PDA

View Full Version : Why you shouldnt go small. . .


njtrigger
November 11, 2006, 08:49 PM
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/americas/11/11/shot.in.head.ap/index.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/11/nyregion/11cop.html?ex=1291957200&en=c8a5f4748bece810&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

In the second article, the officer was carrying a .25 caliber weapon. He shot both suspects 4 times.

I have concluded that the .40 is probably the best choice for a defensive weapon in your home. The .45 is the best fight stopper, but I would like to have more capacity. Most .45s except for the Glock. The 9 mm is good, but the FBI has concluded its not good enough. So if its not good for them, then its not good for myself. The 357 Sig is good if your a highway patrolman or planning to engage targets at a distance or through barriers.

The burglars had 357 Magnums and one round seemed to stop the officer. The officer had a .25 and couldnt down the burglars with four well placed shots.

For an officer, the .40 or 357 SIG are probably the best choices depending upon your work.

So if I am going to engage a team of burglars in my home, I would rather have the .40. If there were higher capacity .45s maybe I might change my mind. I do know of those high cap aftermarket, but those are unreliable. I like the .45, just want a few more bullets.

MuthaGoose
November 11, 2006, 09:05 PM
In the second article, the officer was carrying a .25 caliber weapon.

I didn't see anything in the second article that said he had a .25 caliber weapon.
In fact the article said he had a Kahr; and I'm not sure Kahr makes anything other than the big three (9x19, .40s&w, or .45acp)

Bill DeShivs
November 11, 2006, 09:06 PM
Article 1: heads are hard to penetrate.
Article 2: Had the officer shot first, the burglars probably would have fled. The fact that he shot six times, and got to his driveway does not speak well for the .357 magnum, which is considered to be an excellent "fight stopper."
So your point is?
Bill

rhgunguy
November 11, 2006, 09:15 PM
If I had my druthers between being shot with a .45, .40 or .25, I would chose not to be shot. If I am doing the shooting, nothing less than 9mm will do for me.

Your opinions on minimums may vary, but that is why we have so many guns to chose from.

michael t
November 11, 2006, 10:00 PM
officer was useing a Kahr they don't make a 25auto also no mention of 25 in report.
Officer hit Armento four times in the abdomen, chest, right leg and groin, once more showing its shot placement.

Oh one 1 last thing I investaged a robbery years ago where robber took 5, 45acp much like above. He showed up at hospital with father almost a hour later nearly 15 mile from shooting.
Their is no pistol round that works 100%. includeing the 40S&W. The OK undersherrif who shot herself week or so ago in throat smoking when EC arrived. only sure thing carry a small nuke of course you and everthing in 1/2 mile go with BG but hey 1 shot stop.

RevolverLover
November 11, 2006, 10:57 PM
Like others have said there was no mention of a .25 being used. The officer had a kahr which isn't made in .25.

FirstFreedom
November 11, 2006, 11:04 PM
Actually it says it's a "KHR" pistol, whatever that might be. If it is a Kahr (probably is), then it'd be 9mm or up. Both guilty of murder.

RevolverLover
November 11, 2006, 11:11 PM
Actually it says it's a "KHR" pistol, whatever that might be. If it is a Kahr (probably is), then it'd be 9mm or up. Both guilty of murder.

If you read further in the article.




Correction:

An article on Sunday about the fatal shooting of a New York police officer gave an erroneous identification in some copies for the pistol he was carrying. It was a Kahr semiautomatic, not a KHR. A related article in some copies about Lillo Brancato Jr., one of the two suspects in the shooting, misstated the name of a newspaper that interviewed him about his role in "Falcone," a CBS television series. It is The Times Leader of Wilkes-Barre, Pa., not the Wilkes Barre Time Leader.

lempka
November 11, 2006, 11:26 PM
Have read many articals about people getting shot in the head with a 22lr and did not survive. Its all about shot placement. Never would I want to be shot at with any caliber!!! Practice! Practice! Placement! Placement!

I would not have anything less than a .40 though.

The Body Bagger
November 11, 2006, 11:47 PM
Wow just two articles and someone becomes an expert on handgun cartridge effectiveness. Seen real life stops and continuations from suspects and insurgents being hit with everything from .22lr to .50cal. As for real life effectiveness, it was and almost always had been a combination of shot placement and the will to fight in the target. After six years active duty military and two years as a LEO in a major metropolis, I am more than comfortable with my Glock 17 9mm.

Loucks
November 11, 2006, 11:56 PM
There are quite a few 1911 variants that accept double stack magazines out there in the event that you would like to step up from the .40. If you can't stand any that are offered commercially, you can always get a frame/slide set from Caspian and build your own. I'd love to, but my hands are built for single stacks.

Oh, and where can I get this "nuke" thing? It sounds like just the ticket. Mutually assured destruction, anyone? ;)

croyance
November 12, 2006, 12:51 AM
Wilson has a double stack 1911. The Para-Ordnance 1911 has 14 round capacity in full size. The HK USP holds 12. By the time you would need to reload, the chances are the situation is resolved one way or another.
For home, shotgun is really much better.

Majic
November 12, 2006, 01:52 AM
Let's just say you concluded what's best for "YOU" and leave it at that.

death2twinkys
November 12, 2006, 04:31 AM
14 rounds of 45 isnt enough? XD45

TacticalDefense1911
November 12, 2006, 01:45 PM
Well put Majic

njtrigger
November 12, 2006, 03:08 PM
Wait a second. I missed the new XD45, just looked at it now. When did they come out with that?

TacticalDefense1911
November 12, 2006, 03:26 PM
The XD45 has been our for at least a year now I think. I believe that it was the NRA's gun of the year last year.

death2twinkys
November 12, 2006, 07:32 PM
A friend of mine got one right after they came out, damn good gun.

ShelbyV8
November 12, 2006, 08:10 PM
The Kahr K9 was approved by NYPD for off duty carry. 7 in magazine and 1 in chamber (8 rounds). It seems that approval has been pulled due to issues with the Kahrs.

gonefishing43
November 12, 2006, 08:25 PM
The 22cal. has probably killed more people than any other gun. Spending time at the target range is the key, no matter what you are shooting

threefivesevenmag
November 12, 2006, 08:40 PM
This stuff again?

orionengnr
November 12, 2006, 08:55 PM
more time reading, less time posting. Please.

You will achieve "Senior Member" status sooner or later...that is not the point.

The point is to learn something along the way...

death2twinkys
November 12, 2006, 09:34 PM
Shot place is the most important thing but I won't know how calm i will be when I end up in a combat situation. Therefore i would rather have something that can drop a BG if i don't shoot him in the eye or heart, It's just comforting to know that if a shoot him in the arm he will go down (maybe not stay there) as quickly as a head shot.

marlboroman84
November 12, 2006, 10:10 PM
more time reading, less time posting. Please.

You will achieve "Senior Member" status sooner or later...that is not the point.

The point is to learn something along the way...

That has got to be in the top 5 best things I have ever seen posted here.

There have got to be over 10 threads on this topic just in the Hogan's alley section of this forum alone. It seems like a new one pops up every single day. Sometimes bullets kill, sometimes they don't. If you wanna carry a .50ae because you wanna make sure they stop in their tracks and flip over a few times :rolleyes: :rolleyes: be my guest noone will stop you. Some of us are real happy with our poor wittle bitty cutesy wutesy nine millimeters and I got some people who could tell ya .25's and other "puny" calibers work just fine if they weren't six feet underground.

paramedic70002
November 13, 2006, 08:39 AM
Yes, but the question becomes, do you want your opponent to cease his activities in the near future? .22s = slow death more often than not.

Glenn E. Meyer
November 13, 2006, 10:27 AM
Before someone spouts - 'I have concluded' - they should state their credentials in medicine, engineering and/or research design.

The stopping power threads that definitively state XYZ are so old, aren't they?

threegun
November 13, 2006, 11:24 AM
Therefore i would rather have something that can drop a BG if i don't shoot him in the eye or heart, It's just comforting to know that if a shoot him in the arm he will go down (maybe not stay there) as quickly as a head shot.


What caliber will put a bad guy down with an arm shot? Much less as quickly as a head shot.

Glenn E. Meyer
November 13, 2006, 11:28 AM
A Minuteman III hit in the arm with the warhead exploding will usually do it - I have concluded that and the Minuteman III has served me well. :D

threegun
November 13, 2006, 11:32 AM
I do this often. I meant what carry handgun caliber can put someone down with an arm shot.

Big Calhoun
November 13, 2006, 12:20 PM
I side with the older and more experienced...caliber can be important, shot placement can be the difference between life and death.

Glenn E. Meyer
November 13, 2006, 01:41 PM
Three - what do we mean - put down with an arm shot? I'm sure you know the issues. :)

You go down if you bleed out, nervous system destruction or you have a psychological reaction to the shot. What is the time scale?

If the poster means a guaranteed almost instantaneous reaction without chance of a response to you, then the arm shot will take time to bleed you out, not destroy your CNS but it could give your the psychological stop.

The poster probably wants a handgun round that:

1. spins you around and knocks you down.
2. generates a neural shock or hydrostatic shock that travels up your arm to your noggin or heart
3. Frazamooles your cumblabatatron

Only rounds that do number 3 have been developed and can only be fired from a 1911. :D

BamaXD
November 13, 2006, 02:13 PM
Wow, so the 9mm 1911 will work just as effectively as the .45 1911? Awesome! (Immediately dives for cover behind lots of sandbags for the hail of .45 that is soon to follow) :D -BamaXD

Dan M.
November 13, 2006, 02:59 PM
njtrigger, Springfield just recently released the XD45 Compact is that's the one you're referring to. I haven't seen one yet--not sure they're even available in CA at this time.

threegun
November 14, 2006, 06:55 AM
Glenn,
3. Frazamooles your cumblabatatron

Only rounds that do number 3 have been developed and can only be fired from a 1911.

I'm in trouble then. I had better pretend that an instantaneous stop is only 100 percent possible with a shot that interrupts the brains ability to function. Since I don't shoot 1911's my arm shot would only be effective if the bad guy chooses to give up or he bleeds out much later. Wait if I am lucky enough to be attacked by a one armed bad guy and take out that one arm..............yep it might work.

death2twinkys
November 14, 2006, 07:07 PM
A .45 threegun it will drop them no matter where it hits from sheer force I don't mean kill them I mean knock them on their ass. Anyone here who disagrees probably doesn't know what a .45 was made to do.

marlboroman84
November 14, 2006, 07:22 PM
A .45 threegun it will drop them no matter where it hits from sheer force I don't mean kill them I mean knock them on their ass. Anyone here who disagrees probably doesn't know what a .45 was made to do.

That's a joke right? Is that statement made from experience? So no matter how big the person is and even if they are running full speed at you, a .45 will instantly make them fall flat on their butt? I know a few G.I's who would disagree with you and then ask you to back that up.

The .45 is a great round no doubt, but this nonsense of it flipping people off their feet and being a one shot wonder stopper is ridiculous. It's also another thing that has been done to death here.

With such a great sig line, I didn't peg you for the type to think one gun was all powerful. I'm hoping you were joking and I just didn't get the sarcasm through your text. :D

RevolverLover
November 14, 2006, 07:29 PM
A .45 threegun it will drop them no matter where it hits from sheer force I don't mean kill them I mean knock them on their ass. Anyone here who disagrees probably doesn't know what a .45 was made to do.


Your joking right?

revjen45
November 14, 2006, 08:11 PM
"The 22cal. has probably killed more people than any other gun."

And smallpox and syphilis, and plague have killed a lot of people, but not quickly enough to save your bacon in a gunfight. If the BG dies in ICU 3 days after killing you it's better than having him laughing about it in a bar, but hardly effective self defense. A .22 is a little better than a pocketknife, but not by much.

death2twinkys
November 14, 2006, 09:02 PM
Not a joke but its far more likly to knock a, say running drugged up Philipeano on his but i ddint say flipping but it will down him probably more likely if u nail him in the arm since it will spin him off balance I don't claim to know the physics exactly but I do know that a 45 round will knock a man flat when a 22 passes strait through. If for no other reason than because its larger. You can't be serious when you suggest that I am wrong, granted you would probably need to hit bone to drop them in one shot, but even hitting bone a 22 will just shatter or pierce the bone. It can't produce enough momentum and energy transfer potential (is that worded right if not I hope you underrstand what I am saying) to knock them down. Now, the only thing I have for evidence comes from my grandfathers' accounts from the Korean war. Again I NEVER said flipping, it will knock someone down and can change a mans momentum if only the direction. Is that good enough i didn't want to make a huge speech, but if I am wrong correct me. From what I do know of physics, which is basically the idea and theories (I never could do the math), this seems sound. A 22 is very small and very fast it will have good penetration but not alot of stopping power which is what i would rather have. I don't want to wound an attacker I want to either kill or disable an attacker I don't trust a 22 to do that, not at my skill level and not without proof beyond a shadow of a doubt that I could draw and fire within 3-6 seconds an accurate enough shot to disable someone larger than me far enough away so that he doesn't fall on top of and disable me, and since the local ranges won't even permit me to practice, but thats a different thread.

marlboroman84
November 14, 2006, 09:12 PM
The physics of it are simple. A 230 grain bullet is not going to knock a 215 pound man over if he is advancing toward you. Yes, a .45 would more than likely be more effective than a .22, but it is still a small bullet.

It's been several times over that a handgun is inadequate for defense anyway, it's just because of it's ease of carry that is popular. Ask most people if they would rather have a .45 or a semi-auto shotgun. I'd bet you'd get alot of responses to shotgun.

Hollywood has poisoned people's minds into thinking that a bullet will throw people through windows and doors and flip them off their feet. If you are talking about hitting someone with a bullet, them stopping, checking the wound, and sitting down, then yes I can see that. I cannot see a very large, angry man charging at you being thrown onto his hind-end because you shot him once or even twice with a .45.

Also in response to your comment about drawing 3-6 seconds. It is generally advised you be able to draw from concealment and fire 1 on target shot in 2 seconds. Any longer and you are at risk of the target being to close to get a good shot or them pulling their own weapon and disabling you.

death2twinkys
November 14, 2006, 09:42 PM
I never said flip. Sorry, I don't like it if people put words in my mouth. A .45 has more stopping power than a 22 any day of the week. Yes I would rather carry a shotgun, but how would you conceal that? A .45 makes a much better option in that regards also if you consider a persons center of gravity and the amount of force it takes to push a person over... to knock someone down it won't take much to make a person stumble and fall over. If your feet are running forward and the top half of your body suddenly stops your going to fall down.

Nigelcorn
November 14, 2006, 10:44 PM
Something that would help greatly with this thread's readability is if those that are posting would take the 15 seconds it requires to read over their post and check for those pesky little things some call "grammar" and "spelling." It also helps to end sentences with some sort of punctuation. I'm not trying to be a professor about this, but it gets annoying to have to re-read a post several times because of how it is written. It also makes it real hard to give any credibility to the person that is writing the post, even if they have valid points to make.

RevolverLover
November 14, 2006, 11:00 PM
Again I NEVER said flipping, it will knock someone down and can change a mans momentum if only the direction.

One shot or multiple shots from a .45 is no guarantee that it will knock someone down and thats speaking from personal experience.

mgdavis
November 14, 2006, 11:29 PM
I don't claim to know the physics exactly but I do know that a 45 round will knock a man flat

Obviously you don't know the physics. Do you recall Newton's Third Law? Equal and Opposite reactions ring a bell?

45RackerTracker
November 14, 2006, 11:31 PM
If you fired a cannon ball you'll knock a man down. .22s usually bounce off bone and take a new direction while inside a body. If you handheld a weapon capable of knocking a man down, then you also would go down. Sir Issac Newton's Law, for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. ;)

death2twinkys
November 14, 2006, 11:34 PM
I'm done if your not going to read the entire post then whats the point?

CobrayCommando
November 15, 2006, 12:10 AM
I doubt a .45 would even throw you off balance.

You can test it by firing it into a sack of something that weighs about 170 pounds, and see if the sack even moves. In the Thompson and Lagarde tests in which they recommend a .45, they shot suspended cadavers and the bodies shot with it barely even moved, much less were kicked back.

marlboroman84
November 15, 2006, 07:31 AM
I'm done if your not going to read the entire post then whats the point?

I read all your posts. I read this entire thread. Your points were, a .45 is better than a .22 and a .45 will cause a man to be and I quote you here,I mean knock them on their ass. Anyone here who disagrees probably doesn't know what a .45 was made to do.
I agree that a .45 is better than a .22. I do not agree with the fact that it will knock a man on his butt. The .45 was designed for the same thing every other bullet was essentially designed for, to wound or kill.

It's a simple matter of physics and it has been pointed out to you several times. I seriously suggest you do some tests and then post your findings. Fill a bag with 50 pounds of sand. Just 50 pounds, then shoot it with a .45 and see how much it moves. Until you do this I doubt anyone else is going to take what you say on this matter seriously.

threegun
November 15, 2006, 07:38 AM
Death2twinkys,

A .45 threegun it will drop them no matter where it hits from sheer force I don't mean kill them I mean knock them on their ass. Anyone here who disagrees probably doesn't know what a .45 was made to do.


Wrong. Unless your adversary is hit in the brain or gives up voluntarily he will not go down as a result of the .45 impact. He may go down after enough blood loss or if he succumbs to the pain but not from the impact. You are probably under the false impression that the military gave many when they switched to the .45acp. It was supposed to provide enough power to stop a drug crazed charging enemy in his tracks...............not! It simply provided a better option than the .38 that came before it.

My coworker fire at a robber and put a nice hole thru this kids calf. He thought he had missed why?????????because the boy didn't fall or flinch rather he ran like a jack rabbit.......hole and all. Maybe 120 pound jitterbug (term they use on each other to describe a young black teen). BTW my coworker was using hollow points 230 grain Winchester black talons.

45RackerTracker
November 15, 2006, 09:19 AM
Did the hole go all the way through? How long was the barrel on the gun? I've got Winchester Rangers in 200gr, and I am curious.

USNavy_233
November 15, 2006, 09:45 AM
If you want to knock a man down, put a 300WINMAG round through his ocular cavity. If you want to keep yourself from being the victim of an attack, maintain constant situational awareness, be proficient in unarmed self-defense, and carry the gun you shoot most efficiently with. It's just that simple, really.

Glenn E. Meyer
November 15, 2006, 10:09 AM
Our friends on the Mythbusters show had a great demo of all kinds of guns shooting at dead ol' pigs. They didn't move that much under extreme blasting.

Anyway, I predict by 2010, there will be about 300 more mousegun, 45 vs all threads which will add nothing to what has already been said. :D

threegun
November 15, 2006, 12:35 PM
45RackerTracker, It was a full size colt 1911 and yes it went through even after impacting the ground between them. My coworker had been use to his king cobra he carried for years. When the heat of the potential shoot out hit him he reverted back to the hard double action pull of the revolver which caused that 1911 to discharge early. Originally we thought that he simply pulled the trigger as the gun climbed the leg of the robber causing the leg to be hit. We now know differently. After a long prison sentence the now reformed robber paid a visit to our shop. He thanked my coworker for saving his life by shooting him which caused him to be caught and his life changed. He showed us his scars. Both appeared level as if the round was fire about 10 inches or so from the ground. A round impacting the ground at a 45 degree angle is said to take the same path leveling out horizontally. So we now believe that my co worker hit the ground between them and the round continued thru the robbers calf......ending the fight. Yes my coworker was going to fire again but the robber dropped the gun and money instantly.

David Armstrong
November 15, 2006, 01:10 PM
A .45 has more stopping power than a 22 any day of the week.
That is one of those "so what?" statements. NO handgun has enough power to stop anybody. The bullet, if placed properly, can create secondary effects such as blood loss or CNS disruption that can cause a person to stop, or the person can choose to stop (the psychological stop). But almost no stopping power isn't much improvement over almost no stopping power.

Ares45
November 15, 2006, 05:35 PM
A .45 threegun it will drop them no matter where it hits

Well at least this place is still good for a laugh...

C'mon people, where were you during high school physics class?...

Newton's 3rd law of motion -For every action has an EQUAL and opposite reaction.

If a 45 was powerful enough to knock a man off his feet it would do the same to the shooter.

odessastraight
November 16, 2006, 09:23 AM
If the bullet launcher (handgun) was of the same weight as the bullet then you physics majors would be correct in pointing out Newtons law.

For me, caliber of my CCW boils down to either .45ACP, .357 Mag... or .44 Sp. (with handloads). I think the reason most choose one of those "smaller" weapons is related to comfort. The little poppers hide so easily. Being recoil shy also factors in here. They know the .357 snubby has lots of blast and a fair amount of recoil that they eliminate by going with the weaker "smaller" calibers.

Here are my thoughts on the ideal CCW. Round butt model 29 (OK or 629) S&W, 3 incher, bobbed hammer, with the adjustible sights replaced with the Cylinder & Slide modification for fixed sights. Also, maybe with the modification for full moon clips. I would carry .44 Mag. loads with 250 grain, very flat nosed bullets (read Keith SWCs) loaded to right at 1000 fps.

JDG
November 16, 2006, 03:04 PM
Just last week here in michigan, a dispute broke out, and a man was shot dead with one shot from a 32 cal revolver. Guess it was a lucky shot to the chest. Must of not had a coat or shirt on. The shooter had a ccw, and was released after questioning.

dawg23
November 16, 2006, 05:22 PM
Originally posted by njtrigger:"Wait a second. I missed the new XD45, just looked at it now. When did they come out with that?"

You have also, apparently, missed new developments in 9mm ammo. Specifically the Winchester Law Enforcement ammo (127 grain +p+), and ammo loaded with the Barnes ""DPX" bullet (such as Cor-Bon).

There is plenty of 9mm, .40 and .45 ammo that meets the IWBA test protocol.

Research, prior to posting an unsubstantiated opinion on one of the age-old, never-to-be-resolved questions, can be a good thing.:)

dawg23
November 16, 2006, 05:28 PM
Originally posted by Odessastraight: "If the bullet launcher (handgun) was of the same weight as the bullet then you physics majors would be correct in pointing out Newtons law."

Can you explain the suspension of Newton's 3rd Law of Motion (or any other law of physics) based on the relative weights (mass) of the affected or associated objects ??

And while you're at it, tell us the conditions under which "f" no longer equals "ma".

odessastraight
November 16, 2006, 07:24 PM
Nope, a law is a law no dispute about it. I just think evoking Newtons 3rd to support a contention that in order for a cartridge to be an effective "stopper" it would have to knock down the shooter too is bogus. A handgun's weight/mass attenuates the reaction and , for a given cartridge, the more the weight/mass of the handgun the less the recoil.

Heeey, hows about that Mod. 29 deal? I have a snubby 686 set up just about like what I tried to descrbe for the 29...full moon clip mod and all. Well, no bobbed hammer and still with the adjustible sights but a very nice CCW in its Milt Sparks IWB.

mgdavis
November 16, 2006, 09:02 PM
I weigh 150lbs. Does that mean that a bullet able to knock over a charging individual who weighs 180lbs would not have a equal reaction on me, simply because I launched it from my 31oz 1911?

threegun
November 17, 2006, 06:25 AM
All this jargon means is that handgun rounds are puny and cannot knock an individual down unless A. He falls to the ground in pain B. He is hit in the brain C. He is hit in the spine. A handgun bullet cannot physically put him down by its momentum. So a hit from a 22 could cause a man to go down just as fast as a hit from a 45 but neither can put him down instantly against his will unless B or C above are hit. So when somebody says that a 45 will knock um down right now............they are full of poop. The advantage of the larger calibers is that they can cause more of what does put a bad guy down blood loss and pain.

Every handgun sold at our shop is guaranteed to blow the balls off a charging Rhino or you get triple your money back. Funny that no one has ever used it........maybe handguns do have knockdown power LOL.

Nigelcorn
November 17, 2006, 10:17 AM
About Newton's 3rd law...Are you guys really saying that for a bullet to have an effect on the person being shot, it would have to have the same effect on the person doing the shooting? I am not saying that a 45, or any caliber, can in itself send a person flying backwards, but I think that you can't ignore the fact that the force given the person doing the shooting is spread over the area of the pistol which is purposely designed as ergonomically as possible to distribute force evenly. The person being shot is receiving however many ft/lbs of energy that caliber is traveling with in the area of the tip of the bullet. There is a big difference. Again, I am obviously not saying that any caliber will send a person flying off their feet, but I think it is just as ridiculous to say that just because a bullet doesn't move a 150lb bag of sand, it will have no effect on stopping a BG. You can't take the psychological component of being shot out of the equation either. Even if the bullet wouldn't have caused the person to go down right away, many times being shot by any caliber will have that effect.

Glenn E. Meyer
November 17, 2006, 11:27 AM
Nigel - you have missed the point of the debate, sorry to say.

Nigelcorn
November 17, 2006, 05:57 PM
Well, that's a very real possibility that I missed the point. If you are talking about what I said about the psychological aspect of being shot, then I never intended that to be part of the debate, and know that was not what was being discussed. I was only questioning the validity of the physics arguments that were based on Newton's 3rd law.

45RackerTracker
November 17, 2006, 08:43 PM
Newton's law is very simple and based on observation. You only get a reaction (force) equal to the initial action (force). The only difference between the starting point and end result, is the surface area. If an object with a large surface area strikes another object with a specific amount of force there would be a result. If you reduce the size of the object doing the striking and maintain the force constant, then the object doing the striking has a greater chance of penetration. An example is getting struck with the butt of a knife or getting struck with the point of the same knife at the same amount of force. We usually hammer nails into wood by striing the head of the nail and not the point. :)

threegun
November 18, 2006, 07:04 AM
Nigel, We just don't want you to be surprised when you fire five 45acp's into a thug and he doesn't fall or even flinch. We don't want you to remain under the impression that the person being shot will automatically fall from the psychological effects of having lead rip through there body. Some will give up if only grazed by a 22lr and others will only give up when their lights go out from blood loss.

A perfect example is the ex heavy weight boxer shot in the gut point blank by the cop he was beating badly. The boxer/thug didn't flinch and continued to assault the officer until backup arrived.

No handgun will cause a human being to be knocked down by its momentum, unless they are standing on a balance beam LOL.

odessastraight
November 18, 2006, 02:29 PM
To those of you who actually do think that that all calibers are the same let me just ask you to use a bit of common sense. Forget all the debate about Newton's law or anything else that may be open to opinion and debate. If you were in a rock fight and reached down to grab a missle to whap someone's gourd what would you pick;...a piece of gravel or a nice hefty, baseball sixed rock? Yeaaaaaaah, no need to even answer. The same would go for sellecting a club were you unfortunate enough to have to fight with one. You wouldn't pick some whimpy little switch from a small pine tree, you'd be looking for a solid Hickory or Oak limb to thump your enemy. Same with your choice of a cal. for CCW. You want to thump the BG. I'm not saying any of them will knock him for a loop. I'm just saying you want to thump the BG with the biggest weapon you can handle. For me the minimum is .45 ACP or .357 Mag. Should you want to pelt them with gravel ("smaller" cals.) that's no skin off of my nose... unless you may ever have to cover my 6 O'clock.

Nigelcorn
November 18, 2006, 02:59 PM
hmmm, now I'm pretty sure that what I said originally was exactly the same as what whoever tried to explain the 3rd law to me. My point was that because a bullet has less area than the gun that fired it, you can't look at the impact on the shooter and say it will be the same as the person being shot. Pretty much exactly like whoever it was that explained hammering the nail. Again, I said (twice) that I don't think any handgun caliber is going to knock somebody over.

Also, the argument about a piece of gravel or a baseball sized rock has limited application to this because in that example, the two different sized rocks are traveling at almost exactly the same speed. Nobody in their right mind would pick the gravel given those limitations. However, that doesn't apply to handgun calibers. Some people feel that a higher velocity is more important. Others feel that a higher weight. I don't really care. I think that either one will get the job done just about as well as the other.

odessastraight
November 18, 2006, 03:41 PM
Nope Nigel, the lightweight piece of gravel is moving at exactly 73.050 fps whereas the honkin' size stone is making exactly 52.ooo2 fps. Geeze Nigel, the drill was just to use your common sense not come up with even more trivia for debate (velocity vs. bullet weight). Nevermind, I've just come to the conclusion that you, and several folks posting here, SHOULD carry .22s or .25s or .32s. Now, like Newton, Darwin really did have some sound theories. Oh yeah... :D ... in case you think I'm actually serious.

45RackerTracker
November 18, 2006, 07:35 PM
I quit.

AngusPodgorney
November 19, 2006, 06:25 PM
Just be thankful he didn't quote Tommy Lee Jones... again! And suggest that anything other than a GLOCK is an outdated Sissy gun. :confused:

MostToysWins
November 19, 2006, 06:56 PM
These are the most overdone, tired, boring, opinionated, worthless threads on any gun forum.

Stopping power, one shot stop etc etc are myths, plain and simple.

For every good point, there is always an equally good counterpoint, and they go nowhere.

YES, I read this entire thread and just started shaking my head about half way through it. Same stuff different day.

Newton's law being debated was a new twist I have to say. :rolleyes:

You can do a seach and find more caliber war threads than you will every be able to read.

Once again I vote to BAN ALL CALIBER WARS!!!!

(Puts on super strength, high intensity, super-duper, triple layered flame suit)

PS, please save your, "If you don't like them don't read them" comments. Those are as old as the caliber wars.

(Re-puts on super duper, extra thick, nuclear proof flame suit)

Nigelcorn
November 19, 2006, 07:04 PM
I agree with most toys wins.

Daves-got-guns
November 20, 2006, 06:55 PM
i have heard of some african big 5 hunters doing a double tap with their double barrel .500 nitro mags or w/e. The theory is simple, right after the first shot gets there another shot hits and it has roughly twice the energy than if you fired 1 shot, or if you fired that one shot and then waited, and let the trigger go again. Since this thread has already discussed everything from a .45 knockin a man on his arse end after doing a double backflip and the splits, might as well talk about a double tap. Also theres a few handguns i would consider to have the stopping power of a rifle, a .454, .480 or the linebaugh calibers. Or if you want to go crazy, grab a blackhawk and load it up with +p 300 grain hardcast bullets! Also to the fellar who carries the moderate .44 with 250 semi-wad cutters, thats a good load for hunting, but idk if i would want a people gun loaded that way. Have you figured any advantages of this load, like accuracy penetration etc. or do you want something thats just gonna kill a man (no offense.) Are you worried about smashing bone?

odessastraight
November 22, 2006, 09:34 AM
Well, I'm the "fellar" who wrote that my ideal ccw would be that snubby .44 Mag with the 250gr bullets @ 1000fps. Alas, I don't own such a ccw and carry an L frame Smith snubby in .357. I do have a Charter Arms in .44 Special that fits in my front pocket, but I can't get over 700 fps from a decent bullet (read 250 gr.) out of it and still expect to keep the little revolver from being pounded to death.

The "double tap...tripple taps...face-full O taps" kind of thoughts hold no alure for me. That's why I want a ccw that can be expected to stop a BG with the one shot. Same with the round capacity of my CCW. I don't want a ccw that has it's yearly ration of ammo attached. I'm comfortable with having 5 or 6 heavy rounds from a good revolver (and a full moon clip/speedloader for a reload).

For deer, I'll take my .44 Mag with a longer barrel and my loads to 1400 fps, but yeah, in general I want my ccw to have the same effect on a BG as it would have on a deer. Yes, of course I want my CCW to be accurate and to smash bone. I want it to be able to completely penetrate the center of A BG from any angle doing as much damage as possible to his vital organs as it smashes through him. I think the .44 Mag. with 250gr. Keith SWCs @ 1000 fps would fill the bill and the S&W 29 round-butt 3 incher wouldn't be any more to carry than a 1911 Commander. Short .45 ACPs just aren't enough to meet my requirements (above with the smashing thru the center of mass thing). Full size 1911s...well, OK maybe sometimes, but I still think I can do better. Same with the .357 Mag. It's my choice now, but I've always got this feeling that I can do better... like a wider, heaver bullet at the same velocity as I'm getting from the .357. So, my rationale for the .44 Mag.

Daves-got-guns
November 22, 2006, 01:20 PM
good thinking, i know alot of people will mention this or that for bullets goin thru and having too much energy or w/e but honestly misses would be more of a concern to me then blow thru. I kinda got the same logic, but i do like hollow points for anything under .45 or a "magnum" grade cartridge. I also like .357 mag with 125 sp's because i think they will expand very well, and will break, mame, destroy bone to a good extent, and if a miss happens and one goes thru a wall, not alot of energy is going to be transerred on to hurt somebody innocent. Also i beleive a factory loaded 125 will take a dear deer very humanely, atleast under 30 yards which is about as good as i can hit anything with a open sighted pistol. Also stopping bgs i would definitely use a double tap on anything, just because 1 shot stops arent %100 with any centerfire pistol cartridge

Daves-got-guns
November 22, 2006, 01:24 PM
also recoil is a big thing, and i prefer fast-faster follow up shots then i would get with a .44. I am going to purchase a stainless blackhawk in .45 with the 4 3/4 barrel and for home defense or any defense, i will keep it loaded with the speer 250 gold-dot, or buffalo bores 255 soft cast swc.

mvpel
November 22, 2006, 02:09 PM
If anyone ever shot me with a .22, and I ever found out about it, boy would I be angry.

cloudcroft
November 23, 2006, 12:48 AM
Well, if he shoots you where he should with it, you'd not have that concern.

In fact, you'd never have any concerns ever again.

-- John D.

JohnKSa
November 23, 2006, 02:36 AM
That's why I want a ccw that can be expected to stop a BG with the one shot.A quest doomed to failure.

I read a case study awhile back where two policemen ended up both emptying their .44 revolvers (loaded with ammunition such as you describe--the article called them light .44Mag loads) at a criminal who brandished a firearm at them. He was hit 11 times solidly in the torso. While he expired without shooting at the officers, he stayed on his feet long enough to be shot 10 more times than you think this cartridge will take to stop a BG. It's also interesting (chilling?) to consider what would have happened had the BG had an accomplice or two since both cops were left with empty revolvers after dealing with just one attacker.

I'm not trying to get you to change your CCW, just pointing out that your expectations are not realistic.

45RackerTracker
November 23, 2006, 04:24 AM
John, thou speaketh the truth, Amen.

odessastraight
November 23, 2006, 01:22 PM
I can also see your point about using 125s in your .357 Mag. There have been good reports about the effectiveness of that cartridge. Still, naaaaaaaaaa, it's just too light for me. Out of a snubby .357 it's actually very close to the balistics of a 9mm in a service type auto. I lean to the large mass and heavy weight side more than do you, but I reckon that's OK.

I have experience hunting deer with the .44 Mag. (Elmer Keith loads) and I guess you just have to see how they perform to be convinced. My Dad and I and a friend or two would always fill our tags and then hunt for any other member of the hunting party who hadn't got theirs. A majority of the deer were "one shot stops".

Daves-got-guns
November 23, 2006, 11:17 PM
alrite i understand how a man could take 11 hits to the torso with a .44 mag with a light bullet combo, but one shot to the head and it dont matter what you got and their usually dead. It is true that no matte what you may use that the mythical stopping power is not always there to have your back, and 1 shot stop statistics may fly out the door. But for me i would be very comfortable with either a 125 .357 or 250 gold dot at handloaded or factory standard. I dont prefer heavy loaded guns because of recoil, but i do keep a 3" mag 00 as the first shell in my shotgun, backed up by a number 1 buck and then 4 more nearby. It is fascinating that a man will take 11 hits from a .44 to the chest and not die, it shows that drugs, the will to live and unnatural occurances can keep the human spirit alive just long enough.

cloudcroft
November 24, 2006, 01:08 AM
Daves-got-guns,

Even if a good shot to the head does NOT kill outright, it well may be "disorienting" enough to the target to allow a second shot that WILL.

If not, there's usually more shots available for application to the target if required....and if you're like me, a couple of spare mags, too.

Whatever it takes,

-- John D.

Socrates
November 24, 2006, 02:05 AM
THAT'S FUNNY!!!.

The only 44 magnum handgun shooting I could find was by an Arizona DA, returning from hunting, and, seeing a bad guy pointing his rifle in his direction. He pulled his 44 magnum, with Glaser safety slugs, and head shot the guy, with fatal results, including entry, and large exit holes.


As JohnKSA will tell you, there is NO CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE suggesting any handgun would be effective for one shot stops, and, I would say there is NO CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE, that with proper bullets, the 454, .475 and .500 Linebaughs, in both long and shorts, and, the 500 JRH, and S&W 460 and 500, wouldn't be proven consistently one shot stop ability, given adequate testing.

I can tell you 45 Super, and .451 Detonics, using 200 grain flying speer ashtrays, at 1200+ feet a second, where very effective for certain police departments. Lee Jurras could also tell you of departments that used certain combinations he designed, that worked well. Nyeti is floating around, and, could tell you of 45 Colt loads, and their results, in police shootings, approaching 100 BG's, but, none of these would prove conclusive one shot stops.

I can also say, that almost without exception, all the main stream 'self-defense' ammo, be it for .38, 44 magnum, or 45 Colt, preforms to near the same level of penetration, and, with similar results. Only when you start increasing penetration, from 12" in gel, to 18"+ in gel, do you start getting consistent results from any of these handgun calibers. However, due to their greater bullet weight, the 45 Colt+ calibers tend to penetrate more, even with hollow
points,...

Happy Thanksgiving

S

JohnKSa
November 24, 2006, 07:13 AM
...I would say there is NO CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE, that with proper bullets, the 454, .475 and .500 Linebaughs, in both long and shorts, and, the 500 JRH, and S&W 460 and 500, wouldn't be proven consistently one shot stop ability, given adequate testing.Even 12ga slugs occasionally fail to stop a person with torso hits. The idea that there is ANY handgun cartridge that can consistently provide one shot stops is not one that can be supported by the facts.

"Jim Higginbotham, a 30-year law enforcement veteran and trainer writes the following on the subject of pistol cartridges and failures to stop:

...There is a lot of area in the torso in which a hit will seldom produce rapid incapacitation even if hit by a 12 ga. slug or a 30-06 ...

Here's another interesting shooting with a 12 ga slug.As to "big hole" failures, here in the People's Republic of NJ there was an incident awhile back that shook a lot of folks. A drugged up goblin was shot through the back door and seat of a van he was driving with a 12ga slug. He exited the van with an inch-and-a half hole blown clear through his chest. (Yes, Virginia, daylight was visible!) He ran about 25 yards firing his pistol at his pursuers until he collapsed.

Socrates
November 24, 2006, 07:42 AM
ACTUALLY, I was a test shooter for the industry standard 12 gauge slug, for BRI, INC. a LONG time ago. A 500 grain sabot, or slug, EVEN AT 1800 FPS, is NOT
a heavy, high powered rifle, like the same weight bullet, but going 400-500fps more. There is a HUGE DIFFERENCE between 1800 fps, and 2300 fps.

The irony is, when tested at between 900 fps, and 1300 fps, the 525 grain .510 caliber bullets, and, lighter 440 grain 500 caliber flat nosed bullets, seem to be more effective on large game then the same bullets, at 1800 fps, out of a 50 Alaskan.That is EXACTLY WHY I AGREE WITH YOU, THAT PROOF OF EFFECT IS REQUIRED, SINCE LOGIC DOESN'T SEEM TO WORK WITH BALLISTIC OBSERVATION.

My friends actually shoot stuff with .50 and 510 caliber bullets, a lot, and, the stuff they shoot is big, and nasty.
The end results are rather illogical, and, their reports clearly support JohnKSA's theory that their is no clear evidence for what would constitute a consistent one shot stop, regardless of caliber, FOR HUMANS, WITHOUT PROOF.

Having test shot 12 gauge sabots, we were NEVER UNDER THE ILLUSION THAT WHAT WE WERE SHOOTING=458 WIN MAG, OR, 450 ACKLEY, OR, 458 LOTT. THE VELOCITY WAS TOO LOW.

Even with a 4 bore, leaving a huge hole, it still doesn't provide the knock down factor that a 450 N2, with a 500 grain bullet at 2200 fps does. 1600 pound asian buffalo went DOWN, got right back up, but, the initial hit was enough to provide time to fire a brain shot, to finish.

4 bore allowed the buffalo to go 60 yards, then, lay down and die. tHAT'S A 2200 GRAIN BULLET, AT 1300 FPS.

Velocity, IN RIFLES, AND HEAVY BULLETS, CLEARLY HAS A
VERY IMPORTANT PLACE. 416 rigby, with 400 grain bullets at 2400 fps is famous for flattening lions. Likewise, 500 grain, 2150 fps, or more, in 458, works the same.

The odd part is, between 1700 fps, and 2200 fps, the affect seems to be huge. Just read Rich's hunting report, on shooting cape buffalo with the anemic 50 Alaskan, using a 450 grain solid, at 2000 fps. It is like reliving all the bad hunting stories from the 458 win mag, with bad bullets...
USE ENOUGH GUN...

ALL THAT SAID, I'M FAIRLY CONVINCED THAT A .475, OR 500, OR 510 CALIBER, WITH AN EFFECTIVE EXPANDING HOLLOWPOINT, LIKE THE HORNADY XTP, OR THE HAWK THIN SHELL BULLETS, IN HEAVYWEIGHTS, FOR THOSE CALIBERS, HAVE A FAIRLY GOOD CHANCE OF ACHIEVING THE SAID ENDS. As JohnkSA has pointed out, despite shot gun slugs, guys have continued. I believe, supported by observation, that in fact, the huge caliber slugs are more effective on humans the SLOWER THEY GO, PROVIDED THEY STILL EXPAND, or, they must be going 2150-2200 fps, or more. For some reason I can't explain, the inbetween velocities seem to be less effective, on deer, and human size targets.
Ballistics are a strange thing.

Happy Thanksgiving...

S

Daves-got-guns
November 24, 2006, 11:50 AM
if you go on garret cartirdges.com i beleive, their 45 70 will out penetrate a .458 win mag with roughly the same weight bullet which i think is quite interesting. Theres just a certain combo of velocity, diamator, weight and bullet type that works for every cartridge, the trouble is finding them. I believe a moderate paced .45 colt to be superior to a zippy 9mm any day, but the 9mm has just that right amount of zing where i would carry too, but i want heavier slow moving bullets for penetration on anything like car doors or other obsticles i cant think of. Also for home defense with a .44 mag or .45 colt i would only load 1 heavy round in the cylinder, and probably keep it under the hammer so that if i really needed that power it would be later on, and my first rounds being standard pressure, or .44 special loads because muzzle blast is a big thing in your house at night when you just woken up. Out on the street in concealed carry i would carry the hottest loads I could handle reasonably, because i figure in a defensive situation you are notgonna be concerned with how hard your guns gonna kick.

odessastraight
November 24, 2006, 04:20 PM
Well, I reckon I know one thing, for sure. If typing could kill BGs some of you pilgrims would be more deady than smallpox.

Maybe I was stretching it a bit to bring in shooting deer with a .44 Mag, but at least a .44 Mag. in a relatively small revolver, COULD be used for CCW. .500 this or that against nasty critters??? Now trying to relate that to a "smaller" or bigger CCW is just a tad more than a stretch, dontcha think?

.............................................................
...Hope some of you don't dislocate your arms...patting each other on the back so much.
.............................................................

JohnKSa
November 24, 2006, 04:38 PM
If you want to carry a .44Mag and can manage it, that's fine. I'm not trying to change your mind.

I'm just pointing out that the idea that there's any cartridge out there in a CCW friendly package (including the magnum handgun calibers if you wish) that will produce consistent one shot stops is not supported by any facts/testing results/scientific data/real world experience.

Carry what you want--if you have it with you when you need it and you're good with it the odds are that it will be enough. But don't be fooled into thinking that you have "a ccw that can be expected to stop a BG with the one shot." There is no such thing.

Daves-got-guns
November 24, 2006, 07:32 PM
haha i will have to say im no keybord commando, but i do know alot of muzzle blast does not help in your house. I would rather have a easier kicking gun in the house for more chances of not gettin my head shot off.

Makarov The Lucky
November 26, 2006, 12:38 AM
This is ridiculous...your choice of gun for home defense is exactly that, your choice. Im sure no one is going to change their mind from someone else typing to them unless they are givin good reasons.
A well placed shot from a .22 will kill someone, no doubt. Thats what most hitmen used for assasination missions. The fact is that a robber bursting into your house at 2am isnt an assasination mission. Your defending yourself from someone else who could, possibly, be armed and you want something that will put them down n out.

My favorite caliber is .45ACP. A great caliber for home defense in my opinion.
Low velocity, heavy bullet, big bullet. I would say go for a good 1911 or an XD. Although I do believe 40 would be a nice defense gun too.
I would still prefer a .45 for anything else I could imagine. It all depends on your tastes though. I still like to shoot other calibers also.

odessastraight
November 29, 2006, 08:28 PM
I welcome the muzzle blast and the stout push of recoil for I know they are indicators of an effective CCW. If you are forced to shoot a BG you will not notice either. Far better to have a loud KERWAM followed by the dull thud of the BG hitting the deck than several soft pop, pop, pops followed by the BG shouting "Ouch, ouch, ouch...just wait till I get my hands on you and that little popgun of yours".

Do not be misled by the lightweight, low powered crowd who preach the double/ tripple taps for a large volume of fire. They will have you believe that all SD calibers are basicly the same and that multiple shots are more important than one well aimed shot with a heavy round. Not so. The old saying of "Bring enough gun." applies to SD even more than it does to hunting dangerous game.

jeager106
November 29, 2006, 08:48 PM
odessastraight: A quote I thought you might take a moment to ponder.

"A firearm is a tool. Your weapon is between your ears."

I carried a gun professionally for over 20 years.
I never carry a gun anymore.
I am never unarmed.

.44 Magnumitis is an emotional disorder.
I've seen so many shooting victims that I'm sure I've finally begun to forget a few.
I've performed a number of autopsies on homicide victims, and photographed many more.
There is no way anyone can predict how another human will react to bullet wound trauma from any firearm.
Period.

odessastraight
November 30, 2006, 12:34 AM
I have pondered the quote for a moment and I agree with it. I read the rest of your post right down to the "...I never carry a gun anymore..." and wrote the rest off as having nothing more of interest. This is a fourm specifically about guns and the carrying of such.

I have a simple wish and that is for a CCW with a bit more thump than a .45 ACP (especially a compact version ...shorter barrel than a 1911 Commander). Specifically I want my CCW to have a maximum barrel length of 3 inches and launch a 250 grain bullet at 1000 fps ( OK. I'll settle for 900 fps if I must). If that turns out to be ".44 Magnumitis" well, OK. I guess I'll be in good company with Elmer Keith as my mentor.

Each shooting situation will indeed be different, but just try a bit of common sense. Try to forget the various hypes and spins that various authors will put forth to support their choice of CCW/ammunition. Common sense should tell you that you want a CCW that will smash through the center mass of a BG no matter what the angle or clothing the BG may be wearing. Even though each person will react differently to being shot your common sense should convince you that a wide, flat, 250 grain slug blasting completely through center mass will be fairly effective in stopping a fight.

JohnKSa
November 30, 2006, 12:50 AM
"Common sense" tells a lot of people a lot of things. For thousands of years it told people the world was flat and that the earth was the center of the universe, among other things.

But I've heard more than one person with experiences similar to jeager106's make comments very similar to the one he posted.I've seen so many shooting victims that I'm sure I've finally begun to forget a few.
I've performed a number of autopsies on homicide victims, and photographed many more.
There is no way anyone can predict how another human will react to bullet wound trauma from any firearm.
Period.

Socrates
November 30, 2006, 01:10 AM
From Another forum, on one man's observations on firearms:

Nyeti on 45 human shootings
For what its worth, all those specialty loads pretty much suck. They lack the neccesary pentration needed to get to vital organs in realistic shooting situations. Glasers, and the like, make a horrendous mess on the surface, but don't get to what is important in the human body where everything of importance is generally armored with bone.

I have pretty extensive experience with the .45 Colt in anti-personnel shootings because a majority of officers at my agency used it for a duty load for most of my early years in L/E (we still issue it, so I get ammo for free.........don't hate me).

Here is my take on ammunition based on 18 years of first hand investigation of over 75 officer involved shootings and tons of assault and homocide cases. Against people, use a heavy bullet driven at a moderate velocity in a modern hollow-point. I only hunt people, so this is really my area of expertise, and I am keenly aware that soft humans are very different from the four leggers. As a compromise in a general purpose gun, there are some moderate velocity very heavy rounds that can be utilized for both animals and people that are less than ideal for both, but will work. nyeti
When I say heavy, I usually tell folks the heaviest bullet available in that particular caliber in a good, modern hollowpoint. For example in semi auto's (sorry, I know its a bad word), 147 gr. in 9mm, 180 gr. in .40, 230 gr. in .45 ACP. As far as the .45 Colt, we used 220 gr. Silvertips, and at one point we had a similar load from Federal. The STHP's were awesome on humans, and for some weird reason performed better than similar loads in .45 ACP. Moderate velocity in my world is somewhere in the 800-900fps range. There is a big difference in trying to drive a bullet through a human (worst case scenario-through a bunch of bones before getting to the big blood pumping organs or the central nervous system), and driving them through a four legged animal who has much bigger bone structure, and tend to be much bigger with tougher skin. Like I said on heavy.....if they make it, its all good. If there was a 300 plus grain hollowpoint out there in .45 Colt at about 800-900 fps in .45 Colt, I would carry it. The problem with alot of the non-expanding bullets against humans is that they don't expand and tend to blow right through. This is fine if its going through "good stuff", but it tends to keep going. Ideally (and I've seen this a couple of times) is rounds that fully penetrate a bad guy, and we find a fully expended round in the bad guys clothing on the backside......perfect, full expansion, full pentration (a big hole with fluid coming out both ends), and nobody getting hurt on the other end. Hope this all helps. For some reason, you folks tend to have a much better grasp of common sense than some of the other forums where I get lambasted by some 17 year old kid who reads the gun rags and earned all their experience playing with airsoft guns and the all knowing internet.


S

jeager106
November 30, 2006, 09:35 AM
Socrates:

You sure have my attention.
I was a police officer for 22 years and my career ended early due to a broken back (2nd time actually) and doing nine months in rehab learning to walk again.
Over the years I learned that there are only a couple of areas of the human body that can be counted on to stop an aggressive action if one can drive a bullet of appropriate mass and velocity into those areas.
(Note the italics and careful wording)
Distrupt the central nervouse system, i.e. brain, spine.
Cause a sudden catastrophic loss of blood pressure. heart large arteries(don't discount the large leg arteries here).
Note I said sudden and catastrophic.
The support structure. The pelvis and large bone of the leg.
These support areas are large, some deep into the body, and need to be smashed to be effective.
That said, smash the support structure, and you stop the agressive action and actor, long enough to get more creative in ending the confrontation.:)
To accomplish this effectively requires a bullet of sufficient mass and velocity.
A .22 is questionable.
So are many of the itty-bitty guns and calibers.
Personally I like the .357 caliber for many viable reasons.
I also favor the .45 a.c.p. and the much over looked .45 Colt.
I have two Rugers in .45 Colt. Awesome round, great ballistics, revolvers can be made to accomidate this round that are concealable, and very useful defensive, police and CCW weapons.
Too bad there are so few revolvers made in this venerable, still quite effective, caliber!
I have considerable experience, and training, in the nasty world of shooting humans. I could drop an impressive list of names of experts in the field that I have known well, partnered with in the teaching field, but I'm not in the game any more, so what's the point?

Oh, odessa, just because I choose not to carry a flippin' gun anymore does not negate my experiences, or training. I know that I am never, ever, unarmed. I simply don't carry a firearm.
I had to do a paradigm shift in thinking to become an average citizen, start college at age 49, earn two science degrees and find another job.
Not carrying was part of that paradigm shift.

I have enough experience and traning to know what I don't know.
I have not stopped learning. Never will.
No one knows everything. Including the magnumitis boys.:D

Daves-got-guns
November 30, 2006, 07:03 PM
haha, im starting to agree with and idolize jeager, everytime he speaks. I now know i will never know half of what you know, but i do agree a .45 colt or .44 magnum loaded to .44 special levels would be my first choice in a defensive gun inside my house. I wouldnt mind carrying a heavier loaded bullet in the cylinder for what if scenario, but i wouldnt want a cylinder full of eardrum popping loads in my house. On the streets, or in a outside setting i would get alittle more creative, but isnt there only soo much bullets/rifling can take before they start to become inaffective for their givin purpose?

jeager106
November 30, 2006, 08:20 PM
Dave.
Thank you so much for the compliment!:)
Indeed there is a point where too much power makes a load less effective.
No one could argue that a .458 Winchester mangun is more powerful than any handgun could ever hope to be.
Yet most well made handgun loads and bullets are more effective against a soft tissue target. Like a person.
If we carry this line of thought to the hunting field the same physics apply.
A .308 Winchester loaded with quality 150 grain bullets would be far more effective on deer sized game than the mighty .458.
A .357 magnum loaded with Federal or Remington 125 grain hollow points is more effective against our hypothetical soft tissue target than the .44 mangun loaded with 240 grain hollow points.
Oh, oh. The magnumitis crowd will be all over me for that statement.:eek:
Hey. I didn't do the research. There research was done by those with more resources than I ever had to work with.
By the way. The .357 with the above loads has quite a reputation for "one shot stops". Again, I didn't do the research.
Recoil and ear splitting muzzle blast that lights up the night don't mean doodley squat if the bullet and load isn't balanced and up to the task at hand.
But the most important aspect of all to this grizzly discussion is the basic fact that a miss does you no good at all.

Daves-got-guns
December 1, 2006, 02:07 AM
haha np jeager! it is always nice to see somebody who actually knows what their talking about! it's my understanding that the one shot stop rate is awarded to the ole federal premo .357 125 jhp/lhp or something like that. I have jsp's in my .357, even though it may not be the best bullet for the job i do believe it will work if called upon. They are intended deer loads of course, and if i was serious about hd i would get hollowpoints. Alot of people will think a big, hefty bullet with lots of gunpowder will smash mame and kill a person, but i have never shot a person and dont plan on it. I would stick with what people have tried and used successfully before i loaded up a cannon. Honestly dirty harry was just a movie and even in one of his movies he states that he uses .44 specials in that big gun of his.

cloudcroft
December 2, 2006, 01:14 AM
Who cares about that "one-shot stop" BS? You sure can't depend on THAT happening when you NEED it to.

How many shooting incidents are about only one round fired? The very small minority perhaps, and even then, it's mainly because of dumb luck, not marksmanship. Ask the American military.

Most shooting incidents are NOT one-round and for good reason.

Therefore, one-shot stops are nice to dream about but quite irrelevant in reality.

Use whatever caliber you can hit with, and use it "often!"

If you must find the Holy Grail of "one-shot stops," and only have a caliber that is rated 50% for same, hit TWICE (or more) and get your 100 that way. That's reality.

Next you'll be discussing how many angels can dance on the head of a pin...

-- John D.

Daves-got-guns
December 2, 2006, 04:58 AM
hah, im sorry but i would rather have every statistical advantage in a gun fight with a pistol. Sure every or almost every caliber out there will kill a man, even those parlor guns they sell in cabelas that use a percussion cap to shoot a small pellet could put somebodys eye out and bleed to death, but why go with something that has less then a %80 real world statstic? I don't mean to rag on anybody, and i know im not gonna change anybodys opinion, but for cost, effectiveness and comfort you can find a handgun and reliable bullet combination that puts you within the %80 alleged one stop club. Sure they are statistics, and you could easily wind up on either side of them, but why not give yourself alittle edge?

45RackerTracker
December 2, 2006, 11:15 PM
If you shoot someone in their eye with anything, they will not bleed to death, they will drop instantly. A shot to the eye is a direct hit to the central nervous system. Other than that I agree that you need every advantage possible, that is why I carry a .45 ACP. Notwithstanding, this does not negate the efficacy of the 9mm.

David Armstrong
December 3, 2006, 03:04 AM
but why go with something that has less then a %80 real world statstic?
The basic problem with that idea is that nobody can provide a valid study showing what that statistic would be. I'll agree with jeager, if you focus on your tools (guns) instead of your weapons (mindset) you're already way behind the curve. Like him I spent about a quarter of a century kicking in doors, chasing badguys, and becoming intimately involved with shooting incidents. That leads me to say without much hesitation that caliber is probably the LEAST important factor in the outcome of a gunfight.

jeager106
December 3, 2006, 02:32 PM
Dave says:

"if you focus on your tools (guns) instead of your weapons (mindset) you're already way behind the curve."

Yup! That pretty much sums it up.
You are the weapon, the tools are a mix of the all important training, and hardware.
I thought my way out of far more "fertilizer hits the ventilator" situations that I ever shot my way out of.
I was only in three gunfights. As I grow older I get more grateful that I never had to kill anyone. Not as grateful as the fact that I never let anyone kill me however!;)
As an example of mindset ( weapon ) vs. tools (gun).
I worked undercover briefly, buying dope from dopes.
I never, ever, carried a gun. Most undercover cops, if not all, went nuts trying to determine the best itty-bitty firearm that could be crammed in crannies where they would not be obvious yet could be reached instantly to shoot ones way out of the fertilizer/ventilator situation.
That don't work so good, by the way.
I can understand that thinking. An undercover copper seldom has the benefits of backup that can arrive quickly enough to stop a bullet already fired at ones noodle.
If the subject of carrying a "piece" came up, and it did, my story line to the metal midgets that try to make a living selling drugs while snorting all the profits was simple and to the point.
I simply stated that I wasn't about to take a chance of getting caught carrying a gun! The manditory jail time was 3 years, no wiggle room, for having a gun AND dope.
"Only an idiot would be dumb enough to carry a freakin' gun. Only dummies and undercover cops carry guns. Everyone knows that!"
That mindset and statement assured the dealers (who are never alone) that:
1) I was no threat to them 'cause I gave reasons for not having a gun so I was not going to rip them off.
2) I couldn't possibly be a cop 'cause only dummy dealers and cops carry hidden guns.
It worked for me.
Besides. If some maggot druggie did try to produce a gun I would rather take his gun than try to fish a North American Arms mini revolver out of the crack of my a...........well, you get the point.:D
Weapon = mindset.
Tools = hardware.

Daves-got-guns
December 4, 2006, 01:50 AM
yeah that is true, in some ways it would be good to give back to my comunity by being a cop, in some other ways not so good. Undercover ehh? that sounds pretty dang intrigueing, and should be some more good stories for the youngens as you get old, and that's a plus knowing you never had to kill anybody, i think if i did have to shoot at somebody, i would try to aim for the heart lung area, and probably not the head as the head is waay too small of a target for me in a stressfull sitiation. I know we can't have %100 faith in our little pea shooters, but i try to think of a firearm as a extension of our being, weather it be that below the belt area, our hands, or w/e. I am attached to my weapon sure, but if i really think about it and the mechanics, its still a tool, and the real weapon is between ur ears, and the safety is there too! i don't know alot of what you guys know, but i will try to learn as best as i can

David Armstrong
December 4, 2006, 01:56 PM
I never, ever, carried a gun. Most undercover cops, if not all, went nuts trying to determine the best itty-bitty firearm that could be crammed in crannies where they would not be obvious yet could be reached instantly to shoot ones way out of the fertilizer/ventilator situation.
I took the other tack, but with the same idea. I frequently carried a fully engraved Walther PP, ivory grips, gold chasing, etc. "You think some cheesy cop's gonna carry something like this? That's $2000 worth of gun there, friend!" Being blatant with it and using it as sort of a showoff item eliminated any cop-thought about it.

Socrates
December 4, 2006, 03:02 PM
Jeager106 said:
"Dave.
Thank you so much for the compliment!
Indeed there is a point where too much power makes a load less effective.
No one could argue that a .458 Winchester mangun is more powerful than any handgun could ever hope to be.
Yet most well made handgun loads and bullets are more effective against a soft tissue target. Like a person.
If we carry this line of thought to the hunting field the same physics apply.
A .308 Winchester loaded with quality 150 grain bullets would be far more effective on deer sized game than the mighty .458.
A .357 magnum loaded with Federal or Remington 125 grain hollow points is more effective against our hypothetical soft tissue target than the .44 mangun loaded with 240 grain hollow points.
Oh, oh. The magnumitis crowd will be all over me for that statement. "

I don't agree. Tailor the load to the target. Your making the
mistake in logic that so abounds here. The failing of many of the handgun cartridges are THEY can't be tailored to satisfaction for a particular target, or, the industry standard SD ammo is inadequate for it's stated goal, due to inadequate penetration. If you look at 44 magnum defense ammo, they take the 44 and load it to 9mm penetration levels, with light bullets??? WT...?

To take your 458 Winmag illustration. Even though 500 grain solids are 'only' moving 2150 fps, they still work on soft skin game, and, you have to see in person just HOW effective. No 308 comes close to being that effective. My friends all like big, heavy, FAST moving bullets for deer. Big holes, quick deaths, and far less meat damage then the .300 super fasts. However, the great thing about the 458s is you have the ability to get big, and fast, something the .308's can't do.
If you really want to tailor for soft skin game, and, effective SD rounds for the house, take the 458, load it with Hawk, 300 grain, soft lead, bonded hollow points, with thin jackets, and, after you've reamed your 458 up to 450 Ackley, or Lott, run those bullets at 3200 fps, and try that on softskin game. Now, when you get caught by an angry elephant, with that load in your rifle, bend over, place head firmly between legs, and,...However, at least the wonderful thing about the 458, or Lott, or Ackley, is, if I want to tailor
loads to a certain situation, I have solutions for just about every situation. I can't load 240-600 grain bullets in the .308, but, I can in the 458's.

I think that has to be how you look at your handgun cartridges. Pick your situation, and then pick the caliber that matches the situations you put yourself in.
I've never figured out why people say the .357 is far inadequate for big hogs, read 350-600 pounds, preaching 44 magnum minimum, and yet we say it will work on humans that size? About 90-100% of crimes are done while the BG is high, on drugs, or alcohol, so, they really don't feel much, same as the hogs, and our prison system helps out by giving them weights to lift, to make sure when they get out, they are maximum size. I'm REALLY unconvinced of the 'statistics' that say the .357 is adequate, but, I believe with the proper bullets, and combination, it can be loaded to be close, and get the 18" of penetration the FBI now believes is ideal for their service weapons. The 44 magnum has a much bigger case, can be loaded with heavier hollowpoints, that will go end to end, or side to side on a huge bad guy, leave both a big entry and exit wound, and, break bones, in a straight line. The lighter bullets, .380, 9mm, etc. can't do that, unless, they are loaded with solids. The 44 and 357, 45 Super, with heavy enough hollow points, and the 45 Colt, can penetrate, and, have a working, expanding bullet.

I do think the flash, bang, and unburned powder, caused by a police officer discharging a 357 snubbie, at 5 feet or less, is the major source of these 'one shot stops'. Frankly, I'm convinced the face full of hot, burning powder, blinding the BG at point blank range is what causes these 'One...'
combined with the VERY loud noise. BG is now hit a bit, maybe, and, is blinded, and deaf. THAT'S WHAT CAUSES THE ONE SHOT STOPS, NOT THE TINY LITTLE BULLET.
I carry a .357 snubbie, with the hottest 357 rounds I can control, for that reason. Just thought one could make a serious case for carrying blanks, for most of these situations...;)

If I was undercover, and, I was inclined to carry, I would certainly take a caliber that was capable of ending the altercation as fast as possible. At drug dealing ranges, that to me, would mean a caliber that would have to penetrate a skull, at point blank range. I don't think much else is going to stop a meth loaded, 400 pound Hell's Angel, at point blank range. Now, you can figure out a bunch of different solutions to that problem...

By the way, the only rifle caliber I have for home defense is a 375 H&H. I can only find one shooting of a human with it. So, since I don't have enough statistical evidence, I must conclude it's inadequate for the job. :rolleyes:

The one shooting I did find was an AD, at point blank range, hitting a hunter in the arm. While clearly not tailored for the accidental target, it did a rather strange thing for a totally inadequate SD round: It took the man's arm off, resulting in massive blood loss, and shock, and, death on the flight to the hospital. I guess I'd just have to settle for it NOT being a one shot stop, since the guy could still use his other arm.:rolleyes:


S

odessastraight
December 4, 2006, 09:17 PM
I don't want to "sound" like I'm piling on, Mr. Jeager, but I don't really think you are using a sound basis for your points. Sure, trite little "catch" phrases (like the mind being the weapon) may be great sound bites, but please remember that there are others here who are in (were in) the profession of arms. Despite the adversion that I feel toward any kind of pacificism such as that not carrying a weapon (ohhhhhhh sorry,....A tool) would indicate. I still can see the benefit of reading your posts. Still, what it really boils down to is that you're just another gringo, here, spitting out chili pepper seeds.

a previous poster pointed out that you are most misinformed about the awesome affect upon ANY living thing that a .458 solid will have. One of those just wouldn't poke through the center mass of a man, but would create massive tissue damage. I've seen the results of 7.62 FMJ close range wounds. Very nasty. They just don't poke through at rifle velocity.

cloudcroft
December 4, 2006, 09:46 PM
The term "gringo," usually used by Hispanics talking about whites (Anglos), is an insult...just like "******" is to blacks when used by whites.

I suggest we avoid these terms unless we're in DEFCON 3 mode.

-- John D.

odessastraight
December 4, 2006, 10:04 PM
A paraphrase of a piece of that dialog just seemed to fit here Mr. spray & pray, light load & ultra PC guy. Wait a minute.....I'm a gringo here, too, so it's OK. C'mon, let's don't get this thread closed with personal differences. Stick to comments about guns, not social interactions.

.....ohhhhh, and the word in the dialog wasn't really "spitting". I toned it down a tad due to this being a family forum.

JohnKSa
December 4, 2006, 10:25 PM
THAT'S WHAT CAUSES THE ONE SHOT STOPS, NOT THE TINY LITTLE BULLET.The fact is that many people are psychologically predisposed to give up when confronted with the reality that their life could end abruptly. This is a well known phenomenon and one that needs little explanation.About 90-100% of crimes are done while the BG is high, on drugs, or alcohol...Got a cite for that? I've never heard or read anything to support a value anywhere near that high.I've never figured out why people say the .357 is far inadequate for big hogs, read 350-600 pounds, preaching 44 magnum minimum, and yet we say it will work on humans that size?Nor is "350-600 lbs" anywhere near an average weight for criminals. I dare say that's not even the average weight for the NFL.

Gotta say that your posts make a LOT more sense now that I realize you think that 90-100% of crimes are committed by a criminal who's high and that a human attacker will weigh 350-600 lbs.

CobrayCommando
December 4, 2006, 11:59 PM
It's almost hard for me to believe a thread with a first post like this one's has gone on for 5 pages.

Gotta say that your posts make a LOT more sense now that I realize you think that 90-100% of crimes are committed by a criminal who's high and that a human attacker will weigh 350-600 lbs.

I think I would rather prepare for that (person) then for a 100 pound weakling who is sober and understands perfectly what a bullet will do to his body. That is a reasonable worst case scenario, especially if you live on any Pacific island.

Just think of what happened to trooper Coates. Those .357s didn't even penetrate. In spite of that, .357 magnum wadcutters at a nice velocity would be an excellent self defense choice. They can never close, and would do quite a bit of damage as well as penetrating deeply.

Socrates
December 5, 2006, 01:27 AM
I'm about Mike Tyson's height, weight, reach, have boxed from 1977 until 1995, and did martial arts during that period, along with Black belts in Karate, Kenpo, and, did full contact karate as well. The only guys that ever have attacked me on the street were all bigger then I was, might have something to do with it.
Three guys in Oakland attacked me in a bathroom, and, I would guess the smallest at 6'3" and 240. One hit me over the head with a Walther PPKS. When I weighed 160, I was stalked, and attacked by two prison guards on Oahu. One, solid muscle, at about 200 and 6'2" and, the other, massive, samoan bodybuilder type, was 6'4" and around 275-320 pounds.

Most criminals I've been around are like sharks: picking off the easy targets. Also, having worked with the SFDA's office, I got to build my own profile of what kind of criminal might attack me.

So, I survived those encounters. Maybe some others would not have, because, thanks to my training, I did not react in the manner they expected, and, they went on to easier prey.

My favorite was the guy in Hawaii that hit me with a couple
quick hooks on the jaw, expecting me to go down, and I just looked at him, and said,
"Who the h.... are you?"
He said,
"You got good jaw."
I looked back, straight through him, and said,
"I KNOW!"
:D

S

45RackerTracker
December 5, 2006, 12:22 PM
There's a mod here with a dog named Gringo, who insists that the word is not denegrating. I'm glad he's correct in his reasoning.:rolleyes:

Capt Charlie
December 5, 2006, 12:46 PM
C'mon, let's don't get this thread closed with personal differences.
Too late.

This one was about done anyhow, but some of the "gringo" comments hammered the final nail in the coffin.

Closed.