New "Stopping Power" statistics revealed! - Page 1

Site Notices

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - New "Stopping Power" statistics revealed! (Page 1 of 3)

Posted: 6/2/2011 10:44:55 PM EDT

posted by Greg Ellifritz, TDI Instructor/Staff

Firearm Stopping Power…a different perspective.

I’ve been interested in firearm stopping power for a very long time. I remember reading Handguns magazine back in the late 1980s when Evan Marshall was writing articles about his stopping power studies. When Marshall’s first book came out in 1992, I ordered it immediately, despite the fact that I was a college student and really couldn’t afford its $39 price tag. Over the years I bought all of the rest of Marshall’s books as well as anything else I could find on the subject. I even have a first edition of Gunshot Injuries by Louis Lagarde published in 1915.

Every source I read has different recommendations. Some say Marshall’s data is genius. Some say it is statistically impossible. Some like big heavy bullets. Some like lighter, faster bullets. There isn’t any consensus. The more I read, the more confused I get. One thing I remember reading that made a lot of sense to me was an article by Massad Ayoob. He came out with his own stopping power data around the time Marshall published Handgun Stopping Power. In the article Ayoob took his critics to task. He suggested that if people didn’t believe his data, they should collect their own and do their own analysis. That made sense to me. So that’s just what I did.

Over a 10-year period, I kept track of stopping power results from every shooting I could find. I talked to the participants of gunfights, read police reports, attended autopsies, and scoured the newspapers, magazines, and Internet for any reliable accounts of what happened to the human body when it was shot. I documented all of the data I could; tracking caliber, type of bullet (if known), where the bullet hit and whether or not the person was incapacitated. I also tracked fatalities, noting which bullets were more likely to kill and which were not. It was an exhaustive project, but I’m glad I did it and I’m happy to report the results of my study here.

Before I get to the details, I must give a warning. I don’t have any dog in this fight! I don’t sell ammo. I’m not being paid by any firearm or ammunition manufacturer. I carry a lot of different pistols for self defense. Within the last 2 weeks, I’ve carried a .22 magnum, a .380 auto, a .38spl revolver, 3 different 9mm autos and a .45 auto. I don’t have an axe to grind. If you are happy with your 9mm, I’m happy for you. If you think that everyone should be carrying a .45 (because they don’t make a .46), I’m cool with that too. I 'm just reporting the data. If you don’t like it, take Mr. Ayoob’s advice….do a study of your own.

A few notes on terminology…

Since it was my study, I got to determine the variables and their definitions. Here’s what I looked at:

• Number of people shot

• Number of rounds that hit

• On average, how many rounds did it take for the person to stop his violent action or be incapacitated? For this number, I included hits anywhere on the body.

• What percentage of shooting incidents resulted in fatalities. For this, I included only hits to the head or torso.

• What percentage of people were not incapacitated no matter how many rounds hit them

• Accuracy. What percentage of hits was in the head or torso. I tracked this to check if variations could affect stopping power. For example, if one caliber had a huge percentage of shootings resulting in arm hits, we may expect that the stopping power of that round wouldn’t look as good as a caliber where the majority of rounds hit the head.

• One shot stop percentage- number of incapacitations divided by the number of hits the person took. Like Marshall’s number, I only included hits to the torso or head in this number.

• Percentage of people who were immediately stopped with one hit to the head or torso

Here are the results.

.25ACP-

# of people shot- 68

# of hits- 150

% of hits that were fatal- 25%

Average number of rounds until incapacitation- 2.2

% of people who were not incapacitated- 35%

One-shot-stop %- 30%

Accuracy (head and torso hits)- 62%

% actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head hit)- 49%

.22 (short, long and long rifle)

# of people shot- 154

# of hits- 213

% of hits that were fatal- 34%

Average number of rounds until incapacitation- 1.38

% of people who were not incapacitated- 31%

One-shot-stop %- 31%

Accuracy (head and torso hits)- 76%

% actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head hit)- 60%

.32 (both .32 long and .32 acp)

# of people shot- 25

# of hits- 38

% of hits that were fatal- 21%

Average number of rounds until incapacitation- 1.52

% of people who were not incapacitated- 40%

One-shot-stop %- 40%

Accuracy (head and torso hits)- 78%

% actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head hit)- 72%

.380 ACP

# of people shot- 85

# of hits- 150

% of hits that were fatal- 29%

Average number of rounds until incapacitation- 1.76

% of people who were not incapacitated- 16%

One-shot-stop %- 44%

Accuracy (head and torso hits)- 76%

% actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head hit)- 62%

.38 Special

# of people shot- 199

# of hits- 373

% of hits that were fatal- 29%

Average number of rounds until incapacitation- 1.87

% of people who were not incapacitated- 17%

One-shot-stop %- 39%

Accuracy (head and torso hits)- 76%

% actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head hit)- 55%

9mm Luger

# of people shot- 456

# of hits- 1121

% of hits that were fatal- 24%

Average number of rounds until incapacitation- 2.45

% of people who were not incapacitated- 13%

One-shot-stop %- 34%

Accuracy (head and torso hits)- 74%

% actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head hit)- 47%

.357 (both magnum and Sig)

# of people shot- 105

# of hits- 179

% of hits that were fatal- 34%

Average number of rounds until incapacitation- 1.7

% of people who were not incapacitated- 9%

One-shot-stop %- 44%

Accuracy (head and torso hits)- 81%

% actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head hit)- 61%

.40 S&W

# of people shot- 188

# of hits- 443

% of hits that were fatal- 25%

Average number of rounds until incapacitation- 2.36

% of people who were not incapacitated- 13%

One-shot-stop %- 45%

Accuracy (head and torso hits)- 76%

% actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head hit)- 52%

.45 ACP

# of people shot- 209

# of hits- 436

% of hits that were fatal- 29%

Average number of rounds until incapacitation- 2.08

% of people who were not incapacitated- 14%

One-shot-stop %- 39%

Accuracy (head and torso hits)- 85%

% actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head hit)- 51%

.44 Magnum

# of people shot- 24

# of hits- 41

% of hits that were fatal- 26%

Average number of rounds until incapacitation- 1.71

% of people who were not incapacitated- 13%

One-shot-stop %- 59%

Accuracy (head and torso hits)- 88%

% actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head hit)- 53%

Rifle (all Centerfire)

# of people shot- 126

# of hits- 176

% of hits that were fatal- 68%

Average number of rounds until incapacitation- 1.4

% of people who were not incapacitated- 9%

One-shot-stop %- 58%

Accuracy (head and torso hits)- 81%

% actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head hit)- 80%
Shotgun (All, but 90% of results were 12 gauge)

# of people shot- 146

# of hits- 178

% of hits that were fatal- 65%

Average number of rounds until incapacitation- 1.22

% of people who were not incapacitated- 12%

One-shot-stop %- 58%

Accuracy (head and torso hits)- 84%

% actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head hit)- 86%

Discussion

I really would have liked to break it down by individual bullet type, but I didn’t have enough data points to reach a level of statistical significance. Getting accurate data on over 1800 shootings was hard work. I couldn’t imagine breaking it down farther than what I did here. I also believe the data for the .25, .32 and .44 magnum should be viewed with suspicion. I simply don’t have enough data (in comparison to the other calibers) to draw an accurate comparison. I reported the data I have, but I really don’t believe that a .32 ACP incapacitates people at a higher rate than the .45 ACP!

One other thing to look at is the 9mm data. A huge number (over half) of 9mm shootings involved ball ammo. I think that skewed the results of the study in a negative manner. One can reasonable expect that FMJ ammo will not stop as well as a state of the art expanding bullet. I personally believe that the 9mm is a better stopper than the numbers here indicate, but you can make that decision for yourself based on the data presented.
Some interesting findings:

I think the most interesting statistic is the percentage of people who stopped with one shot to the torso or head. There wasn’t much variation between calibers. Between the most common defensive calibers (.38, 9mm, .40, and .45) there was a spread of only eight percentage points. No matter what gun you are shooting, you can only expect a little more than half of the people you shoot to be immediately incapacitated by your first hit.

The average number of rounds until incapacitation was also remarkably similar between calibers. All the common defensive calibers required around 2 rounds on average to incapacitate. Something else to look at here is the question of how fast can the rounds be fired out of each gun. The .38spl probably has the slowest rate of fire (long double action revolver trigger pulls and stout recoil in small revolvers) and the fewest rounds fired to get an incapacitation (1.87). Conversely the 9mm can probably be fired fastest of the common calibers and it had the most rounds fired to get an incapacitation (2.45). The .40 (2.36) and the .45 (2.08) split the difference. It is my personal belief that there really isn’t much difference between each of these calibers. It is only the fact that some guns can be fired faster than others that causes the perceived difference in stopping power. If a person takes an average of 5 seconds to stop after being hit, the defender who shoots a lighter recoiling gun can get more hits in that time period. It could be that fewer rounds would have stopped the attacker (given enough time) but the ability to fire more quickly resulted in more hits being put onto the attacker. It may not have anything to do with the stopping power of the round.

Another data piece that leads me to believe that the majority of commonly carried defensive rounds are similar in stopping power is the fact that all four have very similar failure rates. If you look at the percentage of shootings that did not result in incapacitation, the numbers are almost identical. The .38, 9mm, .40, and .45 all had failure rates of between 13% and 17%.

Now compare the numbers of the handgun calibers with the numbers generated by the rifles and shotguns. For me there really isn’t a stopping power debate. All handguns suck! If you want to stop someone, use a rifle or shotgun!

What matters even more than caliber is shot placement. Across all calibers, if you break down the incapacitations based on where the bullet hit you will see some useful information.

Head shots = 75% immediate incapacitation

Torso shots = 41% immediate incapacitation

Extremity shots (arms and legs) = 14% immediate incapacitation.

No matter which caliber you use, you have to hit something important in order to stop someone!

Conclusion

This study took me a long time and a lot of effort to complete. Despite the work it took, I'm glad I did it. The results I got from the study lead me to believe that there really isn't that much difference between most defensive handgun rounds and calibers. None is a death ray, but most work adequately...even the lowly .22s. I've stopped worrying about trying to find the "ultimate” bullet. There isn't one. And I've stopped feeling the need to strap on my .45 every time I leave the house out of fear that my 9mm doesn't have enough "stopping power”. Folks, carry what you want. Caliber really isn't all that important.

Take a look at the data. I hope it helps you decide what weapon to carry. No matter which gun you choose, pick one that is reliable and train with it until you can get fast accurate hits. Nothing beyond that really matters!

From another website.. I'm not sure if the mods here want it hotlinked

With how expensive .380 ACP ammo is, I'm glad to know the .380 has a better one-stop shot rating than the .357 Magnum and .45 ACP

Posted: 6/2/2011 10:47:52 PM EDT

[#1]

So .22 LR outperforms 9mm and .45 ACP?

Posted: 6/2/2011 10:55:18 PM EDT

[#2]

OK... I am NOT the expert on this subject but...

1. IF you want to do a nice study and tout statistics, can we please have some fucking statistics to compare these bullets effectiveness and give p values? Can we at least have some confidence intervals with those numbers that were given? Can we at least have n for each caliber? Some statement that controls for JHP vs SP vs HP?
2. Mixing .357sig in with the .357mag dilutes the meaning of the stats given to nothingness (IMHO as a .357sig shooter it overrates the .357sig and underrates the .357mag)

Posted: 6/2/2011 10:56:22 PM EDT

[#3]

Quoted:

So .22 LR outperforms 9mm and .45 ACP?

You didn't hear? The .22 and .25 are used exclusively by mob hitmen and Isræli Mossad for assassinations because the bullets bounce around inside the body and head like a pinball..

Posted: 6/2/2011 11:00:27 PM EDT

[#4]

Oops delete post please.

Posted: 6/2/2011 11:01:37 PM EDT

[#5]

Quoted:
So .22 LR outperforms 9mm and .45 ACP?

Statistically yes....many many more 22 cal pistols that are dirt cheap and almost everyone owns one...there for more accidents happen....be it some tard looks down the barrel and pulls the trigger etc...

Plus small game hunting accidents etc etc

Cheaper to shoot there for it's shot most often...

Hell..watch cops on tv and most guns they pull from criminals are 22's because they can't afford better guns lol

Makes sense

Posted: 6/2/2011 11:02:47 PM EDT

[#6]

Why was .357 Magnum mixed with .357 Sig? To bring up the stats on the SIG?

Posted: 6/2/2011 11:03:13 PM EDT

[#7]

who knew

rifle>SG>pistol

ground breaking

Posted: 6/2/2011 11:06:47 PM EDT

[#8]

This is an old study. Seriously.

Posted: 6/2/2011 11:07:17 PM EDT

[#9]

There was a study done some years ago before the semi-auto craze

to see which bullets did the most damage. It was not scientific, but a

study of people shot. It came out that the heavy .38's were the most

lethal. Again before the semi's so calibers were limited. The heavy bullets

were able to punch through and tear up more than lighter ones.

Posted: 6/2/2011 11:11:06 PM EDT

[#10]

Quoted:

Quoted:
So .22 LR outperforms 9mm and .45 ACP?

Statistically yes....many many more 22 cal pistols that are dirt cheap and almost everyone owns one...there for more accidents happen....be it some tard looks down the barrel and pulls the trigger etc...

Plus small game hunting accidents etc etc

Cheaper to shoot there for it's shot most often...

Hell..watch cops on tv and most guns they pull from criminals are 22's because they can't afford better guns lol

Makes sense

Therefore

Posted: 6/2/2011 11:12:14 PM EDT

[#11]

sorry im a believer of shot placement...

Posted: 6/2/2011 11:14:29 PM EDT

[#12]

Quoted:

Quoted:
So .22 LR outperforms 9mm and .45 ACP?

Statistically yes....many many more 22 cal pistols that are dirt cheap and almost everyone owns one...there for more accidents happen....be it some tard looks down the barrel and pulls the trigger etc...

Plus small game hunting accidents etc etc

Cheaper to shoot there for it's shot most often...

Hell..watch cops on tv and most guns they pull from criminals are 22's because they can't afford better guns lol

Makes sense

Therefore

Yes sorry...I'm iPhone retarded today...note my double post:-/

Posted: 6/2/2011 11:41:08 PM EDT

[#13]

Quoted:
sorry im a believer of shot placement...

Yup.

Posted: 6/3/2011 12:10:57 AM EDT

[#14]

While this whole thing is unscientific as fuck, it does not surprise me at all, just based on my own observations.

Posted: 6/3/2011 1:26:57 AM EDT

[#15]

Quoted:

posted by Greg Ellifritz, TDI Instructor/Staff

Firearm Stopping Power…a different perspective.

.22 (short, long and long rifle)
# of people shot- 154
# of hits- 213
% of hits that were fatal- 34%
Average number of rounds until incapacitation- 1.38
% of people who were not incapacitated- 31%
One-shot-stop %- 31%
Accuracy (head and torso hits)- 76%
% actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head hit)- 60%

9mm Luger
# of people shot- 456
# of hits- 1121
% of hits that were fatal- 24%
Average number of rounds until incapacitation- 2.45
% of people who were not incapacitated- 13%
One-shot-stop %- 34%
Accuracy (head and torso hits)- 74%
% actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head hit)- 47%

.357 (both magnum and Sig)
# of people shot- 105
# of hits- 179
% of hits that were fatal- 34%
Average number of rounds until incapacitation- 1.7
% of people who were not incapacitated- 9%
One-shot-stop %- 44%
Accuracy (head and torso hits)- 81%
% actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head hit)- 61%

.45 ACP
# of people shot- 209
# of hits- 436
% of hits that were fatal- 29%
Average number of rounds until incapacitation- 2.08
% of people who were not incapacitated- 14%
One-shot-stop %- 39%
Accuracy (head and torso hits)- 85%
% actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head hit)- 51%

No matter which caliber you use, you have to hit something important in order to stop someone!

Conclusion
None is a death ray, but most work adequately...even the lowly .22s.

From another website.. I'm not sure if the mods here want it hotlinked

With how expensive .380 ACP ammo is, I'm glad to know the .380 has a better one-stop shot rating than the .357 Magnum and .45 ACP

Uhhh... seems like .357 magnum would be a little more effective than this is... nice to know that the little .22lr has some zip to it, though. Whoa, check out the incapacitation percentage for .357 mag, though

Posted: 6/3/2011 2:27:59 AM EDT

[#16]

As for the "% of hits that were fatal", is it taken into comparison for how long the shooting victim was lying around before getting treatment? Bleeding out through a .22 hole will eventually be just as fatal as a .357 to the head. If the .22 is popular in gang-ridden areas, I guess few people care enough to call 911.

Edit: Read it again, still not sure.. "hits to the head and torso"... and then?

Posted: 6/3/2011 3:16:13 AM EDT

[#17]

I am pretty shocked - so I traded all my 1911s and bought a Ruger

Something just doesn't look right.

Posted: 6/3/2011 3:18:32 AM EDT

[#18]

Posted: 6/3/2011 3:30:50 AM EDT

[#19]

Its all about shot placement, especially so in handgun calibers which are weak compared to rifles.

Posted: 6/3/2011 3:57:43 AM EDT

[#20]

tag for reading later

Posted: 6/3/2011 4:07:02 AM EDT

[#21]

Quoted:

I am pretty shocked - so I traded all my 1911s and bought a Ruger

Something just doesn't look right.

Missing is the distance between the shooter and the target.

If I put a pistol with a .22 Short against your head and squeeze the trigger you will go down.

If I fire a 1911A1 at your head from 50 feet away and hit you in the head, you will Probably go down.

Posted: 6/3/2011 4:10:28 AM EDT

[#22]

That's some funny shit right there. Not a single factoid or combination of statistics there represents "stopping power".

Posted: 6/3/2011 4:16:27 AM EDT

[#23]

There is alot of WTF in that there article!

Posted: 6/3/2011 4:23:22 AM EDT

[#24]

It's hard to draw any definitive conclusions from a statistical analysis like this. As has been mentioned previously, there are way too many variables.

I think all we can deduce from this is that firearms are, generally speaking, deadly weapons - with long guns being vastly superior to handguns. Further, as we should all already be aware, there is no magic bullet for all circumstaces and shot placement is critically important (regarding lethality and a round's ability to incapacitate).

All in all, I say it's a good effort. But, alas, it really proves nothing we didn't already know.

Posted: 6/3/2011 4:30:19 AM EDT

[#25]

So did the shotgun numbers include birdshot?

My opinion is that all these studies are nonsense.

Posted: 6/3/2011 4:32:47 AM EDT

[#26]

Must not have looked at too many police shootings if the .40 didn't have any more people than that.

Posted: 6/3/2011 4:35:54 AM EDT

[#27]

The plural of anecdote is not data.

J

Posted: 6/3/2011 4:40:49 AM EDT

[#28]

I love this post....
In my classes people ask me all the time
about calibers.
I always say a .22 is just as deadly as
a .45 in the right hands.
Invariably someone says "Oh, a .22 isn't gonna do anything".
and to that I respond "go out 50 feet and let me shoot you then".
Good post but the old two to the body one to the head and
keep firing until they quit twitching will always be my defensive
strategy regardless of caliber.

Posted: 6/3/2011 4:45:10 AM EDT

[#29]

This is not a study. This is a collection of anecdotal data. An actual study includes data analysis. There are so many problems with these "numbers" I don't even know where to begin.

Posted: 6/3/2011 4:48:09 AM EDT

[#30]

tag oh wait ....

Posted: 6/3/2011 4:51:41 AM EDT

[#31]

The data regarding the .357 meshes with just about everything else I've read on this subject, to inlcude (I wish I could remember where I found it) a pretty extensive article written by a medical examiner regarding wounds he had seen.

Posted: 6/3/2011 4:57:26 AM EDT

[#32]

myth busters

Posted: 6/3/2011 5:11:35 AM EDT

[#33]

Quoted:

sorry im a believer of shot placement...

and that is pretty much what his data revealed.

his most important finding is what many have known all along... HANDGUNS SUCK for killing human sized target. not just small calibers... all of them. Thats why we continue to shoot until the threat is down.

Posted: 6/3/2011 5:14:02 AM EDT

[#34]

Posted: 6/3/2011 5:23:27 AM EDT

[#35]

Quoted:

This is not a study. This is a collection of anecdotal data. An actual study includes data analysis. There are so many problems with these "numbers" I don't even know where to begin.

It's funny how fast people pull out that word when they read somthing they don't like.

Posted: 6/3/2011 5:26:34 AM EDT

[#36]

This really shows something that I’ve believed for a long time. If you shoot someone in the vitals with anything there’s a good chance that they are going to either retreat or drop. Way I figure it, it’s all about the psychology of the attacker and most attackers aren’t looking for a fight to the death. They are looking for easy targets and want to flee from anything else.

This doesn’t mean I’m not fond of the bigger calibers. That’s because you might run into some drugged crazed psycho who won’t stop until he bleeds out. Bigger holes make for more blood loss. But a little .22 or .25 is still pretty darn effective at stopping most attacks.

So, get the biggest thing you can carry comfortably. But, make sure it’s small enough that you can and will carry it. Then load it with decent quality ammunition and practice with it. If you have to use it then shot placement is very important and be prepared to shoot until the slide locks back.

Posted: 6/3/2011 5:28:29 AM EDT

[#37]

I swear, if anyone tries to post this as "data" to prove something in the Ammo Forum, Zhukov's gonna have an aneurysm.

Posted: 6/3/2011 5:36:52 AM EDT

[#38]

Quoted:

This is an old "study". Seriously.

Fixed it for you.

Posted: 6/3/2011 5:50:39 AM EDT

[#39]

So with proper shot placement to either the head or torso; .32ACP is King of the Hill providing 72% one shot incapacitation.

Both the herp and the derp is strong in that article.

Posted: 6/3/2011 5:51:27 AM EDT

[#40]

This seems to back up what I believe.

Any gun is better than none.

Shot placement. Its definitely about shot placement.

Beyond those two things I believe everything else is probably conjecture. Oh wait, rifles are more lethal than handguns. That too.

Posted: 6/3/2011 6:10:25 AM EDT

[#41]

Posted: 6/3/2011 7:04:50 AM EDT

[#42]

Just needs more data points

Posted: 6/3/2011 7:51:21 AM EDT

[#43]

Quoted:
Just needs more data points

Maybe something like "Percentage of one-shot stops on Tuesdays with a full moon."

Posted: 6/3/2011 7:56:52 AM EDT

[#44]

Folks, terminal ballistics is no longer a dark art akin to alchemy. There's plenty of good solid data out there generated with the scientific method and validated with results on the street. Pay attention to that information...not this sort of stuff.

Posted: 6/3/2011 8:07:29 AM EDT

[#45]

I was going to say "In before the fools who say shot placement is king, or all handguns suck, or a handgun is only a means to fight your way back to the rifle you should never have set down", but I see I'm late to the party, at least partially. But I'm sure the rest will show up before much longer, along with a few Glock kaboom jokes and a smattering of birdshot stupidity. This is after all, GD.

And the info in the op leaves out the most important fact in any shooting, and the most difficult to assess properly, the human factor. No two humans respond exactly the same way to being shot.

Posted: 6/3/2011 8:07:32 AM EDT

[#46]

Quoted:
The plural of anecdote is not data.

J

That's a good one.

I need to remember that.

Posted: 6/3/2011 8:10:53 AM EDT

[#47]

Quoted:
Folks, terminal ballistics is no longer a dark art akin to alchemy. There's plenty of good solid data out there generated with the scientific method and validated with results on the street. Pay attention to that information...not this sort of stuff.

Absolutely.

It amazes me that there are still some people that think there is some kind of "mystery" about terminal ballistics. The science is well-documented and well-established. It is not a mystery.

Posted: 6/3/2011 8:12:23 AM EDT

[#48]

And I've stopped feeling the need to strap on my .45 every time I leave the house out of fear that my 9mm doesn't have enough "stopping power”. Folks, carry what you want. Caliber really isn't all that important.

Thats pretty much how I've thought about it for a long time now.

Posted: 6/3/2011 8:35:29 AM EDT

[#49]

For those of you calling B.S. on the 22 & 25, which I found odd as well, until you think about it. My wife has a Beretta 25 and when you think about that gun, you're not going to be shooting at someone 25 yards away. You're going to be shooting it at someone rounghly an arms distance away (same as the 22). So maybe distance of confrontation should have been listed as well?

Posted: 6/3/2011 8:51:45 AM EDT

[#50]

This is purely anecdotal, but my Dad, who was in the medical profession once told me, "Forget calibre, all that. Bullet placement is everything."

That was from his observation of gunshot wounds, and the results.

This from the OP pretty much bears that out.

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - New "Stopping Power" statistics revealed! (Page 1 of 3)

General » General Discussion

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us