Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Posted: 10/11/2003 12:44:46 PM EDT
www.chuckhawks.com/ammo_by_anonymous.htm


What do you think? Accurate Info?
Link Posted: 10/11/2003 1:39:31 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/11/2003 1:40:35 PM EDT by cornbread2]
This is correct and very usefull info. Believe it.
Link Posted: 10/11/2003 1:50:06 PM EDT
Visit the terminal effects forum at www.tacticalforums.com
Link Posted: 10/11/2003 1:52:45 PM EDT
It's a big stinky pile of horse poop. Stay away.

Listen to Lumpy196.
Link Posted: 10/11/2003 2:20:02 PM EDT
Link Posted: 10/11/2003 7:31:47 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Aimless:

. All good .223 defense rifles have been banned as "assault rifles" - Thank you, Democrats - but you may already own one. If so, lucky you.


There seems to be a fair amount of crap in there.



What if he was talking about CA and NJ?


CRC
Link Posted: 10/11/2003 8:34:50 PM EDT
CRC, that's just one line of crap from a whole load of it. The guy who wrote that bull didn't even have the decency to sign his name to it. "Stopping power" is fiction.
Link Posted: 10/11/2003 9:22:32 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Jetlag:
"Stopping power" is fiction.



Really? Please do elaborate
Link Posted: 10/11/2003 9:38:04 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Lockedon:

Originally Posted By Jetlag:
"Stopping power" is fiction.



Really? Please do elaborate



Because you cant quantify what for the most part is a living organisms psychological reaction to physical damage.

Its better to quantify what damage is most likely to shut the organism down. Less room for error with that approach.
Link Posted: 10/12/2003 9:11:19 AM EDT
They rate this ammo from REAL WORLD shootings and give their opinions based on the results in the shooting of human beings.

If brand A JHP gave 80% one shot stops and brand B did 95% in real shootings it is likely that brand B would be the best choice for your carry load.

I can't see why that this is so hard for some to understand.

To me it makes a hell of a lot more sense than the results of shooting blocks of jello in the lab or taking advice from your dumbass brother in law that has never shot anyone.

How can it get any more real than this?

Link Posted: 10/12/2003 3:35:45 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/12/2003 3:36:26 PM EDT by Jetlag]
cornbread2, because it's real easy to make statistics say anything you want them to say especially when you're trying to sell books.

Using your example, we'll say brand A stopped the target 80% of the time when one shot was fired and brand B stopped the target 95% of the time when one shot was fired. But they forgot to tell you what happened when two shots were fired or three or four or ten. Let me give you an example:

Brand A:
Out of 100 shootings:
80 involved only one shot:
64 of the one-shot shootings stopped the target:
80% one-shot stops/one-shot ratio
64% one-shot stop ratio

Brand B:
Out of 100 shootings:
20 involved only one shot:
19 of the one-shot shootings stopped the target:
95% one-shot stops/one-shot ratio
19% one-shot stop ratio

Now which one would you like to carry?

Sorry, but I'll leave the statistics to the politicians, and stick with science, thank you.
Link Posted: 10/12/2003 6:43:58 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/12/2003 6:48:00 PM EDT by ar10er]
Something else to factor in.

If brand A was used in 100 shootings, and the first round hit in 80 of those shootings was in the arm, that will not stop many determined criminals.

If brand B was used in 100 shootings, and the first round hit in 80 of those shootings was in the head, that will stop all of the criminals, no matter how determined.


In other words, it depends on where you hit them.


Yes, Lumpy is correct.
Link Posted: 10/12/2003 8:23:53 PM EDT
In statistics they tell you that a sample of 30 or greater is needed to accuratly show a trend for a given variable. With a shooting there would seem to be numerious variables(ie. Shot placement, size of body, age, mental state, chemical abuse, sex, exact course of bullet, even the ambient temp...etc...) If a bullet struck a surface 1 millimeter to the left of a previous shot it has a whole new set of possible paths the bullet can take.

To factor out all the variables except two, which brand bullet in which caliber would take a huge statistical sample. Like the population of China huge, billions shot in a labratory setting,not a few hundred shootouts.
Link Posted: 10/12/2003 10:40:57 PM EDT
I'll sum it up by saying I have NO intention of ever being involved in a one-shot stop statistic for someone. I dont train to make one good center-mass hit. Think multiples.
Link Posted: 10/13/2003 6:09:02 AM EDT
Another important point to consider is that he starts off saying that most of the article is based on info from Marshall, Sanow and Ayoob. Are you willing to trust your life and the lives of your family members to the opinions of magazine writers? When people have tried digging into Marshall and Sanows data there have been numerous irrgularities, mathemetical errors, supposed incidents from police departments that nobody at the police departments in question has ever heard of, etc.
Link Posted: 10/13/2003 6:12:27 AM EDT
Link Posted: 10/13/2003 10:40:13 AM EDT
There is SOME good info there, but MOST of it is BAD ADVISE OR HORSEHOCKEY!
Link Posted: 10/13/2003 10:50:40 AM EDT
The more I read, the worse it gets! This guy is an assclown, or is just pulling our collective leg.
Link Posted: 10/13/2003 7:09:17 PM EDT
I can attest to the the fact that 'stopping power' is at best, a myth. In a police training video we were shown, an officer was shot once with a .22lr derringer and killed, while the assailant who shot him received 6 hollow point +p .357 magnum rounds from the officer, all center mass. The assailant lived. One would think, however, that due to stopping power the .357 would have totally screwed the shooter over, but such is not the case.
Link Posted: 10/14/2003 12:39:01 PM EDT
Marshall and Sanows work is pure junk. Nothing even close to approaching reality. FIREARMSTACTIAL.com (work by M. Fackler MD et all) is reliable and scientific. But, It's your life.....you make the choice.
Link Posted: 10/15/2003 2:00:34 PM EDT
Having just read the article, put me down in the "what a bunch of nonsense" crowd. Numerous factual errors, lots of opinions presented as facts, and so on. Some of the info is good, but that is sort of like saying you can find some good corn kernels if you dig through enough cow flop.
Link Posted: 10/15/2003 10:33:55 PM EDT

Originally Posted By ar15zams:
I can attest to the the fact that 'stopping power' is at best, a myth. In a police training video we were shown, an officer was shot once with a .22lr derringer and killed, while the assailant who shot him received 6 hollow point +p .357 magnum rounds from the officer, all center mass. The assailant lived. One would think, however, that due to stopping power the .357 would have totally screwed the shooter over, but such is not the case.



About the stoping power myth: Doesn't the article address that stoping power is not equal to killing power?
Link Posted: 10/15/2003 10:59:07 PM EDT
"10 Gauge

Yow. Load your 10 gauge with whatever the hell you want."


At least the guy has a sense of humor.

Link Posted: 10/16/2003 7:20:33 AM EDT
ar15zams,

also, you are leaving a fair amount of detail out of your statement abou tstoppoing power..

If you are referring to the Trp Coates video:

1) Trp Coates was hit with the .22 between the seam of his vest, and the bullet travelled into his heart. Even so, he was able to move away, call for back-up, and then continue to live for minutes more as he bled out..

2) The assailant was rather "large." As a result, his body mass absorbed most of the damage from the .357 hits.. Even so, the assailant was effectively neutralized, as he couldn't move, except to raise his weapon for the one last lucky shot..

3)The main lesson was Trp Coates' tactics..

Hindsight is always 20/20 of course, but if he had sought cover after engaging the subject, he would still be alive..

Instead, he placed himself at a 45 degree angle, unprotected, while he called for backup..That's how the subject got in his lucky shot..

But the .357 rnds were effective stoppers, if they would have been combined with effective tactics..
Top Top