FBI Claims Stopping Power A “Myth”
Using the utter lack of training and failure rate of LEO’s is not the most reassuring basis for choosing a pistol caliber. In fact, .22′s hardly have ANY recoil and it is used in the OLYMPICS where shot placement is vital. In a world where stopping power is a myth and shot placement is paramount, the .22 would seem ideal for the FBI’s conclusions.
18 comments:
judging by LEO's "miss rate" and by how many bystanders were shot in NYC last year, I'm wondering if the .17 pellet is the best choice for them?? No stopping power but at least commuters can get to and fro work in one piece..
I recall when the military switched from the 45 to 9mm. The reason was mission survivability ... simply due to the extra rounds the 9mm gun held v the 45. the way cops shoot and their terrible accuracy rates .. 30rd 22 maybe their best option.
Wait, does this mean they are going to buy billions of rounds of .22 now?
There is no difference between damage inflicted with a 9mm and that of larger calibers
Stopping power is a myth
The last two are the questionable conclusions, and at least one of them is probably correct, with respect to ammo like Ranger T(alon) and the even better expanding Federal HST (Hydra-Shock Talon?). I don't think it makes that much difference if a .8" 124gr shredding blade goes all the way through a person or a 1.1" 230gr. The earlier conclusions basically say that FBI can't shoot worth shit and it gets worse when recoil goes up.
With the number of innocent people murdered by cops at all levels greatly exceeding the number of cops murdered by criminals in the age of body armor, I'm all for giving them .22 revolvers and no speedloaders.
Don't y'all remember that back in the 80's the FBI bought several hundred .22 cal. SMG's with a 1200RPM rate of fire, and "several hundred round capacity" drum magazines? The damn things would cut a car in half just on volume of fire alone! I don't know if they ever deployed them.
I have many friends who are bear hunters in Maine, hunting over bait mostly. Most bear shootings happen late in the day along towards dark. Sometimes a bear is only wounded and can move away from the site. The hunter has to pursue it in the failing light. Every single one I know carries a 44 magnum revolver, the Redhawk being quite popular. A wounded bear is a very dangerous enemy and one may only get one chance so you need to make sure. Stopping power is NOT a myth to these guys!
I once watched an EMT show on tv and this guy had gotten shot with 9mm, right in the bridge of his nose. The bullet was still in his head. He was lying on the gurney in the ambulance talking to his family. All I could think of was what would he have looked like if that had been a 44 mag or the good old .45.
NERF rounds?
Caliber is a secondary issue. Most cops are lousy shots. They only shoot when their agency tells them they have to. When I was in the business, I carried a Glock 19 with Winchester 124-grain +P+ rounds. Very effective, IF you practiced shot placement. It goes back to what my firefighter father said in 1972 when I became a Deputy Sheriff: "Don't be a cop, John. Cops are lazy and stupid." For the most part, dad was right.
Hmmmmm....
Hit with a .50 cal or a .22.....
THERE GOES THAT ARGUMENT.
Incidentally, the switch to 9mm was driven by logistics issues. That and the our desire to become cool, like the Europeans.
They're not saying stopping power is a myth, categorically. They're saying the idea of "stopping power" disparity among the common service handgun calibers is largely a myth. With the modern hollow point designs that have come out in the past 15 years the terminal performance among these calibers is very close.
There are persistent legends about such and such caliber being the Hammer of Thor, and it's just not true.
This is actually encouraging, y'all. We are in a Golden Age of ammunition development. The current crop of hollow point designs are state of the art.
Look at this chart, in particular the one shot stop column (2nd from right): http://www.chuckhawks.com/handgun_power_chart.htm
Notice that once you get above .32 or so, the one shot stop percentages are pretty much the same? For instance, the best of 9mm equals the best for .45. That might be what the FBI is talking about. If you do the math and compare the worst % for 9mm (83%) and the worst nonFMJ for .45 (87%), and then compare say, the number of rounds a Glock 21 can hold in its "normal" magazine (13) and a Glock 17 (17) you'd expect that you'd get single round kills for 11 rounds from the Glock21 and 14 from the Glock 17.
I think this makes sense. Once you've got enough energy in the round for penetration (and that's where the .22 fails, I've read of cases of .22 shorts bouncing off foreheads and nylon jackets), the amount of energy imparted into the target body will determine how far from the round serious damage will occur. The energy transferred into the body will fall off at the square of the distance. So double the distance, and the energy at that distance is cut by 75%. With similar ammunition (say, Cor bon) in .45 and 9mm, from similar guns (the two Glocks mentioned above), the difference in muzzle energy is about 25% (the .45 has 25% more). But that 25% energy difference quickly falls off to nothing as the distance from the round increases. So if you're shooting at the heart, a good one-stop shot point, and you need to cause enough of its volume hydrostatic or direct impact damage for immediate incapacitation, what is the difference in the target circle area between a 9mm and a .45? If the heart is 4 inches in diameter, and you can get a one shot stop with a .45 by hitting within 6 inches of dead center, but a 9mm requires 5.5 inches of dead center, the target circle area of the 9mm is 84% the size of the .45's. (Note that I used 6 and 5.5 for illustration purposes only, if you know the actual values then you can run the numbers and get a more accurate percentage). So, assuming everything else is equal, if you're using a Glock 17, you should expect that you'd get 84% of the one-shot kills that you'd get with a Glock 21 per round. So if you're good enough to get all 13 from the G21 into the needed area, you'd still get 14 with the G17.
What really matters is energy into the target, which starts with muzzle energy. It is affected by the aerodynamics of the round, range to the target, and how well the projectile transfers that energy into the target. Aerodynamics and range to target shouldn't have much effect at handgun ranges. The ability of the projectile to transfer energy into the target is something that isn't caliber specific (hydra-shocks probably transfer the same percentage of energy regardless of caliber). So all that should matter is the impact energy available, which will be close to muzzle energy, and whether that energy will be transferred into enough tissue to be immediately fatal. Because the energy imparted drops by the square rule, differences in energy, even large ones, will rapidly drop off as the distance from the round increases.
knockdown power is a hollywood myth. bullet placemement (accuracy) and the size of the hole it makes is paramount.
if you can't hit what you're aiming at, .50 cal doesn't mean shit.
a well placed .25 cal shot will mean life vs death situation for you.
however, if you can adequately place a .45 really close to what you want to hit in a heated situation, then by all means a 1911 is perfect for you. otherwise, carry a 9mm and you can make more holes. hope you can hit what where you're aiming.
The military is stuck with ball ammo, and it's pretty clear that 9mm ball is significantly inferior to .45 ball. Fortunately the rest of us are not so limited and good quality 9mm HP seems to be right up there with .45. It makes sense the military would go away from 9mm while everyone else would go toward it.
I went with 40SW for one major reason;
In a shortage situation, there have been three since, 40SW would be available when 9mm was not. Every time it proved true.
Lets not even talk about what happens when rounds are used in 16" pistol cal carbines which is of course a whole nuther ball game.
Anon @ 0521.
The military switched to the Baretta in order to get bases in Italy, nothing more. Having used both on active duty, the Baretta sucks.
Friend of mine recently told me about the first man he killed. It was a shootout with an escapee from a Federal Prison. The con died 11 months after being shot, from Gangrene from his leg wound. That reminds me of the VC dipping the Punji Sticks in human feces so when a GI stepped on the Punji Stick the gangrene would make the wound a lot worse. How about using hollow point bullets that have been filled with poop and sealed with some lead or some lacquer to seal in the crap that would cause the gangrene?? My preferred carry piece is a .38 hammerless S & W with a couple of extra speed-loaders. Boy Scout Motto: Be Prepared.
Gunny G....thanks for your remarks. That POS Beretta 9mm was nothing but a political decision. It started the ball rolling where the US military stopped buying equipment made by USA companies. Instead we now by from SIG, FN, Berreta and others. It is so bad that today, American troops are issued 1st Aid kits with bandages made in Red China.
Post a Comment