaded near max capabilities.

      4. avatar samuraichatter@gmail.com says:

        I agree with you. I go kind of half-way with Yankee Marshall here even though I do not really like the guy or his channel. I think he overstates his position here a bit.

        The forty has been poo-pooed lately after being all the rage. I think the big argument against it is most of the pistols chambered in it (mostly glock) are designed for a 9mm platform. In addition to the other disadvantages you get with a forty you also increase wear on the gun and shorten its life. For all its negatives, .45 guns are built on a .45 platform.

        .45 really does bring less to the table especially in the “normal” loads which is what is often tested. I think you wrote elsewhere that .45 glocks handle non-round nosed bullets best and give you higher capacity. I would not have many qualms about going with a .45 glock shooting something like a lead solid buffalo bore or underwood +p. Ten or more rounds of that is “good enough” in the capacity department and you get a crap ton of obstacle defeating capability. I trust heavier though slower moving projectiles over fast light ones as the later tend to pitch, yaw, break apart, etc.

        1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

          Samuraichatter,

          I share your concerns about long-term hardware durability with .40 S&W. Is there any authoritative word on the subject?

          “[light and fast bullets] tend to pitch, yaw, break apart, etc.” I think that is a feature, not a bug!

  2. avatar ActionPhysicalMan says:

    TYM is a good entertainer. I don’t mean that as an insult.

    1. avatar Tym says:

      I wish people would quit calling someone named Yankee Marshall Tym, this Tym posting was born in the Cradle of the South, doesnt like Yankees and likes to carry when appropriate my 11.25 mm Model 1927 and my short barreled .45 cal New model Blackhawk convertible. When expecting two legger types both are loaded with 45acp rounds, with the baddest +p rounds going in the Blackhawk.

      Do i feel outgunned? Not yet and im 60 years old, made it to China by the time i was ten and started my way back to the State’s, been there and done that, and survived this far without YM’s click bait advice.

      That said i would rather be arguing about the size of carry guns or what type of oil to use in a motorcycle then whats was about to happen cause Hillary got elected,LOL, havnt stop laughing yet, Hillary lost,LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL!

    2. avatar tmm says:

      I stopped caring about YM a while back.

  3. I’m no expert on guns by any means but doesn’t a GLOCK 21 hold 14 rounds? Praytell how is that low capacity? And there are some that hold 15. And 45’s that go 1100 or more FPS. He IS moderately entertaining…

    1. avatar Curtis in IL says:

      I think the point to be made is that for a given size and weight, you can have a lot of little bullets or fewer big ones. So if you opt for fewer big ones they better be more effective than little ones.

      I don’t care. I shoot 9mm because it’s cheap.

      1. avatar former water walker says:

        Me too! 17+1 burns a lot of boo-lits! Besides if I want “stopping power” I’ll blast them with my shotgun?

    2. avatar Deal with it says:

      It’s because modern thin skinned people have to insult anything that is contrary to their way of doing things. We see this not only in guns, but everything in life. If any of you have annoying in-laws that criticize the vehicle you drive, house you bought, or activities you enjoy, you know what I’m talking about. It’s the, “well I need to justify my carrying of a 9mm therefore it can kill God and every other round on the planet simply bounces off its target harmlessly” attitude. Substitute 9mm for any round in they sentence.

      1. avatar PsyGuy says:

        OH! I see you’ve met my friend… who thinks anything less than a 45 will just bounce off people wearing nothing more than a t-shirt.
        “They don’t have enough penetration power!”
        “Really? Go down range….”
        “Well, lets not get carried away!”

    3. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      Glock capacities:
      Glock 21 == 14, 13 in the magazine +1 in the chamber — .45 ACP
      Glock 22 == 16, 15 in the magazine +1 in the chamber — .40 S&W
      Glock 17 == 18, 17 in the magazine +1 in the chamber — 9mm Parabellum

      1. avatar TravisP says:

        CZ P09 9mm = 22 rounds 21 in the mag one in the Pipe (Using included +2 baseplate)

  4. avatar Mtondee says:

    Funny, I read one article about recoil and limited rounds of the 45, then read the next praising the kimber revolver in 357, Contradiction continues!

    1. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

      .357 magnum hits WAY harder than .45acp. Especially if you use the full pressure stuff and not the neutered factory loads intended for 60 year old J frames. Could be the reason for the disparity.

      1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

        Speaking of hard-hitting .357 Magnum loads, how about hot cartridges with 125 grain bullets coming out of a 6 inch barrel? That combination produces a muzzle velocity of 1500 fps. I don’t think too many human attackers are going to shrug that off.

        My personal favorite, however, are hot .44 Magnum loads with 180 grain hollowpoints and 6 inch barrels. That combination sends the bullet out at nearly 1600 fps!!! I cannot see anyone being able to stand on their feet after taking a .43 caliber, 180 grain hollowpoint bullet at 1600 fps to the chest. I don’t care how much PCP they’ve ingested.

        1. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

          Just my personal philosophy, u_s but with the hot stuff I prefer a 158gr for .357. I figure the bu llet manufacturers make their bul lets with the lighter factory loads in mind and the 125s may self destruct on contact. Even in my 3″ GP they’re coming out at 1300+fps which is 65+fps faster than typical factory loads. Same thing with .44 magnum as I believe the 180gr. has almost identical SD as the 125gr. .357. Although in .44 the light loads seem to usually be 240grs.

        2. avatar tdiinva (now in wisconsin) says:

          Ballistics by the Inch shows no such loading.

          http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/357mag.html

          Most 3″ barreled revolvers are the size and weight of.a full sized 1911 while lighter revolvers like the Model 60 are the same size as the G-22 or an XD/m. Both have 4.5″ barrels. The cylinder gap bleeds off the extra energy. There isn’t much difference between equal rounds for the same barrel length.

          Revolvers are inefficient platforms that are harder to shoot the an automatic, i guarentee that you can put more rounds, more accurately down range in a shorter period of time with a G-22 then you can with a revolver.

        3. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

          This is what I carry; http://www.ruger.com/products/gp100/specSheets/1753.html

          Loaded with these; http://www.doubletapammo.net/index.php?route=product/product&path=303_331&product_id=380

          Lighter than a 19 11 and significantly more powerful. And yes I know energy is lost through the cylinder gap (duh!) but that is completely offset by the fact that the barrel on a revolver starts in front of the bu llet instead of the back of the cartridge.

          Could I put more ro unds downrange faster with a Glock? No shit? The revolver only carries 6. I can however put them downrange more accurately with a revolver. Given an improvised rest I have no doubt about my ability to take out a jihadi at 100 yards with my carry gun. Can you say the same for yours?

        4. avatar Your Real Name says:

          100 yards huh? Wow wee.
          lol

        5. avatar Accur81 says:

          At Gov,

          Double Tap loads hot, but I’ve seen them overestimate their velocities. Underwood loads hot as well, and I’ve chrono’ed them at even higher than what’s on the box.

          Anyways, your Double Tap 3″ .357 158 grain JHP at 1300 FPS runs 593 FPE. The Underwood Double Tap .45 ACP +P 185 JHP at 1200 FPS is also 592 FPE. Both velocities on the box.

          I own and carry 9mm, .380, .357, .40, and .45 so I’m not married to any particular caliber or platform. My .357 is a snubbie 340PD, which I’m thinking about trading in for one of the fancy 8-shot Smith .357s.

          I know a lot of TTAG guys are big fans of snubbies, but they don’t do a whole lot for me.

        6. avatar tdiinva (now in wisconsin) says:

          Gov:

          A 10mm FBI light load fired from a 4″ barrel puts out more energy than a .357 from a 3″ revolver and a full power 10mm which is equivalent to a .357 puts out way more energy than a .357 at those barrel lengths. It is a myth that you get an extra inch from a revolver. They bleed enough energy to negate that.

          Shooting Jihadi’s at a 100 yards eh? From a 6″ barrel with a scope or red dot firing single action. I would believe that. Assuming neither you or tbe Jihadi was moving in a crowd.

        7. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

          A81, @1300fps I’m already allowing for the fudge factor on the Double Taps. Haven’t chronoed them but the difference between them and the neutered factory loads is completely obvious, so they’d have to be pushing way over 500 ft/lbs out of the 3″. As far as the 185gr. .45 acp, first you’re comparing a SAAMI standard pressure load in .357 vs. a non standard pressure load in .45. Second you’re comparing a 5″ semi-auto to a 3′ revolver, as I’ve pointed out elsewhere a 3″ revolver carries like a 4″ auto not a 5″. Third, that 185gr. bu llet will under-penetrate at those velocities. The 158gr. 357 slug has a higher SD than a 230gr. .45 slug. The .45acp does have an advantage over 9mm if you’re willing to use the hottest +p loads though.

          I agree on the shorter snubbies. I don’t have any desire to carry a 1-7/8″ barrel, but 3″ is kind of the sweet spot for getting enough out of the .357 cartridge and still be comfortable and concealable.

          TDI, You simply don’t know what you’re talking about. And I’ve shot enough at 100 yards to know that with a rest I can easily put at least 4 out of 6 rou nds on a 12″ target, I’d call that minute of jihadi.

      2. avatar tdiinva (now in wisconsin) says:

        .357 hirs way harder than any 45ACP when fired out of a 4″ barrel. Unfortunately, you can’t conceal a 9.6″ pistol. Realisticly, 3″ is about as big a gun you can carry and there are 45 ACP rounds that hit harder than .357 out a short barrel. Back in the day .357 was a great performer out of a short barrel relative to other rounds, Now we have .40 caliber, 10mm and even some .45 loadings that beat it in similar sized platforms.

        1. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

          First, a 3″ revolver carries like a 4″ pistol. Buy one and carry it around for a while, you’ll see. Second, with the full power am munition (not +p, there is no such thing in .357 magnum) you can easily top 600ft/lbs out of a 3″ .357 revolver, which significantly tops .45acp +p+ in 5″ barrels. 10mm is roughly the equivalent of .357 magnum with lower SD bullets, but the .357 holds an edge with higher SDs (if you’re in bear country). Then you can get into the reliability vs. capacity argument.

    2. avatar bLoving says:

      (heh-heh-heh)
      Thanx, Gov! I knew I could count on you to stick up for us wheelgun toters!
      My SP 101 with 130gr .38+p’s should serve my just fine for my most likely target: one or two unarmored thugs confronting me at conversational distance. I think I’ll do okay.

      1. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

        Actually, my motto is carry whatever you like to shoot and is comfortable enough to carry. If you’re into 1911s, pick out something nice (but not too nice because you’re going to get holster wear), stick it in a holster and go about your business. Point a .45acp and me and I guarantee my hands will go up in the air (just make sure you’ve got the drop on me or you’ll have 6 magnum holes in you faster than you can say ‘stick ’em up’). And if you’re worried about having to shoot your 6th (or 10th or 19th) round in anger you should really worry more about lightning safety.

  5. avatar HandyDan says:

    I’m never sure if he actually takes the things he says seriously, or if he is just trolling. I stopped watching his channel after I got sick of the general immature humor. He does often raise some intelligent points, but is incapable of being objective and seeing the other side of the argument.

    1. I love his humor. Most of it is self deprecating. What caused me to unsub a couple times, but kept coming back like a battered wife, is his politics. Too liberal for my liking, but for Seattle, I guess he’s okay.

  6. avatar Ed says:

    The guy’s a know-it-all douche. Period. Can’t stand to watch his videos, full of opinion…void of facts. He also has a video proclaiming a 4″ revolver the best carry gun EVER. Silly me, I thought it was the one you were most comfortable with carrying and shooting.

  7. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

    Frankly I never understood the argument that .45acp is more powerful or has greater ‘stopping power’ than 9mm. In the original loads the .45 produced a whopping 5 more ft/lbs out of a 5″ barrel than a 9mm does out of a 4″. Sure the bullet’s a bit bigger but if it expands like a 9mm should it won’t penetrate and if it doesn’t it’s not really going to make a bigger hole. BTW, if .45 didn’t have a reputation for not penetrating car doors and windshields they would never have invented the .38 super.

    1. avatar Dave says:

      Okay first off 38 Super was designed for competition shooting not for self-defense. What you have to consider are the physics of the bullet itself its weight in particular. Is it more lethal to be hit by a small car going 60 miles an hour or a Mack truck going 40 miles an hour they both kill you. And the 45 ACP doesn’t have to go over a thousand feet per second to penetrate well because of the weight of the cartridge. The only drawback to the 45 ACP is when shooting at targets far away the round losses terminal velocity quickly overextended ranges which it was never designed to do in the first place. Most of the research done on the 45 ACP cartridge not penetrating cars was done in the late 1950s when Vehicles actually had Steel body panels and much thicker window glass. Are local police department carry Glock 21 in 45 ACP and I have personally talk to officers that had to use their gun in the line of duty and the 45 brought down the suspect quickly and very effectively even when the suspect was on drugs. Just my $0.10 worth.

      1. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

        First, I’m not particularly opposed to the round itself, but you ignorance is simply astounding. The .38 super was invented in the 1920s primarily as a law enforcement round because back when cars were made out of steel and glass, .45acp had a poor reputation for penetrating them. It wasn’t until the 1990s that competition shooters resurrected the cartridge.

        Comparing bullets to cars? A 3000 lb. car traveling at 60mph would strike you with 361,066 ft.lbs of energy (roughly 1000x that of a .45acp bul let) and doesn’t need a millimeter of penetration to kill you. Bullets on the other hand need to penetrate into the vital organs to kill, which I thought I explained in my prior comment. The .45 will either expand like a 9mm and under-penetrate or expand less than a 9mm and the hole it punches will be essentially the same. And for the record, cars may be made somewhat differently than the were in the 1950s but bones are still made of the same thing. That doesn’t mean the .45acp isn’t capable of putting a man down, it just means that so is a 9mm. Or, if you want to put down them in a hurry you should try .357 magnum.

        1. avatar Aaron M. Walker says:

          Actually, I have a history book stating that due to the increase in Gangster wearing early era bodyarmor, or making there own from steel belted tires. The .38 super was created for the FBI, and law enforcement to defeat armored gangsters in firefights….Kind of like the caliber issue of today…..(re: 9mm vs .45 vs 10mm vs .40 s&w.)

      2. avatar Joel says:

        My opinion is only worth $.02. I wish it had more value……

    2. avatar DaveR says:

      “BTW, if .45 didn’t have a reputation for not penetrating car doors and windshields they would never have invented the .38 super.

      Better to quit while you’re ahead. You’re last sentence is simply wrong.

      1. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

        Somebody should report this error on Wikipedia.

        The cartridge was designed for use in the M1911 pistol and was capable of penetrating the body armor and automobile bodies of the time.[4] When the .357 Magnum was introduced in 1934, this advantage of the .38 Super was no longer enough to lure police departments and officers from the traditional revolver. – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.38_Super

        1. avatar Rick the Bear (now in NH!!) says:

          That is my understanding from what I’ve read as well. I’ve also read that it was popular in Mexico where civilians were not allowed to own military caliber firearms.

    3. avatar Hannibal says:

      “Sure the bullet’s a bit bigger but if it expands like a 9mm should it won’t penetrate…”

      Uh, it is bigger, it does expand, and it does penetrate. Not sure where you’re getting this. Unless you meant ‘won’t penetrate as much as the 9mm’ which would be correct, but not necessarily meaningful. As long as the slug can penetrate to hit the vital areas, it doesn’t need to penetrate more.

  8. avatar K Maiden says:

    I for one, enjoy his banter. Keep it up YM! Thank you.

  9. avatar Dave says:

    I’m not really sure how he compares the 38 Special with Max velocity of a round 780 feet per second to 850 feet per second 9 millimeter caliber 38 caliber same thing that’s supposed to penetrate bone and muscle tissue? Better than a 45 going 900 hundred feet per second weighing 230 grains I’m very curious?

    1. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

      Given the same (expanded) bu llet diameter and the equal energies, a heavier slower bul let will penetrate deeper which would explain the advantage of the slow .38 special over the .380 auto. But .45acp also has a much fatter bull et which impedes penetration.

      1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

        Governor,

        Penetration is a function of bullet impact velocity and sectional density. Bullet diameter basically means nothing with respect to how far a bullet can/will penetrate.

        Facts regarding 9 mm, 115 grain versus .45 ACP, 230 grain quality expanding hollowpoint bullets:
        — .45 weighs twice as much as 9 mm
        — .45 expands to about 1.4 times the diameter of 9 mm expanded
        — 1.4 times greater diameter = twice the frontal area
        — twice the weight and twice the frontal area = same sectional density

        Thus, if you have quality expanding hollowpoint bullets in the most popular weight for 9 mm and .45 ACP, you have the same sectional density and thus the same potential for penetration if both bullets impact at the same velocity. However, the muzzle velocity for 230 grain .45 ACP bullets is only something like 840 fps whereas the muzzle velocity of 115 grain 9 mm bullets is something like 1,100 fps. That means a 115 grain 9 mm bullet should penetrate deeper than a 230 grain .45 ACP bullet simply because the 9 mm bullet has a substantially higher muzzle velocity.

        Of course if you step up to 124 grain or even better 135 grain bullets in 9 mm, they should penetrate noticeably deeper than .45 ACP because they have a higher sectional density than .45 ACP and they have a faster muzzle velocity.

        Given the fact that penetration is extremely important for stopping attackers and quality expanding 9 mm hollowpoints should expand to at least 0.6 inches or so, I would take 9 mm over .45 ACP every time. Add the fact that 9 mm gives you substantially greater magazine capacity and it should be a slam dunk!

        1. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

          Velocity in itself inhibits penetrate, all else being equal (i.e. impact energy). For instance, a 68gr. .224″ bul let has a higher SD than a 240gr. .429″, yet when shot from a rifle at 2700fps it will penetrate substantially less than a 240gr. out of a pistol at 1350fps. The faster bu llet disperses a large portion of it’s energy outward rather than forward because the flesh simply can’t get out of the way fast enough. Similarly the faster bull et also loses it’s energy to the atmosphere faster for the same reason, the air simply can’t get out of the way fast enough. A 40mph wind is 4 times as strong as a 20mph, and the same exists when the air is standing still and an object is moving through it.

          As far as the 9mm vs .45acp argument goes, I’m mostly basing my assessment on a fairly long history of looking at ballistic gel tests. A .45 bul let that expands to 7/8″ never seems to penetrate as much as a 9mm bu llet that expands to 5/8″.

        2. avatar Joel says:

          Typically faster moving bullets penetrate less because they expand more. Just sayin.

        3. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

          That too Joel. But if you start looking at 5.56fmj ballistics tests you’ll see what I’m talking about.

        4. avatar js says:

          Actually, penetration is not particularly related to velocity. As others have noted, increasing speed may decrease penetration.

          Look up “long rod penetrators”, and also “Impact Depth” on Wikipedia.

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impact_depth

          It’s an approximation, but darned accurate. Steel-core AP bullets seem to penetrate only to about their length, which fits perfectly with Newton’s approximation. Raising the velocity by 400 fps made no difference in my experiments (.308 vs. .300 RUM).

  10. avatar Geoff PR says:

    Thank you, TTAG, for reminding me *why* I don’t bother to watch YM anymore…

  11. avatar strych9 says:

    Personally I like the guy and I think he’s funny sometimes. That doesn’t mean that I always agree with him and here I don’t.

    To me the whole concept of defending/justifying a pistol round in terms of, well anything related to terminal ballistics, “knockdown power” or lethality, is stupid. If you want to drop people reliably you use a rifle or a shotgun, not a pistol. Truth be told the statistics indicate that a penetrating wound to the chest cavity with a knife is more likely to be lethal than a shot to the chest with any pistol caliber except possibly .500S&W (which I don’t think existed at the time of the studies on this that I’ve read). Overall a knife is less likely to be lethal because a ton of the wounds they cause are to the extremities and often not a major artery or vein. Generally I suspect this is because your average person who gets stabby/slashy doesn’t actually know how to use a knife against another person very effectively but that’s just my supposition and I’m getting off topic.

    The real question when choosing a gun or caliber is what you’re comfortable with and can shoot the best. The reason for anything affecting this is immaterial. My wife doesn’t like the new checkering on Gen 4 Glocks. I don’t get it but I don’t try to shove carrying one down her throat either because that would be stupid. Whether the reason for your lack of comfort with a gun/round is “realistic” or purely mental doesn’t matter. If it affects your comfort level in shooting the gun and getting rounds on target then it matters in the real world. If other people don’t like it or think your reasoning is stupid then ignore them or tell them to kick rocks.

    Part of being comfortable with a gun/round is not having nagging questions in the back of your mind about your ability to put rounds on target to good effect in situations you deem to be somewhat likely based on your experience and what you do in life. Those aren’t questions other people can answer for you and once you’ve answered them for yourself the opinions of others mean exactly nothing.

    Sorry YM, creating a matrix for this topic and trying to find the “best” answer makes no sense. Just because you don’t see an advantage doesn’t mean others don’t. “I hit the target more often with .45ACP” is the only “justification” that really matters and why that’s the case doesn’t matter at all.

    1. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

      Actually you’re usually better off going for the extremities with a knife. The object isn’t to kill but to get away. Strikes to the arms and legs tend to disable their functions. When someone is pumped up with adrenaline (or other substances) a lethal wound (including one from a firearm) won’t always save your ass.

      1. avatar strych9 says:

        The point of talking about knives in my OP was merely that the statistics are skewed because they count every single knife attack where someone was cut on an arm or the hand. In many cases the attacker wasn’t “that serious” or had no idea what they were doing with the knife and probably didn’t intend to use it for anything other than a bluff.

        Now, if you’re to the point where you’re reduced to a blade and you have to fight you don’t slash or poke and run (poking and running is for the ladies you meet at a bar but really aren’t that in to). You attack and press the attack until the attacker is done or you’re done. This idea of disabling a leg or an arm is nonsense unless you’re extremely skilled with a knife and even then it’s a huge gamble. Failure means your in fisticuffs /grappling/his knife range and haven’t disabled that arm or leg. Meanwhile you’ve likely taken damage yourself possibly from this other guy’s blade. The chances you disable a leg in a street fight are slim which means that adrenaline you mentioned makes this person able to chase you and continue the fight. Short of a good cut on the brachial artery (arm) or a good cut on the femoral (leg) you’re gonna be seeing round 2 with that person.

        The “truth about knives” is that you don’t want to get into a situation where one is being used as a weapon by anyone, yourself included. Knives are, in the right hands, one of the most dangerous weapons you can come across but they come with their own set of rather serious risks to the user. That said, a determined attacker with a knife is very, very difficult to deal with because of the brain fart factor they induce in the person being attacked.

        Again, if you’re forced to use a knife do not slash and run or attempt to disable a limb. If you’re to this point it’s life or death and the thing that’s going to get you out the other side alive is extreme aggression in attacking the other person until they are incapable of continuing the fight.

        1. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

          Yes, getting in a knife fight is only slightly more desirable than getting in a gun fight. I was thinking more of using a knife for self defense against an unarmed but larger physically stronger person, as in if say a woman is being attacked by a man. Stab and slash. Don’t just jab and pull the blade straight out. Still, if you stab your attacker in the liver he’s likely to be mobile for several minutes. Sever tendons and nerves and the limb becomes useless.

  12. avatar Madcapp says:

    Any gun in .45 caliber would be a better gun in 9mm. And that is the truth about guns. No amount of 1911 fanboys crying is going to change that fact.

    1. avatar DaveR says:

      And any gun in 9mm caliber would be a better gun in .357sig

      (…and so it goes)

      1. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

        …and any gun in .355 sig would be better in .357 magnum…

        1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

          And any gun in .357 Magnum would be better in .44 Magnum!

        2. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

          Dammit u_s, I’m trying to not buy this for my next carry gun; http://www.realguns.com/articles/789.htm

          You’re not helping.

        3. avatar Binder says:

          And the 460 g21 rules them all

    2. avatar Geoff PR says:

      “Any gun in .45 caliber would be a better gun in 9mm.”

      Until you’ve launched your #7 and suddenly discover you *really* need rounds # 8, #9, #10, etc.

      “And that is the truth about guns.”

      Errr, nope.

      “No amount of 1911 fanboys crying is going to change that fact.”

      Crying is just what you’ll be doing (along with crapping your pants) when you suddenly realize rounds # 8, #9, #10, etc. are necessary for your continued existence…

      🙂

      1. avatar tsbhoa.p.jr says:

        so then a nine would be better then? you cornfused me…

        1. avatar Geoff PR says:

          I was *born* corn-fuzed… 🙂

      2. avatar Prudikal says:

        or instead of a 1911 you use an fnx 45 (reg or tac) so you have 15 rds + 1 in the chamber.

    3. avatar Joseph Quixote says:

      Actually hitting your target is important. 1911s are a very accurate platform. They have real triggers and in my opinion a much better ability to point and shoot. The spray and pray your read about from New York’s finest only comes from those guns that hold 14-22 rounds. I would bet that many who own the big double stack pistols don’t practice enough because they believe that with multiple rounds they are sure to hit their target.

  13. avatar Steve says:

    Check out the Winchester 230gr Ranger-T’s: http://www.luckygunner.com/labs/self-defense-ammo-ballistic-tests/

    9mm has some advantages, for sure (cheaper to feed, higher capacity, lower recoil), but the 45 ACP definitely doesn’t suck, especially considering FN and Remington both have models with a 15 round capacity, negating it’s primary drawback.

  14. avatar Buzz Word says:

    I’ve read where surgeons can’t tell 9mm, .40 S&W and .45 Auto wounds apart.. pick the one you’d like to get shot with the least and go with that. If you find any of these rounds snappy then you need to eat more spinach or something. In a real fight, you’ll wish you had a 10mm or .44 Magnum. If you buy into the one-shot stop stuff, the .45 and the .40 have a real edge over the 9mm, even with modern rounds.

    1. avatar Tex300BLK says:

      “If you buy into the one-shot stop stuff, the .45 and the .40 have a real edge over the 9mm, even with modern rounds.”

      https://youtu.be/iYRsZEmIfsY

  15. avatar No one of consequence says:

    Okay, fine. So when will TYM be volunteering to get shot with a .45 ACP to demonstrate its suckiness?

    1. avatar DrewR says:

      He pretty plainly says in the video itself that 45 doesn’t suck, just that he considers it the least effective of the modern defensive loads. I disagree with him, as someone pointed out earlier all three major semiautomatic rounds leave similar damage in people. I personally got a kick out of the fact that he says one of the major drawbacks is capacity when he prefers a five or six shot revolver.

      1. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

        Actually I don’t think his argument was that .45 was less effective but less advantageous (which makes his argument entirely subjective).

        And once again, .357 magnums hit WAY harder than .45acps do.

        1. avatar DrewR says:

          You are correct on both counts, Gov. I used effective as though it were a synonym of advantageous, which it is not.

          I wholly agree with you on the 357 being the more potent pill. My intent was merely to point out that, on the issue of capacity alone, the argument is flawed. 8 or 9 rounds of 45 will be roughly as effective as 6 rounds of 357, if not more so considering average shots to stop for all handgun calibers from 22 to 44 mag is two, according to a chart I got from this site a few years back. I am not particularly concerned with capacity as much, but if one does make that argument then 8 or 9 rounds with faster reloads trump 5 to 6 with slower reloads.

          All modern defensive handgun calibers are effective, and everyone should carry what they shoot best with quality defensive ammo that has been thoroughly vetted in their gun. Statistically there isn’t a huge difference in the real world.

          I own and shoot all of them, except 40 and 10mm, 40 because it doesn’t have enough of an advantage over 9mm in a pistol to justify the extra price per round (however had the sub 2k gen2 I happened upon recently had been in 40 I would have been even happier with it. From a 3 or 4 inch barrel the 40 is only a little better, from a 16 inch barrel it is much better.) I don’t own 10mm just because I already own several 357s, and I don’t want another round that is roughly on parts and costs just as much to shoot.

        2. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

          Yea, I was just trying to explain his rationale. The other factor would be to carry the revolver for dependability. Personally, when I carried a 9mm I took comfort in the fact that there were 18 of them little pills in the gun. Now that I carry a revolver I take comfort in the fact that the 6 rounds I carry will hit much harder. Either one will do just fine. I can also see the rationale of carrying a 1911 because a) they’re cool and b) it’s easier to shoot a single action trigger accurately. I don’t really get the Glock (and non-Glock brand Glock) .45s. If you’re going with that platform I’d think 9mm or .40S&W would be better. Or 10mm if you want a high capacity .357 magnum powered semi-auto.

  16. avatar Noishkel says:

    Oh fun. Another caliber d*ck measuring contest.

    But then again I generally just can’t stand TYM anyway. He’s just got that smarmy punch-able face and annoying Glock fanaticism that just gets on my nerves.

  17. avatar Jack says:

    Still not convinced. I’m continuing to carry a 1911 in 45 acp fan as I have done for 46 years.

    He makes a good point on penetration. I think the best choice in 45 acp is fmj.

  18. avatar YAR0892 says:

    Caliber helps, but round placement is king. .17, .22, 9mm, .45, .30, 40mm, or 120mm-if you can’t get the round on target then your caliber means nothing. The smallest round capable of leaving a half-ass wound channel through the target’s CNS is better than a near-miss by the largest weapon available. Size helps, but round placement trumps all.

  19. avatar Bigsky says:

    For those interested in actually understanding ballistics please read ALL of the document created by Rathcoombe.

    A bit about him, “A brief word about my background is warranted. I am a mechanical engineer by profession and employed in the defense industry as an analyst and designer of anti-armor lethal mechanisms (ie, warheads and penetrators). Terminal ballistics is both my hobby and my profession. On the job I use a computational tool known as a “hydrocode” called CTH, which was developed by Sandia National Laboratory, to perform penetration analyses, along with code that I have written for specific applications.”

    http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/wounding.html#introduction

  20. avatar Catherine says:

    Disappointing video. Yankee Marshal satire & provocation is sub-par if it doesn’t include Gary the Glock and at least one reference to midget hookers.

    1. avatar Geoff PR says:

      …er, did you just say midget hookers?

      (Re-subbing YM and frantically searching his vids…) 🙂

      1. avatar Catherine says:

        Oh, yes. Yankee Marshal has mentioned “midget hookers” to intensify the absurdity of his satire. They play a big role in his piece on tbe ammo crisis from a few years ago: https://youtu.be/z5QY3Hgg5sM

        Some other LoL YM videos:

        • Why Revolvers are Better than Semi-Autos: https://youtu.be/-OSodRtHHmo

        • Don’t Blow Your Dick Off (Use a Holster): https://youtu.be/VG0FT3G_xyE

        • Five Most Beautiful Handguns (Gary the Glock’s I’d Hit That List): https://youtu.be/fQojq0ybA58

  21. avatar Gutshot says:

    Hmmm, I’m thinking 460 Rowland or 10mm if you want real horsepower and capacity from a handgun. Both available for use in the 1911 or Glock, or Glock knockoffs.

  22. avatar Kendahl says:

    Misses don’t count and I shoot 9 mm better than .45. There was an argument for the latter when all we had were solid bullets. With modern defensive ammunition, there is little difference in handgun calibers. We carry handguns only because rifles and shotguns are too big to conceal.

  23. avatar CCDWGuy says:

    Ok, I had a Kimber Super Carry Utra, .45, I could not shoot it with any accuracy or consistency. Sold it back to Cabella’s. Bought a Walther PPQ M2 and I can do ok with it but will never carry it even though it holds 12 rounds and has the most awesome trigger. It’s just better for me to carry an M&P Shield as I can hit stuff center mass on a regular basis and only with an 8 round mag and one in the chamber and an extra mag on my belt. For me a 9mm is the better option as I can hit what I shoot. i’m sure there are others who can do the same with a .45.

  24. avatar emfourty gasmask says:

    I really enjoy my RIA TAC Ultra CS.

    “compactish” but proven to be a pretty solid contender. A guide rod swap and a spring change and I can carry it loaded up with 8 rounds of 45 Super, which is more than enough for the baddies here in Arizona. I’d say that’s pretty flexible if you ask me. I used to be against 45 ACP until I realized that it has a seriously large pool of ammo types to pull from.

  25. avatar PROUD chicano says:

    I generally like his channel he’s pretty funny. As for the caliber war I don’t want to get hit with any sized bullet and I’m confident that any would be attacker wouldn’t shake off 230 grains of 1911 delivered JHP.

  26. avatar me says:

    Damn, just said maybe a week ago, my .45acp has a higher capacity that either of our two 9mm’s, or the wife’s .380 so the arguments about capacity are crap, i can fire the .45 more accurately and faster than the smaller calibers, as does my very small framed wife, the only real comparison in our pistols is the difference between striker fired, and DAO, so before I was concerned with hole size, capacity, velocity, knock down power or any other bullshit, i will say a trigger that allows good shot placement is key, DOA that is guesswork on the break causes Inaccuracy, predictable clean break improves groups, who cares how big and heavy the lead is in a typical dgu, they are usually face to face and at a whopping 15ft.

  27. avatar Jeff says:

    I don’t limit to just 9mm, .40, .45 or any single size. get em all. plus I wouldn’t waste one second of my time watching one of ym vids. I watched a couple vids a few years ago, but he’s just not funny or entertaining.

  28. avatar Silentbrick says:

    Sorry, the best home defense round is the M576 40mm buckshot round. One shot, everyone in front of you dead:p. Bring a squeegee.

    Size does matter.

  29. avatar TruthTellers says:

    People are obsessed with the .45 ACP as the big bore pistol cartridge, but you look at the size of the pistols and they’re always bigger than .40 or 9mm, not to mention of lower capacity. To me, it’s not better than either 9 or .30 for self defense purposes.

    Then it’s also more expensive to shoot, whether one reloads or not.

    I don’t agree with the Yankee Marshall often, but when I do, it means he’s right.

  30. avatar Pg2 says:

    SW 625 rock solid for nightstand/home defense.

  31. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

    I love a good caliber war.

  32. avatar Michael says:

    I haven’t met the bullet I want to be shot with…..

  33. avatar Stephen J says:

    It would be funny if it was intentional satire. He’s the equivalent of an unwitting Onion columnist.

  34. avatar Crowbar says:

    Since I have been working at my friend’s gun shop, I have .heard this several times, “I can’t rack the slide on a little .380 and I can’t shoot a J frame worth a damn. I would really be be more comfortable with a .22 or .22 mag. What do you think?” My stock reply is “If a .22 or .22 mag are your only options, I say carry them because a little gun beats no gun and I sure as hell don’t want to be peppered with 10-15 rounds of 40 grain jhp at 1000+ fps.” Seems to make people feel better.

  35. avatar BC says:

    I recently had the opportunity to test bullet resistant wall board. It was rated class 3, meaning up to .44 mag. It stopped all my pistol caliber rounds, but the .40 S&W rocked it the most. Yes, more than .45. Obviously, wallboard vs human body is two different things, but .40 definitely showed more energy than 9mm or .45. Shooting 3-gun, I definitely see .40 knocks down targets better than 9mm. But these anecdotes aren’t based on humans, they’re simply energy based. I’ve been carry 9mm more lately cuz it give me more capacity, meaning more potential hits. Everyone says shot placement is what counts, but no one ever says how they’re going to be so collected in a defensive use that they can call their shots. So I love my .40, but tend towards capacity to make more holes, increasing my probability of getting a stopping hit. I’m a realist; I know I’m not likely to make a X shot when the stuff is real.

    1. avatar Geoff PR says:

      “I recently had the opportunity to test bullet resistant wall board.”

      Got a link for the manufacturer?

  36. avatar Hunter says:

    my carry gun is a .45 depending on weather. sometimes it’s a 9mm or even a .380. it all depends on the time of year and if i decide to open carry or not. of course i have to decide if i’m going to carry my Sig 1911 Nightmare .45 or my P227 carry .45 or my P226 9mm or my P229e2 9mm or my P238 .380. hmmm decisions decisions

  37. avatar Bill says:

    Isn’t this guy gay? I heard he was gay.

    1. avatar Roy Johnson says:

      I don’t know about that, but regardless I can only tolerate him in small doses….sorta like “nutnfancy”….

      1. avatar jwm says:

        nutnfancy has never heard of small doses.

        1. avatar Snake Plisskin says:

          ?

          man, he DO like to pontificate…

    2. avatar Martin says:

      I really don’t think it’s anyone’s business if he is or not but I came across the answer to this in about 3 minutes of investigation.

      I love his videos. Funny, informative and he speaks the truth.

  38. avatar Aaron M. Walker says:

    Since this devolved into a funny pissing contest ! I though I’d through this into the mix…Didn’t we just have a TTAG article about someones Glock 20 10mm going Nuclear !!?

  39. avatar rdsii64 says:

    Pistols suck. I carry a phased plasma rifle in the 40 watt range!!

    1. avatar Aaron M. Walker says:

      Ha! Look pal! I’ll take a Star Trek hand Phaser any day! Set to Vaporize…I mean Stun !!!

  40. avatar Roy Johnson says:

    Well, to quote a retired USMC guy I know when I was wandering off into caliber-land on a similar subject, he said “Well, there are a lot of dead Japanese and Germans who might disagree with you on .45 ACP not being effective…”

    I shut my mouth at that point….

  41. avatar Pete says:

    YM lost me years ago after his persistent inability to recognize good guns when they hit him in the face (in particular the RDB, because he’s an obsessive hater of all things Kel-Tec). But there was plenty of other idiotic content too.

  42. avatar Matt(TX) says:

    Was at the range shooting a Springfield XD/45. Range guy had an XD/40 cal. Shot his and shot mine and couldn’t tell the difference.

  43. avatar DaveR says:

    If you reload, .45ACP is king IMO. For me, reloading 9mm, 40, 10mm and (OMFG!) 357sig are more “fiddley” due to small component size. The result is that I shoot my 45acp way more than with my 9mm.

    More practice=more hitting, and THAT’s infinitely more important that any pointy-headed caliber debate.

    So long as you have something bigger than 32ACP, you’re greatest weakness is a defensive situation is going to be training-related

  44. avatar Not Jimbo says:

    YM is just a trolling commentator with click bait titles. I never got one useful bit of information from him and his humor does nothing for me so I haven’t watched his vids for years.

  45. avatar Charles says:

    However, after that .45 goes BOOM instead of pew-pew, only the truly dangerous are left to deal with. He does make valid points about choosing your weapon wisely, mainly because getting a 5,000 Magnum Stainless Steel Ivory handled Unobtainium Barreled Terminator Movie Inspired Hand Cannon because it’s cool does not mean you will be carrying it when the goons attack you.

    1. avatar Bigsky says:

      LOL, I hope your first sentence is sarcasm or your shooting a 454 Casull. If neither are the case please read in it’s entirety…..
      http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/wounding.html

  46. avatar Cloud says:

    .40 is too snappy. I don’t like the recoil. I prefer .45 or 9mm.

    1. avatar RandallOfLegend says:

      45 ACP has more recoil out of the same size frame as a 40. Shoot the 40 out of a 38 ounce 1911 and the 40 will feel light and fluffy.

  47. avatar Kap says:

    A .44 special is a preference, can fire larger grain bullets than either the .45 or .40, has same vaunted stopping as both, Easier on hand with recoil, only carries 5 or 6 cartridges, slower reload time, so it has its disadvantages, no matter the number of Cartridges you shoot it still takes one to connect! or buy a 44 mag and shoot in both worlds! at close range a Bowie knife works wonders either way you have a couple of pounds of extra weight, wonder why some of the old time gun writers chose .44 special?

  48. avatar Ed Rogers says:

    This is one of Yankee Marshall ‘s most successful efforts. It has obviously generated much controversy and debate. Simultaneously, it has given him much more exposure. Good for him!

    I believe we all benefit from carrying, regardless of caliber. Which is the best? That’s purely subjective, especially if we never have to draw or discharge our firearm.

  49. avatar RandallOfLegend says:

    Watched and enjoyed the entire video. The comment thread below this article exactly matches his predictions to responses in the video. Imagine that. Good show.

  50. avatar Joseph says:

    Anyone who thinks that any one of all the calibers mentioned above is not effective on humans hasn’t been to many, if any, shooting scenes. Poking holes where they don’t belong with ANY caliber projectile is immediately detrimental to ones health. How soon the shootee stops hostilities has more to do with his mindset and where he is hit than anything else. It’s fun to argue about it, just don’t take yourself, and your caliber, too seriously . It’s a handgun for chrissake.

    1. avatar big daddy says:

      I give up trying to explain these things to people. If you are talking about Ball/FMJ it’s different than modern bonded JHP. It’s a handgun, you want a possible one shot kill use a rifle with a large caliber and soft points or a shotgun with a slug even 00. These are tools, use the right tool for the job, that is all. One man’s right tool is not another. But the total ignorance and misinformation is almost impossible to get by when discussing it. I like all calibers, they all have something they do well, even .45ACP.

      1. avatar AJ187 says:

        I agree. Too much hatebait articles and videos driving people apart on semantic issues. What a waste of time.

  51. avatar Hannibal says:

    The guy’s a goof. I like him, but he’s a goof. He makes the common inane argument that the 9mm has somehow been improved by technology to make it a wunder-round but he ignores that those same improvements have been applied to every common type of defensive round, including .45

  52. avatar Klaus says:

    There’s a lot of Moro’s, Mexicans, Germans, Austrians, Hungarians, Nicaraguans, Japanese, Germans (again), Koreans, and Vietnamese who thinks it’s just fine for self defense.

    1. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

      Those guys don’t think much of anything – they’re all dead.

  53. avatar James in AZ says:

    Um, i carry FMJs only. For an extra margin of reliability in case my gun gets dirty. A G21 w/ spare mag seems plenty to me.

  54. avatar Stuki Moi says:

    For home (inside the house), night stand defense, not going deaf is kind of nice. And, gun size isn’t a big deal. So low pressure .45 out of a long barrel full sizer is cool. Very much Including my personal fave .45 gap.

    In smaller guns, a bullet traveling only marginally fast out of a full length barrel, doesn’t really give me the warm and fuzzies out of a 3 incher. Neither does a cartridge so big, capacity is marginal even from a full sizer.

    As long as modern guns runs reliably with straight no taper cases, and the shooter can handle the recoil in the size of gun considered, the .40 probably is exactly what it was designed to be, the Goldilocks size between 9 and .45. But in the real world, in the big scheme of things, all three, as well as the Gap and Sig and 10mm, are pretty much Goldilocks anyway.

  55. avatar PsyGuy says:

    I am not sure what his whole point here is… He is all over the place.

    He wants to talk about the 380’s size and hiding it in you pocket… you can hide an xds 45acp in your pocket with 1-5/6 capacity.

    If you want to compare the rounds, compare the rounds and not everything around them as those are things that can change (mag size, single/double stack, gun size, etc).

    Every round has a function that its designed for.

    If he wants to “what if…” it to death then, “What if the SHTF and you have to scavenge for ammo?”

    Some places list 9mm, 45ACP & 40 as the top 3 pistol rounds. I’d count that as a plus.

  56. avatar Tom Moscone says:

    He’s a fun YouTuber. Don’t hate him or disqualify him just because he makes the effort and risk of staking out a controversial opinion. That’s what make arguments fun! Didn’t you hicks ever have high school english teachers telling you not to pick a boring thesis that everyone already agrees with, that as long as you’re making the effort to write a paper you might as well take up the challenge of a controversial thesis?

    I find that gun enthusiasts are no different than the fanboys and nerds of any other subject like video games or bernie sanders, by which I mean that they are easily TRIGGERED and are much too quick to confuse criticisms of their favorite brands and products as criticism of themselves as humans. RELAX people, Yankee Marshall didn’t call you a worthless sack of shit, he was just trying to make an entertaining argument about why he doesn’t like .45 ACP very much.

    I think he’s generally correct about .45 vs .40 vs 9mm. .45 doesnt offer anything over .40 to justify the higher price, lower capacity, and higher recoil. And .40 the same compared to 9mm. Thats’ why all the internet conventional-wisdom-mongers tell everyone to buy 9mm.

    But if you like .45, don’t let a youtube clown make you sad and weepy! It will work just as well in the end!

    I would never have believed that gun enthusiasts were just as sensitive and weepy as justin bieber enthusiasts before I started reading these comments sections JFC…

  57. avatar Chris T from KY says:

    The best firearm is the one you can dress around. If you can’t ccw it then you will have to get a different gun, perhaps with a different caliber.
    Open carry?
    Then carry a .50 caliber hand gun if you want to.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email