What does being a "better shot" have to do with the issue at hand?
How vital is it to get defense ammo?
- Thread starter The Exile
- Start date
- Status
As mentioned, upwards of 2 feet of penetration with 124gr 9mm FMJ is likely.
In terms of guns, yes. If you have the money to train with your self-defense ammo, that would probably be a good idea too, but most people don't. Back when I was single and couldn't figure out how to spend my money as fast as I made it, every round I fired through my centerfire pistols was a premium JHP loading. Now, things are a bit different. It's very common to train with a loading that duplicates (to a reasonable extent) the recoil and ballistics of one's carry loading and to just shoot enough of one's carry loading to make sure it is reliable in one's carry firearm.
That's a good point. Let's think through the whole situation, not just one possible outcome.
1. Nobody recommends shooting with a "crowd" as a backstop, but it's possible that one might not realize there are people downrange from an attacker, or the situation might be so dire that shooting even when collateral damage is likely is still warranted.
2. If the situation is so dire that it warrants shooting at an attacker standing in front of a crowd, one should do one's best to connect with all shots.
3. If one must shoot with a crowd as a backstop and all the shots are hits, which is better, bullets that go through the attacker and a foot into the person behind him, or bullets that will likely stop in the attacker?
4. If one must shoot with a crowd as a backstop and a shot misses, which is better, a bullet that will go through two bystanders, or only one?
5. If one must shoot with a crowd as a backstop and a shot misses, which is better, bullets that will lose considerable energy and deform on impact with a hard surface, or bullets that ricochet very easily and are still a good projectiles aerodynamically and from a penetration standpoint after the ricochet impact?
If you want to carry ball ammo, just do it. But don't try to rationalize it by pretending that any other course of action would hurt your shooting performance.
1. The fact is that it's not difficult to find practice ammo that will duplicate carry loadings for all practical purposes--at least one company sells a package deal that come with a handful of self-defense loads and a number of practice rounds that duplicate the trajectory/recoil of the self-defense loads. Furthermore, in a lot of cases, good self-defense ammo will be more accurate than ball ammo. I used to do all my serious pistol accuracy testing with my self-defense loading because it shot more accurately than any of the ball ammo I could get my hands on.
2. Even if you can't get something that is a perfect match for your carry loading, you could get something that's close enough that it won't be an issue. People used to practice with .38Spl and carry .357Mag in their revolvers for duty/self-defense and it didn't seem to cause issues. It would be pitifully simple to find a practice load that shoots more like your carry load than .38Spl shoots like .357Mag.
There are some valid reasons to carry FMJ for self-defense.
1. It is legally required.
2. It is all that is available.
3. One's carry gun is not reliable with expanding ammunition.
4. Any circumstances under which the gun would be used would demand the maximum possible penetration. Perhaps one's carry gun is in a relatively light caliber and is to be carried in extremely cold weather where very heavy clothing is ubiquitous. It might be wise to choose FMJ to insure sufficient penetration.
5. Expanding ammunition that meets the FBI's penetration specification is unavailable for the gun/caliber chosen for carry.
well, the issue being about self defense, being able to hit your target most effectivly seems like it should be first priority. this is part of the reason you hear people say to carry the ammo your practice with. it will cycle your firearm, and you are tuned to the recoil and impulse of that specific ammo. having to shoot a different ammo in a high stress situation doesn't seem like it would make anyone more likely to hit their target, quite the opposite - and well, it doens't matter a whit what the bullet type is if it doesn't hit the target, in terms of helping you defend yourself.
for the OPs inquiry, many people like the high cost SD ammo, they believe a majic bullet will help them. I don't really buy into it, you have to be able to quickly and consistently hit COM, reliably. I don't buy into SD ammo being any better for this than regular FMJ ammo. The bullet type may create a more significant wound cavity, but only if you actually get rounds out of your firearm that hit the intended target. You have to be able to put multiple shots on target as quickly as possible, SD specific ammo will not help you do this - and common sense says it is more likely to lower performance of speed and accuracy.
If you are at home, don't worry about it at all, just go get your rifle.
Can you share any example of where this has happened? Pretty sure this is statistically non existent as an actual risk in self defense. That and since you might miss, it may be a good idea to know what is behind your target before going all spray and pray.
FL-NC
Member
Using a cheaper type of ball ammunition for training is a common practice in many agencies, including some I worked for/with. Another practice is that of expending older duty ammunition in training, either due to it having been in circulation for a while, or because it has been replaced with a different type of ammunition. For example, the last contract I worked on we trained with PMC ball, but were issued hydra shocks for duty use. At some point, the agency decided to switch from hydra shocks to gold dot, so the hydra shocks that were in circulation were downloaded into ammo cans for practice use, right next to the cans of ball. The first contract I worked with did all training with ball (PMC I think) but required us to "fire for record" using duty ammunition (hydra shock). We were told that this was for liability purposes. Scores remained consistent across the board. Both agencies issued Glock 9mm pistols. No one had any issues with reliability of their pistols (no surprise there). Qualification tables in each example were realistic and combat based. Targets were either IPSC type or FBI qual targets, with engagement distances from 5 to 25 meters. Getting hits in the 5 ring or A zone were not affected by the ammunition used. As far as "being a better shot" with a specific type of pistol ammunition in a SD scenario, IMO this is folly. Unless the shooting scenario was something like a bullseye match, long range silhouette shooting, or something in that category, this isn't even a thing. Also an apples and oranges comparison.
Okay. How much "better" need one be?
I don't hear that.
I hear that people should carry good defensive ammunition, shoot enough of it to be confident in it, and practice with less expensive ammunition with a similar POI.
I do.
I don't.
It is patently obvious that one should try to do that.
No, the purpose of premium defensive ammunition with bonded JHP bullets that penetrate and expand in accordance with FBI testing protocols is not to help a shooter hit a target multiple times rapidly.
???????????
The likelihood may be remote, but the severity of the consequence would be extremely high.
That is the reason for the maximum penetration specification in the FBI test protocols.
For self defense. Yes, that's what they do. Read up on Fourth Amendment case law.
Charlie98
Member
You make my point for me. Any responsible hunter uses bullets designed for... hunting. The same concept is applied to the OP's question about 'expensive' SD ammo vs FMJ.
entropy
Member
Given.
If one can afford this. Most of us can't. Therefore, we do the next best thing; Practice with a round whose flight ballistics are so similar as to be indistinguishable. Several of us have mentioned such ammo pairings.
Unless you are shooting 100,000 of a specific round a year and nothing else. None of us here do that, including you. No one gets that "tuned to" a round.
If you are shooting 100,000 rounds of a specific round, you will be able to put one or two of a different round on target. Several members have already mentioned the bulk of their practice is with .22 LR versions of their CCW.
Given.
While there are some people out there like that, they tend to be even more grossly uninformed about SD ammo than you are. You have focused on flight ballistics, on how a bullet gets to it's target, but seem to only touch lightly on terminal ballistics, what the bullet does when it gets there. There is plenty of research on that subject. I suggest reading Dr. Martin Fackler's works on the subject, as well as Evans and Sanow's, though they are a bit outdated,
This is ideal; there have been many successful cases of self defense that that didn't happen in. But, yes, I agree. That is how and why we train.
Again, several of us have stated that our SD is more accurate than our practice ammo. If I can get them all touching at 7 yds with .45 ACP ball, how much more accurate do I need to be?
Again, the best SD rounds in a given caliber emulate the ball rounds' ballistics. Yes the 'screwdiver head' 150 gr. .45 ACP round touted in that slick ad WILL shoot differently than 30 ball-and I wouldn't recommend it. But Speer Gold Dot 230, Fed. HST 230, and Hornady Critical Duty 220 shoot to the same POA as ball through both of my .45 ACP's. I have carried all 3 of these rounds in the past, and would not hesitate to again.
Again, an ideal, but yes, I agree.
Several of us have repeatedly iterated that indeed it will.
Ok, now it sounds like you are trolling. YOU are the one that brought up 'you have to be able to quickly and consistently hit COM, reliably', not Ernie.
Yes, of course, the 4th Rule, "know your target and what is beyond". We all know it. But John brings up some salient points. There is always the possibility one might have to fire with a crowd in the back ground.
I suggest you educate your self on self defense ammo. Every bullet a person fires has a lawyer attached to it.
'Common sense' and real world experience are often at odds. I have real world experience with it, and no, they are not.
Or shotgun. There we are in agreement.
Last edited:
I'm not trying to convince anyone one way or the other, just sharing my view for the OP. I have, but don't carry Self Defense specific ammo (actually, I do in one of my revolvers), to me it is just another variable I don't want to worry about in a 9mm, and one that won't make me more efficient in hitting a target if the need arises. The ammo you're carrying places a very distant 2nd to the ammo hitting a target. IMHO, you are way better off spending time and nrg on practice and training than being concerned with any particular ammo. Sometimes, fancy ammo can also underperform. If all the officers in the Miami Date shootout had carried ball ammo, it would have ended the conflict and the event would not be famous. Their hollow point ammo failed to penetrate where ball ammo would have finished it very quickly. Is fancy and often expensive SD ammo always better? simply - no it is not always better. It all depends on circumstances, and that's not good enough for me to care about adding in another variable, I'll take reliability and less variables, but to each their own. I'm not trying to convince anyone, just sharing that there are people who've though about this and decided against SD ammo. I also, just carry ball ammo in my little .32 ACP, as the benfit of SD specific ammo in that caliber and some questions about reliability in my specific firearms, point to not worth it. So, for me, if I'm willing to carry fmj in .32 ACP, well - fmj in 9m has more foot pounts of nrg, so - good enough IMHO. I could worry about types of ammo, but I'll put than time and nrg into practice and training.
Double Naught Spy
Sus Venator
It would be a good idea to know what is beyond your target, but in a crisis, people often do not check or don't have the liberty of putting a priority on the lives of bystanders over their own. Not a lot of people get shot with through and through a person shots. I don't think it has ever been a high percentage issue. However, most people not intentionally shot are shot directly, by ricochet, or through walls/barriers.
Take the 2012 Empire State shooting. Police got the gunman, but shot 9 other people in the process, most but not all by ricochets. IIRC, 2 were directly shot by cops, 7 hit by ricochets.
https://www.foxnews.com/us/nypd-9-shooting-bystander-victims-hit-by-police-gunfire
Direct fire...
https://abcnews.go.com/US/cops-crew-member-killed-omaha-police-shooting/story?id=25155611
https://nypost.com/2020/06/24/bystander-shot-when-retired-nypd-cop-opens-fire-amid-restaurant-fight/
https://www.police1.com/officer-sho...cidentally-shoot-bystanders-e8Eupec49UWVG8HB/
Shot through wall...
https://www.pennlive.com/news/2018/03/friendly_fire_killed_deputy_ma.html
And sometimes the hostage just gets shot over and over again by the good guys...
https://www.latimes.com/local/lanow...age-killed-police-gunfire-20140811-story.html
And sometimes, it is simply the wrong target identified...
So hollowpoints may help reduce pass through injuries or death, but all that great extra damage they are supposed to do can be very detrimental when the wrong targets get shot.
It takes less time to compile a list of 9mm ammo that meets FBI protocols than it takes to boil water
Today's premium ammunition had not been developed. Today's FBI recommendations should tell you something.
How about improved performance?
I've never heard of anyone making such a decision on an informed basis, except those who use ammunition that will not expand anyway, or they are not permitted to carry defensive ammunition in their jurisdiction.
How do you think that would benefit you?
I don't worry--I look at Dr'.Gary Roberts' list and buy what I can find.
D.B. Cooper
Member
- Joined
- Oct 2, 2016
- Messages
- 4,396
Laws of Armed Conflict
Trunk Monkey
member
When I was in the Army they called it The Law Of Land Warfare.
I don't claim to be an expert. There was a scene in the movie Breaker Morant where they're talking about how The Boers use Dum-Dums and it stuck in my mind
TomJ
Contributing Member
From BuffaloBore's website:
Also, while round nosed bullets tend to slip through tissues doing little damage; flat nosed bullets crush their way through tissues and do considerably more damage.
This compares RN ammunition to their 45 ACP flat nose ammunition, but the point is that of your three choices, RN, FN or HP RN will do the least amount of damage.
Also, while round nosed bullets tend to slip through tissues doing little damage; flat nosed bullets crush their way through tissues and do considerably more damage.
This compares RN ammunition to their 45 ACP flat nose ammunition, but the point is that of your three choices, RN, FN or HP RN will do the least amount of damage.
Trying to convince someone that is carrying FMJ ammo (and defending the choice) to carry HP is likely a waste of my time.
Like the folks that are content to carry ___ in a "good" area, but "up" their carry to ____ elsewhere, they are likely not going to change.
So I'll not try, but I will say...
LE in the USA on patrol carry at least 9mm and its a HP (Don't care if there is one or two examples that don't when 99% do.)
Less than 380 is unacceptable for SD if stopping a threat ASAP is a priority.
380 is minimal / marginal even in its better loads and should be chosen when one can do no better, ex: "work attire".
9mm minimum with a good HP like HST, Ranger, Gold Dot if stopping threat(s) ASAP is a priority.
Like the folks that are content to carry ___ in a "good" area, but "up" their carry to ____ elsewhere, they are likely not going to change.
So I'll not try, but I will say...
LE in the USA on patrol carry at least 9mm and its a HP (Don't care if there is one or two examples that don't when 99% do.)
Less than 380 is unacceptable for SD if stopping a threat ASAP is a priority.
380 is minimal / marginal even in its better loads and should be chosen when one can do no better, ex: "work attire".
9mm minimum with a good HP like HST, Ranger, Gold Dot if stopping threat(s) ASAP is a priority.
Corpral_Agarn
Member
Here's how I see it:
Defensive Ammo>target ammo>no ammo
Defensive Ammo>target ammo>no ammo
I agree. I'm not sure you understood the point of my response--it needs to be taken in the context of what it was responding to. I was responding to a sarcastic remark that was pointing out that there was no need to be worried about overpenetration because the biggest danger to bystanders was shots that missed.
The point of the list wasn't to encourage people to shoot with innocent people in the background, it was to help think through the possibilities and see what the difference between expanding and non-expanding ammo would be in each of the possibilities.
As for whether there are really situations where one might feel justified shooting even when collateral damage is likely, I think there are, but they are probably extreme cases. The French Theater attack might be one. Shooting at an attacker, even though he was surrounded by innocent people during that attack could have been justified, IMO. There were 137 people killed, about another 100 seriously wounded, and more than 300 more who were injured but not seriously. In a situation like that, it might make good sense to go ahead and try to kill or stop the attackers by shooting at them even with the very real threat of collateral damage.
It's more likely that a defender would fire when innocents might be hit not deliberately but rather because they aren't aware of their presence. It's pretty common for people in life-or-death situations to get Tunnel Vision on their opponent as their brain tries to restrict any input that isn't essential to survival. Also, things happen very fast, often in low light, and can be chaotic--with both the defender and the attacker likely moving and poor lighting, it could be difficult to insure that no shots are broken with anyone in the danger zone.
jdh
Member
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2008
- Messages
- 1,375
Get a good jhp if possible, make sure it functions. Looking up ballistic tests is kind of interesting I think. Flat point is better than round nose, if you can get any jhp. Some of the "cheaper " jhp do a decent job. It's all too dependent on financial situation, firearm platform, training etc.
A 22 lr round nose placed in the head or neck area is likley a fight Ender. I just don't want someone loosing sleep because they can only load a Remington or Winchester white box jhp in their defense pistol. Run the best you can.
A 22 lr round nose placed in the head or neck area is likley a fight Ender. I just don't want someone loosing sleep because they can only load a Remington or Winchester white box jhp in their defense pistol. Run the best you can.
Trunk Monkey
member
jdh
Member
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2008
- Messages
- 1,375
Found this:
https://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/DR_pubs/DR_a/pdf/web/ARN19354_FM 6-27 _C1_FINAL_WEB_v2.pdf
Dated August 2019.
You are over-thinking. If your training ammo provides a reasonable simulation of your premium defensive ammo, that will do.
Corpral_Agarn
Member
and you can practice a LOT more often.
D.B. Cooper
Member
- Joined
- Oct 2, 2016
- Messages
- 4,396
Flat Point cast lead projectiles from Buffalo Bore and/or HSM, won't feed worth a crap in an autoloader; they sometimes hang up in my lever gun.
D.B. Cooper
Member
- Joined
- Oct 2, 2016
- Messages
- 4,396
LOAC may be an Air Force specific term, or an outdated term (mid to late 1990s). I was in the Army prior to that, but I don't recall what they called it.
But we're also wandering off topic at this point. Not that it matters; I think the general, almost unanimous consensus (a rare thing on the internet these days) is that quality SD ammo is, indeed vital, and FMJ should only be used for training unless no other option is available (which, given the current run on ammo, is likely the case for many people, especially new gun owners.)
- Status
Similar threads
