Exactly, it is the best mix of attributes. The .45 is the best mix of attributes to kill a horse. So if we had to defend ourselves from horses, then .45 would be the thing to use.Yes, 9mm is a widely used standard, not because it somehow "works better" but because the 9mm round is "just right."
Are you thinking of the .380 APC? It is basically an underpowered 9mm, and has the attributes you are talking about. Even a .45 is more likely not to go all the way through. A 9mm was designed to have a flat trajectory for 25 meters, not to be stopped by walls.It can stop an adversary without the bullet going through him and then going through the wall behind him and then going through the wall behind that and killing the unseen child or other person that happens to be on the other side. If you are looking for a good self-defense weapon in an urban setting with many walls and windows and rooms, the 9mm is a great choice, hence a widely used standard.
One of the problems with the 9mm is it is deadly at 100 meters, a football field. It can easily kill someone a block or two away.
Both the 9mm Parabellum, and the .45 were designed for war. Para bellum literally is the Latin for prepare for war. The 9mm was designed to be an easy shot at 25 meters(27 yards). The .45 was designed for calvary, basically to kill horses in war.Nope. The .45 was designed to provide the additional, needed stopping power its predecessor lacked. It was developed for wartime applications.
Shotguns are bulky.Have you considered a shotgun?
The Glock 26 is a good slim 9mm Glock, that still accepts double stacked mags. It might not be the fanciest gun, but it does everything reasonably well.The next time you are thinking about it, look up some Glock, Sig Sauer and Baretta/Taurus semiautomatic 9mm pistols. Your mention of 9mm as a standard for what you are describing was spot on.