One-Shot Incapacitation by Handgun Compared

Status
Not open for further replies.
aaaaa

aaaaa

Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2022
Messages
2,193
Location
Near Detroit MI
I don't know where they got this table but it seems wrong. How can .32 caliber have the highest one-shot incapacitation rate among handgun calibers listed? Should I trade in all my handguns for .32s?;)
main-qimg-23b8cb1e5f82dfe1da5c7d5a66224cd6-lq.jpg
Source: Expand First Post and Scroll Down.

So the person who posted the chart explains it this way,
No one wants to carry a below average handgun into an encounter. In the data above, however, the .32 is clearly above average and outshines most handgun rounds in terms of reported usage to incapacitate. Smaller calibers carried by civilians (like the .32 above) often stand out among undifferentiated percentage data because the incidence of their use by civilians is either much higher and at shorter ranges than those commonly associated with agency use (9, .38, or .357).
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
@aaaaa
Just above that graph from your link the person references the use of the .32 in Europe.
I have no idea if this is true, the comment or the graph, but I ain’t dumping my 9mm’s, .38’s, 357’s or .45’s on anyone’s opinion on the .32 is better in any way to them. Not saying there is anything wrong with the .32. I am just saying I wouldn’t base my decisions on a discussion from Quora where as one dude is referencing “Europe” as his basis of justification for his opinion.


From the link you posted:
The .32caliber (both in a revolver and in an auto-loader) is very popular among law enforcement and security agencies in Europe and other parts of the world. Only in America is it considered a “weak” or ineffective round, which is remarkable because it actually has a pretty good track record.

main-qimg-23b8cb1e5f82dfe1da5c7d5a66224cd6-lq.jpg
 
aaaaa said:
How can .32 caliber have the highest one-shot incapacitation rate among handgun calibers listed?
Click to expand...
Imagine what caliber's all the LE, MIL, and competition shooters carry, and what the normal training mantra is for shooting an attacker, "shoot until the threat stops". Since most of these are trained shooters, who can shoot quickly, shooting high capacity firearms, it's possible they can shoot several rounds into an attacker before the attackers body knows it is actually stopped. It may be the first shot is actually the shot that stops the threat, but it is unlikely for us to know, as the body may have absorbed four or five shots in a short time and while we may know which bullet was the stopper, we may not know in what order that round was fired. Was it the first, and the attackers body just didn't react yet, or was it the fifth, since the rounds all arrived in such a short time.

On the other hand, perhaps someone that carries a .32 caliber pistol may not be trained at all, and a typical .32 caliber pistol is a lower capacity gun, these shooters may shoot once, assess, shoot one more time, assess, shoot one more time, assess. It's possible, the slow delivery of shots allows the attacker to cease their attack after the first shot, not requiring additional rounds.
 
Do you really believe a 32 acp has better incapacitation potential than a 45 acp?
I had three of these books, this was the 3rd:
4b8e47e2baa3c9077b1ba05ae138c582aa369de1.jpg
On one shot stop % the best 9mm HP and 45 acp HP were about 90% versus maybe 60% for 32 acp Silvertip - as I recall.
The problem is it excludes all those that required multiple hits to stop.
In the data OP referenced it takes on average two - three hits to incapacitate, which is not shown on that chart.
Problem with that chart is same as with the one shot stop % from book, excludes all the examples where multiple hits were required.
If OP would prefer to bet his life on 32 FMJ, or Silvertip rather than a 9mm HST that is his choice, certainly not mine.
I see incidents where a single attacker takes 5 hits or more and is not quickly incapacitated, by at least 9mm HP - if LE involved:
https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/do-examples-incidents-matter-to-you.902897/
Carry less than 9mm? Not me, no thanks.
And when I was a cop 92-94 we were taught to "double tap" (357 Mag/9mm/45) - because we did not count on one shot stops.
 
Everyone I know carries a handgun. I don't know a single person who carries a 32. In fact, I can't think of anyone who even owns one. Based on what I see for sale nowadays, I don't even know if I could honestly say that they are in common use. Also, modern guns hold more than 1 round. Why not exploit this engineering marvel when it matters the most?
 
Any charts based on Edward Sanow's and Mr. Evan Marshall's data or "analysis" should be treated with skepticism. The one book of theirs I purchased did not provide their "data sets", that is the incidents they used as support for their theories. I came to the conclusion they were just another bunch of guys who figured out a way to make money selling books, all based on the hidden rabbit in their hats. The rabbit proves they are right, but you can't see the rabbit.

One stop shots based on what target areas hit? What we need are some good data bases, and who is out there shooting humans in a controlled manner? Who is lining up hundreds of people and shooting this group in the head, or heart, or lung area, or from side to side, to determine how long it takes the victim to die? No one that I know.
 
Just for info, the 32 HR and 327 snubbies from SW and Ruger are popular guns among some of the well known trainer set for their snub guns.
 
Shooting humans and gathering data is a tough prospect to determine results. The people doing the shooting are almost never the ones examining the body, and there is a large variety among humans, size, musculature, will to live/fight on, drugs, etc.

On the other hand, there is some value to paying attention to what handguns/handgun calibers do on human size game animals. In spite of all the humans that are shot each year, we shoot a significantly larger number of game animals each year, and those that are hunting those animals are probably hoping for a one shot stop. In addition, those doing these shootings are probably repeat shooters, so they study what works and what doesn't and for the most part have personally examined the animal to determine how their particular round fared. Over a period of time, since over their lifetimes they have probably taken a number of game, they have determined what calibers and bullet designs perform well, and which ones don't.
 
Im thinking the reason this country is in the state it is today, is because of silly crap like "one shot stop" gullibility.

It seems those who can think critically, are becoming more and more of a rare breed, and "Idiocracy", as silly a movie it was, is more and more becoming truth, and not a comedy.

As was mentioned above, and regardless the caliber, "shoot them to the ground" should be your mantra.

Otherwise, that one shot you let off, and then stopped to look (cause your super-duper caliber is a one-shot leader on paper), may very well end up being the "one shot" data recorded. Just not in the way you thought. ;)
 
Slamfire said:
Any charts based on Edward Sanow's and Mr. Evan Marshall's data or "analysis" should be treated with skepticism. The one book of theirs I purchased did not provide their "data sets", that is the incidents they used as support for their theories. I came to the conclusion they were just another bunch of guys who figured out a way to make money selling books, all based on the hidden rabbit in their hats. The rabbit proves they are right, but you can't see the rabbit./QUOTE]

I have seen that rabbit and he's a big one. Evan never said he was looking at multiple hits. He was looking at one shot stops. As to hit location. That was averaged out by the large data set. Same with distance, clothing and other factors.

I asked him once why he didn't publish his data. His response was that he wasn't going to make it easy for his critics, "let them collect their own data". So far no one has.

The simple fact is that Evans study is the only one, that I know of, to study actual bullet performance on actual human tissues. Not on a manufactured approximation.

IronHand
Click to expand...
 
Here is the study the chart in OP came from:
https://www.buckeyefirearms.org/alternate-look-handgun-stopping-power

32 acp result based on 25 people shot versus 9mm with 456 people shot.

Lets look at a different piece of data:
32 acp % of people not incapacitated - 40%
9mm % of people not incapacitated - 13%
40 S&W % of people not incapacitated 13%
Now tie together the given accuracy rate of about 75% for those 3 calibers along with about 2 hits required to incapacitate.
Potential for having to fire 3 rounds to incapacitate one attacker and the odds of them not being incapacitated are higher with 32 acp.
Entertain the idea of having two attackers and using the data given that is possibly 6 rounds fired and a 40% chance attacker(s) is not incapacitated.

Lets see how 32 acp performs from a P32:
https://www.luckygunner.com/lounge/the-best-32-acp-ammo-for-self-defense/
Fiocchi 73 gr. FMJ 16.8''/.31
Okay, now lets find a 9mm HP that penetrates at least 16.8'' like the 32 FMJ
https://www.luckygunner.com/labs/self-defense-ammo-ballistic-tests/
Federal 124+P HST 18.3''/.66

Given equal or more penetration 9mm HST makes a hole double the size of 32 FMJ.

I had a Seecamp 32 acp in the 1990's and subsequently a P32 a few years later, so I can offer an objective opinion. ;)
Is there anywhere I'd prefer to defend myself with a Seecamp/ P32 rather than a 9mm Kahr PM9/CM9, Glock 43, Sig 365? No. Nope. No thanks.
 
trackskippy said:
Im thinking the reason this country is in the state it is today, is because of silly crap like "one shot stop" gullibility.

It seems those who can think critically, are becoming more and more of a rare breed, and "Idiocracy", as silly a movie it was, is more and more becoming truth, and not a comedy.

As was mentioned above, and regardless the caliber, "shoot them to the ground" should be your mantra.

Otherwise, that one shot you let off, and then stopped to look (cause your super-duper caliber is a one-shot leader on paper), may very well end up being the "one shot" data recorded. Just not in the way you thought. ;)
Click to expand...

Along that line of thought is the apparent willingness of people to accept as fact a series of books (by Evan Marshall & Ed Sanow) based upon a collection of shooting data that has been shown to have been poorly managed at best and manipulated at worst. The Ellifritz work, which was intended as a better attempt at collecting combat data, may very well avoid the poor management of the M&S ''data base'', but it still suffers from inadequate design noble intentions aside.
 
LEO desire the ability to penetrate barriers such as vehicles. They want more power and don't care much about size or weight.
I have a stereotype view on owners of smaller weapons. I see them used against domestic partners who may not be armed or ?
The person using a .22 may have been able to practice more then other weapons? Does the data include rifles and carbines?
Why don't head shots count in some of the studies? There are a multitude of variables.
The USA stuck with large caliber pistols while the rest of the world went smaller. The need can't be that different.
 
Agree, under the current state of affairs, the 32 caliber is not much of a stopper, but I think with the Ruger .327 Federal Magnum revolver, it ought to be competitive with the 38 Special. Why does 32 get so little respect. You can hardly get ammo in 32, very few choices and far between, unless it is 32 ACP, there is tons of that out there. Maybe we need a revolver chambered for 32 ACP! It could be a shorter revolver considering the length of the cartridges, and 32 ACP is about the same pressure as a 32 H&R Magnum, or approx 20,000 psi, comparable to 38 Special +P.
 
There is also the very real problem in that, within the engineering of firearms and their ammunition, relatively tiny values make significant differences between them (why else would we have so many 6.8 or .357 caliber choices about?)
But, humans, like many animals, do not "scale" in the same way as ammunition does. Going from 1100fps to 2600fps matters, but 1000 to 1100fps can have little significant difference.
But, it's tremendously easy for "us" to get all tied up knots over fractions of a millimeter.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

M
  • Locked
Formulating the Pressure Wave Hypothesis
2
Replies
45
Views
4K
thales
T
P
  • Locked
Defining stopping power (Michael Courtney's thread)
2 3
Replies
59
Views
2K
Michael Courtney
M
M
  • Locked
Contributions to the scientific literature
Replies
5
Views
787
Michael Courtney
M
O
  • Locked
As promised - 32 Cal tests from this weekend!!!
2 3 4
Replies
79
Views
7K
420Stainless
4
J
  • Locked
Shot placement is key!
2
Replies
29
Views
2K
James T Thomas
J
Back
Top