A large, heavy, long-barreled .44 pistol is accurate at long ranges, and would give you time to get off several carefully aimed shots.
Big, massive, well-balanced pistols with carefully designed grips minimize recoil, but they still require extensive practice–and a strong wrist. I know I would not feel comfortable relying on one for protection against large game unless I had fired several boxes of shells through it under varying conditions. And under no circumstances would I consider using it in an offensive capacity. If you’re going to pick a fight, no handgun can replace a rifle.

I had a teacher who was stationed in Alaska in the Army. While on guard duty, he and a fellow GI were charged by a polar bear, and both opened fire with their Garands beginning at a range of over 100′. Most, if not all, of their combined 16 rounds (FMJ .30 calibre military ammo)struck the target, but the beast did not die until it fell to the ground just a few feet in front of them.

Or a short, light rifle. I know I’d have a better chance getting off a controlled 2nd and 3rd shot with the 357.

And fortunately, I believe the adrenaline of the moment would mask the pain until the danger was over. But I think that even with two hands I couldn’t control the .44 enough for a reasonable second shot. The bear might be preferable to that damned gun.

It makes sense to have a big bore revolver on your hip for just such an eventuality, but the 2″ barrel Rob talks about is pointless. A small gun is for concealble personal defense, but a cartridge that powerful is simply unmanageable in a gunfight, not to mention most of the power gets wasted, blown out the muzzle as unburnt powder. There’s a reason .44 Mag pistols have long, long barrels, it gives all the powder time to burn and produce propellant gas.

I’ve seen snub nose .44s and they are for Dirty Harry wannabees. Something that small will have hellacious recoil, blinding muzzle flash, and make an awful racket. You will never regain your composure to get off a second shot.

I can’t imaging putting 6 rounds through a .44 Magnum. You are much man.

Some experts recommend a .22 for women because it’s more important to get a number of shots in the kill zone. I’t would probably be a good caliber for a man if he could get past his ego.

Another statistic suggests that a high degree of accuracy is not needed because most shootings occur within 20 feet or less.

Not much stopping power against a determined assailant, compared to your 9mm but sufficient to fend off 99.9 percent of your garden variety, unarmed muggers.

Kel-Tec is a very reliable US made brand and is in high demand.

At any rate, the Filipino Moro rebels were supposedly hard to stop with the GI issue revolver of the time (the usual excuses: they were drug-crazed fanatics, etc), So the 1911 was born. It served us well for almost a century, and would probably still be in use if it weren’t felt we needed to standardize with our 9mm equipped Nato allies.

It’s big, bulky, and requires a lot of training to be properly used. It also has a rather small, by modern standards, capacity for ammo (max 8 rounds including 1 in the chamber. But it is still hard to beat for its combination of simplicity, reliability, durability, ease of maintenance, safety features, and sheer stopping power. For sportsmen, it has the advantage that is is easily customizable for competition, and gunsmiths are familiar with it and parts are easily available.

Incidentally, I agree with you about the .44 Magnum. It is too powerful to be manageable in a pistol, and grotesquely overpowered for personal defense. However, it does make sense in one application. Some rifles are chambered for the .44 Magnum, and it is interchangeable with a lighter load, the .44 Special. Neither is a true hunting cartridge, but it makes sense for the bush, where you can carry a compact Magnum carbine capable in a pinch of handling bigger game, and a revolver loaded with Specials for a backup sidearm and personal protection. In an emergency, the ammunition for either can be substituted in the other, always a nice feature.

When I entertained fantasies of going cruising, I had considered arming my yacht this way, but soon realized that other countries don’t take kindly to armed civilians sailing around in their territorial waters. It’s more likely for your guns to get you arrested than they are to repel boarders.

I shot a .45 with a muzzle break cut into the end of the slide. It had almost no recoil, and could be held on target very, very easily. Otherwise I’ve had to hide my pain when firing a .45, and it can get to be considerable. I avoided them like the plague, and not flinching was possibly my greatest accomplishment in self-control. I fired a .44 magnum one time, and it flew out of my hand while I damned near screamed.

You make a very good point about reliability, and I’d put a few clips of both hollow-point and frangible bullets through it to check that. If they are reliable I’d probably load each type alternately. For one thing, if I ever had to shoot someone I would probably empty the clip in them if it was just one person. No one wants a wounded person who is very angry and probably armed.

Gun nuts come up with more goddamned scenarios than you can imagine. If you have a 13 round clip, they’ll come up with one that requires 14 rounds. If you have a .40 S&W, they’ll point out that it takes a .45 to get through a 2″x4″ and what are you gonna do if – - – ? If you have a pistol they’ll point out you need the power of a rifle, and if you have a rifle they’ll show how you need to conceal your weapon. And, how many times in their lives have civilians been better off if they were armed compared to how much better off if they aren’t. When I was drinking, and around drinking people, not being armed saved a lot of lives, both that of the shooter and victim. Some people get absolutely nuts. And you can go through thousands of normal lives and never need a gun. The FBI estimates that 25 friends and relatives are killed by civilian weapons for every badguy. Not many armies can sustain those kinds of losses. Not even the completely bogus, faked, made up and inflated body counts in Vietnam claimed kill ratios like that. By the way, before they started using suicide bombers, that was the ratio of Palestinians killed to Israelis killed. 25 to 1. And the same ratio of Native Americans to US Army.

If I were buying my choice of a personal defense weapon it would be this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FN_P90
Quite a weapon, and a 50 round magazine.

Frankly, I cannot imagine a situation where I’d shoot someone. I really can’t. It would have to be up close and very personal. But I would let someone know I did have a gun, and get the hell out of there. I’d endure a lot to not have to deal with it.

BTW, I did get assurances I could get the money for a dog, and may head off to Florida later this summer. Not as far as Miami, but if yer willin’ ah may git a ways down ther.