Bond Arms Snake Slayer, first impressions

Bond Arms Snake Slayer
with Winchester PDX1 .410 ammo

It's big. It's stainless. It's heavy and it's made in the USA, Texas, specifically. Those were the first impressions.

Mine is the newer model with the improved trigger and broader hammer spur. It has the new style grips as well, with "checkering" in the form of snake scales and a carving of a mean looking rattler on them. They are somewhat larger in swell and sweep, giving a good, solid grip.

I have to say that in the hand, this pistol looks intimidating, especially if one is looking down those .45 caliber barrels.

I find the trigger to be crisp and positive, with sufficient pull as befits a concealed carry gun, but not at all heavy. I suspect the instances I have read in which people, usually internet posters (take that for what it's worth) complain about the heavy trigger. As far as I can tell, the trigger has always been fine. It's not the same kind of trigger as one finds on semi-autos, for example, because it swings back and down in a short arc. If the shooter keeps his or her hand from jamming underneath the cocked hammer and puts their finger properly on the trigger, it's just fine. Trigger problems are self-induced for the most part.

One aspect some people will have to get used to is the force and leverage necessary to cock the gun. If one has a proper shooting grip, cocking with the thumb of the shooting hand is not particularly easy. If the thumb is placed more forward on the hammer spur, greater leverage is gained, and it becomes easier. Still very firm, but it can be cocked this way. If a person has strong hands and grip, of course, it becomes easier. For many people though, women especially, cocking the pistol should be done and practiced differently. I suggest two methods that work well for concealed carry if one-hand cocking is an issue.

One: When drawing from concealment, the off hand will be used to pull the covering garment away for the draw. As the pistol comes out of the holster and starts toward the presentation position, use the off side hand, which will be right next to the gun at this point anyway, to fan the hammer back to the cocked position as the off hand hand rotates to assume the support position. If it is necessary to fire quickly, with one hand right after the gun leaves the holster, using the off hand to cock the weapon will have it instantly ready to fire, with the added advantage that the off hand will not be in front of the muzzle.

Two: Draw, present the gun in a two hand stance, then cock the hammer with the off hand's thumb. Very easy and quick, and the advantage that you can wait, if necessary, before putting the gun into "battery", or in this case, cocked and unlocked.

I have a .410 belt shell holder on order from Bond Arms, and Gordon Bond has offered to supply a holster or two for evaluation for concealed carry purposes. I'm looking into the D.M. Bullard cross draw holster for sitting and driving, and possibly an IWB from them as well, but I haven't heard back from Bullard.

Today is a trip to the "city" for errands, so I'll be toting the Snake Slayer as the main and the LCP as a BUG.

The testing goes on.

The Bond Arms Snake Slayer

After more thought and research into Bond Arms, I decided to purchase a Snake Slayer and give it a thorough testing as my primary carry gun.

Now, being that I also own and carry 9 mm and .380 semi-automatic pistols, why would I look to make a change to a two shot, single action derringer? Some explanation of my reasoning is in order.

First, I think there are two main theories, or schools of thought, regarding how an average citizen can approach how, what and when to carry a concealed weapon. The how and the when questions are easily answered:

How

• a method that is comfortable, so the pistol will be readily accessible given the fact that the gun will be under some kind of covering garment, 
• secure so there is no danger of the gun becoming accidentally dislodged from the holster and is secure from an unexpected grab or discovery,
• safe, so that the trigger is always covered to protect against negligent discharge,
• keep it concealed. 

When

• at all times where legally permissible. This requires that you know the law in the state where you are carrying. For example, I live about an hour's drive from another state, which I visit frequently. My carry permit is valid in both states, but the laws are somewhat different. In one, for example, I must be aware of which restaurants are compliant with the carry laws - in essence, an establishment must derive the majority of their income from food, not liquor. I wouldn't carry in a bar. Period. In one state, if the merchant posts a "No Guns" sign, the only force of law is regarding trespass. If an employee or manager knows you are carrying he or she can ask you to leave. That's it. If you don't, you could be charged with trespass.

What

This is usually where the controversy comes in, where gallons of ink (virtual and real) get spilled, tempers sometimes rise and some members have been banned from internet gun forums for letting their passion overrule their reason. As my old Company Commander in boot camp said, "Opinions are like ****, everyone has one."

In brief (and I'm not trying to cover all of the arguments, just a few of the main ones) the arguments run like this: 

Carry as big a gun as you can handle. 

This seems to be based on the old "stopping power" idea, being that one needs a large caliber, big bullet traveling at a high velocity to "stop" a man-sized, meth-crazed, 250 lb. biker assailant. Good luck with that. I don't know about you, but I have never even seen a meth-crazed, 250 lb biker and if I were attacked by one, I doubt that pistol "stopping power" would do much immediate good.

This notion of "stopping power" probably derived from tales coming out of WWI in the Pacific. While it is true that a 1911 .45 semi auto might drop a 100 pound, weak, starving, disease riddled Japanese soldier with one shot, a .22 would probably have worked about as well. The stories I heard while in the service in the 1960s about the "crazed" (insert an Asian enemy here) being shot six times with a .38 then slicing off the shooter's head with a samurai sword/machete/bayonet before collapsing is mostly b.s. Sounded good at the time though.

Modern ballistic studies, as well as studies based on actual law enforcement shootings, disprove this idea. Many assailants have been shot with many bullets of various calibers, including large ones beginning with a "4", and remained active and dangerous for some time.

One major problem with a big caliber gun firing large bullets at high velocities is their tendency to punch through a human torso, arm, leg, hand, neck, etc. and slam into something else. Like, through a sheet rock wall or door, or two. A car door, window, building. An innocent person who just happened to be in the vicinity. Missing your target with one of these big guns is bad. Who knows where those stray .44/.45/.357 rounds are going to end up when you miss?

The other problem with the "big as you can handle" gun is just carrying it. From my reading, and the people I know who have big pistols, most of them don't carry those guns regularly. They are too big and too heavy to strap on and carry all day, everywhere. And, if you have a carry permit and don't carry, what's the point? I've had people say to me, "I only carry when I'm going to need it." "I didn't know you could see into the future," I say. 

An average loaded model, 1911 .45 weighs about 45 oz. or 2.8 pounds. Think about carrying around half of a five pound sack of sugar attached to your belt. Make that three pounds with the holster, and a little more with a spare loaded magazine. Even so, you still get comments on the gun forums like, "The 1911 does weigh a little more, but it is a better gun in every other way. No one would ever or has ever disputed that." Not.

Even a more "modern" pistol, like a Glock 21 weighs 40 oz. loaded. That's 2.5 pounds. No big savings over a 1911.

I often wonder, really, how many of those Glock owners actually carry those guns regularly.

(There must be a reason why small, compact, lightweight guns like the Ruger LCP are so wildly popular...)

Shot placement

This old saw pops up with alarming regularity on the gun forums. (Again, a word of caution about gun forums. They are like men's gossip groups. There is a disproportionately large population of self-styled gun experts who post regularly in some forums but are basically opinionated jerks with little practical or actual knowledge of the subjects they pontificate on. Don't rely on gun forums to provide accurate, real and unbiased information. While there are knowledgeable, helpful people out there, it's very difficult to tell the phonies from the real ones, especially for those new to guns and self defense carry.)

The idea behind shot placement is that any caliber is effective when one shoots accurately and at a vital "stopping" area. There are more than a few things wrong with this notion. First, for 98% of the people who shoot hand guns, shooting with repeatable accuracy is not possible. Even then, the accurate and consistently good shots do their shooting on a range, at a target using techniques that have no bearing in a charged, adrenaline-fueled, self-defense shooting episode. Good sight picture. Steady trigger squeeze. Breath control. Steady hands. All of this goes out the window when someone threatens to take your life. Thinking that the average person who carries for self defense, who seldom gets to the shooting range and even more rarely practices rudimentary self defense shooting drills will be able to put his or her shots accurately on a vital target area when fighting for their lives is ludicrous. Remember that the next time your read or hear some fool promoting shot placement. 

The other fallacy behind shot placement is the idea that there are "vital stopping areas" that will drop an assailant dead in their tracks. Works pretty good on TV shows like "Justified", but in the real world, leaving aside the question of actually hitting one of those areas, who knows where and what they may be, or where to aim to get to them? Theoretically, maybe, but practically? There are documented cases of bad guys being shot in the head (surely, common gun wisdom knows this is a vital stopping area) who don't go down, but keep on shooting.

A caveat regarding laser sights
I have to note that the acceptance and use of laser sights on handguns has a direct, and positive bearing on the notion of shot placement. Many respected authorities on handguns and self defense, such as Jeff Quinn of Gunblast.com, recognize the usefulness of laser sights for the average shooter. In short, lasers make one a better shooter. Not just at night or in places of diminished light, but across the board. While it is true that an accomplished and practiced marksman or markswoman can shoot as well, perhaps better, than you or I using a laser sight, you and I will never be shooting at that level. Not unless we have the time, money and inclination to train hard enough to be a master. Most of us don't. So, it can only help with most guns like the semi-autos and revolvers being carried for self defense to buy and use a laser to improve one's marksmanship. It is also a safer thing to do for the general public. We need all of the help we can get to be sure to hit only our intended target. I have reviewed a number of lasers in this blog. I like the LaserMax variety. If you are interested, read my reviews, and others', and decide for yourself.

Carry plenty of rounds

Most modern semi-autos carry more than enough rounds for self protection. Many carry more than necessary. I have a Ruger SR9c with a seventeen round magazine. With one in the chamber, that's eighteen shots. Now, I can imagine a scenario in which I might need eighteen shots, but the odds of that actually happening are remote, to say the least. Yes, people will cite instances in which a self defense shooter needed a large number of rounds, but the odds of that happening are very slim. 

The unstated assumption behind carry plenty of rounds is that one could easily be in a situation where there are a number of assailants or it takes multiple (like four, five, six, or more) shots to stop the threat. But, if one does enough digging through reported self defense incidents that involve the person being threatened resorting to a gun you'll find that a very large number of these incidents never involve a shot being fired. The potential assailants flee at the sight of their intended victim drawing a gun. Of those in which the potential victim does fire, it usually involves only one or two rounds before the threat is stopped. The bad guys run away, sometimes uninjured, sometimes ending up at a hospital where they are usually arrested. Sometimes they are killed.

Often when multiple shots are fired, only a few find their target. The rest find unintended targets, thankfully most of them in an inert object. But not always.

The question becomes, how many rounds are enough? This is, of course, an unanswerable question. As I leaned in project management school, the real answer is "it depends."

And so we come to what I think are the real questions. Why do I legally carry a gun for self defense? And, what does that actually mean, and what am I willing to do, and not do, because of that? And, given the answers to those, what, when and how should I carry?

I carry because bad people also carry guns (and knives, and clubs, and chains, and some are much bigger, younger, and meaner than me) and until they don't, I refuse to be a victim who can't fight back.

I carry because I feel a responsibility to my family and my fellow citizens. I'm no cop, but I am a citizen and believe it is my responsibility to protect the lives of innocent people when there is no other choice.

Carrying a gun for self defense means that I am capable of using it effectively, and I will use it without hesitation if forced to do so in defense of my life or that of others. This also means I am prepared to be injured or killed in so doing.

I am not willing to risk the lives of, or injury to innocent people by firing my weapon in a manner that may do so. I must have a clear shot, even if it means exposing myself in order to shoot safely in a violent, self-defense situation.

I will choose and use a weapon that is, as much as possible, consistent with the above. 

It seems to me that many people choose their handguns with the idea that they are good shots, can hit their targets regardless of circumstance, that they require a larger and more powerful weapon that will carry enough ammunition to stand off an assault by a crowd of assailants.

I don't subscribe to those ideas. My thinking has changed to this. I want a small, reliable gun that I can carry comfortably, all the time; that is powerful enough to quickly stop an attacker, but not so much that it is a danger to others nearby; that I can shoot accurately enough at close range but its effectiveness (lethality) falls off quickly beyond that distance. At this point, my thinking is that a small, hand-held shotgun is one answer to these requirements.

Those are my reasons for choosing a Bond Arms derringer as my primary carry weapon. Firing a .410 shot shell with large diameter shot, such as 000 or 00 buckshot, or perhaps the self defense rounds that use a combination of three or four disks and BB pellets, the little gun should be very effective at short range, even with not-so-good shot placement, and will be less of a danger to others.

Two shots should be enough for the vast majority of situations I might encounter. If not, I will have the option to reload, or to resort to a small backup gun.

The Bond Arms derringer should be very reliable. It is a single action pistol with little to go wrong. No springs, slides, or revolving parts. It is designed with built in safeties using both the single action cocking and rebounding hammer.

It is small enough to carry, but large enough to do what it is meant to do.

So.... I have a Bond Arms Snake Slayer on order. Perhaps it will arrive this week. I'm putting my money where my opinion is so I can test out my theories and this innovative firearm. I will be looking at how it shoots, how it conceals, how it carries from day to day. I will be testing its reliability and use factor - how easy is it to draw from concealment, cock and fire? What kind of ammunition and shot patterns work best in self defense situations. How is the best way to carry spare rounds and reload quickly. And, anything else that occurs I think you'd want to know about.

I will report back here after I get my Snake Slayer and begin to apply some reality testing to it.

A "Safer" Carry Gun?

A couple of posts back, I was analyzing the Bond Arms derringer models as potential self defense carry guns. Since then I've had a number of conversations about this topic, both in real time and on the internet via a couple of gun forums. And I've received a couple of news items involving self defense shootings that I think are relevant. But first, the gun forums.

Even though I moderate a small forum, and used to moderate a large one with over ten thousand registered members, I don't put a great deal of faith in what I read. Although some members are knowledgeable and helpful, and will even admit when they don't know about something, many more are willing to use the shield of the internet to jump in and comment, or pontificate, on topics they know little, and sometimes absolutely nothing, about. Derringers seem to bring this latter group out of the woodwork. They are similar to the same crowd that declares any caliber of pistol that doesn't begin with a "4" are worthless.

Now, back to the topic of derringers. Bond Arms derringers specifically. My previous post pretty much lays out the good and the bad for these little pistols, but to cut to the essence for their use as self defense carry guns, I have to say that the biggest negative that comes immediately to mind is their two shot capacity. Against this, it can be stated that most "self defense" situations that involve guns are those in which no shots are fired by anyone. Showing your firearm to a would-be assailant(s) is often enough to end the situation then and there. For other situations, I believe one or shots usually puts paid to the situation as well.

Of course, there are occasions when more than two shots are required even though these instances are infrequent. I have to comment here that when this happens it's not always because one is assaulted by more than two individuals who keep on coming even though the victim has fired three, four, five, six or more shots. In most instances, multiple shots are fired because the shooter can't hit what he or she is aiming at. Or isn't aiming in the first place. This means a number of bullets are flying around the scene, landing somewhere. A dangerous practice.

There are two ways to overcome this. Practice a lot. Practice defensive firing drills. Expend a lot of ammo getting proficient with your handgun. True, but seldom done. "It's too expensive." Yes, it is expensive. "I don't have the time." You can make time for something that important. "I don't have a regular place to shoot." And, that's because???....

The other way to deal with this is to use a close-range gun that will much more often hit the bad guy with enough force to end the situation in one shot with reduced chance of shots going astray. I'm not talking about carrying big caliber magnums. Shooting statistics don't support the big caliber theory anyway. I mean shooting something like a .410 shotgun shell loaded with 5 pellets of 000 buckshot. That will get anyone's attention and will more likely hit the intended target than a 9 mm hollow point, for example. And should one or two of those pellets sail on past, they will be rapidly losing velocity and offer a much greater chance of not killing someone or going through a wall, window or car door and into a person.

That is the main reason I am attracted to the Bond Arms derringers in .410/.45 long colt calibers. A two-shot hand-held shotgun seems like a pretty potent weapon in a self defense scenario.

One incident I learned about yesterday involved a gunfight near a Pizza restaurant. A 'civilian' getting out of his car, was confronted by an armed robber in another car who pointed a gun at him and demanded his money. The 'civilian', a legal concealed handgun carrier, drew his weapon and fired. The two men exchanged shots as the robber drove away. Neither person was hit, but bullets went into nearby building and windows. Fortunately, no one else was hit either

The second involved another attempted robbery of a man and his wife who were sitting in their car in broad daylight in a city street. The would-be robber pointed a 1911 .45 at the driver and demanded his money. The driver pulled a Bond Arms derringer and shot the robber once at six yards. The robber went down badly hurt. A bystander kicked the robber's gun away and the victim kept his gun, with the remaining .410 shell ready to fire, on the robber until the police arrived. The robber died. The man and his wife lived. No one else was hurt.


Of course, even so, should one be limited to two shots, it is necessary to have your reloading procedure down pat and be able to execute it in a hurry.

Or carry something like a Ruger LCP as a backup pocket gun, just in case.

I'm still awaiting my opportunity to put a Bond Arms derringer to the test - drawing, firing and reloading in an acceptable period before I would carry, or recommend them for self defense carry.

I'm still looking for that opportunity and when it comes, I'll report in detail here.

Stay safe.

The Endless Carry Argument: which gun? what caliber? what self defense round? which holster?

Uncle George's Wallet Holster

From my experience on a couple of decent firearms forums which primarily serve citizens interested in pistols for both shooting and self defense, this argument seems never to die. I think it is important to address because of the increasing numbers of people who are new to handguns and new to legal carry for self defense. These long-running discussions, which can unfortunately turn dictatorial and nasty when the so-called experts get involved, do more to confuse the issue than offer clarity. So, I'm attempting to interject a bit of basic information, and, hopefully, clarity into the topic of handguns meant for self defense carry.

I've illustrated this post with a photo of one of Uncle George's wallet holsters made for the Ruger LCP because carrying a handgun for self defense is a simple and basic act, and this is about as simple as it gets. Anyone - male, female, big, tiny, it doesn't matter - can carry one of these setups almost anywhere without being noticed or uncomfortable. The Ruger LCP weighs 9.4 ounces, 10.0 with a Crimson Trace laser sight installed (as above). It's a little over five inches long and less than an inch wide. It is built for concealment and for carrying. It, and other similar 'pocket pistols' usually are chambered for the .380 caliber round (also called the 9mm short). With a good factory load, designed for self-defense, such as the Hornady CD or perhaps the Speer Gold Dot (and similar ammunition), it is an effective self defense weapon.

So, what we have here is a lightweight (Light), small (Compact) Pistol designed to be carried for self defense by practically anyone. This, evidently, drives some self-styled 'gun experts' crazy.

They can't so much complain about the polymer frame, since many of the handguns they prefer incorporate that in their builds, but seemingly everything else is fair game to them: caliber (too small), bullets (not heavy enough, not designed right), sights (poor iron sights that aren't adjustable), small capacity (seven rounds is not enough), not durable enough (will suffer problems if it's shot too much), and so on. To further disparage these kinds of self defense weapons, they have labeled them "mouse guns". Must mean that they are only good for plinking mice, or that mousy people use them. Not sure on that. And, they probably aren't either.

A few examples of the "experts" recommendations for self defense carry:

• If the caliber of your pistol doesn't start with a "4" it isn't big enough.
• Double-stack magazines are required so you can carry enough ammo without having to frequently reload.
• Your self defense gun must be 100% reliable under all conditions.

There are more, but those will do for illustration purposes.

In my opinion, basically all of those arguments are bogus when it comes to self defense. The two critical factors are, 1. carry a gun. All of the time. It is a true statement that you better have one when you need one.

2. hit only what you intend to hit when you have to shoot.

If the caliber of your pistol doesn't start with a "4" it isn't big enough.

It is obvious that if you pull a gun and fire off a round (or twelve, even) and don't hit the threat, you've done yourself no good and possibly have injured, or worse, an innocent person. No matter what the caliber of the gun, velocity or impact of the bullet, your self defense gun is useless unless you can hit something with it. Reliably, accurately and repeatedly if necessary.

Unless one is a practiced, experienced shooter, shooting a large caliber handgun is harder than shooting a handgun of smaller caliber and power. Most people who carry for self defense are not practiced, experienced shooters and are not going to become one either. They, hopefully, practice enough to be comfortable with their weapon and to be accurate enough for the ranges and target sizes that would be appropriate for most self defense situations. Most of these people shoot a reasonably sized handgun - .38 special, 9mm, .380 calibers. They are big enough to do the job, but not so heavy, noisy and recoil producing to be hard to shoot.

Double-stack magazines are required so you can carry enough ammo without having to frequently reload.

Double stack magazine handguns are bigger and heavier than single stack guns. As a consequence, they are more uncomfortable and heavy to carry and more difficult to conceal. Hence, they tend to not get carried as a regular thing. Your double-stack .40 caliber pistol is doing you no good as a self defense weapon while it's in your car or home in the safe. Besides, when are you going to really need a fifteen, sixteen or seventeen round capacity in the self defense world? I supposed if you were attacked by a gang and were forted up behind a car, then, maybe. You'd likely be outgunned anyway so things wouldn't be turning out well for you.

I think the notion of being in an extended shoot out is common because that is what TV and the movies show us. But, that's really the rare exception when citizens are forced into self defense shooting. Read up on it. Most scenarios involve one or two rounds being fired. It's rare that more than five or six are expended in these situations. They start quickly and end quickly with people running away or stopping their aggressive behavior because they are suddenly dealing with a bullet wound or two.

You can easily carry a spare single-stack magazine along with your smaller self defense weapon so you'll have a reload in the unlikely event you will need one.

Your self defense gun must be 100% reliable under all conditions.

That would be nice, but face it, no machine is 100% reliable even under good conditions. It's the nature of the beast. It's the world of Murphy's Law. I know shooters who have fired thousands of rounds from their handguns and think this is a guarantee of reliability, that the gun is going to go bang the next time they pull the trigger. Think about it. Just because the machine has not experienced a failure before does not mean it's never going to fail.

Check your self defense gun by shooting regularly, but don't burn through hundreds and hundreds of rounds. Shoot it enough to be sure it's running well, like it should, then carry it. Maybe go out and practice once a month to keep your proficiency and to exercise the gun. You will soon know if it has an endemic or recurring problem. Send it back to the maker and have them fix it. Use another self defense gun in the interim.

The reliability factor is one of two that mitigate for carrying a backup gun. In the unlikely event that your pistol malfunctions at exactly the wrong time, you may have the opportunity to go to your backup. Odds are that the two guns won't fail at the same time. The second reason is that you may not be able to get to your primary weapon due to being injured, having the gun taken away, dropped, or perhaps your assailant in on top of you wrestling with your gun, or preventing you from getting to it. You may have the option of going for the backup.

In the real world, it is impossible to prepare for all contingencies, just as it is impossible to carry a gun that is 100% reliable. You can narrow the odds and put survival more in your favor by understanding that a reasonable and rational level of preparedness is attainable and sustainable if you only do a few things.

1. Find a handgun that suits you and which you will carry at all times where legally allowed.

2. Keep that gun in good condition.

3. Practice regularly so that you can access it and shoot it accurately under self defense conditions. Practice at short ranges, say, the distance between two walls in a regular room in your house. Become good at hitting an area the size of the human torso.

That's it. Shooting an assailant a number of times in the torso will definitely put the odds of survival in your favor. Of course there are true stories of men being shot multiple times with decent caliber handguns, mostly by law enforcement officers, who still fight back and don't seem to know they are shot. This is the exception however. And, when you think about it, if you should encounter one of those people, it doesn't much matter if you are toting a Model 1911 .45 automatic or a .380 LCP. But one thing for sure, I'd rather reach for and use my .380 in a circumstance like that and hope my accuracy was enough to stop the threat, than to be throwing rocks, glasses or chairs as my self defense weapons.

If you think the circumstances may demand it, you can always carry a larger gun along with your primary self defense weapon, but you don't have to make it a regular thing.

Realistic self defense carry will keep your armed and prepared in all situations. You probably won't be ready for the zombie apocalypse, but you will be ready to deal more effectively if you are seriously threatened. 

Reliability and Risk

One of the big questions about legal concealed carry for self defense is which gun will be the most reliable. Which will be most likely to go "bang" if you have to pull the trigger. Many people would say that a double-barrel shotgun is the best answer, but when you have to factor in other considerations the picture becomes much more complicated.

You cannot easily conceal a double-barrel shotgun for every day carry. Nor would most people want to. Given that a legal concealed carrier will desire to keep his or her gun concealed from others, yet have it readily accessible when needed, comfortable to carry so it isn't left at home, and reliabile so that it works when needed, the question of what to carry and how becomes thorny indeed.

Probably the most popular handgun for concealed carry is some version of the semi-automatic pistol, usually a center fire caliber since these have more power than a rimfire gun. Two questions follow on from that.

One, which caliber should I carry?

Two, what size gun?

Both questions are important and both have their adherents. You will find that many people consider anything less than a .45 caliber handgun to be next to useless for self defense. Their argument usually relies on what they call "stopping power", i.e., the ability of a bullet to generate enough energy into a target to "stop" that target from further action. There remains much debate about the idea of "stopping power" in the knowledgeable gun community.

The idea that one can shoot a full sized adult with a .45 caliber bullet and knock that person down is pretty far fetched. It might work sometimes, but mostly it probably won't for various reasons. The person shot is too cranked up on adrenalin or other stimulants to be much affected. Big animals, shot with large caliber rifle bullets will often not realize they are "dead" and continue to charge or run, as the case may be, for a relatively long period after being shot. So, a big bullet is no surety of "stopping power".

Also, one must be able to actually hit the target. If you miss, it doesn't much matter what caliber of bullet you use.

You will find that most law enforcement and military handgun applications have moved away from the big .45 caliber guns to smaller calibers, the 9 mm being the world-wide favorite at this moment. There are variations of course: .40 caliber, .38 special for certain applications, etc. But this shows that the idea of "stopping power" being the most important is no longer in favor.

Modern ammunition loads that are designed for self defense are very effective in sizes from .380 auto, considered the minimum self defense caliber by many, up through the larger calibers. This is important because the effectiveness of a self defense round is not restricted to caliber and power. The design of the bullet and it's characteristics relative to particular handguns is very important. For example, a well designed .380 auto self defense round, like the Hornady Critical Defense round, may have as much, or more, effect on an adult assailant as a basic .45 caliber full metal jacket bullet fired from a short-barreled .45 pistol. This is certainly true if the .380 bullet is better placed into the target than the .45 round.

Besides these factors, a person carrying for self defense must also consider size and weight of the handgun. Most people will not lug around a two-pound pistol every day, even though their intentions are good to start with. Gun manufacturers have recognized this and responded with a slew of "compact" handguns, both semi-autos and revolvers. The overall aim is to combine what the buying public will consider sufficient "power" with compact size and lighter weight in order to arrive at a perfect carry pistol. Such a gun does not exist, given that everyone has their own idea of perfect. However, there are now many more options to choose from for a daily carry handgun.

It is almost a truism that the best self defense gun is the one you have with you when you need it. No matter if you favor a full size model 1911 .45 semi-auto loaded with outstanding self defense ammunition. If it is home in the safe, or locked in the car because it's become a real pain to carry all day, it is for all real purposes useless as a self defense weapon. I think this is the fundamental reason behind the amazing sales of Ruger's little LCP (Light Compact Pistol). They seem to be selling them as fast as they can make them. They are small, light and very effective when loaded with modern .380 self defense ammunition. Even though many gun "writers" term them derisively as "mouse guns", a great many average people (and many knowledgeable gun owners) are buying and carrying them for self defense. I've yet to meet a person who snorts at these "mouse guns" who will volunteer to be shot with one. That says something.

With the success of the LCP and the LCR (the .38 Special and .357 magnum revolver versions of "light and compact") from Ruger, the market has responded by producing an increasing number and models of "light and compact" for concealed carry. There are many options now.

Perhaps a more crucial question of having a gun with you when you need it, is the one of reliability. If you pull out your compact semi-auto pistol and pull the trigger and it doesn't go "bang", things can turn ugly really fast. No one wants to have a gun that won't work.

The internet gun communications - sites and forums mainly - are rife with tales of malfunctioning guns. If one read solely these and did not put this talk into perspective, you would think a semi-automatic pistol was a fragile beast liable to malfunction at any time. Since most of the worlds police and military depend upon semi-automatic sidearms, this is manifestly not the case. But, it is true that at some times, some guns (probably all guns) will fail. The question is, can you depend upon a certain brand and type of gun to be reliable enough to trust for every day carry?

This question will require a lot of thought and research. My internet forum members will continue to be a great help with this question and I'll give it some deep thought as well. After all, I am personally very interested in this question.