Member
Joined:
Aug 2024
Posts:
1823
EE: 0% (0)
TX, USA
Posted: 12/25/2025 12:58:30 PM EDT
[Last Edit: dukeofearl][Edited]
Here we go again  Is there a true apples-to-apples published scientific study revealing the total percentage of one shot stops comparing 9mm vs. 40 using comparable ammo. For instance, Fed. 9mm HST (any bullet wt.) vs Fed. .40 S&W HST (any bullet wt.) A study conducted by FBI, military or LE agencies? No subjective personal opinion or anecdotes. |
|
The old essentially anecdotal “ one shot stop” studies done in the 70’s and 80’s ( authors Marshall and Sanow) have been largely debunked by more scientific research and data. The problem with any such studies or data collections is the high degree of variability in several aspects making the ability to draw conclusions impossible Things like size of subject, anatomic structure hit , intervening barriers , mental and physical condition of subject, and so much more. The reality is there are so many variables to these things making any sort conclusions becomes impossible. To draw a comparison how many hunters have seen properly struck deer hit with rifles and say some dropped immediately and others similarly struck ran several hundred yards before dropping. We can do controlled gel tests and the like to get some ideas, but once dealing with living things with brains various levels of physical health or strength, and psychological factors, all bets are off. We have all been witness to or heard stories of people that soaked up a bunch of 45’s and kept fighting, and other stories of instant incapacitating with 22’s. With the mass exodus away from the 40 especially in police service, my prediction is there will be a few high profile cases of people soaking up a bunch of 9 and not stopping ( with no evidence whatsoever that the situation would be different with another caliber) resulting in the pendulum swinging again |
|
Short answer: No. More useful answer: Penetration is king. And also queen, knights, and bishops. Beyond that, it doesn't really matter what you use. With modern LE loads, the wound pathways in actual humans are pretty much indistinguishable between the typical duty cartridges. Further, the wound pathways are also pretty much indistinguishable between FMJ and JHP. These heretical statements are brought to you by literally 4 decades and about ten thousand GSWs examined and tracked through human beings at autopsies done with my own 2 hands. Summary: Focusing on ammo misses the point. The ability to visualize internal anatomy and accurately create holes in the important structures is what really matters. |
|
The Marshal and Sanow studies were flawed, but they did serve as benchmarks for the time. They were heavily skewed towards revolvers in an era when revolvers were king. One shot stop is much more relevant when you have six rounds and a heavy double action trigger pull. Almost every modern training protocol subscribes to the "anything worth shooting once is worth shooting twice" train of thought. That in itself would data set comparisons difficult for semi auto calibers. |
[NO TEXT]
|
Originally Posted By PigBat: Short answer: No. More useful answer: Penetration is king. And also queen, knights, and bishops. Beyond that, it doesn't really matter what you use. With modern LE loads, the wound pathways in actual humans are pretty much indistinguishable between the typical duty cartridges. Further, the wound pathways are also pretty much indistinguishable between FMJ and JHP. These heretical statements are brought to you by literally 4 decades and about ten thousand GSWs examined and tracked through human beings at autopsies done with my own 2 hands. Summary: Focusing on ammo misses the point. The ability to visualize internal anatomy and accurately create holes in the important structures is what really matters. Yeah, NO. A 125 grain SJHP .357 magnum load [even a 'dumb'' one like the remington load] wound channel will look far different then a .357 round nose FMJ load with fragmentation and the multiple fragment paths VS what is basically an ice pick type wound channel. Bullet design, if well done, helps to make up the velocity loss when dropping from a rifle round to a pistol round. The old 9BPLE was a pretty effective ''stupid round'' simply because they were right at the envelopes edge velocity wise and pressure wise and were nothing like a 9mm FMJ at 1050-1100 FPS. I still have a bunch of it and I wouldn't feel at a disadvantage even with some of the new bullet designs like the HST. [which is my load out for 9mm usually] |
Liberals are a curious mix of communism and fascism, they want to destroy you but want to use your own money to do it.
I'm getting down to the last box, the others have all been destroyed...
I'm getting down to the last box, the others have all been destroyed...
Joined:
Dec 2024
Posts:
4
EE: 0% (0)
TN, USA
|
Going to agree with pig bat and wagnr- nothing better than post Mortem exam to see what the bullets really did. My personal limited experience is witnessing someone survive a torso hit from a 50 BMG and another hit with multiple 7.62x51 rounds standing up completely coherent asking why did you shoot me? |