Best Defensive Handgun Caliber? (Page 2 of 2)
|
Originally Posted By backbencher: He may have said that, and Marshall and Sanow claimed all sorts of things about one shot stops. On the publication of their second book, some statisticians pointed out their statistics were impossible, and Marshall and Sanow would never publish their data - so anything they published should be regarded as junk science. Greg Ellifritz has claimed to conduct a handgun caliber effectiveness study. He has also not published his data, so we have no idea if his conclusions are correct or not. I'll have to look into the FBI study cited above. Originally Posted By backbencher: Originally Posted By Dissident: Aren't all handgun calibers a compromise of some sort? Also, I seem to recall Darryl Bolke citing some studies which pointed to the 357 as having the highest recorded instances of one stop shots. Am I misremembering that? He may have said that, and Marshall and Sanow claimed all sorts of things about one shot stops. On the publication of their second book, some statisticians pointed out their statistics were impossible, and Marshall and Sanow would never publish their data - so anything they published should be regarded as junk science. Greg Ellifritz has claimed to conduct a handgun caliber effectiveness study. He has also not published his data, so we have no idea if his conclusions are correct or not. I'll have to look into the FBI study cited above. Here’s Greg’s write up of his results: Active Response Training I found analyses of Greg’s results here: LFX Training. And here: Tier Three Tactical. The first site has nice tables that may be read quickly. TLDR: Larger calibers do perform slightly better at stopping threats, but marginally so. Looking 9mm, .40 cal, and .45 ACP, all these calibers have one shot stops to the head/torso about 50% (9mm is at 47% and .40 cal is at 52%) of the time and have an average shots to incapacitate between 2.08 (.45 ACP) and 2.45 (9mm); failure to stop rates are 13% (9mm, .40 cal) and 14% (.45 ACP) for these three calibers. Based on this data, I would pick 9mm when no artificial capacity limits are imposed (eg “high” capacity mag bans); if capacity limits are imposed, .45 ACP or .357 magnum would be my choices. |
|
Originally Posted By backbencher: Your 24% & 26% numbers appear nowhere in the document above. In fact, I have highlighted the sentence below, in the document you quoted above: Studies of so?called “one shot stops” being used as a tool to define the effectiveness of one handgun cartridge, as opposed to another, are irrelevant due to the inability to account for psychological influences and due to the lack of reporting specific shot placement. I suspect you are conflating the FBI Executive Summary and either Marshall & Sanow or Greg Elliffritz, neither of which have published data and must be regarded w/ suspicion in the case of Ellifritz, or outright ridicule in the case of Marshall & Sanow. This is the link I found: https://www.scribd.com/document/355927271/Executive-Summary-of-Justification-for-Law-Enforcement-Partners Does anyone have a link to the complete document, rather than the executive summary? Or has the FBI not released the complete document to the public? Back when my agency made the switch I looked up the study and saw the numbers. This document that I pasted appears to just be the summary. Not sure what the ridicule is regarding a study like this. I get the conclusion.....marksmanship is more important than caliber when it comes to ending gun fights. Solid hits by any caliber as opposed to flesh wounds or misses. Ammo evolution has brought smaller calibers up to par with the larger calibers. 45 did come out 2 points ahead...probably insignificant but I still wanted my 21SF for primary carry. For concealability I carry a 9 but did step up to a higher capacity 9 after I retired. |
|
Originally Posted By LV1976: 9mm. The difference in expansion of 9mm 147 grain HST and .40S&W 180 grain HST is 1/10th of an inch, or 2.54mm. I don't consider that additional amount of expansion to be worth the tradeoff of lower capacity and higher recoil. 2.54mm doesn’t sound like much. But when the bullet sizes are 9/10mm, that means the difference is more than 25%. Not saying your conclusions are invalid, just that there are multiple ways of viewing data. Most people would love a 25% raise, or 25% better fuel economy, or 25% more sex. Yet you dismiss it as near meaningless. Then consider muzzle energy. The 180gr is putting out just of 400ft/lb, while even with +p, you’re only getting 350-360 ft/lb. So now you’re getting 25% bigger, with 10-12% more energy. I’ve certainly had 3-gun stages with knock downs that 9mm needs high “headshot” leverage to clear, while a .40 anywhere on target gets it done. Now there’s the trade offs. Depending on the gun, you have a decrease in capacity of 10-20%. Felt recoil is hard to measure. Some will report up to 30-60% more recoil. Others find it minimal. Hell, I’ve had my wife say the .40 P229 feels like less than a 9mm P228. And a PPQ is probably worse. So that’s a hard one to quantify. But all that is masturbatory nerding out. I think it’s safe to say we all know that one-stop shots are only a thing if you hit something CNS. Which everyone goes back to shot placement, but let’s be real: very, very, very few people will be able to call their shots in a dynamic defensive situation. Your adrenaline will be going, both you and the target may be moving, the target is not likely to be full frontal like a paper target and clothing fill further obfuscate where exactly vitals are. If you think “I’m going to one shot them in their spine and they’ll drop like a sack of potatoes” you’re fooling yourself. It’s not shot placement, but rather simply where the shot lands. I know, I know. Everyone on arfcom is a stone cold killer that can shoot the wings off a fly. I don’t know what to say other than “no, you won’t”. When it comes down to it, it’s super unlikely you’ll ever need to use a pistol. The likelihood that it will matter what size bullet you use, or even the capacity of the pistol, will matter to the outcome is infinitesimal. What really matters is that you have awareness, fundamentals, and the proper mindset to engage. |
|
Originally Posted By urbanredneck: Back when my agency made the switch I looked up the study and saw the numbers. This document that I pasted appears to just be the summary. Not sure what the ridicule is regarding a study like this. I get the conclusion.....marksmanship is more important than caliber when it comes to ending gun fights. Solid hits by any caliber as opposed to flesh wounds or misses. Ammo evolution has brought smaller calibers up to par with the larger calibers. 45 did come out 2 points ahead...probably insignificant but I still wanted my 21SF for primary carry. For concealability I carry a 9 but did step up to a higher capacity 9 after I retired. Originally Posted By urbanredneck: Originally Posted By backbencher: Your 24% & 26% numbers appear nowhere in the document above. In fact, I have highlighted the sentence below, in the document you quoted above: Studies of so?called “one shot stops” being used as a tool to define the effectiveness of one handgun cartridge, as opposed to another, are irrelevant due to the inability to account for psychological influences and due to the lack of reporting specific shot placement. I suspect you are conflating the FBI Executive Summary and either Marshall & Sanow or Greg Elliffritz, neither of which have published data and must be regarded w/ suspicion in the case of Ellifritz, or outright ridicule in the case of Marshall & Sanow. This is the link I found: https://www.scribd.com/document/355927271/Executive-Summary-of-Justification-for-Law-Enforcement-Partners Does anyone have a link to the complete document, rather than the executive summary? Or has the FBI not released the complete document to the public? Back when my agency made the switch I looked up the study and saw the numbers. This document that I pasted appears to just be the summary. Not sure what the ridicule is regarding a study like this. I get the conclusion.....marksmanship is more important than caliber when it comes to ending gun fights. Solid hits by any caliber as opposed to flesh wounds or misses. Ammo evolution has brought smaller calibers up to par with the larger calibers. 45 did come out 2 points ahead...probably insignificant but I still wanted my 21SF for primary carry. For concealability I carry a 9 but did step up to a higher capacity 9 after I retired. Based on the Ellifritz data (linked above), I’m inclined to believe that bigger calibers likely have more “stopping power” but it is marginal at best and a statistical false indicator due to higher accuracy with those larger calibers in the study at worst (users may have been more precise due to lower capacity resulting in higher one shot stop rates and lower shots to incapacitation averages). 9mm is clearly a good choice for ccw based on the data (so is 380 for that matter) and so are the larger calibers. So, the conclusion I draw is that 9mm in a G19 or G17 is a good choice as is 45 ACP in a G21. I’ll still carry my .45 or .357 if I feel like it and I’ll happily carry a 9mm most of the time. |
| 45 acp is probably the best if you just look at performance. Less recoil than 357 or 10mm. Enough penetration and top rounds get near .90 expansion diameter. Only issue is the guns it comes in are much larger and hold less ammo than 9mm which is completely adequate for the task. A small 9 mm holding 12 rounds is still smaller than the smallest 45 that holds 7. While I don't think you need 20 rounds for self defense 7 is a little light. |
|
Originally Posted By pajasonc: 45 acp is probably the best if you just look at performance. Less recoil than 357 or 10mm. Enough penetration and top rounds get near .90 expansion diameter. Only issue is the guns it comes in are much larger and hold less ammo than 9mm which is completely adequate for the task. A small 9 mm holding 12 rounds is still smaller than the smallest 45 that holds 7. While I don't think you need 20 rounds for self defense 7 is a little light. It’s hard finding a good compact .45 anymore in my opinion. The Shield or XDs are fine, but don’t have great capacity. I love the 1911 platform, but it has that low capacity. The XD .45 Compact is basically unobtainable and the Sig P320 compact only holds 9+1 and is also a P320. |
|
Originally Posted By NN300BLK: It’s hard finding a good compact .45 anymore in my opinion. The Shield or XDs are fine, but don’t have great capacity. I love the 1911 platform, but it has that low capacity. The XD .45 Compact is basically unobtainable and the Sig P320 compact only holds 9+1 and is also a P320. Full size...still want my .45. Fourteen rounds of 45 is superior to 15 or 17 rounds of 9mm. But once you delve into concealability and capacity of ccw...it is hard to argue for 45. I bought a shield 45 a few years ago along with a 9 shield. I could carry the 9 for off duty and figured that one day I would carry the 45...but it never happened. Carry a max 9 since I retired. I can carry in all 50 states but states like CA still restrict capacity for retired LEOs so if I have to travel some place like that I will probably dig out the old shield with the mag extensions I put on it to get 9+1. The 45 shield only holds 6 or 7 depending on the magazine. |
|
Originally Posted By urbanredneck: Full size...still want my .45. Fourteen rounds of 45 is superior to 15 or 17 rounds of 9mm. But once you delve into concealability and capacity of ccw...it is hard to argue for 45. I bought a shield 45 a few years ago along with a 9 shield. I could carry the 9 for off duty and figured that one day I would carry the 45...but it never happened. Carry a max 9 since I retired. I can carry in all 50 states but states like CA still restrict capacity for retired LEOs so if I have to travel some place like that I will probably dig out the old shield with the mag extensions I put on it to get 9+1. The 45 shield only holds 6 or 7 depending on the magazine. Originally Posted By urbanredneck: Originally Posted By NN300BLK: It’s hard finding a good compact .45 anymore in my opinion. The Shield or XDs are fine, but don’t have great capacity. I love the 1911 platform, but it has that low capacity. The XD .45 Compact is basically unobtainable and the Sig P320 compact only holds 9+1 and is also a P320. Full size...still want my .45. Fourteen rounds of 45 is superior to 15 or 17 rounds of 9mm. But once you delve into concealability and capacity of ccw...it is hard to argue for 45. I bought a shield 45 a few years ago along with a 9 shield. I could carry the 9 for off duty and figured that one day I would carry the 45...but it never happened. Carry a max 9 since I retired. I can carry in all 50 states but states like CA still restrict capacity for retired LEOs so if I have to travel some place like that I will probably dig out the old shield with the mag extensions I put on it to get 9+1. The 45 shield only holds 6 or 7 depending on the magazine. My thinking exactly. In the subcompact/micro compact category, the XDs and Shield have almost half the capacity of the Hellcat or P365 and more recoil in a size class where recoil has more importance than with bigger heavier guns. The XD 45 Compact is the most compelling compact .45 for me at 10+1, but even then, my Echelon 4.0c is more ergonomic, lighter, and holds 5 more rounds. And like I said, I haven't seen one even though Springfield doesn't show it as discontinued. The full size is the tipping point. As you said, you get 14 rounds of 45 instead of let's say 18 9mm, but once you get into the 13-15 round area, the additional capacity probably is a diminishing returns type scenario. |
|
Originally Posted By NN300BLK: My thinking exactly. In the subcompact/micro compact category, the XDs and Shield have almost half the capacity of the Hellcat or P365 and more recoil in a size class where recoil has more importance than with bigger heavier guns. The XD 45 Compact is the most compelling compact .45 for me at 10+1, but even then, my Echelon 4.0c is more ergonomic, lighter, and holds 5 more rounds. And like I said, I haven't seen one even though Springfield doesn't show it as discontinued. The full size is the tipping point. As you said, you get 14 rounds of 45 instead of let's say 18 9mm, but once you get into the 13-15 round area, the additional capacity probably is a diminishing returns type scenario. Originally Posted By NN300BLK: Originally Posted By urbanredneck: Originally Posted By NN300BLK: It’s hard finding a good compact .45 anymore in my opinion. The Shield or XDs are fine, but don’t have great capacity. I love the 1911 platform, but it has that low capacity. The XD .45 Compact is basically unobtainable and the Sig P320 compact only holds 9+1 and is also a P320. Full size...still want my .45. Fourteen rounds of 45 is superior to 15 or 17 rounds of 9mm. But once you delve into concealability and capacity of ccw...it is hard to argue for 45. I bought a shield 45 a few years ago along with a 9 shield. I could carry the 9 for off duty and figured that one day I would carry the 45...but it never happened. Carry a max 9 since I retired. I can carry in all 50 states but states like CA still restrict capacity for retired LEOs so if I have to travel some place like that I will probably dig out the old shield with the mag extensions I put on it to get 9+1. The 45 shield only holds 6 or 7 depending on the magazine. My thinking exactly. In the subcompact/micro compact category, the XDs and Shield have almost half the capacity of the Hellcat or P365 and more recoil in a size class where recoil has more importance than with bigger heavier guns. The XD 45 Compact is the most compelling compact .45 for me at 10+1, but even then, my Echelon 4.0c is more ergonomic, lighter, and holds 5 more rounds. And like I said, I haven't seen one even though Springfield doesn't show it as discontinued. The full size is the tipping point. As you said, you get 14 rounds of 45 instead of let's say 18 9mm, but once you get into the 13-15 round area, the additional capacity probably is a diminishing returns type scenario. This was my thinking as well, but with a G30S instead of an XD. G30S is roughly the same size as a G19, but with a 50% reduction in onboard capacity. 50% is a big number, but I don't see it as a total detriment. While I carry the G30S from time-to-time, a G48 MOS with OEM 10rd mags is my usual off-duty EDC. Same capacity, but thinner, slightly less recoil (I find the thicker grip of the G30S to help with recoil; feels the same as a full size M&P45) and the bonus of a RDS (my G30S isn't cut for an optic and I don't intend to, either). |
|
Originally Posted By the_professional: This was my thinking as well, but with a G30S instead of an XD. G30S is roughly the same size as a G19, but with a 50% reduction in onboard capacity. 50% is a big number, but I don't see it as a total detriment. While I carry the G30S from time-to-time, a G48 MOS with OEM 10rd mags is my usual off-duty EDC. Same capacity, but thinner, slightly less recoil (I find the thicker grip of the G30S to help with recoil; feels the same as a full size M&P45) and the bonus of a RDS (my G30S isn't cut for an optic and I don't intend to, either). Originally Posted By the_professional: Originally Posted By NN300BLK: Originally Posted By urbanredneck: Originally Posted By NN300BLK: It’s hard finding a good compact .45 anymore in my opinion. The Shield or XDs are fine, but don’t have great capacity. I love the 1911 platform, but it has that low capacity. The XD .45 Compact is basically unobtainable and the Sig P320 compact only holds 9+1 and is also a P320. Full size...still want my .45. Fourteen rounds of 45 is superior to 15 or 17 rounds of 9mm. But once you delve into concealability and capacity of ccw...it is hard to argue for 45. I bought a shield 45 a few years ago along with a 9 shield. I could carry the 9 for off duty and figured that one day I would carry the 45...but it never happened. Carry a max 9 since I retired. I can carry in all 50 states but states like CA still restrict capacity for retired LEOs so if I have to travel some place like that I will probably dig out the old shield with the mag extensions I put on it to get 9+1. The 45 shield only holds 6 or 7 depending on the magazine. My thinking exactly. In the subcompact/micro compact category, the XDs and Shield have almost half the capacity of the Hellcat or P365 and more recoil in a size class where recoil has more importance than with bigger heavier guns. The XD 45 Compact is the most compelling compact .45 for me at 10+1, but even then, my Echelon 4.0c is more ergonomic, lighter, and holds 5 more rounds. And like I said, I haven't seen one even though Springfield doesn't show it as discontinued. The full size is the tipping point. As you said, you get 14 rounds of 45 instead of let's say 18 9mm, but once you get into the 13-15 round area, the additional capacity probably is a diminishing returns type scenario. This was my thinking as well, but with a G30S instead of an XD. G30S is roughly the same size as a G19, but with a 50% reduction in onboard capacity. 50% is a big number, but I don't see it as a total detriment. While I carry the G30S from time-to-time, a G48 MOS with OEM 10rd mags is my usual off-duty EDC. Same capacity, but thinner, slightly less recoil (I find the thicker grip of the G30S to help with recoil; feels the same as a full size M&P45) and the bonus of a RDS (my G30S isn't cut for an optic and I don't intend to, either). The G30S is kind of a classic in some ways, I wouldn’t mill the slide either. 
|
|
I would argue training is far better than any sort of item you might own. With that said, I don't think any caliber is better since it entirely depends on what the shooter is comfortable with. I would say if you are buying something at the store and only doing so because it is the cheapest gun you can find, and you never shoot it at all and just think you'll be okay, then yes, you are asking for trouble. |
|
Originally Posted By 03RN: Did you read the title? Yes, and the original post. I’m intelligent enough to have noticed the specific threat was not stated. Man is implied, but not stated. To a thinking person “defensive” can be different things at different times. My stated calibers apply. Example: coyote hunting. Dog down. Approach dog. Not sure if dead. A single 22LR to the head is the most efficient. Example 2: hiking on a trail that may have human predators and big cats. 10mm is most versatile. Example 3: walking around town. Not likely to need to coup de grâce a dog or shoot a 4 legged cougar but may need to shoot a 2 legged predator who sees you as his/her next victim. Here a compact 9mm is most practical. ETA: one’s predilection toward inductive logic or deductive logic is usually a strong indicator of their general cognitive development. It’s safe to assume you automatically defaulted to defense against humans at the exclusion of other threats. Yes. I read the title AND I THOUGHT about my answer. Did you? |
|
Originally Posted By GaryT1776: Yes, and the original post. I’m intelligent enough to have noticed the specific threat was not stated. Man is implied, but not stated. To a thinking person “defensive” can be different things at different times. My stated calibers apply. Example: coyote hunting. Dog down. Approach dog. Not sure if dead. A single 22LR to the head is the most efficient. Example 2: hiking on a trail that may have human predators and big cats. 10mm is most versatile. Example 3: walking around town. Not likely to need to coup de grâce a dog or shoot a 4 legged cougar but may need to shoot a 2 legged predator who sees you as his/her next victim. Here a compact 9mm is most practical. ETA: one’s predilection toward inductive logic or deductive logic is usually a strong indicator of their general cognitive development. It’s safe to assume you automatically defaulted to defense against humans at the exclusion of other threats. Yes. I read the title AND I THOUGHT about my answer. Did you? Originally Posted By GaryT1776: Originally Posted By 03RN: Did you read the title? Yes, and the original post. I’m intelligent enough to have noticed the specific threat was not stated. Man is implied, but not stated. To a thinking person “defensive” can be different things at different times. My stated calibers apply. Example: coyote hunting. Dog down. Approach dog. Not sure if dead. A single 22LR to the head is the most efficient. Example 2: hiking on a trail that may have human predators and big cats. 10mm is most versatile. Example 3: walking around town. Not likely to need to coup de grâce a dog or shoot a 4 legged cougar but may need to shoot a 2 legged predator who sees you as his/her next victim. Here a compact 9mm is most practical. ETA: one’s predilection toward inductive logic or deductive logic is usually a strong indicator of their general cognitive development. It’s safe to assume you automatically defaulted to defense against humans at the exclusion of other threats. Yes. I read the title AND I THOUGHT about my answer. Did you? This is fair. The nature of threat was implied and not stated as you said. Assume this is CCW or EDC. The expansion (JHPs) discussed in my OP are not regarded as a good choice against some backwoods/backcountry threats. |
|
Originally Posted By GaryT1776: Yes, and the original post. I’m intelligent enough to have noticed the specific threat was not stated. Man is implied, but not stated. To a thinking person “defensive” can be different things at different times. My stated calibers apply. Example: coyote hunting. Dog down. Approach dog. Not sure if dead. A single 22LR to the head is the most efficient. Example 2: hiking on a trail that may have human predators and big cats. 10mm is most versatile. Example 3: walking around town. Not likely to need to coup de grâce a dog or shoot a 4 legged cougar but may need to shoot a 2 legged predator who sees you as his/her next victim. Here a compact 9mm is most practical. ETA: one’s predilection toward inductive logic or deductive logic is usually a strong indicator of their general cognitive development. It’s safe to assume you automatically defaulted to defense against humans at the exclusion of other threats. Yes. I read the title AND I THOUGHT about my answer. Did you? Originally Posted By GaryT1776: Originally Posted By 03RN: Did you read the title? Yes, and the original post. I’m intelligent enough to have noticed the specific threat was not stated. Man is implied, but not stated. To a thinking person “defensive” can be different things at different times. My stated calibers apply. Example: coyote hunting. Dog down. Approach dog. Not sure if dead. A single 22LR to the head is the most efficient. Example 2: hiking on a trail that may have human predators and big cats. 10mm is most versatile. Example 3: walking around town. Not likely to need to coup de grâce a dog or shoot a 4 legged cougar but may need to shoot a 2 legged predator who sees you as his/her next victim. Here a compact 9mm is most practical. ETA: one’s predilection toward inductive logic or deductive logic is usually a strong indicator of their general cognitive development. It’s safe to assume you automatically defaulted to defense against humans at the exclusion of other threats. Yes. I read the title AND I THOUGHT about my answer. Did you? I'm not questioning your intelligence. But sometimes you can be to intelligent to have a normal conversation with normal guys just shooting the shit. Or this   Men and women different approach to communicating It is safe to assume I defaulted to self defense from humans because he gave zero context to assume anything else |
Do Good
Be Dangerous
Live Free
Be Dangerous
Live Free
|
Originally Posted By 03RN: I'm not questioning your intelligence. But sometimes you can be to intelligent to have a normal conversation with normal guys just shooting the shit. Or this  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GkGPAfo3QtwIt is safe to assume I defaulted to self defense from humans because he gave zero context to assume anything else I've more or less lived my whole life in bear and cougar country. A semi-auto is not high on my list if I'm going into the pasture after dark with the possible exception of 10mm or maybe, maybe 45 +P. |
|
In my working life, I've investigated over 35 shootings. Police and non police. What im going to post is based upon actual observed results, not statistical analysis beyond those observed results. Youre already the outlier by being in a gunfight at all. I've observed people drt from a single hit with a .32acp ball, and a guy have to be told he'd been shot with a .45acp. What I observed is that in the overwhelming majority of gunfights, caliber was way less important than getting on target first. I also observed that in general .40 or larger stopped the fight one round faster than .38 or 9mm or smaller. The variables in play are numerous, but thats what I observed. In police shootings, ive seen mag dumps, spray and pray with 15 rounds producing one or two hits. I've seen revolver shootings with the fight over and 3 rounds still left in the cylinder. I cannot tell you what is best for you. That is a personal choice based upon your skills, experience and environment. Most defensive gun uses ive investigated resulted in zero shots fired. 0% of those cases were resolved based upon the caliber or type of weapon. The simple display of a weapon was enough to deter violence. In my personal case, it was a keltec p32. The would be robber ran away. Carry what you are comfortable with and will actually carry and not leave at home or in a lock box in the car. How does your lower back feel after 10hrs of doing whatever you do? My odds of facing international terrorists or ms13 are pretty low in rural Ohio. My odds of facing a dangerous animal are moderate. My odds of lower back pain are high. My edc after 40 years of policing is a 2" .357 varying the load depending on where im going today. Alternatively that keltec P32 for social settings. If im going to be walking where I know bears do their thing, its a 4" .357. If im going to be in an urban environment its a g43x. My former duty G45 with optics does nightstand duty now, and my 1911 is still seeking a purpose other than recreation. Maybe id use it for +p hardcast if I was going where larger bears are. |
Trusting your life to the benevolence of an armed criminal is not a strategy, it is stupid!
|
https://www.activeresponsetraining.net/an-alternate-look-at-handgun-stopping-power @backbencher Think this was one of the studies that the FBI looked at. Think they looked at this one too. https://www.amazon.com/dp/158160128X?tag=arfcom00-20 These were both listed in an article on the FBI study. Not sure why the study is so hard to find now. |
|
Originally Posted By urbanredneck: https://www.activeresponsetraining.net/an-alternate-look-at-handgun-stopping-power @backbencher Think this was one of the studies that the FBI looked at. Think they looked at this one too. https://www.amazon.com/dp/158160128X?tag=arfcom00-20 These were both listed in an article on the FBI study. Not sure why the study is so hard to find now. Originally Posted By urbanredneck: https://www.activeresponsetraining.net/an-alternate-look-at-handgun-stopping-power @backbencher Think this was one of the studies that the FBI looked at. Think they looked at this one too. https://www.amazon.com/dp/158160128X?tag=arfcom00-20 These were both listed in an article on the FBI study. Not sure why the study is so hard to find now. Your second link is to the now debunked Marshall & Sanow cash grab - when they published their second book, folks took a look at their statistics, and said, that's impossible. Folks started asking for the original data, & Marshall & Sanow wouldn't produce it, so the assumption is they made the whole thing up. Your first link is to Greg Ellifritz's document, in which he claims to have collected data, and presents his summary. Here is the key line: Take a look at the data. By which he means - take a look at my summary of the data I have claimed to have collected, but have not published - so you can't look at it, nor even know IF I collected the data I have claimed to collect, and which I claim to base my summaries on. So while Ellifritz's "study" may be interesting, it is no more scientific than Marshall & Sanow's publications, as without access to the original data, we can't tell if his "summaries" are correct or if he just made the whole thing up. At least gel tests, whether clear or properly calibrated, refrigerated organic ballistic gelatin - are repeatable. Even clear gel tests have scientific value. Greg Ellifritz's "summaries" have no published data to back them, and are unverifiable. |