Evan Marshall's One Shot Stop Data

[Socrates]

Wonder how these factors affect the prior quoted statistics?

"on 357 close range
Wanna know why 125 gr. JHP .357 mag works so well on people? Noise and Flash. Several years ago I was talking about this load with some of the foremost experts in ballistic testing (and they don't write articles in gun rags). These are folks who use real labs, and have excellent access to L/E shootings. Their initial findings were that 125 JHP .357 mag is an "above average" performing round in gelatim testing, but nothing like its reputation. They began looking at L/E street shootings with the round and found an interesting set of similar circumstances existed during shootings with dramatic success. The shootings took place at night, at less than 6 FEET, with barrels 4" or less...................anybody want to raise their hand who wants to be in front of that. 125 gr. .357 mag's will throw a 15 yard ball of flame down range. Can you imagine what its like at 6 feet or less. The conclusion was that the blast and noise was a significant factor in making this round very succesful in shooting people at very close range.

I carried a Ruger SP101 for many years as a counter carjacking gun and a back up. My load of choice was the 180 gr. Winchester Black Talons which I understand is normally a Javelina hunting load. Many of the 145-158 gr. JHP's are excellent as well. All of them tend to be blasty out of the snubs.

During many disussions with true experts, the agreement was that typical human beings do not react well to having a grenade going off in their face. At these close ranges, that big blast going off will generally cause most folks to hit the ground out of normal reaction (similar to what we see when deploying flash bang grenades during SWAT operations), then realizing they have been shot as well helps in performance. Keep in mind that phyisically a human can remain in a fight for a minimum of 4-5 seconds (a lifetime in a gunfight) with any of the major arteries totally destroyed (aorta, brachial, femoral, etc..). This is why psychological reaction is important. Animals haven't watched enough TV to know that they are supposed to fall over and die when they get shot. The only way to be assured of a BG going down like a sack of potatoes is with a Central Nervous System shot. CNS shots need good penetration to make that happen, which is why I dislike the "gimmick" ammo so much.

I agree that the "sound and fury" of the full-load .357 may very well enhance its stopping effect on bad guys; the defender, who is already acquainted with the effect, is left unfazed. (The gun itself partially shades the shooter from the worst of it.) As for penetration, I have seen a shooting incident in which the Federal 125-grain JHP from a 4" GP100 went through the sternum, heart, one lung, exited the armpit, producing a plume of blood, avulsed tissue, and fragments of bullet jacket material which landed on the pavement, while the main part of the bullet entered the arm and lodged there. Was it a one-shot stop? Well, there was no rag-doll-drop-on-the-spot-like-a-sack-of-potatoes, but ALL the fight was gone from the perp, who dramatically changed direction from the line of attack, and staggered away for a bit. Good enough for me to still carry that same load in my 4" sixguns and much of the time in my snubbies. With the slightly lower velocity from the snubby, expansion will be less, which usually means deeper penetration."

s

[Rimrod]

He said the companies had competed without much success. Then after the F.B.I. set their criteria they all came up with something new. Yes they did and they are still coming up with something new.

Expansion AND penetration wasn't the only thing the F.B.I. wanted, they had that in any hunting round. What they wanted was a bullet that could penetrate walls, clothing, glass etc. and still expand and penetrate.

Now after all the improvements and high tech computer designed wonder bullets, which one is the best? Which one will out perform all the old useless bullets, up to and including the lead roundballs used in the cap and ball revolvers,that will stop an attacker with one shot? Regardless of shot placement and mental state.

What the police are looking for is a round that will make up for poor shooting. That is what this whole thread is about and it doesn't exist. The more a bullet expands and the deeper it penetrates the more likely it is to damage something vital, but you have to come close first. The F.B.I. is saying the reason the agents died in the Miami shootout are because of the ammunition. What about shot placement? What about the fact that handguns are not all that great in a gunfight? If the incident was to repeat itself today with the newest calibers and ammunition available, would it end up any different? I doubt it.

[dbldblu]

Good post Chrisandclaudia2. It never ceases to amaze me when I see someone practicing head shots at the range and if you talk to them they think that is a viable self defense tactic. I was part of some training once that attempted to create what it would be like in an actual gunfight. They had us sprint absolutely flat out for 50 yards to arrive at the firing line and then draw and fire. I will just say that you won't be as good as you think you are.

[TacticalDefense1911]

The one shot stop percentages need to be used in the proper way. They are just guidelines, not the end all, be all. There are way too many variables. I believe that people have too high of expectations when it comes to the one shot stop percentages. They provide a set of numbers that seem to coincide with what you hear from police departments and what you see in jello testing. The one shot stop percentages also seem to mimic what most people believe: the 9mm, .40, .45, and .357 mag and sig are the best defense calibers out there, given you use the correct load. Evan's newest book is a much better book then the original two books and is worth a read, even if you dont like him.

[Jeepmark2005]

One shot stop - A shot from a suffeciently powerful round to the central nervous system that destroys the brain or severs the spine high in the body.

or

A round fired to the body that causes the individual struck to discontinue his assault.

I prefer a .45 but there is no way to predict how any individual will react to being struck with a bullet.

With whatever caliber, shoot until the threat stops being a threat. DO NOT expect a magic bullet to blow a man out of his shoes.

Even with the entire respritory system destroyed a human can continue to fight for 10 - 15 seconds.

The effect of the round depends more on the individial struck than it does on the round fired.

[Socrates]

I prefer a .45 but there is no way to predict how any individual will react to being struck with a bullet."

That's only because you've never had a .50 Max.
S

[chrisandclauida2]

i call bs with the crap about the foremost experts blah blah blah.
the 125 grn 357 round is the most effective cause of its blast of fire and concussion. bs.

if these were really experts they would know that the huge vast majority of the time in a fight or flight situation things like concussion and blast arent registered especially in daylight shootings. they might also know some rounds are low flash where others are higher flash. some powders burn in the barrel and some dont. you only get the huge fire ball when all the powder isnt expended at ignition and some burns out of the chamber.

this one shot stop crap stinks like dog crap on the drive way in the summer. it isnt in any way scientific at all. these have been coverd but things like wher the shot entered the body the gun brand of the rounds barrel length and on and on aren't even recorded much less worked into the equation.

there are those who pick rounds due to mythical energy dump or other power factors that are on some so called experts imaginary pie chart of fame.

all these show that all modern rounds from 38 sp on up to 45 and 44 are about the same in terms of so called one shot stops or stopping power. they are within the margin of error on some charts.

the only one shot stop is a walnut sized area behind the bridge of the nose. you have to be lucky to hit it. most headshot dont kill instantly. that means they can kill you.

spine shots dont kill that means they can kill you.

pelvis shots dont kill that means they can kill you.

shoot center mass till they stop or they will kill you.

come on people its just this simple. your not a sniper or rambo or dirty hairy. your joe nobody that trains to protect them selves. thee are no rules in someone trying to kill you or a loved one. they wont stop so you can see if your double tap worked.

the only rule is shoot center mas till they stop or they will kill you or a loved one. dont rely on this crap of energy penetration etc. shoot till they stop

[Socrates]

"They began looking at L/E street shootings with the round and found an interesting set of similar circumstances existed during shootings with dramatic success. The shootings took place at night, at less than 6 FEET, with barrels 4" or less...................anybody want to raise their hand who wants to be in front of that. 125 gr. .357 mag's will throw a 15 yard ball of flame down range. Can you imagine what its like at 6 feet or less. The conclusion was that the blast and noise was a significant factor in making this round very succesful in shooting people at very close range."

JUST THOUGHT I'D POST THAT AGAIN, SO YOU MIGHT READ IT...C+C2. IT SAYS,
"The shootings took place at night, at less than 6 FEET, with barrels 4" or less..................."
daylight shooting had nothing to do with this.

Police are pretty famous for having to use what they are told to use, and, if the department has 357's, it's NOT using one of them new fangled, low flash, low recoil, limited avaliability rounds. It's buying big, and big company, like Federal, etc. as a general rule.

That said, I pretty much agree with the rest of your post.

If it was one, super reliable source, I'd maybe want a second. So, when I started carrying a 360PD, I asked the originator of the super HI-vel ammo, you know, the company that sold a couple billion rounds of Hi-vel 357, what he'd use. He said the same thing as my other source, the round with the biggest bang and flash you can shoot accurately, at short range.

"all these show that all modern rounds from 38 sp on up to 45 and 44 are about the same in terms of so called one shot stops or stopping power. they are within the margin of error on some charts."

Well, sort of. I use Corbon's 125s at 1150 in 38 Plus P out of a 2 inch 360 PD. Is that the same as a 357 125 at 1350, or, a 44 special, 240 grain bullet, at 1100 fps? How about a 45 Super, 230 grain bullet at 1100 fps, or a 185 at 1300 fps?

Each caliber has observations where it flat out works.
The 'statistic's by these guys(S and who?) are so under developed, and under represented, that everything seems equal, except what they want to sell. Given a choice, and, I think with REAL documentation, the 45 Super and 44 magnum would FAR exceed the effects of a .357, or 38 PLUS P, given proper loads, bullets, and similar accuracy.

That's not to deny that given certain loadings, like 125 grain 357 bullets, going at LEAST 1350 fps, the results aren't spectacular. Guess when you own an ammo company, that's produced more then a few billion rounds of ammunition, from 38 on up, you MIGHT get a little feedback, and, from that feed back, define what works in each caliber:
"You say you feel ALL handguns are not consistent stoppers on man sized targets"...I SAY if the caliber starts with a 4, and weighs at least 250 grs, moving at least 950 fps. IT WILL be consistent if properly placed...Thats the big secret. I also believe if it starts with a 3 and weighs 110 grs, traveling at least 1350 fps, it can be a consistent stopper also....provided its properly placed...Now before I hear the onslaught of disbelief....remember the little tail about the solids and the SP's I mentioned....Use the right equipment...Guys usually know the general senario they will be facing...The NYC detective 's will probably differ from The Montana Hiway Patrolman, just as the guy going after Grizz with his favorite 44 or 45, or 475 and 500 will differ from the Eastern Whitetail hunter...Now this might not answer all your questions ...BUT...I don't believe there is a pat answer...I personally have tried to choose the equipment for the job...And or offered the Individaul a choice. I took my choice, design, and finished product at tested it in a good portion of the world under a variety of circumstances....My choice today for Grizz or Moose in Alaska, My 375 Howdah or my 475 Linebaugh...All lesser game my Ruger 44 Mag SuperBlackhawk.Jurras 180 gr. JSP.... Personal defense My 70 Series 1911.or 4" 25-5....All-around one gun...Probably 44 Superblackhawk....But who wants just one gun.....If I could only own one, I'd probably have to say my Linebaugh 475, could load in down for squirrel or up for bear.."

That's pretty much my bible. Over nearly 30 years, this guy has shot a half million rounds of 44 magnum, had access to the result from the billions of rounds of different caliber ammunition his company made, and, from that information, come to a few conclusions, that if you don't mind, I take to the bank, and, take over most internet "gurus".

"the only one shot stop is a walnut sized area behind the bridge of the nose. you have to be lucky to hit it. most headshot dont kill instantly. that means they can kill you.
"
Bull. The only head shot I could find on record with a 44 magnum, was a DA that shot a guy with a 44 magnum, and glasser safety slug. Think watermelon with a high powered rifle, and, no head, that's what the guy didn't look like.

The same source you prior discredited has extensive history of police shootings, with 45 Colt. Most with 200 grain, or larger, hollow points. The stopping effect is spectacular, as is the effect of a heavy pistol round hitting a closed liquid. For example, with proper caliber, sufficent velocity, you get results like this:



Certain handguns in this world are capable of that kind of impact, and velocity. Right off the top of my head, S&W 500, MAX 510, .475 L/H, 500 JRH, 460 S&W. Yes, hit a Jack, or a ground hog, and it's red mist.
Same with a head shot.


S

[JR47]

I'm going to suppose that most of the "one-shot stops" are bs people have never read any of the books. The idea was to compare the relative efficiency of bullets fired under similiar circumstances. While barrel-length could be important, I can't see where the make or model of weapon matters to the cartridge.

The author specifically cautions AGAINST trying to use the information provided as something chiseled in stone.

Who here has suddenly started advocating shooting a hostile target once? l

[buzz_knox]

I'm going to suppose that most of the "one-shot stops" are bs people have never read any of the books. The idea was to compare the relative efficiency of bullets fired under similiar circumstances. While barrel-length could be important, I can't see where the make or model of weapon matters to the cartridge.

The author specifically cautions AGAINST trying to use the information provided as something chiseled in stone.

Who here has suddenly started advocating shooting a hostile target once? l

I own all three of the books and have read them a couple times each. I find the criticisms of the books and the methodology used to be quite on point. And please recall that there are two authors involved. Evan Marshall does recommend ammunition based on the results, but cautions against taking it as holy writ. Ed Sanow does treat it as fact, however, and tended to quote from the works as proof of a rounds effectiveness or lack thereof.

As for shooting hostile targets once, that is the entire premise of the works. If multiple rounds are involved, the results are disregarded.

[OBIWAN]

The real damage comes for the people gullible enough to believe in One-Shot-Stops (and other mythical creatures) are much more likely to stop shooting too soon.

They will likely be shocked if/when they see the bad guy take 5-6 rounds and keep fighting.

Which, despite the statistics, happens all too frequently

One only needs to peruse the threads on "stopping power", etc to see how much junk science has warped people's understanding of the mechanism by which bullet wounds cause incapacitation

[JR47]

buzz, I'd suggest that you re-read my post. I was asking at what point anyone here considered the "one-shot stop" in real life?

To be quite honest, the idea of tracking just what rounds in real life met the real world criteria the man set up, was a worthwhile indicator. He NEVER advocated using the top-rated round, then only firing once. The fact that certain rounds appeared to cause a higher rate of "cease the assault" was meant to allow you to make a more or less informed choice. Otherwise, you were left to your own devices to determine what was working in a wider area than your town.

The fact that some people just can't follow recommendations without trying to impress with proclamation is a symptom of society, not of research.

[Socrates]

I think, at best, the statistics indicate caliber comparisions, in similar circumstances, and, if take the statistical view that you must have sufficent shooting numbers to make any comparisions, all of the information is probably useless, staistically, except for the calibers used by the police, in large numbers, such as 38, 357, and, that may just be it.

I don't have the books, but, do they list the sample numberings in each caliber, and the circumstances similar in each shooting?

The matrix you would have to develop to make valid statistical comparisions would be huge, and I don't think they did this work.

S

[JR47]

The first book used results from as few as 6, and as many as 400+ per cartridge. This wasn't caliber, but each specific load. The follow-on books expanded on that.

While I doubt that six is much of a statistical sample, in the calibers it covered, the .44 Magnum, .41 Magnum, etc., that was actually a fair representation of just how large a percentage carry the caliber.

The man set up his protocols, then began his research based not on calibers, but on what shootings met the criteria. This was later divided into calibers, more for ease in reading the results, than for anything specific.

Everyone is correct, it's not the MOST scientific way to study the phenomena, but neither is ballistic gelatin in respect to actual results. There is no guaranteed one-shot stop in a gunfight. NOBODY here said that, not even Marshall. Given that, his results gave a good idea of what worked well, at the time.

[OBIWAN]

The fundamental problem in all their work is that they attatch some mystical significance to the "cessation of hostilities".

If one shot "stops the agression" then the bullet is fantastic

Even though the same bullet in the same location in a more agressive individual could easily have little or no effect.

There is some great information on Shawns site

http://www.firearmstactical.com/streetstoppers.htm

Easily my favorite quote (from the summary) is

"The authors appear to have painted themselves into the corner of the gun culture belonging to the intellectually challenged "true believers."

But those true believers are certainly welcome to accept that M&S are right

And pretty much everyone else is wrong

[Doc TH]

Have to go with Rimrod on this because:
individual events are associated with too many unmeasured variables to allow meaningful summaries of the data - e.g., what clothing was worn, at what angle did the shot penetrate, what vital organs (if any) were struck, how reliable are the accounts, etc., etc.
In answer to the question about Fackler, he was Army an M.D. who started his wound research while on active duty at Letterman.
The NYPD performed and published a summary review of outcomes of gunfights that involved police officers. The caliber or specific cartridge characteristics had no relationship to the termination of a shooting. The only factor that correlated with outcome was shot placement.

[JR47]

Shawn has a habit of making proclamations that denigrate anyone not agreeing with him. That's just his way of looking at things.

I'd be more apt to say that anyone who accepts either view of determining the outcome of a gun-fight based on autopsy OR ballistic gelatin testing to be the "mentally challenged" he speaks of.

To say that M+S, who used COM as a requirement, is somehow non-scientific, and then to use the NYPD shooting results that proclaim placement as all-important is a bit confusing. NYPD testing didn't take into consideration any of the same parameters that are used to condemn M+S. How could one be non-scientific, while the other is valid? Short answer, they can't.

The same conditions exist when converting ordnance gel tests into real-world results. Ordnance gel isn't alive, has no survival instinct, cannot be high on drugs, and doesn't possess even the normal percentage of organ placement disparity that exist in the population.

[OBIWAN]

Exactly Doc

Notice that Dr. Roberts noticed that M&S admit this themselves in Handgun Stopping Power....but forge right on ahead ignoring the fundamental problems with their method

( From Firearms Tactical)

A typical example of the contradictions in this book is the following quotation from page 161, which indicates the authors are fully aware of the meaningless nature of these irrelevant and misleading "street results" and "one-shot stop" statistics:

"To make matters worse, all shooting results are anomalies, or single cases, unique to themselves. The data is strictly anecdotal. As such they blatantly defy direct comparison to one another. Each case is filled with variables almost beyond number. Some of these variables are real. Some are only perceived.

The real fact-based variables include, but are not limited to, the victim’s state of mind, the presence of alcohol or other behavior-modifying chemicals such as PCP, and the physical size and stamina of the victim. Other variables include the barrel length and bullet impact velocity, the generation and condition of ammo used, and the presence of obstacles that the bullet passed through to reach the intended target.

The largest variable in any gunfight is the exact path the bullet takes from entry until exit and the exact tissue the bullet engages. Two bullet paths can be identical from entry to exit. If one happens to nick something like a major artery or chip a bone in the spine, the results can be wildly different, even if the rest of the scenario is identical."

I guess Dr. Fackler was referring to the authors as well with his "true believers" comment.

Or maybe M&S are just in it for the money

Either way, how can they call this "the definitive study"

[OBIWAN]

Rimrod....the FBI blamed the failure on lack of penetration because one bullet stopped just short of the bad guys heart.

Interestingly anough, Sanow claimed (in print) that even if the bullet had continued through the bad guys heart it would likely NOT have been effective

While instant incapacitation is not a given, most people do not survive a bullet through their heart.

And it runs contrary to the inclusion by M&S of hits "anywhere on the torso"

As if a shot through the abdomen is just as effective as one through the heart

And I like the point raised by Dr. Maarten van Maanen that M&S ignored any conflict where more than one shot was required.

Couldn't that data be used to baleance the OSS ratings since every time more than one torso hit was required could easily be called a One Shot Stop Failure for that ammunition

[buzz_knox]

While instant incapacitation is not a given, most people do not survive a bullet through their heart.

A surprisingly large number of people do survive long enough to kill the person who caused the injury. The human body is easy to kill, but incredibly hard to stop. And it's not killing we are interested but stopping.

[Rimrod]

Yes Obiwan, but they also blamed the calibers used. This is what started the greatest caliber experiment to determine what they should adopt next. After their experts tested every caliber available they announced the ideal cartridge wasn't made. Although when they gave the specifics of the round it sounded just like a .41AE. But since their experts didn't read gun magazines, they used the 10mm FBI load which had feeding problems. Then S&W came to the rescue with the .40S&W, which was nothing more than a redesigned .41AE, and they even had one of the developers of the AE round on the payroll to help create it.

So now we have the ultimate handgun caliber, the 40S&W, which is quickly finding it's way into police holsters across the country. Except the F.B.I.s own HRT team that uses the .45ACP.

When the F.B.I. was looking for the ultimate cartridge they wanted the ulitimate for 'ALL' their field agents. The .40 isn't the best cartridge, it's the best cartridge for the average non-shooter, which includes many police officers. From what I understand the agents involved were field agents and capturing well armed and dangerous bank robbers by themselves isn't part of their training. I have heard several versions of the incident, most of which sound like a Keystone Kops episode and I doubt using any other handguns would have made much of a difference.

While the suspect that was shot close too the heart may not have died instantly with a heart shot, they feel he might have died sooner than he did. He was the one that did the most damage to the agents as I recall.

I read one of Elmer Keiths books were he stated if he shot an animal that didn't know he was there the animal was more likely to drop dead. If the animal was alerted to his presence it would try and run even with a serious wound. It sounded much like the difference of a person who is shot by ambush and one who is involved in a life and death struggle when shot. I believe the book was "Sixguns" if anyone cares to look it up. And since the suspects in Miami knew they were in trouble they would have been more excited than say Bonnie and Clyde was when they were ambushed. Not that it would have made any difference in their case.

[shield20]

Yes, Platt did ALL the damge in that shootout. And he was hit by Dove's shot fairly early on as he climbed out the window of his vehicle. It almost definetly would have gone much better if the round had penetrated that extra inch, as he rampaged for around 3 minutes after that deadly hit, including killing Dove and Grogan, and wounding McNeil & Hanlon. He and Matix were also hit by other (hand)gunshots that did limited damage before they were killed by Mireles.

Considering Grogan and Dove(and Risner) were SWAT trained agents, which meant they got to carry SW459 9mm semis, while 'normal' agents had revolvers loaded with .38 and +p (and access to shotguns); the FBI motive to replace all handguns with something more substantial - capacity, caliber, and penetration-wise - was a great idea.

[Rimrod]

It might have gone better if Dove was armed with the standard issue model 13 loaded with a magnum round too. Maybe.

Is there any one variable that would have changed the situation from being a tragedy? People will say that if they had different guns or ammuntion it would have been avoided. What if Dove and Mireles hadn't been there. Or if there shots weren't quite as good? The F.B.I. blamed the equipmet. I don't agree.

But there is more to a firefight than what gun and ammunition you choose. Don't expect one or the other to save your hide. I'm not SWAT trained but I know enough not to attempt such an arrest with handguns. The shotguns were loaded with buckshot but used at a distance that should have called for slugs.

You can read all the books by Marshall, Sanow and every other Tom, Dick and Harry that ever wrote one. You can shoot every bullet out of every gun into a block of Gelatin which will tell you how they compare to each other.

The biggest thing you have to worry about is the other guy(s). They may give up at the first indication you are armed, or they may kill you after you empty your gun into them. You have no control over this.

[Japle]

I find it interesting that Marshall, in his books, gave Fackler full credit for his work, but Fackler goes out of his way to slam Marshall every time he gets the chance.

Couldn't be any jealousy there, could there?

John
Cape Canaveral

[juliet charley]

Nope--more like professional disdain for misguided work pretending to be credible.