What will a 9mm, .40, .45 do to a man?

[RETG]

Simple, if shot placement is right, any of the rounds will kill a man or woman. Regardless of what people will say, a 9mm will kill. A .40 and a .45 will also kill. Amazing, if a .50 shot placement is not correct, it won't kill.

Dang, a .17 will kill if the person is hit in the right spot!

 

[inSight-NEO]

10mm if you want to "knock someone down"

Yes. But, go with .45ACP if you want to actually be accurate in the process.

If one insists on bringing up the 10mm thing, why not just throw a 12 gauge shotgun (loaded with 00 Buckshot) into the mix?

Shotguns aside, I like the .45ACP overall; followed by the .40 S&W. The 9mm just does not do it for me. Would I use it? Yes. Is it my preference? No. Of course, to me, for the most part, "dropping" someone has more to do with shot placement than caliber.

In this case, either one of the 3 would do the job. Just a matter of which caliber makes the job that much easier...for the lack of a better term.

 

[joel_conley]

They will kill people.....

 

[xXxplosive]

The .45 ACP........when you want to stop the threat NOW.....not 5 minutes from now.

 

[REAPER4206969]

The .45 ACP........when you want to stop the threat NOW.....not 5 minutes from now.

Out.

 

[gofastman]

.45 ACP....... when you don't bother to study bullet wound dynamics and think you are carrying a phaser.

I'm not saying is not a very devastating round, but if a .45 puts you down, chances are a 9mm would have done the same thing and vice versa.

 

[rellascout]

The .45 ACP........when you want to stop the threat NOW.....not 5 minutes from now.

Can we nominate this one for the most inaccurate, uninformed statement on THR in 2010. :banghead:

 

[1SOW]

seconded!

 

[inSight-NEO]

The .45 ACP........when you want to stop the threat NOW.....not 5 minutes from now.

I applaud your love for the .45ACP. It is, after all, my preference in handgun loads. However, the .40 S&W has also been shown to be quite the effective "man stopper." The 9mm, while not quite as effective as the others, can still be effective at stopping vs merely wounding. It can indeed depend on the choice of load and of course, shot placement.

The ballistics probably favor the .45ACP...no surprise there. But, life/circumstance being as it is, this is not a "fail safe." Something to think about.

Regardless, whether .45ACP, .40 S&W, 9mm, whatever...being armed will always trump going without.

 

[Manco]

Simple, if shot placement is right, any of the rounds will kill a man or woman. Regardless of what people will say, a 9mm will kill. A .40 and a .45 will also kill. Amazing, if a .50 shot placement is not correct, it won't kill.

Dang, a .17 will kill if the person is hit in the right spot!

True enough, shot placement is paramount. That said, the great enabler for shot placement is penetration. If a bullet doesn't penetrate at all, for example, then shot placement is pretty pointless. To a point, the deeper a bullet can penetrate, the more vital tissues it can reach from a wider range of angles, giving one a larger total area in which shot placement can be effective in stopping and/or killing. The FBI estimates that this point is reached at about 18 inches, which is pretty much total penetration of a human body of virtually any size and from virtually any angle (through limbs if necessary). Anything less means that sometimes a potentially well-placed shot can fail to reach vital tissues in its path. FMJ or solid lead bullets in any of the service calibers should be able to exceed this standard easily; in fact, they are overkill for human targets in terms of penetration, hence the development of hollow-point bullets (JHP in the case of these calibers) to maximize the use of energy and momentum.

The problem with JHPs, in my opinion, is that they often trade off too much penetration for expansion, especially since the latter looks impressive and is a major selling point. Expansion increases general wounding and can even improve the odds of effective shot placement by a small fraction, but it's all for nothing if penetration is lacking. While ideal loads can theoretically be created for any of the common service calibers, I've found that there tends to be more .40 S&W loads that I favor for their balance between penetration and expansion, especially in the higher bullet weights such as 180 grains, so it's my caliber of choice. 9mm (even +P, which I'd avoid in any caliber) can never quite match it, as equal penetration implies a smaller bullet diameter, and .45 ACP gives me nothing useful in a JHP that .40 S&W cannot, while costing more and allowing for less round capacity (moot for me here in California, but in general it's true).

 

[macadore]

Wow. Thanks for the replies. I never knew that bullets wouldn't knock someone down.

Think about it. For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. Any bullet that would knock down the person being shot would also knock down the person doing the shooting. Bullets don't knock people down. They poke holes in them.

Years ago I had some logs that were 18 inches long and 8 to 10 inched in diameter. I stapled targets on them and shot them from 25 yards with a 44 Magnum. I never knocked one of them over. If you have someplace to shoot, get a 40 pound sack of sand and shoot it with the caliber of your choice. See how far it moves, it it moves at all.

 

[speaksoftly]

Could there be a more "newb" thing to argue about? I carry .40 because I can be accurate with it and it's readily available. However, IMHO, talking about stopping power in pistols is like asking which 4 banger you want to run on the drag strip on Muscle Car Madness weekend. People who think you're anemic without .45 rounds on your person always come off sounding like they have something to prove in my experience. I'd like to know how many of the posters here swearing by their .45's have seen the round in real live action. I'd bet it's a small number.

"A pistol has one purpose...as something to fight your way back to your rifle or shotgun."

 

[JohnKSa]

The FBI estimates that this point is reached at about 18 inches...

It's probably worth pointing out that the FBI penetration figures are not simple penetration numbers. Each penetration figure is the average penetration of 40 shots from 8 separate tests. 5 of the 8 tests involve intermediate barriers--2 pieces of 20ga cold rolled steel, 2 pieces of gypsum wall board, angled automobile windshield glass and 1 piece of 3/4" plywood. The remaining tests involve bare gelatin, heavily clothed gelatin and heavily clothed gelatin at 20 yards. What the FBI calls 12" of penetration is not at all what the average person thinks about when they think about 12" of penetration.

http://greent.com/40Page/general/fbitest.htm

 

[JoeSlomo]

"Knock down" power is B.S. A myth.

It all depends on WHO gets hit, and where. The human body is capable of absorbing more punishment than you would think possible.

ALL defensive hand guns are "underpowered".

Go with the largest caliber you are comfortable with that you can fire accurately.

There is no "magic" round or caliber...

 

[Manco]

It's probably worth pointing out that the FBI penetration figures are not simple penetration numbers. Each penetration figure is the average penetration of 40 shots from 8 separate tests. 5 of the 8 tests involve intermediate barriers--2 pieces of 20ga cold rolled steel, 2 pieces of gypsum wall board, angled automobile windshield glass and 1 piece of 3/4" plywood. The remaining tests involve bare gelatin, heavily clothed gelatin and heavily clothed gelatin at 20 yards. What the FBI calls 12" of penetration is not at all what the average person thinks about when they think about 12" of penetration.

http://greent.com/40Page/general/fbitest.htm

That's right, depending on what exactly you mean. Ultimately the depth of penetration is measured in ballistic gelatin AFTER the bullets pass through the various barriers. If one does not care about barrier penetration like the FBI does, that's fine, but the suggestion of 12"-18" of penetration (12" is a minimum standard, and anything up to 18" is progressively better) into simulated bad guy still applies.

In other words, the FBI is NOT saying that they prefer to have 18" of penetration into bare gelatin so that they can therefore have 12" of penetration after going through barriers. They're saying that they're going to shoot a bunch of test bullets through a variety of barriers, and that they still prefer to have 18" in all cases after the bullet passes through (usually they won't get it, but the closer the better).

In short, don't worry about their ammunition testing protocol (unless you want to use whatever they're using)--their suggestion for penetration depth into bad guys is independent of that, and is only concerned with what happens to the bad guys. Most people only seem to care about meeting their minimum standard, and the point that I'm always trying to drive home is that 12" is not ideal, at least according to the FBI, because 18" is even better (more than that would be a waste on human-sized targets, I presume). Their current duty ammo in .40 S&W gets 19" of penetration in the most common case of a clothed bad guy, and some of the best numbers overall through other barriers, so they seem to practice what they preach, at least regarding ammunition.

 

[3845]

I was fortunate in not having to shoot anyone when I was working, but I have seen a few people who were shot. Except for the dead ones, they all seemed pretty sick, regardless of the round used. That said, some of them gave up because they wanted to , not because they had to.
Seemed like a risky business to me. Oh wait...

 

[zhyla]

This thread is so disillusioning. Next you're going to tell me that the bullets don't hit the bad guy in slow motion.

 

[jonboynumba1]

There are a few popular schools or thought among most serious handgunners...they tend to be "caliber does not matter accuracy does/shot placement" which has a strong point...if not carried to an extreme to make you feel great about carrying a lil .32 or .380 "pocket rocket" which is handy if it is a that or nothing prospect...but most folkd would agree decent SD calibers start at a hot premium HP equiped .38/9mm and improve considerably when the first number of the chosen caliber starts with a ".4"-LOL Others say only a .40 or more popular still only a .45 is good enough. But you need a gun you are comfortable with and can shoot well...and you need to practice a lot to get there...and 9mm's are great for that role! They are all more similar than they are different...I do like .45 better myself for a lot of reasons...but with good ammo I have and do carry 9mm as well. All things being equal get the most gun that you can handle and shoot well and afford to keep shooting...and for most new shooters that is really a 9mm...which is also affordable to feed compared to my favorite...do I trust a 9mm? Yes...with quallity ammo I trust my wife's life to it every day and more importantly to her shooting and deffensive skills and judgement...often the last is far more important than which gun or caliber one chooses. I often carry on or the other depending on various criteria and what mood I'm in...I shoot both very well...and am completely comfortable with either. Both have been great guns and both have been calibers I've shot critters with...I know what my ammo "can do"....none of us know what our bullets "will do" life and bullets are both very unpredictable afterall.

(but you now YEAH!....45 is better than anything else out there-LOL!! -just kiddin!...maybe

 

[speaksoftly]

You guys are a bunch of wimps with your .45's and 10mm's. Carry anything smaller than this bad boy and you might as well be carrying an airsoft! ;-)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1yzI0AIpUUA&feature=related

Personally, I carry three. Two IWB and one in an ankle holster. That and a few rounds of extra ammo and I'm all set to go to the mall.

 

[Kingofthehill]

damn... some stupid posts in this thread.

unreal. I thought people who invested time into joining online gun forums would do some research and forget some of the gun sales BS they got at the counter when buying their first gun.

JOe

 

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

I am the only one who thinks that if something is worth shooting once, it's worth shooting 3 or 4 times? And I'd rather not be halfway to empty when that happens. I shoot 9mm JHPs because I like have 17 rounds as opposed to half of that.

 

[Kingofthehill]

I am the only one who thinks that if something is worth shooting once, it's worth shooting 3 or 4 times? And I'd rather not be halfway to empty when that happens. I shoot 9mm JHPs because I like have 17 rounds as opposed to half of that.

Agreed. seems that most of the time actual hit rates are VERY low. I would rather have more chances with a 9mm which is still a VERY capable round.

JOe

 

[Manco]

I am the only one who thinks that if something is worth shooting once, it's worth shooting 3 or 4 times? And I'd rather not be halfway to empty when that happens. I shoot 9mm JHPs because I like have 17 rounds as opposed to half of that.

You're not the only one who values capacity by any means. I like to be prepared not only to hit several times, but also miss several times, as well as go up against several opponents, potentially. Obviously that's a worst-case scenario, taken together, but as your example shows, it doesn't take much to run a pistol dry, and I'd rather have extra rounds and not need them than need them and not have them.

 

[harmon rabb]

Agreed. seems that most of the time actual hit rates are VERY low. I would rather have more chances with a 9mm which is still a VERY capable round.

Or perhaps sacrifice a few rounds worth of capacity to move up to a .40. That's why .40 is a good carry caliber, imo.

 

[inSight-NEO]

ALL defensive hand guns are "underpowered".

Go with the largest caliber you are comfortable with that you can fire accurately.

There is no "magic" round or caliber...

Agreed. Pretty much sums it up.

Having said this, I can see where the larger calibers can be more desirable [for HD anyway] as optimal accuracy may be tough to achieve during a violent encounter. Particularly for those who only shoot once or twice a year. Hence, a caliber such as the .45ACP, along with perhaps the .40 S&W, may tilt the odds here. However, on the flip side, these weapons can be harder to fire than, say, the 9mm. It seems as if there is always a trade-off of some sort. Either way, I believe the quoted statement(s) are accurate in any case.

Regardless, IMHO, none of this handgun bantering really amounts to all that much if one has a shotgun or rifle around, unless speaking specifically about a CCW. This is a general statement, so please, take it for what it is.


Topics such as this can be informative, if done right. Unfortunately, it generally turns into nothing more than a caliber war/pissing contest.