[Scenario-Your Opinion] % Chance of 1-Shot Stop With .40 JHP Through the Heart From A Full Size Gun?

LookAtYou · May 17, 2022

Ammo: Winchester Defender Bonded 180 Grain JHP (Test results from a M&P40C 3.5" Barrel)

Gun: Glock 22 (4.49" Barrel)

In your opinion, what is the % chance that just 1 shot from .40, through the heart, with THIS SPECIFIC ammo and sized gun, will do the job? No matter how big the person is.

People often tout .357 mag as the only pick of the common handgun ccw calibers that reliably/frequently achieves one shot stops, but I feel .40 isn't much less capable. Eh? Idk why people say .40 "Short & Weak"? It often hits harder than .45 AND .40 Hollow Points expands more reliably than .45, due to higher velocity. What gives? I say this setup would be a pretty frequent 1 shot stop too. And you get (POTENTIALLY) 16 "One-Shot Stops". .357 mag at most, on average, can give 7 potential 1 shot stops, due to only 7-round capacity.

481 · May 17, 2022

Any high quality, premium JHP will do its job if you do yours.

The real question is, ''Have you trained to become proficient enough to put the bullet where it needs to go while under the stress of a life-threatening assault?''

LookAtYou · May 17, 2022

481 said:
The real question is, ''Have you trained to become proficient enough to put the bullet where it needs to go while under the stress of a life-threatening assault?''

I get that, trust me I do. But I'm curious to get people's opinions on what a 0.65+" hole, placed through the heart, will or won't do. I think .40 is insanely capable of a round, yet is called the .40 Short & Weak?

481 · May 17, 2022

LookAtYou said:
I get that, trust me I do. But I'm curious to get people's opinions on what a 0.65+" hole, placed through the heart, will or won't do. I think .40 is insanely capable of a round, yet is called the .40 Short & Weak?

Someone else's opinion of a specific caliber isn't going to matter very much in any gunfight that you might find yourself in.

Choose, train with, and carry a high-quality firearm.
Load it with a high-quality JHP.
If you believe yourself to be at significant risk of having to use your firearm to defend yourself, and if you find it appealing, obtain an insurance policy such as CCW safe, USCCA or whatever else appeals to you.
Pray that you will never have to use any of the above.

As a general rule, people don't live very long with large holes through their heart, but there are exceptions to that rule.

Mike J · May 17, 2022

LookAtYou said:
I get that, trust me I do. But I'm curious to get people's opinions on what a 0.65+" hole, placed through the heart, will or won't do. I think .40 is insanely capable of a round, yet is called the .40 Short & Weak?

I am pretty sure that will kill whatever human or animal is shot through the heart. Of course it is still a cardiovascular stop. That means that whatever creature is shot there will continue doing whatever (fighting or attempting to flee) until it runs out of blood (oxygen). I say this because I know from hunting that you can hold for a lung/heart shot on an animal but depending on the angle it is standing at in relation to you, whether it moves as you pull the trigger, etcetera you may get different results. Of course this does depend on whether you hit one lung, two lungs or both & the heart. You can hold basically the same place when you shoot at an animal & get different results. I have shot deer & gotten a bang flop from a lung shot. I have also had them run 25 or 30 yards before they kicked out. With a central nervous system hit (neck shot) they will drop right there & not even move. The reason most people shoot for the chest cavity (heart & lungs) is because it is a lot bigger target than the neck shot. I hope you & I never find ourselves in the situation of having to shoot someone but if we do I don't imagine it will be a static situation where they are standing still waiting to be shot. There will probably be a lot of activity going on.

wbwanzer · May 17, 2022

I'm no ballistics expert or a medical expert, but I'll go out on a limb here and say 100% chance if it's through the heart unless it happens right outside the hospital door.

LookAtYou · May 17, 2022

481 said:
Someone else's opinion of a specific caliber isn't going to matter very much in any gunfight that you might find yourself in.

Choose, train with, and carry a high-quality firearm.
Load it with a high-quality JHP.
If you believe yourself to be at significant risk of having to use your firearm to defend yourself, and if you find it appealing, obtain an insurance policy such as CCW safe, USCCA or whatever else appeals to you.
Pray that you will never have to use any of the above.

As a general rule, people don't live very long with large holes through their heart, but there are exceptions to that rule.

So what's your personal stance on handgun caliber choice for self defense? Do you think all calibers are equally effective? What do you prefer to use for human self defense? What do you think of effectiveness of a .380? Would you carry a .380 for self-defense? Confidently?

Hartkopf · May 17, 2022

A 380 fmj through the heart will probably be 100% one shot stop. So would a 22LR. It might take a few minutes longer than the 40 though.

LookAtYou · May 17, 2022

What about same scenario, 1 bullet through the heart, but it's a .380 Flat Nose FMJ round? So no expansion, just penetration.

LookAtYou · May 17, 2022

Hartkopf said:
A 380 fmj through the heart will probably be 100% one shot stop. So would a 22LR. It might take a few minutes longer than the 40 though.

I literally just asked the same question, but for .380, right as you posted this lol.

LookAtYou · May 17, 2022

Hartkopf said:
A 380 fmj through the heart will probably be 100% one shot stop. So would a 22LR. It might take a few minutes longer than the 40 though.

What about the pictured .40 JHP through one lung? Would that still prove to frequently be lethal ya think?

481 · May 17, 2022

LookAtYou said:
So what's your personal stance on handgun caliber choice for self defense?

Personally, I'd prefer a center-fire rifle. An M14 would be nice. If confined to selecting a handgun, any of the service calibers (9mm, .357SIG, .357Magnum, .40S&W, 10mm, .45ACP) will do if loaded with a premium JHP like the Speer Gold Dot, Federal HST, Remington Golden Saber, Winchester Ranger 'T', etc.

LookAtYou said:
Do you think all calibers are equally effective?

That depends upon what you mean by 'effective'. You'll have to define 'effective' first. What does 'effective' mean? To some, it means instant lethality, to others it means creating some degree of physical incapacitation (that may not necessarily be lethal) after the bullet has struck an assailant, and others may define it as simply deterring an attack with—or without—a shot being fired that may—or may not—strike the assailant.

LookAtYou said:
What do you prefer to use for human self defense?

My preferences run the gamut; 9mm, .357SIG, .357Magnum, .40S&W, 10mm, .45ACP. I've carried them all and am comfortable with all of them.

LookAtYou said:
What do you think of effectiveness of a .380?

Lacking a definition of 'effectiveness' for the purpose of our discussion here, the .380ACP has its uses where smaller pistols are required but are not necessarily 'welcome'. In an NPE, a .380 might be my only option so that is what I would opt for.

LookAtYou said:
Would you carry a .380 for self-defense?

If circumstances require it, yes.

LookAtYou said:
Confidently?

...and with a prayer on my lips that I won't need to use it.

.

LookAtYou · May 17, 2022

481 said:
Personally, I'd prefer a center-fire rifle. An M14 would be nice. If confined to selecting a handgun, any of the service calibers (9mm, .357SIG, .357Magnum, .40S&W, 10mm, .45ACP) will do if loaded with a premium JHP like the Speer Gold Dot, Federal HST, Remington Golden Saber, Winchester Ranger 'T', etc.

That depends upon what you mean by 'effective'. You'll have to define 'effective' first. What does 'effective' mean? To some, it means instant lethality, to others it means creating some degree of physical incapacitation (that may not necessarily be lethal) after the bullet has struck an assailant, and others may define it as simply deterring an attack with—or without—a shot being fired that may—or may not—strike the assailant.

My preferences run the gamut; 9mm, .357SIG, .357Magnum, .40S&W, 10mm, .45ACP. I've carried them all and am comfortable with all of them.

Lacking a definition of 'effectiveness' for the purpose of our discussion here, the .380ACP has its uses where smaller pistols are required but are not necessarily 'welcome'. In an NPE, a .380 might be my only option so that is what I would opt for.

If circumstances require it, yes.

And with a prayer on my lips that I won't need to use it.

Effective meaning it stops the threat. Heck, let's just go with the instant lethality of the round definition. You think the 95 Gr WWB Flat Nose FMJ would be lacking in lethality? Like the chance for the assailant to keep fighting through it is a little too high for your standards?

481 · May 17, 2022

LookAtYou said:
Effective meaning it effectively stops the threat.

If the definition of a word includes the word being defined, it is not a definition.

LookAtYou said:
Heck, let's just go with the lethality of the round. You think the 95 Gr WWB Flat Nose FMJ would be lacking in lethality? Like the chance for the assailant to keep fighting through it is a little too high for your standards?

OK, so if we're looking at 'lethality' as our measure of effectiveness, even the lowly (by some folks' reckoning) .22LR is lethal.

With that in mind, the next question is, ''How much time does an assailant have to do all sorts of horrific things to you and/or your loved ones before he dies?''

LookAtYou · May 17, 2022

481 said:
If your definition of a word includes the word being defined, it is not a definition.

OK, so if we're looking at 'lethality' as our measure of effectiveness, even the lowly (by some folks' reckoning) .22LR is lethal.

With that in mind, the next question is, ''How much time does an assailant have to do all sorts of horrific things to you and/or your loved ones before he dies?''

Let's say, "reliable lethality". The vast, vast, vast, majority of the times, it will be lethal. If it isn't lethal, it's a surprise. Is .380 that to you? Maybe the line for this is drawn at 9mm, due to JHP ammo? Or .38, due to wadcutter ammo?

Would you personally consider it too risky to rely on .380 Flat Nose FMJ for self-defense against humans? Why or why not?

WrongHanded · May 17, 2022

A bullet hole through the heart will stop a person, no matter the caliber, 100% of the time. The question is, how long will it take to stop them? No one can tell you that.

The better question is: Can you hit the heart on a moving target 100% of the time? I know I can't.

The .40S&W is a solid and reliable cartridge. It was nicknamed "Short & Weak" because it was shorter and weaker than it's parent cartridge, the 10mm Auto. It's also know as the "Snap & Whip" these days, because it is both snappier and whippier than the 9mm (misspelling intentional). The .40 will do the job (as has been said), providing that you do yours (as has been said).

Unlike many people who measure other auto cartridges against the 9mm, I started with the .40S&W, so it's my baseline. It's decent, but thoroughly unremarkable at this point in time.

481 · May 17, 2022

LookAtYou said:
Let's say, "reliable lethality". The vast, vast, vast, majority of the times, it will be lethal. Is .380 that to you? Maybe the line for this is drawn at 9mm, due to JHP ammo?

I appreciate what you are attempting. However, it is just not that simple. If we accept the standard of a particular pistol/ammunition combination as being ''reliably lethal....the vast, vast, vast, majority of the times'' that it is used, that is a pretty tall order, don't you think?

Can we reasonably and realistically expect such performance (namely, a bullet that could be called ''reliably lethal....the vast, vast, vast, majority of the times'') from any caliber, rifle or handgun, irrespective of what part of a human body the bullet strikes?

Could a bullet that passes through someone's hand be expected to be ''reliably lethal....the vast, vast, vast, majority of the times''?

Conversely, a bullet passing through someone's brain stem might easily meet that standard, but then caliber really wouldn't matter in that case would it?

.

stanley_white · May 17, 2022

Is my attacker an opportunity-motivated criminal or an ideologically-motivated terrorist?

-Stan

LookAtYou · May 17, 2022

481 said:
I appreciate what you are attempting. However, it is just not that simple. If we accept the standard of a particular pistol/ammunition combination as being ''reliably lethal....the vast, vast, vast, majority of the times'' that it is used, that is a pretty tall order, don't you think?

Can we reasonably and realistically expect such performance (namely, a bullet that could be called ''reliably lethal....the vast, vast, vast, majority of the times'') from any caliber, rifle or handgun, irrespective of what part of a human body the bullet strikes?

Could a bullet that passes through someone's hand be expected to be ''reliably lethal....the vast, vast, vast, majority of the times''?

Conversely, a bullet passing through someone's brain stem might easily meet that standard, but then caliber really wouldn't matter in that case would it?

.

One .380 FN FMJ to one lung. What effect would this commonly have, in your opinion? How likely would death be?

481 · May 17, 2022

LookAtYou said:
One .380 FN FMJ to one lung. Shat effect would this commonly have, in your opinion?

Pain. Difficulty breathing. Diminished blood pressure. Possible loss of consciousness occurring in seconds to minutes to hours.

LookAtYou said:
How likely would death be?

Death could be immediate or it could result days later from sepsis. Or it may not happen at all.

.

herrwalther · May 17, 2022

Ammo is cheap compared to life. Anything worth shooting once is worth shooting twice. And you at least double the chance the attacker stops.

dogtown tom · May 17, 2022

LookAtYou said:
In your opinion, what is the % chance that just 1 shot from .40, through the heart, with THIS SPECIFIC ammo and sized gun, will do the job?

The same % chance as any other round.
A pistol round through the heart is a fatal wound. That heart doesn't know if the bullet that just passed through is .40 or .355 or whatever.

dogtown tom · May 17, 2022

herrwalther said:
Ammo is cheap compared to life. Anything worth shooting once is worth shooting twice. And you at least double the chance the attacker stops.

Harris County, TX District Attorney John Holmes: "If it is okay to kill a guy dead, it is okay to kill him dead, dead, dead."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/daily/nov98/12/houston.htm

shoobe01 · May 17, 2022

As above: What is a "Stop" to you? If you can always shoot them through the heart then anything down to probably a non-expanding .17 will kill the target if you wait a bit.

Why shoot them only once?

Why not bring a friend, who has a rifle?

Etc.

edwardware · May 17, 2022

LookAtYou said:
In your opinion, what is the % chance that just 1 shot from .40, through the heart, with THIS SPECIFIC ammo and sized gun, will do the job?

A hole a quarter that size "through the heart" will "do the job."

LookAtYou said:
. . . yet is called the .40 Short & Weak?

. . . because it is a short(ened) and weak(ened) 10mm Magnum, developed because the FBI's limpwrist brigade couldn't consistently qualify with a Man's cartridge.

. . . and because 10mm really is overkill for typical police work. None the less .40Short'n'Weak is both historically accurate and delightfully irritating to fan bois.

[Scenario-Your Opinion] % Chance of 1-Shot Stop With .40 JHP Through the Heart From A Full Size Gun?

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Similar threads