Does stopping power work both ways?

[seeker_two]

Why is it that, when we discuss stopping power, the discussion trends toward our SD rounds (whatever the caliber or load) being shrugged off by the bad guy.....but the BG's guns & ammo has no problem striking us down like the Hammer of Thor?.....

....does this seem right to you?.....

[evilleprichaun]

who's saying the bad guy isnt using SD rounds also?

[pax]

I'm not sure I've ever seen a post that says you have to die just because you catch a bullet during a fight.

But for those who don't know:

A wide majority of people hit with handgun ammunition survive, as do significant numbers of those hit with rifle and shotgun fire. If you're alive enough to know you were hit, you are alive enough to choose survival: stop the bad guy so he doesn't hit you again, then stanch your bleeding and walk/limp/crawl/drag yourself to a phone where you can call for help. Stay awake and alert until help arrives.

Don't quit. Don't teach others to quit.

pax

[Brian Pfleuger]

More often than not, both ends of the spectrum are exaggerated in one way or another.

One side makes the argument that the right bullet is like a Star Trek phaser, the wrong bullet, is like a cork gun, the bad guys can't hit the broad-side of a barn from the inside and the good guys are masters of Ninjitsu and James Bond mixed with Neo.

The truth is that most modern defensive bullets perform about the same from any cailber/cartridge, the Bad Guy is likely to be using something similar, no bullet guarantees instant incapacitation without a CNS hit, the Good Guy is likely to miss a lot, and the BG will miss too, except he might not miss, and the GG isn't Neo or James Bond and (s)he's likely to get shot too.

While many bullet wounds are not fatal like a phaser, they do have a way of massively disrupting your plans. A hit in the arm, for instance, isn't going to blow your arm off (whether it's a 45acp or a .25acp) but either of those (or most anything else) does have an EXCELLENT probability of rendering that arms nearly or totally useless.

Expect to get hurt.
Expect to hurt back.
Never give up until the light fades.

[scrubcedar]

Seeker you are 100% right, I've said so over and over again, in this forum. As someone who has actually seen the effects of a GSW on a person (Retired nurse) it takes a lot to incapacitate a determined human.
Sometimes only the catastrophic loss of blood is enough and death is the reason for the incapacitation. We used to look at at each other after we would see really severe trauma's from any source and ask ourselves how they even made it to us alive let alone pulled through.
This was not at all unusual. Here is a useful fact to add to this though, the ones who remained conscious and fought for life seemed to be able to take far more damage and live.
I know that sounds almost too simple. "They were hurt less, that was why they were awake." No, quite often the ones who were unconscious seemed to be hurt less, and we were surprised they didn't make it. Human will is an amazing, wonderful, thing don't underestimate yours.

[Mello2u]

seeker_two

Why is it that, when we discuss stopping power, the discussion trends toward our SD rounds (whatever the caliber or load) being shrugged off by the bad guy.....but the BG's guns & ammo has no problem striking us down like the Hammer of Thor?.....

....does this seem right to you?.....

In my reading of the posts here I do not see what you are claiming.

If in fact this does occur though, it may be because the bad guy is the assailant with the a premeditated attitude and a goal of killing his victim. Where on the other hand the victim is reacting in surprise, fear and whatever to the attack, if they are aware at all.

This brings to mind what Jeff Copper taught with his color codes. He taught that it was nearly impossible for someone to make the change of attitude of white to yellow in sufficient time to react with the necessary force to save their life. He considered it to take too much time for someone in condition white to assess the situation, accept the threat, and then move into the attitude (yellow or orange or red) to be able to offer violence in return for the attack that precipitated it all.

I agree with:

Brian Pfleuger

Expect to get hurt.
Expect to hurt back.
Never give up until the light fades.

I might add:
Do not expect the fight to end with the showing of your firearm.
Do not expect the fight to end if you deliver two shots center of mass.

[Koda94]

Originally Posted by seeker_two

Why is it that, when we discuss stopping power, the discussion trends toward our SD rounds (whatever the caliber or load) being shrugged off by the bad guy.....but the BG's guns & ammo has no problem striking us down like the Hammer of Thor?.....

interesting perspective but not correct, just as many victims survive shootings as do criminals.

Regarding perspective, there is a difference between shooting to kill and shooting in self defense. There is no such thing as "stopping power" in this context, there is only the difference in the way the weapon is used, training.

[DaleA]

Why is it that, when we discuss stopping power, the discussion trends toward our SD rounds (whatever the caliber or load) being shrugged off by the bad guy.....but the BG's guns & ammo has no problem striking us down like the Hammer of Thor?.....

I think we DO take this view point a lot.

It might be human nature. A variation of 'the grass is always greener.'

In a similar vein, others at different times have brought up the point that the anti-gun folk believe a thug can pick up any kind of gun and instantly be proficient and leathal with it while it would take a law abiding citizen YEARS of intensive military/LEO training to be able to use the same gun to shoot back.

[orionengnr]

But, since we spend a bit of time pondering, reading and posting on these cases, perhaps we are taking a pragmatic view...or perhaps a "worst case" view.

We know what a well-placed handgun round can do, and while we hope that will be the effect on the BG, we have no way of knowing what ammo he is using, and (perhaps) we may expect the worst if we are hit.

At the very least, most of us have never been shot (and hope to keep it that way) and being shot is an unknown factor (to us).

I have read more than once that inner-city gang-bangers view being shot as a badge of honor. After being shot once or more (probably fairly ill-placed shots by their fellow losers) their air of invincibility is reinforced (remember these are young males who already possess that mindset to begin with)...

If I am ever in such an encounter, I hope that my adversary is over-confident, under-skilled and chooses his equipment (both handgun and ammo) poorly.

The only variables I can control are the ones that apply to me. I'm too small to fight, and too old and busted-up to run.

My common sense, choices in equipment, my diligence in practice, my commitment to attaining and maintaining a certain skill level...and most importantly, my avoidance of putting myself in places/situations that may turn ugly...

I am no longer a young pup, and I give thanks for the fact that I have lived this long. I would like to continue doing so a bit longer. Making it through the second 50 years should be easier in some regards and tougher in others.

Again...focus on the factors you can control.

Best, Rich

[Aguila Blanca]

Originally Posted by seeker two

Why is it that, when we discuss stopping power, the discussion trends toward our SD rounds (whatever the caliber or load) being shrugged off by the bad guy.....but the BG's guns & ammo has no problem striking us down like the Hammer of Thor?.....

Possible reasons are that (a) A lot of the bad guys you're likely to encounter today may be high on one or more chemical substances, which can make them both stronger and more immune to pain; and (b) it is not outside the realm of possibility for bad guys to be wearing body armor, whereas if I'm dashing down to the Quik-Mart for a quart of milk it's very UNlikely that I'll be wearing personal body armor.

[JohnKSa]

Since people like numbers, the general rule of thumb I've seen is that 80% of people shot with a handgun survive and 80% of people shot with a long gun do not survive.

Yes, it works both ways, HOWEVER, there's one thing to consider. From what I've seen, the experts suggest that most criminals are not particularly selective in their ammunition choices. So an informed defender using premium SD ammo may actually have an advantage (though probably not a large one) over an attacker/criminal.

From what I can tell, expanding ammo isn't really any more lethal--the biggest advantage, in my opinion, is that it's more "noticeable". What I mean by that is that non-expanding ammunition may penetrate through and through without causing any immediate pain or sensation, but that is less likely with good quality expanding ammunition. I think it's a significant advantage for the defender if the attacker realizes immediately that he's been shot. He might not be any more likely to expire as a result of being shot, but it could be a major factor in changing his priorities from trying to injure the defender to seeking medical help--and, as a matter of course, ceasing hostilities.

[btmj]

There was just today an article in the Wall Street Journal... A trauma center in Baltimore (I think) has a 4% mortality rate for Gun Shot Wounds (GSW), and that includes patients brought in who are DOA. Bottom line, a person with a gunshot wound who enters a trauma center with a pulse has a very good chance of surviving.

That is the good news. The bad news is that the point of the article is that there has been a decline in the homicide rate over the last umpteen years... but it is possible or even likely that the reason for the decline is due to improvements in hospital treatments for GSW and stabbings. It is possible that people are shooting and stabbing each other as much as they ever did, perhaps more so... but since hospitals have gotten so much better at keeping people alive, it leads to a lower homicide rate.... if the victim does not die, it is not a homicide.

[Ferretboy]

Maybe its due to the "expect, and prepare, for the worst, hope for the best" mentality that most Self Defense minded people have?

[Scorch]

My theory is that whatever you have, the BG might have as well. So my philosophy is shoot first, shoot well, and shoot to kill. And be the last one standing. Purple puckers don't look cool on the beach.

[hogdogs]

I think the reason many do not worry with what type of bullet is in the chamber of the BG's gun is because the BG is a predator and if we need to defend our self, we want to immediately stop the threat to our life...

We do not need "stopped" as we are not the "threat" so if he is going to shoot me with a BB gun or .454 Casull I don't care to differentiate 'tween the 2...

Brent

[BlueTrain]

While what you say is true, it is also true that once you begin to take action to defend yourself, you then become a threat to the bad guy and he will then be defending himself as well and chances are, he will have more experience doing that than you do.

[hogdogs]

chances are, he will have more experience doing that than you do.

That is just the assumption I am hoping a BG makes...

Yes I do become a threat to them but in the mindset of many if not most violent predator criminals... They are often not at all prepared for confrontation as their "experience" as a predator usually has their intimidation doing all the work and their victims feel compliance is the best, safest, easiest way out of the jam they find themselves in...

Brent

[ltc444]

The simple answer about stopping power is the laws of physics and the engineering works both ways.

[Frank Ettin]

Originally Posted by ltc444

The simple answer about stopping power is the laws of physics and the engineering works both ways.

And physiology.

The wild card will always be psychology. Often a bad guy with a survivable wound or even minor wound will give up or take off. That seems to be how the bad guy gets "stopped" by being shot in most self defense encounters. It's the times someone is sufficiently determined to fight on, no matter what and as long as at all able to, that presents the real challenge.

If the bad guy is determined, he will sometimes be able to continue to effectively fight even when mortally wounded -- as was the bad guy Michael Platt in the 1986 Miami FBI "shoot-out."

On the "good guy" side we have the example of LAPD Officer Stacy Lim who was shot in the chest with a .357 Magnum and still ran down her attacker, returned fire, killed him, survived, and ultimately was able to return to duty. She was off duty and heading home after a softball game and a brief stop at the station to check her work assignment. According to the article I linked to:

... The bullet ravaged her upper body when it nicked the lower portion of her heart, damaged her liver, destroyed her spleen, and exited through the center of her back, still with enough energy to penetrate her vehicle door, where it was later found....

[ltc444]

Frank were are your three valid sources.

[Frank Ettin]

Originally Posted by ltc444

Frank were are your three valid sources.

[1] One source on the issue of psychological stops can be found in this study by Greg Ellifritz.

As Ellifritz note in his discussion of his "failure to incapacitate" data (emphasis added):

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....

Also, see the FBI paper entitled "Handgun Wounding Factors and Effectiveness", by Urey W. Patrick. Agent Patrick, for example, notes on page 8:

...Psychological factors are probably the most important relative to achieving rapid incapacitation from a gunshot wound to the torso. Awareness of the injury..., fear of injury, fear of death, blood or pain; intimidation by the weapon or the act of being shot; or the simple desire to quit can all lead to rapid incapacitation even from minor wounds. However, psychological factors are also the primary cause of incapacitation failures.

The individual may be unaware of the wound and thus have no stimuli to force a reaction. Strong will, survival instinct, or sheer emotion such as rage or hate can keep a grievously wounded individual fighting....

And for some more insight into wound physiology and "stopping power":

• Dr. V. J. M. DiMaio (DiMaio, V. J. M., M. D., Gunshot Wounds, Elsevier Science Publishing Company, 1987, pg. 42, as quoted in In Defense of Self and Others..., Patrick, Urey W. and Hall, John C., Carolina Academic Press, 2010, pg. 83):

• And further in In Defense of Self and Others... (pp. 83-84, emphasis in original):

• And further in In Defense of Self and Others... (pp. 95-96, emphasis in original):

• Urey Patrick was in the FBI for some 24 years, 12 of which were in the firearms training unit where he rose to the position of Assistant Unit Chief. John Hall is an attorney who spent 32 years in the FBI, including serving as a firearms instructor and a SWAT team member.

[2] The circumstances of the 1986 Miami FBI shoot-out are fairly well known, but there's a good discussion in a Wikipedia article. An abstract of Dr. W. French Anderson's forensic analysis can be found here. And this (Part 1 and Part II) FBI training video on the subject is interesting.

From the Wikipedia article:

....As Platt climbed out of the passenger side car window, one of Dove's 9 mm rounds hit his right upper arm and went on to penetrate his chest, stopping an inch away from his heart. The autopsy found Platt’s right lung was collapsed and his chest cavity contained 1.3 liters of blood, suggesting damage to the main blood vessels of the right lung. Of his many gunshot wounds, this first was the primary injury responsible for Platt’s eventual death....

From the Anderson article:

...As Platt crawled through the passenger side window, one of Dove’s 9mm bullets hit his right upper arm, just above the inside crook of the elbow. ....The bullet exited the inner side of his upper arm near the armpit, penetrated his chest between the fifth and sixth ribs, and passed almost completely through the right lung before stopping. The bullet came to a rest about an inch short of penetrating the wall of the heart.
...


At autopsy, Platt’s right lung was completely collapsed and his chest cavity contained 1300 ml of blood, suggesting damage to the main blood vessels of the right lung. Dr. Anderson believes that Platt’s first wound (right upper arm/chest wound B) was unsurvivable, and was the primary injury responsible for Platt’s death....

[3] In my prior post I linked to the source of the information on Stacy Lim.

[Frank Ettin]

Originally Posted by Scorch

...So my philosophy... shoot to kill...

Bad idea. We shoot to stop, not to kill. Shooting to stop could result in the death of the assailant, and we must accept that. But our goal is not to kill; it is to stop.

If one shoots an attacker, and he stops but is still breathing, finishing him off becomes murder.

[hogdogs]

And to add... If you do not lawyer up and you opt to speak to investigating LEA... "I shot to kill the scumbag" could be used against you in court far better and easier than "I drew my weapon and made the conscious decision that I had to stop this threat against myself and family so I fired..."

Brent

[sfmedic]

I am new to this forum but my guess is that the concept of "Stopping Power" has been discussed ad nausea um on this forum.

I think one of the points that Frank Etten cites in his response that the "shock" effect is minimal should clearly be attributed to handgun rounds only.

The "cavitation effect" from high V bullet rounds from a rifle is devastating. when we go through surgical training we mange High V gunshot wounds surgicly by doing dead tissue debridmonts - the amount of "Jello" and devitalized tissue in the GSW track is pretty self explanatory to anyone into terminal ballistics.

As mentioned by the poster of a previous response (physics work both ways) YOU CANT BEAT PHYSICS

The energy imparted by the bullet has to abide by the law of energy E=MC2 in the world of ballistic energy mass isnt the big dog on the block its Speed because the speed is squared

anything going supersonic will screw you up.

the other physics that hollywood producers cant grasp is that no one is thrown backwards by a small arms shot - for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. If the BG is thrown backwards then the shooter must aslo be thrown backwards if he hangs on to his weapon.

and I think that all bullets are not equal. The way the round acts once it comes in contact with the body has a lot to say about how the BG's day will go.

I don't remember the name of the study but it was done in Switzerland and they shot something like 200 goats to test lethality.

Because of that study I carry either MAGSAFES or GLAZERs and will not carry stuff like combat talons because of that studies data.

Question - before I posted I was trying to find the DOJ study on GSW to the head that showed a ridiculously low "put down" rate from handguns. Anyone have that?

we stopped doing the "mozambique / el presidente drills to the head after that study and started third tapping the pelvic girdle after that one

[Frank Ettin]

Originally Posted by sfmedic

...I think one of the points that Frank Etten cites in his response that the "shock" effect is minimal should clearly be attributed to handgun rounds only...

[1] Please spell my name correctly.

[2] And yes, our focus is handgun rounds. The focus of our discussions is self defense by private citizens, including the carrying of firearms by private citizens for self defense. That most commonly involves handguns.

[3] All the material I cited and quoted very clearly relates to handgun rounds.

Originally Posted by sfmedic

...The energy imparted by the bullet has to abide by the law of energy E=MC2 in the world of ballistic energy mass isnt the big dog on the block its Speed because the speed is squared...

[1] And that equation has absolutely nothing to do with the subject we are discussing, nor does it describe ballistic energy.

[2] That equation is useful do describe the energy produced in nuclear reactions when a small amount of matter is lost and is converted to energy.

[3] The factor "c" is not speed. It is rather the speed of light (roughly 186,000 miles/second). The speed of light is a common constant in many equations of physics, and the letter "c" is commonly used in physics equations to refer to the speed of light.

Originally Posted by sfmedic

...Because of that study I carry either MAGSAFES or GLAZERs and will not carry stuff like combat talons because of that studies data....

It is however my understanding that these bullets have very poor reputations for penetration. While they can make ghastly appearing superficial wounds, they sometimes do not adequately penetrate to major blood vessels or blood rich organs.