Actually, in an attack, that's exactly now it'll work: success or failure. I grant you trial-by-armchair is different...
No, I didn't imply that, although it could be (dopeyly) inferred.
There was nothing else to infer. So what were you trying to say? Please spell it out for dopey people like me.
You also said that it doesn't matter why a round fails, just that it failed. I think that such a statement pretty much speaks for itself....
And spare us all the implication that we need a pedantic primer on the probability of dice, huh?
The arguments that you made indicated a need. If you didn't need it, then why did you say what you did? Note that this probably seems ruder than I actually intend, but I'm not sure how else to say it.
In the overall determinants of gunfight outcome (from awareness, use of cover, accuracy, number of shots fired, caliber choice, etc.) how much influence do you think a 95 gr FMJ vs a 90 gr HP has?
In the big picture, it is but one consideration of many. That said, in a shooting incident, if the deeper-penetrating round actually reaches and damages vital tissues that another round would not have reached, given identical shot placement, then the choice of ammo can have a profound influence.
Although it varies from case to case, on a relative scale I would say that load selection is more important overall than caliber selection. Even so, naturally load selection is especially critical in less powerful calibers since there is less momentum and energy to work with. FMJ rounds penetrate significantly deeper, but trade off expansion. Since they behave differently from JHP rounds, it is likely that they differ in overall effectiveness, as well. This is perhaps more true for .380 ACP than more powerful calibers in the big picture because most JHP loads in this caliber only achieve around 8" of penetration, which is starting to get pretty shallow (which is subjective, I realize) for the typical size of the intended target.
So, FBI agents are free to choose whatever they want, no matter FBI regs?
With the odd exception, I think it's a safe bet that most of us here are not FBI agents, although even they can choose whatever they want for their personal firearms.
Regarding the intended audience of the FBI report that recommended 12-18 inches of penetration, it was all of law enforcement, but that doesn't necessarily mean that it has no applicability for civilian use. The goal of the penetration standard specifically is to maximize terminal effectiveness of pistol shots, regardless of the audience they had in mind. For civilians who wish to do the same, here is what the FBI thinks, take it or leave it. And for civilians who wish to maximize bystander safety instead, do whatever you think is best.
It was my intention to debate whether we do well to generalize them to private, defensive users. I understand the stance of "the FBI says so," but I also understand the stance of those who wish to decide for themselves.
So do I, but meaning no offense, the way you presented your case opened the door for all kinds of confusing and distracting arguments from both sides.
To an extent, sure. Also based on assumptions--that may not apply as often to us--
All of which I have already gladly acknowledged.
None of us can predict how the target will move in a real shooting, so I think that this is broadly applicable.
If I haven't stated this before (I thought I did), then I'll state it now--the well-known FBI penetration standard has nothing to do with penetrating barriers. It only concerns how far they think a bullet needs to penetrate through a human body in order to maximize its wounding potential (and this implies through-penetration--just barely). Regardless of whether barriers must be penetrated along the way or not, they're saying that 12-18 inches of penetration into flesh is required--these numbers are NOT influenced by barriers whatsoever.
Barriers don't enter the picture at all until we consider the FBI test protocols for ammunition, which is a separate matter. What they do is place each of a specified set of barriers (which includes simulated clothing and no barrier at all) in front of a block of calibrated ballistic gelatin, shoot through each barrier separately, and record the resulting penetration depth that corresponds to each barrier. What they look for in a duty load for their own agents is 12-18 inches--the same numbers as always--of penetration into gelatin for every single barrier that was penetrated during the test.
Those who do not care about barrier penetration can completely ignore most of the data, and focus their attention on the results for bare gelatin and/or simulated clothing alone, for which the penetration standard is still the very same 12-18 inches. Maybe you didn't mean the following, but in general I keep seeing the notion that the 12-18 inches figure somehow takes barriers into account, but that is simply not the case at all. Nor does it have anything to do with the FBI's choice of caliber, which was done by different people within the FBI for whatever reasons you can imagine.
To the extent that we conclude that the penetration of
one of Agent Dove's bullets was the key factor in that disaster--or even a major factor--IMHO we do a disservice to those agents injured and killed that day. But, sure, if you're planning on doing felony car stops against .223-armed bank robbers, go for penetrative handgun rounds.
The Miami shootout made the FBI realize that they weren't getting all they could out of their handguns. The penetration standard they recommended as a result is only one narrowly-focused aspect of the huge fallout resulting from this incident, but it is perhaps the one aspect that has the broadest applicability. All the other crap that surrounds the shootout such as the blame game and the change of caliber are irrelevant to this discussion, as we're talking about pistol ammo as opposed to tactics.
So, the FBI recommendation for 25 ACP is...?
Oh-ho, you're a barrel of laughs today!
Interesting that, when a counter-example reveals the invalidity of you're "the recs cover all calibers" approach, you decide to be dismissive.
Wow...I was NOT being dismissive at all--I honestly believed that you were joking around with that question, and I thought it was funny, that's all.
So you seriously wanted me to answer that question (even though it was originally followed by a
smiley)?
Alright, the simple answer is that the FBI does not have different penetration standards for different calibers, just like I've been saying all along. Penetration is more important than bullet diameter anyway, so why would they? See for yourself (page 11):
http://www.firearmstactical.com/pdf/fbi-hwfe.pdf
They're all small, although centerfire rifle rounds shot out of rifles are generally far more energetic and may wound in additional ways. While the FBI still tends to apply the same penetration standard to rifle rounds, the standard was really created with pistol rounds (that do virtually all of their damage via direct contact) in mind.