About Chuck Hawks ,Stopping Power and the .45 ACP - Page 2

**JohnKSa** · February 3, 2005, 11:41 PM

mathman,

I ended up by saying it doesn't make any difference, so it should be clear that there's no need to take offense. Maybe you didn't, it's hard to tell sometimes on these forums--just making sure.

If you can shoot a .45 well, you can shoot a 9mm faster and probably better--even if the recoil doesn't bother you, less recoil will still make you faster. That's why they handicap 9mm shooters in some competitions (especially ones started by .45ACP afficionados.

) In spite of the handicap imposed, you still find some people shooting 9mms in these competitions for just the reasons I mentioned--increased capacity and decreased recoil. That speaks volumes.

As far as penetration, I was talking about body armor and obstacle penetration--as you pointed out, pretty much all premium ammo is designed to penetrate to about the same depth in human tissue regardless of caliber.

To be completely accurate, most shootings aren't shootings at all. In the vast majority of gun self defense uses, the gun isn't even fired! Not only is capacity irrelevant in those cases, but so is every other functional parameter of the firearm that you can list. Still, you have to prepare for the worst case, not the average case or even the most likely case.

BTW, love your signature. That is easily the most profound equation in mathematics--except that we engineers use 'j' instead of 'i'.

David Armstrong · February 4, 2005, 12:56 AM

Quote:

but to say that the stopping power of the .45 ACP is more myth and legend than reality is just plain BS...

The only problem with that is that the stopping power of the .45 IS more myth and legend than reality. The world is full of examples where the .45 failed, just as it is full of examples of failure of the 9mm, the .38, the .40, the .357, and so on. When you get away from the world of anecdote and legend, and look at it objectively, there isn't that much difference between any of the common combat calibers.

mathman · February 4, 2005, 10:32 AM

ok, ok, ok,...I concur...

caegal · February 13, 2005, 12:10 PM

>When you get away from the world of anecdote and legend, and look at it objectively, there isn't that much difference between any of the common combat calibers.

Absolutely! Even real worlds data is extremely flawed in the area of shootings. When someone says that they have been a cop,drug dealer, hit man, or soldier and has actually shot people, that is still irrelevant to proving the effectiveness of a handgun caliber. (unless of course the person is actually deliberately shooting people and doing the autopsy on there own afterwards)

Data samples are impossible to take because of the amazing differences in circumstances in which people are shot. All current ways of judging the effectiveness of a handgun are flawed. The most we have is tests to make sure they penetrate deep enough, and strive towards the largest of holes possible.
Obviously a .45 cal makes a larger hole than a 9mm, obviously two 9mm make a larger hole than a .45 cal, and obviously if either of those holes are in the heart, spine, brain, etc the person is very dead.

hdm25 · February 17, 2005, 06:48 PM

It's odd, I suppose, but everyone with whom I am personally acquainted who HAVE shot people with multiple handgun calibers (and they ARE few and far between) has no real caliber preference. Actually, because of their platform preference, they end up carrying 9x19mm in a Glock, P7, or BHP. Come to think of it, they shy away from the .45 because of capacity issues. They'd rather have MORE rounds than BIGGER ones.

February 4, 2005, 10:32 AM	#28
mathman Senior Member Join Date: January 15, 2005 Location: SoCal Posts: 1,531	ok, ok, ok,...I concur... __________________ Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear to be bright until you hear them speak.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

February 3, 2005, 11:41 PM	#26
JohnKSa Staff Join Date: February 12, 2001 Location: DFW Area Posts: 24,971	mathman, I ended up by saying it doesn't make any difference, so it should be clear that there's no need to take offense. Maybe you didn't, it's hard to tell sometimes on these forums--just making sure. If you can shoot a .45 well, you can shoot a 9mm faster and probably better--even if the recoil doesn't bother you, less recoil will still make you faster. That's why they handicap 9mm shooters in some competitions (especially ones started by .45ACP afficionados. ) In spite of the handicap imposed, you still find some people shooting 9mms in these competitions for just the reasons I mentioned--increased capacity and decreased recoil. That speaks volumes. As far as penetration, I was talking about body armor and obstacle penetration--as you pointed out, pretty much all premium ammo is designed to penetrate to about the same depth in human tissue regardless of caliber. To be completely accurate, most shootings aren't shootings at all. In the vast majority of gun self defense uses, the gun isn't even fired! Not only is capacity irrelevant in those cases, but so is every other functional parameter of the firearm that you can list. Still, you have to prepare for the worst case, not the average case or even the most likely case. BTW, love your signature. That is easily the most profound equation in mathematics--except that we engineers use 'j' instead of 'i'.

February 13, 2005, 12:10 PM	#29
caegal Senior Member Join Date: January 2, 2005 Posts: 114	>When you get away from the world of anecdote and legend, and look at it objectively, there isn't that much difference between any of the common combat calibers. Absolutely! Even real worlds data is extremely flawed in the area of shootings. When someone says that they have been a cop,drug dealer, hit man, or soldier and has actually shot people, that is still irrelevant to proving the effectiveness of a handgun caliber. (unless of course the person is actually deliberately shooting people and doing the autopsy on there own afterwards) Data samples are impossible to take because of the amazing differences in circumstances in which people are shot. All current ways of judging the effectiveness of a handgun are flawed. The most we have is tests to make sure they penetrate deep enough, and strive towards the largest of holes possible. Obviously a .45 cal makes a larger hole than a 9mm, obviously two 9mm make a larger hole than a .45 cal, and obviously if either of those holes are in the heart, spine, brain, etc the person is very dead.

February 17, 2005, 06:48 PM	#30
hdm25 Senior Member Join Date: January 7, 2000 Location: Paragould, AR Posts: 263	It's odd, I suppose, but everyone with whom I am personally acquainted who HAVE shot people with multiple handgun calibers (and they ARE few and far between) has no real caliber preference. Actually, because of their platform preference, they end up carrying 9x19mm in a Glock, P7, or BHP. Come to think of it, they shy away from the .45 because of capacity issues. They'd rather have MORE rounds than BIGGER ones.