One-Shot Drops Surviving the Myth [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : One-Shot Drops Surviving the Myth


Pages : [1] 2 3

RMTactical
06-09-2005, 15:29
http://www.rrmemphis.com/myth.pdf

RMTactical
06-09-2005, 15:31
What stands out to me is that 10% of these guys were killed with their own weapon... :(

turbonatr
06-09-2005, 16:09
http://www.fbi.gov/publications/leb...leb.htm#page_15


In the authors’ ongoing study of violence against law enforcement officers, they have examined several cases where officers used large-caliber hand guns with limited effect displayed by the offenders. In one case, the subject attacked the officer with a knife. The officer shot the individual four times in the chest; then, his weapon malfunctioned. The offender continued to walk toward the officer. After the officer cleared his weapon, he fired again and struck the subject in the chest. Only then did the offender drop the knife. This individual was hit five times with 230-grain, .45-caliber hollow-point ammunition and never fell to the ground. The offender later stated, “The wounds felt like bee stings.”

In another case, officers fired six .40-caliber, hollow-point rounds at a subject who pointed a gun at them. Each of the six rounds hit the individual with no visible effect. The seventh round severed his spinal cord, and the offender fell to the ground, dropping his weapon. This entire firefight was captured by several officers’ in-car video cameras.

Can't say it enough...handguns SUCK at stopping people!

RMTactical
06-09-2005, 16:17
Originally posted by turbonatr
http://www.fbi.gov/publications/leb...leb.htm#page_15




Can't say it enough...handguns SUCK at stopping people!

No doubt, that's why you cannot just shoot someone once. You've GOT to shoot until the perp is no longer a threat. One or two shots to the chest MAY not be enough to get the job done and there are too many variables. Some to consider, some that can't be worked into the equation until AFTER.

turbonatr
06-09-2005, 16:21
Excellent read, GoreLicks. Thanks!

oldgranpa
06-09-2005, 17:04
And here I was hoping someday to see a "two-shot-stop" rating of different calibers. It's becoming obvious that would be no more effective than a "one-shot-stop" rating, whatever that is.

I guess for us civilians with our little 9mm pocket guns the best rule is still rule 3.....run away if you can!

Changes what I think about my .45 home defense pistol too.

Whatever!

og

turbonatr
06-09-2005, 17:17
I really understand that everyone out there wants to make the best possible choice they can about their carry choices, etc., but what it really boils down to is training. Worry more about putting those bullets where they need to be as accurately and as quickly as possible. 9mm, .357, .40, 10mm, .45acp...it's all the same. Pick a premium JHP of sufficient weight, functions 100% in your particular gun and get to the range!!

RMTactical
06-09-2005, 18:55
Originally posted by turbonatr
I really understand that everyone out there wants to make the best possible choice they can about their carry choices, etc., but what it really boils down to is training. Worry more about putting those bullets where they need to be as accurately and as quickly as possible. 9mm, .357, .40, 10mm, .45acp...it's all the same. Pick a premium JHP of sufficient weight, functions 100% in your particular gun and get to the range!!

Exactly.

Shoot, and shoot often. Secret Service agents qualify everyday when they go into work. Being proficient with your weapon is what will make the difference. Aiming at the COM, not just the whole body as a target.

Rollo Tamasey
06-09-2005, 19:38
I know maybe even this would not garentee a stop even if it hit the BG directly but it woulkd be about the biggest cartridge that most people could handle.

After reading your post I can see why that dirty harry guy in the movie always wanted the biggest revolver of his day.

RMTactical
06-09-2005, 19:44
Originally posted by Rollo Tamasey
I know maybe even this would not garentee a stop even if it hit the BG directly but it woulkd be about the biggest cartridge that most people could handle.

After reading your post I can see why that dirty harry guy in the movie always wanted the biggest revolver of his day.

I think you missed the point. Well placed shots, at a rapid pace with a decent caliber seems like your best bet.

gary newport
06-09-2005, 19:57
Originally posted by GoreLicks
I think you missed the point. Well placed shots, at a rapid pace with a decent caliber seems like your best bet.

You nailed it! ;c

sneakyracer
06-09-2005, 21:57
"These offenders did not care about bullet weight or velocity. The majority of the offenders in both studies had been involved in prior shootings before assaulting or killing the officers. Their major concern was being “fast on the trigger” and delivering the bullet to its intended target. One stated, “There’s no time to sight up the gun. If you hesitate, you’re dead.”
"

exactly why i think QK and point shooting training is paramount

Tommy Vercetti
06-10-2005, 03:12
Thank God "Extreme Shock" has so fortuitously come along with their "explosive fang face anti-terrorist" rounds to help these officers out. Now all they need is a white kydex homemade holster to fit their new single shot .32's. Shame on you for debunking the one shot myth without even considering the fact one can apparently now hunt wild boar with this round. Finally a good large game .32 round. ~`c

vafish
06-11-2005, 06:14
Originally posted by GoreLicks
Exactly.

... Secret Service agents qualify everyday when they go into work.....

And just where do you get that information from?

It's been a few years since I worked with them, but they did not qualify everyday. IIRC they had quartely qualifications (with the counter assualt team having monthly qualifications with 4 guns, handgun, AR, MP5, and shotgun). Like any federal police agency they had some gun guys that shot a lot but most were not gun guys and only fired at qualification time.

The presidential protective division and counter assualt guys did practice a lot more than most. But they still did not practice daily. They just didn't have a range available to do so, or enough time in the day to drive to the range, qualify, then work a full shift.

vafish
06-11-2005, 06:25
Originally posted by sneakyracer
"These offenders did not care about bullet weight or velocity. The majority of the offenders in both studies had been involved in prior shootings before assaulting or killing the officers. Their major concern was being “fast on the trigger” and delivering the bullet to its intended target. One stated, “There’s no time to sight up the gun. If you hesitate, you’re dead.”
"

exactly why i think QK and point shooting training is paramount

It's also why movement and cover are important.

The problem is that most of us are forced to practice on a square range standing perfectly still in a little shooting booth.

The article does a good job of pointing out the problems with most LE firearms "Training". (I say training in quotes because many departments consider their semi-annual qualification as their firearms training)

RMTactical
06-11-2005, 10:18
Originally posted by vafish
And just where do you get that information from?


An agent. But he could be wrong, I guess. Or maybe I misunderstood him. It was a while ago since I spoke with him.

ColSanders
06-11-2005, 18:42
Great link, thanks!

CougarRed
06-13-2005, 07:26
These agents clearly should have been using Federal 115 +p+ 9mm (9PBLE). It's much better than those 45s, percentage-wise.

;a

sneakyracer
06-13-2005, 09:13
Originally posted by vafish
It's also why movement and cover are important.

The problem is that most of us are forced to practice on a square range standing perfectly still in a little shooting booth.



Yep, and in my range they dont allow rapid fire. So its very hard to practice "quick on the trigger" . While bad guys do whatever they want.

Its all BULL, they should allow rapid fire. At least to competent individuals with competency determined by an instructor. I can deal with being restricted to certain area of the range for example.

I understand the reason not allowing rapid fire, there are a lot of boneheads that go to the range so the range has to factor in for the lowest denominator so to speak.

jng1226
06-13-2005, 11:11
Originally posted by sneakyracer
Yep, and in my range they dont allow rapid fire.

The range closest to my house is the same way. I drive another 20 minutes out of the way to go to a range that does allow rapid fire just for this reason.

If at all possible, you should find IDPA matches near you and participate as much as possible. If your local matches are run well, you will not only get to practice rapid-fire while drawing from your actual carry rig, you will also be forced to shoot from awkward positions, on the move, etc. - definitely NOT a static/cramped booth/one-direction-of-fire experience. The "stress" of competition and a squad of other shooters watching you will also elevate your training closer (even if just a little bit) to the real thing. Lastly, it is just plain fun!

Jeff

RMTactical
06-13-2005, 13:39
http://www.greent.com/40Page/general/defammo.htm

randy1503
06-14-2005, 20:39
maybe those guys who were shot and didn't flinch were high on drugs.

turbonatr
06-14-2005, 20:46
Originally posted by randy1503
maybe those guys who were shot and didn't flinch were high on drugs.

Even cops shot during gunfights report not noticing they were hit until after the fight was over. Adrenalin dump is a very powerful thing.

RMTactical
06-14-2005, 22:06
Originally posted by turbonatr
Even cops shot during gunfights report not noticing they were hit until after the fight was over. Adrenalin dump is a very powerful thing.

Yep, so don't stop shooting!!! ;)

utahglock
06-15-2005, 10:05
So we accepting a "collage" as a way to destroy a myth? Sounds intellecually silly and lazy to me.

I've never advocated shooting only once-the one shot stop whether you agree or not is simply a unit of measurement.

Evan

jimco
06-15-2005, 10:23
BUT even you admit, the "one shot stop" (you shoot somebody once and they stop) is a myth, and as a unit of measure, the percentages are all but meaningless and misused when it comes to any real world application (other than, of course, selling magazine articles and books).

turbonatr
06-15-2005, 15:56
Originally posted by jimco
BUT even you admit, the "one shot stop" (you shoot somebody once and they stop) is a myth, and as a unit of measure, the percentages are all but meaningless and misused when it comes to any real world application (other than, of course, selling magazine articles and books).

...and ammo.

jimco
06-15-2005, 16:42
Yep! CorBon and Triton have probably both benefitted greatly from some of those gunrag articles. In fact, a few of those "articles" should have been billed as "infomercials" rather than articles.

Ebb27
06-16-2005, 01:40
When in doubt,
empty the mag! ;f

Alaskapopo
06-16-2005, 06:25
Originally posted by sneakyracer
"These offenders did not care about bullet weight or velocity. The majority of the offenders in both studies had been involved in prior shootings before assaulting or killing the officers. Their major concern was being “fast on the trigger” and delivering the bullet to its intended target. One stated, “There’s no time to sight up the gun. If you hesitate, you’re dead.”
"

exactly why i think QK and point shooting training is paramount

If you miss your dead. There is a difference between hesitating because your not mentally ready to shoot someone and taking enough time to make well placed shots. Point shooting works great if your close enough to touch the bad guy past that it sucks.
Pat

Alaskapopo
06-16-2005, 06:26
Originally posted by 355sigfan
If you miss your dead. There is a difference between hesitating because your not mentally ready to shoot someone and taking enough time to make well placed shots. Point shooting works great if your close enough to touch the bad guy past that it sucks.

Two to the chest 1 to the head repeat as needed.
Pat

another okie
06-16-2005, 12:30
I've been shot twice in hunting accidents. One I didn't even feel, one hurt really, really badly. The one that hurt more was superficial, the one I didn't even feel was not superficial, to say the least.

jng1226
06-16-2005, 13:03
Originally posted by another okie
I've been shot twice in hunting accidents. One I didn't even feel, one hurt really, really badly. The one that hurt more was superficial, the one I didn't even feel was not superficial, to say the least.

Twice!? ;P

I don't mean to offend you, but do you have an 8-point rack growing out of your head or something? ;e

I'm glad you're OK though. There's another one for "stopping power", as I'm sure whoever shot you wasn't using a hyper-powerful 10mm handgun cartridge with an astounding 650 ft-lbs of energy. It was probably just a measly .243 Winchester with only 2200 ft-lbs that you didn't even feel...

Jeff

jimco
06-16-2005, 13:24
TWICE? Remind me to never share a stand with you! :)

Linh40
06-16-2005, 20:08
Originally posted by another okie
I've been shot twice in hunting accidents. One I didn't even feel, one hurt really, really badly. The one that hurt more was superficial, the one I didn't even feel was not superficial, to say the least.

Who shot you? your friends? and if so do you still go hunting with them? Safety first

RMTactical
06-16-2005, 20:27
Originally posted by Linh40
Who shot you? your friends? and if so do you still go hunting with them? Safety first

No kidding, and what were you shot WITH?

paccw
06-19-2005, 08:00
What most reports lack.

2 to the chest then 1 to the head survivors.And any caliber will do.;c

cheygriz
06-19-2005, 16:36
I was taught to keep shooting until the threat is neutralized. I taught that same philosophy to my students for 15 years.

Another thing that bugs me. Marshall and Fackler both have some good ideas. If they would work together, and BOTH be willing to give up preconceived notions, we would all be better off.

It seems to me that BOTH of them, are so damned busy trying to "prove" their preconceived notions that they are blinded to any information that doesn't fit those notions.

They're both potentially good researchers. What a pity they both put petty jealousies before the advance of knowledge.:(

Clem Eastwood
06-19-2005, 21:48
i know an old guy who was shot once w/ a .45 to the left of COM a little below the shoulder and said he didnt know he was hit until after the shooting stopped (he's an old body guard), and on the flip side my friend shot a guy COM (in self defense) w/ a 9mm black talon and the guy dropped and died right there. neither of the above incidents had multiple wounds, just one. so id say shot placement is pretty important.

Mike H
06-19-2005, 22:44
We should all believe the delightfully sweet natured Evan Marshall and his entirely believable OSS statistics. ;Q

V Creed
06-20-2005, 04:14
Originally posted by utahglock
I've never advocated shooting only once-the one shot stop whether you agree or not is simply a unit of measurement.

Evan

Evan,
I've been astounded at the number of folks on GT who haven't been able to figure this out. How much simpler can it get? ^2

V Creed
06-20-2005, 04:34
I found this statistic interesting: "Sixty-two of the perpetrators committed suicide after killing the officer." ;f

jbrown50
06-23-2005, 08:06
Originally posted by jng1226
Twice!? ;P

I don't mean to offend you, but do you have an 8-point rack growing out of your head or something? ;e

I'm glad you're OK though. There's another one for "stopping power", as I'm sure whoever shot you wasn't using a hyper-powerful 10mm handgun cartridge with an astounding 650 ft-lbs of energy. It was probably just a measly .243 Winchester with only 2200 ft-lbs that you didn't even feel...

Jeff


`l

cheygriz
06-27-2005, 09:26
Originally posted by Mike H
We should all believe the delightfully sweet natured Evan Marshall and his entirely believable OSS statistics. ;Q

Or perhap we should all believe the sweet natured, mild mannered and ultimately believable Marty Fackler. After all, being a medical doctor automatically makes him an expert on ballistics, doesn't it?

Now here's a novel idea! Let's all completely believe and trust little old Jeffie Cooper and do away with all weapons except 1911s, and all ammo except hardball! After all, anyone that has read Jeffie knows that you can hit an elephant in the tail with .45 hardball and put him orbit. As long as the bullet was launched from a 1911, that is!;f

30roundmusket
06-27-2005, 19:18
Originally posted by jng1226
The range closest to my house is the same way(no rapid fire). I drive another 20 minutes out of the way to go to a range that does allow rapid fire just for this reason.


Jeff

I was told only 1 shot per second. I asked, what if the badguy is shooting at me faster than 1 round per second?

I don't go to that range anymore.:(

ronim
06-30-2005, 18:32
plain and simple, if you want to knock the target down, you want a large slow moving bullet. You want to penetrate, you use a faster moving round.
The .45 govt. was put into use because the army found the .38 cal pistols they were using, did not work well against drugged up fighters in the Phillipines.
There is a reason the army and other people are going back to the .45 govt. slow, big bullets knock down, getting that same sized round in the hottest speed you can find causes you to loose the knock down effect.
I shoot 9mm at work and at home. It is a nice round to train with, but I would never depend on it in combat. 15 rounds in 9mm is not worth 7 in the old govt models.

This is only my personnel opinion, I do like the .40 as well. But for knock down, I go with 110 gr Semi Jacketed HP .45 Govt. I am sure there is even some slower moving rounds that would do even a better job of knock down. That is what I use after 20 years of shooting 9mm and .45 for comps, and now the Army.

I believe after a person is knocked down, their brains have more than enough time to process the pain and damage that was involved in that act that put them down.

thanks for the great reads on this thread
ronim

turbonatr
06-30-2005, 19:57
The point of the linked article was that handgun cartridges as a whole suck at stopping people, .45acp included. One excerpt of the article is...

In the authors’ ongoing study of violence against law enforcement officers, they have examined several cases where officers used large-caliber hand guns with limited effect displayed by the offenders. In one case, the subject attacked the officer with a knife. The officer shot the individual four times in the chest; then, his weapon malfunctioned. The offender continued to walk toward the officer. After the officer cleared his weapon, he fired again and struck the subject in the chest. Only then did the offender drop the knife. This individual was hit five times with 230-grain, .45-caliber hollow-point ammunition and never fell to the ground. The offender later stated, “The wounds felt like bee stings.”



You say you would not depend on a 9mm in combat. With all due respect, no handgun cartridge should be trusted in combat. That's why soldiers are issued rifles (you know, firearms that shoot high-velocity projectiles;)) as their primary weapons, not handguns.

Alaskapopo
06-30-2005, 23:43
Originally posted by ronim
plain and simple, if you want to knock the target down, you want a large slow moving bullet. You want to penetrate, you use a faster moving round.
The .45 govt. was put into use because the army found the .38 cal pistols they were using, did not work well against drugged up fighters in the Phillipines.
There is a reason the army and other people are going back to the .45 govt. slow, big bullets knock down, getting that same sized round in the hottest speed you can find causes you to loose the knock down effect.
I shoot 9mm at work and at home. It is a nice round to train with, but I would never depend on it in combat. 15 rounds in 9mm is not worth 7 in the old govt models.

This is only my personnel opinion, I do like the .40 as well. But for knock down, I go with 110 gr Semi Jacketed HP .45 Govt. I am sure there is even some slower moving rounds that would do even a better job of knock down. That is what I use after 20 years of shooting 9mm and .45 for comps, and now the Army.

I believe after a person is knocked down, their brains have more than enough time to process the pain and damage that was involved in that act that put them down.

thanks for the great reads on this thread
ronim


HA HA HA HA HA;z ;z ;z

You actually believe a pistol of any caliber will knock a man down. You must of missed some of neutons basic laws. For example every action has an equal and opposite reaction. No pistol round will knock a man down or even make him shudder. Knockdown power is a myth.
Pat

Dragoon44
07-01-2005, 00:00
The incalculable factor in "stopping power" is the determination of your attacker. determined attackers fueled by rage, will power and or drugs are extremely difficult to stop. they can take non survivable wounds and still continue to effectively fight until they die. a good example is Platt in the FBI-miami shootout he took serious and non survivable wounds and was literally a dead man walking when he went on to kill two agents and severely wound 3 or 4 more.

Sky Pirate 7
07-02-2005, 09:50
In two previous studies on violence against law enforcement officers conducted by the authors, offenders stated their reason for selecting a particular firearm as availability, 41 per cent in the first study and 68 percent in the second.6 These offenders did not care about bullet weight or velocity. The majority of the offenders in both studies had been involved in prior shootings before assaulting or killing the officers. Their major concern was being “fast on the trigger” and delivering the bullet to its intended target. One stated, “There’s no time to sight up the gun. If you hesitate, you’re dead.”

So true.

Another thing I found interesting is that far more police officers have been killed with 9mm than any other caliber (the 2nd most "cop-killing" caliber was .38 special). I think this is mainly due to the availability of 9mm and .38 special handguns, though another factor to consider is that both of those handguns typically have low recoil (allowing faster and more accurate follow up shots) and 9mm handguns usually have very high capacities.

Finally, did you notice that half of all cops killed were wearing body armor??? That leads me to believe that a lot of cops were killed by headshots.

shepsan
07-03-2005, 15:50
I have read many conflicting theories about the subject of ammunition stopping power. What is real stopping power? Is it caliber or is it velocity? Are expanding bullets better than ball to stop and attacker? Which brand is best?

There seems to be as many answers to these questions as there are writers addressing the subject. After reading Dave Spaulding’s article in the August/September 2005 issue of HANGUNS, I find that his comments answer most of these questions to my satisfaction.

Besides providing anecdotal evidence on the subject, Mr. Spaulding discusses specific brands, types and calibers of ammunition. It is however, Mr. Spaulding’s own theories that I found to be most valuable.

“Stopping power really does not exist. What we are looking to achieve is incapacitation.” In other words, “we know that any firearm can cause death by damaging vital organs in the body. However, death does not always result in instant incapacitation.”

“The handgun incapacitation problem or lack thereof, is not an ammo problem at all; it’s a training problem. Let’s use common sense and take a look at the topic of handgun incapacitation. Is a large bullet better than a small bullet? To think otherwise would be silly. A larger-diameter bullet will strike more tissue, which will result in a larger would.”

“By delivering two bullets about four inches apart, the chance of hitting a vital area is enhanced. Naturally, more shots would be even better.”

Mr. Spaulding quotes Dr. Vincent DiMaio, “a famed medical examiner.” Dr. DiMaio:”incapacitation was a direct result of where you shoot the suspect and how many times you can shoot him.”

It seems to me from reading the reference articles, that regardless of the caliber, velocity or type of bullet that one loads, the best way to incapacitate or if you prefer, stop an attacker, is to put numerous quick hits on the center mass of a person. In any event, expending a complete magazine is far safer than expecting that one great shot to down the adversary.

ronim
07-05-2005, 15:32
I agree, my primary being 5.56 but, as a back up that may result in me living or not. I say .45 any day over 9mm. 2 .45 govt to the chest or head of body armor is worn will do the trick. Or yes you can empty the mag of the 9mm. Either way, I want to get back to my primary as quickly as possible. So yes, a rifle round is always better.
I do not know if this is true or not, but I did read in an article how the .22 cal had killed more people other than military actions. So good aim should be and is the best thing for a knock down. Good controlled group to vitals seems to be the best answer for knock down.

Remember the Army went to 9mm to make NATO happy. The Army went to the berretta to make Italy happy. Not because of ballistics or quality of the weapon. Now the Army has gone back to .45 Govt in some Units for the secondary weapon.

fredj338
07-05-2005, 19:01
The validity of the "One shot stop" has been thrown around since the study was done. You can't really argue the results. The results are what they are, but it is to be taken as is, not a definetive study saying if you use brand 'A' it WILL stop an attacker 91.2% of the time. There are many, many stories about good guys, bad guys, soldiers & civilians taking massive damage to the torso & surving to fight on, sometimes even to live through it.
Probably better than shooting jello blocks or using some formula to give a shooter an idea of what works better, and some rounds/bullets do work better than others. The studies are real world shootings, take the results for what they are worth. Bottom line is no handgun round can be determined to stop an attacker reliably w/ one shot, so as said before, shoot until your target is down.

Rebeldon
07-06-2005, 11:58
I read where the officer shot the offender in the chest four times, and the offender kept coming at him with a knife.

If I were confronted with an offender carrying a contact weapon, I'm going to aim at his pecker. One shot to the pelvis and he's down. It would be mechanically impossible to stand, nomatter what the offender is snorting or smoking.

Alaskapopo
07-06-2005, 12:52
Originally posted by Rebeldon
I read where the officer shot the offender in the chest four times, and the offender kept coming at him with a knife.

If I were confronted with an offender carrying a contact weapon, I'm going to aim at his pecker. One shot to the pelvis and he's down. It would be mechanically impossible to stand, nomatter what the offender is snorting or smoking.

The pelvic shot is not as easy as one would assume its harder than a head shot. Also most handgun rounds lack sufficient momentium and energy to break the pelvis.
Pat

Ron3
07-08-2005, 20:33
"One shot to the pelvis and he's down."

Pretty dangerous belief, man.

We should all beware the absolute thoughts. (I.e. If I do "A", bad guy WILL do "B")

Ron3

Ebb27
07-09-2005, 01:00
Originally posted by 355sigfan
The pelvic shot is not as easy as one would assume its harder than a head shot. Also most handgun rounds lack sufficient momentium and energy to break the pelvis.
Pat

Bones like the pelvis are quite flexible too.
It's a lot more likely you'll just make a hole in it,
than shatter it like it were a piece of glass.

Ideally you would like to take out the hip-joint,
so the attacker would be unable to stand.
Unfortunately though it's a lot easier said than done.
Most attackers won't just stand there
and let you take perfect aim on them.

With the use of body armor becoming more common,
it's not a bad idea to consider shots other than COM.

RMTactical
07-11-2005, 21:15
Originally posted by 355sigfan
The pelvic shot is not as easy as one would assume its harder than a head shot. Also most handgun rounds lack sufficient momentium and energy to break the pelvis.
Pat

True. My mom is an ER nurse and she said that most of the gunshot wounds she has seen in that area of the body, the bullet will deflect and change course... sometimes to the victims detriment, sometimes not...

She also mentioned that most gunshot victims DO have multiple wounds and that surviving is rather easy as long as the bullets did not hit critical areas, also a factor is the speed of treatment for the wounds. Many people walk out of the hospital after having been shot. They can be easy to survive.

I found it interesting that sometimes they leave the bullets in the victims. Strange, since you would think the lead in the bullet would be toxic...

Anyway, something to think about...

I think COM is where it's at. That or, if you can do head shots.

Turk40SW
07-13-2005, 09:33
Stopping power can be looked at in two ways from my point of view.

1. Stopping a threat, not caring if they live or die just stopping the threat.
2. Time to ceasation of brain function.

Personally, I could care less how long it takes for the brain to stop functioning. I want as much impact/trauma as possible. IMHO Hit the fastest, hardest, with the heaviest bullet that has the most expansion, without over-penetrating. And keep hitting them till the threat is over. Then remain prepared to do it again.

I want a devastating 4 inch diameter wound channel and a doubling in size of the round. 12-13" penetration.

Doubletap .40 155gr Gold Dot JHP @ 1275fps - 13.00" / .76"
Doubletap 10mm 155gr Gold Dot JHP @ 1475fps - 13.5" / .88"

CAcop
07-16-2005, 10:58
I got a question: Which is better 9mm or .45ACP?

turbonatr
07-16-2005, 11:25
Originally posted by Turk40SW
I want a devastating 4 inch diameter wound channel and a doubling in size of the round.

No handgun round will give you a 4" permanent wound channel.

Shotgunner
07-16-2005, 11:48
Originally posted by Rebeldon
I read where the officer shot the offender in the chest four times, and the offender kept coming at him with a knife.

If I were confronted with an offender carrying a contact weapon, I'm going to aim at his pecker. One shot to the pelvis and he's down. It would be mechanically impossible to stand, nomatter what the offender is snorting or smoking.

Interesting thought. If you can't incapcitate him by the trauma of impact, you can demoralize him to the point where he has no will to live. ;g

Pecker shot = real trauma

Ron3
07-17-2005, 13:56
Originally posted by turbonatr
No handgun round will give you a 4" permanent wound channel.

Hmm, maybe an M79 40mm with a pistol grip and a lead hollow point slug? ;P

I wouldn't want to fire it either!

Ron3

isuzu
07-22-2005, 17:54
Originally posted by GoreLicks
No doubt, that's why you cannot just shoot someone once. You've GOT to shoot until the perp is no longer a threat. One or two shots to the chest MAY not be enough to get the job done and there are too many variables. Some to consider, some that can't be worked into the equation until AFTER.

A cop from the Philippines (where I came from) told me that a person can still kill you within eight seconds even after he has been shot with non-survivable wounds. I wouldn't believe him at first, but after reading some posts, what he told me makes sense after all.

We got some training from an Israeli who came to the Philippines sometime in the late 80's. He was very good with the Browning Hi-Power. He told us to use the "body, body, head" technique. He told us a shot in the head is an insurance in case the perpetrator: 1) is using body armor; and 2) wasn't stopped by the two shots to the torso.

isuzu
07-22-2005, 18:04
Originally posted by CAcop
I got a question: Which is better 9mm or .45ACP?

It really depends on what ammo are you using for a certain caliber. A .45 ACP 230 gr Hydra Shok has had an impressive record. A 9mm 115 gr Cor-Bon is also good. 38 Super 115 gr Silvertips and Cor-Bons hold their own records as well. I wonder why people have "forgotten" the 38 Super. My friend used to hunt Philippine Deer with this caliber, and he told me he had better results with 38 Supers than with the .45 ACP. He further added that deer shot with a 38 Super FMJ almost always collapsed where it stood. Those shot with a .45 ACP FMJ still ran about 50 meters before collapsing.

Another friend's business was robbed by 5 people, all carrying .45 1911s sometime 2003. His brother-in-law was the manager of the business. His brother-in-law shot one of the robbers with a Beretta 22 pistol loaded with 22 lr Stinger on the chest. The robber was immediately incapacitated and died about 1 hour later in the hospital. Several employees of the business were injured after the robbers shot them.

Sorry, I have no experience with .40 S&W.

stengun
07-25-2005, 22:06
Howdy,

Originally posted by Rebeldon
I read where the officer shot the offender in the chest four times, and the offender kept coming at him with a knife.

If I were confronted with an offender carrying a contact weapon, I'm going to aim at his pecker. One shot to the pelvis and he's down. It would be mechanically impossible to stand, nomatter what the offender is snorting or smoking.

Not true. I saw a guy get shot in the pelvis area w/ a short barrel 16 ga shotgun w/ a slug at short range and the guy did not go down. He ran around screaming that his guts were on fire. The gun shot actually blow off his ***** and both testicles! He lived through the ordeal somehow and carried his guts around in a bag for 2 years.

Paul

P.S. Buy products that are made in the USA by US citizens.

searcher
07-28-2005, 22:39
Originally posted by 355sigfan
HA HA HA HA HA;z ;z ;z

You actually believe a pistol of any caliber will knock a man down. You must of missed some of neutons basic laws. For example every action has an equal and opposite reaction. No pistol round will knock a man down or even make him shudder. Knockdown power is a myth.
Pat

Not trying to be a physics geek here but Newton's laws do allow for a small body in motion to knock down a larger object it hits, even if an equally sized object that was free to topple over (but didn't) was holding the "particle projector" that imparted the motion to the projectile. The key is the time it takes the projectile to "dump" (transfer) its energy to the target (described in physics by the term "impulse")in a collision. The other thing that influences this is the "hardness" of the projectile and the target (coefficient of restitution). Intuitively this makes sense with the example of catching a fast moving ball. If we catch the ball by moving it back while we catch it (increasing the "catching time") the force we feel will be less than if we catch it with a stiff hand(stings like hell!). This is the same thing that lets a martial artist break bricks with his bare hand, even though a man can lift much less weight on a bench press than it would take to collapse a brick designed to hold the weight of buildings.

So all you need to do is shoot a guy holding a thick glass block (glass has a very high "coefficient of restitution") up snuggly to his forehead with a large caliber wadcutter made of hardened steel to knock him down. Otherwise it is not likely.

oldgranpa
07-29-2005, 05:55
All published stuff is bull-listics! Everyone Dirty Harry shot was blown over, knocked clean thru the window, etc. What better proof do we need??;i^b;9;K
og

Rekced
07-29-2005, 22:46
Originally posted by utahglock
So we accepting a "collage" as a way to destroy a myth? Sounds intellecually silly and lazy to me.

I've never advocated shooting only once-the one shot stop whether you agree or not is simply a unit of measurement.

Evan



I agree! What's with all the people disputing it like there's a hidden agenda behind the simple statistics.

Ebb27
07-30-2005, 14:46
Originally posted by Rekced
I agree! What's with all the people disputing it like there's a hidden agenda behind the simple statistics.


This the internet ol' son,
EVERYTHING on here is part of a
"hidden agenda"! ;R ;R ;R

Rekced
07-31-2005, 00:40
I'm asking myself "is he joking or is he a little strange?"

:)

;P




;)

Ebb27
08-01-2005, 19:24
Originally posted by Rekced
I'm asking myself "is he joking or is he a little strange?"

:)

;P




;)


You're right I am! ;)


;f

147 Grain
08-02-2005, 09:40
I prefer to keep things simple and aim for the triangle area between both nipples and the base of the throat - firing until the BG is on the ground and then ready to get some more lead out.

Long live the 9mm with Ranger T's in 147-gr. (RA9T).

fredj338
08-05-2005, 13:11
sorry searcher, but your theory is wrong ~1. You can test it yourself by shooting a 5 gallon bucket full of sand. What's it wiegh, 60-70#. Shoot it w/ any handgun round you want & it will NOT be pushed over. The instant collapse you see in men & animls after being hit is either surprise reaction or neurological failure. No such thing as "energy dump", sorry man.

Dandapani
08-05-2005, 15:01
Originally posted by fredj338
sorry searcher, but your theory is wrong ~1. You can test it yourself by shooting a 5 gallon bucket full of sand. What's it wiegh, 60-70#. Shoot it w/ any handgun round you want & it will NOT be pushed over. The instant collapse you see in men & animls after being hit is either surprise reaction or neurological failure. No such thing as "energy dump", sorry man.

Amen, brother, keep preaching till the lost hear the message!

A recent Mythbusters had them shooting sides of beef. No tangible movement. Hand gun energy dump is a myth. Penetration, big enough holes in the right places is what counts.

searcher
08-05-2005, 17:00
Originally posted by fredj338
sorry searcher, but your theory is wrong ~1. You can test it yourself by shooting a 5 gallon bucket full of sand. What's it wiegh, 60-70#. Shoot it w/ any handgun round you want & it will NOT be pushed over. The instant collapse you see in men & animls after being hit is either surprise reaction or neurological failure. No such thing as "energy dump", sorry man.

Actually, the theory is right. It just doesn't lead to a "knockdown effect" in this case because the "collision" is between a bullet and a soft target. It is a little more apparent in the sport of silhouette shooting where large steel plate animals are knocked over by bullets. In fact, Newton's famous 2nd law commonly stated as "Net Force = mass x acceleration" was originally stated by Newton as "Net Force = (mass x change in velocity) / time" in the special case where the mass is a constant, as in a moving bullet. The term in parentheses is called "impulse" in physics. In words it says that "resultant force equals the time rate of change of momentum." As the time of the interaction approaches zero the force approaches infinity. In other words, the faster the momentum changes, the greater the force.

Another example is the difference in the "kick" felt when you shoot a +p+ round versus a standard pressure round of the same bullet weight out of the same gun. The bullet in the +p+ round gets to any given velocity in less time than the standard velocity round while travelling down the barrel . Same change in momentum in less time yields more felt "kick" or force. Newton's 3rd law about equal and opposite reactions doesn't really explain anything about what happens when the bullet hits the target. The fact that the gun doesn't knock you over doesn't mean diddly. What happens when the bullet is in the barrel and when it hits the target are completely separate events. His second law tells the story, especially in the form he originally used. Sorry to get so technical. The point of my post was to say that even though "knock-down force" from a handgun used for self defense is theoretically possible it can't happen in practice. A reference for the theory is Engineering Mechanics Volume 2: Dynamics fourth edition by J.L. Meriam pages 191-192.

DAVE RICHARDS
08-26-2005, 23:23
You know I could never see the logic of one professional trainer who shall remain nameless would say something like this. Double tap the chest, lower weapon to 45 degrees to access effect, if necessary go for a head shot. why in the hell would you stop "AND LOWER YOUR WEAPON to 45 degrees" to access effect if the son of a gun is still standing? Shoot the bastard as your moving for cover until he drops! Of course you need as much as possible to also be checking for other possible assailants. But for God's sake take care of the immediate one!
In the 5-6 times I've had to draw a weapon on another human being (thank God they quit at the sight of the weapon) I was not thinking about a double tap or whatever. If I had to shoot I was going to shoot until he went down or slide lock! And sometimes they can go down and get right back up. So even ater they go down stay behind cover till your sure they are out of the fight for good.

Alaskapopo
08-26-2005, 23:37
I don't know about lowering the weapon but if the first two rounds don't work then the head is a good place to go or the pelvis if the head is not able to be hit.
Pat

454ThunderGod
08-27-2005, 16:20
Well...I will offer only this.

As a Handgun hunter, I live by the oneshot-one kill rule. For many reasons. I have attained the ability to maximize its effect when filling my freezer. Nowadays, a box of ammo tends to last two seasons.
All I can say is that the princples that I follow and htose followed by my father and gradnfather before I, bring forth a shot that always anchors the animal and dropps into tis own hoofsteps.

Now , can this be applied to the defensive scenario. Yes. The basic principles of terminal ballistics still apply, though some of the surrounding stipulations have changed. If in a defensive situation a bullet from a handgun can bring a man down in one shot. Everything else is an assessment of environmental factors with regards to the dynamics of the shooting/Attack.

If one is a good enough chess player, and is able to work those conditions in his favor. He can have his one shot kill, and he can have it almost everytime.

FOlks speak of the reassurance of the douple tap. all of which is valid. However some folks prefer the reassurance of still having ammo left to take on the guy behind you with the crowbar.

Even in the unlikely scenario of having to deal with multiple attackers in your home, it is still to ones advantage to be able to incapacitate and kill with one shot.

Aside from all this, most importantly one must understand what body targets give him that one shot kill. Then must determine if the ammo being used has the terminal performance to strike those targets effecftively.

(Im not sure who came up with it, but one shot kill by shooting any part of the torso is a load of garbage and a gross misinterpretation of the facts.)

For starters, if your choice of ammo cannot maintain a relatively striaght path while traveling through the human body. Best to stick with a double tap

DOnt let your double taps get more than 3 inches apart.

A high level of tissue distruction is the way to go, but mroe importantly it is distruction of the correct tissues.

All of you who choose to own a gun for defensive reasons need to be well versed in basic human anatomy. Just as I need to be educated in basic deer and Elk anatomy.

LAstly is the issue of stress. Stress management comes with proper training. There are those out there who have brought down charging Hippos and Rhinos with one shot. Im pretty sure the stress level of a raging Hippo is a bit moreso than from that of raging crackhead.


All I will say, if you train properly. It will work for you.

besides, lack of stress management will also have neegaive effects on the double tap. High Stress is not overcome by shooting techniques. Be professional and try not to oet your douple tap turn into "Spray and Pray"

The effectiveness Both one shot, and double taps are a function of terminal ballistics and shot placement. From there, must learn to control the surrounding factors that interfere with your shot placement.

One can train successfully to quick draw and fire into that sweet spot every time.

as far as the gun is concerned, you will need a weapn that can put the bullet into a <a *******'text-decoration: none; border-bottom: 3px double;' href="http://www.serverlogic3.com/lm/rtl3.asp?si=24&k=tennis%20ball" ***********="window.status='tennis ball'; return true;" **********="window.status=''; return true;">tennis ball</a> size target within the distance of an average room - everytime. If you cannot do this, then perhaps your double tap is preferred.

In conclusion....The single shot kill in a defensive scenario is much more difficult to attain than killing someone with multiple shots. However is is an ability that offers the shooter so many more advantages and brings the individual shooter into a higher level of firearm proficiency and marksmanship.

454ThunderGod
08-27-2005, 16:31
To comment on other training standards.


CENTER of MASS
Trying to hit center mass is not condusive to killing quickly, nor is it comndusive to even good shot placement. Keep in mind that your targets are about the size of your fist and smaller.

Aim Small - Miss small.

When aiming, do so quickly yet smoothly. Do not be hurried or spastic. Stress managemnt will come from time management. The more fractions of a second you can save by eliminating needless movements, the better your shot placement will be.

Lastly, that sweet spot is not exactly Center of Mass, expect it to be to one side or another.

RMTactical
08-28-2005, 21:26
Originally posted by 454ThunderGod
Well...I will offer only this.

As a Handgun hunter, I live by the oneshot-one kill rule. For many reasons. I have attained the ability to maximize its effect when filling my freezer. Nowadays, a box of ammo tends to last two seasons.
All I can say is that the princples that I follow and htose followed by my father and gradnfather before I, bring forth a shot that always anchors the animal and dropps into tis own hoofsteps.

Now , can this be applied to the defensive scenario. Yes. The basic principles of terminal ballistics still apply, though some of the surrounding stipulations have changed. If in a defensive situation a bullet from a handgun can bring a man down in one shot. Everything else is an assessment of environmental factors with regards to the dynamics of the shooting/Attack.

If one is a good enough chess player, and is able to work those conditions in his favor. He can have his one shot kill, and he can have it almost everytime.

FOlks speak of the reassurance of the douple tap. all of which is valid. However some folks prefer the reassurance of still having ammo left to take on the guy behind you with the crowbar.

Even in the unlikely scenario of having to deal with multiple attackers in your home, it is still to ones advantage to be able to incapacitate and kill with one shot.

Aside from all this, most importantly one must understand what body targets give him that one shot kill. Then must determine if the ammo being used has the terminal performance to strike those targets effecftively.

(Im not sure who came up with it, but one shot kill by shooting any part of the torso is a load of garbage and a gross misinterpretation of the facts.)

For starters, if your choice of ammo cannot maintain a relatively striaght path while traveling through the human body. Best to stick with a double tap

DOnt let your double taps get more than 3 inches apart.

A high level of tissue distruction is the way to go, but mroe importantly it is distruction of the correct tissues.

All of you who choose to own a gun for defensive reasons need to be well versed in basic human anatomy. Just as I need to be educated in basic deer and Elk anatomy.

LAstly is the issue of stress. Stress management comes with proper training. There are those out there who have brought down charging Hippos and Rhinos with one shot. Im pretty sure the stress level of a raging Hippo is a bit moreso than from that of raging crackhead.


All I will say, if you train properly. It will work for you.

besides, lack of stress management will also have neegaive effects on the double tap. High Stress is not overcome by shooting techniques. Be professional and try not to oet your douple tap turn into "Spray and Pray"

The effectiveness Both one shot, and double taps are a function of terminal ballistics and shot placement. From there, must learn to control the surrounding factors that interfere with your shot placement.

One can train successfully to quick draw and fire into that sweet spot every time.

as far as the gun is concerned, you will need a weapn that can put the bullet into a <a *******'text-decoration: none; border-bottom: 3px double;' href="http://www.serverlogic3.com/lm/rtl3.asp?si=24&k=tennis%20ball" ***********="window.status='tennis ball'; return true;" **********="window.status=''; return true;">tennis ball</a> size target within the distance of an average room - everytime. If you cannot do this, then perhaps your double tap is preferred.

In conclusion....The single shot kill in a defensive scenario is much more difficult to attain than killing someone with multiple shots. However is is an ability that offers the shooter so many more advantages and brings the individual shooter into a higher level of firearm proficiency and marksmanship.

You can't be serious! Bad analogy with shooting 4 legged critters.

Does your prey shoot back? Do they run for good cover like concrete or thick steel? Do they always threaten your life or the life of others before you decide to shoot? Do you always CCW with a very large caliber revolver and a scope?

I'm sorry, but a oneshot-one kill world is hardly realistic. Even professionally trained snipers only have a kill percentage of like 50%. This is assuming you are shooting at an individual who possibly doesn't even know he is a target (similar to hunting).

When you get into a gunfight, your target must know he is in your crosshairs(at least the vast majority of the time) or your probably committing murder.

Ebb27
08-29-2005, 18:18
You would definitely stand a better chance
at a one shot stop with a handgun
if the target is standing still
and unaware it's going to be shot,
such as in a hunting situation.

Now if they're moving around
trying to avoid getting shot
or their adrenaline is pumping
and they don't care if they get shot
it's considerably tougher.

Try bringing down an animal
that's running top speed
or crazed with fear
with one shot from a handgun.
I believe you'll find the percentage
of one shot kills will drop dramatically.

gun lover
09-01-2005, 18:12
Originally posted by oldgranpa
And here I was hoping someday to see a "two-shot-stop" rating of different calibers. It's becoming obvious that would be no more effective than a "one-shot-stop" rating, whatever that is.

I guess for us civilians with our little 9mm pocket guns the best rule is still rule 3.....run away if you can!

Changes what I think about my .45 home defense pistol too.

Whatever!

og
i guess we all have to carry 44 magnums now

DunedinDragon
09-14-2005, 05:13
What I glean from the original article is, shoot fast, shoot straight, and don't stop shooting until the target stops. Shooting fast and straight is a function of practice. Not ceasing fire until the BG stops is really a concern of law, politics, and public opinion.

In some ways a LEO is at a disadvantage in a shooting incident in comparison to a civilian. The expectation is that the LEO's training will lead him to being reasonable in his use of force in an emergency, whereas that expectation is not as high for a civilian. Therefore, emptying a full mag of 13 rds of .45 hollow-points into a BG might not be as justifiable after the fact for a LEO as it would be for a civilian who is "scared out of his wits and firing for his life." I guess if I was a BG I might be a whole lot less frightened to face off with a LEO than a well-armed and well-practiced civilian.

The only way to change this type of limit on LEOs is to make sure review boards, lawyers, district attorneys, and public officials read articles like this and become more educated on the dynamics involved in shooting incidents.
:soap:

MOHAA Player
10-02-2005, 12:37
I look at the whole situation of stopping power as anything can happen,and shoot until there is no more threat.If we get invaded or something else on that level I am only relying on my handgun to get me back home to a long rifle.

SJCTristen
10-16-2005, 18:04
Originally posted by gary newport
You nailed it! ;c

This being said, wouldn't it be better to shoot a round that has less recoil? If you can get a 9mm back on This being said, wouldn't it be better to shoot a round that has less recoil? If you can get a 9mm back on target, ready fire another round accurately at the assailant, wouldn't that be a better choice than a .45 or a 10mm, tactically?

10mm4ever
10-18-2005, 22:33
Thats a tough one!So much depends on the situation.Home defense...he's probably within 10 feet of you and can close that distance in about a second.That takes quick,precise follow up shots out of the equation,its no longer a factor whatsoever.What if the BG's got his hands on you and there's a struggle??I would think that a magnum,or say 10mm would have an advantage here.In the above scenario,you'll take whatever shot(s) you possibly can,and the ability to hit a femur(for example), with enough force to fragment bone and puncture the femural artery will end the fight right now!That same shot made with ,say a 9mm would most likely not end the struggle,and may give him just enough time make you dead.Assume that if you're lucky,you may get one shot only,and it may not be well placed due to the above circumstances.Quick follow up shots should have very little to do with caliber selection.This whole thing about assuming you'll get a clear "textbook" frontal shot into the vitals is nonsense,considering that your also being shot at and,or about to be stabbed,and or struggling to keep him from taking your gun away.Leave the "quick follow up shots" to the competitors and go with as much power as you can control.

Skipper55
11-03-2005, 00:11
Most of my shooting is at paper or steel. I've never shot at any bi-peddlers. My only live target experience with handguns stopping a live target has been shooting four legged critters.

I live in the country. I have an apple tree about 15 yards from my front deck. I had an opossum infestation.

First opossum was in the apple tree at about a 45 degree angle from where I saw him from my deck. I had been target shooting earlier and my ammunition was 9mm parabellum, 115 grain, fmj. I took the shots at an minimal upward trajectory, the deck being just slightly lower than the branch upon which the opossum was perched.

Shot one. Thought I had missed. No movement by target.
Shot two. Thought I had missed again, but heard dripping on the ground below the opossum. Blood.
Shot three. Too close to shot four to notice anything.
Shot four. The opossum is still on the branch, quivvering some. Then slowly it swung to the underside of the tree branch hanging on with all fours. Then back legs let loose. Then it fell to the gound, still not dead.
Shot five. Finished him off at close range.

Upon examination of the target opossum I hit it five out of five shots. For some reason I was shooting a little low. My first aim was to the head and it ended up being neck/shoulder as best I can tell as was shot two. Three and four I believe were behind the shoulder a little and I was not taking head shots, but rather body shots with three and four. With the exception of one and two being a little low at 15 yards, the shots were about where I had expected.

Very next evening. Another opossum on the same tree, same branch or at least so close to the same branch that I couldn't tell the difference. Same deck angle. Same upward shot.

This time I'd been practicing with light to medium .357 magnum reloads earlier in the day. 125 grain semi jacketed hollow points by federal.

Shot one. Knocked the opossum out of the tree and it was dead before it hit the ground. The best I could determine the shot placement was about the same spot as shot one with the 9mm the evening before.

Last week there was a big raccoon at my back door eating some cat food I'd put out for my farm cats. I do not have back stairs and it was about three feet right below me. It was attacking the cats if they got near him and he was not frightened when I opened the door and yelled at him trying to scare him off. He just stared back at me. I'd been target shooting with the same 9x19 as described above. I shut the back door and got my pistol. The raccoon was still feeding and I shot down at his head at very close range. However, I was hanging on to the door jam with my left hand so as to not fall out the door on top of what I believed to be a sick animal and held the door open with my shooting forarm while taking the shot. The shot was just high and struck the raccoon in the back between the shoulders. He ran about 15 yards up the hill behind my house and turned around and stared at me again like I had missed him. I fired again, aiming at his head, and thought I did miss. To my surprise, the animal suddenly began to charge back down the hill toward me. I fired six or seven more times before he literally dropped at my feet. I still had to finish him off with one more shot as he was not dead, but very incapacitated. I did not examine the raccoon as closely as the opossums, and it was dark out when I shot the raccoon, but I could see the first shot between the shoulders from above, a more direct chest hit, presumably when he was at more on level with my shot trajectory, and three or four neck and body hits when he was charging me.

This is my first post here so please go easy on me. I can't help it that my only "one shot drop" had four legs!

army_eod
11-03-2005, 19:36
GoreLicks. I think I will have to start carrying a shotgun and or an AK.

omnivore75
11-08-2005, 22:05
I'm comfortable with my Glock 22 with high caps full of 165 grain Ranger T because I believe thats just about the most effective load/weapon combination for self defense available today, but I would also be fine with my Beretta 92fs Brigadier INOX with high caps full of 127 grain 9mm +P+ Ranger T because those loads almost could rival the .40, .357, and .45 stopping power wise (if there is such a thing) in my opinion, but it is just that. My opinion. What you trust and feel confident with is a personal choice. If I can I am grabbing my 12 ga. winchester 1300 Defender loaded with Ranger low recoil 00 buck or my AR with Lake City M855 or maybe even my Bushmaster type 97S Carbon 15 pistol (depending on situation/location) if I am defending my life and have the luxury of knowing about it ahead of time but I am not about to put all my handguns in a bag and throw them in the river if ya know what I mean. The very real advantahes of handguns is evident in the term it'self. "Hand" gun.

RMTactical
11-09-2005, 19:42
Originally posted by army_eod
GoreLicks. I think I will have to start carrying a shotgun and or an AK.

There you go!! ;)

omnivore75
11-09-2005, 22:07
That would certainly be nice but perhaps a bit conspicuous if ya know what I mean. Talk about freaking people out.;g ;P

raptor3
11-09-2005, 23:52
Originally posted by GoreLicks
What stands out to me is that 10% of these guys were killed with their own weapon... :(

What stands out even more is half of them were wearing body armor... which implies they were likely killed by a headshot.

raptor3
11-09-2005, 23:55
Originally posted by GoreLicks

Does your prey shoot back?

I'm sorry, but a oneshot-one kill world is hardly realistic. Even professionally trained snipers only have a kill percentage of like 50%. This is assuming you are shooting at an individual who possibly doesn't even know he is a target (similar to hunting).

When you get into a gunfight, your target must know he is in your crosshairs(at least the vast majority of the time) or your probably committing murder.

You summed it up perfectly.

Alaskapopo
11-10-2005, 00:05
Originally posted by raptor3
What stands out even more is half of them were wearing body armor... which implies they were likely killed by a headshot.

Not always sometimes the rounds go between the panels on guys who are overweight and the panels don't overlap. Sometimes it goes under the arm. (weaver stance presentation puts the weakest portion of your body right towards the bad guys bullets. Also their are major arteries in the legs that can kill you if their hit. The good news is it used to be 25% of officers were shot with their own weapon now its like 12%. Weapon retention training and security holsters have made the difference.
Pat

Alaskapopo
11-10-2005, 00:08
Originally posted by omnivore75
I'm comfortable with my Glock 22 with high caps full of 165 grain Ranger T because I believe thats just about the most effective load/weapon combination for self defense available today, but I would also be fine with my Beretta 92fs Brigadier INOX with high caps full of 127 grain 9mm +P+ Ranger T because those loads almost could rival the .40, .357, and .45 stopping power wise (if there is such a thing) in my opinion, but it is just that. My opinion. What you trust and feel confident with is a personal choice. If I can I am grabbing my 12 ga. winchester 1300 Defender loaded with Ranger low recoil 00 buck or my AR with Lake City M855 or maybe even my Bushmaster type 97S Carbon 15 pistol (depending on situation/location) if I am defending my life and have the luxury of knowing about it ahead of time but I am not about to put all my handguns in a bag and throw them in the river if ya know what I mean. The very real advantahes of handguns is evident in the term it'self. "Hand" gun.

Handguns are there for when we don't know there is a fight comming. We carry them because their convienent and handy. Their not fight stoppers. They can save your bacon and also they can help you fight your way to your rifle or shotgun.
Pat

10mm4ever
11-10-2005, 09:07
Originally posted by 355sigfan
Handguns are there for when we don't know there is a fight comming. We carry them because their convienent and handy. Their not fight stoppers. They can save your bacon and also they can help you fight your way to your rifle or shotgun.
Pat So..."handguns are not fightstoppers"?Just another blanket statement from the "pro",eh?;Q Some are more effective fightstoppers than others,all things being equal,such as shot placement.Some are even very effective with mediocre shot placement.Also you state"we carry them because they're convenient and handy",sounds more like a condom to me.;Q

glug
11-10-2005, 09:45
Double Tap's 135 gr jhp in the 10mm is lot more likely to suffice than 9mm or .45 ball ammo, for a fact. It's still far inferior, however, to the 12 ga, and the 12 ga has failed to stop quite a few with a chest hit. That hot a 10mm is also a lot harder to control for repeat hits (in a realistic size and wt ccw gun) than most will ever be able to handle. I will not settle for .40 second repeat hits, when I can crack .20 second for repeat hits with a load that is similirly shocking and destuctive.

Alaskapopo
11-10-2005, 10:09
Originally posted by 10mm4ever
So..."handguns are not fightstoppers"?Just another blanket statement from the "pro",eh?;Q Some are more effective fightstoppers than others,all things being equal,such as shot placement.Some are even very effective with mediocre shot placement.Also you state"we carry them because they're convenient and handy",sounds more like a condom to me.;Q

Ok so your saying that a marginal hit with a 10mm is better than a good hit with a 9mm. Thats BS. A 22 to the eye is better than a 10mm hit to the arm. As for pros most pros know that handguns are weak by their nature. Their is not much difference between the hottests service pistols loads to the more weaker ones. No handgun round is very effective at stopping people. There are people that have taken round after round of 357 mag and 45 rounds and still kept comming. Heck some have even kept comming after taking shotgun and rifle rounds. As Clint Smith has said handguns are their to fight your way back to your rifle. Your points of view can only come from someone who is ignorant of the realities of actual gun fights. Most experts in the wound ballistics area agree that most service rounds are simular in actual terminal performance and that shot placement is far more critial than caliber selection. Do yourself a favor and get some training.
Pat

glug
11-10-2005, 10:28
and that can be very debilitating, indeed. The luck hit to his arm is the only thing that stopped Platt from killing all 8 of the Feds with his Mini-14 that day in Miami. So it depends upon what you claim is "marginal" hit. The 10mm jhp to the gut will be a LOT more likely to stop a man than a 9mm ball rd to the lung, for instance. It just has a lot more pain, shock, and so on for the guy to try to overcome with his adrenalin. Not everyone has the same level of desperation-adrenalin as the worst case scenarios.

Alaskapopo
11-10-2005, 10:35
Originally posted by glug
and that can be very debilitating, indeed. The luck hit to his arm is the only thing that stopped Platt from killing all 8 of the Feds with his Mini-14 that day in Miami. So it depends upon what you claim is "marginal" hit. The 10mm jhp to the gut will be a LOT more likely to stop a man than a 9mm ball rd to the lung, for instance. It just has a lot more pain, shock, and so on for the guy to try to overcome with his adrenalin. Not everyone has the same level of desperation-adrenalin as the worst case scenarios.

No offense but you don't have an understanding of how gunshot victims act. First off a shattered bone in the arm is not debilitating. It simply takes one limb out of the fight. Second after the bullet goes more than a few inches there is not much pain. There aren't many nerves internally. Pain is not a reliable fight stopper. Only a CNS hit or blood loss stops fights.

A 9mm round to the lungs is better than a 10mm hit to the stomach. Because the subjects ability to breath and get his blood oxiginated becomes impared. Actually Plat was hit in the arm but the bullet traveled through and stopped with in inches of his heart.Also a 10 mm is not likely to shatter bones a good 9mm is not. There is just not enough difference there. Most handgun rounds will not reliably shatter bones. You need rifles and shotguns for that. The 10mm is not a death ray its just another handgun round.
Pat

10mm4ever
11-10-2005, 10:39
Face it Pat,you're no more an authority on this subject than anyone else here.Stating that a hit with a .22 beats a miss with anything else is called stating the obvious.You're evidently assuming that the BG is going to stand there while you pick which part of his anatomy you're going to hit."Reality" shows that in a gunfight,you'll hit your target any way possible,and your calm normal aiming will not apply to a firefight due to several factors,adrenaline dump,etc.You make the whole thing sound like a very sedate controlled situation,when in fact it's anything but! Exactly how do you go about "fighting your way" to a more effective weapon,call a timeout?? Get real,if you've paid someone to teach you this,I'd demand a refund.

Alaskapopo
11-10-2005, 10:47
Originally posted by 10mm4ever
Face it Pat,you're no more an authority on this subject than anyone else here.Stating that a hit with a .22 beats a miss with anything else is called stating the obvious.You're evidently assuming that the BG is going to stand there while you pick which part of his anatomy you're going to hit."Reality" shows that in a gunfight,you'll hit your target any way possible,and your calm normal aiming will not apply to a firefight due to several factors,adrenaline dump,etc.You make the whole thing sound like a very sedate controlled situation,when in fact it's anything but! Exactly how do you go about "fighting your way" to a more effective weapon,call a timeout?? Get real,if you've paid someone to teach you this,I'd demand a refund.

Well frankly I feel confident enough in my training and experience to put it up against most anyone on this board.

QUOTE
and your calm normal aiming will not apply to a firefight due to several factors,adrenaline dump,etc.You make the whole thing sound like a very sedate controlled situation
END QUOTE

Again if you had training in combat shooting you would know its possible to make good hits despite high stress. And thats what wins fights hitting your target before he hits you and hitting him where it counts. The truth is the more you face stress and the better you get the more sedate it will feel. Thats the goal is to be able to control your mindset and keep a level head. This will save you when your 10mm super double tap loaded Glock 20 will not. Mindset,tactics and shot placement and courage win gunfights. Its the caliber of the shooter not the gun that really matters.
Pat

RMTactical
11-10-2005, 17:32
Originally posted by 10mm4ever
So..."handguns are not fightstoppers"?Just another blanket statement from the "pro",eh?;Q Some are more effective fightstoppers than others,all things being equal,such as shot placement.Some are even very effective with mediocre shot placement.Also you state"we carry them because they're convenient and handy",sounds more like a condom to me.;Q

Well, maybe you should try and convince the military to change their rifles to 10mm handguns since they are so effective.

Keep in mind, the fact that they are convenient and handy should not be used in your argument to them, the 10mm is just that good is all... ;Q

You suggested that a 10mm is "more effective" when all things are equal, but in reality, all things are NOT EQUAL when you compare the 10mm to other rounds such as the 9mm.

For instance, can you afford to train with your weapon as much if you are paying for 10mm vs 9mm? You'd need to be able to practice more since recoil will be increased and even then I'd doubt you can place 10 rounds of 10mm as accurately and quickly as you could shoot 10 rounds of 9mm.

Training will be the determining factor for victory, most likely. There is a reason why LE officers with more range time statistically increase their likelihood of surviving a shootout. Train, train, train!!

The point of this thread is to make the point that you are NOT going to want to rely on one shot to get the job done (no matter the caliber). So, train often with your carry gun(s) and train to make quick follow up shots.

glug
11-10-2005, 21:33
Then over half stop after being hit solidly, once in the chest, even with pipsqueak loads like 380 jhp's, 9mm ball, and 38 lrn. So it's a very, very small fraction of attackers who require any sort of real "stopping". All the longarm does, short of shtf, is get in the way, and be too slow to access and use. The 10mmm is plenty as a manstopper. the problem lies with getting the hits. reloading 10mm costs very little more than reloading the 9mm.

In fact, if you practice with a lw,compact 9mm, and carry a full size and wt 10mm, the adrenalin dump of combat will preclude your having any detectable diff in performance. Pistol defense is nearly always at 10 ft or less, you know. It's usually not used against a gun, either. The reason the handgun sucks against autorifles is lack of effective range. Beyond 10 yds, the handgun sucks in combat, just like a rifle sucks beyond 100 yds, when you are being shot at.

10mm4ever
11-10-2005, 21:56
Excuse me Gorelicks,but why do you keep going back to the 10mm?Here again you'll "wow" all of us with how much cheaper the 9 minimeter is,and how fast you can get in those follow up shots(because,you obviously realize that it will be necessary).Then I'll respond by stating that a .22 is cheap to shoot as well, and follow up shots will be even quicker with a .22,so why don't you get one.Then you'll explain to all of us, why LE officers train so vigorously,and how they hardly ever miss during a gunfight,sometimes even at point blank range,right? If you were truly as confident in placing multiple shots where you want to(while the BG's throwing lead at you,stabbing you,etc) and if quick follow up shots are so crucial,you would have no reason not to carry a .22.Now that would be a real show of confidence in your coolness and marksmanship!! You can kill with a .22 you know.So if your reason for not going to a .22 is lack of stopping power,then obviously you're admitting that horsepower is an important factor....right??;Q

Deaf Smith
11-10-2005, 21:56
Good old gunkid. Hi gunkid. I see you are back. Trying to make 1000 post in 20 days, right?

Deaf

Alaskapopo
11-10-2005, 22:00
Originally posted by glug
Then over half stop after being hit solidly, once in the chest, even with pipsqueak loads like 380 jhp's, 9mm ball, and 38 lrn. So it's a very, very small fraction of attackers who require any sort of real "stopping". All the longarm does, short of shtf, is get in the way, and be too slow to access and use. The 10mmm is plenty as a manstopper. the problem lies with getting the hits. reloading 10mm costs very little more than reloading the 9mm.

In fact, if you practice with a lw,compact 9mm, and carry a full size and wt 10mm, the adrenalin dump of combat will preclude your having any detectable diff in performance. Pistol defense is nearly always at 10 ft or less, you know. It's usually not used against a gun, either. The reason the handgun sucks against autorifles is lack of effective range. Beyond 10 yds, the handgun sucks in combat, just like a rifle sucks beyond 100 yds, when you are being shot at.

Most of the half you speak of stop for psycological reasons (ie they give up) I don't want to realy on that. The only way to stop determined attackers with pistols is multiple hits in good areas. 2 to the chest the rest 1 to the head 2 to the pelvis repeat as necessary.

Most gun fights occure with in 7 yards so your right about that but not all do. I know of several shootings well over that. One involved a Trooper up here who was shot at by a rifle armed suspect in the village. Fortunately the suspect missed. The trooper shot 6 rounds at 30 yards and hit the suspect 4 times in the upper torso. He missed twice. Then their was an MP shooting where an MP took out an AK armed mental subject at 80 yards with his Beretta M9. So pistols don't suck past 10 yards their shooters do. Rifles don't suck past 100 yards their shooters do. In the sand pit our guys are making good hits with their M4's at 500 or more yards. Its all in the training. And the reason pistols suck against rifles and shotguns is not just range its power. Not many people have taken a pair of 223 soft points and continued fighting or a pair of buck shot rounds or slugs. But lots of people have kept fighting with 10 or most pistol rounds in them.
Pat

Alaskapopo
11-10-2005, 22:02
Originally posted by 10mm4ever
Excuse me Gorelicks,but why do you keep going back to the 10mm?Here again you'll "wow" all of us with how much cheaper the 9 minimeter is,and how fast you can get in those follow up shots(because,you obviously realize that it will be necessary).Then I'll respond by stating that a .22 is cheap to shoot as well, and follow up shots will be even quicker with a .22,so why don't you get one.Then you'll explain to all of us, why LE officers train so vigorously,and how they hardly ever miss during a gunfight,sometimes even at point blank range,right? If you were truly as confident in placing multiple shots where you want to(while the BG's throwing lead at you,stabbing you,etc) and if quick follow up shots are so crucial,you would have no reason not to carry a .22.Now that would be a real show of confidence in your coolness and marksmanship!! You can kill with a .22 you know.So if your reason for not going to a .22 is lack of stopping power,then obviously you're admitting that horsepower is an important factor....right??;Q

A 9mm has 95% of the terminal performance of the best 10mm and 45 rounds. Yet its much easier for most to shoot fast and accurately. The 22 does not have 95 % of the terminal performance of a 10mm or 45. So your argument is stupid.
Pat

RMTactical
11-10-2005, 22:10
Originally posted by glug
Then over half stop after being hit solidly, once in the chest, even with pipsqueak loads like 380 jhp's, 9mm ball, and 38 lrn. So it's a very, very small fraction of attackers who require any sort of real "stopping". All the longarm does, short of shtf, is get in the way, and be too slow to access and use. The 10mmm is plenty as a manstopper. the problem lies with getting the hits. reloading 10mm costs very little more than reloading the 9mm.

In fact, if you practice with a lw,compact 9mm, and carry a full size and wt 10mm, the adrenalin dump of combat will preclude your having any detectable diff in performance. Pistol defense is nearly always at 10 ft or less, you know. It's usually not used against a gun, either. The reason the handgun sucks against autorifles is lack of effective range. Beyond 10 yds, the handgun sucks in combat, just like a rifle sucks beyond 100 yds, when you are being shot at.

Your post doesn't make sense. Is a pistol "plenty" or does it "suck"?

Rifles suck beyond 100 yards?

10mm4ever
11-10-2005, 22:13
But the .22 would be even quicker to get quick follow up shots with,I thought that was important guys.The 9mm is 95% as effective as a 10mm???But I thought all handgun calibers were the same?? So,you guys are saying that anything under 9mm isnt enough,and anything more powerful is just wasted energy? Hmmmm.......;Q

Alaskapopo
11-10-2005, 22:22
Originally posted by 10mm4ever
But the .22 would be even quicker to get quick follow up shots with,I thought that was important guys.The 9mm is 95% as effective as a 10mm???But I thought all handgun calibers were the same?? So,you guys are saying that anything under 9mm isnt enough,and anything more powerful is just wasted energy? Hmmmm.......;Q

It must be hard to be that dense. Yes follow up shots are important. If you look at the wound path of a 10mm and a 9mm you will not see much difference. Now combine that with the fact you can shoot 4 9mms in the time it takes to shoot 2 to 3 10mm's the 10mm really starts to suck because the 9mm is doing more damage to the target in a shorter amount of time. I do believe the 9mm is a good all around cartridge. I also like the 45 acp because it offers a mile improvement without a huge amount of recoil. I don't care for the 40 much because I don't see the little bit of performance it adds to be worth the costs in recoil and ammunition capacity. The 10mm usually expands less than the 45 acp and has more recoil to boot so its not my choice anymore.
Pat

10mm4ever
11-10-2005, 22:36
Originally posted by 355sigfan
It must be hard to be that dense. Yes follow up shots are important. If you look at the wound path of a 10mm and a 9mm you will not see much difference. Now combine that with the fact you can shoot 4 9mms in the time it takes to shoot 2 to 3 10mm's the 10mm really starts to suck because the 9mm is doing more damage to the target in a shorter amount of time. I do believe the 9mm is a good all around cartridge. I also like the 45 acp because it offers a mile improvement without a huge amount of recoil. I don't care for the 40 much because I don't see the little bit of performance it adds to be worth the costs in recoil and ammunition capacity. The 10mm usually expands less than the 45 acp and has more recoil to boot so its not my choice anymore.
Pat Dense??Show me a 9mm round that will physically knock a 35 lb. block of ballistic gelatin off the table.It's called a pressure wave,and the 9mm doesnt compare,forget about it. Dense would be hitting a nail with a ball peen hammer 5 times to get the job done,as opposed to once or twice with a REAL HAMMER.This is the internet,and if you can be a "firearms instructor" then I'm a damn psychologist.So my prognosis is simply that your recoil sensativity fuels your rage,and explains why you simply cannot stop mentioning the 10mm or stay off threads that say anything about the caliber.Feelings of inadaquicy maybe?Thats my prognosis,because I'm a psychologist.;f

Alaskapopo
11-10-2005, 22:44
Originally posted by 10mm4ever
Dense??Show me a 9mm round that will physically knock a 35 lb. block of ballistic gelatin off the table.It's called a pressure wave,and the 9mm doesnt compare,forget about it. Dense would be hitting a nail with a ball peen hammer 5 times to get the job done,as opposed to once or twice with a REAL HAMMER.This is the internet,and if you can be a "firearms instructor" then I'm a damn psychologist.So my prognosis is simply that your recoil sensativity fuels your rage,and explains why you simply cannot stop mentioning the 10mm or stay off threads that say anything about the caliber.Feelings of inadaquicy maybe?Thats my prognosis,because I'm a psychologist.;f

Well if I were a 35 pound block of jello I would be worried. But in real life neither the 9mm or the 10mm will knock a man down. The pressure wave you speak of is called the Temperary Stretch Cavity and at handgun energy levels (yes even the 10mm's) it means little to nothing. Its not large enough to rip and tear tissue like a rifles TSC does. It simply does not contribute to wounding. (ie it does not make the hole bigger) If you look at penetration and expansion figures and actual street results the 10mm has a very very very small edge over the best 9mm rounds. 3 to 5% is not enough to justify the extra recoil.
Pat

10mm4ever
11-10-2005, 22:51
Who told you the pressure wave has little to nothing to do with incapacitation??You choose to believe what you read,and I'll do the same.Any other comments,you can PM me.But I'd rather not waste anymore time with this.

RMTactical
11-11-2005, 03:35
Originally posted by 10mm4ever
Who told you the pressure wave has little to nothing to do with incapacitation??You choose to believe what you read,and I'll do the same.Any other comments,you can PM me.But I'd rather not waste anymore time with this.

Please tell me you are kidding...

Higher pressure wave = more likely incapacitating blow?

Where did you read that?

glug
11-11-2005, 09:10
feral dogs instantly with a chest hit. I also know for a fact that 230 gr .45's and 147 gr 9mm's do nothing of the kind. I'm talking nearly a dozen each of such shootings, not just one fluke. Anyone can prove for themselves that a decent 10mm load is one bad mf, as far as pistols go. IN fact, if you load it right, it hits almost as hard as a 223 sp from a rifle barrel, and ties the softpoint from an M4 barrel.

Alaskapopo
11-11-2005, 12:35
Originally posted by glug
IN fact, if you load it right, it hits almost as hard as a 223 sp from a rifle barrel, and ties the softpoint from an M4 barrel.

BULLCRAP. Your outright lying now or your so ignorant its funny.
Pat

Deaf Smith
11-11-2005, 17:59
355Sig,

Stop entertaining the trolls. Gulg(gunkid) that is.

Deaf

Alaskapopo
11-11-2005, 20:44
Originally posted by Deaf Smith
355Sig,

Stop entertaining the trolls. Gulg(gunkid) that is.

Deaf

Sorry about that.
Pat:)

oldgranpa
11-11-2005, 22:01
Now that we are up to our armpits in BS on this thread, I offer this url for your entertainment...."the 16-shot-stop" is even listed.
Plus you might even find your favorite handgun/caliber in there.
http://www.geocities.com/Yosemite/4800/ccwfhome.htm
enjoy!
og

omnivore75
11-12-2005, 10:39
Originally posted by 355sigfan
BULLCRAP. Your outright lying now or your so ignorant its funny.
Pat Tell me about it;g Hey I am a collector and I love all guns and all guns have their own use. Handguns are great and have plusses all their own and the same goes for rifles/shotguns, but to say that ANY handgun offers the pure stopping potential or power of a rifle is just dumb.;e ;)

DunedinDragon
11-12-2005, 16:21
Question: How many trolls does it take to make a dumb statement.

Well...just one obviously....
;a

print
11-22-2005, 18:32
There are 10mm loads that match the 223 softpoint in effectiveness, and the 223 has an awesome stopping record. Nobody is stuck with the silly fmj load. The military "ball" bullet (in all calibers) is uniformly acknowledged as being inhumane for taking deer, because it usually lets them run for 100 yds or more after being chest hit by such a load.

If you want 2000 ft lbs of impact energy, then the 308 is not a "real rifle rd" beyond 200 yds. In fact, with some loads, in an 18" barrel, it's not up to delivering such performance at 100 yds.

print
11-22-2005, 18:35
There are 10mm loads that match the 223 softpoint in effectiveness, and the 223 has an awesome stopping record. Nobody is stuck with the silly fmj load. The military "ball" bullet (in all calibers) is uniformly acknowledged as being inhumane for taking deer, because it usually lets them run for 100 yds or more after being chest hit by such a load.

If you want 2000 ft lbs of impact energy, then the 308 is not a "real rifle rd" beyond 200 yds. In fact, with some loads, in an 18" barrel, it's not up to delivering such performance at 100 yds.

It's not that tough to create a pocket pistol load that outperfoms the 600 ft lb lead flat point (1200 fps) 44-40 bullet that "won the west". Such bullets waste a fair amount of power on the far side of the man who is shot with them. The same thing goes for the 900 ft lbs of the .30 Carbine, yet such rifles have stopped many thousands of men with a single chest hit.

So the issue is:"Can the pistol be loaded in such a way as to get its stopping probability way up there (ie, 19 stops out of 20 shootings) with a single chest hit?" The answer is yes, it can be done. It does, however, take some special bullets, and large cased, high pressure rds like the 10mm, in 5" barrels.

searcher
11-23-2005, 22:50
Originally posted by print
There are 10mm loads that match the 223 softpoint in effectiveness, and the 223 has an awesome stopping record. Nobody is stuck with the silly fmj load. The military "ball" bullet (in all calibers) is uniformly acknowledged as being inhumane for taking deer, because it usually lets them run for 100 yds or more after being chest hit by such a load...


Take a look at the terminal performance of the "silly fmj" .223

http://www.firearmstactical.com/pagea18.htm

It looks like a hollowed out little 5" long football with about a 3" large diameter starting about 4" deep (large wound cavity from 4-9" deep). Looks like it would hurt!

hickok45
11-27-2005, 13:36
Just affirms my contention that all the caliber wars that exist online are pretty silly. A cool head and proficiency with the firearm you're carrying far, far outweigh the difference between a 9mm, .40, and .45.

oldgranpa
11-27-2005, 14:52
well said, G. Glock. Caliber wars are meaningless and just there for our entertainment, which includes all the OSS stuff.

Ragnar D.
11-30-2005, 15:29
Often, however, it does not. Not in flesh, anyway. What it does in jello is irrelevant, despite the claims of the lazy and the ignorant. There is no reason to risk using fmj bullets, and the 223 softpoint is both more destructive and more reliable in its effect, to longer ranges, and out of shorter barrels. Besides, the 223 is not the issue here. Handguns are the issue, and I agree that the velocities shown by the 10mm RBCD ammo shows what can be achieved. I did not say that I favored their style of bullet. I said that 70-80 gr bullets can be driven to 2300-2400 fps in 5" barrels with the 10mm. Now watch somebody (who can't read) explain all about how the RBCD bullet is no good. Make that lightweight bullet out of solid copper and have it be split lengthwise, like the QuikShok bullet. No, such a bullet is not illegal, either. Hit some animals with it, and you will see that it performs just like the 223 softpoint, which is to say, quite dramatically.

What cops have to do and what civilians can get away with are not the same things. If you had beat Rodney King silly with a nightstick, you'd have served 5+ years in the penitentiary.

Alaskapopo
11-30-2005, 15:47
Originally posted by Ragnar D.
Often, however, it does not. Not in flesh, anyway. What it does in jello is irrelevant, despite the claims of the lazy and the ignorant. There is no reason to risk using fmj bullets, and the 223 softpoint is both more destructive and more reliable in its effect, to longer ranges, and out of shorter barrels. Besides, the 223 is not the issue here. Handguns are the issue, and I agree that the velocities shown by the 10mm RBCD ammo shows what can be achieved. I did not say that I favored their style of bullet. I said that 70-80 gr bullets can be driven to 2300-2400 fps in 5" barrels with the 10mm. Now watch somebody (who can't read) explain all about how the RBCD bullet is no good. Make that lightweight bullet out of solid copper and have it be split lengthwise, like the QuikShok bullet. No, such a bullet is not illegal, either. Hit some animals with it, and you will see that it performs just like the 223 softpoint, which is to say, quite dramatically.

What cops have to do and what civilians can get away with are not the same things. If you had beat Rodney King silly with a nightstick, you'd have served 5+ years in the penitentiary.

GUN KID IS BACK
Pat

Navy HMC
12-02-2005, 21:46
Originally posted by 355sigfan
GUN KID IS BACK
Pat

Interesting, this is his first post and he's discovered already.

RMTactical
12-03-2005, 03:58
Originally posted by Navy HMC
Interesting, this is his first post and he's discovered already.

You just can't miss him, he's very easy to spot.

ER_STL
12-05-2005, 15:07
Originally posted by G. Glock
Just affirms my contention that all the caliber wars that exist online are pretty silly. A cool head and proficiency with the firearm you're carrying far, far outweigh the difference between a 9mm, .40, and .45.

I think some who participate in these arguments are providing great information to support several differnt types of view. Others though are probably looking to read opinions that support their own because caliber choice appears to be such a sensitive issue. I would probably advise someone who asked "which caliber" to make their choice and then avoid this forum. :)

If the statistics I've read from John Lott are accurate then a CCW holder has an excellent chance of surviving a would-be attack from a turd simply by letting the turd know that he has a gun. Of those who would risk getting shot to attack a gun-holder, many stop once they're shot, regardless of the caliber of ammunition or type of gun used (according the FBI Wounding Ballistics .pdf that I've seen linked around here). If that also is true then simply having a gun and the ability to shoot an attacker if necessary gives the defender an excellent chance of success in a confrontation. It's not even until someone is unfortunate enough to face the small number of determined attackers left who won't stop until they're forced to do so that shot-placement and caliber even become an issue.

It seems to me that once someone can settle on a caliber that has proven to penetrate adequately, the differences in the ballistics of the calibers that qualify might not outweigh the other factors such as ability to shoot well, cost and availability of ammunition, enjoyment of shooting (and practicing), confidence in the selected caliber, etc, etc.

Glock20 10mm
12-26-2005, 14:00
1 shot stops are a myth... 186 LEO while in the Navy, 9 of which resulted in UOLF, the Berretta M9 was a puke piece and on several occasions required the expenditure of an entire 15rnd clip plus a 12ga 00 back up to neutralize a hostile. Granted we were using military ball ammo, but still the inadequacy of the 9mm rnd was enough for me to obtain permission from my CO to use my personal side arm with NATO approved FMJ rnds as my primary weapon and the issued Barreta as my back-up.

Even then with the heavier caliber weapon, one shot stops were not seen. In this case I would have to blame the ammo for the majority of the inadequacy of these rnds. Tight grouping in the chest on several hostiles proved ineffective in dropping let alone slowing the hostile.

As has been said several times in this forum, tight grouping, high rate of fire and maintaining a level head are what will win a pistol fight.

As my teams training office said over and over and we drilled over and over...

"2 in the chest, 1 in the head... ensure the SOB is dead" LCDR Jensen USN(R). And it does work... most of the time.

B_Easy
01-05-2006, 21:22
Originally posted by Ragnar D.
Often, however, it does not. Not in flesh, anyway. What it does in jello is irrelevant, despite the claims of the lazy and the ignorant. There is no reason to risk using fmj bullets, and the 223 softpoint is both more destructive and more reliable in its effect, to longer ranges, and out of shorter barrels. Besides, the 223 is not the issue here. Handguns are the issue, and I agree that the velocities shown by the 10mm RBCD ammo shows what can be achieved. I did not say that I favored their style of bullet. I said that 70-80 gr bullets can be driven to 2300-2400 fps in 5" barrels with the 10mm. Now watch somebody (who can't read) explain all about how the RBCD bullet is no good. Make that lightweight bullet out of solid copper and have it be split lengthwise, like the QuikShok bullet. No, such a bullet is not illegal, either. Hit some animals with it, and you will see that it performs just like the 223 softpoint, which is to say, quite dramatically.

What cops have to do and what civilians can get away with are not the same things. If you had beat Rodney King silly with a nightstick, you'd have served 5+ years in the penitentiary.

Ummmm...ballistic gelatin is used because it mimics flesh. Of course it's not going to be 100% accurate, but the only way to get that is case studies (mutilating bodies) or animal testing, which is erroneous as animal muscle is different from human muscle. Animals have stronger muscle fibers, on the whole, than humans do. That's why an ape is 6x stronger than a human of comparable muscle mass, body weight, and size.

Regardless, back to the discussion at hand...

.223 soft-point isn't really necessary, unless you want crappy penetration. We're talking a high-velocity round which is going to fragment anyway, with better penetration, versus a soft-point high-velocity round which will also fragment, albeit more reliably, but with decreased penetration.

I don't know about you, but hitting the person comes first, THEN worrying about whether or not the bullet will promote maximum damage.

Derringer
01-07-2006, 22:46
Interesting set of comparative into live tissue(porcine)shots:
9mm VS 5.56 into LIVE TISSUE
(edited for elimination of any ambiguity, i.e.-not a potroast)
http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=16&t=262940

If animal tissue is stronger...

Derringer
01-09-2006, 22:23
i suppose the doctors and other professionals that repeatedly purchase and shoot this ammo are doing it because they SEE what the ammo does NOT do?
my experience with these customers is that they tell me it works when they use it. THEY ALSO complain about the price(but not enough to stop them from reordering).
i might buy something once to try it out, but I won't be buying it again(Extreme Shock).
I have spoken with many professionals that are using the ammo in testing. I am aware of the threads on other websites and ONE thing seems to stand out- most of the comments come from those that have never shot this ammo.
I would LOVE to find a lead ball ammo that does what i've seen this ammo do to wild dogs, pigs, coyotes, deer etc..
if you know of a brand please save me some money and time and I'll stop selling the "junk" i'm selling now.

Thanks for your time.

AWDTerror
01-09-2006, 23:50
;z ;z ;Q ;Q

There's a sucker born every minute.
-P.T. Barnum

Derringer
01-10-2006, 11:30
That's it, avoid the subject of performance. Just resort to personal attacks.:)
If you don't have anything to say except cliches and parroting the same things over and over again not many useful ideas can be gleaned.
RBCD is NOT the answer to all shooting scenarios.
I carry gold dots and black hills 124+p for certain things in addition to RBCD.

The small arms munition market is worth 3 BILLION plus currently,
and some of that money goes to the "experts". when companies hand out money a few tend to agree with big guys to keep on the gravy train.

:cool:

AWDTerror
01-10-2006, 11:36
go read in the rbcd post before you open your mouth here. I have seen the performance of rbcd, and I am no way impressed with it what so ever. so i'll stop pissing in your wheaties in this thread.

B_Easy
01-13-2006, 15:51
Originally posted by Derringer
That's it, avoid the subject of performance. Just resort to personal attacks.:)
If you don't have anything to say except cliches and parroting the same things over and over again not many useful ideas can be gleaned.
RBCD is NOT the answer to all shooting scenarios.
I carry gold dots and black hills 124+p for certain things in addition to RBCD.

The small arms munition market is worth 3 BILLION plus currently,
and some of that money goes to the "experts". when companies hand out money a few tend to agree with big guys to keep on the gravy train.

:cool:

I've yet to see what's different about it.

The animal tests I've seen show that it's regular old high velocity low weight ammo.

By the way, the #'s listed on the website are FALSE

The penetration depths reflect the round in gel, where it doesn't fragment, while the cavity diameters reflect the round in animal tests, where it DOES fragment, but doesn't penetrate due to little retained mass.

In other words, they're tying together two separate tests to make their ammo seem worthwhile.

Of course it looks like it works, the wounds are massive in diameter, but the depth of them is less than impressive.

mitchshrader
01-13-2006, 17:28
but i guess as careful as i can.

my personal choice is medium power, low recoil, and a long barrel.

in other words, something that shoots straight. repeatedly.

and 'shoot it dry' ..

and 'CNS if convenient' ..

better ideas welcomed.

MOHAA Player
01-16-2006, 09:14
Originally posted by Ragnar D.
Often, however, it does not. Not in flesh, anyway. What it does in jello is irrelevant, despite the claims of the lazy and the ignorant. There is no reason to risk using fmj bullets, and the 223 softpoint is both more destructive and more reliable in its effect, to longer ranges, and out of shorter barrels. Besides, the 223 is not the issue here. Handguns are the issue, and I agree that the velocities shown by the 10mm RBCD ammo shows what can be achieved. I did not say that I favored their style of bullet. I said that 70-80 gr bullets can be driven to 2300-2400 fps in 5" barrels with the 10mm. Now watch somebody (who can't read) explain all about how the RBCD bullet is no good. Make that lightweight bullet out of solid copper and have it be split lengthwise, like the QuikShok bullet. No, such a bullet is not illegal, either. Hit some animals with it, and you will see that it performs just like the 223 softpoint, which is to say, quite dramatically.

What cops have to do and what civilians can get away with are not the same things. If you had beat Rodney King silly with a nightstick, you'd have served 5+ years in the penitentiary. ;z ;z ;z ;z ;z

PSU_G34
01-16-2006, 10:08
Originally posted by searcher
Actually, the theory is right. It just doesn't lead to a "knockdown effect" in this case because the "collision" is between a bullet and a soft target. It is a little more apparent in the sport of silhouette shooting where large steel plate animals are knocked over by bullets. In fact, Newton's famous 2nd law commonly stated as "Net Force = mass x acceleration" was originally stated by Newton as "Net Force = (mass x change in velocity) / time" in the special case where the mass is a constant, as in a moving bullet. The term in parentheses is called "impulse" in physics. In words it says that "resultant force equals the time rate of change of momentum." As the time of the interaction approaches zero the force approaches infinity. In other words, the faster the momentum changes, the greater the force.

Another example is the difference in the "kick" felt when you shoot a +p+ round versus a standard pressure round of the same bullet weight out of the same gun. The bullet in the +p+ round gets to any given velocity in less time than the standard velocity round while travelling down the barrel . Same change in momentum in less time yields more felt "kick" or force. Newton's 3rd law about equal and opposite reactions doesn't really explain anything about what happens when the bullet hits the target. The fact that the gun doesn't knock you over doesn't mean diddly. What happens when the bullet is in the barrel and when it hits the target are completely separate events. His second law tells the story, especially in the form he originally used. Sorry to get so technical. The point of my post was to say that even though "knock-down force" from a handgun used for self defense is theoretically possible it can't happen in practice. A reference for the theory is Engineering Mechanics Volume 2: Dynamics fourth edition by J.L. Meriam pages 191-192.:soap:

Think of the "knock-down" effect as the work done on the target by the bullet instead of the instantaneous force (delta function, for which the integral over dt is zero)applied to the target.

P.S. Mythbusters is cool:cool:

Pr1nc3_Prince
02-06-2006, 12:33
I know of someone who died from a "lucky" shot.

it was a .38 FMJ that hit his chest, then the spinal chord, and bounced back to pierce the heart.

he dropped dead right there and then.

personally, i'd rather shoot the guy until he's dead but in the case of multiple assailants and you find yourself with limited ammo, that may not apply.

Imho, i'd rather intimidate the rest by shooting the nearest guy. if that fails it'll be my day in hell.

Ebb27
02-06-2006, 19:22
Originally posted by Pr1nc3_Prince

if that fails it'll be my day in hell.



I think anyway who goes into a life or death struggle with only a pistol would be wise to keep this in mind!

Sure you may drop 'em with one shot, or you may empty a whole mag into them and still get killed. It's always a crap shoot and sometimes the dice come up snake-eyes.

Bravo-Four
02-07-2006, 18:26
Dont worry, as soon as glock figures out how to make its recoiless .308 pistol we will finally be saved.

Pr1nc3_Prince
02-08-2006, 07:11
Originally posted by Bravo-Four
Dont worry, as soon as glock figures out how to make its recoiless .308 pistol we will finally be saved.

i doubt it.

your problem would be over-penetration and legislation, which i beleive is a bigger problem than handguns.

i'd prefer the recoil-less handgun using SHELLS!

;a ;a ;a ;a

dport
02-13-2006, 17:49
Originally posted by utahglock
So we accepting a "collage" as a way to destroy a myth? Sounds intellecually silly and lazy to me.

I've never advocated shooting only once-the one shot stop whether you agree or not is simply a unit of measurement.

Evan
Yep it's a unit of measurement that measures which unit is so narrow as to be unuseable except for measuring things you already know the outcome of and the certain circumstances surrounding it.

It's like saying every time I play checkers on even numbered days against the cat where I'm the "red" checkers I win 87% of the time.

It has no utility except in describing those certain circumstances.

dport
02-13-2006, 17:55
Originally posted by searcher
Not trying to be a physics geek here but Newton's laws do allow for a small body in motion to knock down a larger object it hits, even if an equally sized object that was free to topple over (but didn't) was holding the "particle projector" that imparted the motion to the projectile. The key is the time it takes the projectile to "dump" (transfer) its energy to the target (described in physics by the term "impulse")in a collision. The other thing that influences this is the "hardness" of the projectile and the target (coefficient of restitution). Intuitively this makes sense with the example of catching a fast moving ball. If we catch the ball by moving it back while we catch it (increasing the "catching time") the force we feel will be less than if we catch it with a stiff hand(stings like hell!). This is the same thing that lets a martial artist break bricks with his bare hand, even though a man can lift much less weight on a bench press than it would take to collapse a brick designed to hold the weight of buildings.

So all you need to do is shoot a guy holding a thick glass block (glass has a very high "coefficient of restitution") up snuggly to his forehead with a large caliber wadcutter made of hardened steel to knock him down. Otherwise it is not likely.
No handgun round has enough momentum to knock down a human being. Unless they're off balance. Hell, a 12ga slug doesn't have enough momentum even if all the "energy is expended into the target."

Try again.

dport
02-13-2006, 18:02
Originally posted by glug
and that can be very debilitating, indeed. The luck hit to his arm is the only thing that stopped Platt from killing all 8 of the Feds with his Mini-14 that day in Miami. So it depends upon what you claim is "marginal" hit. The 10mm jhp to the gut will be a LOT more likely to stop a man than a 9mm ball rd to the lung, for instance. It just has a lot more pain, shock, and so on for the guy to try to overcome with his adrenalin. Not everyone has the same level of desperation-adrenalin as the worst case scenarios.
It wasn't 9mm ball. It was a 9mm Silvertip that didn't penetrate 12 inches and reach the heart. Penetration, not wound channel diameter, was the key to that failure.

mitchshrader
02-13-2006, 18:32
high school student to do it for us.

the energy at the muzzle = the energy at the target + the energy lost to friction between the muzzle and the target.. and as it doesn't knock YOU over, there ought to be a clue it won't necessarily knock them over either.

now, knockdown power. well, a double twelve has that, i got knocked down firing one both barrels once. big bruise, knocked me on my butt.

so, i'd figure a double twelve has knockdown power at the other end too. that's about 4000 lbs muzzle energy, thereabouts.

that's about like a 30.06 and a bit.. say, a .338 maybe.

that's knockdown power.

Ebb27
02-13-2006, 19:35
I think what most people are mistakenly calling "knock-down-power" is actually the reflexive action of pulling away from extreme pain. Just as your body pulls away from a hot stove when it's burned, it lunges away from the pain of bullet tearing into it.

This would also explain why someone intoxicated or pumped up on adrenalin doesn't react as violently to being shot. They simply aren't feeling any pain.

Tito
02-14-2006, 14:40
My Glock 20 and 29 don't recoil bad at all.

hawk
02-14-2006, 15:03
Originally posted by dport
It wasn't 9mm ball. It was a 9mm Silvertip that didn't penetrate 12 inches and reach the heart. Penetration, not wound channel diameter, was the key to that failure.

Too late dport, glug (aka: gunkid) got banned 3 months ago shortly after he re-registered. ;f

Dandapani
02-14-2006, 17:46
Originally posted by mitchshrader
high school student to do it for us.

the energy at the muzzle = the energy at the target + the energy lost to friction between the muzzle and the target.. and as it doesn't knock YOU over, there ought to be a clue it won't necessarily knock them over either.

now, knockdown power. well, a double twelve has that, i got knocked down firing one both barrels once. big bruise, knocked me on my butt.

so, i'd figure a double twelve has knockdown power at the other end too. that's about 4000 lbs muzzle energy, thereabouts.

that's about like a 30.06 and a bit.. say, a .338 maybe.

that's knockdown power.

Amen, Mitch, amen, preach it brother!

Handgun ammo energy is too small to be a factor!

dport
02-14-2006, 20:41
Originally posted by hawk
Too late dport, glug (aka: gunkid) got banned 3 months ago shortly after he re-registered. ;f
I missed a Gunkid sighting. I always miss the fun.:(










;)

Irondog
02-20-2006, 18:10
Can't say it enough...handguns SUCK at stopping people!

And they always will. The movie industry has injured and killed more people with other misconceptions..."One shot, and he flew through the air." UH HUH We carry handguns because they are portable, not because they are powerful.

The attempt to use the one shot stop as a unit of measure is STATISTICAL analysis. Humans are not math problems, that's why they win medals for gallantry, heroism, or ignoring their own extreme peril in combat. Turn that around and use that energy in a felonious way....hmmmmmm.
People do the unexpected most of the time, that includes when you are trying to stop their behavior with a gun.

Bits&Bytes
02-23-2006, 09:42
You know.. food for thought...

David killed Goliath with a single stone and a sling shot.

(not sure what caliber the stone was though...)

B&B

Ebb27
02-23-2006, 20:13
Here's an interesting story from Massad Ayoob.


More than 10 years ago, my friend Mark Seiden called me in on a murder case in Miami that Janet Reno, then State’s Attorney for the county in question, had ordered prosecuted. A woman named Mary Hopkin had killed her common law husband, a man named James Yarolem.

James was in his forties. Mary was 63. Her life had been hard, and when she found a younger man who convinced her he loved her, she took him into her home. This did not turn out to be a wise decision.

Mary worked. Jim didn’t. He drank and smoked up all the money she brought in. He abused her, with the classic escalation. First, verbal derisiveness. Then the shove with the palm. Then the slap of the open hand. Then the blow of the closed fist. The time came when she confronted him and said, “Jim, you drink all my beer, and you smoke all my cigarettes, and you won’t get a job, and … I think it’s time you left.” Even then, being in the classic denial pattern of a battered significant other, she couldn’t bring herself to say, “Oh, and by the way, you beat the crap out of me whenever you feel like it.”

She didn’t need to say it. Jim didn’t handle her declaration well. He began to beat her up with more vigor than before. She went to call the police, and Jim ripped the telephone out of the wall, wrapped the phone cord around her neck, and strangled her unconscious. He left her for dead and went off to the nearest bar. When Mary awoke, she crawled—she couldn’t walk on her arthritic and aging legs, she crawled—to the nearest trailer to hers and when she got there blurted, “Call the police.”

The cops arrived. When Jim came back Metro-Dade officers were there. They arrested him. When they dragged him away, the cops testified later, he was screaming “Mary, you f---in’ *****, I’ll kill you for this!”

Very soon thereafter, he was out on bail and he came to make good his threat. By now, Mary was in terror of him, and had borrowed from her son the cheapest revolver available, an RG .22. The RG is the gun that Handgun Control Inc. is trying to talk about when they rail on about “Saturday Night Specials.” If you left it on a hot stove it might melt.

Jim pounded on the door like the big bad wolf. “Mary, let me in!” “Jim,” she answered, “I know what you’re going to do! I have a gun! I won’t let you kill me! Go away! Don’t make me shoot you!”

He didn’t listen. He smashed the door off its hinges and came at her, and she fired three shots. All three .22 bullets hit him. He turned and ran, got about 20 feet, and collapsed and died. To make a long story short, she was charged with murder.

http://www.backwoodshome.com/articles/ayoob62.html


The officer in the original post couldn't stop the BG with his service caliber weapon, but a little old lady with a .22 did drop the BG. It just goes to show there's no real rhyme or reason to most shooting incidents.

Hickeroar
04-03-2006, 15:54
^^^ what was the outcome of this trial? I REALLY hope they didn't convict this poor lady...


EDIT: Nevermind... She had no money. Mark Seiden, her attorney, took her case anyway. Mark was a former homicide cop for Metro-Dade before he became a lawyer. I did what he did, after he called me. I took the case pro bono, at no charge. After I spent an hour with Mark on direct examination explaining to the jury why she had no choice but to shoot, I took out the prosecutor in a little less than a minute of cross examination. The jury was quick, too: they took about two hours to acquit her of all charges.


Sweet

Ebb27
04-05-2006, 19:13
This case is living proof of the old saying,
"it's better to be judged by twelve, than carried by six"!

turbonatr
04-05-2006, 19:29
It's also makes these silly caliber arguments seem quite moot, no?

;)

Be safe.

oldgranpa
04-05-2006, 20:51
turbonatr,
you are so right! We always seem to hear more stories about little 22's killing people than the big, honkin 45's do. Or 9's, 40's, etc.
And with a little junk gun at that!
Cheers,
og

RMTactical
04-05-2006, 21:41
Originally posted by turbonatr
It's also makes these silly caliber arguments seem quite moot, no?

;)

Be safe.

Precisely!

Whatever you carry, learn to shoot it and empty the mag when you're in danger! ;)

Ebb27
04-05-2006, 21:41
The most famous .22 killing was the Officer Coates incident.



In November 1992, South Carolina Highway Patrolman Mark Coates shot an attacker four times in the torso with his 4 inch Smith & Wesson .357 Magnum revolver. His attacker, an obese adult male who weighed almost 300 pounds, absorbed the hits and shortly thereafter returned fire with one shot from a single-action North American Arms .22 caliber mini-revolver. Coates was fatally wounded when the tiny bullet perforated his left upper arm and penetrated his chest through the armhole of his vest where the bullet cut a major artery. Coates, who was standing next to the passenger-side front fender of the assailant's car when he was hit by the fatal bullet, was very quickly incapacitated.

After Coates was hit, he immediately ran several feet, scrambling around the front of the assailant's car while simultaneously radioing dispatch that he'd been shot. As he neared the driver's-side front fender he suddenly collapsed onto the pavement.

Trooper Coates fired four 145 grain Winchester Silvertip .357 Magnum bullets directly into his assailant's heavy abdomen, achieving solid hits with each. These particular bullets penetrate deeper than 125 grain JHPs, however none ruptured any vital cardiovascular structures. During the initial ground struggle, Coates was shot twice, but his vest protected him. After fighting off his attacker, Coates quickly climbed to his feet and emptied his revolver. At that particular moment the assailant was still lying on the ground. The combination of the assailant's obesity and the unusual angle at which the bullets entered his body worked to the disadvantage of Trooper Coates.

The Coates shooting exemplifies the fable of energy transfer, especially when encountering a determined attacker. The .357 Magnum cartridge is regarded by many as the ultimate manstopper; a true one-shot stop wonder. The Winchester 145 grain .357 Magnum cartridge is given a one-shot stopping power rating of 86 percent by Marshall and Sanow. According to this rating system, a single hit ANYWHERE in the torso is supposed to be highly effective in stopping an attacker, regardless of whether or not the bullet destroys vital tissue. But on this night, it failed FOUR TIMES! The assailant easily absorbed four bullets in his body, each delivering over 450 foot pounds of kinetic energy. This is equivalent to being hit four times by a baseball going approximately 210 miles per hour.


None of Coates' powerful .357 Magnum bullets were effective, but the bad guy's weak .22 caliber bullet was. The .357 Magnum bullets dumped all their energy into the attacker, whereas the single .22 caliber bullet disrupted vital tissue. The assailant survived the shooting, was convicted of murdering Coates and was sentenced to life in prison.


http://www.firearmstactical.com/briefs3.htm


I don't know if the .22 was a "junk" gun or not,
but it certainly worked as advertised, once again.

10mm4ever
04-06-2006, 08:12
The 145 gr. Silvertips are definately NOT my choice for my .357. They are indeed a "watered down" version.

Ebb27
04-06-2006, 09:22
As opposed to those high-powered .22s the BG was using. :upeyes:

turbonatr
04-06-2006, 11:18
Factory 145gr. Silvertips exit my 4" GP 100 at around 1350fps. Since you're a muzzle energy guy, that's nearly 600fpe. Hardly watered down. If this load didn't put that BG down, I find it hard to believe any other load would have given the same shot placement.

Alaskapopo
04-06-2006, 14:09
There was a lot of things that went wrong for the Trooper. He should have keyed in on what the subject was saying rather than just going through his praticed speal so he could get a consent search. The perp pretty much gave away something was up and that he was armed.

He also should have not been so quick on the radio. He should have waited till he knew the perp was no longer a threat. The fatal shot came when he was keying his mike calling for help. We just reviewed the shooting recently in a class I attented dealing with officer survival.
Pat

TexasLiberal
04-07-2006, 20:03
I carry speer Gold Dot 158 HJP. in my .357

but I think that fat guy just got luckey.
in both his shot placement and in his wounds.

Ron3
04-08-2006, 11:55
Unfortuneatly Trooper Coates made a list of tactical errors.

Searching a suspect who wasn't handcuffed, searching the suspect from the front (the "kick me" position), he even had both of his own hands in the suspects pockets while standing right in front of him.

This was just the beggining of a string of mistakes.

This is a good example that having a powerfull weapon and good marksmanship are not enough to save your life. Mindset and tactics must come first.

(Note-I referred to the murderer as "suspect" because thats all he was to Mr. Coates at that time)

Mr. Coates murder has certainly saved the lives of many Police Officers and will continue to do so as long as we keep discussing it.

Jake Starr
04-20-2006, 13:15
However, the fact largely remains that bullet placement, rather than caliber, causes immediate stop-page of body functions in most instances.

PBR Sailor
04-20-2006, 18:58
Placing one shot on an armed assailant is asking for trouble. That being said, shot placement is the most critical aspect.

Displace and shoot until you are no longer threatened.

Ebb27
04-20-2006, 20:21
+1

pbass
05-01-2006, 14:07
Originally posted by Mike H
We should all believe the delightfully sweet natured Evan Marshall and his entirely believable OSS statistics. ;Q

Your exposure is old and limited. By 1996, when Marshall and Sanow released "Street Stoppers," the 2nd of 3 books, there were enough multiple-hit street shootings to include Chapter 24, "Effects of Multiple Bullet Impacts." It's 5 pages of data and only a couple paragraphs of introduction, which only says the data sheds doubt on teaching double taps.

Essentially, there is very, very little difference between the probability of stopping a person with one or two shots, suggesting (to me, anyway) that if a person doesn't go down to a solid torso shot with a certain round, it's unlikely he'll do so when shot a second time in the torso with the same round.

This exposes a strange kind of thinking which I have seen on the boards. It says that any kind of round is fine if it'll feed--if it doesn't work the first time, "just shoot him some more."

The person saying this believes at core that all people are built and wired the same. If a certain 60% round doesn't get him the first time, then we have a 60% shot of getting him the second time. It all adds up great for the good guy, just the way a casino sooner or later takes all your money, even if it's only making 2% with every spin of the wheel.

If only it were a game of chance, if only this could be true! But the Marshall-Sanow percentages aren't gambling probabilities, and they don't measure odds, which works only in a perfect universe of 52 different cards of exactly the same shape, weight, stiffness, and back design. Not only are people not like that, but odds try to predict. Marshall-Sanow historical percentages report facts we already know. No formula is used except to make everything comparable by converting to percentages. And that's no more data manipulation any more than converting from metric to standard.

When I see a round is listed at 60%, the way I read it is the way it was derived: it was used to on different people on the street and stopped 60% of them. In other words, the population is what's being measured: 60% of the population is vulnerable to that round and the rest aren't.

Whoa! If we can't "make up" for ineffective shots with more of the same, then what? The easiest thing I can do is look at the data to pick a load that I hope will work for the largest section of the population. In fact, given that there isn't any empirically measurable "second chance" advantage, I'd do well to pay LOTS of attention to the Marshall data.

My 2 cents.

gary newport
05-01-2006, 16:28
Originally posted by pbass
Your exposure is old and limited. By 1996, when Marshall and Sanow released "Street Stoppers," the 2nd of 3 books, there were enough multiple-hit street shootings to include Chapter 24, "Effects of Multiple Bullet Impacts." It's 5 pages of data and only a couple paragraphs of introduction, which only says the data sheds doubt on teaching double taps.

Essentially, there is very, very little difference between the probability of stopping a person with one or two shots, suggesting (to me, anyway) that if a person doesn't go down to a solid torso shot with a certain round, it's unlikely he'll do so when shot a second time in the torso with the same round.

This exposes a strange kind of thinking which I have seen on the boards. It says that any kind of round is fine if it'll feed--if it doesn't work the first time, "just shoot him some more."

The person saying this believes at core that all people are built and wired the same. If a certain 60% round doesn't get him the first time, then we have a 60% shot of getting him the second time. It all adds up great for the good guy, just the way a casino sooner or later takes all your money, even if it's only making 2% with every spin of the wheel.

If only it were a game of chance, if only this could be true! But the Marshall-Sanow percentages aren't gambling probabilities, and they don't measure odds, which works only in a perfect universe of 52 different cards of exactly the same shape, weight, stiffness, and back design. Not only are people not like that, but odds try to predict. Marshall-Sanow historical percentages report facts we already know. No formula is used except to make everything comparable by converting to percentages. And that's no more data manipulation any more than converting from metric to standard.

When I see a round is listed at 60%, the way I read it is the way it was derived: it was used to on different people on the street and stopped 60% of them. In other words, the population is what's being measured: 60% of the population is vulnerable to that round and the rest aren't.

Whoa! If we can't "make up" for ineffective shots with more of the same, then what? The easiest thing I can do is look at the data to pick a load that I hope will work for the largest section of the population. In fact, given that there isn't any empirically measurable "second chance" advantage, I'd do well to pay LOTS of attention to the Marshall data.

My 2 cents.

So M & S say that their data shed doubt on the increased efficacy of multiple hits? Gee, one of the (many) criticisms of M & S was that they relied solely on "one-shot" incidents (and anybody worth shooting is worth shooting twice). How convenient that multiple hits turn out to be of doubtful effectiveness! :upeyes:

PBR Sailor
05-01-2006, 17:51
What about Soldier of Fortune magazine's investigation and critique of their book?

:freak: :beer:

Ebb27
05-01-2006, 21:02
The article that started this thread proves that two shot's won't always stop someone. That doesn't mean multiple shots aren't effective, just that sometimes it takes more than two shots, or three or even the whole mag. However if you shoot someone enough times they will stop, eventually you will destroy enough tissue so that their body can no longer function or they will simply bleed to death from all the holes.

I don't care how you're "wired" or "built" if you are shot enough times you will go down. Agreed one or two shots can't guarantee a stop, but 10 or 15 "generally" will.

You keep firing until the threat is neutralized or you run out of bullets. Then when you run out of bullets you pray you're man enough to whip a guy that's been shot 15 times.

Alaskapopo
05-01-2006, 22:17
I believe this points out how important it is to train for head shots in the failure to stop drill. Two to the chest then go for the head or pelvis then back to the chest and so on until your out of ammo.
Pat

PBR Sailor
05-02-2006, 06:00
355sigfan,

I agree. Personally, I believe that a pelvic girdle shot is easier to place on a threat than a head shot and should be in your tool box of gun fighting survival skills. The pelvic girdle is closer to the center of mass and will appear to be moving less than the head in a dynamic situation when the unfriendly is moving around and not static. I believe the head shot is the ultimate fight stopper, but I believe that the pelvic girdle shot is more easily performed. I am glad you mentioned that concept.

Displace and fire, displace and fire, displace and fire..........

:freak: :beer:

pbass
05-02-2006, 07:53
Originally posted by gary newport
So M & S say that their data shed doubt on the increased efficacy of multiple hits?

Nope. The DATA says that X% are taken down by one of X round, and pretty close to X%, like within 1 to 2 percentage points, are taken down by two of X round.

How convenient that multiple hits turn out to be of doubtful effectiveness! :upeyes: [/B]

Convenient? They busted their buns to collect the data, and like I say, no Marshall-Sanow critic in over a decade has wanted to collect it themselves. In fact they AVOID the data. They know if they collect the data it will still be the same data. You want convenient? As all those armchair theorists have discovered, it's whole a lot easier to roll the eyes and ignore data than collect and deal with it.

Before Marshall and Sanow, who would've thought the Fed or Rem .357 125 JHP could be more effective than any .44 Mag load? Or that the .32 ST could work pretty much as well as a .38 +P LSWCHP? Facts like these play havoc with armchair theories for sure, but they're the facts. You can choose theory over fact if you want. No offense, but I'll take fact.

Jake Starr
05-02-2006, 13:51
David killed Goliath with a single stone and a sling shot.

It wasn't the size of the stone but its placement...

Alaskapopo
05-02-2006, 14:45
Originally posted by pbass
Nope. The DATA says that X% are taken down by one of X round, and pretty close to X%, like within 1 to 2 percentage points, are taken down by two of X round.



Convenient? They busted their buns to collect the data, and like I say, no Marshall-Sanow critic in over a decade has wanted to collect it themselves. In fact they AVOID the data. They know if they collect the data it will still be the same data. You want convenient? As all those armchair theorists have discovered, it's whole a lot easier to roll the eyes and ignore data than collect and deal with it.

Before Marshall and Sanow, who would've thought the Fed or Rem .357 125 JHP could be more effective than any .44 Mag load? Or that the .32 ST could work pretty much as well as a .38 +P LSWCHP? Facts like these play havoc with armchair theories for sure, but they're the facts. You can choose theory over fact if you want. No offense, but I'll take fact.

The problem is Marshalls work is hotly debated due to his questionable operational defination of a stop. He excludes many failures from his data base because multiple shots were involved. Most shootings are not a one shot affair. Example (well gee I shot him but he did not go down. I guess I can't shoot him anymore) The reality is most shootings involved multiple rounds. Both the good shootings and the bad ones. Marshalls by the use of his definations had to throw out over 99% of most shootings out there.
Pat

PBR Sailor
05-02-2006, 17:55
It was my understanding that SOF magazine contacted people who had allegedly provided information for the Stopping Power book and SOF was told by the sources they had not been contacted by Marshall and Sanow. I never did hear Marshall or Sanow's reply to the allegation.

One large state agency allegedly provided information on their 9mm ammunition performance. SOF indicated that someone within that agency related war stories and not statistical data. I have not heard a reply to that allegation by SOF either.

It was my understanding that there is a scientific protocol for collecting data and analyzing data while conducting a study and that protocol was not used when compiling information for the book.

Did Marshall and Sanow respond to the allegations that their study was not conducted properly in any of their new publications? I certainly don't know and wonder if anyone else on this thread has knowledge.

Marshall and Sanow were right about one thing in the Stopping Power book. The .45 ACP Federal Hydrashock ammunition has been very effective in our area.

:soap:

kashton
05-03-2006, 23:10
"Walk softly, but carry a BIG STICK!"

hint hint... 12 g Semi-auto shotgun

Alaskapopo
05-04-2006, 01:39
Originally posted by kashton
"Walk softly, but carry a BIG STICK!"

hint hint... 12 g Semi-auto shotgun

That would get the job done personally I prefer a Colt M4.
pat

10mm4ever
05-10-2006, 11:38
Originally posted by 355sigfan
The pelvic shot is not as easy as one would assume its harder than a head shot. Also most handgun rounds lack sufficient momentium and energy to break the pelvis.
Pat The goal of a pelvic shot isnt necessarily to "break the pelvis". If you look at a human anatomy chart it becomes obvious as to what potential a pelvic shot has. Once a bullet enters the pelvic region, it becomes surrounded by intestines, reproductive organs and the hard curved surfaces of the pelvic region. Given a bullets natural tendency to bounce or glance off of other rounded hard surfaces, there's a very real potential that the bullet will ricochet around quite a bit and possibly cause damage to the spinal cord resulting in a stationary target(not to mention the obvious damage it's inflicting on other organs,etc). Ask anyone who's ever been shot in this area, the pain is more often than not so unbearable it generally results in a DNRF regardless of whether the spinal cord received damage or not. I have no idea how you could suggest that a head shot would be any easier to achieve than a pelvic shot? The head can move independant of the torso, but the opposite is not true. The torso is always the easiest to hit, and the pelvis is a part of it. I suppose anyone can refer to themselves as a "instructor" and/or "professional" as you've done countless times in previous posts but what the hell...it's the internet, right??. On the outside chance that someone were involved in a real life or death scenario whom decided to take your "professional advice" to heart, it could easily cost him/her their life. Just Something to consider the next time Pat(not that it will change a thing). EDITED TO ADD: Uh, what happened to the post of yours that I quoted at the top of THIS POST Pat? Did the self proclaimed "professional" find the "delete this post" button?:laughabove:

pbass
05-10-2006, 12:44
Originally posted by 355sigfan
The problem is Marshalls work is hotly debated due to his questionable operational defination of a stop. He excludes many failures from his data base because multiple shots were involved. Most shootings are not a one shot affair. Example (well gee I shot him but he did not go down. I guess I can't shoot him anymore) The reality is most shootings involved multiple rounds. Both the good shootings and the bad ones. Marshalls by the use of his definations had to throw out over 99% of most shootings out there.
Pat

Nope. If a barrage is fired most of the time there are one or two hits, if any. The ones with exactly one or exactly two from the same gun are now tablulated. The two are mostly within one or two percentage points of one (the twos table was published as soon as there were sufficient cases to report). The drastically fewer incidences of twos hints there really aren't enough threes to make a comparative table from. Yet. And we are still waiting for some one of the M&S detractors, ANYONE, to build a comprehensive data table to refute the existing one. That challenge has been unanswered for 10 years, and I'm not holding my breath.

Natty
05-15-2006, 18:55
Obviously this 'one shot stop' farce was perpetrated to make money and sell a product.

Anyone who questions this matter is told to buy 3 books. OK

My life and my loved ones lives are worth more than one single shot.

Oh, but this is just to be used as a unit of measurement. OK

This outrageous statement does not take into consideration intangibles like a stop to a 110lb woman counts the same as a stop to an enraged 440lb man. So much for the unit of measurement.

PBR Sailor
05-15-2006, 19:59
Originally posted by Natty
This outrageous statement does not take into consideration intangibles like a stop to a 110lb woman counts the same as a stop to an enraged 440lb man. So much for the unit of measurement.

How about a stop to a 100 lb man under the influence of PCP? Probably the worst case scenario I have ever had the displeasure to know about.

:patriot:

Ebb27
05-15-2006, 20:25
Originally posted by PBR Sailor
How about a stop to a 100 lb man under the influence of PCP? Probably the worst case scenario I have ever had the displeasure to know about.



Just imagine if it had been an enraged 440 lb. man, on PCP! :shocked:

To me it seems pretty clear that a pistol isn't always capable of stopping someone who's determined not to be stopped. If they're intoxicated on drugs, and/or alcohol, or simply pumped up on adrenalin and feeling no pain and all you've got is a pistol you've got a problem. There have been more than a few cops as well as civilians that have lost their lives in just such a situation.

A pistol is just a tool, not a magic death-ray. If used properly it "may" save your life, then again it may not. It doesn't guarantee you'll win the fight or even survive, it just increases your odds a bit.

pbass
05-20-2006, 05:23
Originally posted by PBR Sailor
How about a stop to a 100 lb man under the influence of PCP?

2-ton minivan @ 88 FPS.

Alaskapopo
05-20-2006, 19:58
Originally posted by pbass
Nope. If a barrage is fired most of the time there are one or two hits, if any. The ones with exactly one or exactly two from the same gun are now tablulated. The two are mostly within one or two percentage points of one (the twos table was published as soon as there were sufficient cases to report). The drastically fewer incidences of twos hints there really aren't enough threes to make a comparative table from. Yet. And we are still waiting for some one of the M&S detractors, ANYONE, to build a comprehensive data table to refute the existing one. That challenge has been unanswered for 10 years, and I'm not holding my breath.

Your answer just glossed over a very valid concern. If you cannont understand why only including shootings with one shot is a problem then this whole discussion is over your head intelectually.
Pat

pbass
05-21-2006, 17:37
Originally posted by 355sigfan
Your answer just glossed over a very valid concern. If you cannont understand why only including shootings with one shot is a problem then this whole discussion is over your head intelectually.
Pat

The primary concern is validity of data, comparing apples to apples and having enough data to do so. That means shootings where one and only one kind of round got the hit on the target. Now that enough data has accrued to allow two shot incidents to be tabulated, you say, no good, need three? Give me a break.

Alaskapopo
05-21-2006, 17:45
Originally posted by pbass
The primary concern is validity of data, comparing apples to apples and having enough data to do so. That means shootings where one and only one kind of round got the hit on the target. Now that enough data has accrued to allow two shot incidents to be tabulated, you say, no good, need three? Give me a break.

Thats not what we have. First they have never released their sources or had their study peer reviewed. Second they are not allways comparing apples to apples. A round that hits an arm prior to hitting the heard will have a different effect that one that has no barrier between it. Both are the same on Marshalls study. A round that hits the lungs is the same as one that hits the spine in Marshalls sutdy. There is no consistency. Doing a study like that scientifically is almost impossible.

They throw out tons of failures due to multiple shots being fired. This skews their results for higher OSS percentages. No handgun round can be realistically expected to stop someone with one round 90% of the time. Even Evan admits that. The study is deeply flawed. I too was a huge fan until I got educated.
Pat

gary newport
05-22-2006, 14:01
Originally posted by 355sigfan
Thats not what we have. First they have never released their sources or had their study peer reviewed. Second they are not allways comparing apples to apples. A round that hits an arm prior to hitting the heard will have a different effect that one that has no barrier between it. Both are the same on Marshalls study. A round that hits the lungs is the same as one that hits the spine in Marshalls sutdy. There is no consistency. Doing a study like that scientifically is almost impossible.

They throw out tons of failures due to multiple shots being fired. This skews their results for higher OSS percentages. No handgun round can be realistically expected to stop someone with one round 90% of the time. Even Evan admits that. The study is deeply flawed. I too was a huge fan until I got educated.
Pat

:goodpost:

Bravo-Four
06-06-2006, 15:38
You whip this out, the BG might die from the amount of fecal matter that quickly lines his undertrousers, if not from one fatal shot to the pinkie toe :outtahere:

http://www.smith-wesson.com/wcsstore/SmWesson/upload/images/firearms/163504_large.jpg

pbass
06-07-2006, 04:54
Originally posted by 355sigfan
Thats not what we have. First they have never released their sources or had their study peer reviewed. Second they are not allways comparing apples to apples. A round that hits an arm prior to hitting the heard will have a different effect that one that has no barrier between it. Both are the same on Marshalls study. A round that hits the lungs is the same as one that hits the spine in Marshalls sutdy. There is no consistency. Doing a study like that scientifically is almost impossible.

They throw out tons of failures due to multiple shots being fired. This skews their results for higher OSS percentages. No handgun round can be realistically expected to stop someone with one round 90% of the time. Even Evan admits that. The study is deeply flawed. I too was a huge fan until I got educated.
Pat

That's a crock. I say again, anyone who felt the data at fault in the past decade could have gathered their own data but nobody has. Now if the data is so bad, why have the detractors not done their own footwork, particularly given that they could easily sell tons of books? Because they'd come up with the same data.

10mm4ever
06-07-2006, 08:14
Dont you see, Pat got "educated"! Evidently, he has resources unavailable to us "un-educated" folk.

sneakyracer
06-07-2006, 08:39
Originally posted by Bravo-Four
You whip this out, the BG might die from the amount of fecal matter that quickly lines his undertrousers, if not from one fatal shot to the pinkie toe :outtahere:

http://www.smith-wesson.com/wcsstore/SmWesson/upload/images/firearms/163504_large.jpg

The Blast alone will blind him and knock him down!!
:laughabove:

pbass
06-09-2006, 05:15
Originally posted by sneakyracer
The Blast alone will blind him and knock him down!!
:laughabove:

A long time ago I read a review, in American Handgunner I believe, of the 2" Colt Trooper. The writer noted the horrendous blast and kick, but added that even if you missed, the burns would at least dissuade your opponent from continuing his aggression. Suppose you're close enough to touch your opponent with the muzzle? There is an excellent page somewhere with photos of what happens to vests that take contact shots. Really enlightening. And that's just what happens to the vest!

kernal_panic
06-15-2006, 21:11
Originally posted by turbonatr
I really understand that everyone out there wants to make the best possible choice they can about their carry choices, etc., but what it really boils down to is training. Worry more about putting those bullets where they need to be as accurately and as quickly as possible. 9mm, .357, .40, 10mm, .45acp...it's all the same. Pick a premium JHP of sufficient weight, functions 100% in your particular gun and get to the range!!

thats right. pick a gun and caliber you can shoot well, as long as its 10mm auto, and air condition the MFer.

10mm4ever
06-17-2006, 05:15
Originally posted by kernal_panic
thats right. pick a gun and caliber you can shoot well, as long as its 10mm auto, and air condition the MFer. :laughabove: :laughabove: :laughabove: +1.

kikr
06-21-2006, 00:36
I've always stated that you shoot the BG untill he doesnt want to be shot anylonger.

jsm190
07-04-2006, 04:54
Suddenly I don't feel as safe with my .38 5 shot and no extra ammo. Wish it was easier to conceal one of my .40s and a spare mag down here in the summer.

searcher
07-04-2006, 14:24
Originally posted by jsm190
Suddenly I don't feel as safe with my .38 5 shot and no extra ammo. Wish it was easier to conceal one of my .40s and a spare mag down here in the summer.

Large open Hawaiian shirt over sleeveless t-shirt is not hot to wear and conceals anything, if you don't mind looking like a party animal all the time and knowing that many people may suspect you're packing. Just need to watch the wind blowing the shirt up to expose the gun. I've thought of attaching lead fishing weights to the bottom front shirt corners to stop the wind problem but haven't tried it yet.

brownie
07-04-2006, 21:39
pbass:

People get ill from bullets two ways.

Electrically---CNS hits and

Sudden loss of blood pressure from bleeding organs.

One shot stops at 60% from the S+M are what they are, I'll not involve myself in that debate, but your theoretical idea that second rounds have no more effect at getting people to stop is not correct.

I put three rounds into three different organs and three organs are not "leaking" and have the effect of getting the blood pressure to be reduced faster than three hits to one organ [ those perfect little groups people like to shoot for ].

Second and third, fourth, rds [ subsequent rds ]have a cumulative effect on the body. Punch a hole in a garden hose with an ice pick, it leaks [ reduces the pressure ] at a certain rate. Punch a second hole in the hose and the pressure drops twice as fast.

Faster, more rapid loss of blood pressure gets people to stop their agression faster [ the pump has a leak or two in it ].

If their adrenaline has kicked in with fight ot flight before being shot, the systolic pressure can remain artificially elevated for a short period of time, thereby keeping people up longer than would normally ocurr.

More holes/organs leaking? More rapid the loss of pressure and the faster the body reacts to that rapid loss by not working efficiently. The more holes, the less efficient we operate.

These facts are indisputable medically. More holes is better. A 60% ost from their data [ whether the study is valid or not ] increases as more rounds create more leaking.

Keep em coming till the pressure just can not sustain the pump [ the heart ] and the brain shuts down for lack of the pump giving oxygen to it.

Brownie

keith56
07-04-2006, 21:47
If 2 to the body do not work 2 to the head will. Shot placement is the key. Magic bullets and big bores are no substitute.

pbass
07-05-2006, 13:35
Originally posted by brownie
[B]pbass:

People get ill from bullets two ways.

Electrically---CNS hits and

Sudden loss of blood pressure from bleeding organs.

Might work for you, but I'm not smart enough to translate that into the many variations that might be seen in application. There is such an incredible difference between individuals and interplay between body systems in one individual, and so many combinations of circumstances and possible responses to the different kinds of trauma that a person may experience from just one specific round, that all I can do to make sense of it is to play the recorded odds.

Snowman92D
07-06-2006, 08:31
Originally posted by brownie
Keep em coming till the pressure just can not sustain the pump [ the heart ] and the brain shuts down for lack of the pump giving oxygen to it.

...and since that may take quite a while, try to find you some solid cover to get behind.

AIVegas
07-08-2006, 10:08
You can't simply rely upon pain to take down an attacker...there are three ways that bullets will stop an attacker, and they are as follows:
A.)Sever or destroy nerves vital for movement, i.e. shot to the spine or to the head.
B.)Cause enough blood loss to have said attacker pass out (best done by severing major arteries)
C.)Break a bone that's vital for aggressive movement, i.e. shot to the kneecap or shin.
Because of the stressful situation caused by someone attacking you, it's not a good plan to rely on having any of the above happen in one shot. That's why when there's one person attacking you and you draw a firearm, you should fire and continue firing until you are positive that the attacker is neutralized. Larger bullets will often tend to make options B and C happen faster, especially hollowpoints, since they increase the likelihood of severing something major and increase the amount of blood spilled. My point is, don't rely on pointing and pulling the trigger once...if you're to the point that you're in a gunfight, you had better plan on more than one shot per attacker.

pbass
07-09-2006, 15:54
Originally posted by keith56
Shot placement is the key.

Or as Bill Jordan used to say, "Get a bullet into your man." I'm repeating that here 'cause some view shot placement as something like choosing and hitting one of those little dots on an acupuncture chart.

amd4me
08-08-2006, 17:06
Originally posted by another okie
I've been shot twice in hunting accidents. One I didn't even feel, one hurt really, really badly. The one that hurt more was superficial, the one I didn't even feel was not superficial, to say the least.
Jesus , what happened man?

myglockisa23
08-18-2006, 07:54
There may not be a one drop caliber but the fact that the secret service uses the 357 sig to protect #1 should mean something for that caliber....

Aren't there several agencies that have recently dropped the 40 cal for the 357 sig? With the FBI using 10mm in the HK MP-5's... they seem to think bigger is better.

gary newport
08-18-2006, 13:41
Originally posted by myglockisa23
There may not be a one drop caliber but the fact that the secret service uses the 357 sig to protect #1 should mean something for that caliber....

Aren't there several agencies that have recently dropped the 40 cal for the 357 sig? With the FBI using 10mm in the HK MP-5's... they seem to think bigger is better.

10mm makes some sense in a subgun--but the FBI doesn't use it in handguns anymore.

myglockisa23
08-18-2006, 13:57
Correct.. they still use the G22 and some G23 along with certain agents and teams using different guns like the Springfield 45's.

entropy
08-23-2006, 22:06
Originally posted by Bits&Bytes
You know.. food for thought...

David killed Goliath with a single stone and a sling shot.

(not sure what caliber the stone was though...)

B&B

I thought he just knocked Goliath out and had to finish the job with a sword. :)

blinddog
08-26-2006, 22:04
Use the largest caliber you can shoot effectivly,and accuratly, use the heaviest bullet that, is reliable in your chosen firearm, empty it.in the largest part of the body, sounds like the same stuff I have been saying for years

brownie
09-06-2006, 00:29
Might work for you, but I'm not smart enough to translate that into the many variations that might be seen in application.

Perhaps this will be easier for you to comprehend.

"Keep em coming" would mean you are [ hiding behind you bullets ] till he succumbs to them. You know anyone who can continue to take rounds at 3 per second and return fire?

I don't know anyone who returns fire while taking 3-4 per second into their body, no one. That covers about any situation you'll need to remember. Put em in them, and keep it up till they go down.:thumbsup: It's a very simple concept.

Hiding behind your bullets is a technique that works, it also helps to put them into them at the same time. Splits run anywhere from .21-.25, thats 3-4 per second at the minimum.

Or as Bill Jordan used to say, "Get a bullet into your man."

Good advice from one who knew the real world.

Brownie

HILLSIDEBLUE
09-07-2006, 12:48
In 1972 I had to shoot and kill a guy that was attacking me with the bumper jack from a car..........

I shot him once in the chest with an old fashioned, round nose, 158 grain, .38 special........That was what my department issued.....

The fact that I had the training to hit the guy in the right place was the trick to survive the attack.......

I now carry .40 caliber 180 grain loads, but I know that if the shot doesn't hit the right spot, the size of the slug doesn't matter at all..........

Practice, Practice, Practice............

If your grab, point and squeeze becomes second nature to you, you can survive a similar attack..........

It's your responsibility to be the very best shooter you can be.....

MOHAA Player
09-09-2006, 13:21
Originally posted by HILLSIDEBLUE
In 1972 I had to shoot and kill a guy that was attacking me with the bumper jack from a car..........

I shot him once in the chest with an old fashioned, round nose, 158 grain, .38 special........That was what my department issued.....

The fact that I had the training to hit the guy in the right place was the trick to survive the attack.......

I now carry .40 caliber 180 grain loads, but I know that if the shot doesn't hit the right spot, the size of the slug doesn't matter at all..........

Practice, Practice, Practice............

If your grab, point and squeeze becomes second nature to you, you can survive a similar attack..........

It's your responsibility to be the very best shooter you can be..... True but better performing calibers give you a better chance of a faster stop.More exp/pen is always a plus.
MOHAA

10mm4ever
09-09-2006, 16:28
Good posting Mohaa. Go with the most powerful platform you can handle with proficiency. Evan Marshall has shown one documented case where a fellon died instantly from a .44 mag. to the knee! Dont give in to the overpenetration paranoia either. The FBI has only 1 documented case in the last 30 years where a bullet that penetrated through its intended target actually caused harm to another. Also, LEO's miss their intended target 88% of the time, and civilians miss about 1/2 as much, so the fear of overpenetration is a MOOT point. The more damage and trauma you can cause with each shot that you connect with will further increase the potential to end the threat in short order which in turn increases the odds of saving lives. Shouldnt that be the #1 goal??? The .40 has been outstanding and I would expect that same excellent performance, as a minimum from the 10mm with its better loadings.:thumbsup:

10mm4ever
09-09-2006, 16:35
Originally posted by gary newport
10mm makes some sense in a subgun--but the FBI doesn't use it in handguns anymore. Sorry Gary, but that seems like backwards logic to me. In a sub-gun that can dump out 600 rpm's(that's 10 rounds per sec.), I would think that caliber becomes less important. I would think that with a semi-auto, the power level becomes more important, as you are attempting to "turn off the switch" with one round at a time, not a burst.

Tiel Raptor
10-06-2006, 07:27
Originally posted by pbass
Or as Bill Jordan used to say, "Get a bullet into your man." I'm repeating that here 'cause some view shot placement as something like choosing and hitting one of those little dots on an acupuncture chart.

What does the "rule" say..."If you are using proper two handed shooting stance, then you aren't running for cover!"

In a real world shooting, and I've only "studied" these, i haven't seen alot of shooters standing and shooting. They have been backing up, running like hell away, or hunkerd down behind cover (the BEST place in my book).

So, I would want a weapon and caliber combo (with cheese) that I can shoot with one hand quickly and accurately.

Jerry

thejackbull45
10-15-2006, 15:43
Originally posted by GoreLicks
I think you missed the point. Well placed shots, at a rapid pace with a decent caliber seems like your best bet.

Then why do most of my local, my state, the fed use something bigger than the 9?

MOHAA Player
10-15-2006, 20:35
Originally posted by thejackbull45
Then why do most of my local, my state, the fed use something bigger than the 9? Because there are better ballistic options out there then the 9mm that fit into the same size weapon.Less shots to stop a attack is a advantage to me.
MOHAA

Alaskapopo
10-15-2006, 21:14
Originally posted by MOHAA Player
Because there are better ballistic options out there then the 9mm that fit into the same size weapon.Less shots to stop a attack is a advantage to me.
MOHAA

Actually the 9mm still holds a small edge in overall use amoung leo's. There are more agencys using the 40 now but still more cops carring the 9mm. The reason is the big agencys that employ most of the people issue 9mm's. For example NYPD, Chicago PD, Philly PD, LAPD ect.

In real life the 9mm is just as good a stopper as the 40sw.
Pat

nemesis
10-15-2006, 21:22
Originally posted by Alaskapopo
Actually the 9mm still holds a small edge in overall use amoung leo's. There are more agencys using the 40 now but still more cops carring the 9mm. The reason is the big agencys that employ most of the people issue 9mm's. For example NYPD, Chicago PD, Philly PD, LAPD ect.

In real life the 9mm is just as good a stopper as the 40sw.
Pat

Actually, there are other factors that amount to "big agency's" decisions on caliber choice like cost. For those not on a limited budget there are other choices.

In real life, now that's interesting. Could you provide some concrete numbers to back that up. "In real life" never seems to go beyond the reality of certain individual's mind.

thejackbull45
10-16-2006, 07:03
Originally posted by Alaskapopo
Actually the 9mm still holds a small edge in overall use amoung leo's. There are more agencys using the 40 now but still more cops carring the 9mm. The reason is the big agencys that employ most of the people issue 9mm's. For example NYPD, Chicago PD, Philly PD, LAPD ect.

In real life the 9mm is just as good a stopper as the 40sw.
Pat

Listing pds in large liberal cities doesnt help your arrguement IMHO.

thejackbull45
10-16-2006, 07:03
Originally posted by Alaskapopo
Actually the 9mm still holds a small edge in overall use amoung leo's. There are more agencys using the 40 now but still more cops carring the 9mm. The reason is the big agencys that employ most of the people issue 9mm's. For example NYPD, Chicago PD, Philly PD, LAPD ect.

In real life the 9mm is just as good a stopper as the 40sw.
Pat

Listing pds in large liberal cities doesnt help your arrguement IMHO.

Alaskapopo
10-16-2006, 12:09
Originally posted by thejackbull45
Listing pds in large liberal cities doesnt help your arrguement IMHO.

Who cares what the political state of the city is. Its irrelevant to the discussion. The simple fact is more cops still carry 9mm's. Rather they work in a large liberal city or in a right wing wacko small town. I find it amusing when people try to use the world liberal in the same context as evil. You must be a Rush Limbaugh fan.
Pat

nemesis
10-16-2006, 12:18
Originally posted by Alaskapopo
Who cares what the political state of the city is. Its irrelevant to the discussion. The simple fact is more cops still carry 9mm's. Rather they work in a large liberal city or in a right wing wacko small town. I find it amusing when people try to use the world liberal in the same context as evil. You must be a Rush Limbaugh fan.
Pat

Childish attacks aside. Politics can play an integral part of a weapon platform choice. This really is no secret.

thejackbull45
10-16-2006, 12:26
Originally posted by Alaskapopo
Who cares what the political state of the city is. Its irrelevant to the discussion. The simple fact is more cops still carry 9mm's. Rather they work in a large liberal city or in a right wing wacko small town. I find it amusing when people try to use the world liberal in the same context as evil. You must be a Rush Limbaugh fan.
Pat


The fact that these cities are liberal is a fact AND pertenent to the discussion. Lib cities are afraid of guns in the hands of citizens and police.

Its sad how you are ashamed of the liberal lable and have to insult people with views different than yours. Liberal does mean no guns which is why the term was used.

Lastly, DITTO.

Alaskapopo
10-16-2006, 12:36
Originally posted by thejackbull45
The fact that these cities are liberal is a fact AND pertenent to the discussion. Lib cities are afraid of guns in the hands of citizens and police.

Its sad how you are ashamed of the liberal lable and have to insult people with views different than yours. Liberal does mean no guns which is why the term was used.

Lastly, DITTO.

Actually the term liberal has nothing to do with guns. Go take a political science course. The term has been perverted by the right wing consiracy tin foil hat crowd. In the most pure sence under a liberal govt you would have more rights including gun rights. Get out a dictionary and look up the words liberal and conservative.
Pat

thejackbull45
10-16-2006, 12:41
Originally posted by Alaskapopo
Actually the term liberal has nothing to do with guns. Go take a political science course. The term has been perverted by the right wing consiracy tin foil hat crowd. In the most pure sence under a liberal govt you would have more rights including gun rights. Get out a dictionary and look up the words liberal and conservative.
Pat


Ok lets call them the left, does that make you feel better?

So you would agree that the right is more liberal then the left.

blinddog
10-16-2006, 13:05
This argument is really pointless unless you understand the purchasing procedures large agencies go through before issuing a new side arm. Many times "stopping power" is the least considered issue.
What it really boils down to is that NO HANDGUN WILL IMEDIATLY STOP AN ATTACKER unless the CNS is involved. So for a defensive handgun you need the penitration to enter deeply enough to pass nearly through the body to involve the spine. Knocking out hthe pump will still give a determined attacker a few seconds, even as much as a couple minutes to do you harm.
The CNS has got to be cut to get a fast one shot stop period. If the caliber is that important then the .22 rimfire would be the primere round as more peoplr are killed with them than any other, in the US anyway.

ponykilr
10-21-2006, 11:21
although i argue more often than not for a deep penetrating, heavy for caliber bullets.....

i am starting to consider that what is involved in a one shot stop, may be more than this.

although i still believe that a spinal or brain shot is the only instant stop, there MAY be other things that would be able to contribute to a stop(perhaps not even a lethal hit).

i am considering a few things and running tests as time and funds allow. super high speed .357mag and sig(double tap/corbon) may have the ability to stop an attacker quickly (not nessesarily a lethal hit) by the "punch" effect. what i mean is that even given equal penetration, the high velocity and temporary disruption MAY lead to someone stopping their "fight/will to continue" with a less than lethal hit.

somes tests i have completed show the devistating effect on water jugs from high velocity. while i am not sure of the effect on living tissue, i feel i cannot discount it entirely.

a 125gr .357mag sjhp has a terrific effect on the first and second jugs and the core continues into the 3rd jug. a .45acp 230gr has a much less dramatic entry, but will more often than not continue into or exit the fourth jug. these are the two extremes as far as my testing and what i consider for defense.

here is the question in my mind(which i will be answering for myself, i am not looking to argue or preach)
which will cause the best hope of a instant or really fast stop?

in my case, 9mm is my usual choice so because of my preference for heavy/slow projectiles, i use 147gr rangerT. i use fmj in my p3at so i can be sure it goes deep, and in .45 i always opt for 230gr.
i am trying to figure out FOR ME, if i need to consider a round that goes deep, but has high velocity to also have a chance to cause this "punch" effect.

this is all something each of us has to get right for ourselves. i will update when i decide.

HILLSIDEBLUE
10-21-2006, 12:31
A lot of people talk about the "punch" of a bullet when it strikes the bad guy...........

The punch he feels is exactly equal to the recoil you feel when firing the round..........Newton's law says that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.......There's no way around that..........

Shot placement is the only thing important in stopping an attacker......Hit him in the right place and he will drop from shock, blood loss or loss of control, like a shot to the brain stem........

Spend time practicing your shooting......If shooting water bottles is fun that's fine......It makes you learn how to hit a target where you want..........The big splash is fun to watch, but it is more important to know that you can hit the bad guy without loosing your cool and continue to hit him until he falls....That takes training and practice.....

Most of these tests that are run by ammo manufactures are meant to sell ammo to people........In the real world they don't really mean much.......A good quality round that is reliable and accurate is more important than knowing how many water bottles it will go through.....Just my opinion, I mean no disrespect.....

John

ponykilr
10-21-2006, 13:14
i agree with everything you said except...
the "punch" i am refering to is caused by the high velocity of the projectile pushing water and tissue away in a violent manner. this is not equal to what the shooter feels in recoil though the actual energy numbers may be shown/interpreted to be the same.

many times a person is quoted as saying "i didnt even know i had been shot". what i will figure out for MYSELF is if i believe a higher velocity projectile with a more violent disruption of tissue will cause a person to "give up fighting" or decide quicker that "wow that hurts, i need to get out of here"

i am not joining the light/fast crowd but just am doing a little testing to see if the concept has merit. meanwhile, ra9t at just under 1000fps is still my choice.

i am a hard arguer for heavy/slow and have been in some heated discussions here. but i am not closed minded to some exploration.

Ebb27
10-21-2006, 18:11
Originally posted by HILLSIDEBLUE


The punch he feels is exactly equal to the recoil you feel when firing the round..........Newton's law says that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.......There's no way around that..........



Not quite!

The bullet is ripping deep into flesh and creating a severe wound, the grip of your pistol isn't. The pistol is not opening up like a little metal parachute inside of your body like a hollow-point bullet does.

The energy levels may be similiar but the impact is not the same, nor is the reaction to that energy going to be the same.

In the article from Firearms-Tactical titled "The Myth of Energy Transfer", they too try to debunk the idea of energy transfer, but in the article they state that a 357magnum bullet feels roughly equivalent to getting hit with a baseball going 210 mph, and go on to point out that though the BG was shot several times with a 357mag it did not stop him.

Now I've shot .357magnum revolvers many, many times and it never felt like I was being hit in the hand with a baseball going 210 mph.

You're failling to take into account that all the bullet's energy will strike an area of less than half an inch and drive deep into the body destroying tissue and sensitive nerves. The grip of your pistol doesn't "normally" tear through the flesh and nerves of your hand.

The average pistol grip won't penetrate 12" to 18" through tissue the way a bullet will, so how can you possibly compare the impact of a bullet to the impact of a pistol grip???

Now if you stick a long nail or spike on the back of your grip then fire a round that might give you a better idea of how it might feel.

blinddog
10-21-2006, 18:36
This was an old argument when I started shooting:rofl: What it all amounts to is, a projectile on matter if Bullet,an arrow,or a rock or bottle. can it hit hard enough to stop a determend attack? The answer to that is yes. A hard enough hit by any projectile will stop any determined attack, provided it can kill, disable, or other wise incapasitate the attacker. Many Many gunwriters and other wags have come up with theories as to why this happens. Big bullets that penitrate deep and disrupt the CNS smaller lighter bullets that go real fast and administer enough shock to disrupt the CNS. I think it is some of both, but the main factor is the CNS has got to be disrupted meaning the spine has to be severed or the brain has got to be killed eather by injury or loss of blood/oxygen. The mechinisim that causes this is only important as a point of argument.

Learn to shoot fast and accurately, under stress. I can garantee that you will never be attacked by a jug of water, or a block of clay. These mediums are good for testing a bullets reaction/penitration in a jug of water or a block of clay. Knowing this is good since you want your projectile to both penitrate deep enough to disrupt the spinal cord and cause enough shock from blood loss to disable/kill the brain.

Then we come to the whole consept of human Vs. animal we humans think/ reason/imagine animals do not.
Shoot a deer/coyote or any other animal it will run or try to run, it may try to attack you. A human on the other hand, is going to have a reaction sort of like. "Oh! A gunshot" "Wow I have been shot!!!" "BLOOD!!!!!!!!" " OH S***T I am BLEEDING" "I AM GOING TO DIE"
This reaction can lead to what is known as psyhcogenic(sp) shock. Any of you ever seen someone get a shot and pass out? Or pass out at just the sight or smell of blood? Thats it, the mind can with the proper mental stimulation cause the blood to rush out of the head in effect starving the brain causing the person to faint. I have seen that reaction to very minor wounds but on the other hand seen people with major injuries get up and walk around like nothing at all was wrong. That is the part of the mental side of stopping power. The thing is if you get into a lethal confrontation you want the best tools avalible that means the biggest, hardest hitting projectile you can get. Bigger /heavier = deeper penitration and more damage potential.

HILLSIDEBLUE
10-22-2006, 04:38
I got a call one day to the old Meadowbrook Hospital building in East Meadow, Long Island.........
An off duty Registered nurse and her boyfriend were fooling around with a zip gun he had made........
He was loading it with what used to be called "CB Caps", a super short .22 load, smaller than your thumbnail.....
He pointed the zip gun at his girlfriend as a joke, but the gun went off, hitting her in the cheek, just under her eye...
When I got there she had a towel over her eye and I looked at the wound, told her she would be OK and drove her over to the Emergency Department in the police car.........
I really thought they could just pull the little bullet out of her eye socket, maybe in surgery, but I thought she would be OK...
One of the other cops stayed with the boyfriend......

After x-rays were done, the doctor told me that I should take a statement from the girl, who was about 25, and make sure I told her that she was not going to survive the accident..........The bullet was in her brain stem and would kill her in a matter of a couple of hours.....

I told her that I wanted a statement from her and she had to tell the truth about the incident and how she got shot, because the doctor told me she was not going to live and there was no surgery at that time involving the brain stem.......

I took a "Dying Declaration" statement that said her boyfriend had pointed the gun at her on purpose.............

Two hours later, I arrested him for MURDER.......

The CB caps he used were the same loads I used to fire in my basement into a phone book to play with my .22 target pistol.....They were probably the slowest, lightest firearm load there was at the time.........But the bullet, put in the right place, sure killed the nurse in less than three hours.........

Shot placement is pretty important..........

I carry a GLOCK 27 in .40 caliber now.....180 grain, bonded hollow points, but I wouldn't want to get hit with a CB cap either.......

It doesn't have to be a big, expanding round to do a lot of damage........If it hits the right place.........

MOHAA Player
10-22-2006, 07:43
Originally posted by HILLSIDEBLUE
I got a call one day to the old Meadowbrook Hospital building in East Meadow, Long Island.........
An off duty Registered nurse and her boyfriend were fooling around with a zip gun he had made........
He was loading it with what used to be called "CB Caps", a super short .22 load, smaller than your thumbnail.....
He pointed the zip gun at his girlfriend as a joke, but the gun went off, hitting her in the cheek, just under her eye...
When I got there she had a towel over her eye and I looked at the wound, told her she would be OK and drove her over to the Emergency Department in the police car.........
I really thought they could just pull the little bullet out of her eye socket, maybe in surgery, but I thought she would be OK...
One of the other cops stayed with the boyfriend......

After x-rays were done, the doctor told me that I should take a statement from the girl, who was about 25, and make sure I told her that she was not going to survive the accident..........The bullet was in her brain stem and would kill her in a matter of a couple of hours.....

I told her that I wanted a statement from her and she had to tell the truth about the incident and how she got shot, because the doctor told me she was not going to live and there was no surgery at that time involving the brain stem.......

I took a "Dying Declaration" statement that said her boyfriend had pointed the gun at her on purpose.............

Two hours later, I arrested him for MURDER.......

The CB caps he used were the same loads I used to fire in my basement into a phone book to play with my .22 target pistol.....They were probably the slowest, lightest firearm load there was at the time.........But the bullet, put in the right place, sure killed the nurse in less than three hours.........

Shot placement is pretty important..........

I carry a GLOCK 27 in .40 caliber now.....180 grain, bonded hollow points, but I wouldn't want to get hit with a CB cap either.......

It doesn't have to be a big, expanding round to do a lot of damage........If it hits the right place......... I see your point of shot placement,but bigger calibers will still do more damage and stop a attacker with less shots fired and that is a advantage that is worth the extra money to me.
MOHAA

HILLSIDEBLUE
10-22-2006, 10:13
That's true............I carry a .40 cal Model 27 with 180 grain Federal bonded hollowpoints for that reason.........

My next GLOCK will be a Model 20 in 10mm and heavier rounds (The heaviest that does at least 1000fps) for the night table and walks in the Florida woods.........Lots of pigs out there......

Ebb27
10-22-2006, 11:01
Small caliber bullets are suprisingly lethal, often more so than larger rounds. Unfortunately though it often takes awhile before they work their magic.

Bigger handgun calibers aren't necessarily any more lethal, but someone is a lot more likely to notice they've been shot with a .45 than with a .22 or at least worry more about it.

I know we've all been taught that "stopping-power" doesn't exist, but that's all bigger calibers really bring to the table, the same with HPs. Sure a larger caliber with HPs will create a more severe wound but unless that wound is to vital organs it won't be anymore lethal than a small caliber with FMJ. The increased chances of a pyschological reaction to the more severe wound is the principal advantage not increased lethality.

I think a lot of people feel that a gun gives you the power of life and death over someone, thus the more powerful the caliber the greater your power. In reality though you're just going to do someone an injury with a handgun. Possibly lethal but in most cases not.

Still though if I'm going to wound an attacker I prefer to wound them as severely as possible.

blinddog
10-22-2006, 16:51
As I have posted before i have worked many cases involving gunshots. Small calibers accounted for many more dead folks than did the larger calibers. But I have seen many more people who were shot with a small caliber. So proportunantly the larger calibers are more deadly. Case in point 1. Two men get into an argument at a bar one is 6'5" and 300 lbs. The other is 5'9" and about 165. The smaller man is the aggressor in the argument because the larger man just don't want to hurt him, (from his own statement)
The bartender ends up throwing the smaller man out of the bar. Half hour later the larger man decides to go home. As he walks out the door the smaller man fires seven shots at him from twenty feet, with a 380 auto. The larger man chases the little guy away on foot the little guy was much faster. the larger man then goes back in the bar because he hurt his ankle. He walks in ands a woman starts screaming because his shirt is covered in blood. He had been shot seven times once in the left wrist breaking his watch four times in the abdomen and chest once in the right thigh and once in the right ankle. At the ER the bullets to his chest and abdomen were all removed with foreceps from the fatty tissue none went into the actual body cavity, the worst wounds he had were to his ankle and wrist And what really PO'd him was his saicko watch got broken.

Incident 2 man DOA 1 round from a 380 fired at a downward angle next to the left side of his neck, the bullet bisected his heart killing him five minutes later.

The moral here is that yes a small caliber can kill rapidly under ideal conditions but conditions are very seldom ideal.
If you are ever called upon to defend your life or the life of somone else you need to use the largest hardest hitting hammer you can but you need to be able to hit with it.

Carry a 544 Casul or a 480 Ruger they are both very large but if you do not shoot them much due to recoil of ammo cost you are not likely to hit anything with them. Carry a 45 ACp a 40 S&W or even a 9MM if that is what you can shoot accurately. I would Never want to trust anything smaller than the a 40 S&W Myself though, and I prefer a 45.

Sidekick
11-06-2006, 19:36
I knew a man who was shot twice in the chest with a 7MM Remington Magnum. Before he even went down, he drew his 1911 and emptied the magazine toward his assailant who had fired out of a van from across the street.

In my opinion, it's not so much the lack of performance in handgun cartridges as it is the human body's ability to absorb an enormous amount of trauma and still perform for a short time. He died a few minutes later, to be sure, but had his attacker been closer, he might have went with him.

bnlchris18
11-22-2006, 17:23
With a .45 ACP or larger caliber, firing one or more times into the assaulters pelvis will drop him instantly, the large caliber bullet will do one of two things, shatter the pelvis, causing extreme shock and trauma, or pass through the pelvic area into the spine. The assaulter will most definately become incapacitated. My uncle is a Doctor who goes to the same range, and he told me that the body will drop, as the legs cannnot fuction without the support structure of the pelvis. Many of the fireamrs instructors at the range I go to in Titusville Florida teach us to fire twice just bellow the belt line. Also, it takes less time to draw and fire at a lower target point than raising the weapon to fire at the center of mass, which is never a sure thing, or the head, which under stress, would be a very hard shot to pull off.

bnlchris18
11-22-2006, 17:34
One last thing, larger caliber bullets + bigger holes = faster blood loss. With a smaller caliber weapon such as the Glock 17, I think it would be best to fire three or more times into the assaulters sternum. If well trained however, a double tap with a smaller caliber weapon is almost or equal to a larger caliber weapon as two bullet wounds in a very small group should cause the same affect as one larger caliber wound. A pelvis shot with a smaller caliber weapon would be less likely to shatter bones, as to fragment or deflect into another direction after hitting the pelvic bone.