FBI Standards: Should we care?

This is a discussion on FBI Standards: Should we care? within the Defensive Ammunition & Ballistics forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Originally Posted by Once I think you should use the standards as a guideline. I don't want to use the word benchmark but I will. ...

Page 10 of 11 FirstFirst ... 67891011 LastLast
Results 136 to 150 of 159
Like Tree74Likes

Thread: FBI Standards: Should we care?

  1. #136
    Ex Member Array Sneaky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East coast of USA
    Posts
    330
    Quote Originally Posted by Once View Post
    I think you should use the standards as a guideline. I don't want to use the word benchmark but I will. Don't take it literally please. Looking at the test results in ballistac gel you can get a good idea of what does what. You should make your call as to what caliber you want to carry and what pistol/wheelgun you shoot well using the tests as information. Just one part of the process.You should do your due dillagence and research what you are interested in loading in your EDC[s] From a purely obective point of view- a 6' 1" 150lb person was stopped with one shot from a 9mm to the chest.
    It depends on what kind of situation you're dealing with.
    You bring to the table of ballistic's a very interesting concept of information! Having seen the 45 and 9mm calibers in a few shooting situations speaks volumes & volumes over any lab test results where conditions are nearly perfect
    for testing various calibers but please remember that an actual shooting situation is far and away from the perfect world of the lab!

    Betting your life on lab results is purely not the best thing you can do for any defense! Talk to retired police officers and active duty LEO and find out what in the heck works in an actual shooting encounter. Ask what ammo they us that has stopped BG's!
    This 2 cents worth of info came the hard way--actual experience!

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #137
    Member Array Blades's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Fayetteville, NC
    Posts
    319
    Quote Originally Posted by Sneaky View Post
    Betting your life on lab results is purely not the best thing you can do for any defense! Talk to retired police officers and active duty LEO and find out what in the heck works in an actual shooting encounter. Ask what ammo they us that has stopped BG's!
    This 2 cents worth of info came the hard way--actual experience!

    I wonder why the FBI doesn't talk to retired police officers and active duty LEO instead of trusting "lab results". No telling.
    --Jason--

  4. #138
    Ex Member Array Sneaky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East coast of USA
    Posts
    330
    Quote Originally Posted by Blades View Post

    I wonder why the FBI doesn't talk to retired police officers and active duty LEO instead of trusting "lab results". No telling.
    At one time the FBI was greatly influenced by Fackler who tested his ammo in the lab and recommended 12 inches or more of pentration to the FBI! Later they got rid of Fackler but still practice the ballistic concepts of Fackler!

    Just a point of interest--The Military did not practice Facklers ballistic concepts but won many a war without Facklers ballistic concepts by stopping many a foe of America!

  5. #139
    New Member Array petecamp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    14
    I think a lot of the argument on this issue is simply wasted time.

    Gel testing is a scientific method that will indicate, or point, to how a load will perform in human flesh. It is an indicator, not an authoritarian statement. It is meant to help analyze and compare the performance of rounds in live tissue without the necessity of using live subjects. The value of such testing is that it is repeatable and holds variables to a minimum. The flaw is obvious. The gel is not human flesh and bone covered with clothing.

    Analying street wounding data is a statistical method that, properly understood, helps to see how a round performs in real world situations. The data is understandably clouded by the almost infinite number of variables in shooting incidents. It does make an excellent tool for comparing real world performance, but is limited by the uncertainty introduced by the variables. There is simply no way to quantify all of them for a statistically large enough population to be completely accurate.

    Neither method should be taken alone. Both are simply attempts to quantify performance of rounds in real life situations that do their best to defy description. To rely solely on either method alone is folly. They should be seen as mutually supporting and indespensible to arriving at good choices for defensive ammo.

    Why must you choose one or the other? beats me. Look at both methods and see where the data coincides. I you know of a better way of doing things, I'm sure the FBI, and everybody else, will be all ears.

  6. #140
    Ex Member Array Sneaky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East coast of USA
    Posts
    330
    Quote Originally Posted by petecamp View Post
    I think a lot of the argument on this issue is simply wasted time.

    Gel testing is a scientific method that will indicate, or point, to how a load will perform in human flesh. It is an indicator, not an authoritarian statement. It is meant to help analyze and compare the performance of rounds in live tissue without the necessity of using live subjects. The value of such testing is that it is repeatable and holds variables to a minimum. The flaw is obvious. The gel is not human flesh and bone covered with clothing.

    Analying street wounding data is a statistical method that, properly understood, helps to see how a round performs in real world situations. The data is understandably clouded by the almost infinite number of variables in shooting incidents. It does make an excellent tool for comparing real world performance, but is limited by the uncertainty introduced by the variables. There is simply no way to quantify all of them for a statistically large enough population to be completely accurate.

    Neither method should be taken alone. Both are simply attempts to quantify performance of rounds in real life situations that do their best to defy description. To rely solely on either method alone is folly. They should be seen as mutually supporting and indespensible to arriving at good choices for defensive ammo.

    Why must you choose one or the other? beats me. Look at both methods and see where the data coincides. I you know of a better way of doing things, I'm sure the FBI, and everybody else, will be all ears.
    I agreed with you that you need both concepts of ballistic facts-both lab and real street performance to get some kind of idea on the character of any ammo! But I still believe that practice, practice, and more practice and ammo
    won't matter what the heck you use--its your shooting skills that will prevail you to survive any possible shooting encounter along with thee Almighty saving your Behind!

    Praise the Lord and Pass the Ammo!

  7. #141
    Member Array Blades's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Fayetteville, NC
    Posts
    319
    Quote Originally Posted by petecamp View Post
    I think a lot of the argument on this issue is simply wasted time.

    .
    Yep, but it is fun to debate.

    Welcome to the forum "petecamp".
    --Jason--

  8. #142
    Member Array tricolordad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    New Richmond, Wisconsin
    Posts
    490
    Quote Originally Posted by Blades View Post
    I think the four layers of denim represent clothes of any kind. I don't think the FBI expects all suspects to be wearing denim.

    I think your right, ten rounds of .22 in your stomach will cause you to go down, but how long will it take? Ten minutes? Two hours?
    Haha I love you. 22 critics. Stand in front of me and find out. I'll even let you hold the stopwatch.

  9. #143
    sgb
    sgb is offline
    VIP Member Array sgb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    You don't need to know
    Posts
    2,414
    Quote Originally Posted by tricolordad View Post
    Haha I love you. 22 critics. Stand in front of me and find out. I'll even let you hold the stopwatch.

    And again with the STUPID "You wouldn't let me shoot you with it" response, which proves nothing. You wouldn't let me smack you in the face with a shovel, so that proves a shovel is good enough, right?
    Brad426 likes this.
    "There is a secret pride in every human heart that revolts at tyranny. You may order and drive an individual, but you cannot make him respect you." William Hazlitt (1778 - 1830)

    Best Choices for Self Defense Ammunition

  10. #144
    Member Array tricolordad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    New Richmond, Wisconsin
    Posts
    490
    Im simply making a point that if it was as innefective as you all claim then put it to the test, otherwise provide a solid source that proves without a doubt that. 22lr DOESNT WORK.

  11. #145
    sgb
    sgb is offline
    VIP Member Array sgb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    You don't need to know
    Posts
    2,414
    Quote Originally Posted by tricolordad View Post
    Im simply making a point that if it was as innefective as you all claim then put it to the test, otherwise provide a solid source that proves without a doubt that. 22lr DOESNT WORK.

    The .22lr is a poor choice, if it's enough to satisfy you I wish more power to you. However your argument in support of it's effectiveness is as laughable as is mine with the shovel.
    "There is a secret pride in every human heart that revolts at tyranny. You may order and drive an individual, but you cannot make him respect you." William Hazlitt (1778 - 1830)

    Best Choices for Self Defense Ammunition

  12. #146
    Member Array tricolordad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    New Richmond, Wisconsin
    Posts
    490
    Cite your sources please. If I wasn't using a cheap tablet at starbucks I would plaster this thread with armed citizen reports where .22 worked.

  13. #147
    Member Array Tayopo's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Alamos, Son, Mexico
    Posts
    190
    Gentlemen, I wll repeat, in th 1907 tests for a true combat pistol to be ueed in the Philipines against the Moros the army finally decided that in the range of pistol velocities - 1300 + fps - a proectile of 3" would be needed for a sure stopper, so they opted for the .45 as the best compromise - psst the '9' mm was tested extensively. Also the Marine spec forces is changing back to ,the 45 again, this should tell you something.

    Don Jose de La Mancha
    bmcgilvray likes this.

  14. #148
    Member Array tricolordad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    New Richmond, Wisconsin
    Posts
    490
    Quote Originally Posted by sgb View Post
    The .22lr is a poor choice, if it's enough to satisfy you I wish more power to you. However your argument in support of it's effectiveness is as laughable as is mine with the shovel.
    .22 Kills a rapist; Duluth, MN:
    Police: Woman Shot Intruder 9 Times In Self Defense | www.wsbtv.com
    .22 Stops a charging naked man; Twin Falls, ID:
    Idaho Falls Homeowner Shoots Naked Intruder | KMVT | Twin Falls, ID News, Weather and Sports | Idaho News, Weather and Sports | State & Regional
    Mass Murderer with a Walther .22:
    Seung-Hui Cho - Criminal Minds Wiki
    Georgia:
    Rapist shot killed with .22 - Survivalist Forum
    Columbia, SC:
    Sheriff: Dead motel robber was going to rape clerk - wistv.com - Columbia, South Carolina |
    Mass Murderer from Finland:
    Kauhajoki school shooting - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    I can keep posting, even without digging into the American Rifleman Armed Citizen blog to prove my claims that .22lr will be enough. Laugh all you want but the facts are here. Go ahead and fork over tons of cash and only carry the 1911 as you prefer "instructor." Just remember to exercise proper gun control: 1.5" group at 7 yards.

  15. #149
    Moderator
    Array bmcgilvray's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    10,079
    Ok, tricolordad. You've made your point about the .22 being effective.

    I'm not carrying one however because I perceive it as being dicey in rendering effective stops.

    The efficaciousness of the .22 rim fire for self-defense is a topic which should be debated in its own thread.

    Now we return to our regularly scheduled thread on the merits of FBI standards.
    Charter Member of the DC .41 LC Society

    “No possible rapidity of fire can atone for habitual carelessness of aim with the first shot.”

    Theodore Roosevelt, The Wilderness Hunter, 1893

  16. #150
    Distinguished Member Array Once's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    florida
    Posts
    1,569
    Quote Originally Posted by sgb View Post
    And again with the STUPID "You wouldn't let me shoot you with it" response, which proves nothing. You wouldn't let me smack you in the face with a shovel, so that proves a shovel is good enough, right?
    Well maybe with a little kids cheap plastic beach shovel.

Page 10 of 11 FirstFirst ... 67891011 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

fbi 12 inch penetration standard
,
fbi ballistic standards
,
fbi ballistics test
,
fbi ballistics test results
,
fbi minimum penetration
,
fbi minimum penetration depth
,
fbi minimum penetration standards
,
fbi penetration requirements
,

fbi penetration standards

,
what ammo does fbi use
,

what ammo does the fbi use

,

what ammunition does the fbi use

Click on a term to search for related topics.