Service ammunition: is any of it effective?

[Prosser]

I recently found this report by the FBI
One-Shot Drops
Surviving the Myth
By ANTHONY J. PINIZZOTTO, Ph.D., HARRY A. KERN, M.Ed., and EDWARD F. DAVIS, M.S.
http://www.fbi.gov/publications/leb/2004/oct2004/oct04leb.htm#page_15

On a summer evening in the northeastern part of the United States, a patrol officer received a radio dispatch at approximately 7 p.m. to respond to an address for a disorderly subject. The officer arrived at the location and parked his patrol vehicle on the opposite side of the street, several houses away. Before exiting the vehicle, the officer paused to observe the scene. He saw a male move from behind a large tree in front of the address of the alleged disorderly subject. The officer started to exit his vehicle, but then stopped when he saw the male, with a gun in each hand, begin to run toward him. The man fired both weapons at the officer, who returned two rounds from his service weapon, striking the male in the center of his chest. However, the man continued to fire. One round struck the officer in the head, killing him instantly. The male survived the two gunshot wounds and later was convicted of killing the officer....

Actual Shootings

In the authors’ ongoing study of violence against law enforcement officers, they have examined several cases where officers used large-caliber hand guns with limited effect displayed by the offenders. In one case, the subject attacked the officer with a knife. The officer shot the individual four times in the chest; then, his weapon malfunctioned. The offender continued to walk toward the officer. After the officer cleared his weapon, he fired again and struck the subject in the chest. Only then did the offender drop the knife. This individual was hit five times with 230-grain, .45-caliber hollow-point ammunition and never fell to the ground. The offender later stated, “The wounds felt like bee stings.”

In another case, officers fired six .40-caliber, hollow-point rounds at a subject who pointed a gun at them. Each of the six rounds hit the individual with no visible effect. The seventh round severed his spinal cord, and the offender fell to the ground, dropping his weapon. This entire firefight was captured by several officers’ in-car video cameras.

In a final case, the subject shot the victim officer in the chest with a handgun and fled. The officer, wearing a bullet-resistant vest, returned gunfire. The officer’s partner observed the incident and also fired at the offender. Subsequent investigation determined that the individual was hit 13 times and, yet, ran several blocks to a gang member’s house. He later said, “I was so scared by all those shots; it sounded like the Fourth of July.” Again, according to the subject, his wounds “only started to hurt when I woke up in the hospital.” The officers had used 9-millimeter, department-issued ammunition. The surviving officers re ported that they felt vulnerable.

They wondered if they had done some thing wrong that caused their injury or placed them in the proximity of physical danger. They also wondered if they would react differently if faced with a similar situation.

After reading through it, I"ve had to rethink my opinions on the service caliber pistols, and, the ammunition I carry. I've come to the conclusion that we are painted into a Politically Correct box. All of the service calibers have similar ballistic gello results, and penetration. From this report, they require multiple hits to bring down a bad guy, unless CNS is hit.

So, were Jordan, Keith, and Skeeter right? 170-210 grains at 1400 fps, .41 Caliber or bigger?

If we throw out the FBI requirements, and the need for small, weak people to be able to shoot CCW guns, at what caliber, weapon and load do we start feeling we actually have a chance of slowing the bad guys down with COM hits?

How do we test these rounds?

Finally, if bad guys can take so much damage from the larger caliber handguns, shouldn't we rethink the ammunition capacity we carry?

All of a sudden that 5 shot snubbie is looking REAL weak, even if it is almost a .357.

 

[Old Fuff]

I think that as long as there have been guns, there has been a debate about so-called "stopping power." One can find numerous accounts where a wimp-load has stopped someone dead cold, where in another several hits from the latest and best supper-slammer bullet hasn't even slowed the action.

And of course the other way around.

Great, Great-Grandpa loaded his cap & ball Colt with black powder and a round lead ball. This combination resulted in both one-shot stops and failures thereof.

If you are being shot at by another hostile person the first priority should be to disable that attacker as quickly as possible. If they should die its a secondary consideration. To accomplish this you need to have a firearm that propels a bullet with enough force to penetrate a human body from any angle, and through any likely protective cover. The next requirement is that you hit a vital organ so that the person cannot continue. Obviously the best of these organs are located in the central nervous system. The next best are in the upper-chest area.

Since the days of round lead balls we have known that the critical component to survive is precise bullet placement. When that’s lacking even the best jelly-slayer may not be the answer.

If my 5-shot snubby (actually a 6-shot Detective Special in many cases, or a 5-shot Taurus .44 Special) puts the bullet were it need to go that will be enough.

Accomplishing this is not up to the gun or ammunition - it’s up to me.

 

[Prosser]

Certain caliber 'open the target area' a bit. Skull isn't easy to penetrate, and, the target area for doing that is rather small, with weaker caliber handguns. It increases the target area when the bullet is less likely to deviate from course, and, is more likely to break bone then be deflected.

A 260 grain lead ball at 1000 fps might do the job? Yes? NO?

Also, certain firearms are more likely to put the bullet in the right place. Scandium snubby with 16 lb DA trigger, or a glock with a 6 pound trigger?

Without moving out of the box, we are forced to fire multiple projectiles, as fast as possible. Sort of the machine gun approach to SD shooting. Then capacity becomes very important, and training not to stop until the threat stops moving.

 

[Old Fuff]

Ah yes… The doctrine of spray an’ pray.

Keep in mind the rules of engagement. In our civilian society one is responsible for whatever consequences happen for every shot they fire. In (of all places) New York City there have been several incidents where police officers “lost it” and dumped a whole double-column magazine worth of 9mm or .40 caliber high-performance bullets into someone, and they lived through it. Unfortunately the victims were innocent, but that’s another story. My point is that a whole lot of superfluous hits (and scattering other rounds throughout the neighborhood) isn’t a perfect solution because there is no guarantee that in themselves, multiple hits will effectively disable the aggressor.

Also it takes time to do all of this shooting – especially if you expect to hit anything intentionally. Again under the rules of engagement you are required to respond to an attack-in-progress. The longer you take (measured in fractions of seconds) to successfully stop the attack the more likely you will suffer hits from return fire.

 

[Noveldoc]

I just talked to a Marine on leave from Afghanistan yesterday and got another 45 ACP story. His LT was rushed by an unfriendly with a large knife and hit him three shots center of mass with 9mm GI rounds. Kept coming. Top Sgt. caught the guy with one 45 ACP and the guy flipped down on his back. Young man had bought a nice Ruger .45 and, screw the regs, it was going back with him

I heard multiple similar stories about the .45 from VN vets. Do remember the attackers were small Asian men though. Don't remember many one hit knock down tales from WWII vets fighting Germans so maybe size is a factor.

Another factor with cops is the perps tend to be doped up to the point of feeling no pain and extremely agitated, which also decreases pain perception. I know of a case where the guy kept coming after first hit with a Mossberg 12 gauge firing magnum 00 buck. He was in a murderous rage from PCP.

Another doper kept coming after hits with a .223 carbine and was stopped by the K9 dog.

Not the gun, the situation. If he is really high chances are nothing but a brain or heart shot will work.

Gotta respect cops. tough job at times.

Tom

 

[jaholder1971]

It keeps being said, yet many don't listen.

Stopping power is a myth.

 

[mgkdrgn]

ALL handguns are inherently inaccurate and under powered. If they weren't, nobody would bother lugging rifles round on the battlefield.

 

[franconialocal]

Shot placement

 

[Steve C]

This is why there's no 100% stopping power rating. Even flipping a 2 headed coin isn't a 100% sure that you'll come up heads every time since there's a remote chance it could land on edge. The exceptions don't prove ineffectiveness, only that thee are sometimes exceptions.

People that you think should be dead can still survive and others that you'd think would still be alive are dead.

 

[RedLion]

In all of those stories... there is no indication of where the suspects were actually hit. Getting hit 13 times in the stomach isn't going to do a whole lot... and the fact that all of them woke up in a hospital is pretty good evidence that the police were not hitting anything vital.

Throwing a baseball at someone is going to put more energy on target than a .357 magnum at the muzzle...... so its really about shot placement, not stopping power.

 

[rbohm]

here is an interesting article on this very subject;

http://www.firearmstactical.com/wound.htm

 

[wditto]

if you need to hit someone with a stick to save your family's life , would you use a small stick or a big stick?
no, the stick may not be the perfect answer, but if that's what ya' got, which one would you use?
and yes, I can testafy the .45 acp replaces the big stick very well

 

[weisse52]

Finally, if bad guys can take so much damage from the larger caliber handguns, shouldn't we rethink the ammunition capacity we carry?

I think it was already stated. The stories do not tell alot about where the rounds hit, and as the physical state of the person being shot.
Someone on drugs can absorb alot of punishment and still keep coming.

Shot placement is key. And spray and pray is just that.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

Finally, if bad guys can take so much damage from the larger caliber handguns, shouldn't we rethink the ammunition capacity we carry?

First of all, this all falls into the category of anecdotal evidence -- there aren't enough shootings in the article and they have obviously been cherry-picked to make a point.

Second, as already stated, we don't have enough information about these three cases to make a judgement.

Third, how much ammo is enough? In two of the three cases, the officers did not empty their weapons. In the third case, two officers got 13 hits, but with 9mm and probably only fired half or less ammo than they had on tap.

Fourth, what do we expect handguns to do? I have a friend who is a medical examiner in Virginia who tells of a case where a man was shot through the heart with a shotgun. The heart was completely shredded and the man walked a block, sat down on his front step and died.

Throwing a baseball at someone is going to put more energy on target than a .357 magnum at the muzzle......

No. The baseball may have more momentum, but not more kinetic energy.

A baseball weighs from 5 to 5.25 oz (Rule 1.09 of the official major league bseball rules). A top-notch pitcher can throw it at about 95 mph, or about 140 fps.

Momentum of baseball = (5/16 * 140)/32.2 fps/sec = 21 sfp.

Kinetic energy of baseball = 5/16 * 140^2)/64.4 = 95 ft lbs.

Momentum of .357 mag (125 grain bullet at 1500 fps) = (125/7000 * 1500)/32.2 = 0.8 sfp

Kinetic energy of .357 mag = (125/7000 * 1500^2)/64.4 = 623 ft lbs.

 

[fastbolt]

Handguns, regardless of caliber or capacity, are still just handguns.

Handguns are always going to be a compromise when it comes to dedicated defensive weapons.

Even shotguns and rifles/carbines don't come with 'guarantees' of providing the mythical One Shot Stop.

I carried a 6-shot revolver as an issued service weapon for several years without feeling as though I was woefully under-armed ... considering that I was still just carrying a handgun during my daily activities as a cop. Since that time I've carried 'high capacity' 9mm and .40 S&W issued service pistols, as well as not-so-high capacity .45 ACP service pistols. I didn't feel that much different carrying any of them as when I was carrying a revolver. I was still just carrying a handgun ...

Sure, the extra rounds before reloading might be necessary was convenient, but when it came right down to it I felt that it was my mindset and skills that were probably going to mean the difference.

Toward the end of my career I was carrying a J-frame off-duty more often than not, and that remains unchanged now that I'm retired.

What hasn't changed is my dedication to proper training & frequent enough practice to keep my skills up to snuff.

Yes, I could carry any of the many larger and higher capacity semiauto pistols I own chambered in the Big Three calibers ... and sometimes I do. I also rotate shooting them. Again, to keep my skills current and sharp.

I like to think I have a fair grasp of the inherent capabilities of the various handguns and their respective calibers, as well as the ammunition available for them.

I still prefer to focus on my mindset, skills, abilities and experience when it comes to considering risk assessment and carrying just a handgun as a dedicated defensive weapon ...

I've often thought that some folks might be better served by obtaining some further training, and spending some additional time engaging in some proper practice, than in extensively debating the relative merits of different handgun calibers and ammunition.

I've said this before, but there are a number of grizzled, experienced guys with whom I would rather go through a dark doorway as a team, even if they were "only" armed with S&W M10 revolvers loaded with 158gr LSWC standard pressure loads, than any number of the younger, lesser trained and experienced guys who are carrying the latest high-tech gear and super-capacity pistols loaded with the flavor-of-the-month ammunition extolled by magazine ads and internet firearms forums ...

 

[mljdeckard]

You are correct. Handguns are inferior tools to immediately stop a bad guy immediately and always have been. The reason we spend so much time arguing about the best handgun round is that they all suck. This is not news.

However, this doesn't change anything. I keep a rifle in my vehicle and my home, but I won't likely be able to get to it if I am in a gunfight. I don't plan on getting a CNS hit. Here's what makes it really easy, write this down: "Anything worth shooting is worth shooting until the threat is stopped, you run out of ammunition, or the target disappears from view."

I seriously doubt that the survivor of four .45s to the chest felt 'bee stings' when he got hit. Either he was in shock, he's exaggerating to look tough, or a bit of both. Stopping percentages allow for exceptions. He was an exception, not the rule. I also don't necessarily think that my Federal HSTs moving 875 feet per second would magically be MORE effective if they were moving 1400 fps. I prefer the .45, but I'm not going to say that bullets 2mm smaller, penetrating at least 12", are somehow useless.

Rethink capacity? I carry 8+1 with two reloads. The reloads are more for clearing a malfunction than for giving me more rounds. If I'm doing a job I can't finish with these rounds, I'm using the wrong tool for the job. (Again, A HANDGUN IS ALWAYS THE WRONG TOOL FOR THE JOB.) Change the odds. Reduce the likelihood that you will be in a gunfight in the first place.

 

[LancerMW]

its hard to stop people on drugs

 

[Frank Ettin]

What it all comes down to is that there are no magic bullets and no death rays. Getting good training, practicing, being able to manage your weapon well and shoot accurately, and using good ammunition all improve your chances for a good outcome. But there are no "secrets od the ninja", and you will need to be able to deal with your problem until it is solved.

 

[sidheshooter]

"Remember, big holes, deep holes, properly located holes."
-Wiley Clapp

To that, I'd humbly add "enough holes", and try to run with whatever will allow for the best chance of that happening; IMHO, probably a lot of training, as above, along with any easy-to-shoot sidearm in a caliber with enough bullet mass to pass through all boney structure.

I'm personally fine with a 6-shot model 12-3 with the old, lumpy FBI load, but a) I've shot a lot of rounds through K-frames in training (and speed-loaded a lot under pressure) and b) I lead a very low risk lifestyle.

 

[Prosser]

You are correct. Handguns are inferior tools to immediately stop a bad guy immediately and always have been. The reason we spend so much time arguing about the best handgun round is that they all suck. This is not news.

I'm not sure I'm buying this one. We've been sold a bridge, and, everybody has part of it. We do have handgun calibers, both old and new, that have a much better chance of being effective more quickly then a service caliber. In fact, we've had loads for a 45 ACP that pretty much made it a .41 Magnum, from Lee Jurras' company, but, they aren't Politicially Correct, so the company goes under, and, LEO doesn't buy such ammo, since 'small' officers can't qualify with it, so according to Ayoob, we may have 100k in legal bills, and the threat of "Ending Up like Fish".

Someone earlier mentioned they don't know if the 45ACP would be more effective at 1400 fps, vs. 800 fps. It is on deer. It is on hogs. Why don't we know how it acts on humans? Not PC. FBI can't use 10mm, which came pretty close, thanks to having to be 14th amendment. So, they nueter it to .40 S&W, and, we are back in the same sandbox.

I've got hunting friends. One group swears by 170-210 grains, at least .41",
at 1400 fps. Say it does deer in like the hammer of Thor.

I've got another group that uses 440 grain LFN .500" caliber bullets, at between 950 fps, and 1350 fps, and, they have pretty much proven this kills
like an old Sharps, or a .375 H&H, on big animals.

Either group is outside the service box.

Now, on the heavy big side: the old 45 Colt was a 260 grain bullet, at 1000 fps, in .45 caliber. That was what the 45 ACP was supposed to emulate. Browning, knowing he was going to have to use solids for the military, figured, and correctly, that 45 200 grain ball at 1000 fps would have nearly the same effect. The military said heavier and slower.

Oddly, today, with modern powders, we can do great things with a 45 ACP sized case. We can move 260 grain bullets, HP Speers, at 1000 fps, at about 28K pressure. This would work in a standard gun.

Detonics, a long time ago, was using a 200 grain Speer Flying Ashtray at 1200 fps, using the same sort of pressure, in 45, and, 185's at 1300-1350 fps.
They reported, or rather police reported to them that they did not have complaints from the bad guys. The rounds worked, and worked well.

You can take a 185 grain 44 magnum HP, move it at 1600 fps, and it barely goes 15" in bello.

And then, there is the .41 Magnum and full house 10MM.

We have choices, and, they are suitable. The only problem is the guys that can shoot em, and girls, need to get out and buy them, and use them, so we don't loose such choices in the Politically Correct market place.

 

[DougDubya]

I seriously doubt that the survivor of four .45s to the chest felt 'bee stings' when he got hit. Either he was in shock, he's exaggerating to look tough, or a bit of both. Stopping percentages allow for exceptions. He was an exception, not the rule. I also don't necessarily think that my Federal HSTs moving 875 feet per second would magically be MORE effective if they were moving 1400 fps. I prefer the .45, but I'm not going to say that bullets 2mm smaller, penetrating at least 12", are somehow useless.

It doesn't matter what the survivor "felt."

Four hits and he still walked up to the officer and only stopped with a fifth impact. Had the officer not unjammed his pistol in time, he would have killed the lawman with his knife.

Also note: five torso hits with a .45, and he survived, and after 80% of those hits, he was still able to close in on his opponent.

He might have been trying to sound like a tough guy when he said his wounds felt like "bee stings," but no amount of bravado can help someone get close enough to an opponent with deadly weapon in hand and require additional doses of .45 auto hits.

Handguns stink. Learn your failure drills with a jammed handgun, carry a backup, and just don't stop shooting.

 

[rbohm]

one thing we have to understand about ammunition testing, it is done with animals, for instance the strausberg tests were done with goats. these tests are a good starting point, but they are just a starting point. remember that the animals in all these tests are not doped up on pcp or what ever drug, and are not having a serious adrenalin rush at the same time, like a human bad guy just might be having. thus a .45 acp fmj ball round, which the strausberg test indicates is a 69% one shot stop round, is going to be more like a 25-30% one shot stop round when hitting a bad guy on pcp and rushing on adrenalin. and the bigger the bad guy, the lower the one shot stop percentage. there are times where a big round didnt work, and a small one did. shot placement is the biggest key, and you wont get good placement if you rush your shots.

the only weapon that is hand held that i know of that has a one shot stop of 100% is a katana, and then only if you cut the bad guys head off.

 

[mljdeckard]

Dougdubya, that's exactly what I said.

He's still the exception, not the rule. The vast majority of human targets who take four .45s through the torso, regardless of what type of bullet, are done, instantly. That story is still anecdotal and doesn't change anything.

 

[DR505]

There will always be the exception...the one who takes an amazing amount of hits to stop. However, I do know enough to use my handgun to fight my way to my patrol rifle or shotgun.

 

[Noveldoc]

A halfway reasonable person would stop an attack after one hit. But you are not dealing here with reasonable people; you are dealing with extremely drunk or doped up maniacs. These people are tunnel vision focused on the attack and so full of anesthetizing chemicals they feel little or no pain.

Stopping them means killing them usually. A brain shot will work as will severing the spinal cord. A hit to the heart is quick.

Otherwise you need to hit a major blood vessel or blood rich organ like spleen or kidney and wait until they bleed down enough to go into shock.

I suspect rifle hits would not do too much different on crazed dopers.

Only way to stop these people quick would be to use a SMG or rifle on full auto.

Tom