When it comes to gathering data on performance of ammunition in REAL shootings here is how it works.
The sources of information have to come from the following sources.
1. Eyewitness testimony. This is the WORST kind possible. Two people seeing the exact same thing will give wide ranging information from correct to false. It has little value in courts anymore because of "false memory recall" among others. Do you think the sister of the killed will give you an accurate testimony on what happened?
2. Physical evidence. You don't find police looking to see if ammo was a reload or even what brand it was. It is rare that a brand name is mention in any report nor the weight or type of bullet. It is of no legal use. At the best you will find, "bullet recovered was a nonremarkable (FMJ) projectile of approximately 112 grains weight." Or perhaps, "bullet recovered was a badly deformed slug of about 9mm in size." It could be a .380 or a Makarov round. Nobody cares at this point.
3. Medical reports. They are accurate and scientific but doctors don't care about the bullet. The medical discription will seldom comment on the wound other than mentioning it is from a shotgun or maybe a "high velocity" type bullet etc. they don't get into hollowpoints and FMJ. It is not germaine to the medical needs of the patient.
4. Autopsy reports. Again not much here. I can quote some if you like from actual reports. You'll be badly disappointed.
5. Forensics. This is about where some information comes to light. They will say the empting casing was a Winchester 9mm for example. That's about it. No concerns over reloads etc. Not relavent to a criminal case. They will try to identify he projectile to the gun and go into some detail on the discription of rifling marks but little on the bullet. Nobody cares. Again I have many actual forensic reports and it just isn't there for a variety of reasons.
A "average" shooting case will have about 500+ pages of reports, records and documents to review. IF you get the best of all worlds it is often hard to form a conclusion as to how a bullet performed. Marshal claims in one presentation 11,000+ actual reports in his data base which he allows NOBODY to review nor does he let on how he comes to his conclusions. All "trust me" stuff. If he has that many you do the math of 500+ pages times 11,000 shootings. A small warehouse me thinks.
Also police have about 1500+ shootings per year in this country. Police departments are VERY VERY secretive about the inside details and data privacy also protects most states from revealing much of anything and medical records are VERY private. I only get them from lawyers in most cases.
If Marshal got EVERY case it would take 10+ years to gather that much data. Anything beyond that is getting into ancient history.
Never mind the creditability of the "one shot stoppers" he invented on a cold day in Detroit. Had the guy said he had an educated OPINION I would buy it. As for his "study" it holds as much water as old socks. The math doesn't work. Does it?
Few shooters have a clue as to how this information is gathered and that most won't tell you what you need nor want to know. After 40+ years all I have is OPINION because there aren't enough facts out there to do anything else.
The sources of information have to come from the following sources.
1. Eyewitness testimony. This is the WORST kind possible. Two people seeing the exact same thing will give wide ranging information from correct to false. It has little value in courts anymore because of "false memory recall" among others. Do you think the sister of the killed will give you an accurate testimony on what happened?
2. Physical evidence. You don't find police looking to see if ammo was a reload or even what brand it was. It is rare that a brand name is mention in any report nor the weight or type of bullet. It is of no legal use. At the best you will find, "bullet recovered was a nonremarkable (FMJ) projectile of approximately 112 grains weight." Or perhaps, "bullet recovered was a badly deformed slug of about 9mm in size." It could be a .380 or a Makarov round. Nobody cares at this point.
3. Medical reports. They are accurate and scientific but doctors don't care about the bullet. The medical discription will seldom comment on the wound other than mentioning it is from a shotgun or maybe a "high velocity" type bullet etc. they don't get into hollowpoints and FMJ. It is not germaine to the medical needs of the patient.
4. Autopsy reports. Again not much here. I can quote some if you like from actual reports. You'll be badly disappointed.
5. Forensics. This is about where some information comes to light. They will say the empting casing was a Winchester 9mm for example. That's about it. No concerns over reloads etc. Not relavent to a criminal case. They will try to identify he projectile to the gun and go into some detail on the discription of rifling marks but little on the bullet. Nobody cares. Again I have many actual forensic reports and it just isn't there for a variety of reasons.
A "average" shooting case will have about 500+ pages of reports, records and documents to review. IF you get the best of all worlds it is often hard to form a conclusion as to how a bullet performed. Marshal claims in one presentation 11,000+ actual reports in his data base which he allows NOBODY to review nor does he let on how he comes to his conclusions. All "trust me" stuff. If he has that many you do the math of 500+ pages times 11,000 shootings. A small warehouse me thinks.
Also police have about 1500+ shootings per year in this country. Police departments are VERY VERY secretive about the inside details and data privacy also protects most states from revealing much of anything and medical records are VERY private. I only get them from lawyers in most cases.
If Marshal got EVERY case it would take 10+ years to gather that much data. Anything beyond that is getting into ancient history.
Never mind the creditability of the "one shot stoppers" he invented on a cold day in Detroit. Had the guy said he had an educated OPINION I would buy it. As for his "study" it holds as much water as old socks. The math doesn't work. Does it?
Few shooters have a clue as to how this information is gathered and that most won't tell you what you need nor want to know. After 40+ years all I have is OPINION because there aren't enough facts out there to do anything else.