Does the FBI 12" minimum take into account "big boned" people?

[ArchAngelCD]

I'm sorry but I truly feel you guys are over thinking this matter and coming up with "the worst case" scenarios. Most of us are not LEO's and our SD weapon is a last ditched effort to survive an attack. Unlike a LEO we can remove ourselves from the situation where as the LEO has to say, fight and resolve the situation completely.

The 12" FBI protocol was developed to have a bullet penetrate car doors and windshields and still penetrate a human body and both expand and penetrate. Under normal circumstances if a regular citizen is shooting through a car door at someone they will be spending some time behind bars because it's awful hard to claim SD under those conditions. (but there are always exceptions so please don't tell me another story about a friend of a friend who's friend told them a story)

The normal armed citizen does not need a FBI protocol ammo. That's is not only my opinion but that of Hornady who are now making a line of SD ammo that does not pass the FBI standard yet is selling very well. It's their Critical Defense ammo which is extremely popular.

 

[JohnBT]

What are "normal circumstances"? According to the Boy Scouts, be prepared.

Have all of the gelatin tests been redone yet? You know, the ones with the denim jacket over the gelatin block. They need to put an iPhone in the jacket pocket.

 

[two gun charlie]

having fired hollow points of several makes into wetpacks over a number of years , I can tell you that I wouldn't worry about penetration , rather I would worry about insufficient expansion, that is always the real problem when it comes to dealing death by means of a handgun unless you happen to carry dirty harry's handy little hand cannon
I have had HP by Dennel , that is supposed to be good ammo , that didn't expand AT ALL !! best always seems to be the cheap stuff made by the serbians.

 

[Gryffydd]

Bears don't really have massive bones. There bones are typical

Let me rephrase that then. Bears have larger, tougher bones that are more typically between you and their vitals than humans do. Shooting through a bear's shoulder is going to be harder than shooting through a human's bicep or rib cage.

 

[Skribs]

"The 12-inch model takes into account steel doors"...I see this posted a couple of times here, but from what I've read, the 12" requirement is because you might have to shoot an attacker through an awkward angle. From electronic page 14 of the article linked by mavracer in post #7:

For example, a shot from the side through an arm must penetrate at least 10-12 inches to pass through the heart.

I'm thinking that the steel door requirement is that a bullet must penetrate 12" AFTER going through a steel door (similar to how many websites will test to see if you get a certain level of penetration AFTER going through heavy clothing or AFTER going through certain barriers). So no, I don't need FBI protocol ammunition. However, I can start with what the FBI recommends (12" of penetration) and apply it to after heavy clothing.

 

[481]

I'm sorry but I truly feel you guys are over thinking this matter and coming up with "the worst case" scenarios. Most of us are not LEO's and our SD weapon is a last ditched effort to survive an attack. Unlike a LEO we can remove ourselves from the situation where as the LEO has to say, fight and resolve the situation completely.

A-

This presumes that an aggressor is willing to let you leave. Just because you are not acting as an LEO, doesn't mean that an aggressor will not initiate contact and press forward 'til he gets what he wants. Remember, it is usually the agggressor- a mugger, a burglar, a carjacker, a rapist, a potential abductor, that initiates such enconters, and the presumption that you can just "remove" yourself from the situation is not likely going to be an option available to you.

The 12" FBI protocol was developed to have a bullet penetrate car doors and windshields and still penetrate a human body and both expand and penetrate. Under normal circumstances if a regular citizen is shooting through a car door at someone they will be spending some time behind bars because it's awful hard to claim SD under those conditions. (but there are always exceptions so please don't tell me another story about a friend of a friend who's friend told them a story)

This not necessarily true. If you are being robbed of your vehicle at gun point (at a stop light for example), there is every possibility that you may need to shoot through your car door or window in order to defend yourself if the suspect decides that you are not giving up your "wheels" quickly enough or if he sees you as a threat (after having rightfully drawn your gun to defend yourself). When it comes to violent encounters, there is no such thing as "normal"- such thugs play by no rulebook that you or I follow. Going into an armed encounter with ideas like that is a prescription for tragedy like no other.

The normal armed citizen does not need a FBI protocol ammo. That's is not only my opinion but that of Hornady who are now making a line of SD ammo that does not pass the FBI standard yet is selling very well. It's their Critical Defense ammo which is extremely popular.

Ammo manufacturers sell ammo based on a need created in the mind of the consumer through advertising, but it is not necessarily synonymous with what is best for the consumer. Better to err on the side of preparedness and have a round that meet FBI specs if you end up in a bad way. They are available in a broad range of weights across calibers that will satisfy those on both sides of the "light & fast" v. "heavy & slow" debate.

Even the "normal citizen" (whatever that is) cannot know the circumstances that he/she will be faced with during a fight for their lives and that includes the need to return defensive fire through something (a barrier like a car door, a stocked grocery shelf, office furniture) that a bad guy might've chosen for cover. While I think criminals are pretty stupid people as a rule, they are not going to simply stand still in front of you while you return fire either.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

Even the "normal citizen" (whatever that is)

As opposed to a LEO.

I know there are times where someone might have to shoot through a car window but those are extremely rare where I now live. When I lived in NY City everything I said above would not hold true but then again when I was in NY City I couldn't legally carry a handgun anyway. Now that I'm in PA, well lets say things are different here.

 

[Prosser]

"It is essential to bear in mind that the single most critical factor remains penetration. While penetration up to 18 inches is preferable, a handgun bullet MUST reliably penetrate 12 inches of soft body tissue at a minimum, regardless of whether it expands or not. If the bullet does not reliably penetrates to these depths, it is not an effective bullet for law enforcement use."

I added italics and underline to the part about up to 18 inches is preferable.

So I guess the key to this is to remember that 12" is, in the FBI's view, the least penetration they will accept. The FBI has to have loads that are shootable by all kinds of people, and, if all someone can shoot is a .38, or .22lr,
they still need ammunition standards for purchase.

 

[481]

Now that I'm in PA, well lets say things are different here.

Yeah, I am familiar with the phenomena. I've removed myself since retiring to a more sedate environment as well.

Although where I reside is much much nicer now, there is no such thing as an environment that is entirely devoid of threats, so I remain attuned to potential threats despite the better environment.

Guess I'll never be able to turn that off.

Stay safe.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

Yeah, I am familiar with the phenomena. I've removed myself since retiring to a more sedate environment as well.

Although where I reside is much much nicer now, there is no such thing as an environment that is entirely devoid of threats, so I remain attuned to potential threats despite the better environment.

Guess I'll never be able to turn that off.

Stay safe.

I agree, you can probably never turn it off because of how long being aware kept you/me out of trouble. My main point was because there is so little chance of trouble a 5 round revolver is good protection. I practice often with my carry and can shoot it very well. I'm just too old to change now, I'm a revolver guy and will remain one.

 

[Southern Rebel]

quote: You're not supposed to aim at a person's stomach when protecting yourself, aim at their chest. Usually there is very little fat in covering a human's heart even when they are "padded".

But a big,fat, round belly looks so very much like a three-dimensional bullseye - I am afraid that prior training will just take over!

 

[Sulaco]

quote: You're not supposed to aim at a person's stomach when protecting yourself, aim at their chest. Usually there is very little fat in covering a human's heart even when they are "padded".

But a big,fat, round belly looks so very much like a three-dimensional bullseye - I am afraid that prior training will just take over!

That's probably not very far from the way of it. In a shooting, you'll be so amped up and experiencing tunnel vision that whatever stands out the most will be amplified greatly in your mind to almost cartoonish levels.

And as for "big boned" people, ask anybody who's ever heard of Trooper Mark Coates about penetration. I don't think anyone would argue against the 357 Magnum being a good penetrator. Mark put several shots COM in to his target and not only did the guy kill Trooper Coates with one single 22LR shot, he lived to go to prison (where he sits now). The guy was gigantic and he survived the unsurvivable. Shocking as it is, it happened.

As for me, I train with and carry the most powerful handgun I can handle and don't worry about over penetration. I liken it to buying a truck to pull a boat. I don't buy a truck that just barely meets my hauling needs, I buy one with a little extra just in case. Why should handguns be any different?

 

[mortablunt]

I thought that the 12 in was about being able to get through obstacles between the shooter and the vitals. You know, things like arms, clothing, bones, membranes, windshields, and doors.

 

[Skribs]

Morta, the only thing listed in the article I read was arms and awkward angles.

 

[Prosser]

I suspect the FBI doesn't want most people to know it, but, I suspect violent criminals tend to be rather large predators. Larger then your average person.
Plus, our prison system does a wonderful job of creating a situation where you have to be fit, large, to survive. You can get anything in prison, and, we give them weights and recreational time to get huge. Plus, what is it? 90% of the crime is done by some very small % of criminals, who have a very high rate
of repeating crimes. Hence the rationale for the 3 strikes approach.

The FBI article does not mention penetration relative to penetrating barriers. IIRC that was another test/article.

Smallest guy that ever assaulted me was at 240.

 

[Sox]

Consider that the FBI criteria was put forth in the 80's, since that time we are as a population 30% larger or rather 30% of us are no obese. Therefore, I would think one would be wise to increase that 12" minimum by say 30% or 3-4" so 15-16" minimum. Then I think your'e in the ballpark.

I look at some big dudes and would think twice about shooting them with anything other than a large service caliber.