Done both, and have more than a working knowledge in physics.
Stopping power is a myth. Evan Marshall, who's books defined the term, states plainly that "stopping power is a myth". Page 3, Handgun Stopping Power, 1992.
There are too many people alive today, who were shot with things like a 30mm round, or an RPG, to believe that ANY rifle or pistol round is a guaranteed "stopper".
There are some rounds that can stop an attack, but only if placed precisely, and in a large enough number. If a .22 Long Rifle round can stop a person, then anything larger, in the same place, will do the same thing.
Quote:
Hopefully no one thinks that a little bullet is more likely to down an opponent then a big one. That's a non-issue, and those that bring it up are missing the point.
Actually, it's the opposite. Apparently there are those to whom a bullet smaller than a given, to them, size is seemingly unable to to down an opponent . That is a non-issue, and those that bring it up are missing the point.
Current .25 ACP bullets are the product of 1900's technology, with a very few exceptions. The manufacturers are happy to sell a number of rounds per year. They haven't determined a need to invest money in improving the caliber. The same technology that has given us the improved .380 ACP ammunition could easily be applied to the round. Powders are today available that would increase performance markedly, while maintaining pressures at a safe limit. Look at the Superformance rounds, or Cor-Bon's pistol ammo.
Then again, the current ammunition does seem to kill quite handily. Despite the apparent physics issue. Then again, until recently, physics proved that a Bumblebee couldn't fly. Nobody bothered to tell the bees, apparently.
The size of a projectile matters little, as long as it hits the appropriate target, and penetrates it. Look at the .22 Long Rifle. As most CCW incidents take place at less than seven feet, in near-darkness, distance is also a meaningless factor. Unless one was asleep, most actions play out up close, with 50' engagements virtually the sole province of the LEO.
It's amusing to listen to the pontifications of those who pronounce their knowledge as the ultimate arbiter. They are uniformly wrong.
Will a .25 ACP kill? Of course it will. Nobody is dumb enough to deny that. Is it the optimal self-defense weapon? Nope, and I haven't seen a single person claiming that. However, the gun that you have certainly beats the "better gun" that's at home.
Not too long ago, a Police Officer felt adequately armed with a six-shot .38 Special revolver, loaded with round-nosed 158-200 gr. bullets. Before than, they felt safe carrying .32 S&W revolvers. Many Armies issued the .32 ACP cartridge for battlefield use, as well.
Today, we poo-poo these cartridges as worse than nothing. Oddly, there are literally millions of dead people whom this wasn't true for. Perhaps we should understand that humans aren't particularly hard to kill, or stop, sometimes. Other times, they are literally bullet sponges, of everything man-portable. There doesn't seem to be a linear relationship to this, either. It's like a switch thrown at the first impact. Before the switch, a .22 long rifle will have them on the ground. After that switch is turned, though, they are the Amazing Hulk.
Carry what you feel comfortable with. It will work for the majority of the time, despite the warnings of the pundits. Fo the Hulks, nothing that you have will work, so why worry?
Accuracy trumps technology, and has for thousands of years. That is provided by the shooter