You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Stopping Power Explained
- Thread starter LICCW
- Start date
LICCW,
First of all, if you're shooting a 5-shot S&W (J-Frame) revolver with .357 Magnum loads, I can understand why your shots seem to "pattern" all over rather than group together. Go buy yourself some Winchester 158gr standard velocity ammo for practice and work on a smooth trigger pull and proper sight alignment with your gun. You should be able to group your shots better with the milder load. Then practice with some quality 125 to 158gr +P ammo which will still be milder than the .357 Mag rounds.
When it comes to "stopping power" we have learned quite a few things over the last two decades, first and foremost is that "Stopping Power" is essentailly a myth. No handgun round has suffient power to reliably stop a human being in 99% of foreseeable onditions. Bullet placement is more important than size or weight as long as the bullet used is capable of penetrating up to about 12".
First of all, if you're shooting a 5-shot S&W (J-Frame) revolver with .357 Magnum loads, I can understand why your shots seem to "pattern" all over rather than group together. Go buy yourself some Winchester 158gr standard velocity ammo for practice and work on a smooth trigger pull and proper sight alignment with your gun. You should be able to group your shots better with the milder load. Then practice with some quality 125 to 158gr +P ammo which will still be milder than the .357 Mag rounds.
When it comes to "stopping power" we have learned quite a few things over the last two decades, first and foremost is that "Stopping Power" is essentailly a myth. No handgun round has suffient power to reliably stop a human being in 99% of foreseeable onditions. Bullet placement is more important than size or weight as long as the bullet used is capable of penetrating up to about 12".
Couple of mentions of heart shots.
A heart shot is NOT an instant stopping, bang-flop, drop dead in it's tracks shot on deer, or anything else that I've heard of. It's an old misconception that it is. The heart shot deer I've shot, and every one I've heard of, sends the deer on a high speed run for a short to moderate distance. It's GOING to die, so yes, it's KILLING shot, but it is NOT instant. I wouldn't count on a heart shot in a defensive situation to be any different. It could very well light a fire under the bad guy for a short time, and highly motivate them to do you in in the short time they have left. I'm not a believer in the intimidation theory of defensive shooting ("they aren't going to want to fight after getting shot with a ___"). well, sometimes they just aren't impressed with whatever you shot them with, and just take it personal.
The comment about caliber refering to "why a larger cal, what do you plan to run into..." (paraphrased) we simply don't know what or who we may run into that needs to be shot. Some of us opt for as much gun as we can comfortably carry and shoot well. For me, that's a Smith 4" 44 spl or mag, or a 45 Colt SA revolver. I'd rather have too much gun (if such a thing is possible), than too little. One reason I don't fool around with small caliber guns.
I think BillCA meant to say 38 special 158 gr standard vel loads, rather than 357 loads of any type.
A heart shot is NOT an instant stopping, bang-flop, drop dead in it's tracks shot on deer, or anything else that I've heard of. It's an old misconception that it is. The heart shot deer I've shot, and every one I've heard of, sends the deer on a high speed run for a short to moderate distance. It's GOING to die, so yes, it's KILLING shot, but it is NOT instant. I wouldn't count on a heart shot in a defensive situation to be any different. It could very well light a fire under the bad guy for a short time, and highly motivate them to do you in in the short time they have left. I'm not a believer in the intimidation theory of defensive shooting ("they aren't going to want to fight after getting shot with a ___"). well, sometimes they just aren't impressed with whatever you shot them with, and just take it personal.
The comment about caliber refering to "why a larger cal, what do you plan to run into..." (paraphrased) we simply don't know what or who we may run into that needs to be shot. Some of us opt for as much gun as we can comfortably carry and shoot well. For me, that's a Smith 4" 44 spl or mag, or a 45 Colt SA revolver. I'd rather have too much gun (if such a thing is possible), than too little. One reason I don't fool around with small caliber guns.
I think BillCA meant to say 38 special 158 gr standard vel loads, rather than 357 loads of any type.
Para Bellum
New member
Reading
Here's more good reading on "stopping power":
http://www.firearmstactical.com/pdf/fbi-hwfe.pdf
Read the conclusions on the bottom of the text linked above. If this text is right, the mozambique-drill (body-body-head) seems to be the best way to get out of a gunfight alive. But, who really knows.....?
Here's more good reading on "stopping power":
http://www.firearmstactical.com/pdf/fbi-hwfe.pdf
Read the conclusions on the bottom of the text linked above. If this text is right, the mozambique-drill (body-body-head) seems to be the best way to get out of a gunfight alive. But, who really knows.....?
Sorry nando,
No body armor and the fellow was able to return fire for about 3 minutes. He was also shot 1 more time from the rear with about 5 pellets hitting him as he ran for cover. Made it about 20 yards and went over a downed tree. He finally bled out.
There was no real visible indication of the hit when it happened. Rathole through the lung and left shoulder blade with fist sized exit:barf: , maybe nicked the heart, couldn't tell really, we wern't doing autopsys at the time.
Sam
No body armor and the fellow was able to return fire for about 3 minutes. He was also shot 1 more time from the rear with about 5 pellets hitting him as he ran for cover. Made it about 20 yards and went over a downed tree. He finally bled out.
There was no real visible indication of the hit when it happened. Rathole through the lung and left shoulder blade with fist sized exit:barf: , maybe nicked the heart, couldn't tell really, we wern't doing autopsys at the time.
Sam
tanksoldier
New member
<<If you watched some of the police officer deaths posted elsewhere in this forum you will see an officer put 5 shots into center of mass (don't know caliber or gun) and the BG is fine. The officer dies within minutes from shots from a derringer, but when the backup arrives they can still TALK to the BG! After 5 shots in his body! Definately +1 for shot placement over caliber... but this would be a case for .45ACP.>>
The officer in question was SC State Trooper Mark Coates
The officer's weapon was a .357 magnum service revolver... 5 of 6 rounds COM. .357 magnum is as capable, arguably MORE capable, than .45 ACP.
The officer was killed by one round from a NAA mini revolver in .22LR, entered the side opening of his vest.
5 rounds of .357 should have put just about anybody down. Just an example of what others have said above, even heavy calibers with well placed shots don't work sometimes.
The officer in question was SC State Trooper Mark Coates
The officer's weapon was a .357 magnum service revolver... 5 of 6 rounds COM. .357 magnum is as capable, arguably MORE capable, than .45 ACP.
The officer was killed by one round from a NAA mini revolver in .22LR, entered the side opening of his vest.
5 rounds of .357 should have put just about anybody down. Just an example of what others have said above, even heavy calibers with well placed shots don't work sometimes.
LICCW, you asked: "Can anyone tell me what the deal is? I hear some guys saying 9mm are too small, nothing less than .45 will do, but I look at a .380 and think I don't want to get hit by that. What are the best defensive rounds? How many shots will it take to stop a guy from throttling me and my wife?"
The deal is, there is no guaranteed number of shots or guaranteed caliber that will stop a BG from doing ill to you and yours. There are volumes of reports of people being hit by gunfire who don't even know it and keep on fighting. Some of those people have been soldiers in wartime, some have been police, some have been bad guys. Some were hit by rifle fire, some by pistol fire. People amped up with drugs or adrenaline can survive amazing damage. And even mortally wounded people can kill before they're finally gone.
However, you can improve your odds. Mindset is the first factor, a determination not to just survive but to WIN. Second, find several guns that work for you. Why several? Because your home defense will likely be different from your work defense. For example, you can probably have a shotgun at home but not at work. Third, try to determine what your likely defense scenarios will be and then make the appropriate defense plans. Keep the plans simple and flexible. Plans tend to fare badly when they encounter reality, but at least they give you guidance to get you going rather than just sitting there wondering where to start. Fourth, seek training. Fifth, practice as much as feasible and modify your plans if need be.
[As an aside, if you're shooting better with one type of pistol than another, consider not just how each gun fits your hands (which is important) but also whether the trigger might be part of the difference. A trigger job can usually improve your performance.]
The deal is, there is no guaranteed number of shots or guaranteed caliber that will stop a BG from doing ill to you and yours. There are volumes of reports of people being hit by gunfire who don't even know it and keep on fighting. Some of those people have been soldiers in wartime, some have been police, some have been bad guys. Some were hit by rifle fire, some by pistol fire. People amped up with drugs or adrenaline can survive amazing damage. And even mortally wounded people can kill before they're finally gone.
However, you can improve your odds. Mindset is the first factor, a determination not to just survive but to WIN. Second, find several guns that work for you. Why several? Because your home defense will likely be different from your work defense. For example, you can probably have a shotgun at home but not at work. Third, try to determine what your likely defense scenarios will be and then make the appropriate defense plans. Keep the plans simple and flexible. Plans tend to fare badly when they encounter reality, but at least they give you guidance to get you going rather than just sitting there wondering where to start. Fourth, seek training. Fifth, practice as much as feasible and modify your plans if need be.
[As an aside, if you're shooting better with one type of pistol than another, consider not just how each gun fits your hands (which is important) but also whether the trigger might be part of the difference. A trigger job can usually improve your performance.]
http://www.sportsmansguide.com/cb/cb.asp?a=55758
it says it delivers stop-'em-in-their-tracks knockdown power!
anyone ever used or heard of this type of ammo?
it says it delivers stop-'em-in-their-tracks knockdown power!
anyone ever used or heard of this type of ammo?
Double Naught Spy
New member
The problem with "stopping power" is that folks are of the impression it is the power that stops a target. It isn't, of course. Whether or not a target stops depends on MANY things other than power or bullet characteristics...as already noted.
My pet theory is that the expression of "stopping power" was just simply a bubba's way of trying to express in writing that which a bubba could not spell, "terminal ballistics." Unlike stopping power, however, folks do seem to understand that terminal ballistics are about what the projectile is doing at a given time in its flight in regard to velocity, energy, etc. if it were to impact something at a given distance.
In terms of Para Bellum's quote from Ammo Oracle, the anatomy of a deer is NOT substantially different from that of a human.
No doubt, there are differences, but they are subtle, not substantial. An octopus has a substantially different anatomy from a human, but a deer is very similar.
True, the distances between organs will vary as will bone density. Deer are setup for quadrupedal locomotion and humans for bipedal. As for the CNS being more primitive, hence human CNS is more fragile than a deer CNS, NO. Strangle, deer have the same controlling nerves as humans and they are located is close to the same relative anatomical positions. If there is a more substantial aspect to the deer's CNS, it is in the bone protecting it. On the spine, the bone will tend to be more substantial in terms of bone density than what you would find for humans, but the bone around the brain is less dense and there is less of it.
Where the AO is correct is that just because something works in a deer it will work in humans or vice versa. Determining what does not does not work isn't because of substantial anatomical differences, but subtle. Heck you could say that the spacing between the organs and bone density variances made for substantial anatomical differences when you compare a 300 lb footbal player with his 92 lb osteoporotic grandmother.
My pet theory is that the expression of "stopping power" was just simply a bubba's way of trying to express in writing that which a bubba could not spell, "terminal ballistics." Unlike stopping power, however, folks do seem to understand that terminal ballistics are about what the projectile is doing at a given time in its flight in regard to velocity, energy, etc. if it were to impact something at a given distance.
In terms of Para Bellum's quote from Ammo Oracle, the anatomy of a deer is NOT substantially different from that of a human.
This is, unfortunately, folly. Deer, to begin with, have SUBSTANTIALLY different anatomies than humans (surprise surprise). The distance in tissue to vital organs is different, bone density is different, the location and strength of CNS structures is different, as is the vascular system. Further, because the CNS structures of deer are somewhat more primitive and less intricate than those of humans, they are far less fragile in some places, far more fragile in others. What works in deer may or may not work in humans. The same goes for hogs, varmints, pigs, dogs, zombies (headshots only please), and aliens (particularly grey skins- go for the big eyes, not center mass).
No doubt, there are differences, but they are subtle, not substantial. An octopus has a substantially different anatomy from a human, but a deer is very similar.
True, the distances between organs will vary as will bone density. Deer are setup for quadrupedal locomotion and humans for bipedal. As for the CNS being more primitive, hence human CNS is more fragile than a deer CNS, NO. Strangle, deer have the same controlling nerves as humans and they are located is close to the same relative anatomical positions. If there is a more substantial aspect to the deer's CNS, it is in the bone protecting it. On the spine, the bone will tend to be more substantial in terms of bone density than what you would find for humans, but the bone around the brain is less dense and there is less of it.
Where the AO is correct is that just because something works in a deer it will work in humans or vice versa. Determining what does not does not work isn't because of substantial anatomical differences, but subtle. Heck you could say that the spacing between the organs and bone density variances made for substantial anatomical differences when you compare a 300 lb footbal player with his 92 lb osteoporotic grandmother.
OneInTheChamber
New member
When considers a particular caliber's effectiveness, they must also consider magazine capacity. I'd rather have a Glock 17 in 9mm with 17+1 than a 1911 with 7+1.
I like the equation: (mass x velocity)x magazine capacity. It could be the last round before slide-lock (or an empty cylinder for you wheel gun guys) that stops the BG.
My .02c
Chase
I like the equation: (mass x velocity)x magazine capacity. It could be the last round before slide-lock (or an empty cylinder for you wheel gun guys) that stops the BG.
My .02c
Chase
this is correct
[quote}Deer are setup for quadrupedal locomotion and humans for bipedal. As for the CNS being more primitive, hence human CNS is more fragile than a deer CNS, NO. Strangle, deer have the same controlling nerves as humans and they are located is close to the same relative anatomical positions. If there is a more substantial aspect to the deer's CNS, it is in the bone protecting it. On the spine, the bone will tend to be more substantial in terms of bone density than what you would find for humans, but the bone around the brain is less dense and there is less of it.
[/quote]
This is correct. The difference is indeed related to two points: deer are quadrapeds, so a "upper lip shot" even if you could make one on a deer, would hit different structures than such a shot (if you could make one on a human either) on a person. The second point is, deer lack a frontal lobe. That is the part of the brain that "makes us human" from a neuropsychological perspective. It's the part that enables judgment, planning, foresight, etc. But the brain stem and the cerebellum work similarly (although it might be argued that certain parts of the deer's brain work much better than that of a human).
If you hit a CNS shot on a deer, it drops. If you hit a heart shot, it kicks high and runs for a bit. Adrenaline keeps it going, especially if you don't just leave it alone to die for a bit.
Of course, the average deer doesn't wear a leather jacket and have a beer belly, which our hypothetical BG might very well do....
Springmom
[quote}Deer are setup for quadrupedal locomotion and humans for bipedal. As for the CNS being more primitive, hence human CNS is more fragile than a deer CNS, NO. Strangle, deer have the same controlling nerves as humans and they are located is close to the same relative anatomical positions. If there is a more substantial aspect to the deer's CNS, it is in the bone protecting it. On the spine, the bone will tend to be more substantial in terms of bone density than what you would find for humans, but the bone around the brain is less dense and there is less of it.
[/quote]
This is correct. The difference is indeed related to two points: deer are quadrapeds, so a "upper lip shot" even if you could make one on a deer, would hit different structures than such a shot (if you could make one on a human either) on a person. The second point is, deer lack a frontal lobe. That is the part of the brain that "makes us human" from a neuropsychological perspective. It's the part that enables judgment, planning, foresight, etc. But the brain stem and the cerebellum work similarly (although it might be argued that certain parts of the deer's brain work much better than that of a human).
If you hit a CNS shot on a deer, it drops. If you hit a heart shot, it kicks high and runs for a bit. Adrenaline keeps it going, especially if you don't just leave it alone to die for a bit.
Of course, the average deer doesn't wear a leather jacket and have a beer belly, which our hypothetical BG might very well do....
Springmom
Double Naught Spy
New member
And it would be rare to find a stoned up and hallucinating deer rampaging through the neighborhood, or breaking into your home for another fix.
For real Stopping Power...get a Sledge Hammer!! As for your choice of calibers and handguns, get the one that is most comfortable and most accurate for you to fire. There is no use of having the "Ever dominant, ever monstrously expanding and penetrating" caliber...but not being able to hit what you are aiming for. I have 9mm's, .40's and .45's. While I love to shoot my .45 and am deadly accurate with it, my 9mm will be my absolute first choice to defend myself with. I load her up with 147gr. JHPs...and I can place 16 rounds in a 3" circle, firing a round every second...okay, I may get one flyer here and there. I shot a friends "Bigmomma" 44 mag. and couldn't consistently place any rounds after the first one
I agree with the previous poster: a sledgehammer has real stopping power. In fact, such a tool has often been used to kill cattle. More to the point, however, I for one believe there is such a thing as stopping power and even "knockdown power," although I need to explain that further. The problem here is predicting and quantifying such powers.
It should be obvious that the larger and more powerful, however you define powerful, cartridges have more stopping power and knockdown power. Anything else would be contrary to reason. It is just that there is no certainty to any of this. It is next to impossible to replicate the reaction of humans or animals with any artificial means. It used to be that ammunition tables gave penetration in pine boards. For some purposes that might mean something but mostly it just means something if you are planning on shooting through pine boards.
I mentioned in another post on the same subject that a hit on the head (with anything) will often put a person (or animal) on the ground. He may get up right away and keep going, which brings us back to square one. What is stopping power? It isn't the same as lethality, at any rate.
One old author stated that anyone he had seen shot in the abdomen immediately dropped whatever he may have had in his hands and clutched the wound and such wounds were usually fatal. Is that a stop, even if it isn't a knockdown?
One last thing: the difference between animals and people. I mean, another difference in addition to body configuration and clothing and thickness of skin. With humans there is a physcholgical aspect (in addition to the physiological effect of a gunshot wound). A human usually knows about guns and may have preconceived ideas of how he is supposed to react, while no animal does. Whatever reaction there is as a result of that, either a gunshot wound, or a presumed gunshot wound, is naturally impossible to predict beyond a certain point and also not easy to state what the cause of any particular reaction was anyway. There is also the physical state of the individual (at rest, fighting, running, etc) at the point of a wound occuring, together with his physical condition.
So to sum it all up, it's no wonder that stopping power is more than a little controversial. About all you can say for sure is that only hits count--most of the time.
It should be obvious that the larger and more powerful, however you define powerful, cartridges have more stopping power and knockdown power. Anything else would be contrary to reason. It is just that there is no certainty to any of this. It is next to impossible to replicate the reaction of humans or animals with any artificial means. It used to be that ammunition tables gave penetration in pine boards. For some purposes that might mean something but mostly it just means something if you are planning on shooting through pine boards.
I mentioned in another post on the same subject that a hit on the head (with anything) will often put a person (or animal) on the ground. He may get up right away and keep going, which brings us back to square one. What is stopping power? It isn't the same as lethality, at any rate.
One old author stated that anyone he had seen shot in the abdomen immediately dropped whatever he may have had in his hands and clutched the wound and such wounds were usually fatal. Is that a stop, even if it isn't a knockdown?
One last thing: the difference between animals and people. I mean, another difference in addition to body configuration and clothing and thickness of skin. With humans there is a physcholgical aspect (in addition to the physiological effect of a gunshot wound). A human usually knows about guns and may have preconceived ideas of how he is supposed to react, while no animal does. Whatever reaction there is as a result of that, either a gunshot wound, or a presumed gunshot wound, is naturally impossible to predict beyond a certain point and also not easy to state what the cause of any particular reaction was anyway. There is also the physical state of the individual (at rest, fighting, running, etc) at the point of a wound occuring, together with his physical condition.
So to sum it all up, it's no wonder that stopping power is more than a little controversial. About all you can say for sure is that only hits count--most of the time.
Last edited: