2003 Volume 3

Owning a firearm for self-defence is politically and culturally risky; even though the number of armed Americans increases almost daily, STILL the popular perception of a firearm owner is some kind of paranoid "red-neck" gun-nut who is more danger to his family and neighbours than to any criminals.

Of course, the statistics that show firearms being legally used millions of times a year to prevent assaults, rapes, burglaries, etc., never enter the mainstream consciousness because the media refuses to acknowledge that private ownership of firearms serves a vital function in ANY society. The reality is that more often than you think, owning the RIGHT kind of firearm can mean the difference between life and death.

Guns are not magic devices. When waved in the general direction of a problem, they don't make it go away. The average person purchasing a firearm for self-defence is more likely to have developed his understanding of the function, purpose and usefulness of a weapon from television and movies. Hollywood creates all sorts of myths about the destructive effects of magical guns that blow massive holes through walls, make cars explode or throw a 200 pound man ten feet backwards from the shock of being hit with a bullet weighing a fraction of an ounce.

In reality, a gun is simply a device that uses the application of certain basic principles of physics. It is a way of concentrating force. For example, if you hit a man in the chest with your fist, you might hurt him, but will unlikely cause him any serious injury because the force of the blow is spread out through the knuckles and fingers and across his chest and ribs. However, if you hit a man in the chest with a knife, you will seriously injure him, possibly even fatally, because the same force is concentrated in the point of the blade to a specific point on his body. That's the reason why sharp blades are more effective than dull ones; sharpening something allows more force to be placed on a smaller area. The more that the force is concentrated, the more effective it is in penetrating or cutting.

A gun works the same way; it is not REALLY the type of gun that is important, as the type of round that is being used. Sure there are differences between makes and models of firearms; some are more inherently accurate, some more reliable, some more ergonomically designed, etc., but whether some people like to admit it or not, the LOOK of the gun actually has more influence on their perception of its effectiveness, than anything else. How else to explain the "assault weapon" ban in America? The so-called "assault weapons" are simply semi-automatic rifles that are otherwise perfectly legal, EXCEPT, they look really, REALLY mean.

Because certain guns LOOKED bad, therefore, some people were convinced that they must BE bad! They unconsciously adopted a myth about firearms and then enacted that myth into law. But many others on the opposite side of the gun-issue also believe in pretty much the same myth. All one has to do is peruse a random copy of any gun magazine to see various companies capitalizing on the "look" of the firearms they offer for sale. The naive buyer assumes that the effectiveness of a weapon is tied to its appearance.

For example, I have known a number of gun-owners to spend a lot of time and money deciding which pistol to buy, but never give ten seconds of thought as to which rounds they are going to use in it. I have known some otherwise very smart, well educated people spend a small fortune on an expensive pistol for self-defence, and then only use full metal jacket rounds! At best, they simply ask the gun store owner for his advice, or the advice of the "gun store cowboys" who always seem to be hanging around. But too often, they go to Wal-Mart or such and just pick up the cheapest box of ammo they can find.

Full metal jacketed rounds are the LEAST effective bullets ever devised and were only "invented" in the first place to make guns LESS lethal! British soldiers had discovered in one of their colonial wars that if they cut a cross-shaped notch in the tip of their bullets, it would literally blow a hole in the enemy. The notched bullets expanded upon striking, increasing the diameter of the bullet, thus making a significantly larger hole and obviously increasing the possibility of catastrophic damage. These bullets, called "dum-dums" (possibly because they were developed at the "Dum-Dum" arsenal in India) were horribly effective; so much so that international law forbade their use in military conflicts. Thus modern day military weapons are required to have "full metal jackets" (bullets composed of a soft composite core surrounded by a thin copper jacket). These bullets will not normally expand when hitting something; in fact, they will often pass right through a body leaving only a small hole. Now as they enter and exit something, they WILL impart a portion of their energy to that body, causing serious damage. But they are not the instant killing devices as commonly supposed.

During the battle in Mogadishu, dramatised in the movie, "Black Hawk Down," some American soldiers reported firing entire magazines into attacking Somali gunmen before they would go "down." The high velocity M-16 bullets are small and punch nice, neat little holes in a person that, eventually, may kill them, but often will not stop them when they are pumped up with adrenaline and drugs (as many of the gunmen were). Full metal jacket rounds are politically correct, but are not terribly effective.

Americans should know better; after all we faced a similar problem in suppressing the Moro guerillas in the Philippines at the turn of the 20th Century. More than a few US Army officers armed with .38 caliber revolvers were killed after emptying their revolvers into machete wielding fanatics hopped up on drugs. The bullets simply lacked sufficient force to stop an attacking adversary. As a result, the US Army developed the .45 ACP which was our standard pistol round until the 1980's-when it was replaced by the Beretta 9MM. Actual battle use has shown that the 9MM is not an adequate caliber in its military format; the high velocity 9MM full metal jacketed round simply will not stop an attacker. While the target may later bleed to death from his wounds, those wounds will not stop him before he does a little wounding of his own.

My favourite story about the 9MM comes from an Israeli army officer (during one of their wars against the Arabs) whose command bunker was attacked by a suicidal fanatic. He said, "I don't know why you Americans are so against the 9MM. Why, I shot him 7 times and he went right down!" He was using an UZI, a 9mm machine pistol with a large capacity magazine. I do not know about you, but if you HAVE to shoot something, do you really want to have to shoot SEVEN times before you can stop the attack? Will you even have TIME to shoot that many times?

Special Forces in the US military and Police SWAT teams have now gone BACK to the .45 just because, though they are still restricted on the type of bullets that can be used, they know that a BIGGER bullet means a BIGGER hole; it ain't rocket science. While bullet placement is ALWAYS important, the simple fact is that a bigger hole means a quicker stop.

Now having said that, the 9MM CAN be quite effective with the right round, and careful bullet placement; even a 9MM full metal jacketed round in the head or heart will most likely cause instant death. But no matter how good one may be punching holes in paper targets on the range; few shooters in the real world can achieve that kind of accuracy in the stress of a lethal force encounter. I have seen numerous police gunfights caught on the dash-mounted video-cameras of patrol cars where officers, extensively trained, emptied 14-18 rounds of 9MM at point blank range at armed felons, and MISSED! Not for a moment am I disparaging these brave men's professionalism or expertise; it is a whole different world when the target is firing back!

But if you are involved in a lethal force situation, you do not have the luxury of having a platoon of men surrounding you with rifles, machine-guns, tanks and artillery. And now, thanks to our gun laws, you probably do not have a high capacity magazine available, either. All you have is what you are carrying on your person. You do not necessarily want to KILL your attacker, but you do not have the luxury of wounding him in order to demoralise his comrades. You have to STOP him, and the cowboy myth of shooting the gun out of his hand, or wounding him in the arm or leg will get you killed (nothing makes a bad guy angrier than being shot; they tend to take it real personal).

Therefore, for self-defence, you must have three things; a caliber that is large enough, with enough power behind it, and a bullet that will dump the energy into the target to stop the attack as quickly as possible. Granted, people have been killed by even the smallest calibers like .22's (a weapon designed for shooting rabbits, squirrels and other small varmints); but there are enough cases on the book to show that men have been shot 20 or more times with a .22 and still killed their victims; better not depend on "mouse guns" in an emergency.

Thus, when purchasing a handgun, forget the looks. Instead, focus on the caliber (how large a round it fires) and the type of bullet you plan to use. For the average person, that means some sort of "hollow-point" ammunition. A hollow-point is a bullet with the centre scooped out; essentially capitalising on the "dum-dum" concept invented by the British. When a "hollow-point" round hits a target, the force makes the edges peel back, increasing the diameter of the bullet, thus making the hole larger in the target as well as increasing resistance and imparting more energy. You do not want a bullet that travels through the attacker, exiting out the back and then possibly hitting someone standing behind them. You do not want a bullet that will expand too quickly and thus not penetrate deep enough to cause disabling damage. You want something, that will, if possible; impart sufficient energy into the attacker to increase the likelihood of the wound being catastrophic enough to cause unconsciousness or death almost instantly.

Now I could get really graphic here and describe, from my research library, all the gruesome details of what happens when a bullet hits a human body; but what is the point? I enjoy a good steak, but have little interest in the details of how beef goes from the feedlot, to the slaughterhouse, to my grill. I just would rather not know. In the same way, I'd rather not know all the medical facts behind bullet injuries; all I want to know is that if I ever HAVE to use my firearm for self-defence, it will do the job quickly and effectively with minimum risk to me, my family, or my neighbour down the street. We all pray that we will never be placed in a situation where we have to use lethal force, but sometimes, we simply do not have a choice. Either we take the shot, or we, or someone we love, is going to die.

Which brings us all the way back to my friend "Bob." Bob never hesitated. Before coming to look at a vicious looking bear in his yard, he took his .45 caliber pistol out, loaded Federal Hydra-Shock bullets and jacked one in the chamber, and was ready. He was not looking for trouble, but just taking a sensible precaution. Federal Hydra-Shocks are well-tested hollow pointed ammunition, and in a .45 caliber round, have a well deserved reputation for effective stopping power.

Thus, when the bear jumped over the railing of his deck, at a range of literally 36 inches, Bob shot the bear once in the head; settling once and for all the .45 vs. 9MM debate. The bear dropped down dead. Maybe he could have called the county animal control officer (though where he lives, they would have probably told him to shoot the stupid brute and not bother them over such trifles). But remember, he has little children who play outside all the time, and now a family of bears had determined that his home was their new picnic area. Furthermore, all the myths of "Gentle Ben" went out the window when that bear charged his wife .

But "Bob" didn't believe the myths; either about wildlife or the magic stopping power of guns. He had enough "gun," and enough "bullet" to do the job. He had practiced with his weapon and knew what to do when there wasn't enough time to think. He saved himself, and his wife, from a vicious mauling or even death.

That makes him a hero in my book; and a smart one at that. Did I mention that he had a friend staying over that night - a friend who was armed with a 12 gauge shotgun loaded with triple nought buckshot to back him up? "Bob" is no fool; if something went wrong (as it did), even his .45 might not be enough to stop a charging bear so he had "back-up." Even a .45 is no GUARANTEE against something as large as a bear.

If you are going to have a weapon for self-defence, make sure it can do the job you need it to do, when you need it to do it. I hate to think what would happen to some people I know, carrying a small caliber pistol with full metal jacket ammunition.

This story might have had a far different ending; and a more gruesome one. As it is, "Bob" survived a lethal force situation, protected his family, and even has a great "war-story" to tell because he understood the difference between gun myths, and reality. Do you?