No, it wouldn't have been. Which was kinda my point. Handguns just don't always work.
At least I think that was my point... now I've forgotten what it was LOL
Handgun worked fine. It was operator error, misuse of the equipment.
He gave up a tactical advantage before the first shot was fired.
Later after solid hits took the opponent down, he used the opportunity to take cover instead of pressing the advantage and finishing him.
The bullets, gun, and calibur all did exactly what they were designed to do and what tests confirmed long ago could be expected of the 40S&W when it was being considered next to the 10mm. A time when it was labeled the 40 short and weak. The 10mm was recomended over the 40 for just these types of situations.
The 40 won out over the 10mm because it was lighter, less recoil, a better fit for "recoil sensitive" recruits. Not because it was a proven, more effective round.
There was no failure of the weapon or ammunition in this situation. There was a failure of the operator to use it in a manner it was capable of doing the job it was designed to do.
Last edited: