[Just One Shot]

Here's an interesting read about handgun calibers and the affect on BG.

It's a long read but interesting none the less.

It confirms what many members say about the larger the better.

http://www.mouseguns.com/deadmeat.htm

[zammyman]

A friend of mine is a rangemaster and an RN, he clings to 45ACP. Working in the ER he saw more single shot deaths from 45 than othe calibers.

[SaxonPig]

Yeah, yeah. yeah.

Bigger is better.

The 45 is king.

Yadda, yadda, yadda.

How many decades has this discussion been going on? Anything resolved?

If you feel uncomfortable with less than a 45 then by all means carry one. I have very limited experience in gunfighting but the one time I did shoot a man I hit him 3 times in the chest with a 45 and guess what? He ran away! Took a 4th slug in the kidney to bring him down after he had sprinted about 40 yards.

Go on, tell me all about what a great man-stopper the 45 ACP is. I'm listening.

IMO there is no real difference in the performance of calibers generally used for self defense. There are plenty of success and failure stories to go around on all of them. I heard of a cop who fell and died from forearm wound with a 22. A 400 pound body builder/biker gang enforcer took one round of 9mm ball to the torso and was dead before he hit the floor. A soldier in Vietnam walked 2 miles to find medical attention after taking a 23mm round through the belly. All of these are true stories.

There is no guarantee with any gun. Carry what makes you feel good.

[Jim Watson]

IMO there is no real difference in the performance of calibers generally used for self defense. There are plenty of success and failure stories to go around on all of them. I heard of a cop who fell and died from forearm wound with a 22. A 400 pound body builder/biker gang enforcer took one round of 9mm ball to the torso and was dead before he hit the floor. A soldier in Vietnam walked 2 miles to find medical attention after taking a 23mm round through the belly. All of these are true stories.

And they are passed on as good stories because they are unusual. Man bites dog. Big bullet wounds, little bullet kills. Possible, not common.

The race goes not always to the swift nor the battle to the strong. But that is the smart way to bet.

[Boba Fett]

And they are passed on as good stories because they are unusual. Man bites dog. Big bullet wounds, little bullet kills. Possible, not common.

I'm not going to put a vote in for any caliber here because I believe most standard calibers have their place, but what I have learned about firearms and ammo and data is this:

You need to find unbiased data. People who support a particular caliber will not typically try to find data that is against them. For example, I like the 9mm. I used to think it was the perfect round for CCW. I started looking into it with an open mind and started hearing from soldiers and cops that it has some issues with going all the way through bad guys and hitting innocents. Does that mean you shouldn't carry 9mm? Nope, it just means that is pertinent data to consider.

You also need to find real world data. You can look at all the fake test gel reports in the world, but those are setup for perfect results. Look at the data from police reports, emergency room and hospital reports, and battlefield data for real world data.

Then, look for the consistent and common data. Sure, there are some rare people who've survived being shot by cannon balls and people who've died from being shot by a rubber band, but does that mean I should be packing rubber bands or a cannon*?? Find the data that has the most sources to back it up, not the fewest just to prove your point.


*The author of this post would like to point out that he is being sarcastic and has no knowledge of people dying from rubber bands or surviving cannon ball hits...except for that guy who was promoting some band all those years ago :p

[Beagle-zebub]

Mmmm, the medical examiner from Atlanta? His statements have been discussed before, and they were found to be rich in red flags.

[CWL]

Working in the ER he saw more single shot deaths from 45 than othe calibers.

Caliber of bullet wounds is not determined in the ER, certainly not by a nurse. You certainly can't tell by looking at the entry or exit wounds.

My mother is a (retired) surgical pathologist. She says that they have to weigh the recovered bullet(s) fragments during the autopsy to try and determine the caliber. Oftentimes, it still cannot be determined.

[James T Thomas]

While I agree with your assessment of better larger calibers, please remember that all the examples you find lying around in a morgue have been "stopped."

The circumstances of that "stopping" may not be known, and may not be inferred from the wounds.

[JR47]

As an EMT/P with a Fire/EMS department for 35 years, I can tell you about a number of people who WEREN'T stopped by self-defense calibers.

No pistol round will ever be a 100% effective means of instantly stopping a human being. People with five torso hits, with three COM have had to be restrained on the way to the hospital. The rounds? 124 gr. +P+ 9mm P.

I've also seen a man nearly succumb to a single hit in the thigh, delivered from 15 yards away as he tried to run. The caliber? .380 ACP (in nicked the femoral artery)

Then, we also saw the results of an instant one-shot stop on a 6-02, 200+ pound male wife beater, delivered by his diminutive Phillipino wife. What caliber? a .22 lr, from the 2" barrel of an old RG revolver.

I saw a violent and mentally deranged man attack a Police Officer, and die from a single, well placed .40 S&W round, too.

Then, there was the 6-04, 300 pounder who was on cranck. He decided to trash a jewelry store in a local mall. It took five officers to control him, and six EMTs to transport this whacko to the hospital. 30 seconds after he arrived, and was placed in a confinement area, unfettered, he collapsed, and died. His heart had given up from the continuous activity.

Any of these incidents could be used to prove, or disprove, the efficacy of a bullet size, or even of the lethality of leaving someone alone.

The difference between what we want accomplished in a self-defense scenario, and killing something, is that the self-defense scenario wants instant incapacitation, period. Dying doesn't matter.

[mljdeckard]

With bullets, ANYTHING is possible. I watched a .22 hit a friend of mine below the ribs in front, exit near his spine in the back. It turned out that it had skimmed around the outside of the skin.

What I prefer to work with is much higher degrees of likelihood. The odds are against you when you are fighting for your life, good training and good equipment are the only things that will keep you alive. (Some luck is nice, but I'm not counting on it.) This means I am using the most effective equipment I can. Convenience and comfort are very distant other considerations.

[DawgFvr]

When I think of self-defense...I, personally, am thinking of what I can do to stop/deter the confrontation...not necessarily kill.

If a firearm must be used...accurate bullet placement, no matter what the caliber, would be my concentration.

In the last few media reported mass-killings by beserkers, the 9mm has been lethal...eh?

[James T Thomas]

"Dawg:"

Your first statement is that you would not want to kill, but to stop / deter the confrontation.

Your second statement is about the efficiency of "accurate bullet placement."

Keeping both your intentions in mind, there is not organ or human anatomy target that I am aware of that will accomplish both. Accurate bullet placement usually means a vital; shut down organ such as the heart, brain, etc.
There may be an argument made for the target of the family jewells for deterrence, if they are threatened however.
All the others may or may not provide stop / deter at all.

I suppose you are implying that you do not wish those who would be shot with accurate bullet placement would die, but if you are accurate in that fire, then the outcome may not be according to the first statement.
Just so you realise that.

The 9mm was "lethal;" that is, those seriously wounded enough, or that did not receive prompt medical attention did expire in those media reported mass killings.
Lethal may not mean stop or deter.

Most people, in particular the military, who had experience with the 9mm, found it to be lethal, but most of them, following their exposure decided that they would choose a larger caliber; even if the gain in lethality was only minimaly more. They wanted all that they could get going for them.

[franconialocal]

"Shoot to stop the threat" = very p/c

"Shoot to kill" = reality

[MostlyHarmless]

Everything the self-defense shooter needs to know about ballistics:

1) Only rifle and shotgun loads are really sufficient. Handgun loads are always a compromise.
2) There has been no study that has shown a significant overall difference in stopping power between .40, .45, and .357.
3) Anything .380 or smaller and, realistically, you're going to have to place multiple shots COM.
4) .25 ACP is a fool's caliber.

That said, I found the linked article an interesting read.

[Bubba613]

4) .25 ACP is a fool's caliber.

I must know a lot of fools then because I can immediately think of two cases where a .25 was fatal.
That said, I think once you reach a certain threshold, .38spc and 9mm, then it becomes irrelevant. So many things go into shot effectiveness that differences in bullet speed, width, weight, and style get diluted.
Bottom line: shot placement is king.

[DawgFvr]

JTT: I have many tools at my disposal aside from a side arm. I think you mis-understood my post. First...I can and do attempt to stop/defer a confrontation before I even draw a weapon. If, and when, I have no resort but to draw a weapon...that is the time when I believe accurately placed shots rather than caliber make all the difference in each given situation.

Most people, in particular the military, who had experience with the 9mm, found it to be lethal, but most of them, following their exposure decided that they would choose a larger caliber; even if the gain in lethality was only minimaly more. They wanted all that they could get going for them.

As an ex soldier, you, of all people sould know that side arms were/are not even an issue. I spent 22 years in the Army, 11B Infantry, and I never wanted a larger caliber than the 9mm nor have I ever heard a fellow soldier even broach the subject. Combat Arms soldiers carry rifles...side arms were not even issued to grunts...pretty much last resort and worthless. Officers and REMFs were issued side arms.

[C-grunt]

Ive seen the Iraqi Police kill more than a couple bad guys with 9mm FMJ. Some dropped DRT, some ran a little.

[James T Thomas]

"Dawg:"

I misunderstood your post. Sorry; I read, what seem to me, as two different and opposing lines of thought from the first two statements.

An aside: You must be living close to the border... eh?

I was given the option of an M-16 or the 1911. I chose the M-16, and with hindsight, I "chose well." I was only field grade at the time, and though I was in a supervisory role, time after time, things were whittled down to me and only a few horse soldiers, and the rifle was comforting. I would have taken an M-14 as my first choice.

I had seen the 1911 used very effectively against an NVA officer and Sgt.; by a machine gunner who discovered them observing from the deep grass one morning. The pistol quelled both of them before they could get their weapons going. They had layed them beside themselves in the grass.
It was a "quick draw" from the flap holster!

Perhaps a different war and different times.

My comment about experience with the 9mm comes third hand. The preference of our troops in the Phillipines, etc. 38 is approximately 9mm, and
also police reports of failure to stop with that round.
Please don't start about failures from other rounds! I'm aware of them too.
I stand by my statement that men who have lived through using the 9mm or 38 and did not drop the aggressor would live to almost always get something bigger. No matter if it only gave them a moderate increase in shutting that enemy down. When you are face to face with the prospect of dying, you will be glad for any modest increase you may have to survive.
I can accurately place a 45 just as well as a 9mm, so I chose the bigger one for defense of my life.

C-Grunt writes that " some ran a little."
Was this an execution or summary shooting rather than pitched battle?
It would be interesting to see if there would be any decrease in the numbers of those running around for awhile if 1911's were issued. I don't like them running around even for a little while.
It makes me anxious, especially when they are armed and determined.
The "running dead." No "Zombie" mention please.

[Jason M]

These threads are tiring.

[Koos Custodiet]

Guys, I thought that we'd determined by now that the best caliber is the biggest one you have with you when the crunch hits.

If that's a .25, it's a lot more effective than the .45 in the safe at home.

And if you carry a .45, you'd better carry it all the time, 'cos people are so going to point and laugh if something happens when you don't have it with you, and they're gonna tell you you shoulda carried a .25 :-))))

[orionengnr]

Oh, please, not this again.

This post has surfaced on the S&W forum, been discredited, re-surfaced somewhere else, been discredited, on and on and on. I'm not going to re-read it again, but the first time I read it, what jumped out at me was the math. The guy claims to have been part of X-million autopsies over Y-years. Worked out (IIRC) to 8+ autopsies per day, 7 days a week, 365 days per year for the length of his work experience in whatever county, GA. Turns out that no county in GA has 8+ handgun-related deaths per day, or even close. And how many people work 7 days per week, 365 days per year, year in and year out?

This thing has more lives than a cat, and has about as much value as the contents of the cat's litter box. :rolleyes:

This is the ultimate validation of the search function--it could prevent this trash from being resurrected and recycled yet again.

[C-grunt]

James T Thomas:
C-Grunt writes that " some ran a little."
Was this an execution or summary shooting rather than pitched battle?
It would be interesting to see if there would be any decrease in the numbers of those running around for awhile if 1911's were issued. I don't like them running around even for a little while.
It makes me anxious, especially when they are armed and determined.
The "running dead." No "Zombie" mention please.

No these were little "firefights" the Iraqi police would get in every so often. We had a station we would man with about 1/2 a platoon at the Iraqi police station as the liason between them and our FOB.

Many times it was dumb*** insurgents who would try to plant IEDs right outside the gate in broad daylight or run up with guns. A few times some guy would walk up to the gates, start yelling and then get shot. No ideas what those ones were about.

[JR47]

If the "threads are tiring", don't read them. Just move on, we all do everywhere else. If everyone just HAD to post every time that they saw a thread they didn't want to read, this place would have the band-width of CBS.

orionengnr, instead of posting a scathing indictment, sans proof, how about a link to the "exposed" threads in these other forums? I do believe you, but there's SO MUCH BS masquerading as "fact" on the Errornet, it's good to be able to see links to the "de-bunking."

The actual quote was: I see an average of 8.2 autopsies per day/365 days per year, and I can tell you that when the chips are down, there's nothing that beats a 12-gauge. As for handguns, the name of the game is not only shot placement but how a properly-placed bullet acts once it gets there. I've seen folks killed by a bb to the eye and others survive after being hit by several well-placed rounds with a 9mm.

The poster does not indicate in this that he sees 8.5 autopsies of firearms related deaths, anywhere. The morgue in Atlanta will post more than 8.5 autopsies a day, from all causes. So will the morgues of most large cities. The morgue will gather the bullets, and determine, if possible, the caliber involved. If too badly fragmented, it goes to the forensics people for determination. In some places, the type of gun found will be in the initial reports with the corpse.

Having said that, I have to agree that, either this guy is seventy-plus years old, or there's something quite unusual in his levels of experience. He's worked as an ME, a cop, and that in several cities. To have actually gained that much experience in that many places, he'd need a working life of multiple decades, all in LEO/ME status. That ain't no spring chicken.

I spent 35 years in Fire-EMS, in the same department in Maryland. Prince George's County. It's been a violent place since the 1960's, but only in selected areas. I've witnessed multiple autopsies, some for classes, and some for CE's, but nowhere near that many resulting from shooting. I'm 61, so this guy must be a goodly bit older. The ME's Office, in Baltimore, autopsied in excess of 14 people per day in the 1990's, of all causes. That required multiple MEs. I've been called to shooting scenes just a little over two hundred times in 35 years. Some were suicides, with varying success. Some were genuine accidental shooting, most of whom walked to the ambulance, embarrassed to heck. Some were the result of criminal activity, and those results varied the most of all. All I can gather from my experience is that you really can't count on any bullet producing instant incapacitation, not even a 12 ga., or a high-power rifle.

For me, shot placement, repeated until the threat ceases to make aggressive moves is much better than caliber. A .25 ACP shot to the gut, causing the felon to run away, is a 100% one-shot stop. Five 9mm +P+ shots to the torso, with three COM, that leaves the person shot still physically resisting ten minutes later, is a 0% one-shot stop. In many cases, it's the initiator of the hostilities who will determine the percentage of success. At the point that he/she decides enough is enough, you have that stop.

I carry the largest caliber weapon that I feel will be concealable. I will not run out and buy the latest, greatest Internet Commando recommended death-ray blaster of the week. My income is now fixed, and buying another gun because it's somebody's opinion of the ONLY gun isn't happening. :D

[James T Thomas]

"C-Grunt"

Thanks for the additional information. I have no idea how the warfare in Iraq goes, but do have a feel for that in Afghanistan, with the exception of less heavy vegetation.

There is apparently a great stupidity factor in the recruitment of so many of the "insurgents." I saw some of that with the VC, but the NVA, though they had that too, were tough fighters.

My gratitude to you for your service, and polish up that CIB.


Yes... this again!

[arizonaguide]

I've never shot a human, and I hope never have to! But, from my hunting experiences/physics classes I've developed a theory:


My Theory:

Highest Weight Bullet (in grains) x Highest Volocity (at 10yds) x Largest Diameter (Cross sectional area) = stopping power factor(transfer energy/damage)

Support for theory:
Slow moving Freight train = 10000000lb x 10fps x 100in = serious energy transfer (will knock you down)
Fast moving ice pick = .1lb x 10000fps x .1 = serious penetration. (you may not even know you've been hit till you bleed!)

Examples:
200grains x 1000fps x .45 = 90K AZG "stopping factor".
55grains x 2000fps x .22 = 24.2K
180gr x 1300fps x .40 = 93K

Addendums to theory:
1. There's 2 human targets that will "stop" an agressor's locomotion (pretty much in his tracks) and drop him to the ground and that's the pelvis and the head shot.
2. Expanding bullets increase the Diameter (cross section) multiplier accordingly.

Conclusion:
Two in the nads, one in the head...with a .40 or better!!!

Qualified Exceptions: May substitute .40+caliber for .357mag/.357sig.
12ga @point blank 00/slugs = stopping power.
(unfortunately, only good at home as tough to conceal/carry).


:evil:

[pps]

I was following that thread when it was going on in the Smith and Wesson forum a couple of years ago. The guy claimed a number of autopsies that would have equated to 7 or 8 per day? Maybe not all GSW victims, but still a pretty tall claim.

I'll continue ccwing my 38+p/.357mag thank you. There is a S&W forum member who's sig line sums things up rather succinctly for handgun self defense, along the lines of placement and penetration being most important...:)

[arizonaguide]

Placement and penetration are great!

But where, and with what?
Icepick or sledgehammer?

Center of Mass?, Headshot? Pelvic girdle?

I'm not sold on center of mass for a quick stop, except it's the easiest under stress, I guess.

One things for sure, Autopsies don't necessarily reflect an "instant" stop.
One other things for sure, if I'm shooting 12ga. down my hallway at night at an intruder, I'm aiming first shot LOWER rather than HIGHER!

[pps]

Well, I've never heard anyone refer to a 38 as a sledghammer, so my answer for my SD situation has been predetermined by what I'm able to conceal comfortably in our summers here in Commifornia. From Az, you know what hot weather is.

As far as where, it's wherever the first shot lands. If action goes down fast and I, God forbid, have to draw from concealment then my wherever it lands is not a facetious answer.

The pelvis might get hit as I squeeze off the first shot and move the muzzle towards aiming at center of mass (where sternum and nipple line intersect) if it's frontal. If my target is worth one shot, he's worth a whole cylinder to be sure. If my "aim" is true, he'll be stitched from ********* to appetite.

The only time I've had to shoot that startled was a few years back while boar hunting and a pig came out of the bushes and we were both startled. I landed 3 of 4 shots before I even had time to THINK about where to shoot. 2 were lung shots and the first was planted in the dirt in front of the boar and the last was a head shot while he was writhing around in the dirt in front of me squealing. I was trembling so bad I don't think I could have reloaded if I had to.

So as much as I'd like to tell you where I'd shoot I can't think that far ahead on something that would probably be reaction.

[arizonaguide]

Well put pps! I'm torn right now between a .357 revolver and a .40SW. (for carry)
And I go back and forth with my logic depending upon the day....:banghead:
"Stupid handgun variables!" (said in my best Homer Simpson voice)

ps: I think that pig story is the best example of reality I've heard on the subject. Point and shoot, under stress. Hmmmm.
(plus I heard that chicks think old school revolvers are HOT!):evil:
But then again, I'm 47...(lol)..looks and eyesight both damn near gone, Damn.
Stupid handgun variables.

[pps]

My dad, now almost 70 years old and a little arthritic changed from a .357 (used 38+p Chicago loads) to the G23 in .40S&W for the increased ammo capacity, and the .40, according to him, is easier on his now arthritic hands than the Service 6 he's shot for oh so many years. He likes the tac light I got him for his birthday.

Now I get to give him crap about having all the tacticool bling. Even offered to put a set of night sights on the side of the barrel so he can shoot "gangsta" style. lol we give each other a lot of crap...all in good fun.

[arizonaguide]

Thanks for that PPS!
I give my Dad crap too about similar stuff.
We both swing a hammer occasionally, and so it's usually in the garage.

But, I'll never live down trading his .300 Weatherby (he gave me) for a freakin ("cool")M1Garand though!
(*** was I thinking!) Worse: now I have neither!!!

I was young and stupid.

I'm currently in the market for a .300 though, just to give back to him, (as he's 81.) :)

[kgpcr]

bigger hole= more damage to organs, more bleeding= dead faster

[Double Naught Spy]

dubious at best
While I agree with your assessment of better larger calibers, please remember that all the examples you find lying around in a morgue have been "stopped."

The circumstances of that "stopping" may not be known, and may not be inferred from the wounds.

Right, being in the morgue just means the people died, ostensibly from the wounds. There is no indication of the stop. So the person died. Did that person die before or after killing or wounding his victim after suffering the fatal wound?

Morgue data is inherently biased. It doesn't tell you how many were killed out of a total sample size. In other words, how many were involved and how many survived. It is just part of the picture. It especially does not tell you about the thread title, 'stopping power.'

bigger hole= more damage to organs, more bleeding= dead faster
Boy, this is so NOT NECESSARILY TRUE, especially for self defense. A big hole in the hand is better than a small hole, but certainly may not lead to being dead faster or even producing a stop.

[RyanM]

Morgue data is inherently biased. It doesn't tell you how many were killed out of a total sample size. In other words, how many were involved and how many survived. It is just part of the picture. It especially does not tell you about the thread title, 'stopping power.'

Especially when you consider that with modern medical care, barring an absolutely perfect shot that destroys a good bit of the brain or upper spine, or that perfectly holes a major artery without it sealing up, whether or not someone survives depends almost entirely on how fast they get to the hospital. Get to the hospital within 5 minutes and you'll probably survive, whether it was a .22 or a .44 magnum. Run to another gangbanger's house, hide for 4 hours, and do a half-dozen lines of coke, before finally deciding you feel bad enough to go to the hospital, and your odds aren't good no matter what you were shot with.

There are really three main factors to consider for actual "real life" stopping power. How big a hole each shot makes, how many times you can make holes, and how controllable the gun is (which is the main factor for shot placement). No one factor is vastly more important than the others. People get really hung up on the concept of a "one shot stop."

I wish MacPherson's book were cheaper, and easier for a layman to do the math, because it does help a lot for determining the real difference in wounding effect (given identical placement) between calibers.

For instance (though I'm adding a few equations of my own into the mix, to get ostensibly more accurate results):

9mm 124 gr +P, 1180 fps
33.3 grams tissue destroyed on a frontal torso shot
0.650 sg-ft/sec recoil impulse
18 shots in a full size Glock

.40 S&W 165 gr, 1100 fps
44.2 grams tissue destroyed on a frontal torso shot
0.806 sg-ft/sec recoil impulse
16 shots in a full size Glock

.45 ACP 230 gr, 850 fps
48.7 grams tissue destroyed on a frontal torso shot
0.868 sg-ft/sec recoil impulse
11 shots in a full size Glock (for the .45 GAP, which uses the 9mm width frame, instead of the much wider 10mm frame)

So, what one is better? The answer as, as with almost all things in life, it depends.

.40 gives you 33% more wounding ability than 9mm, shot for shot, but 11% fewer shots, and 24% more recoil
.45 gives you 46% more wounding ability than 9mm, but 39% fewer shots, and 34% more recoil.

Sure, the 9mm does the least per shot of those three, but what would be more deadly, a single .45, or a double-tap of 9mm placed 1/2" apart, in the same area? That's 66.6 grams vs. 48.7, and the 9mm almost packs enough ammo to shoot twice for every round of .45. Plus that difference in recoil is bound to count for something, for most people.

Stopping power does not come down to any one single factor. You have to choose the caliber that's best for you. The best compromise between power, controllability, capacity, and size, that works for you. There is no simple "best, period."

Me, I like .40. It's a lot closer to .45 terminal performance than it is to 9mm, and is a lot closer to 9mm capacity than it is to .45. It may be a "compromise" round, but manages to come pretty darn close to packing the best qualities of 9mm and .45 into a single round. You just end up with nasty recoil.

[MP3Mogul]

Yeah, yeah. yeah.

Bigger is better.

The 45 is king.

Yadda, yadda, yadda.

How many decades has this discussion been going on? Anything resolved?

If you feel uncomfortable with less than a 45 then by all means carry one. I have very limited experience in gunfighting but the one time I did shoot a man I hit him 3 times in the chest with a 45 and guess what? He ran away! Took a 4th slug in the kidney to bring him down after he had sprinted about 40 yards.

Go on, tell me all about what a great man-stopper the 45 ACP is. I'm listening.

IMO there is no real difference in the performance of calibers generally used for self defense. There are plenty of success and failure stories to go around on all of them. I heard of a cop who fell and died from forearm wound with a 22. A 400 pound body builder/biker gang enforcer took one round of 9mm ball to the torso and was dead before he hit the floor. A soldier in Vietnam walked 2 miles to find medical attention after taking a 23mm round through the belly. All of these are true stories.

There is no guarantee with any gun. Carry what makes you feel good.


Definately all these are true. Carry what you are "comfortable" with. I have been involved in two self defense shootings. Once with a 9mm, once with a .40 caliber. The gun's caliber really had no bearing on the shootings.

[arizonaguide]

Ryan, awsome post! Great work.

My question: In McPhearson's book the .45 ended causeing MORE tissue damage (one shot) than the .40?

[kgpcr]

Quote:
bigger hole= more damage to organs, more bleeding= dead faster

Boy, this is so NOT NECESSARILY TRUE, especially for self defense. A big hole in the hand is better than a small hole, but certainly may not lead to being dead faster or even producing a stop.

But all else being equal it is true. I never said it would drop them in their tracks i said big holes tend to drop people faster. Yes there are exceptions to every rule but that does not negate the rule.

[pps]

Nice numbers Ryan. For those of us here in the Peoples Republik of Kalifornia, magazine capacity is only wishful thinking. 10 rounds max unless you have a pre-ban magazine.

You left off 10mm. A G20 with 15 rounds of Double Taps in the 155gr Gold Dots at 1475fps, 748 ft-lb of KE, and p=1.01 slug-ft/sec would give me a warm fuzzy feeling. With the right loading, I'd even consider it as one of the few semi-auto handguns I'd use as a sidearm for boar hunting.

Double tap makes a hot .357 too (158gr Gold Dot that chronographs 1492 out of my 5" model 627 and actually makes good use out of the muzzle brake)

[RyanM]

My question: In McPhearson's book the .45 ended causeing MORE tissue damage (one shot) than the .40?

The book doesn't have very much actual data at all, but it does have a lot of physics-based equations to predict wounding effects.

According to his equations alone, actually... let me check.

.40 crushes a total of 48.60 grams of tissue in 13" penetration, while .45 crushes 59.44 grams.

However, the main weakeness of MacPherson's method is it only takes the direct crush mechanism into effect. I've done some lines of best fit regression for temporary cavity size, some very basic math on strain and compression strength of living tisuse, etc., and adapted some of Peters's equations, to take temporary cavitation into account; both formation of the cavity in the first place, which can actually crush extra tissue, and blunt trauma effect when the cavity reaches maximum size. Then I compared 'em to real life data from deer hunters and people that do butchering every year. A pretty inexact comparison, but my equations did hold up pretty well for basic comparisons, like rifle vs. muzzleloader, or pistol vs. shotgun slug.

I also did some lines of best fit to determine the "extra" penetration of an expanding bullet (compared to one which simply impacts in an already-expanded state); MacPherson's approach was to simply add 2", but that is only accurate on bullets with a sectional density similar to .45-230gr, 9mm-147gr, etc., at 800-1000 fps. Mine closely matches about 80%-90% of gelatin data I've found, for all kinds of crazy sectional densities and velocities, which isn't too bad.

I also adapted Hudgins' equations on how skin tends to resist penetration a lot more than soft tissues, and managed to come up with what I think is an acceptable model of how skin will reduce the velocity of a bullet passing through it (Hudgins' equations only determined what velocity would punch through skin 50% of the time). One interesting thing I found is that actually, for a given total penetration in gelatin, light and fast bullets actually will defeat an intervening limb better than a heavy-and-slow one. Though that's generally because the light ones have to expand smaller to still penetrate as deep; for the same expanded diameter, the heavy and slow ones take the lead again, penetrating more in nearly all cases.

Finally, I did some geometric modeling equations, which represent the wound track more realistically, expanding as the bullet expands, then slowly shrinking down as it loses velocity further in. MacPherson's approach was simply to model the wound as a cylinder, and chop off the end to estimate tissue damage if the bullet exits, or is retained by the skin. A bullet does the greater part of its damage in the first 1/3rd to 1/2 of the total penetration, so modeling only the first 9"-10", like a front-to-back torso shot, can give a better idea of relative performance under likely circumstances.

I'm not trying to cast MacPherson in a bad light or anything, of course. His equations are just fine if you're using a pocket calculator and a piece of paper to try and figure out tissue damage. My equation set is completely unmanageable without using a computer and a ridiculously long spreadsheet (about 40 kb worth of code).

But anyway, MacPherson's direct crush models predict that, for instance, .357 magnum is only marginally more effective than .38 SPL, which actually is not borne out in real life, if you, for instance, shoot a few deer or coyotes or something with each caliber, then open 'em up. They also cannot be used to model rifle rounds at all, really, for the same reason.

End result of throwing my own crap in as well, is that in my opinion, anyway, the results tend to match real life hole sizes a bit better, for calibers which have a muzzle energy greater than ~350 ft-lbs (with a penetration of 15" or less). Seems like that's about the threshold at which temporary cavity starts to contribute to wounding (though 500-800 ft-lbs or so in 15" is required to get a particularly noticable increase), and that's what evens the gap between .40 and .45.

---------------

But all else being equal it is true. I never said it would drop them in their tracks i said big holes tend to drop people faster. Yes there are exceptions to every rule but that does not negate the rule.

Well, problem is, all else will not always be equal. What if a given person can shoot a 9mm much more quickly than they can a .45? Would 3 shots of 9mm be more effective than 2 shots of .45 in the same place?

Most people aren't so strong that they can shoot a .45, or a 10mm, or a .357 magnum, just as quickly and accurately as they can a 9mm. Shot-for-shot performance is only part of the equation.

Likewise, people like to yell "shot placement only!" when these threads come up, and someone else will say "gee, I guess I should just carry a .22 if it's all shot placement." Sort of a goofy response, but that is somewhat true. If shot placement were the only concern, we would all be better off with super high-cap .22s, like the old Grendel pistol or whatever.

Shot placement is the #1 factor of stopping power, of course, but that's irrelevant to a caliber war. The only thing that can be quantified when you're comparing calibers is how controllable they are, and thus how likely someone is to get good placement, for a given amount of upper body strength and training. And everyone is different in those respects. Maybe one guy actually can shoot a .500 S&W magnum just as quickly and accurately as he can a .22. Maybe someone else just cannot shoot anything bigger than a .25 without getting knocked flat on their butt by the recoil.

Everything's a compromise. If you increase power per shot, you're also going to also decrease capacity, or controllability, or increase the size of the gun. And every individual most likely has a different "ideal" compromise for them.

[JR47]

RyanM, have you, or anyone else, tried to accommodate blood pressure spikes as part of your model? Or neural shock caused by the upset of major ganglia due to physical damage?

Fackler couldn't reliably measure it with the equipment of the day, so he virtually ignored it as a function of wounding. However, there are some new means of measuring such variables.

A punch to the solar plexis produces results far out of proportion to the force applied, for example. :)

[arizonaguide]

Good points JR47. There are considerations for the "traumatic shockwave" and "temporary wound cavity" also, that don't always show up in an autopsy, but are definate considerations in shock/awe stopping power...that lead me to believe the sledghammer is better than the ice pick (for "Immediate" stopping power).

[MikePGS]

Isn't this the guy who autopsies more people than there are deaths?

[arizonaguide]

If you're talking about ME, no Im a guide.
My Theory:

Highest Weight Bullet (in grains) x Highest Volocity (at 10yds) x Largest Diameter (Cross sectional area) = stopping power factor(transfer energy/damage)

I believe in the sledgehammer over the icepick for Immediate stop! (but I compromise with a .40)



If you're talking about JR47, here's his scoop:
As an EMT/P with a Fire/EMS department for 35 years, I can tell you about a number of people who WEREN'T stopped by self-defense calibers.

To quote Wikipedia:
Stopping power is a colloquial term used to describe the ability of a weapon to stop the actions of an individual through a penetrating ballistic injury.

The term is not a euphemism for lethality. It refers only to a weapon's ability to incapacitate quickly, regardless of whether death ultimately results. Some theories of stopping power involve concepts such as "energy transfer" and "hydrostatic shock", although there is disagreement regarding the importance of these effects.

Stopping power is related to the physical properties of the bullet and the effects it has on its target, but the issue is complicated and not easily studied. Critics contend that the importance of "one-shot stop" statistics is overstated, pointing out that most gun encounters do not involve a "shoot once and see how the target reacts" situation.

[Marcus L.]

I believe in the sledgehammer over the icepick for Immediate stop! (but I compromise with a .40)

Ditto. Sure shot placement is important, but in a reality shot placement is a hard thing to achieve in the heat of a lead exchange. When shot placement is less than ideal, the larger calibers have more chance of taking out something important than a smaller caliber does. The difference may be small in the grand scheme of things, but the advantage is still there.

I feel that the .40S&W makes the best overall service caliber in terms of soft target damage(tissue), and barrier penetration(windshields, bone) while maintaining good capacity and handling. Given the right pistol platform and an adequate level of practice, just about anyone can shoot well with it. It isn't quite as user friendly with smaller pistols or when using higher recoiling 155gr loads though. Currently my duty pistol is the P229 which I prefer to use 180gr loads. More controllable, with good penetration characteristics and reliable expansion. When it comes to subcompact pistols I revert to the 9mm which is more ideal or that role.

[stewa070]

Over at the Taurusarmed.net site there is an article from the FBI about this very topic. It's under concealed carry or millenium pro i think. There is also an article by Ayoob in the latest handgunner mag that talks about cop shootouts and what happened. Out of like 7 scenarios only one officer could claim a 1 shot knockdown.

The FBI article on that forum states that knock down power is a myth, that a 45 round feels like a 10 pound weight being dropped from 3.5 feet and a 9mm feels like a 1 pound weight from 5 feet. Neither of which were proven to knockdown anybody.

It went on to say that shot placement is best, but that the perception of pain or of being shot is where the knockdown comes in. Also that psychotropic drugs like LSD, PCP, or cocaine often render a bad guy unable to perceive their being shot, and thus do not react as such.

It also talks at length about which round is better - in short that penetration is the only real damage causer if that makes sense - that to penetrate organs a bullet needs to impact some 12 inches to do so - basically stating that rounds like lighter grain JHP or glaser safety slugs are rather inefficient.


Finally a head shot destroys the brain, which is pretty much instantaneous, while a destroyed heart is not so fast to kill. It mentioned that the brain has enough oxygen to function normally for another full minute before incapacitation, and this is the reason why some attackers who do not perceive the bullet hitting them are able to continue attacking for so long before dying.


I'm no expert by any means - just parroting what i read.

[JImbothefiveth]

Wouldn't this not be a good test, since you don't know when the person was stopped? After all, the point is not to kill, but to stop.

[KBintheSLC]

Since the weight of the bullet is a major factor in reaching the vital organs, why penalize yourself with 125 grains of 9mm when you can have 230 grains of .45? -the morgue guy

Why limit yourself to a 55g 5.56 NATO when you can have a 600g 50BMG? Same old argument, different pile. IMO, there is more to picking a caliber than how much death and destruction it can cause. And, there is more to your effectiveness with a firearm than the caliber you choose.

[arizonaguide]

Or, more realistically:

Why limit yourself to 5.56, when you can have 7.62NATO in essentially the same convenient package?

I agree with KB, that there's more to it than "how much death and destruction it can cause".

It's how much Death/destruction it can cause, that's available in an cheap/easy/convenient carry package!!!
(lord knows we like our convenience!)
:)

[RyanM]

RyanM, have you, or anyone else, tried to accommodate blood pressure spikes as part of your model? Or neural shock caused by the upset of major ganglia due to physical damage?

Michael Courtney has, though I haven't seen him around in awhile. He may have been run out on a rail by the hardcore Facklerites.

His model mainly focused on predicting the peak pressure wave, in PSI, generated by a round at a distance of 1" from the center of the wound track, and correlating that with time to incapacitation, based on data from shooting deer. I completely forget his rule-of-thumb equation, but I actually did incorperate that into my models (albeit with different equations, to attempt to calculate the actual pressure wave at the moment when the bullet is fully expanded), though they aren't taken into account when calculating gross tissue damage.

Incapacitation due to the temporary cavity is still pretty controversial, so I left that stuff out.

In case you're interested, my numbers are 411 PSI for 124 gr 9mm +P, 466 PSI for 165 gr .40, and 349 PSI for .45 ACP, with all bullets using expansion values that result in 13" penetration (as before).

Just as a point of comparison, a 150 gr .308 Winchester at 2600 fps, that retains 70% weight, expands to .64, and penetrates 16.75", according to my calculations, destroys or devitalizes a grand total of 1347 grams of tissue (close to 3 pounds, basically everything in the chest cavity), and produces a pressure wave of 3420 PSI.

That's something that absolutely can cause an instant one-shot stop on a solid torso hit, through the temporary cavity, at least some of the time. Pretty much any CCW-able pistol caliber looks like a hucked rock by comparison.

[pps]

Where some of this "pressure wave" data is going to be difficult to quantify is when you take into account different tissue and structures.

Things like kidneys a full bladder or even the heart, you have a structure that is predominantly water that is contained in a vessel. Since water does not compress and transmits force, the "hydrostatic shock" will have a lot of value in potentially rupturing or even bursting that structure.

Things like muscle are very elastic and take a hell of a lot of force/pressure before we get from elastic to plastic deformation. The spongy old lungs will react different than muscle or other organs. Trying to put meaningful "pressure wave" numbers into practice will be a bit like trying to herd chickens.

I think "stopping power" is a nebulous Hollywoodesque term that really has no meaning to me.

[tipoc]

I also remember this "report" from the morgue. 8.2 autopsies a day for 365 days a year = 2993 dead folks at one facility in a year. This is reported as an average year. This is an exceptionally high volume for any urban hospitol. Too high.

The post was debunked on a couple of different forums.

tipoc

[Hostile Amish]

"I've seen folks killed by a BB to the eye"

-chuckles-

[JR47]

I also remember this "report" from the morgue. 8.2 autopsies a day for 365 days a year = 2993 dead folks at one facility in a year. This is reported as an average year. This is an exceptionally high volume for any urban hospitol. Too high.

What you need to do is check out the morgues of any large city, then. Urban hospitals aren't all part of the justice system. many autopsies are performed due to questions of malpractice, unattended death, age of decedent, and criminal question. Many of these morgues, such as Baltimore, Md., the state ME's location, average more like 12 autopsies a day, six days a week.

As far as transient pressure waves goes, the study is in it's infancy. That's why I asked. Exactly WHAT and HOW these waves, with the attendant spike in blood-pressures all over the body, interface with the better known wounding mechanisms is going to be the next big thing.

The Facklerites are, by and large, remnants of a time past. There research maven has retired, and the charismatic organization spawned by him has imploded via fratricide. They became everything that they accused others of being. Stratified, unable to accept new data because it wasn't in lock step with their views, they fell upon each other, each individual claiming that he or she was the most Fackler-like.

There has to be a neural response in the wounding mechanism. There is for every other wounding scenario. Nothing just appears in the physical world. The fact that you can't measure it doesn't make it false, just beyond your available technology.

I agree that the "One Shot Stop" was taken out of context, and romanticized in the literature of the time. It is a meaningless phrase out of context.:)

[tipoc]

A previous thread on this subject, the same actually.

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=367881&highlight=Atlanta+morgue

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=367877&highlight=Atlanta+morgue

tipoc

[arizonaguide]

Wouldn't a broken femur with any handgun count as a "one shot stop"?
Or a shattered hip?
In addition to a CNS shot.

Just sayin. Not saying it's likely.
And, when the bad guy is hopped up on Meth or PCP (or other pain killers), I guess all bets are off. A "Lucky CNS shot" is the only thing reliable for a "one shot stop"... (Realisticly speaking?)

Is everyone practicing headshots to moving targets?
Then give me the max caliber at the max speed with the max magazine capacity (with max reliability)!
(Or in reality some compromise of that.)
.40 for me.

[HB]

My take....
If I had to carry a single shot in conventional defense calibers, it would be a .45. BUT, I don't have to. 9mm gives me lots of rounds if I need them. .40 is a good compromise and .45 makes a big hole with the disadvantage of lower capacity. That being said, If I ever get a CCW permit, I'll most likely carry a .38 or a .380 or small 9mm. I'm not really concerned about prolonged shootings.

The winner will probably be determined by the first 2 rounds and where they hit; not if I have 14 rounds in my gun, 3 in him, or whether the holes are .38 or .45 inches wide.

[tipoc]

What you need to do is check out the morgues of any large city, then. Urban hospitals aren't all part of the justice system. many autopsies are performed due to questions of malpractice, unattended death, age of decedent, and criminal question. Many of these morgues, such as Baltimore, Md., the state ME's location, average more like 12 autopsies a day, six days a week.

But it's doubtful they would be "attended" by the same person which is what the author claims.

tipoc

[KBintheSLC]

As RyanM states on page 2, pistols are pistols and rifles are rifles. Despite the lack of consequential supporting data, I truly believe that it is the temporary wound cavity that delivers the true stopping power. It is the explosive power of hydrostatic shock waves that really "shocks" the body instantly. There is no comparison between a large expanding pistol round, and a large soft-point rifle round.
Pistols, due to much lower velocities, only rely on the permanent wound cavity... in other words, you are just bleeding your target out with a wound the size of the bullet diameter. Therefore, I believe that most mid-size calibers (9mm-45acp) will work out about the same in the real world.
Rifles on the other hand create massive pressure wounds due to the fact that the water in your cells does not compress... instead creating a shock wave that causes severe and instantaneous cellular necrosis.

[Doc_Jude]

Folks that sing "Shot Placement" too much probably spend a little too much time shooting paper & not doing tactical drills. Better yet, do it like we used to: Go run a few hundred yards, push out 50 pushups, & then go see how accurate you are, singing "Shot Placement" at the top of your lungs. :rolleyes:

One Shot Stop doesn't mean,"I shot him in the knee and he fell down" or "I shot him in the liver and he bled out". One Shot Stop means END OF THREAT.

I'm currently livin' in Kalifornia, & I refused to bring any of my old guns into this state (they're staying in WA). I'm just putting together my "Kalifornia Kollection". Here we have a 10 round limit for pistol mags, so when I bought my new Glock, even though I have much more experience with 9mm, I went for the G30SF, because if I can only have 10+1, the bigger the better.
http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f114/jim_jude_3/thinredline2.jpg

[JR47]

You HAVE to HIT the target to stop it. Even paper. The A-ring in IPSC is larger than a bull's-eye, but you STILL have to hit before it scores.

I CCW, but I doubt if I'll have to "run a few hundred yards, push out 50 push-ups", and then sing anything defending myself. I try not to piss off an entire Chapter of Hell's Angels, or MS-13, nor do I plan on shooting in the IPSC Special Olympics.

Tacticool or not, a 75mm howitzer still has to hit within it's lethal radius to kill. There is NO replacement for shot placement beyond the "Golden BB" theorrm. Now, THAT DOES REQUIRE a high capacity magazine, or ten. It's also pretty stupid to try in anything but a war zone, with lots of back-up.

I'm not trying to impress the threat with my physical conditioning, or to remove the oxygen from him via "almost hitting" shots. Perhaps the wind from large calibers whipping past him works in California, but it hasn't anywhere else.

By the way, "One-Shot Stop" was originally two parts of a methodology. A stop was defined as "if the victim was assaulting someone, he collapsed without being able to fire another shot, or strike another blow. If he was fleeing, he collapsed within 10 feet." It also excluded head shots, or any but torso shots. That's from Handgun Stopping Power, 1992, page 43, of the Hard-bound copy.

It's hard enough to score ONE HIT, much less the multiple hits that seem to be required by the previous poster. A larger hole in my pants leg, missing me, will be less effective that even a .22 short to the face. Sheesh!

Yes, physical exertion, or fight/flight body reactions will affect your ability to aim. However, if I start out as a well-trained, and proficient, shot, the adrenal-fed surge will still enable me to hit. In a CCW, I'm not going to be engaging at distances much beyond 15 yards, and I'm darn sure not going to be wasting ammunition for the "percentage shots".

[kgpcr]

I hear stories of 6 shots to the chest with a .357mag and he lived and 8 to the chest with a .45 and he walked out of the hospital 3 days later. i call bull SH*^ on those stories. When you boil it all down you find out that of the 6 shots none hit any vitals. ALso you cant take the very very rare exception to the rule and live by it. I had an uncle in WWII take a .50 to the chest and lived. He spent 8 months in a hospital. that is a once in a million happening as if you have seen what a .50cal can do you would understand. out of 10000 people who would get shot in the same place none would live but yet he did. He hit the ground in Belgum and woke up in England. Yes odd things can happen but dont take them as rule. One thing you cannot aruge with is a bigger hole= more damage= better chances of hitting something that will hasten death.

[S&Wfan]

Are ANY of you guys deer hunters?

Shooting gun games are great (and I've done my share), but shooting a moving, living thing that does NOT stand still to be killed is a lot different than shooting at paper or steel.

Anyone who does NOT hunt deer, or larger game, needs to do so. You'll learn a LOT about shot placement, shooting well in less-than-perfect conditions.

Better . . . you'll soon learn, crawling around, the results of poor shot placement on a deer. After crawling around for hours tracking a wounded deer you'll learn to make every shot count, and kill virtually every animal after that with smooth, one-stop consistency.

What caliber of handgun works best is totally bull schidt if one can't shoot well . . . including those follow up shots you'll never realize you need until you see an animal take a killing shot and simply run off why you sit there, forgetting what to do and it runs off.

A piece of paper stapled to a post is a lot different than shooting a living animal that's moving and trying to avoid being killed. Ditto on a human target . . . except now YOU are also running too, trying not to get hit! Changes EVERYTHING!!!

[pps]

S&W fan

+1000

[JR47]

Yep, I am, and you'll note that my comment is about that shot-placement "song".

Tracking a wounded animal is messy, tiring, and a waste of good meat if you can't find it. A wounded human will soon have trackers after you, in the form of police and lawyers. A wounded deer won't sue.

[KimKommando]

It's not about the rounds, it's about the delivery.

[2RCO]

Arizona guide posted
Conclusion:
Two in the nads, one in the head...with a .40 or better!!!


HEHEHEHEHEHEHE!

[jorb]

Use whatever you are more comfortable with. Between 9mm and .45 I think accurate shot placement is more important than size.

[arizonaguide]

No No, I mean "pelvic girdle"!
:evil:

[Gunnerpalace]

Somebody once said "if you can hit your target, pretty much any gun will do the trick".

[JFrame]

Caliber is everything...Go with .32 ACP, because it hits like a brick through a plate glass window.

Sorry, folks -- I watched Dr. No a couple of nights ago... :rolleyes:

[C-grunt]

Shot placement is a lot more important than caliber. The whole "then carry a .22 short" argument is ridiculous.

Skill is more important than hardware, but the hardware had to be comparable. You could say the same for auto racing. You could take the best auto racer in the world and put him against me at the track. If Im driving a Corvette and hes driving an Aveo, I win. Why...because the hardware isnt comparable.

Good example. In the academy we watched a video of a Highway Patrolman get into a shooting with a badguy. The Officer shot the guy several times in the torso with his .357 mag and was hit once through the armpit with a .22 pistol. The badguy lived, the Officer did not.

[AbitNutz]

There is no problem that can not be resolved by the proper application of explosives....

[LightningJoe]

Whether or not the BG ends up in the morgue isn't the issue. It's stopping his attack that matters. And no one will ever know which caliber does that best. The effect of caliber is swamped by the effects of all the more important variables. Consequently, it can't be extracted from the data.


You can shoot goats in cages or gelatin, but that won't tell you anything (much) about what a human attacker will choose to do once he discovers 1] you're armed, 2] you're shooting at him, and 3] that he is hit.

[Vern Humphrey]

please remember that all the examples you find lying around in a morgue have been "stopped."

The circumstances of that "stopping" may not be known, and may not be inferred from the wounds.

Medical examinations cannot determine the tactical effect -- recall that in the FBI Miami shootout, the toad who did all the killing was himself killed by a shoit fired by the first agent he killed.

The toad killed the agent who killed him, and went on to kill other agents.

[pps]

Here's a little something to send a chill down your spine about handgun stopping power.

http://www.lawofficer.com/news-and-articles/articles/lom/0412/the_peter_soulis_incident.html;jsessionid=10BDC02F0CF4D0B083E43EA06A47B949

[James T Thomas]

No chills in my spine from that one. No details stated by Brian McKenna;
author and "Human Resources" developer for police departments.
He does, though, do a good job of administrative analysis: "Danger Signs,"
tactic criticism, lauding of Body Armor, available statistics , and all that type of commentary.

I still like to read accurate detail; "center mass" to me is too vague to be informative. I do understand its acceptance to Police Administrators and Instructors who must divise programs, which are taught initially, before any actual shooting occurs.

How ever, we, the reader, still do not know if the wounds given to Palmer were shallow or perhaps grazing the vital organs, etc. My conjecture is that this mad man did not receive any wounds that were effectively destructive to his heart or any vital anatomy. Yes, I suppose with all those wounds he had what would be called "fatal" hits, but then, so did Platt.

If you go for this, what in the world would you conclude then?
Seventeen shots from a 40 S&W round -Center Mass and this killer still has the capacity to murder you!
Should the officer have used a battle axe?
Something in that report is "conspicuously absent."

"Dead men tell no Tales."

[SlamFire1]

According to the article, the bad guy died 4 minutes after the last shot.

We have been conditioned by TV shows and movies to think that gun shots are instantly fatal. Have we not seen actors blown 30 feet across a room due to a shotgun blast? Is that real? We have seen tens of thousands of gun shot deaths in movies and TV shows, and we believe that what we see on the screen is reality.

But it is not true. TV shows and Movies have time limits, so the bad guy better die quickly, or it will interfere with a commercial.

However, if you have read enough war books, or listened to the news, many US soldiers have come out of Iraq missing arms, legs, it should become apparent that humans can survive a lot of shock.

As long as the bleeding is stopped.

Blood loss is 100 % terminal. You loose enough blood, you die. Lets assume that this bad guy took 6 minutes to bleed out. Is that unreasonable?

As for battle axes. Battle axes, maces, and pole axes are fearsome devices. The amount of momentum transfer that occurs when someone hits another with a weight at the end of a lever arm is immense. Much more momentum transfer than with a standard sidearm. And if you take into account the shearing action that occurs with a bladed weapon, well, it will take a head off, or an arm, or a leg.

[Vern Humphrey]

A friend of mine was a medical examiner in Virginia. He had a story about a man who was shot through the heart with a shotgun. The man walked a block, sat down on his front step and died. My friend did the autopsy, and the heart was destroyed, shredded.

He said on the stand, some wiseguy lawyer said, "Do you expect us to believe a man walked a block without a heart?"

And my friend said, "I don't care what you believe. I only have to testify to what I found during the autopsy."

[wcwhitey]

There was a case about a decade ago in the Bronx where a teenager shot a pedestrian with a .177 pellet rifle from his apartment window. The pellet penetrated and nicked the mans heart killing him. I forget the rest of the particulars but it did make me scratch my head at the time. I have personally investigated many shootings. The one reoccurring theme is that they don't follow any rhyme or reason. It always appeared to me as matter of luck, good or bad depending on the point of view.

[Happiness Is A Warm Gun]

As an ex soldier, you, of all people sould know that side arms were/are not even an issue. I spent 22 years in the Army, 11B Infantry, and I never wanted a larger caliber than the 9mm nor have I ever heard a fellow soldier even broach the subject. Combat Arms soldiers carry rifles...side arms were not even issued to grunts...pretty much last resort and worthless. Officers and REMFs were issued side arms.

Soldiers carry ball ammo. Cops & Citizens carrying for self defense will almost always carry JHP.

A good modern 9mm JHP such as HST is going to expand to greater diameter than .45ACP Ball.

9mm is of limited use in military because of stupid regulations prohibiting expanding/exploding ammunition.

To extrapolate results of ball (FMJ) ammo to JHP is foolish.

[deerhunter61]

First and foremost has to be the caliber you can shoot accurately and do so repeatedly. That is the bottom line. Someone walking around with a 50cal because he believes that is what he needs to protect himself because it is the biggest and baddest pistol around is worthless to him if he can not hit the broadside of a barn.

[rmmoore]

A friend and former Firearms Co-Instructor is currently an active LEO in a western State. Some years ago during a drug bust, prior to the days of full SWAT teams for drug raids, the suspect he and his partner were looking for opened fire on them. Granted, this guy was in another universe on either PCP or Heroin (I forget), but my buddy's Department issued sidearm was a 9mm, loaded I believe with 127gr JHP's. After he and his partner engaged and returned fire, they shot the drug-enraged guy 24 times, center mass, before he stopped firing back, he died as they were cuffing him.
I'm not banging on the 9mm, ok. If that's the most powerful caliber you can handle, shoot well, and shoot accurately, then GO FOR IT. I own a few myself. There is a place for everyone's choice, mine just may be different than yours.
Case in point: some CCW students of mine were in their late 60's, terribly arthritic, and a .380 was the most powerful thing they could shoot that didn't hurt THEM, they could shoot it well, and weren't afraid to practice with it. For THEM, it was the best choice. The best, most wonderful super-magnum-mankiller isn't worth a damned if it's at home and you're NOT when you need it; or you can't hit the broad side of a barn with it at the range and you've got multiple assailants running at you. Get the picture?
Some ARE better than others, that's life. Deal with it and get over it. Pick what feels good, you can use and deploy it effectively, hone your skills to maximize it's capability, and carry on with your life. For ME, I 'prefer' a .45 (1911), but circumstances dictate that at times I carry a 9mm. Ok, I accept that. When I carry the 9, I understand that if I have to use it, it 'might' not do the job the same as my .45, but it's better than NOTHING, or a stick, or a rock, or a set of keys and a cell phone when the need arises. NOTHING in life is 100% certain, except death, and I'd prefer to have at least a little "say-so" about that:D

[rmmoore]

P.S.- Oh yeah, all of the 24 rounds mentioned above put into the BG's Center-Mass were each considered a fatal wound. He was so doped up, he was dead and didn't even know it. Is the guy (or gal) who tries to do you harm going to be stone cold straight and sober? The ONLY way to absolutely, positively CEASE the action is to STOP all motor skills/functions relative to the threat (I am assuming for the purpose of this discussion, that the BG is intent on killing you or your family members). A bigger bullet has better 'odds' of doing that quickly than a smaller one.

[Isher]

Oh man -

I'm probably gonna get a lot of **** about this, but,

Growing up, the .22 LR was the go to gun.

And I'm only going to give one example.

In the early seventies, a friend of mine was

A mobile butcher.

Which is to say he would drive to your place,

Kill your beef, and butcher, and wrap it

And, bingo, into your freezer.

I know, different times.

The weapon was a short barreled single shot

Winchester .22 rifle.

Worked every time.

So I kind of have my doubts about these stories

Of multiple clips of highpowered ammo being

Shot into perps, or whoever,

With no effect.

I grew up on the ranch.

.22 did it most of the time,

30/30 did the rest.


peace

isher

[hostilecrab]

I would disagree that "larger is better".

I think "smaller and more powder" is better !

What I think matters is two things:
1. Shot placement (disrupting the central nervous system)
2. Velocity (sufficient speed/power to go through clothing,soft tissue and bone)

[Fishman777]

Proper shot placement is required to stop any threat with a hand gun.

There are no magic hand gun calibers. None. That includes .45 acp along with all of the hunting calibers out there (.41 magnum, .44 magnum,..., .500 S&W).

[ArmedBear]

I did shoot a man I hit him 3 times in the chest with a 45 and guess what? He ran away! Took a 4th slug in the kidney to bring him down after he had sprinted about 40 yards.


Hopefully that wasn't a home defense scenario...:p

Even in Texas, you might have to clean up the highway for a few weekends, if you took the 4th shot.:D

[LightningJoe]

Even in Texas, you might have to clean up the highway for a few weekends, if you took the 4th shot.


I'm pretty sure you can keep shooting an attacker who's moving to a better position during a gunfight. Even outside of Texas.

[chris in va]

Winchester .22 rifle.
Worked every time.
So I kind of have my doubts about these stories
Of multiple clips of highpowered ammo being
Shot into perps, or whoever,
With no effect.


The guy shot the cow in the head. Big difference.

Center mass isn't central nervous system like the brain. Lungs, heart, liver etc need to be bled out before the BG will stop. Ever been deer hunting?

[Rifleman 173]

It's the tactics used with the firearm that makes it work right. Two to the chest and one to the head, no matter the caliber, generally leaves the bad guy having a real bad day. Sure, a .45 is a good thing but like a 9 mm or a .22 they all have got to be properly used to be effective. That's exactly why so many elite forces personnel use 9 millimeter pistols to effect.

[Michael Courtney]

Michael Courtney has, though I haven't seen him around in awhile. He may have been run out on a rail by the hardcore Facklerites.

Come on Ryan, you should at least try a google scholar search before floating the hypothesis that our ballistic pressure wave work has not gained the credibility needed for publication in scientific venues. Several important papers were published in 2007, including

Links between traumatic brain injury and ballistic pressure waves originating in the thoracic cavity and extremities

Authors: Amy Courtney a; Michael Courtney b
Affiliations: a Department of Physics, United States Military Academy, West Point, NY, USA
b Ballistics Testing Group, West Point, NY, USA

DOI: 10.1080/02699050701481571
Published in: Brain Injury, Volume 21, Issue 7 June 2007 , pages 657 - 662
Subjects: Neuroscience; Rehabilitation;
A copy of a preprint is available at:
http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0808/0808.1443.pdf

In 2008, we had a number of publications, many of which have relevance with ballistic pressure waves:

Ballistics Testing Group 2008 Publications

A Thoracic Mechanism of Mild Traumatic Brain Injury Due to Blast Pressure Waves
Published as: Medical Hypotheses, Volume 72, Issue 1 (2009) , p 76 – 83. doi:10.1016/j.mehy.2008.08.015
http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0812/0812.4757.pdf

ABSTRACT
The mechanisms by which blast pressure waves cause mild to moderate traumatic brain injury (mTBI) are an open question. Possibilities include acceleration of the head, direct passage of the blast wave via the cranium, and propagation of the blast wave to the brain via a thoracic mechanism. The hypothesis that the blast pressure wave reaches the brain via a thoracic mechanism is considered in light of ballistic and blast pressure wave research. Ballistic pressure waves, caused by penetrating ballistic projectiles or ballistic impacts to body armor, can only reach the brain via an internal mechanism and have been shown to cause cerebral effects. Similar effects have been documented when a blast pressure wave has been applied to the whole body or focused on the thorax in animal models. While vagotomy reduces apnea and bradycardia due to ballistic or blast pressure waves, it does not eliminate neural damage in the brain, suggesting that the pressure wave directly affects the brain cells via a thoracic mechanism. An experiment is proposed which isolates the thoracic mechanism from cranial mechanisms of mTBI due to blast wave exposure. Results have implications for evaluating risk of mTBI due to blast exposure and for developing effective protection.


Comments on “Ballistics: a primer for the surgeon”
Published as: Injury, 2008 Aug; 39(8): p 964-5. DOI: 10.1016/j.injury.2008.03.020
http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0812/0812.4930.pdf

Abstract:
In response to a published assertion to the contrary, this paper briefly reviews many studies that document remote wounding effects of ballistic pressure waves including experiments in pigs and dogs that find brain injury resulting from animal models shot in the thigh and case studies in humans that document both remote brain and spinal cord injuries ascribed to ballistic pressure waves.

Apparent measurement errors in “Development of biomechanical response corridors of the thorax to blunt ballistic impacts”
Published as: Journal of Biomechanics, Volume 41, Issue 2, 2008, Page 486
http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0812/0812.4755.pdf

Abstract: “Development of biomechanical response corridors of the thorax to blunt ballistic impacts” (Bir, C., Viano, D., King, A., 2004, Journal of Biomechanics 37, 73-79.) contains apparent measurement errors. Areas under several force vs. time (Fig. 2) and force vs. deflection curves (Fig.4) differ significantly from the momentum and kinetic energy changes, respectively.


Misleading reference to unpublished wound ballistics data regarding distant injuries
http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0812/0812.4927.pdf

Abstract: An article (J Trauma 29:10-18, 1989) cites unpublished wound ballistics data to support the authors’ view that distant injuries are a myth in wound ballistics. The actual data, published in 1990, contains a number of detailed examples of distant injuries. (Bellamy RF, Zajtchuk R. The physics and biophysics of wound ballistics. In: Zajtchuk R, ed. Textbook of Military Medicine, Part I: Warfare, Weaponry, and the Casualty, Vol. 5, Conventional Warfare: Ballistic, Blast, and Burn Injuries. Washington, DC: Office of the Surgeon General, Department of the Army, United States of America; 1990: 107-162)

Comments Regarding “On the Nature of Science”
Published as: Physics in Canada, Vol. 64, No. 3 (2008), p7-8.
http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0812/0812.4932.pdf

Abstract: An attempt to redefine science in the 21st century (BK Jennings, On the Nature of Science, Physics in Canada, 63(7) 2007) has abandoned traditional notions of natural law and objective reality, blurred the distinctions between natural science and natural history, elevated Occam’s razor from an epistemological preference to a scientific principle, and elevated peer-review and experimental care as equals with repeatable experiment as arbiters of scientific validity. Our comments review the long-established axioms of the scientific method, remind readers of the distinctions between science and history, disprove the generality of Occam’s razor by counter example, and highlight the risks of accepting additional scientific arbiters as equal to repeatable experiment.

Acoustic methods for measuring bullet velocity
Published as: Applied Acoustics 69 (2008) 925–928, doi:10.1016/j.apacoust.2007.05.004
http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0812/0812.4752.pdf

Abstract: This article describes two acoustic methods to measure bullet velocity with an accuracy of 1% or better. In one method, a microphone is placed within 0.1 m of the gun muzzle and a bullet is fired at a steel target 45 m away. The bullet’s flight time is the recorded time between the muzzle blast and sound of hitting the target minus the time for the sound to return from the target to the microphone. In the other method, the microphone is placed equidistant from both the gun muzzle and the steel target 91 m away. The time of flight is the recorded time between the muzzle blast and the sound of the bullet hitting the target. In both cases, the average bullet velocity is simply the flight distance divided by the flight time.
Key words: bullet velocity

A method for testing bullets at reduced velocity
http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0812/0812.4934.pdf

Abstract: Reconstruction of shooting events occasionally requires testing of bullets at velocities significantly below the typical muzzle velocity of cartridge arms. Trajectory, drag, and terminal performance depend strongly on velocity, and realistic results require accurately reconstructing the velocity. A method is presented for testing bullets at reduced velocities by loading the bullet into a sabot and firing from a muzzleloader with a suitably reduced powder charge. Powder charges can be safely reduced to any desirable level when shooting saboted bullets from a muzzleloader; in contrast, cartridge arms can only be safely operated within a narrow window of powder charges/muzzle velocities. This technique is applicable to a wide range of both pistol and rifle bullets at velocities from 700 ft/s to 2000 ft/s.

[tipoc]

Thanks for dropping by Doc.

I'll keep your links for revue.

tipoc

[Isher]

Quote:
Winchester .22 rifle.
Worked every time.
So I kind of have my doubts about these stories
Of multiple clips of highpowered ammo being
Shot into perps, or whoever,
With no effect.
The guy shot the cow in the head. Big difference.

Center mass isn't central nervous system like the brain. Lungs, heart, liver etc need to be bled out before the BG will stop. Ever been deer hunting?
__________________
There are two kinds of people in the world: (1) the free; and (2) food animals.

-Aristodemus

chris in va -

"Center mass isn't central nervous system like the brain. Lungs, heart, liver etc need to be bled out before the BG will stop. Ever been deer hunting?"

Exactly the point of my post. Which gets us back to placement.

Which is to say, if you had a choice between centerpunching a BG

In both knees, followed by a forehead shot....nevermind,

I know I'm not preaching to the choir here.

Just a ranch kid whose dad was a major sonofabitch about

"making each shot count."

And yeah, hunted deer, waterfowl, upland birds.

But wild boar are a challenge.

In the early seventies, it was actually part of my job to thin out

The pig population on the particular canyon of Catalina Island

In which I lived and worked.

I used a 16 gauge side by side with rifled slugs,

Because that's what I had.

And as long as you made the first shot count, it worked.

I blew it, once, with a really big black and white boar

I'd been after for awhile.

Ended up on my back emptying my Colt Official Police

.22 long rifle into the boar as fast as I could.

He crashed down about 4 feet away.

After which I got onto my hands and knees and puked my guts out.

And, re: Aristodemus - if you are speaking of the Spartan who managed to get out of Thermopylae as 1 of the 2 survivors of the three hundred, and
was branded as a coward...........

he is best known for the phrase "Money makes the man."

I do not know of any references to the quotation you attribute to him.


isher

[Darth AkSarBen]

The thought of acoustic wave made me think of a time when I was a senior in High School and I had a Remington 7mm Magnum rifle. I was at my cousins and we were out and going to look for something to use as target practice (he lives in the country in Nebraska) and we saw a feral cat sneaking through the grass. Finally he came to an open spot and just lay there, so my cousin took a shot at him. Died instantly. We've seen jack rabbits shot with this rifle and usually strings them out a bit, but this cat simply folded. We look and there was not a trace of blood on him, no scratch no would visible. His eyes were glazed over and not breathing. Strangest thing I ever say. Only thing I could come up with was the sonic boom was so intense it caused brain hemorrhaging. Still don't know to this day about that, but because I saw it with my own eyes, I know it to be true. The rifle was sighted in for 200 yards, and Rick was only about 25 feet away, and may have flinched a bit, shooting high. He missed, but the cat died anyway.

[RyanM]

Come on Ryan, you should at least try a google scholar search before floating the hypothesis that our ballistic pressure wave work has not gained the credibility needed for publication in scientific venues. Several important papers were published in 2007, including

No, no, I meant run out on a rail, just on this forum. Last I remember, evidence, published work, etc., counted for nothing here. :p

[gglass]

Caliber A, Caliber B, Caliber C... And so it goes.

I own and carry, .22LR , .380 ACP. 9mm, 40 SW and .45 ACP. I have never felt naked, even with the lowly .22 LR.

I've said it many times... The only magic bullet is the one that causes CNS disruption.

[hitbackfirst]

Why so much concern with "one shot stops"? Who is greeting that armed intruder with one bullet, and then pausing to see if it stopped him before firing again? If I am forced to fire on an intruder, I will have fired 3 shots before he falls even if the first shot killed him. Drawing your gun and firing the first shot will usually take much longer than pumping out an additional 2 or more rounds. If I only had a single-shot weapon, I would definitely want the biggest, baddest bullet I could handle, but I certainly don't feel undergunned when carrying a compact 9mm with 10 or more rounds available.

[Vern Humphrey]

Nobody with half a brain would stop shooting before his attacker is down and no danger.

But if you look at accounts of actual shootings, you can see where there are a lot of misses. You can't guarentee you'll get three hits out of three shots -- you'll be lucky to get one.

So, yes, keep shooting. But carry a gun that has a good chance of doing the job with the hits you actually get.

[2075 RAMI]

I must agree that the read was very interesting. However, the content was heavily laced with bias in favor of the .45 caliber bullet.

Like some of the other posters have stated, any caliber you feel comfortable with is the caliber you should rely on in time of need. For myself, I feel totally confident with my 9mm and my 9 Mak. I don't feel the need to carry a larger caliber.

[Double Naught Spy]

Nobody with half a brain would stop shooting before his attacker is down and no danger.

I guess a lot of SD shooters don't have half a brain then.

[SlamFire1]

I grew up on the ranch.

.22 did it most of the time,

30/30 did the rest

Obviously the guy knew the “magic” spot, and had a calm animal.

The Thompson – La Garde tests shot cattle, and they wanted to see how many bullets it would take to kill them. Some took a lot of shots, I can recall reading that the cattle looked puzzled at the 9mm shooter, like "what are you doing?".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thompson-LaGarde_Tests

[Isher]

Slamfire -

The magic spot is as follows:

Draw an imaginary crosshairs - the x and y axes - between the center of the eyes and the center of the top of the skull fore and aft. The z axis - the actual path of the bullet - should run from that point to the foramen magnum (the junction of the spine and the skull).

Even in the slaughtering business, it all about placement, placement, placement.

isher

[kgpcr]

I showed the post about the guy without a heart to my hunting and fishing partner. He laughed out loud but what does he know? He is only a board cerified physician in internal medicine and emergency medicine. yes that is two specialties. His words were as follows, '' the heart stops, BP goes to ZERO and its lights out now! you will not keep walking! He chuckled and walked away. His explanation was a few pellets in the heart maybey but not shredded. These stories are like fish that are caught, they keep growing and growing until a 3 lb fish is Moby Dick. Next we will hear of a guy who had his head blown off by an artillery round and he ate supper and then died.

[kgpcr]

24 shots to the perp COM and he had to be handcuffed?? BS again. I think 99% of these stories are just that.... stories. Kind of like the big fish that got away stories. they keep growing and growing.

[RyanM]

He is only a board cerified physician in internal medicine and emergency medicine. yes that is two specialties. His words were as follows, '' the heart stops, BP goes to ZERO and its lights out now! you will not keep walking! He chuckled and walked away.

And his specialty is what? Does it actually have anything to do with the circulatory or nervous system?

Doctors are no less prone to believing medical-related urban legends than anyone else. Expecting a doctor to know anything about something other than their specialty would be like expecting an Olypmic sprinter to be great at fencing, or something.

Anyone who has hunted deer or other medium-to-large game for any length of time will be able to tell you, firsthand, about animals with no lungs and no heart running a couple hundred yards, or continuing to eat grass for a half minute, before finally expiring.

[pps]

Anyone who has hunted deer or other medium-to-large game for any length of time will be able to tell you, firsthand, about animals with no lungs and no heart running a couple hundred yards, or continuing to eat grass for a half minute, before finally expiring.

Yep, or as my grandfather told me after a solid rifle hit on a black bear. You hit him solid, he's dead...he just doesn't know it yet. That's why the phrase "stopping power" and handgun used in the same sentence makes me chuckle.

[Vern Humphrey]

Ross Seifreid once wrote an article on "The Theory of Relativity" which was all about how some cartridges that some consider totally inadequate when fired from a rifle (such as the old .30-30) suddenly become supercharged when fired from a handgun (like the Thompson Encore.)

If a 180 grain bullet doing 2700 fps from a .30-06 won't "stop" a 150-lb buck, I really doubt a 180 grain bullet doing 950 fps from a .40 S&W will guarenteed, every time, put down a hopped up 150-lb man.

[Grey_Mana]

An arrow from a bow with 70 pounds of pull will have more stopping power and penetrating power than any rifle, much less any handgun.

Now, who uses bow and arrow for personal protection?

[Vern Humphrey]

An arrow from a bow with 70 pounds of pull will have more stopping power and penetrating power than any rifle, much less any handgun.
Not so sure about that -- I've had critters run just about as far with an arrow in them as they do when shot with a rifle.

And with a rifle, you can break bone -- for elk, I like to break the shoulder bone, to keep the critter from getting into steep places that I have to haul him out of.

Now, who uses bow and arrow for personal protection?
Robin Hood.:neener:

[Byron]

James T. Thomas and C-Grunt.Thanks for your duty. Still have my CIB that my CO gave me.Byron,D Co.,3/8th Inf,4th Inf Div 68-69

[tipoc]

Well some folks here seem to believe that the .22 l.r. round is as good as a .38 Spl. or the 9mm or the .45 when it comes to a self defense round. This is odd.

Now the .22 l.r. CCI Blazer Velocitor round, one of the faster out there, does about 1400 fps from a 24" rifle barrel with a 40 gr. hp bullet. It bests most others available by 200 fps or so. That's about 183 ft. pds of muzzle energy. It does considerably less from 4" barrel.

One gr. equals 1/7000 of a pound.

Remington's .38 Spl.+P 158 gr. LSWCHP (considered by many to be one of the better self defense loads available for the .38) does about 890 fps. from a 4" barrel with about 278 Ft' lbs. of muzzle energy.

So the .38 will hit harder and penetrate deeper than the .22 but some who've wrote here hold it up as "just as good as". Odd. A long Philips screwdriver will penetrate deeper than the .22, easier to explain away as well.

The old saw..."A hit with a .22 is better than a miss with a .44" is meant to illustrate the importance of being able to control the gun you are shooting and hit what you want to when you need to. It's purpose is in no way is to imply that a hit with a .22 (or .25 or .32 or .380) is "as good as" a hit with a .44. So the saying oughta be...

"A hit with a .22 is better than a miss with a .44 Magnum. But a hit with a .44 Spl. is a whole lot better than a hit with a .22". Well unless you are hunting squirrels or rabbits which is one thing a .22 is good for. Maybe I'll make that my tagline.

A final point. I worked in a cut and kill plant in St. Joesph Mo. for a year and a packing plant in Grandview Mo. for 3. I've known many meatpackers in both hog and beef plants. .22s are not used to kill cattle or hogs. We killed 1200 hogs a day on two shifts in the Swift plant. A air driven bolt gun is used to knock a hole in their skulls. Though some preferred the base of the spine. They are then hoisted and their throats slit. It's the bleeding out that usually kills those the bolt did not kill. For those that might get loose a 30-06 was kept on hand locked in the foremans office.

tipoc

[eye5600]

It's been noted that individual stories don't count for much, but John Lennon was killed with a .38.

President Reagan was shot with a 22LR, and would have died without immediate medical care. President McKinley was shot with a revolver; I couldn't find the caliber, but since the the first bullet "was deflected by his ribs", it couldn't have been very powerful. President Garfield was killed with a .44 Webley. President Lincoln was shot with a .44 Derringer.

Noted added: As best I can tell, Garfield and McKinley would have survived with the quality of care given to Reagan. I have no idea about Lincoln, but it's hard to believe that his injury would not have been devastating, even if he were to live.

[regal]

I don't think 9mm gangbanger deaths are a good database to determine 9mm stopping power. Good ammo in a 9mm can give it .357 mag performance and I doubt the gangbangers know what the good ammo is.

[eye5600]

I have my doubts about shock with respect to lethality.

I've read that the most delicate organ in the torso is the spleen, and many have died from a ruptured spleen after a fall, e.g. a long fall into water. I can't say I've ever heard of a death due to a ruptured spleen after a gunshot injury.

On the other hand, I do believe that a gunshot wound could cause shock in the sense of short-term confusion and loss of concern about the external reality.

[punkndisorderly]

One should keep in mind that there are so many variables in the average shooting, and relatively few that are studied in detail that drawing any definitive conclusion is all but impossible. For example, all other things being equal, a hollowpoint that expands reliably will behave differently than the same hollowpoint fired from the same gun into the exact same spot that doesn't expand (say because it clogs with cloth).

A fatal shot and non-fatal shot, or incapacitating vs non-incapacitating shot can be a matter of just 10ths of an inch. A fraction of an inch can mean the difference between hitting an artery, heart, etc and being a flesh wound. Reagan's shooting was a good example of that. The individual in question can also make a big difference. For example, a 400 pound man vs a 120 pound man. More and different tissue to penetrate. Drugged/Drunk vs Sober can also make a difference as many shootings by police and military have attested to.

Pretty much every shooting is a unique collection of circumstances. Basing an entire defensive philosophy on one (or even several) is faulty logic. This is especially so when one uses an instance where relatively few of the factors are known.

[MachIVshooter]

I showed the post about the guy without a heart to my hunting and fishing partner. He laughed out loud but what does he know? He is only a board cerified physician in internal medicine and emergency medicine. yes that is two specialties. His words were as follows, '' the heart stops, BP goes to ZERO and its lights out now! you will not keep walking! He chuckled and walked away. His explanation was a few pellets in the heart maybey but not shredded. These stories are like fish that are caught, they keep growing and growing until a 3 lb fish is Moby Dick. Next we will hear of a guy who had his head blown off by an artillery round and he ate supper and then died.

Not a hunter, is he? The last doe I shot was at a range of 40 yards. My .25-06 handloads launch 117 gr. Sierra spitzers just over 3,200 FPS. To say that her heart was anything short of obliterated would be modest. Yet she jumped about six feet straight up, did an about-face, then ran 15 yards to the creek, where she collapsed on a boulder.

To say blood pressure going to zero instantly stops an organism is like saying fuel pressure going to zero will instantly stop a gasoline engine. It won't. The impending doom is certain and swift, but not instantaneous.