Stopping Power

[caegal]

I agree that the Marshall and Sanow study is mostly bad science, there are too many variables to take into account to be completely accurate. You can see this by the huge swing in Percentage of Stops from year to year in the same bullet. There is no verifiable or repeatable result.

If the study does show one thing, it suggests that a bigger hole at a higher velocity will drop someone with more frequentcy than a smaller hole at a slower velocity. That is shown by the trend of the entire study.

Other than that, the idea of stopping power is really dependant on shot placement, luck, and the will of the attacker. I have shot deer in the heart that ran, and I have shot some that just dropped. I will be damned if I know why one ran and the other didnt.

Best stopping power is lots of large holes in vital areas, repeat until desired result.

 

[Ninjato]

No offense intended here and I am sure many of you can shoot better than me BUT

Danindetroit wrote: The big arteries, are the aorta, which has high pressure. It goes down the body in front, to the right of the spine. At around your belly button and a couple inches lower, it the splits into the iliac artery, and that splits into the femoral artery, and another artery that runs behind your femur. If you shoot a round nice and quick into the soft belly of an attacker, slightly to the right of the midline on his body, you have an uninterrupted shot to the aorta, no bones, no ribs which will drain a person in seconds, the illiac artery will do it, the femoral will take longer,but they will pass out quick. Shoot low and to the left, on the same side as the heart, and then as your muzzle rise, keep the gun straight, and slightly to the right, the aorta drops almost vertically from the heart. You will probably get a good shot with no bone through the gut, and at least disrupt spinal nerves, and the attackers legs might go unsteady, then one in the chest for the heart, maybe lower, then one in the head.

I think you have to be on hell of a shooter to pull this off on a moving/rushing target. I'll be happy to just get a hit.

These hypothetical situations are just that. I doubt anyone can pull off what they say in the heat of the moment unless they have had years of training...and even then. I see this kind of discussion pertaining to martial arts. People will actually sit and work out complex self defense techniques only to never use them when the situation calls for it.

The reality is, I doubt ANYONE is willing to stand there and take a bullet...if there is, it certainly is not me. I don't care if it is only a .22LR.

 

[rn22723]

One thing that was barely touched on, you have to put rounds on target!
You shoot to terminate the aggression. That might come with one round or slide lock! You constantly have to reassess! All this techno mumbo jumbo is great reading! And, has some relevance of course. But, we all live in the real world. There are way to many variables to take into account. Simply put you need to get rounds on the target!

Take all the propoganda with a grain of salt! You need to pick a bullet with a good reputation. Ensure function in your firearm. And load up!

 

[rwilson452]

accuracy

A quote attributed to the late W.Earp, "Fast is good, accuracy is final." Any modern centerfire chambering is capable of eliminating a threat from a BG but if you can't hit the BG it's not going to work. Mostly I carry either a .45ACP or a .38SPL depending on the concealment situation. I am good with either. I prefer the .45 because I used it for 20 years in the service so I'm more familure with it. As I recall from my reading the main reason the LEO group went to the 357 was the inability of the 38 to penetrate a car. I have seen several examples of both the 38 and the 9mm not getting past the windshield of a car. I have seen an example of a load of buckshot make a total mess of a windshield but not penetrate. For me if the perp is in his/her car trying to run away, I'll wave bye, bye. Use what you can use and will use. any gun left behind is useless.

 

[Danindetroit]

Ninjato the fact that you have to put the phrase no offense intended in a posts, means that you think it is offensive.

When I shot regularly, I could make head shots at 25 yards with a g-27, that had trijicon sights.

I could also shoot three shoots at 7 to 10 yds, rapid fire from the belt buckle up to below the clavicle. This was done because I had the gun at my side, and acted like I was drawing, from a holster, I shot when the gun was on target, and continued as the gun rose. The holes wandered, but were in vital areas.

The range worker, would help me and my wife out with shooting. He was a firefighter, and worked at a couple gunstores. He was a nice guy who heped me and my wife out. We would give him LE rounds for his time. It seemed a natural way to shoot, to get off a round, before the gun was pointed at the chest, maybe you could get in a shot on the lower torso. I am trying to get my wife some training, I know she does not know anatomy, since a 4 year degree in criminal justice doesn't require any. She is resistant to the idea.

I think you have to be on hell of a shooter to pull this off on a moving/rushing target.

Where do I say that I did that?

No offense intended.

 

[Para Bellum]

I did my own ballistic tests and put them on my website: http://www.raoulwagner.com/9

My business partner was stabbed in the head by a schizophrenic-paranoid until the knife broke on my partner's head. He made it. After 7 operations he's back to work. Other than me he is a pacifist. I practice hand-to-hand combat as a hobby and since that incident I carry a gun.

Since there is no reliable information on bullet-performance out there and the subject is too vital to trust anybody else, I did my own ballistic tests. After studying whatever material I could find on the web, shooting .45s and 9x19mm pistols, I decided that the 9x19mm Glock 19 is my gun.

Then I went on to search for the most reasonable defense load. I live in Vienna/Austria (Europe) where hollowpoints are illegal. The Federal EMFJ isn't, frangible bullets are neither. So I conducted my own wetpack-Test of the Federal EMFJ and Fiocchi Frangible Ammunition in 9x19mm. I published the result with many pics on my website: http://www.raoulwagner.com/9mm.htm
The EMFJ did remarkably well: When I look at the 18mm (0,70") expansion, the 11,5cm (4,52") penetration (hard wetpack) and the shockwave with a diameter of up to 6,5cm (2,55"), I believe that this bullet is very likely to
1. transfer all its energy to the first body being hit (and doesn't endanger my family or employees around);
2. cause significant tissue destruction, pain, blood-loss, shock, and punch;
3. penetrate deep enough to fatally damage vital organs and central nerves.

More penetration would not be acceptable to me; I assume that in the real world I would not be firing at anybody being farther away than 10m (30ft). I even think that the actual self-defense range is 0 to 3m (up to 10ft). Therefore I think that aiming is not the problem. If he moves towards me, he will be close enough to be hit when I fire. If he moves away, I call the police from my cell phone. If he moves towards somebody I want to save, so will I. some IPSC-practice taught me to run and accurately aim and shoot (at short distances) at the same time.

More penetration than e.g. the EMFJ provides seems to cause an extreme risk of (i) not punching enough, since not all energy is being transferred, and (ii) killing a good guy behind the bad guy or behind the door, window or wall behind the bad guy...

The Glaser, Magsafe and Corbon sound interesting to, but nobody imports them into Austria (any salesman listening?).

Stay safe.
___________________________________
Tradition is the illusion of permanence

 

[Mannlicher]

its been said that "stopping power" is best defined by "where you hit them" and "how many times did you hit them", NOT "what you hit them with"