GlockTalk.com
Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.

 
  
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-02-2006, 06:00   #181
PBR Sailor
Senior Member
 
PBR Sailor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: CONUS
Posts: 725
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..........

__________________
Guerre 'A Mort
PBR Sailor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2006, 07:53   #182
pbass
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Virginia
Posts: 209
Quote:
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.

Quote:
How convenient that multiple hits turn out to be of doubtful effectiveness! [/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.
pbass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2006, 13:51   #183
Jake Starr
Senior Member
 
Jake Starr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Louisville, KY
Posts: 4,725
Quote:
David killed Goliath with a single stone and a sling shot.
It wasn't the size of the stone but its placement...
Jake Starr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2006, 14:45   #184
Alaskapopo
NRA ENDOWMENT
 
Alaskapopo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Alaska
Posts: 16,457


Quote:
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
__________________
Colt M16/AR15/ 1911 & Glock Armorer.
Certified Firearms Instructor & Urban Rifle Instructor.
Completed SWAT Entry Team and SWAT Sniper courses.
NRA Endowment Member
USPSA B class
Alaskapopo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2006, 17:55   #185
PBR Sailor
Senior Member
 
PBR Sailor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: CONUS
Posts: 725
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.

__________________
Guerre 'A Mort

Last edited by PBR Sailor; 05-02-2006 at 17:59..
PBR Sailor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2006, 23:10   #186
kashton
EMT-Paramedic
 
kashton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 993
"Walk softly, but carry a BIG STICK!"

hint hint... 12 g Semi-auto shotgun
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
kashton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2006, 01:39   #187
Alaskapopo
NRA ENDOWMENT
 
Alaskapopo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Alaska
Posts: 16,457


Quote:
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
__________________
Colt M16/AR15/ 1911 & Glock Armorer.
Certified Firearms Instructor & Urban Rifle Instructor.
Completed SWAT Entry Team and SWAT Sniper courses.
NRA Endowment Member
USPSA B class
Alaskapopo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2006, 11:38   #188
10mm4ever
10mm Pusher
 
10mm4ever's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: sw,Ohio
Posts: 4,374
Quote:
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?

Last edited by 10mm4ever; 05-11-2006 at 14:46..
10mm4ever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2006, 12:44   #189
pbass
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Virginia
Posts: 209
Quote:
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.
pbass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-15-2006, 18:55   #190
Natty
Senior Member
 
Natty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Maryland/Virginia
Posts: 4,072
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.
Natty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-15-2006, 19:59   #191
PBR Sailor
Senior Member
 
PBR Sailor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: CONUS
Posts: 725
Quote:
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.

__________________
Guerre 'A Mort
PBR Sailor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-15-2006, 20:25   #192
Ebb27
Senior Member
 
Ebb27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: East of the mountains
Posts: 2,837
Quote:
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!

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.
__________________
A Glock in the hand,
is worth two in the safe.

Last edited by Ebb27; 05-15-2006 at 20:28..
Ebb27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2006, 05:23   #193
pbass
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Virginia
Posts: 209
Quote:
Originally posted by PBR Sailor
How about a stop to a 100 lb man under the influence of PCP?
2-ton minivan @ 88 FPS.
pbass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2006, 19:58   #194
Alaskapopo
NRA ENDOWMENT
 
Alaskapopo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Alaska
Posts: 16,457


Quote:
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
__________________
Colt M16/AR15/ 1911 & Glock Armorer.
Certified Firearms Instructor & Urban Rifle Instructor.
Completed SWAT Entry Team and SWAT Sniper courses.
NRA Endowment Member
USPSA B class
Alaskapopo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-2006, 17:37   #195
pbass
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Virginia
Posts: 209
Quote:
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.
pbass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-2006, 17:45   #196
Alaskapopo
NRA ENDOWMENT
 
Alaskapopo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Alaska
Posts: 16,457


Quote:
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
__________________
Colt M16/AR15/ 1911 & Glock Armorer.
Certified Firearms Instructor & Urban Rifle Instructor.
Completed SWAT Entry Team and SWAT Sniper courses.
NRA Endowment Member
USPSA B class
Alaskapopo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-22-2006, 14:01   #197
gary newport
Senior Member
 
gary newport's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: People's Republic of California
Posts: 12,273
Quote:
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
__________________
A forum with WalterGa is a more informative, funnier, and more interesting place.

G17, G17RTF2, G19, G21, G21SF (2), G26, G30, G30SF, G34 (2), G37 (2), G38, G39
gary newport is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-06-2006, 15:38   #198
Bravo-Four
11B3PB4
 
Bravo-Four's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Henderson
Posts: 329
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

Caliber Corner
__________________
G20 10mm
Bravo-Four is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2006, 04:54   #199
pbass
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Virginia
Posts: 209
Quote:
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.
pbass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2006, 08:14   #200
10mm4ever
10mm Pusher
 
10mm4ever's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: sw,Ohio
Posts: 4,374
Dont you see, Pat got "educated"! Evidently, he has resources unavailable to us "un-educated" folk.
10mm4ever is offline   Reply With Quote

 
  
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:12.




Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 1,183
306 Members
877 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,244
Nov 11, 2013 at 16:42