I carry 9mm ball ammo. Do you think that is irresponsible?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Theohazard said:
JeffK said:
Old saying, better to wound someone with FMJ then to kill him instantly, because then you take him and two of his buddies out of action. ;)
Click to expand...
I usually see that myth in reference to the 5.56 round. Either way, it's complete nonsense. ....
Click to expand...
And even if it made some sense on the battlefield it makes no sense for normal "on the street" or at home self defense.
 
people arent smart. its not the best but itlll work.

why?


some states only allow non expanding bullets for self defense by people carrying a handgun under a chl permit thingy. those states have decided jhp is too much for regular citizens walking the dog and what not.

So if a government entity says fmj isnt dangerous due to penetrating to well, it cant be held against you. seriusly, the lawsuits against that state would bankrupt it further.
 
1. Shoot what you're comfortable with.
2. When the Wife carried a .380 she had a mix of half JHPs and half FMJs because of the lower penetration on a .380.
3. When our couch got uppity and had to be put down, the 9mm JHP round went though a counterwall, through the sofa, and into the TV stand. Be advised however, in addition to hours of enjoyment for your kids, a Candyland box will stop Speer Gold Dots cold. :D
 
"The Hague is OLD. The USA did not sign the Accords."

They accords are old. So what, they're still in effect and generally recognized.

The fact that we didn't sign them is also immaterial, because since their passage we have abided by them.
 
It also seems the uneducated anti-guns sometimes seem to believe that HP bullets are 'armor piercing'

As Bezoar said, people aren't smart. I wouldn't doubt a state would ban HP's based on misinformation like that.

I believe the Hague was put in place, not because FMJ's were thought to be superior, quite the opposite I think. I believe that expanding ammunition was deemed unethical to use on humans (in war) because of the gruesome wounds it could cause. There's a big difference between the roughly 1'' long oblong hole left by a yawing FMJ, and the softball size exit wounds, that you'd get with an expanding bullet. I believe back in the late 1800's people knew what the 'Dum dum' soft points were capable of.
 
pops1085 said:
I carry 9mm ball ammo. Do you think that is irresponsible?
Click to expand...

Assuming you have a choice, then yes, I think it's irresponsible. But the odds are good it won't ever matter, so if you want to carry substantially less effective ammunition with a slightly improved chance of hitting something you don't mean to hit, then that's up to you.
 
I'd worry about misses more than over penetration. If one is comfortable with ball and especially if this was the most reliable ammo the gun can shoot, then go with it. Not my first choice, but that's me.
 
Originally Posted by pops1085
I carry 9mm ball ammo. Do you think that is irresponsible?
Click to expand...

Not at all, many of us old timers still use FMJ, the media hasnt brainwashed me yet :)

Use what you wish, the bad guy wont know the difference if you hit the mark. Miss it and no caliber is a sure stopper HP or otherwise.


Hitting the mark is way more important and how to do that other than practise? Many use FMJ for this then switch over to a HP they may not have shot, will it shoot like the practise rounds? you hope so. As in trap I shoot what I hunt with so my aim doesnt mess up. Works for me and a lot of others that do not read nor post on web forums as they see no benifit to it. Some just go on knowing what they know without the need to go tell others how wrong they are.
 
And in ten round magazines because the commish of that era was wedded to revolvers and afraid that an automatic might lead to wild shots.
Click to expand...

Question: Comparing the time when revolvers were the standard issue sidearm to the time when auto pistols were the standard issue sidearm, has the number of shots fired per incident increased, decreased, or stayed the same?
 
Would semi wadcutters be more effective than fmj's? I know semi wadcutters don't expand much but don't they make a bigger permanent cavity whith deep penetration?
 
Yes, handgun hunters saw the advantages of SWC's decades ago and they are more effective on living organisms.
 
Would the SWC advantage also be present in the FMJ flat-point ammo like Winchester .380 white-box ammo?

Also, considering that most FMJ practice ammo is loaded lighter than SD JHP's, could this also help with energy transfer and overpenetration?
 
Last edited:
Yes the swc would still be more effective as an fmj than a rn. The increase in damage comes from the larger frontal area that displaces more tissue as it passes through. Kinda the same concept as an expanded hp. My personal opinion is that a hp that mushrooms out rather than expands in petals tends to kill quicker (at least on deer) i think its because of the greater surface area rather than the greater expanded dia.

A swc will transfer more energy than a rn because of an increase in resistance, but the lower velocity will mean less rapid energy transfer. As velocity increases so does the resistance, meaning a more rapid deceleration of the projectile (energy transfer).

To the OP no i dont think carring fmj is irresponsible. Its on you to assess your situation and carry ammo accordinly. fmj ammo may be able to sever the spine of an attacker where a hp will fall short. On the otherhand a hp may expand just enough to sever a major artery where a fmj wouldn't. So personally i carry 147gr hp in my 9mm, more pennatration less expantion than a lighter hp. I would rather 2 hole an attacker than have the bullet fall short myself, but the increased frontal area of a hp should cause more tissue damage than a rn fmj rather it expands or not.
 
This thread is a little ridiculous and tedious.

It doesn't really matter what the mechanism is that makes HP work better than ball. It works better, as recorded by so many shootings that there really isn't anything left to argue about.

And because HP works so well, that's what the ammo makers use when making their premium ammo. So if you are actually serious about carrying a gun for your own safety (instead of just playing the grownup version of army-man), buy the high quality JHP ammo.

If your gun doesn't like JHP, then buy a serious gun designed to protect you, unless you're just a big poser.


Otherwise, carry a Nambu with 80 year old ammo, or a muzzleloader or whatever Rambo fantasy nonsense you want. Just don't ask if your choice is sensible when it is clear that no educated professional would emulate your silliness.


Does anyone think mountain climber websites have people who ask, "I use cotton rope. Is that irresponsible?" Nope.
 
Well I must say, I'm really enjoying the he ll out of this thread. There's so much information here! That's pretty much the reason I started this thread! I'm not too worried about having conflicting views with some of you, I mean if there weren't any sort of conflict nothing would ever change... I'm still sticking to my guns by the way, the way I see it, not a whole lot has changed. Full metal jacket has been working for a LONG time and what people are made of haven't changed since then. If it worked then, it'll work now.

Ps. I'm sure there are instances of a particular bullet failing to stop somebody in all types of bullets. Shot placement.
 
Using ball ammo means over penetration and hitting something other than your intended target. An innocent bystander....
Using jhp keeps that from happening. That's the entire reason it was invented.
Using ball ammo in a self defense situation is irresponsible.
Carry Federal HST or gold dots.
/thread
 
Last edited:
FMJ,JHP what ever.

The subject of using FMJ for self defense always brings another word into play,

OVERPENETRATION.== overrated

The words that fail to show up is "MISSES" when in reality that is much more likely then overpenetration.

And also Failure of JHPS to expand are very frequent in ever brand and caliber & bullets.

I'm not going to take the time to look these facts up but I do know what I have said are facts.

If any cares to or has time to search them out and post feel free to do so, maybe to OP would like to if for no other reason prove his point with a little Fact.

Look up the percent of misses when shooters are under very high stress! And you may come to the conclusion that overpenetration means nothing.


irresponsible I would not call it that. I mean I wouldn't want to get shot by FMJ or JHP rds. BTW there is a couple of states in our country and around the world that outlaws anything other then FMJ for CC.
 
Last edited:
Using ball ammo means over penetration and hitting something other than your intended target. An innocent bystander....
Click to expand...
Have you any examples of that happening. ?

Using ball ammo in a self defense situation is irresponsible.
Click to expand...
FMJ is all you are allowed to use here and in other places, are we being irresponsible using it. ? Over penetration must not be a concern for the authorities saying FMJ only.
 
Using ball ammo means over penetration and hitting something other than your intended target. An innocent bystander....
Using jhp keeps that from happening. That's the entire reason it was invented.
Using ball ammo in a self defense situation is irresponsible.
Carry Federal HST or gold dots.
/thread
Click to expand...
So you're saying that'd you'd NEVER EVER miss one shot with your HP's?

Okay buddy, sure thing. 'Over penetration' is an over rated myth, unless you have 100% accuracy in EVERY situation, the risk of a miss is worse than any 'over penetration'

When will people get that in their heads? I guess never.

Let me state it again. In bold print.
unless you have 100% accuracy in EVERY situation, the risk of a miss is worse than any 'over penetration'


What's worse? A HP not expanding and 'over penetrating,' a complete miss, where this 'deadlier' HP bullet could now hit a bystander, or a FMJ 'over penetrating' and hitting a bystander. Come on now lets stop being silly.

The only reason to use a hollow point is because you can efficiently make a bigger hole, and expend more of the bullet's energy in the target. IMO the only reasonable reason to opt for a FMJ over HP is because you're using a small, weak caliber, which already has mediocre penetration. HP's sacrifice penetration for a bigger hole. Some cartridges it's not worth sacrificing the penetration for the bigger hole.
9x19, .40S&W, .45ACP, .357 mag, .44Mag are all calibers which have more than adequate penetration on humans and because of this, HP's are a better choice for them assuming they function in the gun and perform as intended.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top