Are hollow points really "deadlier" than FMJ?

[Odd Job]

Going back to your photo of that liver I posted, do you think that an FMJ could be capable of producing a similar cavity, again assuming all other variables were the same?

I would have to find another liver that was shot under the same conditions with an FMJ. My best guess is that a stable FMJ travelling in a straight line would not produce that degree of cavitation.

 

[tubeshooter]

This poll is misleading.

You read the thread title, click the poll and answer it, and then see that it is talking about some "pressure wave".



I think that is why 26% of people (myself included) are answering "No", even though I suspect many feel that HP is in fact "deadlier" than FMJ (for a different reason entirely). Good thing you can change your vote.


This was not a well designed poll. Sorry OP, I hope you don't take offense.

 

[CraigC]

Because their goal is to limit penetration in flesh, while retaining as much penetration as possible in light barriers (like car glass) without the bullet being an undue liability. No cop on earth wants to carry FMJ because it's a threat to civilian bystanders.

That's not the purpose of hollowpoints. Sorry but you're long on ill-conceived theory and light everywhere else.

Cops are civilians too.

 

[lysanderxiii]

I stated very clearly it was just my opinion. I'm basing it on case studies I've seen where the bullet was identified, then comparing those case studies to ballistics gel testing of the same bullet (or a very similar one). For example, I saw a case study involving 9mm HSTs. They penetrate about 15'' in gel, whereas they only penetrated about 8'' in the actual victim. In one, no bone was involved, so that's not an answer. And that's only one example.

BTW, I've also noticed that gel isn't a very good predictor of whether bullets will expand reliably. Going back to the HST, the ones recovered from humans don't look nearly as nice as the ones recovered from gel, and are not nearly as consistent. I'm picking on the HST because it's a very common bullet with quite a bit of precedence behind it, that has a nearly perfect track record in gel testing. I'm not saying it's a bad bullet, I'm just saying that gel isn't nearly as close to living tissue as we would like to believe. And it's certainly not an accurate representation of what wounds will look like in a human, and on that point you're not likely to change my mind.

Okay, your two or three review of the internet qualifies you to discount 35 years of research by experts with actual training and access to actual results from thousands of shootings.

My mistake, carry on....

 

[grampajack]

That's not the purpose of hollowpoints.

That's exactly the purpose of hollow points, and that's exactly what the FBI testing protocols were designed for. All they care about is that the bullet falls into the 12-18'' range regardless of whether it's bare gel, denim, plywood, window glass, etc.

 

[CraigC]

That's exactly the purpose of hollow points, and that's exactly what the FBI testing protocols were designed for. All they care about is that the bullet falls into the 12-18'' range regardless of whether it's bare gel, denim, plywood, window glass, etc.

Horse hockey. Hollowpoints are used because they are more effective, not because they're less likely to exit. Are you really this obtuse??? The reason there is so little data comparing JHP's to FMJ's in actual terminal performance is that no one was stupid enough to think that they are even comparable, until now. Your entire argument is based on the "absence of evidence" fallacy.

 

[grampajack]

Horse hockey. Hollowpoints are used because they are more effective, not because they're less likely to exit. Are you really this obtuse??? The reason there is so little data comparing JHP's to FMJ's in actual terminal performance is that no one was stupid enough to think that they are even comparable, until now. Your entire argument is based on the "absence of evidence" fallacy.

Nonsense. Absolute, unadulterated nonsense.

 

[jim in Anchorage]

Easy question. There illegal in new jersey so I buy HP because I can.

 

[grampajack]

I believe this is the passage in "Gunshot Wounds" to which Odd Job was referring:

Soon after their introduction, hollow-point handgun bullets became the center of controversy. Many civil libertarian groups protested that they were “Dum-Dum bullets,” violated the “Geneva Convention,” and caused severe and more lethal wounds. All these statements are incorrect. The Dum-Dum “bullet” was in fact a .303 centerfire rifle cartridge loaded with a soft-point style bullet manufactured at the British Arsenal at Dum-Dum, India, in the late nineteenth century.

In regard to charges that hollow-point ammunition is “more lethal”, in an unpublished study of over 75 fatalities from hollow-point ammunition by the author, he was unable to demonstrate any death that would not have occurred if the bullet had been an all-lead bullet. As to increased severity of wounding, this is purely theoretical. To this day, the author cannot distinguish a wound by a hollow-point bullet from that by a solid-lead bullet of the same caliber until recovery of the actual bullet.

Now this begs the question, is a solid-lead bullet "deadlier" than an FMJ? At handgun velocities, I would bet not. At rifle velocities, maybe.

Here are a few videos showing pistol caliber, solid-lead bullets in gel. I chose to look at .38 Special first because it falls in between .380 and 9mm (two common carry rounds) energy wise, and it's available in wadcutter and semi-wadcutter, which would theoretically give it the best chance of being "more lethal."

The first video is a full wadcutter. The bullet did not fragment or deform in gel, and to my eye the overall results are indistinguishable from an FMJ. I think this also demonstrates the idea that bullet shape is somewhat negligible at typical handgun energy levels in terms of the crush cavity, i.e. that a flat nose bullet does not "crush" more tissue than a round nose one.



Again, another wadcutter with no deformation.



I would be willing to conclude that even a wadcutter performs more or less like an FMJ at energy levels typical of carry pieces. If a solid-lead bullet was to be more lethal than FMJ, I think that the wadcutter is going to give it the absolute best chance of demonstrating that. With no deformation of the bullet though I don't see any rationale to suggest that a solid-lead bullet is anymore likely to cause significant wounds than an FMJ.

 

[Sauer Grapes]

I wonder what the percentage of homicides committed involve HPs? Probably not many.
That said:
I'm going to continue to carry HPs for self defense.

 

[huntsman]

I watch the 1st 48 and they're pretty detailed with caliber and cartridge, from what I've seen thugs favor cheap fmj and it's not unusual for them to show case and bullet laying near body.

 

[grampajack]

I wonder what the percentage of homicides committed involve HPs? Probably not many.
That said:
I'm going to continue to carry HPs for self defense.

I've not come across any statistics on that. I would tend to bet that most criminals use FMJ, but obviously every police shooting is going to be with JHP, and probably also the majority of self defense shootings. Di Maio and others though seem to have no problem finding victims shot with JHP for their research. I think there are about a thousand fatal police shootings per year if I remember correctly, so I imagine it's not a problem finding subjects to study.

 

[Spats McGee]

As my mother used to say, "Enough!"