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 40Bob If you do not take anecdotal data from the street you are only getting half the information. Tactical Life Defense Loads ...
Massad Ayoob says chances of survival are greater to shoot someone with a bigger round as bigger rounds have one shot stopping power compared to being hit 4-5 times from a smaller round and doing a wider spread of damage to accomplish the same task
HI 40Bob mi compadre; Cafe como siempre alla en mi patio. Yep, you are correct , However this means that we may now need a 4" projectile, no? ? he he
Have you joined Fergie's NAFBPO yet? National Association of Former Border Patrol Officers --> http://nafbpo.org/
News letter --> email@example.com
Don Jose de La Mancha
40 Bob, I stabilized with the .357, and a Keith lead, semiwadcutter projectile of about 146 - 156 grain, and 14.5 grains of 2400 for approx 1350 - 1400 fps.
I once experimented with casting the projectle with cigarette paper in the mould down to the full diam shoulder. In other words, the nose was split down to the full diaeter shoulder.
At close range it gave the equiv of three projectiles, the main body acting as a full wad cutter, and the two nose pieces spining off in a radial, tangent distrupting tissue and cutting blood vessles even further in their own paths.
At further distances where there isn't sufficent compound velocity / energy to tear them loose, they acted as a miniature radial saw cutting and slicing through any body materiel they passed by, due to the rotational effect.
Where the velocity wasn't suffcient to tear them loose, to open them up, or when they were bridged with some materiel, they remained a full weight semiwad cutter.
They were far more accurate than I could shoot, consistant hits to about 400 meters, occasionally to 600, but close enough in any event too convince a baddie to get the h---- out of there.
Don Jose de La Mancha
The bigger guns are the more humane: A .45 automatic will usually neutralize a man the first solid hit, and if the bullet has neither destroyed vital organs nor severed a major artery. And if he can be given proper care in time, he will survive. To be neutralized with a standard .38 , he’ll have to be killed instantly ,or hit with so many bullets that the blood loss and great tissue damage will almost certainly be irreparable.
Lethal and humane. Gotta love it!
Feds & wikipedia ,,,, both change with the blowing wind,,,,
- Massad AyoobThe bigger guns are the more humane: A .45 automatic will usually neutralize a man the first solid hit, and if the bullet has neither destroyed vital organs nor severed a major artery. And if he can be given proper care in time, he will survive. To be neutralized with a standard .38 , he’ll have to be killed instantly ,or hit with so many bullets that the blood loss and great tissue damage will almost certainly be irreparable.
Maybe it's just me, but not only did that statement of Massad's not make a lot of literal grammatical sense, but it's too subjective for me. To sum up what he said; if you shoot a bad guy with a .45 your going to neutralize him with one solid shot, even if it isn't a critical wound. But if you shoot the bad guy with a normal .38 it will be necessary to kill them instantly (CNS shot I suppose) or shoot them so many darn times that they are more similar to a sieve than a body, in order to neutralize them. Maybe it's just me, but...that seems like large talk. Someone please correct me if I didn't interpret that blurb from his book correctly.
"Brilliant. So now we got a huge guy theory, and a serial crusher theory. Top notch. What's your name?" - Paul Smecker