On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 04:36:01 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:


I don't dispute your assertion that the .380 is less efficacious than
a .45, though you obviously exaggerate shamelessly for emphasis. One
pound from five feet indeed! G


You somehow forgot accelleration. I didnt provide that example...it came
from the web, from a gun writers article. Ill try to find it again.

No, I didn't. It's basic physics. You could find formulae in a book
or use Newton's law and a little elementary algebra to derive the
equations.

Energy is force * distance by definition. Force is mass *
acceleration by Newton's law, the acceleration here being that of
gravity or g. F=M*A
Energy = Fx = MAx = mass * g * distance of fall, = weight * distance
of fall. A mass of 1 lb fallen from a height of 5 ft has 5 ft-lbf
of kinetic energy.

The energy of a .380 round is published data. It can also be measured
for a particular load fired from a particular piece with a
chronograph and some simple calculations.

Here's the key difference between our points of view: you clearly
need to feel that you have the best possible chance of prevailing
against any attack as you routinely go in harm's way. It's a
warrior, combatant mentality that works well for military and law
enforcement because it improves probability of survival.

And thats a bad thing for the average civilian????

I'm not labelling it good or bad, right or wrong. It just isn't the
mentality of most gentle civilians.