Is 9mm FMJ really that ineffective against bad guys?

[MCMXIautomatic]

I'm well aware that for self defense purposes, a good modern jacketed hollowpoint load is the overwhelming preference for dealing with a threat, for reasons which I already know and understand, so I need no explanation there. However, I've been wondering about it, and I'm curious to know exactly how effective (or ineffective) 9mm ball ammo really is, and has been historically, at incapacitating human targets based on existing scientific and/or anecdotal information. So far, I haven't been able to find anything conclusive about this after searching online; only a general acceptance of the demonstrable fact that jhp rounds are superior to fmjs for self defense, especially where overpenetration is a concern.

But to what extent the 9mm fmj round is lacking by comparison seems to me like something that could still be open to debate, and therein lies my curiosity.

Consider the reputation and widespread use of the cartridge. It has been putting people in the ground for over a century, in crime, self-defense, and in warfare, and has pretty much only been available as ball ammo for the majority of that time. Isn't there something to be said about the widespread adoption and apparent effectiveness of 9mm Luger, even only in fmj form?

People talk about the lackluster performance of 9mm fmj in real world defensive shootings, which is not something that I would necessarily argue with, but what about the use and effectiveness of the cartridge during combat in the world wars? Wasn't fmj the only flavor that it came in back then? What about all those pistols and submachine guns that were mass produced by the thousands or millions during the wars and were apparently used to great effect in combat with ball ammo? What about all those MP-40s that German NCOs carried and fought with as primary arms? What about all those Sten guns that were supposedly used so effectively by Allied troops and underground resistance fighters? Am I missing something here?

Since this question might be more focused on bullet configuration than caliber, I might also mention the even smaller caliber PPSH-41, which the Russians used in urban fighting with such great success that I've read they even had entire infantry divisions armed with them. Weren't those 7.62x25 rounds their weapons fired all fmj?

So, what are your thoughts and opinions on this? Is 9mm ball really that terrible as a manstopping round, even with proper shot placement? Or is it simply a matter of the bullet giving less than ideal, but still generally good enough performance to get the job done?

 

[Jonesy814]

With proper placement I would think it's very effective, probably more effective than companies that make self defense ammo at $25 for a box of 20 would like you to believe.
It is somewhat more likely to pass completely through and hit someone behind your target but in a war time situation that would be a plus, not a problem.

 

[JONWILL]

It has been killing since it was introduced
WW1. WW2. Etc. Not the best but will do it’s job
From what I understand most of the street killing are done with 9mm and 380 FMJ ammo. Getting the job done in Chicago

 

[CDW4ME]

Lethal and quickly incapacitating are two different concepts.
22lr, 32, 380/9mm FMJ are all lethal, but the goal of self defense is stop (incapacitate) the threat ASAP.
.355 diameter hole has less stop the threat ASAP potential than a .6x hole (expanded 9mm HP)

 

[BSA1]

Don't confuse being lethal with stopping power. It is of small comfort to your family members if your attacker dies 30 minutes later from being shot than you did.

As civilians when attacked we should want the attacker to stop his attack right now. Whether he dies is not a consideration. So if gunshot of any caliber and bullet type causes him to stop his attack it can be said the round has effective stopping power.

When it comes to smaller calibers the debate is more interesting. Do you favor expansion over penetration? The bullet must reach enough deep enough to hit the vitals but leaves a narrow wound channel.

With .380 and smaller I use FMJ for penetration. I confess to a fondness of 230 gr. FMJ in 45 Auto. Something about shooting pumpkin ball bullets from a 1911.

As for combat in wars the handgun most often was a badge of rank for Officers and used for executing prisoners in some Armies. After Dunkirk Britain needed small arms of all types in a hurry. The Sten gun is not particularly accurate but it was proof you could take two pieces of pipe, open bolt and magazine and make a "good enough" gun in a hurry. Close quarters urban street fighting brought about the need for a smaller gun with a high rate of fire than a battle rifle.

 

[FL-NC]

Bigger holes make nastier wounds. Think of a set of drill bits. With a smaller hole, you are causing less damage. This can result in critical organs, blood vessels, etc. being missed due to the smaller "cutting diameter". Also living flesh is pliable, like rubber to an extent. What happens if you drill a small hole in a piece of rubber, like a tire? It closes up somewhat. Yes, its till damaged, and it still leaks, but it closes. Now what happens when you do the same, but use a spade bit or a hole saw? Imagine this effect on flesh, organs, and blood vessels- plus the larger diameter object striking internal items that would have been missed with the smaller object. That is why, with FMJ- you get less for your efforts, especially considering that handgun bullets are moving at a slower velocity than rifle bullets, so cavitation is completely different when comparing handgun FMJ to rifle FMJ. This is one of the reasons (along with reduced range) that subguns like the MP5 have become almost totally antiquated in the Special Ops community.

 

[Zaydok Allen]

A lot of the arguing you hear on the topic happens because 9mm FMJ's get compared to 40 cal and 45 acp FMJ. The bottom line is that a larger hole will do more damage than a smaller one, so long as the cartridge the particular bullet is loaded into has sufficient velocity, and the bullet has sufficient mass to penetrate and damage internal organs. A bigger hole with lower velocity or too low of mass may not do enough damage to stop an attack.

The bottom line is that 9mm Luger FMJ's have sufficient mass and velocity to penetrate and damage internal organs. So is it a bad "man stopper"? Well, I don't think on a stand alone basis anyone can make a legit argument that it is. It's been used successfully for a long time in military applications. However, if you compare it to other FMJ ammo of larger sizes, there may be better options.

It's all about relativity to other cartridges, not the lethality of 9mm FMJs in as of itself.

 

[MachIVshooter]

Don't confuse being lethal with stopping power. It is of small comfort to your family members if your attacker dies 30 minutes later from being shot than you did.

This. Stopping the threat is the only thing that matters. .22 Rimfire has killed scores of people, but it's a lowsy stopper. There are more reports than you can count of people not even realizing for awhile that they've been shot with small caliber handgun. It happens with larger rounds, too, of course, as well as with rifles. No cartridge or bullet is magical, but as the damage goes up, the probability of a person "staying in the fight" goes down. As such, shot placement is still number one, but choosing a more effective cartridge and bullet is a major consideration.

Of course, we have to calibrate our choices to what makes sense for each of us. Should I ever need to defend myself with lethal force, I'd rather have 18 of my hot 10mm loads in the G20 than the seven 115 gr. standard pressure 9mm in my EDC. But I'm far more likely to grab that tiny 9mm on any given day than dress around a full sized pistol with a mag extension, and the first rule of a gunfight is bring a gun. Given that I'm already handicapping myself with a smaller quantity of less effective rounds, why would I then go and choose a bullet that is known to cause less damage?

 

[Riomouse911]

Last time I checked .355 and .452 are about .1 inch apart...and while the .452 fmj pill is larger and heavier, that's not all that much greater in diameter in the grand scheme of things.

Shot placement is the biggest key with fmj bullets: upper spine or brain will usually stop a threat toot-sweet. Other vital organ hits, even through the heart, may take a bit of time to stop a determined crook who wants to keep going.

During my 27 years-and-counting in LE in a very busy part of Southern Ca, I have seen lots and lots of street shootings, home-defense shootings, and officer involved shootings involving a ton of different calibers, guns, bullet styles etc.,it has been my limited first-hand experience (not academic, stat-compiling, wide-ranging research) that 9mm, .380, .40, .45 etc. are all so-so with fmj bullets for rapid stops unless the off-switch of the brain or upper spine is struck and damaged right away. These bullets do zip through tissue without disrupting a lot of stuff around it, per Geneva convention rules, and in some cases I have personally seen people who were unaware they were even shot with fmj bullets until we pointed it out.

I will say expanding bullets really do seem to slow folks down faster with a non brain-spine shot, and do cause more tissue damage when dead people are autopsied, which is the intent of their design. With a less than stellar hit, even in a really solid spot in the torso, don't expect to see Hollywood's instant death results with fmj.

 

[MTMilitiaman]

The profile of typical 9mm FMJ is rather pointed and rounded, which lends itself to better penetration than wound diameter compared to something with a wider meplat. Tissue is rather elastic and bullets wound by crushing. I am sure the round is still lethal and it does bear the name "for war," but we must distinguish between killing someone and stopping them as well as between the effectiveness of a SMG and a handgun. Even without the added ballistic performance afforded by more barrel length, pretty much anything becomes pretty effective when you can zipper somebody with 10 rounds in a second.
I am not going to say the 9mm FMJ is any less effective than any other handgun limited to FMJ ammunition and historically it is true that this round has killed a lot of people. I am just going to say I am glad that there are better options today. If I was sent back in time to WWII, an SMG would have been the last weapon I would have chosen for any theater.

 

[Steve C]

The NYC police use FMJ bullets until 1999 before getting HP ammo for their 9mm Glocks. Most of the stopping percentages in the Marshall Sanow data below would have come from the NYC PD because they likely had the most shootings using FMJ bullets.

While the FMJ ranks at the bottom of the list in stopping power it has reasonable stopping percentages in 4"+ barrels, probably due to the higher muzzle velocity from longer barrels. IMO the main drawback to FMJ is over penetration.

http://handloads.com/misc/stoppingpower.asp?Caliber=15&Weight=All

 

[C0untZer0]

per Geneva convention rules

Hollow points are not addressed by the Geneva Convention(s)




http://www.weaponslaw.org/instruments/1899-Hague-Declaration

 

[C0untZer0]

Why The US Military Should Switch To Hollow-Points

http://taskandpurpose.com/argument-us-military-switch-hollow-points/

The legal argument against the use of hollow-points stems from Article IV, Section 3 of the 1899 Hague Convention, which specifically prohibits “the use of bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core, or is pierced with incisions.” Thirty-four nations to date have ratified this section of the Hague Convention; however, the U.S. only ratified the first three articles of the 1899 Hague Convention. Representatives of the U.S. never signed Article IV, and the Senate didn’t ratify any part of Article IV. Further, Article IV, Section 3 states that the prohibition on the use of hollow-points only applies in a conflict between two signatories; even if the US had signed and ratified it, the provisions wouldn’t apply against many current and potential adversaries. A legal fallback is the Saint Petersburg Declaration of 1868, which features similar language prohibiting expanding ammo. But even fewer countries ratified this, and the United States was not invited to participate as the nation was not considered a major power.

Army to consider hollow point bullets for new pistol

https://www.armytimes.com/news/your...consider-hollow-point-bullets-for-new-pistol/

 

[Sunray]

"...a man stopping round..." There's no such thing regardless of the calibre. No handgun cartridge, including the vaunted .45 ACP, will stop anything or anybody with one shot.
The 9mm FMJ beats a sharp stick every time. Grave yards in Europe are full of people who got shot by a troopie using a 9mm firearm. However, both pistols and SMG's are secondary weapons. The whole thing is about using what you have to stop the BG bothering you.
"...it does bear the name..." Names are irrelevant.
"...the Geneva Convention..." Isn't about the rules of land warfare.
"...the U.S. never signed..." The U.S signed both Conventions after W.W. II. Anyway, using HP's by any military would result in War Crimes charges.
In any case, handguns in the military are still primarily status symbols and are not the primary weapon for any troopie. They're last ditch, "OMG, I've made a serious tactical error and misplaced or allowed my rifle to run dry." weapons.

 

[Panzerschwein]

No handgun cartridge, including the vaunted .45 ACP, will stop anything or anybody with one shot.

Oh yes it can, if you place it properly.

 

[C0untZer0]

"...the U.S. never signed..." The U.S signed both Conventions after W.W. II. Anyway, using HP's by any military would result in War Crimes charges.

The United States did not sign nor did the U.S. Senate ratify any part of Article 4, section 3 of the 1899 Hague Conventions - see the IV,3 column in the table titled "1899 Hague Conventions and Declarations" in the Wikipedia Article:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_parties_to_the_Hague_Conventions_of_1899_and_1907

The DOD Law of War Manual Returns Hollow Point Bullets to Armed Conflict:

https://www.justsecurity.org/25200/dod-law-war-manual-returns-hollow-point-bullets-armed-conflict/

Section 6.5.4.4 of the DOD manual, “Expanding Bullets,” states that “[t]he law of war does not prohibit the use of bullets that expand or flatten easily in the human body.” Hollow point bullets “are only prohibited if they are calculated to cause superfluous injury.” The manual goes on to provide three reasons why expanding bullets are lawful for use in armed conflict:

(1) The 1899 Declaration on Expanding Bullets “only creates obligations for Parties to the Declaration in international armed conflicts in which all the parties to the conflict are also Parties to the Declaration” (the United States is not Party to the Declaration).

(2) The Defense Department determined in a 2013 review that the 1899 Declaration does not reflect customary international law.

(3) Expanding bullets as manufactured today are not “inherently inhumane or needlessly cruel.”

The author Lieutenant Colonel Joshua F. Berry, US Army, is Professor and Vice-Chair of the International and Operational Law Department at The Judge Advocate General’s Legal Center and School in Charlottesville, Virginia. He has extensive experience serving as a legal advisor to operational and tactical units, both in conventional and special operations forces.

 

[hdwhit]

MCMXIautomatic wrote:
Is 9mm FMJ really that ineffective against bad guys?

Yes.

If you read between the lines of the posts that advocate cartridges that are believed capable of breaking the target's neck if it hits him in the pinky finger you will come to understand the quasi-religious dogma accepted as if it were an article of faith that as soon as someone declares his allegiance to the forces of chaos and disorder they are magically immunized against all bullets with a diameter of 0.356 and below.

It is, of course, all sophistry and self-delusion.

A 9mm cartridge with an FMJ bullet will penetrate a target and cause significant damage and disruption. It may or may not incapacitate or kill on the first shot, but many other cartridges share that potential failing. It may pass through the target, which is not desirable, but many other cartridges also share that potential failing. In a self defense situation, you can increase effectiveness by using a soft point, hollow point or other purpose-built expanding bullet, but the increase is marginal.

People will sit around internet forums endlessly touting the supposed superiority of one cartridge over another, but as several others have already pointed out, none of it matters if you can't get the round on the target where you want it. So, buy what feels "right", learn to shoot it properly, practice with it regularly and get down on your knees every night and pray that the path given you never requires you to use your gun.

 

[MedWheeler]

The vast, in fact, an overwhelming, majority of bad guys shot at by citizen defenders using FMJ ammo have been stopped, even those not even hit. So, it's pretty relative. As an offensive round, when the threat is actually being sought out and pursued, it's probably not a wise choice by any means, as neither the bearer nor the threat is being given the opportunity to self-extract. That describes law-enforcement and military applications.

 

[CraigC]

If you go out and actually shooting some live tissue with hardball, there will be no more debate. Hardball is dismal at best. In fact, there is very little difference between wounds made by .45 and 9mm hardball. They actually punch a hole smaller than their diameter with very little tissue disruption. Change the profile to a flat nose with a 60-80% meplat or an expanding bullet and everything changes dramatically.

 

[Jim NE]

Interesting question. Good question, with lot's of thoughtful responses. "Drop dead" reliability (no pun intended) is my ultimate concern, so I often carry 9mm's with FMJ. Most good/well designed 9mm pistols will handle HP ammo no problem, but I've had some nice 9mm's choke on some varieties of HP ammo.

A question: If the point of HP is to drop an attacker with one or two shots, and it's all over, then why carry a higher cap 9mm anyway? Why not a .357 snubbie with HP ammo? If your answer is you might miss the target so you need the capacity, then the question becomes: what...or who...is going to be hit with these devastating HP rounds that missed the target? Just a thought.

I actually have started using Lehigh Defense ammo in one of my semi-autos and it's been very reliable - not an HP, but apparently has stopping power.

 

[MTMilitiaman]

Interesting question. Good question, with lot's of thoughtful responses. "Drop dead" reliability (no pun intended) is my ultimate concern, so I often carry 9mm's with FMJ. Most good/well designed 9mm pistols will handle HP ammo no problem, but I've had some nice 9mm's choke on some varieties of HP ammo.

A question: If the point of HP is to drop an attacker with one or two shots, and it's all over, then why carry a higher cap 9mm anyway? Why not a .357 snubbie with HP ammo? If your answer is you might miss the target so you need the capacity, then the question becomes: what...or who...is going to be hit with these devastating HP rounds that missed the target? Just a thought.

I actually have started using Lehigh Defense ammo in one of my semi-autos and it's been very reliable - not an HP, but apparently has stopping power.

The point of the JHP is not to "drop an attacker in one or two shots." As discussed previously, this effect is rare on most handguns regardless of ammunition used and isn't guaranteed even with full power rifles. JHPs make a handgun more effective in tissue but handguns are still handguns and as such are inconsistent stoppers at best. Shot placement is crucial, esp when dealing with handguns. Because even trained professionals tend to shoot much less accurately when they are simultaneously dodging bullets and because terminal ballistics on a living adversary that wishes to remain living is far from an exact science, capacity matters.

 

[481]

By their design JHPs expand producing a larger presented cross-section that damages more tissue per unit of distance traveled than a FMJ which merely slips through, or pushes aside, soft tissue without damaging as much of it. Since it is the damage to the tissues being struck by a bullet that incapacitates the attacker, the round that produces more damage is going to have a greater likelihood of bringing about that incapacitation. It is not that an FMJ cannot incapacitate an attacker, but rather that there are other designs (JHPs) that will bring about that condition faster.

 

[bnolsen]

From what I've seen the only FMJ load that doesn't grossly overpenetrate is a 230gr 45 acp fmj. Even 380acp fmj grossly overpenetrates. But regardless a "miss" is far more likely and even more dangerous than overpenetration. I think a higher power likely has the most influence on the effectiveness of whatever it is you are shooting, and 9mm or even 380acp fmj can kill with the right holes and enough time.

 

[481]

From what I've seen the only FMJ load that doesn't grossly overpenetrate is a 230gr 45 acp fmj. Even 380acp fmj grossly overpenetrates.

Given that .45 ACP 230-grain FMJs routinely penetrate to 30+ inches-




-and the .380 ACP makes about half that distance with 14-15 inches of penetration-




-how can you say that the .380 over-penetrates when it only makes half the distance that the .45ACP FMJ does?

If anything, the .45ACP 230-grain FMJ grossly overpenetrates by nearly double that of the .380ACP.

 

[Ironicaintit]

People will sit around internet forums endlessly touting the supposed superiority of one cartridge over another, but as several others have already pointed out, none of it matters if you can't get the round on the target where you want it. So, buy what feels "right", learn to shoot it properly, practice with it regularly and get down on your knees every night and pray that the path given you never requires you to use your gun.

I wish I could like it twice!