Didn't Wisconsin just sign a bill to allow CCW now which leaved Illinois as the only state to not allow? thought I saw something in the news about that last week...
They absolutely did. I believe that was the genesis of this thread, actually as OP is in Milwaukee.
As to the debate on the effectiveness of various calibers, the debate has raged for years and will continue to rage for many more years.
Regarding handguns, they will never have the stopping power of a rifle, end of story. (I suppose the TC pistols which shoot rifle rounds could be a thought but they are single shot pistols and not worth mentioning for purposes of concealed carry.)
That leads one to believe, of course, that the bigger rounds are better and in truth, they really are. No question about it.
The argument stopper, though, is that if you can't carry a big gun, carry a little one. I have a little Beretta Minx that shoots .22 shorts and yes, I'd carry it if that were all I had to carry. But I prefer to carry the 9mm 92FS or the Sig P220.
The issue comes down to ammo, really, as much as anything else. What you want is something that doesn't require you to put shots in people's throats or eyes to really have the effect of stopping someone. That requires energy transfer from the bullet to the body of the bad guy. For carry purposes, the .45 ACP is probably the most effective at accomplishing this IF you have the right ammo. If you load it with ball ammo and it passes through the BG, all the energy that it still has at the point of exit is wasted and the bullet is no more effective than whatever energy it left in the person as it passed through his body.
It was shown that many officers using ball ammo back in the day had that happen quite a lot and it would always take several rounds, even dozens, to bring someone down and that usually happened as a critical, vital organ was penetrated as it passed through.
As a result of studies done by FBI in gel testing, ammunition technology has come a long way. As ammunition is used in the field now, it is showing, over and over, how much effectiveness it all has and this information is available from various resources. For example, Federal Hydroshok ammo for .45 ACP is rated one of the most effective.
I don't know which ammo is best for the .380 but I'll keep my eyes peeled and post up as I come across the information. Suffice it to say that the old .380 ammo is probably not all that great but the newer ammo probably is much better. Something to consider with the .380 which is not as critical with 9mm or .45 ACP is that it has a difficult time penetrating heavy clothing. That means that in the winter time, you could have issues with effectiveness if the bullet has to pass through layers of clothing first before reaching vital body organs.
Last but not least in all of these discussions is shot placement. For a .45 ACP, center mass is deemed very effective. 9mm is also deemed effective in center mass. But smaller rounds such as the .380 or .38 special may take several more rounds to stop an attacker if shot only center mass and it behooves one to consider this when choosing ammo.
Obvious, I wouldn't want to be shot with a .380 or a .22 or any other gun! Neither does a bad guy. If you carry a mouse gun like this, of course, be prepared to have a backup gun if possible and spare ammo.
Back to shot placement, it is also a known fact that studies have shown that trained police officers miss most of the time. 81% sticks in my head but I may have to verify that. 81% misses from police officers. In the heat of a shooting situation, the body does very strange things to you and you are very likely to miss rather than get a hit.
The idea here, then, is to get some training. It's available, some is overpriced, and some is worth the money.
I'm rambling over much. Sorry, just couldn't help myself!
--Wag--