9mm vs. .357 magnum-Myth Busted

[mavracer]

Do you really believe that handguns that are adequate of stopping humans would necessarily be adequate for shooing large game, or that it is necessary to use a handgun that is well suited for shooting large game for self defense against humans? If so, why?

Um given an option yes I would absolutely prefer something adequate for large game, preferably a 308 or 12 gauge.

[mavracer]

Do you not believe that living creatures of different species do not reacts differently to bullet wounds (i.e., that the same terminal ballistics performance is repaired for different species? If so, why?

All living creatures will have one of two responses fight or flight (before you say it freeze is a subset of flight).
A: Even within a species the response may be different.
B: If fight is the chosen response, a physiological stop will require damage to the CNS, blood pressure dropped to zero or significant structural damage regardless of species.
C: The more damage, the sooner this can happen, the better.

[mavracer]

Why would you suppose that the FBI load is superior to the .357 Mag for bipedal self-defense?

Not sure what the heck you're trying to get at but external ballistically speaking it's not.
As a package it's a good choice because it's about as much recoil as the average shooter can handle.
For the record it's what I have loaded in the LCR in my pocket right now, because full tilt 357s are too much for me to shoot without readjusting my grip between shots in a 13oz revolver.
However were I to carry one of my full size 357s they'd have 145gr silvertips in them.

[shurshot]

SA1911 stated ;
"UncleEd,
Your facts are nothing more than unsubstantiated opinion. They do not resemble facts in the least.
I have a friend who has put 6 .357 Mag man stopper rounds in the thorax of a very bad guy. The bad guy wasn't fazed. A single 00 buck round from an 870 reduced the bad guy to evidence and property of the coroner." BS!!! Talk about "unsubstantiated opinion"! Same guy who denies that any LEO's in America have to qualify in incremental distances up to 25 yards. You won't last long on here trolling, it won't be tolerated.

[OldMarksman]

Absolutely why because I've seen with my own eyes significant damage from temporary wound cavity (or whatever you feel the need to call it) at handgun velocity.

I refer you to this:

http://www.cap-press.com/books/isbn/...-Third-Edition

Numerous sources are citied that give an assessment contrary to what you have "seen with your own eyes".

Of course, all of the discussion is on the wounding of human targets.

Many of the case studies describe the actual results of wounding as it occurred. These discussions would probably surprise many people.

One interesting observation is that the immediate reaction of some attackers to bullet wounds results from preconceived beliefs--from their having been led, by watching screen fiction, to expect certain effects.

The subject of temporary wound cavity is well covered.

You will have to decide how much effort to put into reading the parts of the book relating to issues involving the liability of police officers and their communities in lawsuits, specifically those that fall under 42 USC 1983; to the unique duties of law enforcement officers, not relevant to civilians, and lawsuits associated with the Fourth Amendment rights of citizens, also not relevant; to the physiological and psychological reasons to stress, both during an encounter and in the recollection of same; recognition and assessment of immediate danger; to how how public perceptions have been distorted by exposure to screen fiction; to what constitutes adequate and appropriate training, and what does not; to the subject of "suicide by cop"; and to other things.

The discussion of wounding effectiveness, of incapacitation, and of immediate human reactions to having been shot is relevant to his thread, even though the context was to frame how those factors and public misconceptions relating thereto can color the issue of how shooting someone--which is the most drastic form of seizure, as defined in the Fourth Amendment--may be seen to be Constitutionally proper, or not.

[SA1911]

I can definitively write from a perspective of experience that a 4" 586 is a heavy weapon. However, its weight adds insufficient ballast necessary to mitigate recoil. A bipedal self-defense handgun's recoil must never jerk its muzzle off a threat. A tactical handgun's recoil will never jerk a good guy's handgun's muzzle off a threat.

The .357 Mag is quintessential diminishing returns. Added velocity above threshold necessary for penetration and prayed for expansion offers no benefit.

Advertised .357 Mag velocities were achieved using handguns with 8.375" barrels, and even with massively long and tactically useless barrels, velocities were exaggerated.

Out of a 4" 586, the best I could manage was ~1250 FPS with 158 grain factory rounds and hand loads. I'd never use a lighter bullet for self-defense. It's all about momentum sufficient to cause necessary penetration.

To achieve anywhere close to advertised .357 Mag velocities, slow burning powder is necessary, and, of course, a very long barrel. When exaggerated velocity rounds are fired from more convenient 4" barreled revolvers, velocities are pedestrian. That's because slow burning powder require excessively long barrels to maximize use of gas created by slow burning powders. Reduce barrel lengths to 2.5", and a .357 Mag is indistinguishable from the FBI load. Slow burning powder is not efficient with short barrels.

A double action revolver has more moving parts than a semi. When a revolver malfunctions, a good guy would be holding a throwing object. In very rare instances in which a semi malfunctions (I cannot recall ever witnessing any good quality semi malfunction, and I'd bet that I've seen more semis on firing lines than most shooters will see in their lifetimes.), they're almost always cleared within a second or two, and a good guy is back in the fight. A semi is simplistic in operation compared to double action revolvers, and it has less moving parts.

Besides unwieldy recoil, muzzle flash of .357 Mag could blind astronauts in orbit, which means it'll destroy a good guy's night vision, which is always bad when a bad guy wants a good guy deep sixed.

The .357 Mag's report is loud...deafening and disorienting loud. Try firing a 4" .357 Mag in an enclosed room. You'll do a Three Stooges Curly routine. Couple night-vision-destroying muzzle flash with the .357's disorienting muzzle blast, and a good guy is severely tactically disadvantaged.

Using a speed loader, a hand shift is required to reload six more rounds in a revolver. Worse, a good guy has to take his eyes off of a threat to reload. This is a potentially fatal flaw of revolvers, that and he's loading only six more rounds. If a good guy is trying to speed loader his revolver in darkness, he had better be praying. If he drops his speed loader, he’ll be holding a throwing weapon. The FACT is a semi is far easier to reload far more rounds, a good guy can keep his eye on a threat while reloading, and a semi is easily reloaded at night.

A revolver is a potentially fatal disadvantage were there more than one bag guy. It's a very wise idea to hold the belief that should a good guy confront a bad guy, he'll have his buddies around, possibly right behind a good guy.

Comparing a .357 Mag double action revolver to a semi is like comparing an ocean liner with a DC-8, the latter putting the former out of business. There's a reason why the HMS Queen Mary has been locked and docked at Long Beach since 1967. Technology put passenger ships out of business. Semis put revolvers outta the cop business.

Not one of these FACTS will dissuade shooters who have bought in to .357 Mag mysticism. The three most difficult words for people to say are, "I was wrong."

I have no emotional adversity to the .357 Mag. I own one. It excels as a trail gun. If an arrow flying ~300 FPS will kill North America's largest game, a 180 grain .357 Mag bullet, cast or Partition, will do a much better job. However, big game doesn't shoot back.

If I were restricted to one handgun, it'd be a .357 Mag. It's an extremely versatile cartridge. Were I in a war zone with enemy soldiers or urban bad guys trying to kill me, I'd want a battle rifle. And that brings us to another contested point. We have to examine causes of the US military transitioning to the 9MM. The 1911-A1 .45 ACP was designed to be an offensive battle handgun. It that role, it hasn't been surpassed, nor will it ever be. For the most part, except for highly specialized operations, technology has obviated battle handguns. Until magazine fed battle rifles were introduced, it took more than a few life-threatening seconds to reload 8 more rounds into a Garand. Modern technology has accorded our soldiers ability to reload 30 more rounds inside a couple seconds. I'd much rather reach for another battle rifle mag than any handgun. In fact, I'd rather carry more mags for my battle rifle than any handgun. Hence, technology, for the most part, has caused battle handguns to become obsolete.

Many shooters have incorrectly imputed illusory efficacy to the 9MM because the US military has adopted it. If they understood parameters the military was working within when change was approved, they'd recognize the fallacy of that assumption. The world's best bullet would never cause 9MM parity with the unequaled .45 ACP.

Self-defense is very personal. A person has to go the route that's right for him. If a revolver is his best option, that's the route he oughta travel. However, serious synapses misfires occur when shooters attempt to foist their very wrong opinions that a 6-shot revolver of any cartridge chambering is superior to a standard capacity (16 rounds) 9MM semi handgun. It is an illogical and unreasonable opinion.

While it might seem that I'd advancing attributes of the 9MM as a cartridge over the .357 Mag as a cartridge, let me assure you that I am not. I own no 9MM handguns. I am not a fan of the 9MM. If I carry a handgun, it's a P239 .40 S&W loaded with 180 grain Fed HST tactical rounds. I'd prefer a full-size 1911-A1 with 9 230 grain rounds, and I wouldn't care if they were ball. But that’s a big and heavy handgun, albeit easy to conceal. I'm looking at this objectively (factually), not emotionally. From experience, those who believe .357 Mag myths do so emotionally as opposed to intellectually.

I wish you all long, healthy lives. I pray that all of you are able to avoid gunfights, for a gunfight means a bad guy wants you deep sixed. My primary rule of gun fighting is avoidance. If I can avoid a gunfight, I won't have to worry whether my last breath is imminent. And I hope that all of you choose handguns that are perfect for you, and that you don't become ensnared in traps of buying handguns that are perfect for those trying to get you to buy their favorite handguns. What's right for one recommending might be all wrong for you.

[ZuluWarrior]

Originally Posted by TXAZ

I'm willing to bet 17 rounds of 9mm can stop more threats than 6 hot .357 rounds.

Ha!

Good point!

[SA1911]

mavracer,

I don't read ballistic tables.

I look for cartridges that have desirable momentum. Momentum caused penetration. Penetration causes human incapacitation.

My advice is to learn how humans are incapacitated. Once you understand the biological science of human incapacitation, cartridge selection is a lot easier.

Best of luck to you

[SA1911]

BTW, shurshot, can you please tell me of a single law enforcement agency that requires its cops to qualify at 25 yards?

Qualifying beyond 15 yards was obsolete by the mid-to-late 80's.

I've had to take tactical firearms courses throughout CA. I've seen and known thousands of CA cops. I ain't been on a 25 yard qual course -nor have I seen one- since the mid-to-late 80's.

My guess is you're operating on paucity of tactical firearms and officer survival knowledge.

Be careful of whom you call a troll, for it might just reveal your true status.

[shurshot]

Last I knew, a portion of the FBI / Fed qual course was out to 25 yards, it may still be. The State LEO course in Maine is out to 25 yards. We shoot in 3, 7, 15, 18 and 25 increments. I believe NH and NY LEO's also shoot out to 25 yards (unless it's changed). Must be a West coast thing, that 15 yard qual course. Come out East and shoot long range and perhaps you will be more objective in future posts. You requested 1, I listed 4 agencys, one I qualify for myself annually, that shoot up to 25 yards. California doesn't set the standard for the rest of the Country, contrary to popular belief.

[CDW4ME]

Temporary cavity effect from a handgun bullet 135 gr. Nosler @ 1,375 fps
Recovered bullet diameter is .58 but pulverized a 1.5 inch area of lung
https://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0702/0702107.pdf
Hot 40 S&W (Underwood) or 10mm can easily deliver that velocity.

[mavracer]

Numerous sources are citied that give an assessment contrary to what you have "seen with your own eyes".

So ultimately you want me to believe something I've seen happen can't happen because you want to believe something else. Whatever if that makes you feel better fine remain in the dark.

Of course, all of the discussion is on the wounding of human targets.

Do you really think there's that much difference between the tissue composition of internal organs or how the cardiovascular system works? I'd suggest you actually take some time to study anatomy it would definitely help if you had real knowledge of how and what organs are damaged and their affects instead of just blindly following the herd.

[shurshot]

SA1911; I realize that you are new here to the forum, given your frequent and animated posts. Be advised, as well as forum rules pertaining to RESPECT, Trolling, etc. we also have a search bar. Here is an OLD thread with various LEO's mentioning their qualification ranges, some at 25 or more yards. I guess many of us LEO's on here must be "obsolete", as we don't reside and train in California. Are you even an LEO? After reading Post #81 on this thread, you are obviously not a Troll, but an experienced and true "opinionated" gunman, so I retract my statement. Apology sent! Try to be nicer though to those with different opinions, in the true spirit of Socratic Dialectic and don't make BS statements like you did unless you clearly indicate an attempt at humor. Your experience is subjective and although welcome, not infinate. Your living room in California is NOT the center of the universe of the gun culture. We all have opinions, from LEO's, Military, Gun Writers, target shooters, old school gun nuts, younger shooters to the Armchair Warriors. That's what makes this forum interesting, as long as we respect each other. Keep your powder dry! https://thefiringline.com/forums/sho...d.php?t=380937

[K_Mac]

SA1911 you insist you are not a troll, and advocate for civil discourse using the Socratic method while telling us how much you know and how uninformed we are. Anyone who questions or disagrees with you is told they don't have the intelligence to understand the complexities of the problem. You decry personal insults while insulting those who challenge you. Arrogance and condescension are not useful in civil discussion and certainly not a component of Socratic method.

I have spent much time and more than a little money to determine a 9 mm pistol is my preferred choice for self-defense. There are many who disagree. Intelligent folks often disagree on important issues. Carry what you believe is best for you. Any service caliber, including .38/.357, will work if placed properly...ability and execution will determine who survives a gunfight.

[SA1911]

shurshot,

I'm hoping that within your last post was the closest you were able to come to apologizing for posting that I'm a troll. Believe me, it pisses me off to no end to be cheap shotted. If I'm wrong, dial me in. Do not cheap shot me. Like President Trump, I will defend my character. Hence, it be a very wise idea that you adhere to this forum's rule of respecting others.

A handgun is close to useless without survival tactics. When I got into my former gig, we shot out to fifty yards. Someone within our agency finally realized the lunacy of shooting at that distance.

Here's the science supporting not shooting beyond 15 yards: gunfights are deadly business. The first rule of gun fighting is the only way to survive one is to not get in one. The second rule of gun fighting is if rule one is unavoidable, don't get shot.

90+% of all gunfights are at 10' and less. Why waste time shooting at 25 yards when only a minute percentage (if any) of gunfights occur at that distance? It's all about threat assessment (situational awareness), requesting a dozen or more units to respond Code-3 (Bad guys have to know that they will not win.), scanning for other threats, identifying nearby barriers, watching hands (Forget the BS about watching a bad guy's eyes. That'll get you reduced to evidence of murder. His hands, not his eyes will kill you.), bringing handgun to battery the nanosecond a cop detects life-threatening danger, and if necessary shoot & keep shooting while running for a barrier. Never, ever make yourself a stationary target, unless, of course, your wife is looking for insurance money. Action is faster than reaction. Were a cop to allow a bad guy to grab his gun, it'll take a cop 1.5 seconds to react and fire.

We were retrained. Emphasis was placed on survival: NOT GETTING SHOT. At all stages of fire, we were taught to scan for barriers and get behind them. Beyond fifteen yards, stats prove that officer survival increases when cops disengage and seek cover. Keep in mind that the longer you're in a gunfight your chances of getting shot will increase.

When cops of my former agency were involved in gunfights, we had a whole lotta cops en route. In fact, the entire area would become swarmed with cops. Hence, disengaging and seeking barriers was the stat proven best for survival.

How long I've been a member here is a weak attempt to discredit my argument. I have no clue how you were taught to investigate. Here' a huge clue for you: it a much better idea to discredit one's argument than attack him. Such a cheap and illogical stunt is known as argumentum ad hominem. I was taught to closely examine a person's argument for credibility and assess the person's veracity. It must be a West Coast thing. Even a prostitute can be raped. A competent cop will listen to her story and search for evidence supporting it.

In what type of law enforcement are you? Do you drive a black & white?

Why don't we start this anew based upon mutual respect?

[OldMarksman]

So ultimately you want me to believe something I've seen happen can't happen...

Not at all. I do not care what you want to believe, but there have been numerous observations that point to different results. At the risk of being repetitive, these included observations of the effete of wounds to humans as they happened.

...because you want to believe something else.

I have no desire to believe anything that is not objectively supported.

Some ten years ago, I both a .35 ACP for defensive carry. I believed, based on years of reading, that it was superior. Then I was bombarded right hereon this board be many ignored persons who beleived the by many inputs to the contrary to be true.

And like Rob Pincus and many others, I collided that the .45 was not the best choice for serious defensive shooting.

Do you really think there's that much difference between the tissue composition of internal organs or how the cardiovascular system works?My point was that the observations and conclusions contained in the work cited were limited to human targets.

But yes, I do believe that what it takes to kill a larger quadruped does differ from what it takes to stop a human target, both in terms of terminal ballistics and in terms of the details of the encounters (rate of fire, number of shots, and so on).

I'd suggest you actually take some time to study anatomy...

I have, of course, studied anatomy.

...it would definitely help if you had real knowledge of how and what organs are damaged and their affects....

I really hope to never gain such "real knowledge" through actual experience involving human targets.

....instead of just blindly following the herd.

I suggest that studying the conclusions of a large number of experts represents a better basis for forming an opinion than might a few anecdotal observations of my own, or of a hunter or two.

[mavracer]

I have no desire to believe anything that is not objectively supported.

So clinging to the idea something can't possibly happen, even with visual evidence of said event happening is objective, alrighty then.

[OldMarksman]

So clinging to the idea something can't possibly happen, even with visual evidence of said event happening is objective, alrighty then.

One more time, no one is saying that something "can't possible happen".

The question is one of whether one should bet one's life on it.

There is a difference between relevant and substantial visual evidence related by quite a number of people, and the post-mortem assessments of a hunter or two who have taken game.

You seem to have a strong desire to argue, but I am not convinced that you have the applicable knowledge or that you have considered much in the way of relevant information from others.

Much the same as I, I must admit, when I chose the .45, but I was able to accept contrary informed opinion without resisting it too strongly.

[ThomasT]

I think I know now why these type of threads get closed. This one made it further than I thought it would.

[UncleEd]

SA1911,

Once again I must state the facts as I did on page 3 of this thread.

Fact: 6 .357s will finish off at least 12 bad guys.

Fact: 17 9mms will barely finish off 3 bad guys.

I didn't think this had to be repeated as the facts
cannot be impugned. It didn't occur to me that any
rational person would challenge these facts.

Again, end of story.

[RIDE-RED 350r]

But wait a second....

If you are a resident of New York as I am, the extra capacity advantage of the 9mm is nearly wiped out as we are not allowed by our kings and queens in Albany to posess magazines for long guns and handguns in excess of 10 rounds! (unfortunately, the bad guys are certain to still have theirs)

All you lucky SOB's and your 17rd mags! LOL!

Just trying to insert a little humor..but it's the truth. I think a couple of other states have similar magazine capacity restrictions as well.

I am following all of this and absolutely agree that 99% of the time the semi-auto is just plain a better overall platform for tactical use like law enforcement needs. Not disputing that and I don't think anyone else does.

But once again, that's not the initial topic/question that was raised here.

IDK, carry what you like, be proficient with it.

[SA1911]

K_Mac,

You've posted:

"SA1911 you insist you are not a troll, and advocate for civil discourse using the Socratic method while telling us how much you know and how uninformed we are. Anyone who questions or disagrees with you is told they don't have the intelligence to understand the complexities of the problem. You decry personal insults while insulting those who challenge you. Arrogance and condescension are not useful in civil discussion and certainly not a component of Socratic method.

I have spent much time and more than a little money to determine a 9 mm pistol is my preferred choice for self-defense. There are many who disagree. Intelligent folks often disagree on important issues. Carry what you believe is best for you. Any service caliber, including .38/.357, will work if placed properly...ability and execution will determine who survives a gunfight."

Post proof of that I've emboldened. My guess is you have tried to go with extremism is vain effort to portray me as something I've never been. I'm guessing that your illegitimate use of extremism is all you have remaining in your bag of tricks.

Your choice of self-defense weapon is up to you. If you're good with a 9MM, I'd never tell you otherwise. However, if you're trying to tell me that a 9MM equals the .45 ACP, I'd tell you to do more research, especially bullet momentum research. There's a reason Big 5 hunters use HUGE and slow bullets. You won't see a Big 5 hunter carrying a .300 Wby Mag.

What you think will work might not work. I can tell you of countless accounts of early law enforcement use of the 9MM in which it failed miserably. Better bullet technology made it better, but it'll never be equal a .45 ACP. Were I to carry a 9MM, I'd use Fed 147 HST Tactical ammo.

Here's more help: never expect a bullet to expand. If it does, take it. But don't bet your life on it.

Maybe this will help; but then again, maybe it won't: there is no such thing as a tactical handgun man stopper. A lot of shooters bought in to Miss Cleo's version of handgun stopping power. They believe or have believed to the point of lunacy that the .357 Mag firing 125 grain bullets is/was the king of man stoppers. The obvious logical fallacy is there can be no king of a nonexistent kingdom. THERE AIN'T NO SUCH THING AS A TACTICAL HANDGUN MAN STOPPER!!!

Here's some more helpful advice: send more money to obtain more handgun and gun fighting perspectives. You seem postured in a very rigid position, and that you've gotten your money's worth of trained killer advice. If you're good, I'm good. After all, it's your loved ones' and your lives on the line, not mine. Were it me and someone knew something that might keep me in taxpayer status, I'd sure as hell listen to him.

Just about any cartridge will work under ideal conditions. Even a .22LR will kill with a precise brain shot. But it's lunacy to believe a bad guy is going to remain stationary while a good guy takes precise aim at a fatal brain shot. Therein lies the conundrum: gunfights ain't ideal. I will definitively write that revolvers are no longer tactical weapons. If you want to insist that they are, have at it. Professionals will know tactical handguns. If revolvers possessed tactical utility, law enforcement agencies would issue them. Revolvers are the passenger ships of tactical handguns. 99.9% of cops would take a Sig P226 over any revolver. That's because they know survival tactics.

Here's more help for you: one cop vs. one bad guy = bad odds for the cop. With 2 or more bad guys intending to do bad things to a cop would make a revolver a serious and probably a fatal detriment.

Reloading while a bad guy is putting rounds on you would tend to place you in a most unfortunate and precarious position, albeit advantageous for your mortician. The longer it takes you to reload, the sooner your body will be transported to your mortician.

Most importantly, there is a whole lot more than handgun cartridge, ability, and execution in determining whether a good guy will survive a gun fight. Those are things you can control. What you can't control will kill you. What the heck are you gonna do were a banger with military experience, who can tactically engage in his sleep, who has performed under extreme stress of actual firefights, who has killed and therefore knows how to kill, who is under the influence of CNS depressants (opiate pain meds for battle wounds pain), who is not afraid to die, and knows he will kill you if he wants to in order to rob you? How would you control him? My advice is to go with rule #1: avoid him and places where you're likely to run in to him.

Here's the best advice I can give you, and I'm gonna give it to you because I'd hate to read your name in an obituary section: years ago when VHS tapes were all the rage, I saw a training VHS tape that was seized during a drug search warrant. The tape depicted Mexican bangers training. Believe me, it's shocking to write the least to have seen bangers training with military tactics and with very sophisticated weapons. We (the AOT class) were told that there were ex-US soldiers in the gang who had trained its members in military tactics and weaponry Based upon what you believe to be true (any service caliber would work), were you to run in to members of this gang and you were armed with the illusory man stopper: a Model 19 loaded with 6 125 grain magnum man stopper rounds, do you think that you'd survive? If you're honest, you'll know the answer.

The only away to assure survival is avoid gunfights. You'll have no clue of talents of a bad guy. To think you'd be able to control his is hubris. Sorry, m'man, but those are the cold, hard facts of gun fighting. That's why avoidance is the way of the wise.

If you're carrying a handgun, it ought to be to get you out of trouble. Anyone carrying a handgun looking to get into trouble is a fool who'll soon leave this world.

[SA1911]

UncleED,

I do have a sense of humor, and I have to apologize for missing the levity within your post.

[shurshot]

"90+% of all gunfights are at 10' and less. Why waste time shooting at 25 yards when only a minute percentage (if any) of gunfights occur at that distance?"(SA1911). Valid point, but couldn't the same be said for carrying a 5 or 6 shot Revolver with no reloads (and no worries), since the vast majority of rounds fired during a gunfight are appx 3.5 or about such? Most of us who carry revolvers carry reloads, lots of them, as we don't want to risk being the minority who end up needing more rounds. Some, who feel the same way, or when on duty ( myself included), carry higher capacity semiauto weapons and additional magazines, just to be safe. One can never have too many bullets. Given that same philosophy (being prepared and not just blindly trusting and basing one's training on statistical averages), wouldn't training out past 3 yards (or ten feet), make more sense, just to minimize the possibility of being in that 10% who end up in very bad situations at longer ranges? Training out to and beyond 25 yards cannot help but make one a more Capable and confident marksman, correct? Perhaps this is why many LEO Agency's, the FBI included, still train out to 25 yards. Just a thought! That being said, I have no problem off duty carrying a .357 Magnum revolver, I'm comfortable with it. In fact, I have a vintage 1970 S&W 2.5" model 19 Combat Magnum on my belt right now in a leather high rise holster. I know, I'm obsolete! But I'm ok with that! Lol

[mavracer]

One more time, no one is saying that something "can't possible happen".

From HWFE the original "only permanent cavity matters" paper by the author you've linked twice in this thread.

"Kinetic energy does not wound, temporary cavity does not wound. The much discussed"shock" of bullet impact is a fable and "knockdown power" is a myth.