In the 1986 FBI shootout, the bullet in question passed through the right arm, into the air, then into the chest, and had to move through various densities of tissue all the way across the chest to the heart, where it fell just short. It pierced the lungs, which caused major bleeding. As I said before, bleeding out takes way too long, and should never be counted on for stopping the fight. Additionally, a heart shot is not an instant stop either. The bullet did not fail. It would be very inaccurate to say the shooter (Platt) could have been incapacitated with any other medium pistol caliber.
Heart shots may not be instant stops in all cases, but they usually beat lung shots. The common service calibers have more than enough penetration potential against human targets to justify increasing the requirement for penetration to increase the probability of stopping a target more quickly. At the time, 9mm loads either penetrated less than desired or grossly overpenetrated with non-expanding bullets, which was why loads in different calibers were tested and selected.
Indeed, this is all speculation that is easily dismissed with a wave of the hand. While we're at it, why use a heavy caliber like 9mm when .22 LR seems to kill people just fine? Care to speculate?
One other issue is the use of the 9mm WIN Silvertip HP, which is well-known as a severe underpenetrator.
Wasn't that the load used in the Miami shootout? Seems like an ammunition failure to me--that is, it may have worked as designed, but the FBI had inadequate or nonexistent standards at the time, and a poor understanding of handgun wounding. Obviously this changed rather quickly.
As stated previously, I've seen occurrences of .40 S&W failing with direct hits to the front of the body.
Failing to do what, immediately incapacitate? Well, that's the common case for any caliber if nothing vital (particularly the CNS) is hit, of course.
I've also read of an instance where a man put a full-sized (5" barrel) .45 under his chin, and the bullet didn't exit through the top of the head. It only had to break through the ethmoid bone and parietal bone of the skull...not too difficult. Though it isn't the case, it almost seems like it defies physics.
Well, if he didn't hold his head perfectly still and there was plenty of give in his neck, then maybe too much of the bullet's momentum was absorbed by other parts of his body.
This report included x-ray images and photos. It would be hard for the information to be inaccurate.
Come on, multiple 180 grain bullets that "mushroomed" nicely and stopped within 1" of non-superhuman flesh?
There is the hard-to-believe and then there is the obviously ridiculous. Here's the FBI's take on what I believe to be the same incident:
http://www.defensivecarry.com/documents/officer.pdf
They don't buy it, either. By the way, I retract my earlier statement that the incorrect information came from the coroner because I really don't know who it came from.
That could vary between bullets of the same weight in the same caliber. Testing even 100 rounds of the same ammunition (230 gr. Gold Dots, for example) will always yield different results bullet-to-bullet. Variances such as primer placement, heat and humidity, powder charge differences, bullet swaging, etc. can change the outcome. Testing gives you no more measure of effectiveness than flipping a coin and guessing. Realistically, between 9mm, .40, .45, it is not enough to even consider.
Shootings always involve probabilities, and averages must make some difference in that respect, even though the differences are small, like I said earlier. Whether the small differences are enough to consider is a personal thing.
Your missing the 9mm SIG P226/228 they issued prior to the Glock 22. It was after the 10mm S&W 1076, which was my point there. They came back to the 9mm from 10mm, then went to .40.
It's possible that they went back to 9mm sooner for some agents because they shot it so much better, which is obviously a valid and advantageous compromise.
They, along with many other LE ageincies are on a caliber rollercoaster; it changes when the wind blows.
I think there is always too much of a focus on caliber here. It's often pointless because there are some 9mm loads that I deem more effective than some .40 S&W and .45 ACP loads (although the two larger calibers have an advantage over 9mm among the best loads of all three).
Agencies like the FBI purchase their duty ammunition in large lots every few years, and of course they're going to look for the best loads they can find each time. Then they might have to compromise for other reasons, such as recoil. It's called shopping, not necessarily being fickle or randomly going all over the place with no clue of what they want. The FBI, for one, seem to know what they want these days. Look at their current duty load, 180 grain .40 S&W Ranger Bonded, which gets about 19-21 inches of penetration (well above average for a JHP) and 50% expansion when shot through simulated clothing. This gives them the 18 inches they prefer, and with decent expansion besides. I chose this load for my own use for the very same reasons, not just happenstance.
If you're aiming for the spine, especially from the front, you might as well just take head shots. It would be much easier than trying to hit a line up the center of the back measuring about 1" across. That takes some serious shooting skill under stress...or luck, which is likely going to be the case.
In a dynamic encounter, I don't believe in "shot placement" in the sense of precise aiming. All one has to do is place shots in the COM as quickly as possible, and the rest is up to random chance. That said, fortunately even random chance can be stacked slightly more in one's favor by using a load that penetrates all the way through, which was my point.
Besides that, even severing the spinal cord does not guarantee full loss of motor function. Maybe if you strike some of the first few cervical vertebrae, but then you're shooting for the neck/head anyway. Even that doesn't guarantee full loss of motor function.
So what? It's still better than a bullet that does not have enough penetration to reach everything in its path.
What penetrates 18" in a jell-o block is not going to mirror that in a human body. The jell-o block is the best we can do for ballistic testing, but it is a far cry from being close to a human body.
It's still better than a bullet that penetrates less than 18".
I feel overpenetration is not an issue for terminal effectiveness, but a liability in a crowded urban area. Would you shoot if there was a mother and baby right behind the subject?
No, I would not. Would you shoot in this scenario just because you believe that the bullet will not penetrate all the way through? What if the target moves and the bullet misses him, or it fails to expand and easily overpenetrates the target?
See above. With all that was said, and the fact that the 9mm luger is one of the best penetrators available in a common pistol, I cannot see the slight edge of a larger caliber.
Although I sometimes use theory to illustrate, I'm far more of an empiricist when it comes to handgun cartridges. I generally compare terminal ballistics data between various loads in various calibers and draw conclusions from that first (which can vary over time as new bullet designs and loads are created). 9mm may have exactly as much potential as the larger service calibers when it comes to penetration, but there are more loads that I like in the larger calibers, including my favorite load of all. Empirically speaking, given equal penetration, the larger calibers tend to gouge larger holes. Does that matter? Not as much as penetration, but it might just a little. If you cannot see this as even a slight edge, that's fine--I'm not trying to convince anybody, I'm just stating what the differences are.
Bottom line is I understand the arguments, and acknowledge the laws of physics, but with the human body, most of it goes out the window when it comes to terminal effectiveness. As I said, anyone working a trauma service can vouch for this.
What do you think of .22 LR as a service handgun caliber? Personally, I wouldn't discount it.
