The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Handguns: General Handgun Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old October 2, 2012, 07:08 PM   #126
481
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 18, 2011
Posts: 469
It is very interesting that you have yet to provide a citable source for your claim made on page 4 of this thread in post #94-

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nanuk:
They drank their own cool aid and manipulated data to suit their agenda, Dr Wolberg at San Diego was one of the obvious ones with the paper on the subsonic 147 grain 9mm.
-that Wolberg manipulated data in his paper despite being offered several opportunities to do so. As a result, I believe that anyone reading this thread may now reasonably assume that you have no way to support the claim that you've made against Wolberg.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nanuk:
Believe what you want. Your sig kinda says it all. A book about a test protocol to simulate what a bullet will do based on a mathematical formula in a water to equate to media that is used to simulate human tissue with no regard for any other physiological reason people stop fighting. Because that cannot be quantified in a lab.
Given your recent history (above), it is hard to take this very seriously since the content of your commentary suggests that you haven't read the book.

Neither Schwartz nor MacPherson (in their respective books that present highly researched testing approaches employing water as a medium) claim to be able to quantify the physiological effects of bullet penetration beyond the amount of tissue that would be crushed during a bullet's penetration through gelatin/soft tissue.

What's next?

Are you now going to accuse Schwartz and MacPherson of intellectual dishonesty without any citable sources or having read their books?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nanuk:
The most reliable indicator is actual police shootings, but most departments are somewhat tight lipped about this data unless you have an inside source.
I believe that approach has been tried already by M&S. Of course, we are chasing our tails since their methodology has been thoroughly debunked.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nanuk:
Which is why I go back to high energy rounds being the most reliable fight stoppers.
I guess that if I was operating in an informational vacuum I might be inclined to do the same thing. Fortunately, we have the work of some pretty educated individuals (Roberts, Fackler, DiMaio, etc- in addition to those named above) to rely upon if we wish to avail ourselves of it.

Sure, believe what you want.
__________________
My favorite "gun" book -

QUANTITATIVE AMMUNITION SELECTION

Last edited by 481; October 2, 2012 at 07:14 PM.
481 is offline  
Old October 2, 2012, 07:17 PM   #127
Nanuk
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 2, 2005
Location: Where the deer and the antelope roam.
Posts: 1,690
Quote:
Exactly what are the other physiological reasons people stop fighting? Are you contending that there are physiological reasons beyond disruption of the central nervous system by trauma, or breaking major skeletal support structures, or tissue damage causing sufficient blood loss to incapacitate?
That is not what I am saying at all.

Why do people stop fighting? Some lose the will to fight some lose the ability to fight. To rule out one because you cannot quantify in a laboratory it is just as wrong as cherry picking the results you want.

I am just saying that gelatin testing is oversimplification. It has its place to be sure, but I have yet to see it presented in such a manner as "This is what success looks like". It has been presented as an educated guess.

I am at the end of this debate. I am not a Doctor.

For my career I spent 26 years of as a street cop in some of the most violent areas in the country and I was also an NREMT on the street for 9 of those years. I know what works and what just makes people angry.

When I say that high energy round work, that is my opinion based on personal experience, not something I read somewhere. Marginal rounds are unpredictable performers on the street. The 38 special, 380 ACP, Standard velocity 9mm. When you bump the 9mm up in velocity it works quite well.
__________________
My rifle and pistol are tools, I am the weapon.
Nanuk is offline  
Old October 2, 2012, 07:25 PM   #128
481
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 18, 2011
Posts: 469
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nanuk:
Quote:
Exactly what are the other physiological reasons people stop fighting? Are you contending that there are physiological reasons beyond disruption of the central nervous system by trauma, or breaking major skeletal support structures, or tissue damage causing sufficient blood loss to incapacitate?
That is not what I am saying at all.
Actually, it is...

From page 5, post #124 of this thread:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nanuk:
Believe what you want. Your sig kinda says it all. A book about a test protocol to simulate what a bullet will do based on a mathematical formula in a water to equate to media that is used to simulate human tissue with no regard for any other physiological reason people stop fighting. Because that cannot be quantified in a lab.

The most reliable indicator is actual police shootings, but most departments are somewhat tight lipped about this data unless you have an inside source. Which is why I go back to high energy rounds being the most reliable fight stoppers.
__________________
My favorite "gun" book -

QUANTITATIVE AMMUNITION SELECTION

Last edited by 481; October 2, 2012 at 07:37 PM.
481 is offline  
Old October 2, 2012, 08:43 PM   #129
Frank Ettin
Staff
 
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 6,641
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nanuk
...Why do people stop fighting? Some lose the will to fight some lose the ability to fight. To rule out one because you cannot quantify in a laboratory it is just as wrong as cherry picking the results you want...
We know that many, perhaps even most, aggressors stop when shot because they choose to. They effectively give up. The real question is what will force the person physiologically to stop if he doesn't give up.

The following data from this study offers an interesting perspective on that question:
The assailants not incapacitated are the ones who can still hurt you.

And as Ellifritz says (emphasis added):
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg Ellifritz

...Take a look at two numbers: the percentage of people who did not stop (no matter how many rounds were fired into them) and the one-shot-stop percentage. The lower caliber rounds (.22, .25, .32) had a failure rate that was roughly double that of the higher caliber rounds. The one-shot-stop percentage (where I considered all hits, anywhere on the body) trended generally higher as the round gets more powerful. This tells us a couple of things...

In a certain (fairly high) percentage of shootings, people stop their aggressive actions after being hit with one round regardless of caliber or shot placement. These people are likely NOT physically incapacitated by the bullet. They just don't want to be shot anymore and give up! Call it a psychological stop if you will. Any bullet or caliber combination will likely yield similar results in those cases. And fortunately for us, there are a lot of these "psychological stops" occurring. The problem we have is when we don't get a psychological stop. If our attacker fights through the pain and continues to victimize us, we might want a round that causes the most damage possible. In essence, we are relying on a "physical stop" rather than a "psychological" one. In order to physically force someone to stop their violent actions we need to either hit him in the Central Nervous System (brain or upper spine) or cause enough bleeding that he becomes unconscious. The more powerful rounds look to be better at doing this....
__________________
"It is long been a principle of ours that one is no more armed because he has possession of a firearm than he is a musician because he owns a piano. There is no point in having a gun if you are not capable of using it skillfully." -- Jeff Cooper
Frank Ettin is offline  
Old October 8, 2012, 10:02 AM   #130
SFsc616171
Junior member
 
Join Date: June 9, 2011
Location: "In the swamps of Montana" with the gators
Posts: 84
Take the velocity/energy list of the following:

.45 long colt, nominal bullet weight 250 grain 750/312

.45 A.C.P., nominal bullet weight, 230 grain = 835/365

.38 Special, nominal bullet weight, 158 grain. = 800/199

You will find that the velocity is pretty close for all three.
However, it is the energy that will increase. For the numbers above alone, a lot of folks love and live by the .45ACP. A lot of us, like me, like the .38, because of the package size, and carry ability.
SFsc616171 is offline  
Old October 8, 2012, 10:29 AM   #131
Nanuk
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 2, 2005
Location: Where the deer and the antelope roam.
Posts: 1,690
Frank,

Quote:
The following data from this study offers an interesting perspective on that question
Great study, It coincides with what I have been saying. At least that is how I read it.
__________________
My rifle and pistol are tools, I am the weapon.
Nanuk is offline  
Old October 8, 2012, 10:53 AM   #132
Mello2u
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 21, 2009
Location: Georgia
Posts: 1,424
Quote:
IMTHDUKE

Which is more important in ballistics?
In a defensive rd for a handgun which is more important to consider....muzzle velocity or muzzle energy?
IMTHDUKE Sets before us two different questions.
First there is the question "Which is more important in ballistics?"
Then there is the far different question "In a defensive rd for a handgun which is more important to consider....muzzle velocity or muzzle energy?"

The first presents a large area to consider because the question is so open ended. It needs to be more specific.

The second question is a bit more specific. At least it focuses on defensive rounds for handguns. This indicates to me that we are not discussing those handgun cartridges either too powerful or too weak to be considered "defensive" handgun cartridges. Also we are not to consider rifle or shotgun cartridges.

I think the second question is what IMTHDUKE meant for us to address.
We must keep in mind what the primary task of a "defensive" handgun cartridge is. The task or goal of a defensive" handgun cartridge is to incapacitate an imminent threat of great bodily harm or death as quickly as possible. To be successful, this cartridge must be fired from a handgun which the shooter will have on their person at the moment the threat is recognized which limits its size and weight. Further the defensive shooter must me able to competently respond to the imminent threat within a time frame that saves the shooter from great bodily harm or death which requires shooter awareness and skill.

As has been stated in this thread, what the projectile must do over 95% of the time to stop a threat is to cause bleeding to such an extent that the threat is incapacitated. Most of the time this bleeding is caused by crushed vascular tissue.

So we are not so much discussing external ballistics as we are anatomy and the destruction caused inside of the body by handgun projectiles which encounter various tissues at various velocities.

So in the context of elastic vascular tissue destruction, constrained within the parameters of "defensive" handgun cartridges; which is more important muzzle velocity or muzzle energy? We are still left with a great deal to consider. Muzzle energy is dependent upon muzzle velocity. One can not stand on its own. Each must be related to other factors such as bullet construction, bullet mass, diameter, sectional density, etc.

An interesting though exercise.

One thing to consider is that incapacitation due to bleeding takes time. This time frame is highly variable.
__________________
NRA Life Member - Orange Gunsite Member - NRA Certified Pistol Instructor
"When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society,
they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that justifies it.
" Frederic Bastiat
Mello2u is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:21 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.10153 seconds with 10 queries