OK, I know and have read a lot of the arguments and posts on this topic.
My point: Forget what someone gets shot WITH.
Who has real battlefield experience with how effective a person is after being shot and or wounded with ANYTHING.
Once a guy gets pegged, I mean a penetrating wound not a scratch, are they mostly not useful or do lots of guys who are shot still fight?
My question is really, once a guy gets a hole in him with any bullet any place on his body...in real life... does he still fight?
BP

Data coming from Afghanistan and Somalia have indicated multiple shots have been required to effectively stop targets. That I have heard from multiple sources, but I cannot say what exactly that means. Were the targets beyond resonable fragmentation range of theh 5.56mm? Did it take multiple shots to kill the target, or to stop him from any further aggression? I hope we can get some first hand data. I do know M60 gunners from Vietnam who said that targets hit with 7.62mm from about any resonable distance went down and did not resume aggression. But these were firefights and it was from a fully auto weapon, so there may have been fear or multiple hits involved.

On a side note, SOF mentioned in an article that in some war-torn African nations, the #1 most common injury in the Hospital waiting room is someone sitting around with a 9mm bullet in him - sometimes several. Why? Because they aren't dead.

If you ask the question of yourself, what would you do? If I took a round in a limb, I might keep going - depends on how desperate the situation is. If I took either round in the vitals, I am going straight to the medic - or having the medic come straight to me, most likely. Now, if I am a religious fanatic, doped on quat, and I believe I will enter paradise if I can just kill one infidel, I may expend my last few breaths and pints of blood trying to take an enemy with me. This is such a hard question to assign a straightforward answer to.

SIEGE

Good question there...

From what I understand it has many factors. Physical condition, mental state and how tough the person actually is and of course shot placement.
I heard a story of a big biker in California who was hit 20+ times with a 9mm while calmly returning fire and drinking whisky-the only thing that stopped the fight is that one of the 9mm bullets nicked his carotid and he bled out about 10 minutes later. I did not believe it until I saw the chest x-ray of the individual and the credentials of the person telling the story. Some people from what I understand who have lived a hard life (like the Taliban, Moros',Somalis') may not even respond to being hit unless a well placed shot clinches it. Drugs also change mental states and may make you even tougher.
Also the thickness and compostion of the body have a bit to do also a fatter person has more room for a bullet to do what it needs to do-but also it can help against low velocity lighter weight ammo (as in the case of the above mentioned biker). Whereas a malnourished individual may be thin enough for a bullet to pass through without any real damage occuring unles a vital point is struck.
Also from what I have read and understand some people have soaked up multiple hits from guns that some people believe to be the last word in stopping power. In the book "Shooting to Live" by applegate/sykes fairburn-in the stopping power chapter they relate a few failures to stop involving .45 caliber handguns amongst others. In the book "Gunshot Injuries" by La Garde he relays multiple incidences of bullets failing to stop savage/determined enemies.

Quoted: My question is really, once a guy gets a hole in him with any bullet any place on his body...in real life... does he still fight? BP

No.


YMMV - bullet placement is a key factor

Once a guy gets pegged, I mean a penetrating wound not a scratch, are they mostly not useful or do lots of guys who are shot still fight? My question is really, once a guy gets a hole in him with any bullet any place on his body...in real life... does he still fight?

Look over the records of Silver Star and CMOH awardees.  Lots of instances where they were hit and continued to fight.  And in WWII it was with 8mm rounds not the wussy .30-06 that the US used (all things being relative the 7.92mm German round was larger than the 7.62mm US round).

You could look over what was reported from the Battle of Mogidishu groups.msn.com/TheMarylandAR15ShootersSite/bhdweaponreferences.msnw

You will see examples of 5.56 being more than adequate and 7.62 not 'immediately stopping'.  The 7.62x51 is a very overrated round.  It works, but its not the 'instant death bullet' that so many want to think it is.

There is mention in there of a woman who took MANY - MANY rounds (5.56 & 7.62) her body shredded and still kept trying to complete her mission - she even took a hit from a 40mm Grenade that took her leg off and she still pushed on.  Unless you get a good CNS hit, there is no predicting how long it will take to stop a person - NO MATTER THE ROUND (assuming small arms - for sure a 120mm APFSDS or a 155mm HE round would 'stop' a person with 1 shot <G>).

Quoted: a 120mm APFSDS or a 155mm HE round would 'stop' a person with 1 shot <G>).

LOL, but does "stop" begin at initial impact or after the fallout of human remains fall from the sky?

7.92mm vs .30-06 was largely in favor of 7.92mm because the heavier 198gr bullet at 2500fps had a longer "indirect" range than the lighter 147gr bullet at 2800fps.  This was largely corrected when the .30-06 Ball cartridge was abandoned in favor of the M1 Ball cartridge.  

.30-06 Ball wasn't made much after 1918, but the billions of rounds is storage resulted in in its use until the mid-1930s when M1 Ball was finally issued.  

M1 Ball was specifically designed to increase the effectiveness of US machineguns at very long ranges (beyond line of sight) and from all tests was more than a match for 7.92mm.  M1 Ball, however, proved too much for US military installation range fans especially those of the National Guard.  M1 Ball was "dumbed down" to the same spec as the obsolete .30-06 Ball and called M2 Ball.  M2 Ball was the standard issue cartridge for rifles and MGs until superseded by 7.62mmNATO.

The need for long range, unobserved MG fire was unique to WW1 trench warfare and there's nothing wrong with M2 Ball.

7.62mm NATO is a ballistic clone to M2 Ball.  Same (basic) 147gr bullet at the same muzzle velocity.  

But, in the end, it's all about hits and wounding and 5.56mm excels in both at combat ranges.

-- Chuck

Chuck,
I was just pointing out that the 8mm German round had a larger diameter than the .30 cal US round.  By everyones 'reasoning' the larger round should always cause more dammage AND the smaller round is 'wimpy'.  I forgot to put the after calling .30-06 wussy <G>.

Obviously its not the case; both in the 8mm vs M1 ball and 7.62x51 vs 5.56x45mm.

As you've pointed out its dammage that counts - don't go worring about the caliber or diameter of the round - Just insure it does enough dammage and penetrates deep enough.

Some of the people in Somalia were hopped up on narcotics too.