HoosierQ
Member
OK. Obviously FMJ has a couple of drawbacks for personal protection and HD, over-penetration (depending on the caliber) and the whole lack of expansion / wound cavity thing. For the sake of discussion, let's kind of leave .45 ACP out of the mix (or not, up to you) because an awful lot of people think that 230 grain FMJs pack a wallop.
The gun ignorant folks think of hollow points as "cop killers", think they are more powerful, shoot through cars, you name it.
So let's say you are armed lawfully and the SHTF in your little world and you have to use deadly force. Would the press, the prosecutor, heck...the jury, heaven forbid, be more likely to look favorably on the person using a) good old fashioned FMJs, the same stuff allowed by the Geneva convention, the same stuff the boys use in combat, the cheap target ammo you get at Wally's (even though the gun savy know it may over penetrate), or b) someone using carefully engineered anti-personnel rounds, "designed to kill effectively", which the person had to seek out and pay extra for etc (even though the gun savy know they are designed not to over penetrate).
Given that a lot of "them" know nothing about firearms and ammo, would "they" make a distinction when the smoke cleared? My scenario assumes that nobody other than a violent criminal and an armed law abiding citizen were in any way invovled in my scenario.
What do you think?
The gun ignorant folks think of hollow points as "cop killers", think they are more powerful, shoot through cars, you name it.
So let's say you are armed lawfully and the SHTF in your little world and you have to use deadly force. Would the press, the prosecutor, heck...the jury, heaven forbid, be more likely to look favorably on the person using a) good old fashioned FMJs, the same stuff allowed by the Geneva convention, the same stuff the boys use in combat, the cheap target ammo you get at Wally's (even though the gun savy know it may over penetrate), or b) someone using carefully engineered anti-personnel rounds, "designed to kill effectively", which the person had to seek out and pay extra for etc (even though the gun savy know they are designed not to over penetrate).
Given that a lot of "them" know nothing about firearms and ammo, would "they" make a distinction when the smoke cleared? My scenario assumes that nobody other than a violent criminal and an armed law abiding citizen were in any way invovled in my scenario.
What do you think?