User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 11/3/2014 10:43:29 PM EDT
[#1]
As a former homicide detective who has attended numerous autopsys...I can say that handgun bullets do expand. One of my first homicides/autopsys I remember vividly looking at the pre-autopsy X-ray and seeing a perfectly expanded Hydra Shok in the victim. I told the Doc "oh, it's a Hydra Shok" and he thought I was nuts. From the angle it had the post exposed just like in the picture on the box. He recovered a perfectly expanded HS. ( 40 SW ).
What I have observed is the following; Most people, about 90%, shot, especially by handguns survive. Most perps do not use premium ammo such as HST, Gold Dots etc. Most common ammo is FMJ Most shootings I have investigated were small caliber (22, 32 380, 38 etc) It is rare for the bullet to expand perfectly and evenly like in jel testing etc. Most ER Doc's, cops etc are not gun people and likely would not know what a properly expanded JHP should look like. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2014 11:11:18 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I've dug pretty good .40 S&W mushrooms out of deer. Maybe gangbangers aren't buying top-of-the-line ammo. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2014 11:41:35 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
As a former homicide detective who has attended numerous autopsys...I can say that handgun bullets do expand. One of my first homicides/autopsys I remember vividly looking at the pre-autopsy X-ray and seeing a perfectly expanded Hydra Shok in the victim. I told the Doc "oh, it's a Hydra Shok" and he thought I was nuts. From the angle it had the post exposed just like in the picture on the box. He recovered a perfectly expanded HS. ( 40 SW ). What I have observed is the following; Most people, about 90%, shot, especially by handguns survive. Most perps do not use premium ammo such as HST, Gold Dots etc. Most common ammo is FMJ Most shootings I have investigated were small caliber (22, 32 380, 38 etc) It is rare for the bullet to expand perfectly and evenly like in jel testing etc. Most ER Doc's, cops etc are not gun people and likely would not know what a properly expanded JHP should look like. Thanks to you and PigBat on your insights. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 2:03:57 AM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Any 22lr HP using a rifle wont expand or fragment in bare gel ? I would of never guessed . And I hunted rabbits and squirrels with CCI stingers and solids. I gave up the CCI stingers because it tore up the flesh more than the standard solid lead. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Penetration has always been more important than expansion. True there is much hype and myth about expansion, but if the penetration is a given, by caliber and bullet weight, then generally you want a good, well tested bullet. That should include the ability to maintain the majority of it's mass (to ensure penetration) and the possibility of expansion. Good ammo is still good ammo. Ninja/Extreme Shock is still BS hype. 22lr hollow point won't expand. 357 mag solid point is still a 357 mag. Any 22lr HP using a rifle wont expand or fragment in bare gel ? I would of never guessed . And I hunted rabbits and squirrels with CCI stingers and solids. I gave up the CCI stingers because it tore up the flesh more than the standard solid lead. Of course they can. Here's a test with .22lr expanding even after passing through for layers of denim. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 2:40:27 AM EDT
[#5]
Apparently this thread should have been titled "Myths I like to perpetuate". Maybe it should move to GD???
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 2:50:24 AM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Handguns suck at killing people and that is the bottom line but I will stick with quality bullets in my guns. People suck at killing people with handguns. Handguns with modern ammo are pretty fucking good fight stoppers. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 8:28:27 AM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Not really. People suck at killing people with handguns. Handguns with modern ammo are pretty fucking good fight stoppers. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Handguns suck at killing people and that is the bottom line but I will stick with quality bullets in my guns. People suck at killing people with handguns. Handguns with modern ammo are pretty fucking good fight stoppers. The FBI and many people like Clint Smith disagree. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 9:38:33 AM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The FBI and many people like Clint Smith disagree. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Handguns suck at killing people and that is the bottom line but I will stick with quality bullets in my guns. People suck at killing people with handguns. Handguns with modern ammo are pretty fucking good fight stoppers. The FBI and many people like Clint Smith disagree. If you could make the perfect shot every time with a handgun you would have no reason to shoot anything else. Handguns have a much smaller margin for error as the bullet needs to strike whatever structure you're hoping to damage. When you look at reports of people shot with handguns that survive you'll find abdominal and peripheral wounds quite often. Move that handful of hits to the center of the upper torso and you would probably have a different outcome. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 12:05:43 PM EDT
[#9]
S
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If you could make the perfect shot every time with a handgun you would have no reason to shoot anything else. Handguns have a much smaller margin for error as the bullet needs to strike whatever structure you're hoping to damage. When you look at reports of people shot with handguns that survive you'll find abdominal and peripheral wounds quite often. Move that handful of hits to the center of the upper torso and you would probably have a different outcome. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Handguns suck at killing people and that is the bottom line but I will stick with quality bullets in my guns. People suck at killing people with handguns. Handguns with modern ammo are pretty fucking good fight stoppers. The FBI and many people like Clint Smith disagree. If you could make the perfect shot every time with a handgun you would have no reason to shoot anything else. Handguns have a much smaller margin for error as the bullet needs to strike whatever structure you're hoping to damage. When you look at reports of people shot with handguns that survive you'll find abdominal and peripheral wounds quite often. Move that handful of hits to the center of the upper torso and you would probably have a different outcome. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile If we compare a pistol bullet to a rifle bullet it is inferior. Same story with a good shotgun load. Any round with a perfect shot works and we all know that. There are plenty of good shots that have failed to stop a attacker immediately but later proved fatal. I am not sure why we are debating this as it is one of the few things considered fact as far as I know. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/5/2014 7:07:08 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I've dug pretty good .40 S&W mushrooms out of deer. Maybe gangbangers aren't buying top-of-the-line ammo. Yup. I have a fair amount of experience with people who have been shot, and the projectiles that hit them, and expansion is pretty frequent with quality ammo. I'll add that someone who can't tell the difference between a JHPS and an FMJ dug out of a human body, couldn't tell the difference between the two looking at them pristine and unfired. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/14/2014 11:08:09 AM EDT
[#11]
Not GD...VA-gunnut
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/16/2014 2:11:04 AM EDT
[#12]
I've recovered handgun bullets from feral dogs, coyotes and javalina and most of the time they do expand, sometimes not enough, sometimes too much and sometimes they fragment. Even hard cast solids will expand if you drive them fast enough or they hit bone.
And while I've never dug a bullet out of a human, I'm going out on a limb and thinking all flesh and bone is similar enough for this kind of comparison.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/17/2014 9:09:22 AM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Not really. People suck at killing people with handguns. Handguns with modern ammo are pretty fucking good fight stoppers. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Handguns suck at killing people and that is the bottom line but I will stick with quality bullets in my guns. People suck at killing people with handguns. Handguns with modern ammo are pretty fucking good fight stoppers. All handguns are relatively poor "stoppers", regardless of caliber or bullet used. Barring a hit to the CNS, the only way to stop a determined & aggressive BG is by shutting down the brain from oxygen deprivation due to blood loss. Even a solid hit to the heart can leave 10+ seconds worth of oxygen in the brain, plenty of time for the BG to plant daisies in your hair. Tomac |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/19/2014 5:31:26 PM EDT
[#14]
I remember when I was attending my basic police academy back in 1992, the instructor doing our traumatic incident class brought post mortem photos of a suspect he had shot, as I recall, a total of 9 times with a Glock 19 loaded with Federal Hydra Shok ammunition (124 or 124 +P+, I believe). Over half of those recovered bullets expanded rather well with the center post clearly defined. The remaining bullets had expansion to varying degrees as well.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2014 11:51:37 PM EDT
[#15]
I disagree with this on the grounds that...
A: The 9mm bullet I put in a bg's head in my home did expand per the examiner and detective. B: The 9mm bullet I put in said bg's dome entered but did not exit. And I'd say C, D, etc... But there's no point. In my case most of what you've stated isn't valid. While this doesn't disprove it on a larger scale, I've seen no reports that actually back your post and it's theories. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2014 9:21:04 AM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Very interesting. Can you elaborate on your point regarding rifle powder cartridges? One reason rifles are better is because the temporary cavity can stretch so far it tears the soft tissue. That doesn't happen with pistol velocities. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2014 9:26:06 AM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: As a medical examiner with nearly 30 years and about 10k autopsies, I've examined many thousands of gunshot wounds and removed thousands of bullets. I therefore claim standing to comment, and I call "outdated" on points 1 - 3, straight up "BS" on point 4, agree wholeheartedly on point 5, and return to "outdated" on point 6. Points 1 - 3 used to be quite true, but I have seen bullet technology dramatically improve over my career. Old hollowpoint designs definitely did / do behave erratically, but modern hollowpoint pistol ammo (i.e., the Ranger, Gold Dot, HST types most typically adopted by FBI and LE agencies) are boringly regular: they expand nicely, penetrate deeply, and are usually found under the skin on the opposite side of the body. As to point 4, the statement is nonsensical on the face of it. Entrance v. exit wound appearance has exactly nothing to do with the bullet design; the wounds only appear "similar" to someone who knows nothing about gunshot wounds. Point 5 is the only thing they told you that is relevant, and is something that bears repeating: when it comes to the actual wound, they pretty much all look alike until we get to rifle power cartridges. Finally, if we are speaking only of 20 year-old hollowpoint designs, yes, the perfect mushrooms are rare. But again, modern designs are boringly regular, and a "pretty" mushroom is the norm, not the exception.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2014 9:36:42 AM EDT
[#18]
Thanks for stating the obvious
I have made my own conclusions based on handgun hunting for deer ( which are similar sized to humans ). Hollow point studies are largely an excercise in marketing hype , designed to boost profits of ammo companies |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2014 9:48:49 AM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
As a medical examiner with nearly 30 years and about 10k autopsies, I've examined many thousands of gunshot wounds and removed thousands of bullets. I therefore claim standing to comment, and I call "outdated" on points 1 - 3, straight up "BS" on point 4, agree wholeheartedly on point 5, and return to "outdated" on point 6. Points 1 - 3 used to be quite true, but I have seen bullet technology dramatically improve over my career. Old hollowpoint designs definitely did / do behave erratically, but modern hollowpoint pistol ammo (i.e., the Ranger, Gold Dot, HST types most typically adopted by FBI and LE agencies) are boringly regular: they expand nicely, penetrate deeply, and are usually found under the skin on the opposite side of the body. As to point 4, the statement is nonsensical on the face of it. Entrance v. exit wound appearance has exactly nothing to do with the bullet design; the wounds only appear "similar" to someone who knows nothing about gunshot wounds. Point 5 is the only thing they told you that is relevant, and is something that bears repeating: when it comes to the actual wound, they pretty much all look alike until we get to rifle power cartridges. Finally, if we are speaking only of 20 year-old hollowpoint designs, yes, the perfect mushrooms are rare. But again, modern designs are boringly regular, and a "pretty" mushroom is the norm, not the exception. Very cool, thanks for the insight! |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2014 9:50:56 AM EDT
[#20]
I
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Exactly Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I'll still use hollow points. Any expansion, however small, is better than a standard FMJ. Other than that, methinks your doctor/cop source isn't scientifically conclusive. I agree. There is NO scientifically conclusive evidence about handgun bullet expansion in humans. But it's a cold bucket of water to the face after gelatin tests, water-barrel tests, bullet salesmanship, and speculation. He didnt say there is no evidence he said your doctors experience alone is not enough to be conclusive. Like I said the FBI seems to disagree and they have the single biggest database in the world. I tend to trust them a little more. Exactly Did you trust the FBI when they decided to go to 10mm ? Or did you trust the FBI when they switched to .40 ( along with most law enforcement agencies ) ?? They had lots of data to support this choice too ... But now that the FBI Reaches a conclusion that we like - NOW I think they got it right - A little irony |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2014 5:16:59 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Did you trust the FBI when they decided to go to 10mm ? Or did you trust the FBI when they switched to .40 ( along with most law enforcement agencies ) ?? They had lots of data to support this choice too ... But now that the FBI Reaches a conclusion that we like - NOW I think they got it right - A little irony You have got to be trolling or else you have some serious comprehension issues. You act like no time has passed. You also fail to mention why they chose to switch from 10mm to 40. If you cant wrap your head around the fact that technology has drastically changed in 25 years then I dont know what to say. You make it sound like they can't have been right then and still be right now. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2014 6:36:53 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
My real world experience doesn't mirror this Internet story. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I talk to big-city medical examiners and homicide detectives. These are people who dig bullets out of dead people for a living. They all, to a man, say this: 1. Hollow point handgun bullets, all of them, frequently do not expand at all. 2. Hollow point handgun bullets usually expand very little, when they do expand. They almost never expand fully. 3. Hollow point handgun bullets almost always exit. 4. Hollow point handgun bullets make entrance and exit wounds that are usually quite similar on first inspection. 5. Professional medical examiners can't tell by inspection, or by thorough autopsy, what caliber it was, whether it was a FMJ or hollow point, whether it was standard velocity or +P, what weight the bullet was, who made it, or what barrel length it was fired from. Whatever it was, it either hit a nerve center or major cardiovascular vessel, or it didn't. 6. Those perfectly symmetrical mushrooms they get from firing bullets into water-barrels? They never see that in the real world. This squares with the admittedly small sample of autopsy reports I've read, and scene and autopsy photos I've looked at. My real world experience doesn't mirror this Internet story. Nor do all the Professionals that have studied this.... Dr. Fackler, Dr. Roberts come to mind..... troll post, IMHO... written by someone that truly does not understand Handgun ballistics. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/1/2014 3:56:42 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I see plenty of wounds that, taken alone, would be non-fatal in GSW autopsy cases. Most dead people with GSWs are shot multiple times (especially in police-involved shootings), and only a few of the wounds cause the fatality. Bullet performance (expansion, penetration, etc.) is not significantly different between the bullets that cause non-fatal wounds and those causing fatal wounds. Old style hollowpoints have the erratic performance OP mentioned; modern designs are far more consistent. The part in red is the crux of the issue. The ammo makers have given us good, reliable ammo that behaves well and consistently. That ammo is listed in the Ammo FAQ on this site. If those well-behaved bullets are sent to the wrong place, however, a good result cannot be expected. We shoot to stop the threat without intent to kill, but the subtext is that a reliable "stop" nearly always equals a "kill": in order to achieve that stop, we damage or destroy vital structures. The other side of that coin is the realization that a non-fatal GSW actually nearly always represents a failure of shooter or ammo: if the shooter placed his shots to hit those CNS/circulatory system targets, and the bullet behaved properly, the wound would almost always be non-survivable. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Keep in mind, there is some automatic self-selecting going on. Autopsies happen on dead people. Bullet wounds that cause the perp enough grief to get the threat to stop while keeping him alive might have some kind of self-selection factor in it. The mushroomed bullets may be in live people. Maybe the live people don't get mushroomed bullets either. To find out the truth, we need to be looking at projectiles from ALL gun shot wounds if we want to talk about what happens when a hollow point hits flesh or bone. The only thing I can conclude from the autopsy numbers is that it's worthwhile not just going for center of mass, but if one can, go for central nervous system or massive blood loss / stopping the circulatory system. I see plenty of wounds that, taken alone, would be non-fatal in GSW autopsy cases. Most dead people with GSWs are shot multiple times (especially in police-involved shootings), and only a few of the wounds cause the fatality. Bullet performance (expansion, penetration, etc.) is not significantly different between the bullets that cause non-fatal wounds and those causing fatal wounds. Old style hollowpoints have the erratic performance OP mentioned; modern designs are far more consistent. The part in red is the crux of the issue. The ammo makers have given us good, reliable ammo that behaves well and consistently. That ammo is listed in the Ammo FAQ on this site. If those well-behaved bullets are sent to the wrong place, however, a good result cannot be expected. We shoot to stop the threat without intent to kill, but the subtext is that a reliable "stop" nearly always equals a "kill": in order to achieve that stop, we damage or destroy vital structures. The other side of that coin is the realization that a non-fatal GSW actually nearly always represents a failure of shooter or ammo: if the shooter placed his shots to hit those CNS/circulatory system targets, and the bullet behaved properly, the wound would almost always be non-survivable. You didn't work in Memphis did you? I worked in Memphis for a funeral home for a few years. Can't say I miss that at all. Saw quite a few gunshot victims as well, mostly suicide. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/10/2014 11:41:21 PM EDT
[#24]
I shoot 240 grain lead swc loaded to 44 special +p out of my 3 inch model 629. I figure your starting with almost a half inch hole. The pistol shooters from about 1870 to the advent of HP ammo seem to think it was good enough. 45 long colt, 38-40, 44-40, 44 russian, 44 american, I think it's good enough for me
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2014 12:07:26 AM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Decades of post - mortem examinations have led to the bullet designs and testing methods we use today. That said I agree it's likely that in civilian gunshot wounds you're seeing cheap ammo, not good ammo. If the OPs experts had more experience with LEO- induce wounds I bet the conclusions would be very different. Oh that's 100% truth. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2014 11:45:43 AM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Oh that's 100% truth. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Decades of post - mortem examinations have led to the bullet designs and testing methods we use today. That said I agree it's likely that in civilian gunshot wounds you're seeing cheap ammo, not good ammo. If the OPs experts had more experience with LEO- induce wounds I bet the conclusions would be very different. Oh that's 100% truth. That's kinda what I was wondering. Since the horrible record of pistols include 25 ACP, 32 ACP, and other small caliber pistols firing FMJ and experienced people have said that most of the shootings they've seen involve these poor caliber and ammunition choices how much is the data skewed? What would be the results if only 9mm-357 Sig-40 S&W-45 ACP using high quality ammunition were recorded? I'd wager you'd see a very large increase in the effectiveness of handguns, maybe handguns can be far better performers than commonly accepted? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2014 1:56:29 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That's kinda what I was wondering. Since the horrible record of pistols include 25 ACP, 32 ACP, and other small caliber pistols firing FMJ and experienced people have said that most of the shootings they've seen involve these poor caliber and ammunition choices how much is the data skewed? What would be the results if only 9mm-357 Sig-40 S&W-45 ACP using high quality ammunition were recorded? I'd wager you'd see a very large increase in the effectiveness of handguns, maybe handguns can be far better performers than commonly accepted? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Decades of post - mortem examinations have led to the bullet designs and testing methods we use today. That said I agree it's likely that in civilian gunshot wounds you're seeing cheap ammo, not good ammo. If the OPs experts had more experience with LEO- induce wounds I bet the conclusions would be very different. Oh that's 100% truth. That's kinda what I was wondering. Since the horrible record of pistols include 25 ACP, 32 ACP, and other small caliber pistols firing FMJ and experienced people have said that most of the shootings they've seen involve these poor caliber and ammunition choices how much is the data skewed? What would be the results if only 9mm-357 Sig-40 S&W-45 ACP using high quality ammunition were recorded? I'd wager you'd see a very large increase in the effectiveness of handguns, maybe handguns can be far better performers than commonly accepted? Nope, in the great scheme of things, they still suck. All we've done is to make them suck a little less, and to suck a little less in a reliable fashion. You still can't make a pistol into a rifle: TANSTAAFL. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2014 9:53:41 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted: All handguns are relatively poor "stoppers", regardless of caliber or bullet used. Barring a hit to the CNS, the only way to stop a determined & aggressive BG is by shutting down the brain from oxygen deprivation due to blood loss. Even a solid hit to the heart can leave 10+ seconds worth of oxygen in the brain, plenty of time for the BG to plant daisies in your hair. Tomac Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Handguns suck at killing people and that is the bottom line but I will stick with quality bullets in my guns. People suck at killing people with handguns. Handguns with modern ammo are pretty fucking good fight stoppers. All handguns are relatively poor "stoppers", regardless of caliber or bullet used. Barring a hit to the CNS, the only way to stop a determined & aggressive BG is by shutting down the brain from oxygen deprivation due to blood loss. Even a solid hit to the heart can leave 10+ seconds worth of oxygen in the brain, plenty of time for the BG to plant daisies in your hair. Tomac |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2014 10:00:09 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The FBI and many people like Clint Smith disagree. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Handguns suck at killing people and that is the bottom line but I will stick with quality bullets in my guns. People suck at killing people with handguns. Handguns with modern ammo are pretty fucking good fight stoppers. The FBI and many people like Clint Smith disagree. I've seen people killed by all sorts of small and heavy arms. Things that are incapacitating with a pistol, are incapacitating with a rifle and vice versa. The main differance I've seen is pistol wounds that are not immediately incapacitating, are not fatal where rifle rounds can be. That whole maxim of "handguns suck at stopping fights/killing" and "pistols are just for fighting your way to a rifle" should just die out and go away. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2014 11:01:58 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Doesn't change anything, modern pistol ammo is very capable of killing people very quickly, and the state of the art has advanced to the point it's easy for people to gain access to high quality training. I've seen people killed by all sorts of small and heavy arms. Things that are incapacitating with a pistol, are incapacitating with a rifle and vice versa. The main differance I've seen is pistol wounds that are not immediately incapacitating, are not fatal where rifle rounds can be. That whole maxim of "handguns suck at stopping fights/killing" and "pistols are just for fighting your way to a rifle" should just die out and go away. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Handguns suck at killing people and that is the bottom line but I will stick with quality bullets in my guns. People suck at killing people with handguns. Handguns with modern ammo are pretty fucking good fight stoppers. The FBI and many people like Clint Smith disagree. I've seen people killed by all sorts of small and heavy arms. Things that are incapacitating with a pistol, are incapacitating with a rifle and vice versa. The main differance I've seen is pistol wounds that are not immediately incapacitating, are not fatal where rifle rounds can be. That whole maxim of "handguns suck at stopping fights/killing" and "pistols are just for fighting your way to a rifle" should just die out and go away. I have never been in a gunfight so I won't argue with you but I find it interesting that your opinion differs from damn near everyone I have ever heard most of which are experienced soldiers or LE. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2014 11:41:40 PM EDT
[#31]
I think what Madcap is saying is that shot placement trumps all.
For most of us, the odds of good shot placement increase with a long gun, especially once the range extends past 25 yards. So, for us mere mortals there's still a lot of truth in that old saw that a "hand gun is for.... Also, good hollow points expand as advertised. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/12/2014 9:36:19 AM EDT
[#32]
I believe good HPs expand, but just in case I carry a 45.
If a 9mm gold dot expands to .55-.60, the .45 gold dot should open up pretty big. (Can't find a diameter, all reports Google turns up for me are 9/40) If the .45 doesn't open, well it's still a 45. Edit .45 gold dot .70-.75. Pretty good expansion I guess. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/13/2014 12:34:47 AM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I believe good HPs expand, but just in case I carry a 45. If a 9mm gold dot expands to .55-.60, the .45 gold dot should open up pretty big. (Can't find a diameter, all reports Google turns up for me are 9/40) If the .45 doesn't open, well it's still a 45. Edit .45 gold dot .70-.75. Pretty good expansion I guess. Good HPs expand in water barrels and gelatin blocks consistently. They don't expand in humans consistently. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/13/2014 12:52:43 AM EDT
[#34]
Uber, please get this moved to GD by a Mod, so that we can all talk about this freely. You know exactly nothing about what you are talking about.
Your other "what ammo to carry in a second mag" thread was almost as awesome as this one. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/13/2014 1:21:11 PM EDT
[#35]
I'll add that someone who can't tell the difference between a JHPS and an FMJ dug out of a human body
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/13/2014 1:48:21 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'll add that someone who can't tell the difference between a JHPS and an FMJ dug out of a human body Reread and edit. You'll thank me. The rest of us can't read you mind. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/13/2014 8:15:34 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Not much different with rifle rounds. Quote HistoryQuoted:
All handguns are relatively poor "stoppers", regardless of caliber or bullet used. Barring a hit to the CNS, the only way to stop a determined & aggressive BG is by shutting down the brain from oxygen deprivation due to blood loss. Even a solid hit to the heart can leave 10+ seconds worth of oxygen in the brain, plenty of time for the BG to plant daisies in your hair.
Tomac Not much different with rifle rounds. Rifle rounds in excess of appx 2,200fps produce permanent wound cavities w/increased soft tissue damage. Handguns (w/few exceptions) only produce temporary wound cavities. Tomac |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/13/2014 8:36:51 PM EDT
[#38]
By order of preference in a must stop short range situation
4) Rounds 380 and below, I'll take FMJ. Penetration is your only friend here 3) 9mm and above give me a good JHP. You have the penetration covered and wound channel comes into play 2) rifle rounds with good core lock style PSP bullets 1) 12 gauge with slugs Longer range you can reverse 1 and 2. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/13/2014 10:20:11 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Rifle rounds in excess of appx 2,200fps produce permanent wound cavities w/increased soft tissue damage. Handguns (w/few exceptions) only produce temporary wound cavities. Tomac Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: All handguns are relatively poor "stoppers", regardless of caliber or bullet used. Barring a hit to the CNS, the only way to stop a determined & aggressive BG is by shutting down the brain from oxygen deprivation due to blood loss. Even a solid hit to the heart can leave 10+ seconds worth of oxygen in the brain, plenty of time for the BG to plant daisies in your hair. Tomac Not much different with rifle rounds. Rifle rounds in excess of appx 2,200fps produce permanent wound cavities w/increased soft tissue damage. Handguns (w/few exceptions) only produce temporary wound cavities. Tomac |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/14/2014 11:10:48 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Still no functional differance between rifle rounds and pistol rounds when it comes to stopping threats. It's either immediate or not. Only big differance is after holes are poked if they are still upright. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
All handguns are relatively poor "stoppers", regardless of caliber or bullet used. Barring a hit to the CNS, the only way to stop a determined & aggressive BG is by shutting down the brain from oxygen deprivation due to blood loss. Even a solid hit to the heart can leave 10+ seconds worth of oxygen in the brain, plenty of time for the BG to plant daisies in your hair.
Tomac Not much different with rifle rounds. Rifle rounds in excess of appx 2,200fps produce permanent wound cavities w/increased soft tissue damage. Handguns (w/few exceptions) only produce temporary wound cavities. Tomac Rifle rounds have an energy level that can shatter bone and produce levels of destruction handguns can dream of. Rifle injuries are not seen outside of battlefields for the most part. Handgun rounds are far lower. It is very hard to asses temporary wound cavity damage on dead victims. They sort of forgot to bleed and bruise since they died so quickly, I have seen more than one military trained surgeon that was perplexed by handgun rounds that just drill holes. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/16/2014 4:22:06 AM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Rifle rounds have an energy level that can shatter bone and produce levels of destruction handguns can dream of. Rifle injuries are not seen outside of battlefields for the most part. Handgun rounds are far lower. It is very hard to asses temporary wound cavity damage on dead victims. They sort of forgot to bleed and bruise since they died so quickly, I have seen more than one military trained surgeon that was perplexed by handgun rounds that just drill holes. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: snip Rifle rounds have an energy level that can shatter bone and produce levels of destruction handguns can dream of. Rifle injuries are not seen outside of battlefields for the most part. Handgun rounds are far lower. It is very hard to asses temporary wound cavity damage on dead victims. They sort of forgot to bleed and bruise since they died so quickly, I have seen more than one military trained surgeon that was perplexed by handgun rounds that just drill holes. I've seen the results of both first hand. Doesn't mean they are not uncommon. Died quickly does not mean incapacitated instantly. I've seen plenty of dudes good and bad get worked on. As I've stated whether rifle or pistol placement is key, and the locations are the same for rifle and pistol. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2014 3:24:13 AM EDT
[#42]
I'm happy to get some over none.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2014 10:49:47 PM EDT
[#43]
Shot plenty of wild game. If a deer can run after being hit through the lungs with a medium power rifle round, you don't think a 220 lb thug could fight through it? There is no golden gun, shot placement trumps all.
I'll continue to carry HSTs and Gold Dots |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2014 10:56:08 PM EDT
[#44]
From my understanding, professional medical examiners are often not very knowledgable in ammunition types and what is supposed to happen, also not their main goal most of the time to carefully judge and meticulously evaluate ballistics and different types other than the caliber. There is also a lot of people out in the world that buy cheap hollow points just because they are hollow points.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2014 11:04:04 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This. A friend of mine (local PD) had to shoot a fellow a couple years back. Domestic dispute case where the perp decided to come after the cops with a hunting knife. My buddy and his partner both shot two times. All four of the Gold Dots expanded picture perfect. (then again 3 of them went right through the bad guy's heart so he went down like a wet sack regardless) Of course, that is an anecdote not data. Still, they do expand more often than ball. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The FBI disagrees. Without knowing the specific bullets that we are talking about it is not much of a test. This. A friend of mine (local PD) had to shoot a fellow a couple years back. Domestic dispute case where the perp decided to come after the cops with a hunting knife. My buddy and his partner both shot two times. All four of the Gold Dots expanded picture perfect. (then again 3 of them went right through the bad guy's heart so he went down like a wet sack regardless) Of course, that is an anecdote not data. Still, they do expand more often than ball. That right there buddy! I tend to carry only GDHP in my rock throwers.. I seen a display of a bunch of different brands hollow points that I guy has at a guns shop (where oddly enough, they don't even sell ammo) and he had different caliber he had shot through ballistic gel, and all the GDHP were picture perfect (9mm, 40, 45) and had a bunch of other well known brands. (Sadly no RIPs  ) But that and the reviews I see online of GDHPs makes me lean only to them, which reminds me. I have to head to the range and shoot all my other HPs.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/18/2014 10:54:34 AM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
From my understanding, professional medical examiners are often not very knowledgable in ammunition types and what is supposed to happen, also not their main goal most of the time to carefully judge and meticulously evaluate ballistics and different types other than the caliber. There is also a lot of people out in the world that buy cheap hollow points just because they are hollow points. Quite true. It baffles me how so many of my colleagues are comfortable evaluating injuries without knowing anything about the device that made the injury. This holds true not only for firearms, but for all sorts of industrial equipment and machinery. The depth of ignorance re. firearms, however, is particularly great. Worse still is that a surprising number of forensic pathologists are quite proud of their ignorance, in the usual smug morally superior way of the modern progressive. Nice example from a well-known forensic pathologist's testimony in a murder trial: Q: Doctor, what are these marks on the skin around the bullet hole? A: Those are from the silencer on the gun. Q: The silencer? We've had testimony from the firearms examiner that this gun has a muzzle brake, but nothing about a silencer. A: It's the same thing. I call everything on the end of a gun a silencer. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/18/2014 11:49:10 AM EDT
[#47]
My only autopsy I saw was a suicide with a Glock in .45GAP. Entrance under jaw, through roof of mouth, sinus cavity, brain & cracked the skull but did not exist the skull. The Speer Gold Dot was nearly perfectly & evenly expanded.
Just 1 sample. 7mm |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/20/2014 3:34:57 AM EDT
[#48]
Gel testing as an engineering analog for terminal performance in humans and the performance of modern hollowpoint designs has been through the process of juried papers, decades of verification including the examination of bullets from humans, and scrutiny across multiple, diverse organizations.
This information is available in the public domain. Any other position requires proof in the form of new data of statistical significance and analysis from several communities interested in terminal performance. Anything else is hapless conjecture. Why is this so hard for so many to accept? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/20/2014 5:09:08 AM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Gel testing as an engineering analog for terminal performance in humans and the performance of modern hollowpoint designs has been through the process of juried papers, decades of verification including the examination of bullets from humans, and scrutiny across multiple, diverse organizations. This information is available in the public domain. Any other position requires proof in the form of new data of statistical significance and analysis from several communities interested in terminal performance. Anything else is hapless conjecture. Why is this so hard for so many to accept? That's the only reason. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/21/2014 5:14:58 PM EDT
[#50]
One of the little problems is that the 'field experience' is just about always on older components.
Add to that the difficulty in determining tissue damage 'after the fact.' Unless the tissue is 'hamburgerized' it is very difficult to determine damage extent when perfusion ended shortly after injury. Bruising? Not going to be there to any great extent if blood flow stopped. Add to all that lividity that starts immediately and it becomes rather 'touch and go' to interpret what you are seeing. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
