OK, now before people get too riled up ... let me just say that I am not saying that anything is or isn't anything. I'm just reading a lot lately and thinking out loud here and looking for some insight from knowledgeable people that know far more about this than I do. So I'm not advocating anything.

That said, here is my logic train. Background of my thoughts ... I have been reading ballistic topics online over years and years, and as a police officer in a high crime area of a large urban city I've witnessed numerous shooting victims first hand and this is what I am seeing more and more.
1. Handgun bullets pretty much suck. Compared to rifle obviously. Seldom have I had conversations with people that are shot with rifles. Usually I just collect them and bag them. Handgun victims though I usually talk to quite often. So bottom line, handguns tend to leave people very much alive. Psychological "stopping power" notwithstanding.

2. Due to #1 above, caliber choice is not very important because ALL handgun bullets tend to suck. As I have read in numerous places, doctors that examine handgun woulds usually cannot tell if the tissue damage was done by a 9mm, .40 or .45 unless the projectile is recovered. So really caliber choice with these 3 at least is not going to make a dramatic difference like the difference in choosing a rifle instead. (notice I said dramatic difference; not just difference).

3. Hollow points rarely if ever expand in real world shootings. Especially coming out of short barreled guns like many people carry. Such as a Ruger LC9 for example. They just don't develop sufficient velocity and/or they plug up.

4. You need penetration. HP's tend to penetrate less IF they expand. Penetration is more important. A hole that is 1mm wider is less important that a hole that is 3 or 4 inches deeper.

So based on these things that I am reading it would seem to me (an untrained eye going on anecdotal evidence and just reading this kind of stuff online in places like this and other tactical forums) that ...

A. Caliber does not matter in a hand gun because all handguns suck pretty much equally and you will be lucky stop a guy with a handgun unless you hit him multiple times or he gives up due to psychological stopping power.
B. HP's don't expand and when they don't they are FMJ and when they do they lose penetration and deeper is better.
C. HP might jam and due to high cost people don't shoot a lot of them to make sure that they don't. FMJ tend to jam less and due to cost people tend to test them more.

So the deduction I am taking away from this is that I am better off carrying a 9mm with FMJ 147gr with a flat nose. Because I get deeper penetration than a 9mm HP; that added penetration is likely more important then the slight expansion that I would get if it expanded, which it probably won't. This is better than a .40 cal with a HP because the .40 likely will not penetrate more than the FMJ 9mm. Am I way off here?

I have brought this up with some people and the first response I always get is "What about over penetration/perforation with a 9mm FMJ?" But I don't think that this is an issue. 99% of the shootings I responded to were 9mm FMJ because that is cheap and plentiful in the areas I worked and bad guys could care less about ballistics. I never saw a perforation of a torso with a handgun bullet. Arms/legs or glancing blows sure, but never a dead center chest perforation. Anecdotal of course, but that's why I'm here. My anecdotal information is not sufficient. Be that as it may mind seems to tell me that handgun bullets are by and large pretty anemic especially when we are talking 9mm coming out of a 2" or so barrel of the typical LC9 or similar.

So there is my theory. Be gentle. I'm just thinking out loud here. I am going to try to make some gel and go to the range to test my theory of FMJ penetration or over penetration compared to sufficient penetration of a HP coming out fo the same barrel of the same gun. That being short of course.

I got to thinking of this because of the article here about .38 snub-nose revolvers being better off using a 148gr WC because a HP likely won't do anything anyway. Got me to thinking well my 9mm doesn't have more of a barrel than that and these 9mm loads are test fired out of a longer barrel than mine. I wonder if the same thing holds true here? Just starting to wonder if having a 147gr FMJ with a flat nose profile would be better overall than a similar HP because it would have less chance for a jam and penetrate deeper. Also added benefit of barrier blindness, no?

You aren't the LEO from a "major metropolitan area in Louisiana" who years ago basically said the same thing:  in real world shootings, handgun shooting victims usually lived unless shot multiple times and the type of bullet was irrelevant, are you?

Of course a shitstorm ensued (because we want to believe otherwise) and one can no longer find any of his posts (last I remember was on Glock Talk or similar).

I can't get too riled up over your theory, even if I don't agree with it 100%.

If comparing FMJ to the entire universe of available JHP, I think that you are correct.

Or, at least you are about as well off with one as the other, probably no great superiority in either case.

Some of the newer JHPs do seem to perform reasonably well, even out of short barrels.

But, for many years, JHPs either didn't expand, or expanded too quickly, which means less penetration.

In .380 and .32, I definitely prefer FMJ, and in .38 Special, a standard load wadcutter would also be a  good choice.

My favorite little .380 is loaded HP, Ball, HP, Ball, HP, etc... Works great and can empty it in less than two seconds with no jams.

If you're worried about velocity, run a longer barreled pistol and+P.

FMJ is always more reliable than JHP, HOWEVER, I run Hornady Critical Duty. Tips stay well together until impact. 124 +P HPs (sig p938 CCW)  I also Run the 230gr+P in my HK USP Tac.

Spend the extra money, find a HP that is reliable and shoot 100 rds of it. What's the price of your(or your family's) life?

Although I normally stay out of the ammo debates due to the general lack of any investigation on the subject matter on my part, but I will share this.   A while ago someone here advocated FMJ ammo for the .380 carry guns.   The concept was that small charge pushing that round out of a short barrel would likely not achieve sufficient velocity to truly expand, and if it did the slower speed and wider surface would have trouble penetrating leather over wool (i.e. winter jacket set up).    The author was a big proponent of JHP/HP etc coming out of a 9mm and up out of 4/5 in barrel, but pushed for ball on the .380 carry pieces.    Seemed to make sense to me.    

I suspect in the end that getting shot is getting shot, and while ammunition does make a difference - the improved performance of the bullet type does not make as much difference we wish to believe.    Use the best you can reasonably afford to use enough to ensure it works in your weapon, and don't worry about the rest.

Killerb6,
Nope. I am retired NYPD and happily living in FL.

And I'm not advocating anything. I'm just wondering. Starting to wonder anyways because of the stuff I've seen and read. I guess I'm just losing my devotion to large caliber HP ammo being any better than anything else. I'm just starting to think that there really is no difference in real world results. Maybe. I guess that's what I'm here to figure out.

It all depends on the ammo you choose. Not all ammo is designed with a 3 inch barrel in mind. You'd be surprised at all the ammo that works flawlessly with a 4 or 5 inch barrel on a Duty Pistol yet doesn't when at all in a 3 inched CCW pistol.

Here is Hornady Critical Duty from a 3 inch barrel. It was not a good performer. It barely expanded. You might as well use FMJ's.

Critical Duty

Then you have a good performer like a Federal HST in 124 gr standard pressure. It actually penetrated more than the version in +P and more consistently than the +P version.

HST 124gr +P

124 gr HST Standard Pressure

So in short, you have to research the ammo you carry. Just because it works for a certain police department in their full sized duty guns, it doesn't mean it will work for you in a short barrel. Also, +P isn't always better.

Congrats on surviving however long in NY; enjoy FL!

I wish I could find that guy's posts but I tried years ago (shortly after he posted) and I couldn't.  He did it on a few different forums as well.

He basically said what you are thinking:  bullet type/construction doesn't matter based on real world shootings...and nobody wanted to believe him.

I've seen a very big (read: fat) guy shot in the gut three times with a 380.  HP ammo.  None of them made it through his fat.

Light fast bullets who's radius becomes rapidly larger might not be the best choice for heavy set perps.  A larger surface area means the bullet will stop sooner, given the same speed and weight.

Data point #2: I attended the autopsy of Fat Albert who was shot twice with .380 Magtech Gold JHP.




#1 entered the abdomen at his 1:00 and lodged in a spinal process, breaking it. Missed the aorta but they still ladled over a liter of blood from the abdominal cavity. Maybe 11 or 12" penetration.




This bent him over for #2 which struck the top of his head, towards the rear.


 

Modern ammo does perform better than it use to.

Quality gun (tested by you) that you shoot accurately and quickly .380 or bigger loaded with HST or Gold Dot.

That's about all I worry about. It's far more about the Indian than the arrow.

If the hollow points expand, cool, if they clog they act like fmj anyway.

I run +P FMJ flat nose Buffalo bore in my 380. LCP

IF your premise that "3. Hollow points rarely if ever expand in real world shootings" is correct (and I would say it is not), then an unexpanded HP is going to penetrate deeply/overpenetrate.

Your argument that penetration is "better" is also flawed.

If you chose a HP and it does not expand, it will do the same amount of damage as a FMJ.  If it does expand, it does more damage.
The FMJ will at best be as good, and often will be worse than a HP.  Makes no sense to not chose a HP.

The biggest factor is that if you know more about gunfights and gunshot wounds than the FBI does, go with what you know is best. Just don't expect me to follow your lead

First let me say thank you for all that are participating. I wanted a technical discussion and i think this is one. I appreciate that.
But, guys. Perhaps I was not clear enough in my first post so let me say again ... I am not advocating one way or the other. I am trying to learn from those ballistic guys in this forum that have forgotten more about ballistics than I will ever know. Again, I do not know what is better/best and my purpose in this entire topic is to try to figure out the answer to that question. So I am not leading anyone anywhere therefore I cannot be followed.

That said I have a few thoughts on some of the things that I read in the last few posts. Last post first.

Why specifically is the THE argument (not my argument) that more penetration is better flawed? Isn't this exactly the entire premise that started this whole discussion back in the '80s after the FBI Miami shooting? I have read a lot about that as I was an active cop at the time and it was huge news and forced training that we all had to attend. The basic premise was that bad guy #1 was shot with a 9mm that stopped an inch or two short of his heart. Had it had a little more penetration then it would have been game over and more LEOs would not have died as that shot was one of the first to hit him. This what was caused the FBI to begin it s whole bullet testing thing which eventually led them to the .40. The idea being that the difference between a 9mm hole and a 10mm hole is not anything to be concerned over but a few inches deeper can be a big deal and make all the difference.

So for example, if a 9mm HP expands to 10mm and people think that that is great then why not just use a .40 which is 10mm to begin with? Then you are guaranteed a 10mm hole even with no expansion. The reason of course is that the difference between a 9mm hole and a 10mm hole is really pretty irrelevant in end result. What does matter is the depth of the hole; not it's width. If you shoot a .100 cal and it only goes in an inch that is not going to have the terminal effect needed to disrupt vital organs and cause the trauma that is needed to incapacitate an attacker. The FBI ended up realizing that reaching the vitals deep in the chest cavity is what is needed so they went with the .40 for it's penetration not it's width.

If so then a HP expanding does what exactly? Makes a slightly wider hole but again if that really mattered then every one would be carrying a .45 or a .50. The explosion in popularity of HP's (pardon the pun) came about in the '80s when "stopping power" came in vogue as it was thought that "energy dumping" caused stopping power and a HP would dump more energy in the target bad guy due to hydraulic tissue disruption or some such nonsense. I believe this has been mostly discredited since then and nowadays it is widely held that tissue damage and damage to vital organs such as the heart is what causes faster incapacitation of an attacker; of course other than a head shot.
So if reaching deep to hit a vital organ is really the key, and it is less important the width of the hole then wouldn't a FMJ have a better chance at doing that? Wouldn't a HP expanding actually hinder it from accomplishing that as it would slow it down and lessen it's penetration with the only side benefit being a slightly/marginally wider hole that would render practically no added benefit?

Next, I see a lot of people use the word "performance" but never define it. Many say that the 9mm performance has improved tremendously over the years since and is now much closer to eh .40/.45. But performance how? If you are talking about it's ability to expand then yes. But if you are talking about it's ability to penetrate then no. Unless the SAAMI specs have changed the 9mm. As far as I know they have not. So if they have not then the 9mm is the same size and weight and is going the same speed as it always has and, as a result, has the same terminal effect as it always had.

In other words had a modern 9mm been used that day in Miami it would have had the exact same result ... except maybe a slightly wider hole which would not have made a difference. A slightly deeper hole would have made a difference. So if you think that a slightly wider hole (ie a 9mm expanding reliably) then yeah they are better today then they were years ago. But if you think that the same weight and width bullet traveling at the same speed as it always used to is going to yield the same result then no, performance has not improved.

NOTE! Of course the FBI is abandoning the .40 now which is a whole other discussion that if we start here will just drive this topic off the rails so please lets don't. I am more concerned here with FMJ or HP being a difference if at all, in a short barreled 9mm.

Secondly I see a lot of posts about .380. While interesting that was not personal focus. Please forgive me if I was not more clear about that at the outset. I think that FMJ in a .380 is a slightly more clear cut topic due to the lower power of the .380. But a 9mm coming out of a short barrel is much more interesting because I really don't know how much we lose in a currently popular smaller gun like a G43 or LC9.

So I'm guessing that since HPs are much more popular then FMJ I am missing something.
Because it would seems to me that IF a .40 cal hole is the intention then you can carry a 9mm and hope it expands or carry a .40 and get a ,40 cal hole every time. Since most people are proponents of 9mm then I'm guessing that getting a .40 hole is not the goal. The goal is to reach those deep organs and damage them thus stopping the attack. Of course with a handgun, not an easy proposition, especially when you and he are presumably both moving while shooting. But all things being equal it would seem that 9mm or .40 really doesn't matter width wise. It is depth wise that they differ where it matters. And, if so, then can't the same argument be made for FMJ vs HP? A HP will make a shallower wider hole and a FMJ will make an only slightly narrower, but more importantly deeper, hole.

So what am I missing?

A nurse that had worked for my mother for many many years had her youngest son back friom boot camp.

He was 18 and had been in minor trouble but had really straightened out.

He went out of his mother's house to see what was going on with what turned out to be a drug deal across the street.

The dealer shot him once in the gut with what turned out to be a .380 FMJ.

EMT and his mom got him to the hospital about 5 blocks away.

He was talking and conscience when they put him under in the OR.

The less than experienced surgeon cut into his abdomen.

Massive blood dump and almost instant cardiac arrest.

His abdominal descending aorta had been severed.

It had dumped massive amounts of his blood into the gut and then tamponad had occurred.
The pressure in the gut was high enough to slow the bleeding and keep him alive.

He never came off the table.

It was a freak perfect hit.
An absolute freak hit.

It is not that a .380 might NOT be very deadly.
But the odds are lower than something a little bigger and heavier.

The coroner gave his mother photos of the bullet.
She new I was an 'gun guy' and came to ask questions.

She watched all this stuff happen in the ER & OR.

She was absolutely heartbroken.

Like the story above, there is no consistency with gunshots from any handgun, regardless of caliber. I've read a story of a guy getting hit with 44 mag in the chest and living and guys taking multiple hits with 9mm and living also. On the flip side I read an article about a cop how was shot with a 25 acp and died in the hospital and so on. I'd say based on what I've read with any handgun , any caliber, any bullet, you have a 50/50 chance of stopping/killing a person. One man may drop dead from a single shot from a 380 while another man will kill you after taking a full magazine of 9mm to the chest.

Absolutely. Of course the infamous story of the trooper that shot a (fat) bad guy in the chest with a .357 mag a few times, bad guy went down but was still alive. Bad guy pulled out .22 NAA mini revolver and shot trooper once hitting him between vest panels on his side. Little .22 went cross-ways through his chest to his heart killing him. Bad guy ultimately lived.

So I guess that's the ultimate point. It seems that when you are talking about handguns only and especially in calibers such as 9mm and .40 cal, FMJ or HP does not appear to make much of a difference. Trooper hit bad guy a few times direct in the chest and bad guy had what most would call a not very good shot off angle in the side, so even shot placement did not seem to be that great of a factor. What ended up mattering most was penetration and only because it was penetration sufficient to reach a vital organ. The .357 mags discharged by the trooper stopped short of doing significant enough damage. Probably because of "thickness" of the bad guy but also the fact that the rounds involved were HP and probably slowed down because of that and possibly hit ribs or sternum which further deflected or stopped them.

I think that it is odd that the same people that make the argument that the .40 is not superior to the 9mm because the minimal extra width that you get with the .40 accomplishes nothing are the same people that say that using HP in a 9mm is very important because it allows the 9mm to expand to .40. If the extra width of the .40 over the 9mm is irrelevant then why do you care of the 9mm HP expands to .40? Wouldn't that also be irrelevant?

I still would love to see some real world gel tests of FMJ 9mm being shot out of a small gun. More for over-penetration study than "stopping power". But it seems as though no one really ever tests FMJ. I guess it is not as fun as seeing the HP expand.

You are missing that modern hollow point ammo from a good manufacturer both expands and penetrates enough to reach vital organs where previous older ammunition did not.

Before the FBI shootout, there were no protocols to go off of so manufacturers were designing bullets to expand as much as possible without any guidelines for sufficient penetration. The Winchester Silvertip was such a round. It expanded very large but didn't penetrate a lot.

The 10mm and later .40 S&W were designed from the ground up to BOTH expand and penetrate at least 12 to 18 inches in ballistic gel. If a round at least penetrated 12 inches in gel, it was enough to reach vitals from any angle in an average sized body.

So now that manufacturers have something to go off, older calibers in a hollow point format like the 9mm and .45 ACP are now designed to both expand and penetrate the required 12 to 18 inches in gel.

Previously they didn't before the new requirements and we're designed for maximum expansion with no guidelines for penetration.

New bullets actually expand less than before to reach those 12 to 18 inched in gel.

And for those who aren't aware, 12 inches in calibrated ballistic gel is not 12 inches in a human body. It isn't a one for one match. A BB penetrates 4 inches in gel for proper calibration but will barely break the skin of a human. Ballistic Gel is just a consistent medium that never changes designed for ammo testing to get repeatable results. All rounds that reach vitals from all angles on a human body penetrate at least 12 inches in calibrated ballistic gel.

Numerous testing from guys that know better than us via trial and error came up with the determination that if a round penetrates at least 12 inches in calibrated gel, it'll penetrate and reach vital organs from all angles fired through skin, bone, and muscle in a human body.

Rounds that penetrated through skin, bone, and muscle in human and pig cadavers were then shot into ballistic gel and penetrated at least 12 inches.

Ah. OK, yes. Excellent point and I must say I agree with you. Modern ammo has improved in that it expands later allowing it to be a better penetrator which is the all important goal based on the FBI testing.

However, even if I concede that point ... to what benefit? So a modern 9mm HP penetrates to 12 inches with reliable expansion, as opposed to a FMJ 9mm also reaching 12 inches but not expanding. So then of course this begs the question what do you gain in the expansion? One millimeter of width? And what does this extra millimeter of width accomplish? If it is so important then should we not be using the larger 10mm width .40 cal to make sure that we achieve it? Judging by the popularity of the 9mm over the .40 lately I think it is safe to say that most people do not consider the extra millimeter of width important at all. The FBI in it's recent switch back to the 9mm is in that group.

And with that expansion, don't you then also run the risk that it might not reach that 12" minimum? I mean it probably will but it might not. I think it is safe to say that, at the very least, the odds of a FMJ of the same caliber reaching that 12" threshold is higher than the same round in a HP. The probability might be low but I think it exists. So then again the HP possibly slowing down that round enough to make it not penetrate sufficiently is an unnecessary risk since a FMJ will definitely reach it and the added 1 millimeter of expansion is not beneficial. Besides of course the risk of a jam that is always higher in a HP than a FMJ. If a jam happens then all bets are off.

So in summary:
If the 9mm reaches the 12" and expands no real great benefit.
But since it is a HP it might not reach the desired 12" due to its expansion; probably will due to testing but might not.
The HP might be more likely to jam introducing another problem fixed with a FMJ.

So I still feel like I am missing something. The only thing to this point that I can come up with is the possibility of a perforation/over-penetration. And based on what I have seen and read I just don't think that a 9mm coming out of such a small barrel hitting someone in the chest is likely to do that. Arm or leg maybe but in all likelihood so would a HP. No one yet has pointed me to any data that has showed that over-penetration in a 9mm is an issue.

Now the FBI has numerous considerations besides performance. They have the disparate sizes and abilities of the agents for one.
They also have lawsuits to worry about and the prevailing "feeling" or perception among many that the HP is a "better stopper". And, perception being reality, this contributes to their decision. God forbid there is an over-penetration. The public, due to the perception of FMJ whistling through people like a hot knife through butter, will be enough to cost them big time. The defense attorney will try to make the case that is was dangerous for them to use these reckless FMJ rounds that out people in unnecessary danger. True or not the perception will likely stick and cost them big.

The human desire to get a 2 egg omelette out of just one egg makes us desire to have a gun that shoots like a .22 but makes the hole of a .45. There is no free lunch. It is beginning to seem to me that if you want a .40 cal hole then use a .40 and if you want a .45 hole then use a .45. If you feel that a 9mm size hole is good enough then realize that HP or no HP probably the resulting hole that your 9mm will make will probably be a 9mm hole. If a HP then maybe slightly larger but maybe not, and by your choice of a 9mm you have already conceded that a 9mm hole is fine. If the 9mm hole is fine then what else matters? Depth. Since the FMJ is more likely to deliver that depth reliably then why not use it? Even if the odds are low, why risk lack of penetration or a jam? I prefer to keep the odds on my side. It is beginning to seem to me like the odds are starting to favor the FMJ. Again, at least in 9mm and coming out of a small barreled pistol.

Sounds like you've got it figured out, go ahead and use FMJ.  Or keep wondering out loud about if you should use FMJ or not.  It's already been settled, many times over.  If you can't accept what's been researched, vetted, and then published on this site in the Ammo FAQs tacked at the top of this particular forum area regarding hollowpoint ammunition, then by all means, use the FMJ if that's what your thought process leads you to.

ETA: You can find the answers to all your musings here: http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_5_20/97960_.html

I have worked as a post mortem investigator in a M.E. office and saw lots of terminal ballistics cases. My best friend has nearly 20 years in as a firearms examiner in two major state crime labs.

I agree with all of the above.

I'm trying t understand why. I have read everything here and still don't see why. All I see is people saying that it expands. OK, I get that. It expands. But what benefit is that? Why do we want expansion? Why is it so important?
I'm sorry I'm so curious but I like to know why I do things before i do them. I get it that people much smarter than me have figured this stuff out already but I just want to know how they arrived at their conclusion and so far the only conclusion that I can find that they have arrived at is that ... it reliably expands. I concede that it reliably expands ... but why does that matter? It seems like the answer should be obvious but I just ain't seeing it.

So your saying that the HP may do slightly more  damage and if ti does then that is better? Is that it? If that's it then I guess that the reason. Perhaps I am looking for something too complicated. Just seems that a slight bit more damage does not justify the range of choice and departments going out of their way to choose these things. Seems like a lot of effort for such a slight difference. I guess I am just reading too much into it. I guess I am getting overly nerdy about this. It just seems odd to me that some are so defensive of their given HP choice as if the difference is huge and it seems like in the end the difference is really that hey if it does a little more damage then that's worth it. And that's pretty much it. There is really no more ot he story and I might as well stop looking into it.

Thank you all for your help.

Cutting tissue with the JHP profile as opposed to lancing with the FMJ. This can speed up loss of consciousness via bleeding.

 



Reduced ricochet hazard. This includes glancing off skulls and bones.






Reduced overpenetration(poo-pooed by many)






FWIW.















 
 

I've got to say, you make some really good points and it seems like they are valid. You are correct that a .355 9mm bullet expanded to .50 will not really make much difference.

A millimeter or 2 larger shot in a non vital area will make absolutely no difference. You'll just bleed. Hit a vital and they will both kill you.

It has to be overpenetration for legal reasons. The more I think of it, the more I'm sure of it.

You are on to something. No BS.

I wouldn't use a pointed FMJ though. They just push tissue aside. A flat nosed FMJ or Hard Cast would be better. They have worked for numerous years in police departments and have killed numerous animals in the woods for years. Bear included.

Not to long ago, a guide on Alaska killed a Grizzly with a 147 gr flat point hard casted 9mm.

If caliber is below 9mm, FMJ if the caliber is 9mm, 40, 45. 10mm etc. Top shelf JHP work fairly reliably. Shot placement is still key. But if the JHP meets the 12-18" standard preference on the deep end of that spec you get more damage and still a entrance and exit wound in most cases.

The only exception (.380) I have seen is the Hornady XTP loadings. It just hits 12" in FBI spec gel tests. There is another bullet but I'm not convinced the machined fluets work I  actual flesh yet.

Sorry, I was away all day. Very much appreciate your replies so let me take them one by one. I very much appreciate the back and forth. I don't know about you guys but I think I am learning something here.

Eric802,
My answer, based on what I have read here and elsewhere would probably be neither. My preference would be deeper if all other things are equal. IN other words if the choice was between 2 bullets with only a 1mm difference in width then I would opt for the one that went deeper thinking that an extra inch of depth trumps an extra 1mm of width. Again, all else being equal ... which it usually isn't.

feudist,
Yes, I agree and I can see your point. But from what I have read that will matter more in the long run but less in the short term. The jagged or uneven profile of an expanded HP will probably cut more tissue and thus more small blood vessels. But from what I read this seems to cause minor extra bleeding which will be a problem in hours not seconds. When a bad guy is trying to kill me I am only slightly comforted to know that after he kills me he is probably going to die a few hours after me. I don't think from what I have seen that the extra tissue damage caused the uneven profile of the expanded HP will be that dramatic over a FMJ. And of course this is IF it expands. So definitely agree that it is a plus I just don't know how much of a plus. I still feel that reaching a vital is much more likely to cause incapacitation than a little bit of extra bleeding.
Now on the over-penetration front I hardily agree. If that is the case, but based on what I have seen and read I just am not sure that it is. Again in a 9mm only and a handgun only and primarily a small barreled handgun. I could be wrong but I that is the big thing I am waiting to see confirmed.

willjr75,
I know right? Believe me when this idea started popping in to my head I argued with myself for a while. It took me a long time and a lot of guts to post this here because, if am right, then this really slays a lot of sacred cows. But I can't help thinking that large police departments and especially the FBI have different considerations than a civilian. The general prevailing consensus is that FMJ over penetrate IN GENERAL without respect to caliber. This comes mostly from movies, so the idea of a large metropolitan department issuing FMJ to its officers sounds crazy and reckless to the public and probably makes bean counters and lawyers loose hair! The facts really don't matter. All that matters is the picture of a kid holding a teddy bear while a department head is on the stand trying to justify why he transitioned his department away from "safe" HP to crazy reckless FMJ that ended up perforating a fence plank and killing that darling little child on the other side. But a civilian only has ot think about his own life. Of course no one wants to over penetrate and hit a innocent bystander. But we can make that choice based on actual ballistic data and the truth about over penetration stats. Not on perception. We don't have to make a decision for thousands of officers, only for one.

But that said I can't help but wonder if it is true. As I said I worked for major metro department and I saw a lot of people get shot. A lot. Most with 9mm obviously as it is pretty popular. Most with FMJ because that is cheap and easy to get. And I don't think I ever saw a perforation through and through. Of course this is just one cop and very anecdotal, but I don't have access to databases of shooting data that shows how many over penetrations there are with each caliber. But it still seem highly unlikely to me that a 9mm coming out of a short barrel hitting someone in the chest where there are ribs and bones and organs, is going to pass straight through. Also what about a cop hitting another cop? Or a cop getting shot with his own gun? Will a FMJ have a better chance of perforating his vest? I know my department used to say not to carry FMJ for that reason. A lot of cops are shot with there own guns and if a bad guy shoots you with your own gun then you want to have a vest that can stop the ammo you are carrying.

So the FBI has multiple reasons for choosing the caliber and ammo that they carry. Not only what works best for stopping an attacker. Maybe they are thinking what works sufficiently for stopping an attacker most of the time with minimal force. Maybe they consider the least powerful round that can get the job done and is less lawsuit likely. A civilian carrying for self protection has different considerations.

Also I agree completely that the profile should be as flat as possible if choosing FMJ. That's why in my first post I said I would probably try a 147gr because they tend to have a flatter profile than lighter ones. Again anecdotal but my best friend was in a police shooting where he hit bad guy 3 times in the chest with 124gr FMJ and guy did not die, but no over penetration either. Eventually hit him with another one in the neck and that one stopped everything.