Earlier I wrote,
I doubt that the folks here who say that these rounds won't stop a man have much real world experience.
And then you responded,
The clear insinuation here was that you had much
"real world experience" with Glasers, and their ability be effective in a self defense situation. And so quite naturally I wrote in a quest for this information,
Then you should be able to tell us of dozens of shootings with Glasers where they failed, right?
Now you respond to my question ...
Chindo18Z: Nice straw man.
Not at all. You hinted that you have much personal experience in the situation under discussion. Turns out, you have none. If you had any, you'd have presented evidence to back up your opinion as I've done and will do again in this post.
Chindo18Z: Conversely...You should be able to tell us about dozens of shootings with Glasers where they worked...right?
I'm not the one making a claim that I have such information. That would be you. In any case I have my own personal experience, where following your advice would have probably resulted in my death, so I tend to feel rather strongly about it! There's also this news story where a Glaser stopped a fleeing crook (who subsequently died) with a single shot ...
http://www.lvrj.com/news/42844117.html
I can't recall any shooting reports where the type of ammunition was discussed save some that occurred when LAPD made the change from the RN lead bullets to HP's. And so such stories either way, would be extremely difficult to document. I have had quite a few conversations with quite a few MD's who work at the LA County Coroner's office, a fairly busy location for gunshot victims. A number of them had done autopsies on people shot with Glasers and every one of those MD's told me that they'd rather be shot with HP's than the Glasers. One of them described the superficial appearance of the GSW this way, "It looked like a rat had been feeding on the body." They've seen first-hand, many shootings with each kind of ammunition. I realize that this is far from a scientific study, nonetheless, that's what they told me. One other thing I learned during the time that I spent with these people and at their office, it's impossible to tell what a bullet, any kind of bullet, will do once it enters the human body. On one occasion a bullet (of any type) will cut through a bone and on another it will ricochet off it, and go in an entirely different direction.
Chindo18Z: Actually there are dozens of threads scattered about the internet concerning Glasers...with all the usual (and very limited) recycled autopsy photos, x-rays, and enumerated incidents (including yours I'm sure).
I doubt that my incident is among the ones
"scattered about the Internet." I've only seen it discussed once in a discussion on the Net and I was the source. It was in another thread about Glasers, on this forum. I've not seen the other things you mention, can you post links to them please. They would seem to support me, rather than you, so I understand if you don't want to.
Chindo18Z: But, after all these years, there are simply not that many documented cases of Glasers (or MagSafe) being used period...much less successfully. I know it and you know it.
Rarely is the type of ammunition that was used in a shooting incident mentioned. And the fact that Glasers are so expensive is one reason that they'd rarely be used. Another is that they're not carried by LE. That is both a cost concern, and a political one. Most discussions of shootings focus on the incident itself, the tactics, and the guns carried. Only rarely is the type of ammunition mentioned.
Chindo18Z: The fact that you shot someone with one isn't a trend. It's a single point of data. You were simply damn lucky. I've been lucky myself. I'll take lucky over good any day.
I agree that I was
"damn lucky." But I disagree that it was
"simple." I thought long and hard about how to load my personal carry gun. At work I was mandated as to what to carry but in this gun, which I also carried on-duty, as my backup, I could choose anything I wanted. I chose purposefully to load the first round a Glaser, and the rest HP's. Had I been fully loaded with HP's there's no doubt that I'd not be around to write this.
Chindo18Z: I once advocated carrying Glasers or MagSafe as a first round.
That's what I think is the best option for people who have a choice as to what they carry. The fact that you've changed your mind doesn't necessarily any growth on your part, just a change of opinion. And from what you tell us, it's an illogical change.
Chindo18Z: After watching folks limp away from torso hits with .30 caliber rifle fire (and continue to fight), I discarded the theory of using non-penetrative handgun bullets. I once thought it was a good idea. I don't any longer.
Makes no sense to me. There is no relation between being hit by a Glaser and being hit by a
".30 caliber rifle." In fact, logically, since the
".30 caliber rifle fire" was ineffective with
"torso hits" you should be opposed to their use!
Regarding the ineffectiveness of the .38 RN lead bullet you write,
Chindo18Z: Wrong. Pretty damn effective each time I saw folks hit with it.
How many times was that? (NOTE: later we find out that it's twice!) It's interesting that my personal experience is meaningless but that yours is highly valuable to this discussion. Lol. I've also had many conversations with MD's who work in ER's treating gunshots. One of those ER's was in Inglewood, reputed in the 1960's and 70's to be the second best place to learn about treating gunshots. (The first, being in Vietnam). Universally, they supported the effectiveness of the HP when compared to the RN .38 bullet. Universally, they said that they'd rather be shot with the RN .38 bullet than the HP and that they'd rather be shot with the HP than the Glaser.
Chindo18Z: You've subscribed to internet wisdom on this one.
You're wrong on this. My investigation on this and my subsequent decision to carry (as I've described) occurred long before the Net was around.
Chindo18Z: On the 2 separate occasions I witnessed 200 gr RNL hitting flesh, it instantaneously stopped the fight.
Before such a statement has any meaning to this discussion we have to know where the rounds impacted. I'd bet that virtually any round would have stopped the fight where these rounds struck. (NOTE: later on, my point here is proved).
My case is notable because with virtually ANY other round, my shot would have been a complete failure.
Chindo18Z: In fact, it apparently matched the track record of your Glaser (everyone fell down, everyone quit fighting, some of them died, some of them lived). In one instance, 5 people were laid out like bowling pins. Nobody was struck by a ricochet or an over penetrating round.
In fact there are quite a few cases of this happening with the .38 RN lead bullet. The fact that the round over-penetrated is what's important, NOT that
"nobody was struck ..." The last is just good luck, not something that one should count on.
From this site
http://articles.latimes.com/1990-04-18/local/me-1244_1_hollow-point-bullets After a year-long study by the LAPD (who were carrying .38 revolvers with 158Gr RN lead bullets
... The report also showed, however, that a substantially higher percentage of solid-nosed bullets passed through suspects, potentially risking innocent bystanders.
From the same source,
Between June, 1986, and December, 1987, the LAPD recorded a total of 163 bullet hits, of which 50% passed through the subject ... [this was when they were using the RN lead bullets].
Chindo18Z: In point of fact, none of the rounds penetrated through and through. Hmmmm...an admittedly pretty poor round, but employed with excellent shot placement.
Your statement about
"employed with excellent shot placement" makes my point. It makes little difference what kind of ammunition, or the caliber (within reason) is used if "excellent shot placement" occurs. It's when the placement is NOT "excellent" that the Glaser is a better choice. And since we know that "excellent" shot placement is the exception rather than the rule, ESPECIALLY for the first round fired in these encounters, I think that carrying the first round as a Glaser is a distinct advantage.
In my situation the shot placement was horrible, a screw-up that I'm completely responsible for. Yet, even with that, the shock delivered by the Glaser stopped my attacker, not only "in his tracks" but mid-swing with a heavy object that was coming towards my head.
The OP is concerned with penetrating walls in an occupied dwelling if he misses, as he should be. I'd not call that "excellent shot placement." lol