I just have to say this. For those of you using the MP5 as your main defense for 9mm, why did they make the MP-5/10 or MP-5/40? Or the UMP primarily available in .40/.45? Because they know 9mm often isn't sufficient. The only reason they use a 9mm is for manageability on full auto.
I was the only one that I am aware of that specifically mentioned the MP5, and it was to contradict the statement that 9mm isn't a good tactical round. Again, the MP5 is the most popular SMG in the world, bar none. If it wasn't a good tactical round in a good weapon, then it would never have become the most popular. Apparently a lot of folks in a lot of countries thought it was just fine and bought a lot of them. Come on, when you think H&K, isn't the first thing that comes to mind the MP5?
The MP5 was first introduced in 1966. It wasn't until 1992 that the 10mm and 40S&W was introduced in the weapon, and both were discontinued in 2000 I believe. 27 years it was only available as a 9mm and has been back to that way for the last 8 years. The 10mm version was created specifically for the United States Federal Bureau of Investigation due to the 1986 shooting which had the FBI do a bunch of ballistic tests and go with the 10mm. I am sure the FBI ordered a decent amount to fund the research needed for H&K to make the 10mm version. Of course, H&K never made a 45 version....why is that?
I wasn't arguing which is better, my argument was with the statement that the 9mm is not a tactical round.
Is the 9mm as good as a 45? No, of course not, but the 45 isn't the best round either. Each round has pluses and minuses that anyone looking for a carry gun has to weight and factor into what they want. What qualifies a good carry gun for one person might be a horrible choice for someone else. Size, weight, recoil, gun design, complexity of use, muzzle flash, magazine size, conceal-ability are all weighted differently for different people. There is no one "right" answer, just pros and cons.
Here is to hoping the pros beat the cons.