Barrier Busters for civillian CC?

[Archer 9505]

The introduction of Hornady's dual product line of Critical Defense (Designed to have moderate recoil, low flash, good penetration and expansion but not designed to defeat barriers) and Critical Duty (designed to meet the full FBI protocol including barriers) has got me to thinking. Occasionally I read a poster's remarks that says something to the effect of "I don't care about barrier penetration, thats for the cops not me". Not that I agree or disagree with that point of view.

My question: Is there a need or benefit in the civilian PD world for ammunition that can defeat barriers?

One example that comes to mind is a car jacking that becomes a close range gunfight. You can't retreat; your in the car. The attacker is using your own vehicle as cover as you fight for your life at point blank range.

What do you believe, is there a need for Barrier Busters for CCW or not, and whats your logic behind your choice?

[mete]

Barnes all copper bullets do a good job .
But the reality of it is that handguns are not the thing to use against vehicles ! If you have to shoot then shoot at the driver ! Side windows are the easiest to penetrate ,the windshield is much harder to penetrate.
If you have the option ,use slugs or FMJ rifle.
But always remember taking out the driver stops the vehicle ,taking out the vehicle [tires, radiator etc] may take some time !

[ROGER4314]

Regarding rifles and barrier penetration, last month, Midway ran a special on 62 grain FBI overrun bullets (projectiles) that were barrier defeating slugs. I bought a couple of hundred of them but have not loaded them yet.

My experience using .223 FMJ 55 grain bullets on steel plate is fairly extensive. Shooting at 1/4" steel plate at 100 yards, the jacket stays on the forward side of the plate and the core punches a perfect hole completely through the plate. That was mild steel and not alloy or heat treated. After seeing that, I don't see the need for special barrier defeating projectiles. The FMJ seems to do a terrific job of piercing mild steel plate.

I shoot almost all FMJ in pistols and use very few defense bullets for concealed carry. As an outdoor shooter, I shot almost every piece, part, material and product on Earth with FMJ's and know what they will do. Stay with FMJ and there won't be a need for barrier defeating bullets.

Flash

[Newton24b]

4 inch .357 with 158 grain hard cast or fmj, thats the original barrier buster

[JC57]

My question: Is there a need or benefit in the civilian PD world for ammunition that can defeat barriers?

There may be. Your question is very broad when taken literally. I don't want to speak for the entire civilian personal defense world (or did you mean civilian police department world?).

However, for me, as a civilian and no longer in a police department, I don't personally have a need for ammo that is designed to defeat barriers.

I guess I'll never know what kind of ammo I need unless I have to shoot in self defense, so I'm hoping that the answer is that I will never need any kind of ammo, ever, except wadcutters for paper range targets.

I'm sure I could invent some sort of what-if scenario that would make barrier penetration extremely desirable, and other scenarios where I would absolutely not want barrier penetration. So let's wait and see what really happens. Probably neither.

[Lost Sheep]

From the news and anecdotal reports I have heard and the speculations I have engaged in, penetrating barriers is low on the task list of personal defense ammunition.

The "Personal Defense" I am thinking of is solely me and any companions being threatened personally, most likely by less than a half-dozen attackers intent on robbery or physical, personal harm and high on my list of priorities is disengagement. This excludes me going after an aggressor who has decided to back into cover. This excludes any scenario whatsoever where I am "on the hunt" for a fight. This excludes private security work (think Brinks Truck Guard)

In the unlikely event that an aggressor is behind cover and I am behind concealment and pinned down or otherwise unable to escape, I will sorely miss barrier-penetrating ammo. But I balance that against the more likely case where I would be responsible for a penetrating round hurting innocent bystanders after passing through an aggressor. I will prepare for the likely scenario and carry rounds designed to incapacitate quickly and NOT penetrate a flesh and bone target, even if that gives up the ability to penetrate barriers.

Just my considered choice.

Now, if I am carrying a semi-auto with two spare magazines, I would consider rounds designed to penetrate a barrier in the second spare. Just in case the unlikely does happen, a semi allows for quickly changing ammo as tactics dictate. Not as easy with a revolver.

Lost Sheep

[SRH78]

There can be some benefit to barrier penetration but, imo, too much emphasis is often placed on penetration. It doesn't take a whole lot of penetration to reach the vitals on a human. While I do think a certain amount of "insurance" penetration can be a good thing, more than necessary is not only a potential liability but also wasted energy that could have been used to damage the target. Law enforcement is a different matter since their goal is a little different and they are much more likely to find themselves needing to penetrate barriers, particularly vehicles.

[NWPilgrim]

From what I have seen the bonded soft point ammo for FBI protocol tests penetrates about the same whether in bare gelatin, through denim or barriers first. So there is no increased risk when there is not intermediary barrier. It still expands quickly and penetrates the same 12-14" with or without barrier.

In that light I see no benefit other than cost to have non-barrier blind ammo. But personal choice really. Just having a gun is miles ahead of the game, and on the slim chance you need to shoot, practically any ammo in a defense caliber is likely to be good enough. Barrier blind ammo gives you a advantage fir that even slimmer chance you need that without over penetrating otherwise.

[seeker_two]

Now, if I am carrying a semi-auto with two spare magazines, I would consider rounds designed to penetrate a barrier in the second spare. Just in case the unlikely does happen, a semi allows for quickly changing ammo as tactics dictate. Not as easy with a revolver.

Why not? An extra speedloader or speed strip of hardcast SWC or FMJ rounds shouldn't be that much harder to carry and load.

I like the idea of having one reload of deep-penetration rounds available. Odds are I may never need it.....but life has a way of sometimes defying the odds....

[Mobuck]

I've seen .223 HP and soft point easily penetrate 1/4" mild steel plate @ 100 yards. I was quite surprised when the 45 grain HP punched a neat hole at that range as I expected the fragile bullet to disintegrate on the plate.
I did a demo for a relative who's a big city firefighter after his unit was fired on by a barricaded subject during a fire call. After seeing the results, the firefighter was scared spitless at the possibilities. He found that the only really safe place was on the far side of the pumper truck's water tank or engine block/tire rim area.

[Crow Hunter]

Remember "barrier blind" ammo doesn't mean that it will just penetrate barriers. Most bullets will do that to one extent or another.

"Barrier blind" means that the bullet will stay together and not separate into it's component parts and hopefully retain it's effectiveness if it does penetrate a barrier.

Usually the core is bonded to the jacket material or it is a solid copper bullet.

In my opinion it is better to have it and not need it, than need it and not have it.

[tipoc]

A whole lot of commercial ammo will penetrate a whole lot of things. It might be harder to find ammo that doesn't. Sheet rock, auto bodies and glass, solid core doors, etc.

Drop by here and poke around some...
http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/theboxotruth.htm

The more you look the more you will see that is penetrated. Think on it and decide.

tipoc

[RsqVet]

I for one think there is much marketing and hype that goes into modern defensive ammo and I think this is more about hype than utility. As others have pointed out much Ammo will penetrate many, many things, just how well and what it does on the far side is often a bit unpredictable from all the experiments I have seen. Not to mention that something like a bonded jacket is useful for other reasons as well.

Personally I don't consider barrier penetration at all for my ammo, frankly I select a decent round and go with it knowing all handgun rounds are marginal, and what I carry is marginal. I am carrying for a possible armed confrontation I hope never comes, not war in the streets. Others are free to do and feel otherwise but I don't carry multiple spare mags and am not convinced that it's terribly likely I will have to engage in a shoot out as a civilian.

[PH/CIB]

The "Urban Jungle" has even more different types of barriers than the real jungle! Trees, rocks, cars, poles, rock walls, concrete walls, brick walls, block walls, earthen walls, appliances, furniture, residential construction, commercial construction, etc, etc, while I would hope none of us gets into an extended firefight where everyone involved takes cover and shoots it out, I suppose it could happen for a short duration until the cops arrive on the scene.

I have watched the LA Bank Shootout many times and while the chances of being involved in something like that are remote, as the bad guys get more devious it would not be doubtful to me at least, that in the future more of them will be using body armor.

I fall into the camp that penetration trumps expansion, while I would rather have both, if I had to settle on one, I would take penetration every time.

So yes, for me anyway, such ammunition if developed and different and better than what is already out there, would be useful and I would buy it.

[Crow Hunter]

The biggest advantage of "barrier blind" ammo is performance through auto glass. Auto glass can make bullets do really weird things at times and having a bullet designed to stay together and "do it's job" after being shot through it is a benefit, particularly if you are in or around cars a lot. Like police officers or civilians who are concerned about car jacking.

[Edward429451]

Ammo which will penetrate well gives one options. I do not worry about over penetration. That's what my brain is for. If the perp is standing in front of a school, I simply wont take the shot. If the perp is too far away for confidence in shot placement, ditto.

But if I do have to take the shot, I want confidence in my ammo that it will do for me what I want it to. I do not believe in tactically weak ammo, I believe in being sure of ones target and what is beyond. If taking a shot with a known penetrating round would be unsafe, then the same shot would be unsafe with TAP rounds. People over think this too much.

[Borch]

MOst of your common carry calibers and ammo will penetrate your everyday barriers like car doors and windows just fine. The agency I work for has a squad car door that we took to the range and shot it with all manner of caliber and ammo type from common engagement distances, 7 to 10 yards. We shot .45, .40, .38, .357, .380, .223, 9mm, 12 ga, FMJ, JHP, JSP, slugs, buckshot, all in varying velocities. ALL of them penetrated the door sheet metal, braces and interior panels just fine. The only one to have a problem was the .380 in JHP and FMJ, both were defeated by the structural bracing in the door.

It was a good lesson to our officers who were using their squad doors as cover, bad idea.

[JohnKSa]

Is there a need or benefit in the civilian PD world for ammunition that can defeat barriers?

Sure. The simplest one is a carjacking where you would have to shoot out of your car. I almost never have my windows down, so if I were boxed in and approached for a carjacking by an armed attacker, I'd have to fire out through the windows or perhaps through a door.

Another is in your own home where an attacker is behind a wall but with their location known--perhaps you saw them duck behind a corner. It would be nice to fire through the wall and know that your bullet has a good chance of having the desired effect on the other side.

As pointed out, most decent quality ammunition will penetrate barriers (with the possible exception of glass). What you get from the newer premium rounds is that they will penetrate all of the barriers very well without significant fragmentation, they will still expand nearly all the time even after going through a barrier, AND they will, after all that, penetrate to at least 12" in the target.

[TheRaskalKing]

There absolutely is a need for something like this, though any time I hear a conversation about civilians needing barrier penetration I always think about the following: We all know the legal ramifications of having to shoot somebody, and we all know that you never shoot or chase a BG who appears to be retreating or running away. Couldn't this be misconstrued by a lousy lawyer in the same way? "My client was attempting to hide and surrender when he was shot through the door." I'm certainly not a legal expert, but IMO shooting somebody through a door or a wall is absolutely asking for all kinds of trouble. The ambulance chasing types will have your head for something like that.

Now, I'm not saying it could never be necessary or legally justified, kill or be killed situations get crazy really fast. It just seems to me that shooting somebody who is hiding behind cover probably isn't always the best idea. IMO it begins to approach mall ninja/suburban commando mentality that it's my job to punish bad guys and evil doers the world over with my CCW. Just my $0.02.

[481]

My question: Is there a need or benefit in the civilian PD world for ammunition that can defeat barriers?

Yes, there is.

Pick a premium JHP that meets the FBI test protocols and you should be fine.

[Edward429451]

kill or be killed situations get crazy really fast. It just seems to me that shooting somebody who is hiding behind cover probably isn't always the best idea.

Of course it's not a good idea, but you're not in the best circumstance and in a life and death struggle. Do you want to live? Want your family to live? We can assume an intruder in the house here. If chess has taught me anything, it's that being aggressive is what wins. The best defense is a good offense. To turn the tables on an intruder and carry the fight to him (through the wall) is my job at the moment. To give him something else to think about beside me and my family. If he took cover, he's prolly armed and ready to fight. If he wants to live, let him turn and run out of the house (or not break in in the 1st place) instead of taking cover.

If he's inside the house, he's already demonstrated violence to gain entry. It's reasonable to assume he will continue to be violent if allowed to gain control of household members. That he takes cover makes it probable that he is willing to fight. All bets are off at this point until the threat is neutralized.

Your comment about being a super hero or whatever shows you have quite the imagination. I wont touch that one because I don't think like that.

[JohnKSa]

...I'm certainly not a legal expert, but IMO shooting somebody through a door or a wall is absolutely asking for all kinds of trouble.

As with any situation, it depends on the circumstances. If the attacker seeks concealment when he could have clearly taken the option to flee instead that is one set of circumstances that would make shooting through concealment a very wise tactic.

In my house, my fallback defensive position offers an attacker ample opportunity to flee in relative safety. Once he moves any significant distance back away from the corner he will have to round to approach me, he will be able to leave in safety and I will most certainly allow him to do so. If, instead, he chooses to stay close to the corner from which he can make an attempt to rush my position, I will do my best to make that location very unpleasant, even if it means firing through the wall.

In a similar manner, there is nothing questionable about firing through concealment at an attacker who is using that concealment to protect himself while he fires at you.

However, there are certainly other sets of circumstances that would make it unwise to shoot through cover.

It just seems to me that shooting somebody who is hiding behind cover probably isn't always the best idea.

It is quite safe to say that "shooting somebody" "isn't always the best idea".

However, we're not talking about what is "always the best idea" as regards shooting someone behind cover/concealment. We're discussing whether it is EVER a good idea to shoot someone behind cover/concealment. Clearly it is the best idea under certain circumstances and clearly it isn't under other circumstances.

[KyJim]

Couldn't this be misconstrued by a lousy lawyer in the same way? "My client was attempting to hide and surrender when he was shot through the door." I'm certainly not a legal expert, but IMO shooting somebody through a door or a wall is absolutely asking for all kinds of trouble.

+1 to what JohnKSa said about this. If the situation is dangerous enough for me to be shooting at someone, it is, by definition, dire enough for me to shoot through a barrier (knowing what/who the target is). As the old saying goes, "I would rather be tried by 12 than carried by 6."

I also agree with those who point out that a good modern JHP is all you need. No reason to buy special "armor piercing" ammo which is illegal in some states.

[481]

I agree, Jim.

Originally Posted by KyJim:

If the situation is dangerous enough for me to be shooting at someone, it is, by definition, dire enough for me to shoot through a barrier.

Definitely one of the most elegant expressions of the philosophy I've ever seen.

Kudos, Jim.

[tipoc]

On the topic of most rounds penetrating walls and such a shooting took place out my this last Thurs. Two shooters stood outside a home and shot into the house just before 1 am. Two different caliber handguns were used. The rounds penetrated through the exterior wall of the house, through the interior sheetrock, across the room and through another interior wall, where one bullet struck an 11 year old boy sleeping in his bed.

At least one of the rounds that penetrated the exterior and interior walls was a jhp. An officer I know has told me that 9mm and 40 S&W bullets but no statement on the caliber has been released yet.

http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/201...ot-in-oakland/

http://www.sfgate.com/crime/article/...ll-3884759.php

This type of shooting happens around here a few times a year. Last year an 8 year old was hit by a stray round from a shoot out across the street. The 9mm jhp passed through an exterior door and an interior wall before striking a boy at piano practice.

The same year a woman was shot when the bullet passed through an exterior wall of her apartment building, an interior wall and hit her in the head as she lay sleeping.

None of this ammo was anything "fancy" store bought off the shelf stuff.

tipoc