Musings on the 12-18" rule
- Thread starter Skribs
- Start date
- Status
BSA1
member
"When is it a inch too short and a inch too far?
Over penetration is rarely the issue, under penetration is what causes the problems."
You missed my point. A bullet is always a "inch to short" when it fails to incapacitate it's intended target regardless of it's design, distance, velocity, etc. and a "inch to far" when it over penetrates and hits a unintended object.
Over penetration is rarely the issue, under penetration is what causes the problems."
You missed my point. A bullet is always a "inch to short" when it fails to incapacitate it's intended target regardless of it's design, distance, velocity, etc. and a "inch to far" when it over penetrates and hits a unintended object.
The worry that overpenetration will hit an unintended target is liability thinking when a lethal threat should be the focus.
We hear this mantra chanted constantly on HD topics, "I have to choose an underpowered round because it might kill a family member or a neighbor."
Justifying inferior ammunition because of a "what if" situation in the face of a clear threat to your life is poor judgement. So is not knowing what is behind your target, too. #4 means that you understand where your bullets will go if you miss. Worrying about the final few hundred pounds of energy striking someone else is focusing on an extremely small window of incidence.
Survey YOUR house from the perspective of where you might encounter an armed intruder - it's not a 360 degree exposure to gunfire from any angle. Start at a position facing the most risky door (that analysis should get you a lot more aware,) just exactly where will the bullets go? Do you need to move to one side to get more cover or a better angle? What does that downrange option look like?
Most people repeat the concept we need to reduce overpenetration without knowing if they even have a problem area to be concerned with. They never walk the house and trace out the most likely downrange vulnerabilities.
On the street, we already see the problem in the stereotypical over staffed NY apprehension, where a perp is spotted and two dozen officers arrive simultaneously, all firing at the suicide motion of an overstressed repeat criminal. 60 rounds later, innocent passersby are being treated. A long long look at the tactical situation should be taken there, and the cost of liability suits should be the reason. What good is it to have dozens of officers firing when the reality is only one or two has the best angle to reduce stray bullets hitting the public?
Most of us aren't running to the sound of gunfire, and frankly, if we did, (school, mall, restaurant,) the number of people in the way isn't guaranteed to be high. At worst it's a hostage situation, or a small number standing in close proximity. I have to ask - if you can't shoot around them, why are you even trying? You need to back down. Lump it. It's what our LEO's are required to do when the correct tactics are being used.
Know your target and backstop, simple as that. Rule #4. The likelihood of someone else getting hit is unfortunate - it could happen, but I'm going to state it as a percentage, 95% unlikely. In that range of probability, a lot of other things are also not guaranteed, your gun functioning, the ammo firing correctly, the perp standing still long enough you can shoot, a second perp coming onto the scene, etc.
All you can do is be aware and try. Not deliberately sacrifice an option where penetration is needed - something that most civilians don't understand about military ammunition. It's not optimal to have hollow point when your enemy is wearing full battle gear and hiding behind an adobe wall. It's not optimal to shoot lower powered ineffectively penetrating ammunition when a known assailant is beating down the solid core wood door to your safe room.
Internet hysteria about overpenetration is adopting an option to fail, and covers up not knowing where you are shooting in the first place.
We hear this mantra chanted constantly on HD topics, "I have to choose an underpowered round because it might kill a family member or a neighbor."
Justifying inferior ammunition because of a "what if" situation in the face of a clear threat to your life is poor judgement. So is not knowing what is behind your target, too. #4 means that you understand where your bullets will go if you miss. Worrying about the final few hundred pounds of energy striking someone else is focusing on an extremely small window of incidence.
Survey YOUR house from the perspective of where you might encounter an armed intruder - it's not a 360 degree exposure to gunfire from any angle. Start at a position facing the most risky door (that analysis should get you a lot more aware,) just exactly where will the bullets go? Do you need to move to one side to get more cover or a better angle? What does that downrange option look like?
Most people repeat the concept we need to reduce overpenetration without knowing if they even have a problem area to be concerned with. They never walk the house and trace out the most likely downrange vulnerabilities.
On the street, we already see the problem in the stereotypical over staffed NY apprehension, where a perp is spotted and two dozen officers arrive simultaneously, all firing at the suicide motion of an overstressed repeat criminal. 60 rounds later, innocent passersby are being treated. A long long look at the tactical situation should be taken there, and the cost of liability suits should be the reason. What good is it to have dozens of officers firing when the reality is only one or two has the best angle to reduce stray bullets hitting the public?
Most of us aren't running to the sound of gunfire, and frankly, if we did, (school, mall, restaurant,) the number of people in the way isn't guaranteed to be high. At worst it's a hostage situation, or a small number standing in close proximity. I have to ask - if you can't shoot around them, why are you even trying? You need to back down. Lump it. It's what our LEO's are required to do when the correct tactics are being used.
Know your target and backstop, simple as that. Rule #4. The likelihood of someone else getting hit is unfortunate - it could happen, but I'm going to state it as a percentage, 95% unlikely. In that range of probability, a lot of other things are also not guaranteed, your gun functioning, the ammo firing correctly, the perp standing still long enough you can shoot, a second perp coming onto the scene, etc.
All you can do is be aware and try. Not deliberately sacrifice an option where penetration is needed - something that most civilians don't understand about military ammunition. It's not optimal to have hollow point when your enemy is wearing full battle gear and hiding behind an adobe wall. It's not optimal to shoot lower powered ineffectively penetrating ammunition when a known assailant is beating down the solid core wood door to your safe room.
Internet hysteria about overpenetration is adopting an option to fail, and covers up not knowing where you are shooting in the first place.
commonwealth109
Member
One thing I agree with is the lack of effectiveness of any type shotgun shot over a certain distance. In fact many more LE dept's are incorporating slug usage. Having a shotgun that you can supplement buckshot with a slug if the confrontation gets over X yards is extremely useful. I'd much rather hit a perp with a 12ga slug at 60 yards than a .223 round, and more depts are training with slugs than ever. Makes sense too, its hard to run around in an engagement toting a service pistol, backup pistol, shotgun, and an AR. So given one long gun choice I'd take the shotty every time, especially if I've got buck & slugs.
No I was just showing what I've seen in gel results. Rifle rounds you see a HUGE wound tract and penetration within the 12-18" rule, which on paper it all sounds good. However, the wound tract in the 12-18" section is not the huge tract you see in the first half.
- Status
