Re: which caliber for all around use?
A couple of points here. The military chose the .45 ACP long before there was such a thing as a .357 magnum. That's why they used that caliber for a long time. They didn't switch to a .357 after it came out because it was a revolver instead of a semi-auto and those quick load mags just can't be beat on the battlefield. And much of the reason NATO went with the 9mm was tradition as much as anything. We used .45's in the wars. They used 9mm's especially in Italy and Germany and also the Swiss produced a heck of a 9mm weapon. Plus those rounds were known to penetrate glass and steel (i.e. car doors) when a .45 would flatten out and bounce back. The use police forces nearly went with a 9mm handgun for that reason during the 1930's because of all the motorized bank robbers roaming the nation. But along came the .357 which had the knock down power of the .45 AND the high speed of the 9mm enough to penetrate steel and glass. So the .357 became the de facto weapon for US police for decades or often the .38 special was used because it was considered more humane wounding instead of killing. And they trusted revolvers more than semi-autos, not needing to re-load as fast as a solider on a battlefield.
It wasn't until the coming of the better 9mm bullets and the plastic gun 9mm's that US police and military switched to that caliber. Of course the military doesn't use hollow points but they were pressured by NATO to adopt a uniform cartridge. And the advent of modern gun designs made the decision much easier because no one wants to carry a 3 pound sidearm when a 1.5 pound sidearm will get the job done. And of course the ammo was lighter as well. And even the ball ammo became more effective adding to it's ability to penetrate steel and glass, both of which are important because of vehicles.
All of this means little to me in terms of what I want to carry. If someone is hiding behind a car door shooting at me I'm likely going to try to run rather than confront them. So give me the traditional .45 ACP. As for protection against dangerous game, I use a .44 magnum. It will get the job done without breaking your wrist even if you're a female. Larger rounds might just break a woman's wrist especially getting into the .454 range. There's a reason handguns are limited to a certain size. We could make them to shoot 20mm cannon rounds but we prefer to be able to shoot more than once in our life. So the limits are put in place more because of what can be handled easily than any other reason.
A .45 ACP can be fired multiple times while regaining aim between shots so it makes a great man-stopper. A .44 magnum doesn't need to be fired repeatedly. It needs to do the job on one shot because of the nature of shooting dangerous game. You will likely only get one shot at a charging bear. A .45 really isn't big enough. A .44 mag is right over the border line of being effective at stopping a bruin in it's tracks. That's much better than being just under that line.
Plus the rules have changed on man-stopper cartridges. We all know about the advancements in cartridge technology that allow a 9mm to effectively stop a man. Then there's the .40 cal. which gives us the speed of the 9mm with the stopping power of a .45 and the ability to load very high capacity mags into a normal size handgun. They will penetrate glass and steel and they come close to knocking down a human as well as a .45 because of bullet technology. Bullet weights are close to the level of the .45 ACP bullets while speeds are close the 9mm's. It's a compromise round really that either gets the best of both possible calibers or the worst depending on your point of view. I carry a .40 now after carrying a .45 for a very long time. I still do carry a .45 often but I also carry a .380 at times too. It if was good enough for Custer, it's good enough for me (the Navy Colt ballistics were very similar to the .380's).
What I carry has as much to do with where I'm going as anything not to mention what I think I might want or need to shoot.