TacticalDefense1911
New member
The data provided is not just from deaths. "Stop" is just referring to stopping the threat from attacking you; you do not have to kill someone to stop their attacks.
One Shot Stops Database
- Thread starter Brian Pfleuger
- Start date
The data provided is not just from deaths. "Stop" is just referring to stopping the threat from attacking you; you do not have to kill someone to stop their attacks.
Curt.45: Another time, two of our guys got into a shootout, shot the badguy 7 or 8 times with 9mm of some type (not sure of bullet) and he lived, although he is now using the colostomy waste removal and collection system. Shortly after we went to the .40S&W. No shootouts since then.
The guy shot with the 30-30 was the dangest thing I've ever seen though.
The guy shot with the 30-30 was the dangest thing I've ever seen though.
scorpion_tyr
New member
Nice database, just don't forget to take it for what it's worth, nothing more. A hit with a .22 LR beats a miss with a .50 BMG everytime.
Dr. Strangelove
New member
I don't come to this side of the playground very often, but this one piqued my curiosity.
For my addition to the discussion, just taking the data at face value without discussion of it's validity, it appears that pretty much any firearm will disable a human being. I was frankly surprised at the 27% one shot stop rate for a .25 auto. Not bad, coming from a cartridge where you can visually track the bullet on the way to the target on a sunny day. (I'm not kidding)
On another note, as many other posters mentioned - I'm shocked at how many people are shot with a .30-30. Seriously??? Who shoots someone with a lever-action rifle? Maybe it's just because so many were made and are left leaning in the corner loaded so that's what folks grab?
I'm no expert, but I'd guess both, maybe splitting points at the minimum, though the dead guy probably loses points for doing whatever got him shot. Maybe it was the last beer? Course, the shooter would loose points if it was found he was using cheap foreign ammunition. Why use an American classic to shoot someone only to spoil it by using PMC ammo?
Lastly, we ought to be careful about how this information gets spread - if the gang-bangers have that table read to them, they'll be out buying up all the lever-actions! I can see it now - gold plated model 94's in all the rap videos, big tassels on the lanyard rings, rifle racks in the back windows of all the hoopties, sampling quotes from "The Rifleman", John Wayne spinning in his grave...
For my addition to the discussion, just taking the data at face value without discussion of it's validity, it appears that pretty much any firearm will disable a human being. I was frankly surprised at the 27% one shot stop rate for a .25 auto. Not bad, coming from a cartridge where you can visually track the bullet on the way to the target on a sunny day. (I'm not kidding)
On another note, as many other posters mentioned - I'm shocked at how many people are shot with a .30-30. Seriously??? Who shoots someone with a lever-action rifle? Maybe it's just because so many were made and are left leaning in the corner loaded so that's what folks grab?
I'm no expert, but I'd guess both, maybe splitting points at the minimum, though the dead guy probably loses points for doing whatever got him shot. Maybe it was the last beer? Course, the shooter would loose points if it was found he was using cheap foreign ammunition. Why use an American classic to shoot someone only to spoil it by using PMC ammo?
Lastly, we ought to be careful about how this information gets spread - if the gang-bangers have that table read to them, they'll be out buying up all the lever-actions! I can see it now - gold plated model 94's in all the rap videos, big tassels on the lanyard rings, rifle racks in the back windows of all the hoopties, sampling quotes from "The Rifleman", John Wayne spinning in his grave...
Last edited:
Whirlwind06
New member
Isn't this where they went out and shot a buch of goats or sheep?
David Armstrong
Moderator
You can do that with a 45ACP also.
abber said:
LOL, Its 2009 and people are still making that claim. Will it ever end?
Back in the day the .357 propelled a poorly designed bullet fast enough to get some expansion. Nowadays it is obvious from ballistics testing that there are far better choices.
Here is a some good information for those who doubt evidence based research and prefer 'street' results:
...the CHP, the largest agency to issue .357 Mag 125 gr JHP’s on the West Coast, clearly reports significantly better results in their officer involved shootings since switching to .40 S&W 180 gr JHP loadings, based on officer perception, objective crime scene measurements, as well as the physiological damage described in the relevant autopsy studies. The CHP used a variety of .357 Mag loads, depending upon what was available via the state contract. According to the published CHP test data from 1989-90,the .357 Magnum load used immediately prior to the CHP transition to .40 S&W was the Remington 125 gr JHP with an ave. MV of 1450 f/s from their duty revolvers. I first saw the data when it was presented during a wound ballistic conference I attended at the CHP Academy in the early 1990's; I heard it discussed again at a CHP Officer Involved Shootings Investigation Team meeting in November of 1997 at Vallejo, CA. The information reviewed the differences in ammunition terminal performance such as penetration depth, recovered bullet characteristics, tissue damage and other physiological measurements and physical evidence detailed during forensic analysis.-Dr. Gary Roberts
One thing you might conclude from the chart is that there is no "good" cartridge that is never used to kill people, such as the .30-30 deer rifle, though I must admit there are certainly plenty not listed. Likewise, there is no "good guy" gun, like a Colt Python, or a "bad guy" gun, like a Taurus.
I believe the idea behind testing is to try to learn something about brand new cartridges and also to compare different things in a controlled environment. I think most critics of these statistics and test results read more into them than the authors ever do. Besides, they just might conflict with their own opinions now and then. Regarding the statistics, they are naturally limited in that (presumably) only a limited number of shootings actually make it into the database because there has to be enough information about the actual shooting to make the incident useful and more importantly, the incident has to be one in which a person was only hit once. Obviously, right away the information only has limited value, which is not to say it is worthless.
Now if you could come up with some statistics about the misses.
I believe the idea behind testing is to try to learn something about brand new cartridges and also to compare different things in a controlled environment. I think most critics of these statistics and test results read more into them than the authors ever do. Besides, they just might conflict with their own opinions now and then. Regarding the statistics, they are naturally limited in that (presumably) only a limited number of shootings actually make it into the database because there has to be enough information about the actual shooting to make the incident useful and more importantly, the incident has to be one in which a person was only hit once. Obviously, right away the information only has limited value, which is not to say it is worthless.
Now if you could come up with some statistics about the misses.
Brian Pfleuger
Moderator Emeritus
Just as a clarifier, these are not test results. These particular numbers are studies of actual shootings.
abber said:
Percentage of what is the question?
I understand the desire to have added 'faith' and confidence in ones chosen handguns abilities, but perhaps you are unfamiliar with statistical analysis and probabilities.
Below is an informative article you might like to read on the subject. There are quite a few others available as well.
The Marshall & Sanow "Data" - Statistical Analysis Tells the Ugly Story
By Duncan MacPherson
The conclusion reached by this accurate and mathematically sound analysis was, that the probability that the Marshall & Sanow "data base" is an assembly of valid information from uncorrupted sources is so low that this "data base" cannot reasonably be believed.
The best Marshall & Sanow ever did was 1 in 80 million that their "data" occurred by chance. Sadly their next effort resulted in 1 in 3 trillion probability that their "data" occurred by chance. If thats not too preposterous to be believed, then I don't know what is.
Brian Pfleuger
Moderator Emeritus
If we assume that the numbers in the database are "wrong" then, are they randomly wrong or consistently wrong?
If the data collection techniques were controlled and repeated, the data could still provide an overall feel for caliber effectiveness compared to other calibers, even if the exact figures are not correct.
You have to admit that, in a very general sense, the numbers are consistent with expectations. i.e.- Small caliber weapons are considerably less effective than large caliber or high powered weapons.
If the data collection techniques were controlled and repeated, the data could still provide an overall feel for caliber effectiveness compared to other calibers, even if the exact figures are not correct.
You have to admit that, in a very general sense, the numbers are consistent with expectations. i.e.- Small caliber weapons are considerably less effective than large caliber or high powered weapons.
Last edited:
It has also been argued that Marshall and Sanow arbitrarily rejected shootings data that fell outside the parameters of those expectations. Since they and they alone chose which shootings to include in their study and which to exclude (and have never provided any sort of documentation of how rigorously and consistently their selection methodology was applied), there really is no way of assessing the reliability and predictive quality of their conclusions.
In short, there's no way of telling whether they threw out data that didn't conform to their preexisting expectations - Garbage In, Garbage Out.
Brian Pfleuger
Moderator Emeritus
I don't find that odd at all. For two reasons:
1)These are, largely, if not entirely, civilian shootings. I'd guess that the 223 is used fairly rarely in SD, especially outside the home. Even at home, most SD shooting are either handgun or shotgun.
2) It is by no means and exhaustive list. These are the shooting available to the authors for study.