Interesting article on caliber vs stopping power [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Interesting article on caliber vs stopping power


vader7071
01-06-2012, 08:25
I am not trying to start a "which round is better argument" with this. But I wanted to share this guys study and results. I found his report very informative and conclusions sound.

Not everyone may agree with him, there are some aspects of the study that I believe he addresses well, but just the nature of the fact skewed the results some (and he points this out and why).

Hope everyone enjoys reading it as much as I did.

http://www.buckeyefirearms.org/printable/node/7866

Taurus851
01-06-2012, 08:35
my take away from the stats were 38 special is more effective than 9mm and 357 is a pretty effective round.

oh yea shotgun and rifle >>> pistol but we knew that already

vader7071
01-06-2012, 08:39
I carry a 9mm (as does the rest of my family except my wife who now carries a .22lr and wants a .40), so I went into it expecting the article to read "9mm sucks, .45 is awesome, .40 is great, and if you are carrying a .22lr, just go ahead and lie down to die."

But as I read his conclusions and the results of the shootings, and took into account the speed at which a 9mm can reacquire a sight picture vs (let's say) a .40, all of the sudden the numbers began to even out, and it came back to that old adage "caliber doesn't stop people, properly placed rounds stop people."

misfit356tsw
01-06-2012, 08:52
My take from the article is any defensive caliber is good (depending on accuracy) and there is no magic bullet. Pretty much what I have thought the whole time. Good article.

9L0ck
01-06-2012, 09:02
Good read.

eracer
01-06-2012, 09:04
He admits to not being able to statistically account for bullet type.

Pretty important variable, if you ask me.

Ghost Tracker
01-06-2012, 09:06
Be careful gentleman...statistics will KILL 'ya!

Buckeye Glocks
01-06-2012, 09:35
He admits to not being able to statistically account for bullet type.

Pretty important variable, if you ask me.

He said, "I really would have liked to break it down by individual bullet type, but I didn't have enough data points to reach a level of statistical significance."

I think there is a difference between having "data points" and "statistically accounting" for something.

He also stated that the bullet type was unkown in many cases. It is not like he was disinterested in that or omitted it because he did not think it was significant.

He could have made up numbers to satisfy people that wanted them, but that would have put into question all of his other statistics.

Bullet type is important but not so important that it cancels out anything he has to say on the subject of the stopping power of calibers he discussed.

Cephus0807
01-06-2012, 09:54
great read. thanks

fastbolt
01-06-2012, 11:02
Skimmed it again, even though I'd seen it somewhere before. Interesting enough for the nature of the article.

Certainly not surprising. Not really surprising regarding the opinion of the author based upon the data he gathered,either. Anybody really expect otherwise?

Handguns are pretty much just ... handguns.

Even rifles & shotguns aren't guaranteed to provide a 'one shot stop'.

Pick whichever handgun chambered in one of the commonly used defensive/service calibers you happen to prefer (or are required to use by policy, restriction, law, etc), and then go on to the critical factors, such as knowledge of the applicable laws, training, practice, skillset, weapon familiarity, etc ... and then maintain that knowledge and your skillset by refreshing training as needed and putting the time in for periodic practice.

Paying some attention to the state of your general health, as well as your physical capabilities and any limitations, isn't a bad idea, either.

(This ought to be moved to the Caliber sub forum, though.)

Breadman03
01-06-2012, 11:20
I tend to agree with the author. I wonder if the .357 category might have consisted of "more seasoned" shooters than some of the other categories.

eracer
01-06-2012, 11:22
He said, "I really would have liked to break it down by individual bullet type, but I didn't have enough data points to reach a level of statistical significance."

I think there is a difference between having "data points" and "statistically accounting" for something.

OK, you got me. He admits to not having enough data points to account for bullet type as a statistical significant variable.

That's REALLY different from saying "He admits to not being able to statistically account for bullet type."

I stand semantically corrected.

He also stated that the bullet type was unkown in many cases. It is not like he was disinterested in that or omitted it because he did not think it was significant.I never said he was or did either of those things.

He could have made up numbers to satisfy people that wanted them, but that would have put into question all of his other statistics.So, not including bullet type as a variable doesn't potentially skew the results to a statistically significant degree?

Bullet type is important but not so important that it cancels out anything he has to say on the subject of the stopping power of calibers he discussed.I disagree. I think it's a very significant variable. Not sure why you don't.

TomB985
01-06-2012, 11:41
This is a good read, thanks for posting!

I think it validates my own feelings on the matter quite well, caliber isn't everything! I can't tell you how many folks I've run into that insist that if they shoot someone with their .45 they're going DOWN. Even a .44 Magnum, which can be more than twice as powerful as a .45, isn't a guaranteed stop in one shot.

Another thing I gained from it is that the ability for follow-up shots is critical, as anyone thinking that they can drop someone in one shot in a situation as stressful as having to fight for their life may want to reconsider. I tend to think stopping power is the ability to put as many well-placed rounds into the right areas as fast as possible. I don't believe in overkill when fighting for one's life, and I would shoot someone 15 times if that's what it took to end the threat.

Once again, a really great read. Thanks!!!

fredj338
01-06-2012, 12:02
This is a good read, thanks for posting!

I think it validates my own feelings on the matter quite well, caliber isn't everything! I can't tell you how many folks I've run into that insist that if they shoot someone with their .45 they're going DOWN. Even a .44 Magnum, which can be more than twice as powerful as a .45, isn't a guaranteed stop in one shot.

Another thing I gained from it is that the ability for follow-up shots is critical, as anyone thinking that they can drop someone in one shot in a situation as stressful as having to fight for their life may want to reconsider. I tend to think stopping power is the ability to put as many well-placed rounds into the right areas as fast as possible. I don't believe in overkill when fighting for one's life, and I would shoot someone 15 times if that's what it took to end the threat.

Once again, a really great read. Thanks!!!
I don't think most intelligent shooters think they are going to get a one shot stop. The thought process, at least for me, is I my only land one good hit in a dynamic gunfight. That hit needs to deliver a max result as it may be the only one that counts. No one can really argue that a 44mag isn't likely to give a better result than a 380 delivered to the same point on the target. So much like hunting dangerous game, shoot the largest caliber you can effectively hit with. Follow up shots are nice, but again, you may only land one effective hit, it needs to count. Spray & pray has pretty much been proven to not work & if multiple hits were all that mattered, the 22lr would be king of the SD/HD calibers.:dunno:

Buckeye Glocks
01-06-2012, 12:31
OK, you got me. He admits to not having enough data points to account for bullet type as a statistical significant variable.

That's REALLY different from saying "He admits to not being able to statistically account for bullet type."

I stand semantically corrected.

I never said he was or did either of those things.

So, not including bullet type as a variable doesn't potentially skew the results to a statistically significant degree?

It does not skew the statistics - it is something that is not measured. If it is not measured you can't say whether it is statistically significant or not. If you had the data points and could calculate the stats then you could determine whether it was or was not "statistically" significant.


I disagree. I think it's a very significant variable. Not sure why you don't.

Obviously it is significant to you that that information is not available. Take the article for face value, make your own decision on what to carry what you feel comfortable with and load it with the ammo of your choice.

eracer
01-06-2012, 12:54
Obviously it is significant to you that that information is not available. Take the article for face value, make your own decision on what to carry what you feel comfortable with and load it with the ammo of your choice.Will do.

MinervaDoe
01-06-2012, 16:03
I think the author probably put an enormous amount of work into collecting his data, only to have to admit to muddled results. It really points out just how difficult it was for Marshall and Sanow to put together a database. And to the detractors, Mas Ayoob has a very good point, "Go out and collect your own data."

WiskyT
01-06-2012, 17:01
He has a masters in public policy management and used a lot of graphs so he must be a whiz with excel or whatever program does that. I've met enough people like that to conclude that they generally don't know much about anything. We had a hallway full of guys like that:supergrin:

conpro
01-06-2012, 23:36
Sounds like i will stick with my 9mm.

Glolt20-91
01-07-2012, 00:26
Let's keep in mind there isn't a national database for OIS, I expect civilian shootings and firearm related homicide data would be more difficult to gather.

Author is to be commended for sharing his collected data, an arduous task to accomplish.

WiskyT
01-07-2012, 05:30
Let's keep in mind there isn't a national database for OIS, I expect civilian shootings and firearm related homicide data would be more difficult to gather.

Author is to be commended for sharing his collected data, an arduous task to accomplish.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

Evan and Sanow act like there is some kind of national clearing house of shooting results. Cops don't write reports detailing such matters. And the ones who have been in shootings rarely talk to anyone about how it actually went down. This guy just seems to be mimmicking Evan and Sanow

Another pet peeve of mine is the idea that there are somehow lots of shootings by police that can be used for statistical purposes. I worked in a very busy county with millions of people in it, and seemingly more criminals. If a cop was in a shooting, I knew about it. It's not as common as some people think.

Statements such as "The so-and-so Highway Patrol have been dropping BG's with this round regularly, they love it!" are nonsense. How many shootings does a HP agency have, a couple a year? Those statements make it seem like they shoot BG's all day long and were complaining about how long the old round took to work, but now love the new one:upeyes:

"The 135 38 GDHP has been giving impressive results with the NYPD". How many NYPD cops are still wearing model 36's and actually working the street? If they shoot someone, I doubt they would talk to any magazine writer about how happy they were with the new and improved bullets.

unit1069
01-07-2012, 08:21
All the years LEO could have been achieving superior results with .32ACP they were under the misguided notion that .38 Special and .357 Magnum made sense for an issue weapon.

WiskyT
01-07-2012, 08:30
All the years LEO could have been achieving superior results with .32ACP they were under the misguided notion that .38 Special and .357 Magnum made sense for an issue weapon.

Good point. I didn't actually look at his "research" until you made your post. Looking at his results,the 32 does better than the 38/357!:faint:

TX expat
01-07-2012, 08:34
That's a really good read, thanks for posting it.

I commend the author for all the work he would have put in to it, and then to still have the sincerity to conclude that there is no 'best caliber'.

Quarter Tank
01-07-2012, 08:39
I love caliber v. stopping power articles and threads for that matter

I do know I have my opinion on what works best and everyone else has theirs. still fun to debate

Liff
01-07-2012, 13:01
If only that article was actually true, then it would be a good read.

Whenever you come across "new information", always consider the source. If your source is some random page on the internet, you probably have a bad source.

The information may or may not be factual, but the basis or foundation of the "knowledge" is flawed.

cowboy1964
01-07-2012, 13:18
With data like this just look at the big picture and don't get bogged down in the details: all the major calibers are so close that they should essentially be considered equal in terms of performance. Which really just leaves you with the other factors: cost (how much can you train), capacity, accuracy, ability, etc.

OctoberRust
01-07-2012, 14:01
With data like this just look at the big picture and don't get bogged down in the details: all the major calibers are so close that they should essentially be considered equal in terms of performance. Which really just leaves you with the other factors: cost (how much can you train), capacity, accuracy, ability, etc.


Don't tell some people here on GT that. They might get jealous they pay twice the amount for .45 that they could for 9mm. :supergrin:



....before any reloaders even comment on that, shut up. :tongueout:

SCmasterblaster
01-07-2012, 15:13
I looked it over. It is a good set of data. I notice that the data did not catagorize the shootees as highly agressive or passive. There is a BIG difference between a passive bank robber and someone angrily charging with a knife at the shooter. And the 9mm Luger data tells me that I had better shoot at least 4 times to bring down my attacker!

SCmasterblaster
01-07-2012, 15:58
I carry a 9mm (as does the rest of my family except my wife who now carries a .22lr and wants a .40), so I went into it expecting the article to read "9mm sucks, .45 is awesome, .40 is great, and if you are carrying a .22lr, just go ahead and lie down to die."

But as I read his conclusions and the results of the shootings, and took into account the speed at which a 9mm can reacquire a sight picture vs (let's say) a .40, all of the sudden the numbers began to even out, and it came back to that old adage "caliber doesn't stop people, properly placed rounds stop people."

And in the article summary section he wrote that 9mm ball ammo was at least in 50% of the data, and that he personally belives that the stats for 9mm woud be much higher if fast, expanding bullets were used in all of the cases.

beforeobamabans
01-07-2012, 17:13
After reading the article and this thread, it reinforces something I learned early in my handgun experience: never sacrifice capacity for caliber. I see a lot of that going on with GT posters.

fredj338
01-07-2012, 18:07
After reading the article and this thread, it reinforces something I learned early in my handgun experience: never sacrifice capacity for caliber. I see a lot of that going on with GT posters.

You are right of course. If you can not shoot well, then you better have a lot of rounds on hand. If you are not going to shoot an adequate caliber & bullet combo, then you better have more rounds on hand. Skill, ability & desire will trump just about any other combination but bad luck.

TomB985
01-07-2012, 20:33
You are right of course. If you can not shoot well, then you better have a lot of rounds on hand. If you are not going to shoot an adequate caliber & bullet combo, then you better have more rounds on hand. Skill, ability & desire will trump just about any othner combination but bad luck.

So you're saying my 10-round Ruger Mk III might not be the best choice? :rofl:

fredj338
01-07-2012, 22:28
So you're saying my 10-round Ruger Mk III might not be the best choice? :rofl:
Well for those that can shoot nothing better, it might be their best choice.:dunno:

beforeobamabans
01-08-2012, 08:48
You are right of course. If you can not shoot well, then you better have a lot of rounds on hand. If you are not going to shoot an adequate caliber & bullet combo, then you better have more rounds on hand. Skill, ability & desire will trump just about any other combination but bad luck.

Overconfidence is the first tactical error....

unit1069
01-08-2012, 09:02
So you're saying my 10-round Ruger Mk III might not be the best choice? :rofl:

I agree with fred.

I taught my teenage daughter to shoot with a Ruger Mark II with 6 7/8" barrel and she's taken to it very well. The Ruger loaded with ten 40-grain Velocitor rounds is certainly much better for her than my 9mm that causes her to flinch when she fires it.

On paper .22lr doesn't seem like a contender for stopping power, and I also agree it's not the optimum self-defense caliber. But any caliber has the potential and capacity to inflict great harm or death.

WiskyT
01-08-2012, 09:34
I agree with fred.

I taught my teenage daughter to shoot with a Ruger Mark II with 6 7/8" barrel and she's taken to it very well. The Ruger loaded with ten 40-grain Velocitor rounds is certainly much better for her than my 9mm that causes her to flinch when she fires it.

On paper .22lr doesn't seem like a contender for stopping power, and I also agree it's not the optimum self-defense caliber. But any caliber has the potential and capacity to inflict great harm or death.

Yup, that's why I think the new Ruger SR22 has potential. If it is reliable, it would make a decent defensive gun for those who don't tolerate recoil or can't rack the slide on a heavier caliber. As long as it is reliable and the trigger reach isn't too long, it will make a good defensive option for some.

fx77
01-08-2012, 10:03
The conclusion for the shooter would be to choose the best caliber round that can deliver the highest energy to a vital spot on a repeated basis under great stress.
That is something for which a retrospective stucdies cannort acccount.

fredj338
01-08-2012, 11:58
Overconfidence is the first tactical error....

How do you get over confidence out of that? No, knowing ones ability & limitations is what I am saying. If you can't shoot, yeah, get more bullets for sure, spray & pray sort of works if you are in close. If you can shoot & you know you can shoot, that confidence will go along way toward a winning/combat mindset. If you suck & you know you suck, then you are the guy drawing early & shooting often, as in many LEA shootings. For sure more ammo will be very helpful.:upeyes:
There is no downside to using the most effective fight stopping caliber & platform available as long as the shooter is capable. One can try to argue you make up for accuracy or power by more bullets, but that really hasn't proven itself in close range encounters where first heavy hits often win the fight. Sure, nothing handheld is 100%, then again, most knowledgeable shooters can agree there are good minimums. I would rather have a 6shot 38sp than a 10sht 22lr. Then again, I can shoot. Anyone that can handle a 22lr can handle a 4" 38sp w/ std vel loads. In my ridiculous state we are stuck w/ 10rd mags. I would rather have 10 big bullets making 10 big holes than 10 smaller bullets making 10 smaller holes. I shoot the 45acp as well as the 9mm, both loaded w/ full power ammo. So no downside using a slightly more powerfull round here.
This debate will go on for ever, as long as there are diff calibers to debate. There will always be the high round count, 9mm fans trying to justify their choice as will be the bigger bullet, bigger hole guys justifying their choice. More ammo is always better in a gunfight, within reason (min caliber), but thinking more ammo is going to win your gunfight is just as short sighted as thinking a larger caliber on it's own will win the fight. No, it's always going to come down to shooter ability & combat mindset with a healthy dose of luck. Remove eirher & depend on the later & you will almost always lose any fight.

beforeobamabans
01-08-2012, 15:20
If you can shoot & you know you can shoot, that confidence will go along way toward a winning/combat mindset.

Do you think Gabe Suarez can shoot?

I agree with you that living in a 10 round state makes the decision a lot easier. You have my condolences.

WiskyT
01-08-2012, 16:04
Do you think Gabe Suarez can shoot?

I agree with you that living in a 10 round state makes the decision a lot easier. You have my condolences.

He never shot anyone, so we don't know.

fredj338
01-08-2012, 16:22
Do you think Gabe Suarez can shoot?

I agree with you that living in a 10 round state makes the decision a lot easier. You have my condolences.
Honestly, I have seen better shooters than Suarez. Again, more ammo is always desireable, but if you are a poor shooter, you may need all those rds too. Really, it's opinion. Suarez has changed his mind over the years, maybe w/ his shooting skillsm, I don't know. Training to hose down your opponent may be fine in some circumstance, but you better hope all those extra rds you fired strike the BG & that while you are mag dumping on one guy, there isn't another guy doing the same to you.:dunno: Diff perspectives is all. If you are happy carrying a G19 & 2 spare mags, more power to you. I am cofident w/ my ability & less rds, then again, I have to be.:whistling:

Edmo01
01-08-2012, 17:38
With the average bad guy needing 2 round to stop him, it makes me wonder about the 5 shot 38 snubbie I sometimes carry.

Edmo

pag23
01-08-2012, 18:13
I would be curious to see it broken down like LEO vs civilian shootings and FMJ vs JHP....

PghJim
01-09-2012, 01:30
I think the author probably put an enormous amount of work into collecting his data, only to have to admit to muddled results. It really points out just how difficult it was for Marshall and Sanow to put together a database. And to the detractors, Mas Ayoob has a very good point, "Go out and collect your own data."

Very good points. Even though the author tried, I do not think the data has any realistic value without bullet make or type. The point about M&S is well said.

Tiro Fijo
01-09-2012, 02:56
...but thinking more ammo is going to win your gunfight is just as short sighted as thinking a larger caliber on it's own will win the fight. No, it's always going to come down to shooter ability & combat mindset with a healthy dose of luck. Remove eirher & depend on the later & you will almost always lose any fight.


:thumbsup:

tsmo1066
01-09-2012, 10:26
The article just reinforces what I've believed for a long time, namely that choice of caliber is very much a secondary consideration to choice of platform, training, mindset, etc.

fredj338
01-09-2012, 13:19
The article just reinforces what I've believed for a long time, namely that choice of caliber is very much a secondary consideration to choice of platform, training, mindset, etc.

100% correct! If you can't shoot for crap, you better have a low recoiling, high ammo cap platform & even then, you are going to need luck, as your mindset isn't going to be there for you. Some might say "over confidence" but lack of is just as dangerous if not more so. You'll present, start shooting before shooting is really req'd, not hit anything or hit the wrong things & your lack of skill/confidence in your ability reduces your survival mindset. The fight is still going on, you are maybe losing ground & running out of ammo, panic sets in & your limited skills are reduced further. So correct, not much makes up for skill & mindset, not more ammo, not larger calibers. Confidence in you ability & platform will likely keep you in the fight should it go badly wrong. Anything else, you are relying on lady luck & she is a fickle biatch.:whistling:

Mattkcc
01-10-2012, 00:58
In the 90's I got to spend a lot of time in a urban medical center trauma room collecting bullets, bloody cloths and lots of cash off of bangers and drug dealers. Got to see a lot of the damage done by a lot of calibers and they were all similar. Most of these guys survived multiple shooting. The one thing that did impress was the damage done by 9mm Black Talons. The surgeons hated them due to the extra damage done and the rounds were difficult to remove. Shredded tissue would be tangled up with the sharp jagged petals of the bullets. They would have to remove the round using their fingers rather then forceps. The petals of the bullet would cut through their surgical glove and into their fingers. The other dramatic wounds I saw was from an unknown rounds from an AK.
Most AK wounds are rather modest, fmc round makes a 30 cal whole going in and a slightly larger going out. The exception was two drug dealer who had an AK emptied into their truck cab. Instead of puncture wounds there were huge gaping splits through what ever was hit. One of the dealers got hit in the thigh, it was split to the bone with a gash about 14" long. Both of them were covered with these wounds, one of the guys faces had been hit and I almost felt sorry for him. One guy survived which was surprised me and he looked the worst. I think people get to hung-up on caliber if you took a guy and were able to shoot him in the same spot on different occasion with a variety of calibers you would see very little difference in effect. I do believe in a well constructed bullet though, probably more important then caliber.

bdcremer
01-10-2012, 05:18
I wouldn't want to be shot by any cartridge. Especially multiple times.

beforeobamabans
01-10-2012, 12:48
100% correct! If you can't shoot for crap, you better have a low recoiling, high ammo cap platform & even then, you are going to need luck, as your mindset isn't going to be there for you. Some might say "over confidence" but lack of is just as dangerous if not more so. You'll present, start shooting before shooting is really req'd, not hit anything or hit the wrong things & your lack of skill/confidence in your ability reduces your survival mindset. The fight is still going on, you are maybe losing ground & running out of ammo, panic sets in & your limited skills are reduced further. So correct, not much makes up for skill & mindset, not more ammo, not larger calibers. Confidence in you ability & platform will likely keep you in the fight should it go badly wrong. Anything else, you are relying on lady luck & she is a fickle biatch.:whistling:

No one is arguing that less skill is better than more. But your encounter will more than likely not be quite as easy as most shooters typically practice. I'm thinking of the GT member who shared the story of his incident. He was jogging and got clubbed in the head from behind. Dazed and lying on the ground, he emptied his 8 round 1911 at his attackers. Four rounds struck and killed one of the perps. It turned out that there were two and the second one fled. If #2 happened to be armed and returned fire the guy with the empty gun would have been in a bad spot.

fredj338
01-10-2012, 14:26
No one is arguing that less skill is better than more. But your encounter will more than likely not be quite as easy as most shooters typically practice. I'm thinking of the GT member who shared the story of his incident. He was jogging and got clubbed in the head from behind. Dazed and lying on the ground, he emptied his 8 round 1911 at his attackers. Four rounds struck and killed one of the perps. It turned out that there were two and the second one fled. If #2 happened to be armed and returned fire the guy with the empty gun would have been in a bad spot.


Then I would submit he wasn't as well trained as he thought. To let guys run up on you & club you, then mag dump, not good training IMO. Sure, more ammo is always better, but more ammo doesn't solve poor training or mindset or skill. This guy was in a state of condition white IMO, not good.:dunno: Why mag dump if no one is shooting at you? It's one reason I don;t liektraining that technique as Saurez shows, you are busy mag dumping & then a guy comes up behind you @ smacks you in the head.

tsmo1066
01-10-2012, 15:18
Being well trained is critical, but no matter how high your level of skill and training, having more bullets at your disposal is still always better than having less. No body ever gets into a gunfight and finds themselves saying "Damn! I wish I would run out of ammo right about now!"

'Tis better to have and not need than need and not have.

fredj338
01-10-2012, 16:24
Being well trained is critical, but no matter how high your level of skill and training, having more bullets at your disposal is still always better than having less. No body ever gets into a gunfight and finds themselves saying "Damn! I wish I would run out of ammo right about now!"

'Tis better to have and not need than need and not have.
CORRECT! Thinking that is going to win your fight though would be misguided. If you can't shoot or function under pressure, you are only prolonging your inevitable demise if you can't stop the fight. Again, in the few states like here that allow only 10+1, would you still carry a G17 or go bigger caliber? Me, I choose bigger caliber since ammo cap is virtually identical depending on platform. Is it a marginal advantage, sure, but life is lived on the margins.:dunno:

fastbolt
01-10-2012, 18:42
Being well trained is critical, but no matter how high your level of skill and training, having more bullets at your disposal is still always better than having less. No body ever gets into a gunfight and finds themselves saying "Damn! I wish I would run out of ammo right about now!"

'Tis better to have and not need than need and not have.

Well, I've not heard many folks say anything to the effect that they'd 'felt better' about being in a shooting situation just because they'd been carrying a hi-cap gun, either.

I have heard some folks relate that they'd been glad they'd still had rounds remaining in their weapons (and in their remaining mags, with one guy having gone through 2 of his duty mags) by the time they realized they needed to settle down and start aiming their shots for better effect.

To me, that was the more telling aspect for at least a couple of guys who had faced the sudden realization that they'd been seriously wounded themselves, but that the suspects hadn't been "stopped" by their gunshot wounds. They were glad they had enough rounds left at their disposal when they decided it was time to start really aiming and hitting better. One guy said he suddenly realized he needed to stop shooting "instinctively" and start aiming his shots, at which time he seriously wounded his attacker, and essentially stopped the suspect from continuing to shoot at him until cover arrived.

On the other hand, when I think back to guys I know (or had access to info from the incident) who have only had to fire anywhere from 1-8 rounds to end the attack, none of them actually came out and said it had occurred to them to be glad they had remaining rounds left. (It's been much more common among the many cops I've known who have been in shootings to need to fire fewer rounds than many rounds, but that's a really small data set compared to the 3% of LE who may have to fire their weapons outside the range/training/quals on any given year (unless the stats have changed in recent years).

Thinking back to the last couple of non-LE shootings I can remember, where I either interviewed the victim or knew the cop who did, and the victim gunfire had either crippled or killed the armed suspects, each victim had only fired a single round (.380 & .45, not that it ultimately really means anything when trying to 'compare' calibers).

Discussing a hundred, a thousand, five thousand, or even more than ten thousand shootings won't provide the level of "definitive proof" sought by a number of folks looking to settle the capacity, caliber or "stopping power" issues.

There are too many variables that can create unquantifiable factors and influences.

Besides, I still think that much more potential benefits may be obtained by directing attention to skillset, training, understanding the lessons of experience and developing the most practical and effective mindset for such deadly force encounters.

It's not uncommon to be able to gather together a dozen or more well-trained, seasoned and experienced LE firearms instructors and take an informal poll of their equipment, including their choice of weapons, ammunition and holsters. The result? Don't be surprised to find their equipment will vary across the broad spectrum of weapons, caliber, ammunition, holsters and other related gear (by policy/equipment restrictions or personal choice).

The one thing they'll probably all share in common, though?

A grasp and acceptance of the critical importance of training, practice and skillset development & maintenance, as well being able to effectively use whatever it is they've either been told to use, or have chosen to use.

Individual preferences and nuances when it comes to the gear is overshadowed by skill, experience and an understanding of how to best apply tactics and strategy to actually using whatever equipment is involved.

Of course, the mark of the better instructors is that they can trade equipment with other instructors and use each other's equipment safely, accurately & effectively. It's just equipment, after all.

Invest the money in a gun or ammunition, and you've just bought equipment.

Invest the money in the equipment user, and you've hopefully created someone who may be able to apply that training, judgment & experience to using a wider range of equipment than just a specific piece.

The whole pointing finger & moon thing ...

fredj338
01-10-2012, 23:27
Besides, I still think that much more potential benefits may be obtained by directing attention to skillset, training, understanding the lessons of experience and developing the most practical and effective mindset for such deadly force encounters.

It's not uncommon to be able to gather together a dozen or more well-trained, seasoned and experienced LE firearms instructors and take an informal poll of their equipment, including their choice of weapons, ammunition and holsters. The result? Don't be surprised to find their equipment will vary across the broad spectrum of weapons, caliber, ammunition, holsters and other related gear (by policy/equipment restrictions or personal choice).

The one thing they'll probably all share in common, though?

A grasp and acceptance of the critical importance of training, practice and skillset development & maintenance, as well being able to effectively whatever it is they've either been told to use, or have chosen to use.

Individual preferences and nuances when it comes to the gear is overshadowed by skill, experience and an understanding of how to best apply tactics and strategy to actually using whatever equipment is involved.
Very well stated. The only thing that makes up for lack of skill & mindset in a gunfight is dumb luck & I never want to count on that!

cowboywannabe
01-10-2012, 23:35
ive seen too many small caliber shootings to believe that they wont stop an attacker.

stop is the suspect word.

knock down? no, only a few did that.

kill? yes, a few did that right away and other had to bleed out.

stop the assault and run away? yes, a few did that and most lived.

stop the assault completely? i can think of two that it stopped the physical fist fight, but the guys who got shot went to their cars and got their guns and went back looking for the guys who shot them. of course these were not COM hits to these guys.

do i want or prefer a small caliber? not at all.

am i nieve enough to think that all it will do is piss somebody off? no.

tsmo1066
01-11-2012, 08:35
CORRECT! Thinking that is going to win your fight though would be misguided. If you can't shoot or function under pressure, you are only prolonging your inevitable demise if you can't stop the fight. Again, in the few states like here that allow only 10+1, would you still carry a G17 or go bigger caliber? Me, I choose bigger caliber since ammo cap is virtually identical depending on platform. Is it a marginal advantage, sure, but life is lived on the margins.:dunno:

If I were limited to ten rounds and for whatever reason needed to be carrying a full-sized platform in the G17 size range I'd likely go back to my 1911, but that's more of a platform decision than a caliber consideration. I prefer the ergos on the full-sized 1911.

Practically speaking, though, I generally tend to stick with more of the mid-sized pistols like my G19. Small enough for easy concealed carry but with enough heft and size to fill my hand comfortably - and of course the fact that it has always been drop-dead reliable doesn't hurt.

Truth be told, if I could own only 1 handgun, it would be that G19 simply because I like the platform.

fredj338
01-11-2012, 09:38
If I were limited to ten rounds and for whatever reason needed to be carrying a full-sized platform in the G17 size range I'd likely go back to my 1911, but that's more of a platform decision than a caliber consideration. I prefer the ergos on the full-sized 1911.

Practically speaking, though, I generally tend to stick with more of the mid-sized pistols like my G19. Small enough for easy concealed carry but with enough heft and size to fill my hand comfortably - and of course the fact that it has always been drop-dead reliable doesn't hurt.

Truth be told, if I could own only 1 handgun, it would be that G19 simply because I like the platform.

My EDC is a 1911PD w/ bobbed mainspring housing. Loaded, it weighs about like a G19, carries flatter, I give up 2rds. Since I always carry a spare mag, I don't feel limited. While I can shoot a Glock, hell I can shoot anything, I am faster & more acccurate w/ any 1911 platform. IF I were suddenly limited to one handgun for the rest of my life, it would be a 4" M29 44mag. It will do anything you could ever ask of a handgun & is still not so big that one could not ccw it. I owuld haveto handload my carry ammo though.:supergrin:

Tiro Fijo
01-11-2012, 13:31
Would some please explain to me this word "training." Train for what? You CANNOT train for the average encounter because no one agrees on what it is. If you can't know with any great certitude what something is then how can you train for it? That's like a priest studying lovemaking.

IDPA, IPSC, etc., are great to train your shooting skills but they will only help you under certain situations. Against a novice criminal, yes. Against a real killer you're doomed. The one who is not afraid of you or your gun. A criminal who will wait for your most awkward moment such as both hands full with grocery bags or 'rounding a corner. No one lives their life in condition yellow 24/7 forever. They would have a nervous breakdown.

A couple of years ago a World Class IPSC shooter was found dead in his home country. Shot dead in the street. He had trained all of his life. It's what you don't train for that will get you killed and not what you train for as a normal average citizen cannot train for and think like a hardened criminal no more than the Pope could train for lovemaking.

That's why in the Old West some of the best lawmen were former criminals. :whistling:

tsmo1066
01-11-2012, 13:51
Would some please explain to me this word "training." Train for what? You CANNOT train for the average encounter because no one agrees on what it is. If you can't know with any great certitude what something is then how can you train for it? That's like a priest studying lovemaking.

IDPA, IPSC, etc., are great to train your shooting skills but they will only help you under certain situations. Against a novice criminal, yes. Against a real killer you're doomed. The one who is not afraid of you or your gun. A criminal who will wait for your most awkward moment such as both hands full with grocery bags or 'rounding a corner. No one lives their life in condition yellow 24/7 forever. They would have a nervous breakdown.

A couple of years ago a World Class IPSC shooter was found dead in his home country. Shot dead in the street. He had trained all of his life. It's what you don't train for that will get you killed and not what you train for as a normal average citizen cannot train for and think like a hardened criminal no more than the Pope could train for lovemaking.

That's why in the Old West some of the best lawmen were former criminals. :whistling:

Can you train for every situation? Of course not, but that does not mean that training doesn't help. In a crisis, people tend to fall back on what they are trained to do, and if they have no training to fall back on, the general tendency in a crisis is to either freeze completely or panic.

Gaining a solid familiarity with your weapon along with some confidence in its proper handling and an understanding of stress-fire and basic tactics is critical not because it explicitly prepares you for every single specific situation that could arise, but because it gives you something to rely on other than sheer panic and 'fight or flight' instinct.

As for the IPSC competitor being shot and killed in spite of his training, tragically training can't guarantee success in every situation. Gunfights are random, unpredictable and fraught with "x factors" that can't be controlled for. On the whole, though, well trained people tend to fare much better than untrained people when the "s" hits the "f".

fastbolt
01-11-2012, 14:34
You know, this whole subject sort of reminds me of the way people were arguing about the "effectiveness" of various martial arts when defending against a "typical street fighter" when I started my arts pursuit 40 years ago.

There wasn't a definitive answer back then, either. Looking back from the perspective of this many years alter, while there are some arts that are seemingly better suited for some situations and some users than others ... it's still the user, and the user's mindset, experience and ability to react to any given (but unpredictable) set of circumstances in a dynamic manner.

Undoubtedly, not only has my career in LE (including being a firearms instructor) been a strong influence on my thinking in this subject, but so, too, has my lifelong pursuit of the arts had a strong influence when it comes to how I think about this subject.

Skills training can help you develop a strong foundation ... of skills.

Some flexibility in understanding how those skills may be applied (from leisure shooting, hunting, competition/gaming, defensive application, etc) require effort on the part of the user. Naturally, depending on the purpose the user has in mind, it's not unexpected some emphasis may be applied in the way of some specialization of skills practice & application.

Being able to adapt that skillset to whatever potential circumstances and situations someone may envision being possible for themselves, in their activities & lifestyle, along with the equipment they've chosen for their own usage, is something each person has to determine for themselves.

Awareness of your environment (including exerting whatever control you may have over where you choose to go about your activities), sound judgment, being able to successfully draw upon experience in order to react & act under stress, and working to develop an appropriate mindset to help you remain functional (physically & mentally) in unexpectedly dangerous circumstances?

Well, that's not something you can buy in a box, thread onto your belt or carry around in a holster.

Mistaking the possession of cool equipment for the possession of good skills and good judgment ... and the intention to react & act properly upon demand for having trained & practiced to react & act as best as able for whatever circumstances may arise ... and range or class time for experience?

Well, that's something we all have to ponder and hope we're able to avoid making mistakes, isn't it?

I've been up and around the block a time or two, and I still often ask myself if I'm not edging over from justified confidence to misplaced or unjustified confidence from time to time. Nobody wants to be overwhelmed by events, and nobody can expect the unexpected with certainty ... but we can train so our skillset requires less cognitive attention to access under pressure, and mentally prepare ourselves to face what we can't always expect (or may prefer to pretend isn't possible).

fredj338
01-11-2012, 14:54
I've up and around the block a time or two, and I still often ask myself if I'm not edging over from justified confidence to misplaced or unjustified confidence from time to time. Nobody wants to be overwhelmed by events, and nobody can expect the unexpected with certainty ... but we can train so our skillset requires less cognitive attention to access under pressure, and mentally prepare ourselves to face what we can't always expect (or may prefer to pretend isn't possible).
^^THIS^^ IDPA, USPSA, etc is NOT training but good practice. Training is just that, scenario based thought process. So mixing both is a good way to keep your skill set & mindset right. If all you do is shoot competition, your shooting skills will be fine, but your mindset may suffer (hence the IPSC guy getting whacked). There is no reason one can not live their entire life on the street in condition yellow.
Pay attention, carry a gun, train & practice w/ it until the shooting part is automatic, then you can focus on the actual event taking place in front of you. If you have to think about presentation, grip, sight pic, loading, unloading, malfunctions, etc you are way behind the curve on the street.