Well said
Well said
A thought- To carry a pistol that you can shoot with precision accuracy. A Ruger Mk1/2/3, Browning Buckmark or similar, revolver with target sights, favorite 1911, whatever. The point being that if you shoot a snake or opportunity for (Legal) game, do it with the first shot.
What research would I need to look at?
Really? You need me to teach you how to use Google? It's out there and I'm not your secretary. Do you really think this is a new topic?
This is your comment.
I'm a combat veteran that has used the .45 in service, and also used it to kill big game. I've done autopsies on hundreds of deer in my lifetime, and the damage is well....dead.
I don't see why or where the .45acp has been classified a "people" round, and don't understand why anyone could say it won't kill big game?
Perhaps you could school me on the ballistics of this statement you made?
Caliber vs caliber opinions are pointless.
You can't just say a .45acp isn't adequate... There are more factors to consider besides caliber when killing something.
ALL HANDGUNS CARTRIDGES SUCK ANYWAYS(regarding "stopping power") Especially when used for defense against big animals or people.
But it is perfectly legal to hunt with in Oklahoma:
Semi-automatic handguns: Chambered for any centerfire ammunition with a 100-grain or heavier soft-nosed bullet and having a cartridge case size of .40 caliber or larger (includes 10 mm, .357 Sig., and 40 cal. or larger) and a minimum barrel length of 4 inches.
http://www.eregulations.com/oklahoma/hunting/deer/
So to each his own.
You can't just say a .45acp isn't adequate... There are more factors to consider besides caliber when killing something.
ALL HANDGUNS CARTRIDGES SUCK ANYWAYS(regarding "stopping power") Especially when used for defense against big animals or people.
But it is perfectly legal to hunt with in Oklahoma:
Semi-automatic handguns: Chambered for any centerfire ammunition with a 100-grain or heavier soft-nosed bullet and having a cartridge case size of .40 caliber or larger (includes 10 mm, .357 Sig., and 40 cal. or larger) and a minimum barrel length of 4 inches.
http://www.eregulations.com/oklahoma/hunting/deer/
So to each his own.
Oh yeah, its legal.
Most Game Wardens in Oklahoma back in the day said more deer were killed with a .22 rimfire off season that with modern CF during season.
I don't think that stands now, but it does prove that every gun is lethal.
I've never seen a study about human rounds vs animal rounds vs caliber.
In the packing house I get my deer processed in, they kill cows with a single shot from a .22 LR.
Bulls get a .22 mag.
Most Game Wardens in Oklahoma back in the day said more deer were killed with a .22 rimfire off season that with modern CF during season.
I don't think that stands now, but it does prove that every gun is lethal.
I've never seen a study about human rounds vs animal rounds vs caliber.
In the packing house I get my deer processed in, they kill cows with a single shot from a .22 LR.
Bulls get a .22 mag.
Yeah, good luck finding one. My personal suggestion is a S&W K frame in .357
Regarding the OP's scenario; that is one of the reasons like revolvers so much.....ease of having different loads ready in an instant. Snake loads for the surprises and something else after that depending on what I am most likely to encounter.
Regarding cartridge "adequacy", carry the biggest, most powerful thing you will ACTUALLY carry and shoot well. That will be more "adequate" than the one you leave in the truck because it is heavy/awkward or one that you do carry but cannot hit that charging elephant/meth head with.
Regarding cartridge "adequacy", carry the biggest, most powerful thing you will ACTUALLY carry and shoot well. That will be more "adequate" than the one you leave in the truck because it is heavy/awkward or one that you do carry but cannot hit that charging elephant/meth head with.
I said they were typically not considered adequate. The key word is typically. Maybe it is too big a word for you so I'll explain it for you. The vast majority of the websites and forums I visited agreed that those calibers were not ideal for large animals. I never said that those calibers could not kill animals. I was merely quoting multiple opinions of people who write about this sort of thing. I never presented it as fact, I offered as an answer to why people change calibers for the trail. You might have picked up on that had you not gone straight to asshat mode.
Further, I'm not sure how stating that you're a combat vet should win you this non argument. I don't remember going through 'shooting large animals with a sidearm' training when I was in the army. While I appreciate your military service, I find mentioning it in this context to be a cheap way to convince anyone of your firearms expertise as it is irrelevant to the current discussion.
