Why is the FBI's choice of gun...

[Kleanbore]

Posted by greener18:

Reinventing the wheel is always a pointless endeavor. Not the first time the government has thrown tax dollars away on weapons development though, ...

First, no one has "reinvented" anything. It's just that technology marches on.

Second, the government has spent nothing on the development of modern premium 9MM ammunition with bonded JHP bullets. Private industry developed everything they sell, and they perform the specialized testing and documentation to prove that their products meet customer specifications.

The companies do that in the hopes that the FBI and other USG agencies (Treasury, for example), state and municipal and county law enforcement agencies, and private citizens will choose their products one that of their competitors.

It's basic business.

The FBI's recommendation is not binding on anyone outside the Bureau, but other Federal agencies, a very large number of police departments, most well known trainers, and a large number citizens are selecting the 9mm today. I seriously doubt that would have happened at all, were it not for recent improvements in ammunition.

One who might be of the mind to do it could simulate a large number of use of force encounters and determine what amount of penetration and what speed of fire and number of shots would most likely suffice in realistic scenarios involving rapidly moving assailants at close range. The ammunition performance test data are publicly available. Human physiological data are available. One would have to vary assumptions regarding what internal damage would likely accomplish what and how.The evaluator could then time strings of controlled fire with different loads.

I believe that after doing all of that the results would simply show that there is nothing at all that is even remotely certain about defensive shooting effectiveness; that there is likely a penetration threshold beyond which more provides little utility, barring the need to shoot through architectural plate glass, and that today's best 9MM ammo will meet the threshold; and that faster shooting is important.

That happens to be precisely what the FBI justification paper has told us, and it happens to be precisely what Rob Pincus concluded before that.

 

[481]

Since the FBI test protocols produce repeatable ammunition performance test data under just about every conceivable possibility, I am not sure that I understand the seemingly endless resistance to them. It's a good worst case scenario test and I'd think that something like that would appeal to everyone—even folks who are not acting in the LE role—since the test protocols encompass such a broad range of conditions.

 

[herrwalther]

Simple. Bullet technology in the 1980's was not all that great. The Miami shoot was a wakeup call for LE and the only viable solution was bigger is better. Tons of ballistic gel testing, spring boarded from the FBI, closed the gap in performance between the 9mm, 40, and 45. Now the FBI is looking at the research and benefiting from their own tests over the span of 30 years. 9mm works, 40 works, and 45 works. That solves the bullet short failings of the 80's. Now they are looking at what is cheaper to train and carry? 9mm. What has less recoil for new/female/inexperienced shooters? 9mm. And what has the best capacity? 9mm. The change makes sense to them.

 

[Warp]

Simple. Bullet technology in the 1980's was not all that great. The Miami shoot was a wakeup call for LE and the only viable solution was bigger is better. Tons of ballistic gel testing, spring boarded from the FBI, closed the gap in performance between the 9mm, 40, and 45. Now the FBI is looking at the research and benefiting from their own tests over the span of 30 years. 9mm works, 40 works, and 45 works. That solves the bullet short failings of the 80's. Now they are looking at what is cheaper to train and carry? 9mm. What has less recoil for new/female/inexperienced shooters? 9mm. And what has the best capacity? 9mm. The change makes sense to them.

Less recoil benefits everybody, not just females or newbs.

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by Warp:

Less recoil benefits everybody, not just females or newbs.

Rob Pincus put it this way:

Physics dictates that the 9mm is going to be a more manageable round (lower recoil) than the .40 S&W out of any particular firearm. So, no matter how much you train and how much you practice, everyone should be able to shoot a string of Combat Accurate 9mm rounds faster than they can fire a string of .40.

[Emphasis added]​

A high school student, at least the ones in my day, would be able to tell us why.

So, why is it important to us? Here's Rob:

I don’t believe that it is likely to take only one shot to stop your next threat. With this in mind, the “data” that we collect (and sometimes obsess over) about the difference in potential terminal performance from one bullet to the next or the relatively few examples we have of single pistol hit results in human beings suggests to me that we should plan on multiple shot strings of fire. If we are planning on needing more than one shot and we know that we want to stop the bad guy as soon as possible, then it makes sense that we should seek the fastest string of fire possible.

It sure does! If your assailant is charging at close range, and if you will likely have to hit him several times to have much of a chance of hitting something vital, "we should seek the fastest string of fire possible" is kind of a given.

But what do we give up, when we choose lower recoil? Not very much! I alluded to this earlier:

9mm or .40 ?? Bet you can’t tell. In a recent test, the PDX1 .40 and 9mm performed almost exactly the same in the gelatin.

Now, the .40 PDX1 preceded the newest 9MM PDX1 in development. It would seem likely to me that the .40 could be improved.

Will it be, any time soon? I doubt it. First, demand for the .40 is way down, and second, unless we are up against Sasquatch, there is only so much that we need in terms of terminal ballistics for defensive shooting.

Rob recommended the .40 for a long time.

Before that, he liked the .45ACP.

So did I. I was shocked to find how little it gave me, some seven or so years ago when I proudly brought one home and ordered a good holster for it. I just hadn't been keeping up with things.

http://www.icetraining.info/131/

 

[herrwalther]

Less recoil benefits everybody, not just females or newbs.

Well yes that is true as well. Just didn't slide that into the sentence. I don't currently have a 9mm and have nothing against the round. So I will get one again eventually to work into a carry.

Rob Pincus put it this way:

I like Rob and have spoken to him at length on several occasions. I have pointed out to him that he is becoming quite the fan boy and not everyone likes the same firearms as he does. As a trainer he should know that the right training you can overcome different action types and still be effective at self defense. 9mm Glock may be his favorite bu not everyone's favorite.

 

[ApacheCoTodd]

This thread is crackin' me up.

Simply put, the FBI is another bureaucracy which continually fights the last war or in this case; the last gunbattle failure.

Woulda, shoulda, coulda....

If the round had penetrated farther, the miscreant would have died instantly!... Sure.

In another set of circumstances we could well be having the "had the round not over penetrated but rather, expanded earlier, he'd have died instantly!... Sure.

It expanded;
too much
too soon
too little
too late

They didn't take into account;
body armor
denim
multiple "T" shirts (clever miscreants)
fat boys
skinny meth boys
car doors
passing kitties
overtravel and dead civies

This round;
hurts the shooters
hurts the gun
doesn't hurt the bad guys

A very strong argument can also be made for diminishing the general day to day firearms proficiency by continually changing up rounds and/or firearms to satisfy the ballistic utopians.

Maybe the analytical tools should worry a little less about analytical tools and more about engagement policy, back-up reaction times, inter-agency communications for regional back-up and simple proficiency.

There will always be another scenario down the road which will come as a surprise, but I'm not saying ignore progress - I'm saying that the reactionary nature of relatively recent, over focus on ballistics for the Investigator tends to undermine confidence and practical realities of an Agent not being a tactical tool.

Expecting the average Agent to be able to effectively defend themselves in every scenario begs the carrying of a carbine everywhere and even then, we'll have Monday Morning Quarterbacks picking nits till the next cows come home shooting.

Todd.

 

[JohnBiltz]

Sorry, but that is looking at it in today's context... going forward 11 years from then brings us to North Hollywood.

One of the largest US police department was not that much better prepared than those agents in Miami. A 12 Gauge with buckshot can be devastating, but it isn't going to be useful in all circumstances. SWAT was better equipped, but still had a good time period before they arrived on scene. While squad cars had shotguns, it is pretty much the same problem as 1986; a situation arose that current tactics/loadouts could not meet. Afterwards, changes were made which sent us down the line to where we are currently.

To say shame on them for not being armed to the teeth, it is a little short sighted. Bank robbers doing what those two did was, in fact, an anomaly. Same can be said for North Hollywood in 1997. That is along the lines of saying the Earps and Holiday should have had a Gatling gun when they walked down towards the OK Corral... considering that it is the only weapon that would have given them the firepower capability that we have today.

First of all I'm 60 years old. I remember when this happened. I also remember that every cop car in the country had a 12 gauge pump back then generally locked with the tube full no round in the chamber, cruiser ready. The practice of law enforcement having shotguns would be over 100 years old by the time this happened. If half of those FBI agents had stepped out of their cars with a shotgun no one would have heard about this incident because they would have shot them into little pieces the second that rifle came out.

They failed to make the stop on FBI terms. That is probably the most critical part of this thing and to be fair probably the thing that was the farthest from being the FBI's fault. The enemy doesn't cooperate, the enemy is trying to win as well. That is why it is called the enemy.

I don't remember the exact circumstances but they figured a traffic pattern that the criminals would be on a road on one day of the week once every couple of weeks. So they flooded that road on that day. They did not expect it to work so they did not take the threat of these guys seriously enough. Most of their shotguns were in the trunks. The car was spotted more and more FBI cars were vectored into it. Eventually the criminals noticed they were leading a caravan. The order was given to make the stop and it all fell apart.

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by ApacheCoTodd:

Simply put, the FBI is another bureaucracy which continually fights the last war or in this case; the last gunbattle failure.

Well, back in the days of the Miami controversy, that seems to have had some truth, but it is not reflected in the discussion at hand, and the applicability of the word "continually" is not apparent.

Maybe the analytical tools should worry a little less about analytical tools and more about engagement policy, back-up reaction times, inter-agency communications for regional back-up and simple proficiency.

How much do they reflect on those things? Quite a bit. But the recommendation we are discussing was about another subject entirely.

...I'm saying that the reactionary nature of relatively recent, over focus on ballistics for the Investigator tends to undermine confidence and practical realities of an Agent not being a tactical tool.

I see no "over focus" on anything. It's simple discussion of what to choose from today's technology for the "investigator" (whose needs, as Al Thompson pointed out in Post #56, happen to correspond closely with those of the armed citizens) and the many law enforcement partners who rely on FBI analyses.

If this somehow "undermines" anything, it is lost on me.

Expecting the average Agent to be able to effectively defend themselves in every scenario begs the carrying of a carbine everywhere...

Every County police car where I live has a shotgun in it , and every one driven by a lieutenant or higher also has an M4, and some squads have 9MM select fire carbines.

But the question at hand is about handgun cartridges. The question, which you posed, was about why what the FBI might choose might be of interest to civilians.

If one cannot get an idea about that from Al Thompson' s post #56, one is not doing much in the way of critical thinking.

 

[mavracer]

Rob Pincus put it this way:

Quote:
Physics dictates that the 9mm is going to be a more manageable round (lower recoil) than the .40 S&W out of any particular firearm. So, no matter how much you train and how much you practice, everyone should be able to shoot a string of Combat Accurate 9mm rounds faster than they can fire a string of .40.

[Emphasis added]
A high school student, at least the ones in my day, would be able to tell us why.

If a marginally bigger hole is of no value to you why not just go with 32 ACP with ball ammo you could shoot even faster.

But what do we give up, when we choose lower recoil? Not very much! I alluded to this earlier:

Quote:
9mm or .40 ?? Bet you can’t tell. In a recent test, the PDX1 .40 and 9mm performed almost exactly the same in the gelatin.

Now, the .40 PDX1 preceded the newest 9MM PDX1 in development. It would seem likely to me that the .40 could be improved.

It'd be funny if it weren't sad Rob is such a fanboy of his own opinion that he can't be objective.
Perform about the same huh I just looked up 3 different tests for both 147gr 9mm and 180gr 40 PDX1 and 9mm has .570-.590 expansion and 14.5-15.5' penetration while the 40 has .670-.690 expansion and 16-17" of penetration.


round and round we go lol
Physics dictates less recoil equals less damage on target for any particular firearm.


BTW if I read it correctly the FBI doesn't want 9mm for everyone they just want the option for some.

 

[Old Guy]

A few yeas back, I visited the FBI Academy.

Guess what they had in the Armory, never fired, never issued. H&K Sub Machine Guns, in wooden cases. What caliber? 10mm. The full sized 10 mm.

Guess the cost of those.

 

[BSA1]

EVERYTHING with a handgun is a COMPROMISE whether it the design and size of the gun, the cartridge and the bullet design.

We know from studies of thousands of gunfights that handguns cartridges are poor stoppers. Handguns are carried in the United States simply because they are handy.

One stop shots are probably the biggest myth we have to overcome. I just ordered another Beretta 92FS with the intention of using it for edc either open and semi-concealed carry.

Terrorism has come to the Heartland and it calls for reconsidering what is on your hip.

 

[IL Guns]

If the round had penetrated farther, the miscreant would have died instantly!... Sure.

"The bullet tore through Platt’s arm, into his chest (the 115-grain Winchester Silvertip 9mm pierced his lung and stopped just short of his heart."

Actually the Silvertip stopped millimeters short of his heart. The aluminum cased Silvertip was made for rapid expansion. It expanded when it hit his arm which in turn dumped energy taking away penetration. If I understand this correctly Todd, what you are saying is that even with Platt's heart GONE, he would have still lived.... Sure.

The only thing you have to take into account is that the round hit his arm first.

I'm pretty sure passing kitties didn't play a role unless you have some secret info that I don't.

 

[Screwball]

First of all I'm 60 years old. I remember when this happened. I also remember that every cop car in the country had a 12 gauge pump back then generally locked with the tube full no round in the chamber, cruiser ready. The practice of law enforcement having shotguns would be over 100 years old by the time this happened. If half of those FBI agents had stepped out of their cars with a shotgun no one would have heard about this incident because they would have shot them into little pieces the second that rifle came out.

Thanks for the heads up on you age... congratulations for a year ending in zero.

Shotguns were common at the time, and still are. Problem is, how were shotguns implemented? The one that wasn't brought into the fight was in the back of McNeill's car. You figure, why didn't he bring it into action... well, considering he was 10 yards away from the cab of the Monte Carlo, which was already sending .223 rounds towards the agents when he pulled up, there just wasn't enough time to get it out.

Mireles' car, on the other hand, was across the street. A little more time to get the shotgun out. Those two agents were under fire as they moved across the street but they both had time to secure a weapon (Mireles was paired with Hanlon, who lost his sidearm and pulled his backup from an ankle holster).

McNeill was actually able to make some decent hits, and probably was the reason that Matix didn't help Platt. It sucks that he was blind in one eye, not seeing Mireles hit and his shotgun nearby, but he was paralyzed from being shot by Platt when he went for the shotgun in his back seat (his revolver jammed from blood/bone after taking a .223 to the hand).

If you do ever get a chance to see the way the vehicles were situated, and the way the Monte Carlo was concealed under trees above the scene, I feel confident to say that your claim about shooting them to pieces isn't fair. Besides, Platt and Matix were shot to pieces... Platt was even when he made his final rush and executed Grogan and Dove. But remember, he started firing while inside the car.

In regards to the shotgun's effectiveness with a threat inside a car, it was clearly shown in the shootout. The only shotgun pellets (00) that connected either suspect was from Mireles' first shotgun blast, which hit Platt in the feet (under the car door as he was getting in). The other four shots didn't do anything to the pair, and it was rounds from his revolver that ultimately ended the shootout. So, puts more against that "shot to little pieces" comment.

I don't remember the exact circumstances but they figured a traffic pattern that the criminals would be on a road on one day of the week once every couple of weeks. So they flooded that road on that day. They did not expect it to work so they did not take the threat of these guys seriously enough. Most of their shotguns were in the trunks. The car was spotted more and more FBI cars were vectored into it. Eventually the criminals noticed they were leading a caravan. The order was given to make the stop and it all fell apart.

It was a long shot, just like them getting plates for vehicles that matched witnesses' descriptions of Matix's truck.

If they didn't find them on that day, they would have found Matix's license photo from that plate inquiry, and could have found out it was him by showing the surviving victim from the Everglades. Two agents wouldn't have been killed, but who would have known what would have happened in a robbery on April 11, 1986... or an attempted arrest of Matix at his home (would Platt have been caught)?

 

[IL Guns]

There are 4 or 5 totally different disagreements going on at the same time. This thread reminds me of being at my mother-in-laws house.

 

[Captain O]

I was under the impression that Mireles fired the shots ending the gun battle with those fired from a 3" barreled S&W Model 13 (158-grain SWCHP+p load).

 

[Jenrick]

The FBI testing protocols have been validated against real world shootings the agents have been involved in. The protocols are used by the manufactures to produce rounds that will meet the requirements. The FBI tests the these new rounds (with copious amounts of gel, it's a bit under 500lbs of gel per round) and documents the results. These results are available to LE agencies to make their own selections based on whatever data points from the FBI's testing them deem important. Ammunition manufactures are not given access to the FBI's data, and releasing the FBI's data to the public would be a real quick way to have the FBI yank your ability to access it.

About the only way of knowing exactly how a given round did in the FBI's testing is that they adopt it. That should be a clue that the round did pretty well in testing.

-Jenrick

 

[IL Guns]

I was under the impression that Mireles fired the shots ending the gun battle with those fired from a 3" barreled S&W Model 13 (158-grain SWCHP+p load).

"Mireles forced himself to his feet, drew his S&W 686, and lumbered toward the car, firing right-hand only with his shattered left arm hanging at his side. Five of his six shots connected solidly, two into one of the suspects and three into the other. Both slumped unconscious and dying and, at last, it was over."

 

[Branko_D]

We still don't really have a way to model what exactly is going to happen when you shoot a living creature. So you have to think of a test, correlate it to real world observation (which is of limited value since it's not obviously done in controlled conditions) to see if it's a valid test, and then you have some basis to compare.

In the 19th century it was pine planks, nowadays it's ballistic gel. While the latter is a better approximation of some kinds of tissue, people ought to bear in mind it's still quite an approximation. I've read a study - pretty recent - trying to figure out how to emulate human skin (they settled on 1mm of natural rubber as being an acceptable substitute). How would you test effects of hitting bone, tissues of different consistency, and so on? Very hard, really.

However, more or less, what works in ballistic gellatin tests and meets their requirements tends to work well enough in practice. You won't do much wrong if you go with their recommendations.

That said, you won't go much wrong if you pick any other caliber which has proven to work well, either. I'd just steer clear of newfangled unproven gizmos (like, eg. the low penetration 'safety' slugs) or things which were noted in reality to perform poorly (eg. mouseguns).

Personally, I'm not buying the suggestion that there's zero difference in efficiency between calibers. This is not physically possible given the way handguns incapacitate people.

What might be said is "there's no difference we can discern", which is pretty unsurprising given the problematic nature of analyzing a limited amount of real world data which wasn't recorded in any sort of controlled condition.

There are 4 or 5 totally different disagreements going on at the same time. This thread reminds me of being at my mother-in-laws house.

Ha ha, the truth

 

[TomJ]

Since I got back into shooting a couple of years ago after a 20 year hiatus, I've been trying to make sense of the caliber wars. The best I can figure out, and please correct me if I'm wrong, is that with the advancements in bullet technology the 9 is close, but not equal to the 40, 45, 357 sig or 10mm in regards to effectiveness of stopping an attacker. The benefit to the 9, however, is higher capacity and less recoil, allowing quicker follow up shots. The trade offs are then greater capacity and the speed of your follow up shots with the 9 versus lower capacity and slower follow up shots with the possible benefit of fewer hits with a larger caliber incapacitating the attacker. Am I understanding this correctly?

 

[Captain O]

Frankly, my friends, I don't give a "hoot mon"

what the FBI uses for their handguns, rifles, shotguns, submachineguns and the like. It doesn't translate too well to what happens in civilian situations.

If I can:

a) Hit where I aim,

b) penetrate the target and,

c) tear up some internal organs along the way.

These attributes appear more important than what serves the Feebies. I'm not "worshipping at the altar of Political Correctness". They are.

 

[Old Dog]

What an awesome thread. Seems to me that if we went back into the THR archives circa 2004, we'd find an eerily similar thread ...

Also seems as though that more'n a few here are allowing their jaundiced view of the FBI to color their remarks. However, since I'm feeling a little love toward that organization right now and believe that it's on the right track as far as what handguns and loads are the most effective right now. Despite what some here seem to believe, the FBI is actually a fairly competent organization.

Nevertheless, this continues to be an entertaining thread.

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by Branko_D:

We still don't really have a way to model what exactly is going to happen when you shoot a living creature.

Reports on real world shooting indicate that there is tremendous variation in how different humans react under different circumstances when struck by handgun projectiles. There is so much uncertainty that there is no way to predict "ecactly" hat will happen.

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by Captain O:

....what the FBI uses for their handguns... doesn't translate too well to what happens in civilian situations.

To the contrary, as Al Thompson pointed out in Post #56, FBI use of force encounters are much more comparable to civilian defense shootings than either are to those experienced by uniformed officers whose job involves making traffic stops, responding to armed robberies, responding to domestic violence calls, going into bars to stop fights, and the like.

And, of course, the kind of targets we face are quite similar in terms of physiology.

 

[BSA1]

Since I got back into shooting a couple of years ago after a 20 year hiatus, I've been trying to make sense of the caliber wars. The best I can figure out, and please correct me if I'm wrong, is that with the advancements in bullet technology the 9 is close, but not equal to the 40, 45, 357 sig or 10mm in regards to effectiveness of stopping an attacker.

Aha welcome back to the real world. The truth is there is no way to make a blanket statement that the 45 is better than the 40 and the 40 is better than the 9mm.

What gets ignored as these discussions heat up and folks become defensive about their personal choice is humans are controlled by multiple variables none of which can be tested in the lab. Their physical build, psychological make-up, drugs / alcohol, fight or flight attitude, reaction to being shot (I have seen many crybaby felons brought in after being shot with a 25 and leaving in handcuffs with just a bandaid over the wound) cannot be repeated under controlled conditions in the lab.

What we do know beyond a shadow of a doubt is one shot stop is a myth, Yet Virginia, as long as there is the Internet that myth will continue to survive and used in discussions.

Many members of THR agree that more ammunition in self defense gun is better. Terrorism is becoming common in the United States. The Sheriff Department in the County I live in shot and killed a terrorist yesterday. He was sitting in his parked car on a remote part of a major highway pointing a rifle at passing vehicles. (F.Y.I. Hesston is in the next County N.W. of us). If the terrorist had started shooting help could have be a long time coming as it is a large county.

Worse yet is there are dead zones for cell phone service in the far east part of the County on that highway as we have traveled on it often. Suddenly a Beretta 92 with 17 round magazine is inadequate.

p.s. I am not misusing the term "terrorist."