Stopping Power

Everything is relative- especially ammo performance.

My concern with the wonder nine's is that, a person may have to fire more than one round to incapacitate an opponent, with the result that it opens the door to the question of whether excessive force was used.

With combat training that runs along the lines of 'a quick double tap to the chest and a slower precisely aimed shot to the head if those have not stopped the perp' approach, which I understand common in many US tactical classes, almost guarantee's questioning in respect to excessive force.
 
My experience with lawyers is that even if you use one shot with a .22 you've opened the door to 'excessive force' questioning.
 
The myth of the one shot stop.....

Has done more to sell different guns and ammunition than any other single handgun related issue. And isn't likely to end anytime soon. But it is a myth.

Yes, one shot stops have happened with all calibers and cartridges. So have failures. Shooting people is not like shooting animals, except when you look at how bullets perform once they enter tissue.

Perhaps the desire for a consistant one shot stop stems from our early history when virtually all guns were single shots. Back in those days, one never sees historical records argueing over the size of the ball (which were generally large and larger!) if someone was shot and not stopped, it was just assumed the shooter didn't aim well enough!

The myth of the one shot stop continues, and statistics are NOT a reliable judge of how likely this is to occurr. There is no database that can be created to include the state of mind (including the subconcious) of the person shot. It is just not possible. And, it does play a huge part in whether or not a person is stopped, by any non-instantly-fatal hit.

Sometimes people go right on with what they were doing until blood loss shuts them down, even when hit in "the right place". Other times people go down from a hit anywhere. And everything inbetween is possible, and has happened. Anecdotal evidence abounds, and in any specific instance, is just as valid as statistical evidence, providing one draws the correct conclusions from it.

Since there is no way to determine or factor for the effect of the mind of the attacker (target), we tend to try to hedge our bets, and anything and everything we can do to increase the odds in our favor, even a tiny fraction, is potentially worth it. We practice to increase our odds of being able to deliver the bullet where we need it to go. We want accurate guns and ammo, to increase the odds of us being able to put the bullet where it needs to go. .22s and other small caliber rounds do stop attackers. But they also have a track record of not stopping attackers, one apparently greater than the failure record of larger calibers.

Its all an odds game. What are the odds, are you going to be faceing someone who will stop when slightly wounded? Or are you going to be faceing a goblin who keeps on his feet for 120 seconds after having the top of his heart shredded, doing his worst in what amounts to the last seconds of his life? There is just no way to know, and the attacker themselves may not know. Many people, raised on TV and movies have been subconciously trained by seeing them, that when shot, they fall down. Others only go down when the physical damage causes it.

That being the case, prudence suggests that the thing we can do to maximize our odds is to use the caliber that creates the most physical damage. But there is no free lunch. Big powerful guns are hard to shoot fast,, difficult to conceal, and so have limits on their real world utility. Tiny guns are easy to conceal, but often difficult to shoot accurately, and fire lower power rounds, and so have limits on their real world utility. One makes what ever concessions seem best suited for one's particular situation.

Don't be too quick to judge what works best based on the wounds that EMTs, and emergency room docs see. In every case, these people, whether on their feet or on a gurney, have already been stopped! Maybe it was becuse of what the bullet did. Maybe it was because of what they did after getting shot. You can't know. We can't know. And because of that, everything we conjecture about what makes a "one shot stop" is just that, conjecture.

The only true "one shot stops" are people who die instantly when shot. DRT.

see my sig line for my personal opinion
 
GUARANTEED stopping power, a direct hit from the front bumper of a 1970 BUICK ( any model ) times 70MPH. When it comes to handguns and some rifles all bets are off. People have been dropped in their tracks from a single 25acp while others take multiple hits from a 45acp or 357 etc and keep fighting. Shockingly some of those big bore high energy hits according to some should have stopped the threat then and there. Like many things in life a gunfight can be a crap shoot ( no pun intended ) when you do everything right and still end up on the losing end.
 
I can tell you that most were stopped by 22's. It was like
that all over the country back then.

Now, that is real world stopping power.

Did the 22 loose all it's power sense then?
Click to expand...

Obviously, your experiences were not shared with others in general during that time frame.

If the .22 was considered effective during those days, why didn't LEO agencies issue them at that time?

I think you are projecting your own assumptions and fears of being shot to someone you do not know.

Never 'downplay' a criminal encounter. He may not have the same respect as you do for the .22. Expect the worst. Choose your equipment and train accordingly.

While a .22 may be an effective caliber against someone who is not really determined to hurt you, it may not stop a determined threat to your life, especially if he's wearing a thick, heavy jacket.

Granted, nobody wants to be shot with anything, not a .22 or even a BB gun. But if the bad guys are running on drugs, alcohol or adreneline they may not feel fear or pain from being shot.

Many criminals are not the nostalgic 'down-on-their-luck' hold-up men that you may envision who heist a wallet or two so they can afford a decent meal. Not all of them are stupid and not all will run at the first shot or sign of resistance.

Some criminals today are real sociopaths. They rob and assault and hurt people because they want to. They enjoy doing it.

There are bad guys out there who like doing home invasions, car jackings and even torturing innocent people. They may beat, stab or shoot people to gain 'street creds' and then brag about it to their homies to gain respect.

Some criminals expect resistance and train accordingly. Prison yard videos have shown them practicing their tactics. And I have seen some gang-banger wannabes at my local gun range.

And some violent offenders have been shot, stabbed or beaten before. They often brag about their wounds to police and to each other. It's part of their culture. Many of them are not afraid that their victims may carry a gun. They might not believe you have the will to pull the trigger.

They know that law-abiding, decent people are reluctant to shoot somebody. And if you're carrying a small firearm such as a .22, that might just give them even more confidence. After all, they know they will probably survive a .22 caliber wound, as long as it's not in a vital area. They may decide they can 'take you with them' if you pull the trigger.

Try to get inside the mind of a serious, violent criminal and then ask yourself if you had to fight a few of them off, would you be comfortable with a .22?

I wouldn't.

In my opinion, if you're going to carry a weapon at all, then carry something that has a reputation of stopping a serious, life-threatening attack.
 
Last edited:
Do you know what the odds of hitting someone past 10 feet
is? Less than 1 in 5.
Click to expand...

Your odds maybe, not mine. I regularly practice at 50 feet and have never missed. To my mind if I hit at 50 feet everything closer is just that much easier.

Where did you gather this statistic?
 
Every time I read one of these threads I am happier and happier to own and carry a revolver. It's good not to have to worry about all this "stopping power" and "equipment failure" nonsense

:cool::cool::cool:
 
41Mag10mm "I don't live in an area with anything more dangerous than 2 legged critters."
No doubt, since there is nothing more dangerous than a man. A charging water buffalo ain't got nothing on a 200 pound man with enough crystal up his nose to launch the Space Shuttle and plenty of hate in his heart. Myself I'd prefer something bigger than a .22 for either. While any gun is better than no gun, a .22 should be near your last resort (possibly ahead of a .25 Auto).
Also I find this near fanatical need to avoid references to killing or death when referring to a SD shooting to be disturbing. I intend to address this further in a thread in Tactics and Training, I invite y'all to come debate with me.
 
41Mag10mm "I don't live in an area with anything more dangerous than 2 legged critters."
No doubt, since there is nothing more dangerous than a man. A charging water buffalo ain't got nothing on a 200 pound man with enough crystal up his nose to launch the Space Shuttle and plenty of hate in his heart. Myself I'd prefer something bigger than a .22 for either. While any gun is better than no gun, a .22 should be near your last resort (possibly ahead of a .25 Auto).
Also I find this near fanatical need to avoid references to killing or death when referring to a SD shooting to be disturbing. I intend to address this further in a thread in Tactics and Training, I invite y'all to come debate with me.
Click to expand...

Well I think you missed my point. If I lived in Grizzly country and frequented the geat out of doors, I think it would be prudent to carry at LEAST a .41 magnum. Not to dispute your point but an 800 lb grizzly can crush a mans head with one swipe of a paw no matter how much crystal he has in his veins.
I'd say the grizzly has some real stopping power.
 
I know of 5 gals that carry .22 semi autos and they feel well armed. Now on the other hand my Mom carries a .357 revolver and sure can hit a target at 25 ft easily. Lots of calibers to choose from, I dont knock their weapons, I helped them get on target and accurate with them. What they do or go to for a weapon now is entirely up to them. Myself? I sure wouldnt want to be shot by anything .22 or larger.

To many other things to worry about than what someone else is doing....
 
Hitting someone past 10 feet 1 in 5 chance, maybe with my eyes closed!:eek: I wish someone had told me that sooner, I hate doing something that can't be done.:D I think if someone is that poor of a shot they are more of a public hazard than the perp. Those bullets have to end up somewhere, and that somewhere can very likely be an innocent bystander or loved one.

I think if someone is that poor of a shot they should reconsider their choice of weapons and opt for something less lethal or get some serious training. I do realize in a gunfight some people just pull the trigger without any focus, its called spray and pray. Firefights are not for everyone and shouldn't be wished on anyone. A one in five hit at 10 feet is the result of Panic shooting.
 
Do you know what the odds of hitting someone past 10 feet
is? Less than 1 in 5.
Click to expand...

I am assuming you mean a moving person, in a high stress situation.
As far as a target the size of a person, In my state to qualify for a CCW permit you must hit 16 out of 20 in the silhouette portion of a B27 target at 21 feet.

If they are that far away, running would be the best defense.
Click to expand...

I agree. Every option should be first exhausted before the use of deadly force, but if you are unable to run that option is eliminated.
Besides, most confrontations needing the use of deadly force are more like within 2 or 3 feet.

I think the "stopping power" argument is about what happens when it has to be used.
 
At the risk of sounding crazy, I tend to like .22LR's. It's my opinion that the .22LR is considerably more practical than almost any other cartridge. The advantage is that you will shoot it a lot, and thus learn to hit what it is you are aiming at. While stopping power is essential in a defensive firearm, remember that a .22LR to the forehead tends to be more effective that a 9MM to the arm. One should note that over half of real world confrontations are successfully concluded by the mere appearance of a handgun, without a shot even being fired. The fact is nobody wants to get shot with any gun, and most people can't distinguish one gun from another. Yes, a .45 makes a bigger hole, it does displace a lot more energy, and it may be most peoples defensive caliber of choice. However, it would be a huge mistake to not consider the skill of the shooter as the most important caliber.
 
One thing is for certain, I wouldn't want to face someone wielding something accurate and easy to shoot fast like my bull barrel Ruger MkIII .22LR. :eek: I can hit better with it than with an SKS combat rifle! And it's more than capable of dropping a human quickly with a good shot.
 
No doubt, since there is nothing more dangerous than a man. A charging water buffalo ain't got nothing on a 200 pound man with enough crystal up his nose to launch the Space Shuttle and plenty of hate in his heart.
Click to expand...

What?!? Are you serious? Man is the most dangerous animal if he's smart and uses his brain but not if he tries to attack you like an animal. I'd rather have a 200 pound meth addict charging towards me than a 2,000 pound animal running at me at 40 mph. It doesn't matter how much meth or drugs someone is on they're still human and can still be killed and stopped like any other human, it just might take more time or effort. It doesn't matter how much drugs he has in his system it doesn't make people into superman. It may seem like he is but in the end he's going to still die in the same way.

I don't mean to downplay how dangerous someone on drugs is or very determined person is but at they're still human. A round that hits and destroys the central nervous system of someone sober is going to do the same for someone on drugs. It's not an easy target but it's not an impossible target either. It doesn't matter how much drugs someone is on the human body still requires certain things to live.
 
When you're finally serious about stopping power ...

MotivatorCreateyourownmotivationalp.jpg


And when you're just playin' :rolleyes: ...

"9mm+P"?
"Nobody told me we'd have to qualify with that +P stuff!"
9mm.jpg


:D

:cool:
 
If I lived in Grizzly country and frequented the geat out of doors, I think it would be prudent to carry at LEAST a .41 magnum. Not to dispute your point but an 800 lb grizzly can crush a mans head with one swipe of a paw no matter how much crystal he has in his veins.
Click to expand...


LOL, those Grizzleys understand the principle of shot placement, going straignt for the CNS with a blow to the head :)
 
Last edited:
The biggest problem with 22 rimfire besides penetration and energy is MISFIRES!
Click to expand...
This guy had it on post #2!

.22 lr can stop a man, and there are a lot of good .22 pistols out there, but out of the last brick of .22s I had, about 1-2% that wouldn't fire. Not a big deal if you're plinking, but I wouldn't trust my life to a .22 for this reason.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top