Thoughts on the XD 45 Compact ....

[Bree]

Originally Posted by BMFOTP

Bree,
I have found that Winchester ammo works best in my XD-45 Compact. I was surprised at how tight the groups are with Winchester ammo. I have tried the Federal, Hornaday, Gold Dots and other premium ammo. I have gone with your suggestion and use both the bonded and T series of ammo from Winchester in my weapon. I figure worst case I have to shoot through glass and the bonded will get the job done and the Winchester T series will make a BG wish he never came across that ammo. I hope to never use my weapon in a SD situation but if I do I am very confident that the Winchester ammo I have in my weapon will end the situation in a positive manner.

Exactly! You have both types of cartridges in there just on the off chance that you have to shoot through some laminated glass. So you have a specialized round that will perform better for that.

They will all do the job straight up. It is that odd ball case where the alternation covers an extra base a little better.

I do the same thing in my .380. I figure that this is a low power cartridge it lacks penetration though it is the same diameter as a 9mm round. So I boost penetration by using DPX which is a specialized deep penetrator. Exactly the reason I don't use DPX in my .45 is why I use it in my .380 as my #1 round.

And since I do want a big expander too... a slice and dicer, I use Ranger T as my alternating cartridge. Like the HST it is a hairy round. If Federal had a good .380 HST I would use that but they don't so Ranger T is just as good for my purpose.

Bree Scout motto... Be better prepared than the BG!!

[XDerminator]

Originally Posted by Bree

...When it impacts anything the case collapses along the score lines and it gets squished out along with the rubber...The EFMJ does not rely on hydraulic presssure for expansion. It just gets smushed by anything it comes in contact with and it starts smushing out immediately upon impact.

Bree--you turn me one when you use all that technical jargon...

[Bree]

Originally Posted by XDerminator

Bree--you turn me one when you use all that technical jargon...

I really thought that "hydraulic presssure for expansion" would have got your boat floating!

[Tx1911]

Gun show today ..... came home with the XD 45 compact. Enough said !!!

[Slimz13]

Originally Posted by Bree

The picture of one of these things spinning through flesh makes me cringe. I get the feeling that if this doesn't stop the BG, nothing will. It is a nasty looking thing.

+1
I cant believe i ever seriously considered 9mm for a self-defense round. A fully expanded .45 is just simply obnoxiously lethal.. I'd say it was overkill, but I don't really think anyone here believes in such a thing.

Originally Posted by Tx1911

Gun show today ..... came home with the XD 45 compact. Enough said !!!

Nicely done! You wont regret it I promise you.

[Bree]

Originally Posted by Slimz13

+1
A fully expanded .45 is just simply obnoxiously lethal.. I'd say it was overkill, but I don't really think anyone here believes in such a thing.

Slimz13...

BAD BAD!! Object is to STOP not to kill. We never try to kill anything. Remember the lawyers!!

[digitalexplr]

Originally Posted by Bree

Slimz13...

BAD BAD!! Object is to STOP not to kill. We never try to kill anything. Remember the lawyers!!

Actually the lawyers will eat you alive if you weren't trying to kill the BG. If you end up in court after using your weapon and you say you used deadly force to just stop the BG, his/her attorney will have you for lunch.

They will want to know how you justified the use of deadly force to handle a situation in which you only wanted to STOP the BG? The attorney will ask if you only wanted to STOP them, why didn't you just turn and run, or hit them with a club, gouge them with your car keys, kick them in the groin, etc.?

When asked by the BG's attorney what your intent was, your answer should be, "I was in fear of my life and was shooting to kill." Because if you are not in fear of your life, fear for the life of another or fear of great bodily harm, you are not justified in using deadly force.

Just the opinion of one ex-cop. This is what our PA drilled into us constantly. Deadly force should only be used if killing the BG is the only thing that will end the situation. If the BG is alive after the smoke settles, that is just his/her dumb luck.

And remember it is always better to be judged by 12 than carried by 8.

[Bree]

Originally Posted by digitalexplr

Actually the lawyers will eat you alive if you weren't trying to kill the BG. If you end up in court after using your weapon and you say you used deadly force to just stop the BG, his/her attorney will have you for lunch.

They will want to know how you justified the use of deadly force to handle a situation in which you only wanted to STOP the BG? The attorney will ask if you only wanted to STOP them, why didn't you just turn and run, or hit them with a club, gouge them with your car keys, kick them in the groin, etc.?

When asked by the BG's attorney what your intent was, your answer should be, "I was in fear of my life and was shooting to kill." Because if you are not in fear of your life, fear for the life of another or fear of great bodily harm, you are not justified in using deadly force.

Just the opinion of one ex-cop. This is what our PA drilled into us constantly. Deadly force should only be used if killing the BG is the only thing that will end the situation. If the BG is alive after the smoke settles, that is just his/her dumb luck.

And remember it is always better to be judged by 12 than carried by 8.

In NY, you are authorized to use only that force necessary to stop the threat up to and including deadly force. Deadly force does not mean force that kills. It means force that is capable of killing. Whether the use of deadly force actually causes death is unknown before you actually use the force and it may be unknown for some time after the use.

The BG runs the risk of dying if he/she presents a threat for which the law provides citizens an affirmative defense for the use of deadly force. Whether death is the result remains to be seen. But you as a citizen do not have the right to seek to kill as your object or intention. You can seek to stop a threat with deadly force. There is a difference between the two states of mind... a small but important difference.

In NY, having killing as your object is not going to get you acquitted, it will more likely get you put in prison. The rules for LEOs are not much different than the rules for ordinary citizens. LEOs have arrest authority and certain rights associated with that. There are some other differences but the justification of self defense follows the same basic rules.

It is a cleverly written dance... the NY Penal Code. It actually has a certain logical beauty to it. Nevertheless, when you follow it from the definitions to proving your self defense justification, the bottom line is you did everything possible to avoid harming anyone while preventing anyone from harm you. And you did only that which was necessary to cause the threat to cease.

Remember in NY you shoot someone and you start with an offense. People are not allowed to shoot other people. If you kill someone, you have a manslaughter offense (felony). People are not allowed to kill other people. You must JUSTIFY your action to remove the status of being an offender or a felon (crime with punishment of one year or more). Burden of proof is on you by a preponderance of the evidence.

As far as your argument about alternatives to stopping the BG... your attorney is 100% correct. If you can do those things, you probably will be required by the court to do them and not kill the BG. The point is that if you can't do those things and a threat justifying the use of deadly force still exists, then you can use it until the threat is stopped or you can escape (retreat). In this case, the BG might die. And if he does and you did all that you could do to prevent it or there was no way out, you will be protected by the law since your affirmative defense will be proven.

That is my understanding of our law and what it entails. Bottom line... get the word "kill" out of your vocabulary relative to your intentions. Substitute the phrase "immediately incapacitate". You will stand a much better chance in court if you have to use deadly force.

What is in your head deep down... unsaid... unshared... is totally your business so long as you keep it there.

[Tx1911]

Originally Posted by Slimz13

+1
I cant believe i ever seriously considered 9mm for a self-defense round. A fully expanded .45 is just simply obnoxiously lethal.. I'd say it was overkill, but I don't really think anyone here believes in such a thing.



Nicely done! You wont regret it I promise you.

I had the XD 9 service and traded in for the XD 45 compact. You can conceal the XD 45 compact better.

[Slimz13]

Originally Posted by Tx1911

I had the XD 9 service and traded in for the XD 45 compact. You can conceal the XD 45 compact better.

Couldnt agree more. My buddy picked up his first handgun- a used police issue G17. He had origionally wanted a hangun for concealed carry (with CCW liscence), but found the Glock 9mm to be too much gun to carry on a day-to-day basis. He turned about six shades of green when i showed how easily i could carry 10rnds of 45ACP in my XD.

Originally Posted by Bree

...What is in your head deep down... unsaid... unshared... is totally your business so long as you keep it there.

Very Good point. One of the aspects of owning a defense firearm that most people (myself included) seem to be woefully under-educated about is what happens AFTER you drop the BG. Might have to start another thread about this...