"Stopping Power" article

Reading throught the posts here, I'm not sure some even read the article. TERMINAL BALLISTICS was the topic, not accuracy vs power.

Sierra, a psychological stop is the most common type of stop there is, and there is no question that just about any cartridge can deliver a psychological response from someone resulting in incapacitation. That being said, CNS hits, blood loss, and major structural damage (shattered hip) are still relatively common. The facts are that the common service rounds penetrate deeper and have a larger surface of impact than a 22lr resulting in a wider and deeper crush cavity (blood loss) and a greater chance of penetrating major organs or damaging the CNS.

By the way, I thought the article was well written, and I agree with all of it.
 
Thank you Frank, that was the explanation I had never heard before. However, given the story of the LEO shot with a 357; I'm not convinced enough to upgrade.;).
 
Sierra280 said:
Thank you Frank, that was the explanation I had never heard before. However, given the story of the LEO shot with a 357; I'm not convinced enough to upgrade...
Click to expand...
As you wish. But the way I look at it is that if a .357 Magnum might not do the trick against a determined adversary, I sure don't want to be relying on a .22 if I can avoid it.
 
Reading throught the posts here, I'm not sure some even read the article. TERMINAL BALLISTICS was the topic, not accuracy vs power.
Click to expand...

That may be the topic, but the term "terminal ballistics" is not used anywhere in the article, a psychological stop may be the most common, but you won't catch me ever trying to rely on this.

I'll stick to my accuracy and power, if this results in a psychological stop along the way, fine.
 
I was talking to a friend the other day who was looking for a used truck. I told him and showed him on Craigslist how he could go down south and get a truck with no rust for the same price he could get a rusty truck up here, because they actually sell cheaper and it off-sets the cost of the trip.

A few days later, he showed up with a rusty truck, telling me "I figured if it was going to cost me $2,000 either way, I might as well just get one here.":confused::eek:

How backwards can you be? If the truck costs the same price, you'd rather have the rusty one?!

Sierra280 said:
Thank you Frank, that was the explanation I had never heard before. However, given the story of the LEO shot with a 357; I'm not convinced enough to upgrade..
Click to expand...

This is the same backwards thinking.

"Since the round that's 3-5 times more powerful and punches a hole 2 1/2 times larger might not work first time, every time, I'd rather just have the weaker one."

Too each his own, this is still a (relatively) free country but that it the literal inverse of logic.
 
"Can we all just get along?":eek:

A semi-auto pistol chambered in 22lr is THE worst choice i can think of.

Small (like itty bitty) frame. Hard to see sights (if any At all)

Rimfire priming system IS more prone to failure

Rimmed case is a less reliable feeding round

All these issues without even talking about the power level provided

In a revolver you at least dont have the feeding issues but unless its an NAA mini- revolver the gun is the same size as other more potent calibers

I keep coming back to WHY we carry a gun in the first place. I do it in case the worst happens. My pistol gives me a chance to fight back and not just stand there like a sheep to be prayed upon

I dont think the 22lr cartridge is the right one to have at hand when the day goes HORRIBLY bad.

A 1968 VW Bug may be able to complete the Indy 500, but it aint going to WIN. Winning is the only outcome that interests me when my life is on the line
 
There are very ergonomic semis in 22 LR.

This is an old debate. For some folks, the 22 is what they can shoot. If I get old and arthritic - maybe my Buckmark with nice fiber optic sights will be the gun. I would rather shoot that at an intruder than my flailing fist of elderly death.

30% 22 LR failure to incapacitate from Frank's quote of Greg's article means 70% success. That's better than geezer and geezerette H2H, I would opine.

Also, given the deterrence value of the gun - why give that up? That comes before the incapacitation choice point.

In my sixties, I have no trouble with standard handgun rounds, shotguns or rifles but 20 years from now?

I would also prefer the trigger pull of the semi 22 as compared to the heavy DA pull of a 22 revolver - unless it's a SAA type.
 
I agree with Glenn. There can be a place for a .22 for self defense. There are folks who, because of infirmity, really can't manage anything more powerful. We've had a few folks in our classes who were elderly, lacked hand strength and/or were arthritic who could manage our .22s but nothing more potent.

The lesson from that data is that a .22 is not the first/best choice if you can handle something with more authority. But if you have no other reasonable choice, use a .22 and learn to use if well and accurately.
 
As we have discussed many times, a 22 is really not a good 1st, 2nd, 3rd or even 4th choice, but it beats feet, fists and foul language. And I think we've come to equate "stopping power" with being "struck by lightning".
 
I'm totally okay with a 2/3 incapacitation rate (physiological), the psychological deterrent is a larger part of the equation. Plus, as the article points out, really rifles have true 'stopping power.' My buddy has a S&W 460, that's approaching rifle ballistics, but I sure can't see having lug that thing around! (He gets some funny looks when he takes it out to the 100 to 300 yd range, lol)

Plus, I'm rifle guy, in a SHTF situation I view sidearms as only a means to get a 'real' gun.
 
Carrying nothing at all would be even lighter.

Carrying a cap gun painted black would give you just as good a chance to scare someone off without having to shoot.

If a .22lr is good, what about .22 CB? A .177 cal pellet pistol would be even cheaper to train with, why not carry that? (probably more reliable, too.)
 
If we are going to post silly arguments, we are done.

Frank laid out the reasonable approach, take it or leave it. If folks still want to chortle about carrying a hand cannon as the only option - then, there is nothing more to say.

If you have a 22, don't carry it - use the Force or your Ki. That it?
 
As mentioned earlier in the thread, there are a couple rational reasons for carrying a .22lr. If your hand strength really isn't enough to operate a center fire handgun or if arthritis or other condition makes that painful, then a .22lr might be a good choice. If you already have a .22lr pistol but absolutely cannot afford to buy anything else, ever, for all of time, then you would be grateful to have that .22lr.

Those were not the case. Sierra didn't mention his wife having any physical disability or their family being destitute. His rationale for choosing a .22lr pistol was faulty.

Moreover, no one advised him or his wife or anyone else to carry a "hand cannon." Unless you would consider a G26, XDS, S&W 638, PF-9, Sig P238, S&W Shield, or any of the myriad other solid defensive pistols with small frames chambered in center fire cartridges to be "hand cannons."

My intentionally ridiculous points were simply intended illustrate the faulty logic of relying on psychological incapacitation alone. That is a silly argument, in my opinion.
 
If the reports are true, the deterrence factor has such a high probability of success that any gun gives you a tremendous positive effect.

If you do go down the low probability branch of shooting, the even the 22 gives you another large positive effect.

So if you have a p = .90 deterrent and then a .70 probability of incapacity with a 22 hit of the remaining group - then you only have 3 out of 100 that stay in fight.

Note, this is a probability assuming an infinite number of incidents. On a given trial - you might just be out of luck.

Now, I always argue to be ready for the extreme as compared to the likely prediction, so I'm thinking about the folks who make it through all that probability branching. Thus, I wouldn't just carry a 22 except in some constrained circumstance.

BTW, I know two folks who deterred with just a gun posture and no draw (one even had NO gun). So life is complex.

Personally, I say carry a 9mm or greater than you can shoot well for the rare instance. I say carry extra rounds for the rare instance.

But if the aliens beamed up everything but my 32s and 22s - I would certainly take them with me.
 
Glenn E. Meyer said:
...this is a probability assuming an infinite number of incidents. On a given trial - you might just be out of luck. ...
Click to expand...
The thing is that rare or low probability events do happen, and if one happens the effects could be devastating. See The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable (Nassim Nicholas Taleb, Random House, 2007).

We often say that it's not just the probability; it's also the stakes.

Consider this thought experiment:

  1. In a ceramic jar are 1,000 identical marbles -- except 999 are white and one is black.

  2. You will draw blindfolded one marble. The bet will be --

    • If you draw a white marble you will receive a bright, shiny brand new dime.

    • If you draw the black marble, you will lose everything -- all your money, all your property, your job, your family, all your worldly possessions -- and walk out utterly alone and naked.

  3. Will you take that bet? If you would not, consider --

    • What would the prize for a white marble have to be to make the bet attractive?

    • Alternatively, how long would the odds have to be to make the bet, ten cents against absolutely everything, attractive?
 
Outstanding post, Frank. The thing that a of folks overlook in thinking about risk is that proper risk management weighs three factors, not just one. Rather than looking at only the probability of an event, it is important to also consider the severity of the consequences as well as the cost of mitigating the likelihood and/or severity.


In this case, the likelihood of a .22lr pistol not being able to prevent injury or death is pretty low. It's also unlikely that an attack will occur in the first place, especially if you practice good situational awareness and avoid risk behaviors.

What are the consequences of a .22lr pistol not being able to prevent injury or death? Well, obviously death or grievous bodily injury. A secondary concern is property loss.

What does it cost to mitigate or eliminate the risk? Carrying a center fire handgun will not eliminate the possibility that an attack is not stopped but it can substantially reduce the probability that a stoppage occurs or that bullet impacts fail to incapacitate. Moreover, it does not present any likelihood of increasing danger. The monetary cost of a quality center fire handgun versus a quality rimfire handgun is not especially high. Say about $350 for a Walther P22 versus about $400 for a S&W Shield (prices from Bud's, shipping and FFL fee would be about the same for each). A $50 difference isn't much to speak of. What about weight, size, etc? Again, the difference is very small.

That makes the risk assessment look like this:

Probability: very low
Severity: extremely high
Cost: very low
 
Handgun Bullet stopping power by G B Bredsten

I bought this book because I wanted someone in the know to explain and or give me an opinion on the subject. I love this book.
I believe almost all stopping power formula have value and their function is to rate guns in order of lethality. Bredsten concludes Hatchers RSP formula is best for handgun stopping power (I have to agree). From his book 1200ft/sec 9mm 124gr gives about 31" penetration Rsp for a FMJ is about 34. 30 being considered the minimum desirable. A fast baseball has about RSP = 3.8 same as a 25 auto. Baseballs are and have proven lethal. Taylors formula gives the ball a rating equal to an elephant gun. A baseball has almost no penetration in ballistic gel the formula for this is SD * V/5.5 = .81" The 25 auto = 15.7" (no expansion) which would you say is more dangerous projectile.
The Thornily stopping power formula (not in the book) is designed to rate hunting rifles it starts at 45 for antelope. I would check a hunting rifle against this scale make a choice, THEN MAKE SURE PENETRATION IS GOOD ENOUGH FOR THE GAME.
Unless someone asks I will write no more on this subject, I could list about 20 stopping power formulas if anyone was interested
 
Last edited:
Just for useless information. An iron atom moving at near light speed will hit you as hard as fast ball.

When could this happen? At Hiroshima and Nagasaki some folks were hit by such atoms from the shell of the atomic bombs. However, they had other problems from the bomb blast.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top