Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Weapons of the World Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: .357 Magnum stopping power
GOP    3/12/2007 10:24:42 PM
Whatsup guys? What kind of Self defense round is the .357 mag? Some of you may know that I'm 17, but I'm a gun nut, and love the S&W 686 with 4 inch barrel in .357 mag/.38 special. I'd use the gun almost completely for shooting at the range, but when I turn 21 I plan on getting my CCW license/pistol permit so it would then be used legally as a self-defense weapon. Just curious what your thoughts on the round is. The reason I like it is because it's stainless steal, and therefore won't rust (we own a fishing boat and it may be used by my Dad on the boat as a Self-Defense weapon). It's also highly, highly thought of in the NSW community (most SEALs don't like the the Sig P226 Navy, because they basically rust at the sound of "salt water")
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17   NEXT
YelliChink       4/14/2008 11:16:14 AM
summary of California code on use of deadly forces in self-defense.

3. THE USE OF FIREARMS IN DEFENSE OF LIFE AND PROPERTY

The question of whether use of a firearm is justified for self-defense cannot be reduced to a simple list of factors. This section is based on the instructions generally given to the jury in a criminal case where self-defense is claimed and illustrates the general rules regarding use of firearms in self-defense.

Use of a Firearm or Other Deadly Force in Defense of Life and Body

The killing of one person by another may be justifiable when necessary to resist the attempt to commit a forcible and life-threatening crime, provided that a reasonable person in the same or similar situation would believe that (a) the person killed intended to commit a forcible and life-threatening crime; (b) there was imminent danger of such crime being accomplished; and (c) the person acted under the belief that such force was necessary to save himself or herself or another from death or a forcible and life-threatening crime. Murder, mayhem, rape, and robbery are examples of forcible and life-threatening crimes.

Self-Defense Against Assault

It is lawful for a person being assaulted to defend himself or herself from attack if he or she has reasonable grounds for believing, and does in fact believe, that he or she will suffer bodily injury. In doing so, he or she may use such force, up to deadly force, as a reasonable person in the same or similar circumstances would believe necessary to prevent great bodily injury or death. An assault with fists does not justify use of a deadly weapon in self-defense unless the person being assaulted believes, and a reasonable person in the same or similar circumstances would also believe, that the assault is likely to inflict great bodily injury.
It is lawful for a person who has grounds for believing, and does in fact believe, that great bodily injury is about to be inflicted upon another to protect the victim from attack. In so doing, the person may use such force as reasonably necessary to prevent the injury. Deadly force is only considered reasonable to prevent great bodily injury or death.
NOTE: The use of excessive force to counter an assault may result in civil or criminal penalties.

Protecting One?s Home

A person may defend his or her home against anyone who attempts to enter in a violent manner intending violence to any person in the home. The amount of force that may be used in resisting such entry is limited to that which would appear necessary to a reasonable person in the same or similar circumstances to resist the violent entry. One is not bound to retreat, even though a retreat might safely be made. One may resist force with force, increasing it in proportion to the intruder?s persistence and violence, if the circumstances apparent to the occupant would cause a reasonable person in the same or similar situation to fear for his or her safety.
The occupant may use a firearm when resisting the intruder?s attempt to commit a forcible and life-threatening crime against anyone in the home provided that a reasonable person in the same or similar situation would believe that (a) the intruder intends to commit a forcible and life-threatening crime; (b) there is imminent danger of such crime being accomplished; and (c) the occupant acts under the belief that use of a firearm is necessary to save himself or herself or another from death or great bodily injury. Murder, mayhem, rape, and robbery are examples of forcible and life-threatening crimes.
Any person using force intended or likely to cause death or great bodily injury within his or her residence shall be presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily injury to self, family, or a member of the household when that force is used against another person, not a member of the family or household, who unlawfully and forcibly enters or has unlawfully and forcibly entered the residence and the person using the force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry had occurred. Great bodily injury means a significant or substantial physical injury. (Penal Code § 198.5.)
NOTE: If the presumption is rebutted by contrary evidence, the occupant may be criminally liable for an unlawful assault or homicide.

Defense of Property

The lawful occupant of real property has the right to request a trespasser to leave the premises. If the tr

 
Quote    Reply

YelliChink       4/14/2008 11:20:42 AM


Also if the bad guy has a firearm, its much easier to get away with
anything, regardless of the exact circumstances, since you can easily
argue that thier "flight" was merely a tactical retreat to get a better
shot.  Not so easy to do if they guy has a crowbar. 


That's why I prefer 12 Ga. with bayonet lug. You get the best tool for both none and firearm-related scenario.
 
Quote    Reply

flamingknives       4/14/2008 12:28:44 PM
"It is up to the courts to decide what may be considered reasonable force." 

That would be roughly equivalent to the Californian :
"provided that a reasonable person in the same or similar situation would believe"

Jury of peers deciding what a reasonable person in the same or similar situation would believe, in court, on a case-by-case basis.
 
Quote    Reply

YelliChink       4/14/2008 12:40:51 PM

"It is up to the courts to decide what may be considered reasonable force." 

That would be roughly equivalent to the Californian :
"provided that a reasonable person in the same or similar situation would believe"

Jury of peers deciding what a reasonable person in the same or similar situation would believe, in court, on a case-by-case basis.

That was posted as trolling measure of rebuttal to your claim that Kalifornia has more draconian laws regarding self-defense. Draconian as it is, but not exceeding UK level, and further news proved that the authority in general does respect people's right of self-defense, instead of arresting and charging in all circumstances like it was  done in UK.
 
Quote    Reply

flamingknives       4/14/2008 1:10:49 PM
Yellichink,

The comment I made comparing California to the UK was based on what Rocky posted, hence the "by the sound of it". In truth, assuming that the laws exist as you posted them, they are roughly equivalent.

There is a difference in the methods of enforcement. The US police seem to have more discretionary power than those in the UK, or the language used in reporting is different*. I'd hate to be so paranoid as to think that a shotgun with a bayonet was necessary to defend my home, but that's just me.

Just for a comparison, though, I did manage to find this:
So clear-cut cases of self-defence in the UK are sometimes dismissed without charge

* I note that, in a possibly similar vein, US press tend to refer to incumbent politicians as "lawmakers", while British press call them members of parliment, ministers, or what have you. Perhaps "police" in the American sense includes judges
 
Quote    Reply

YelliChink       4/14/2008 1:29:31 PM

Just for a comparison, though, I did manage to find this:
So clear-cut cases of self-defence in the UK are sometimes dismissed without charge

* I note that, in a possibly similar vein, US press tend to refer to incumbent politicians as "lawmakers", while British press call them members of parliment, ministers, or what have you. Perhaps "police" in the American sense includes judges

The heroic Mr. Singh was stabbed and slashed several times, almost to the degree of death by loss of blood. If he's charged of murder, then I think you need another revolution. However, I think he should be allowed to pull his handgun, shoot whoever the now-dead SOB in the head the moment he revealed the knife and intention of robbery, and walk away from any legal consequences.

 
Quote    Reply

flamingknives       4/14/2008 2:57:43 PM
TelegraphHow to do it.

Also of interest:
The Times
Especially the Peterborough incident.
 
Quote    Reply

Chopper       9/20/2010 6:20:16 PM
I haven't ever bought a weapon before(well, powder loaded projectile at least), but I heard the .44 mag has the stopping power to take on a friggin bear.
 
Does the .357 mag have the same boasting  rights? Now, I'm not saying that I am planning on hunting bears with a pistol, but it would be nice to know that I have the power to in a .357 mag.
 
 I would get the .44 mag, but I just can't get over how bulky they are for practicality. 
 
Quote    Reply

WarNerd       9/21/2010 5:32:21 AM

I haven't ever bought a weapon before(well, powder loaded projectile at least), but I heard the .44 mag has the stopping power to take on a friggin bear.
 
Does the .357 mag have the same boasting  rights? Now, I'm not saying that I am planning on hunting bears with a pistol, but it would be nice to know that I have the power to in a .357 mag.
 
 I would get the .44 mag, but I just can't get over how bulky they are for practicality.

From your questions I doubt you have spent much time using weapons either.
 
You should always select a weapon based on it's expected use.  If you are thinking home defense in an urban setting, the .44 mag has a major over penetration problem.  If you are crazy enough to go after feral pigs with dogs, the .44 mag is a good choice.  In between . . . it depends.  Against a bear you would have to be very good, VERY lucky, and have nerves of steel to survive.
 
For a first time pistol user the .44 mag is a very bad choice, because you do not know what you are doing and will pick up some VERY BAD habits.  Like flinching when you fire, and maybe even closing your eyes! 
 
The .357 mag is a better choice for a first time pistol user, smaller with less recoil.  It can also fire .38 special ammo, which has even less recoil and is significantly cheaper, which is important because the first thing you need to do is to learn to shoot accurately, and that requires a LOT of ammo and, unless you live in the country, a shooting range.  Shot placement is always more important than 'stopping power'.
 
Quote    Reply

Chopper       9/22/2010 1:09:24 PM




I haven't ever bought a weapon before(well, powder loaded projectile at least), but I heard the .44 mag has the stopping power to take on a friggin bear.

 

Does the .357 mag have the same boasting  rights? Now, I'm not saying that I am planning on hunting bears with a pistol, but it would be nice to know that I have the power to in a .357 mag.

 

 I would get the .44 mag, but I just can't get over how bulky they are for practicality.




From your questions I doubt you have spent much time using weapons either.

 

You should always select a weapon based on it's expected use.  If you are thinking home defense in an urban setting, the .44 mag has a major over penetration problem.  If you are crazy enough to go after feral pigs with dogs, the .44 mag is a good choice.  In between . . . it depends.  Against a bear you would have to be very good, VERY lucky, and have nerves of steel to survive.

 

For a first time pistol user the .44 mag is a very bad choice, because you do not know what you are doing and will pick up some VERY BAD habits.  Like flinching when you fire, and maybe even closing your eyes! 

 

The .357 mag is a better choice for a first time pistol user, smaller with less recoil.  It can also fire .38 special ammo, which has even less recoil and is significantly cheaper, which is important because the first thing you need to do is to learn to shoot accurately, and that requires a LOT of ammo and, unless you live in the country, a shooting range.  Shot placement is always more important than 'stopping power'.


No sir. The only gun I've ever fired was a .22 rifle a LONG time ago. However, I did have a crush on a Thompson center fire Icon if that counts.....
 
 But thanks for the advice, it reinforced my decision to forgo the .44 mag despite the allure of the power and Dirty Harry's portrayal of it.
 
The only thing I plan on using whichever pistol I buy(most likely a Taurus .357 mag model, perhaps the Tracker but if any of you can recommend a better model in the general price range of a non-gun nut who only wants protection I'd be more than grateful) is much target practice, then getting the permit for packing heat so I have the reassurance of it during a situation of life-threatening duress. 
 
 
Quote    Reply
PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17   NEXT



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics