Defensive Carry banner

Stopping power = Trauma

11K views 69 replies 39 participants last post by  Buckeye63 
#1 ·
I'm approaching the topic of stopping power from a more common sense standpoint. First off, any projectile out of a firearm will kill if it hits something major like a COM organ (heart, lungs, liver etc), brain or central nervous system. The human body isn't exactly armor plated (we're wimpy compared to most animals of the same size) and any firearm can and have killed.

A standard FMJ projectile will act a lot like a BBQ skewer. It will drill a nice clean hole from entry to exit. FMJ 22LR, 9mm and most other rounds save .45 ACP (big and slow) will "skewer". And unless the skewering happens to be along the path of a vital organ or shatter an important bone (spine/hip), some people may not even notice they're shot. They may bleed out eventually but the wound would not be debilitating.

Now, take most of the major calibers designed to penetrate, expand and tumble within the body and the story changes. Those types of rounds cause trauma. Not so much like a BBQ skewer anymore but like a screwdriver driven into the body, and twisted and jerked around on the way in. I'll submit at this point that larger, faster moving and better designed (for expansion) rounds tend to achieve this effect better. Without naming calibers.

The trauma that a gaping, big and uneven wound causes would be what stops an assailant. Short of a hit to the vitals, there's no guarantee they'll stop, but trauma may cause the body to shut down or go into a state of shock whether or not a vital organ is hit. That would count as stopping power.

So a FMJ 10mm that "skewers" a nice clean hole thru an assailant will probably do close to nothing if it didn't hit a vital organ (at least nothing more than making a 10mm diameter hole). But a well designed high velocity expanding round of almost any defensive caliber (the slow but heavy .45 ACP being the only exception because it naturally pitches and yaws within human tissue) will cause trauma that will stop and incapacitate most human beings.

Feel free to discuss or add to this.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
See less See more
#3 ·
The simple truth is that PAIN and FEAR are what stops most people. MOST stops with handguns are "psychological" as the victim was not rendered PHYSICALLY incapable of continuing what they were doing, they were , due to PAIN and FEAR rendered psychologically incapable of continuing and they choose to stop. Unfortunately some people are not afraid of anything and some due to psychosis, drugs , adrenalin, or alcohol feel no pain.

As to Trauma, bigger holes are better than smaller holes, and MORE holes is better than fewer holes. Given the choice I'd rather deliver more holes than fewer bigger holes (assuming we are discussing the difference in 9mm, 10mm and 11mm (9/40/and 45).

As to energy...handguns do not have enough energy to "knock people down". A .45 at the muzzle is 400 lbs of energy. A pro boxer hits with anywhere between 800 and 1200 lbs of energy.....so if they do not knock down their opponent with EVERY punch then how will a mere 400 lbs (1/2 to 1/3 the power of a good hook) knock anyone down? It doesn't. In fact a 1 lb weight falling 12 feet will deliver the same "knockdown power" that a .45 does at the muzzle....it is all scientifically measurable.

So what does this mean? Best results are going to be attained either using a rifle (which tend to deliver between 1500 and 3000 lbs or more of energy) or a shotgun (again 1500 lbs of energy AND multiple holes). If we are stuck with a pistol then best results are to punch multiple holes in important structures.
 
#4 ·
My first requirement in choosing ammo reguardless of caliber is does it feed well in my weapon. I normally will buy several boxes of different rounds that I have used in the past or a new one I want to try out. Than off to the range which ever feeds reliably I will be happy with. Than just practice till I am confidant I can draw hit com in under 2 sec than if happy with set up add to rotation. Thats about as technical as I get.
 
#5 ·
Cycle properly.
Penetrate and expand properly, and sufficiently.
Of suitable caliber/type to cause the most-effective incapacitating cavity, while remaining reliable.

Trauma being the indication of the latter aspect. The more damage to immediate surrounds, the better, from an incapacitation standpoint. In a deadly predator situation, the situation needs halting as quickly and effectively as possible. Such ammunition and placement are about the best options we have as defenders of innocent life.

Which brings us to theoretical and tested (lab) estimates of stopping power. Combined with relevant, credible "street" data, that's about as close as we're going to get to guessing how effective this or that cartridge/caliber is going to be.

About the most effective damage path I've seen from a 9mm cartridge in actual meat is: DoubleTap's 9mm JHP 124gr +P, through a side of beef. Makes a mess, big time, more reliably than several other "top" rounds I've fired through similar media. Anything similar should work just as well.
 
#7 ·
DetChris, have you read Duncan MacPherson's "Bullet Penetration"? In it he attempts to examine the concept of what it would take to incapacitate a person WITHOUT a hit to a vital organ, and his premise sounds similar to what you're proposing - that overall shock and trauma to the body, even without direct damage to the CNS or major circulatory system, may possibly result in involuntary incapacitation of the person hit.

His premise is based on the old LaGarde steer tests, where steers were shot in (presumably) non-vital areas, and it was recorded as to how many shots it took before the steer dropped. The idea being that a steer wouldn't (or shouldn't) have the psychological triggers that humans have (being, we've seen so many movies where people fall down when they're shot, that we "know" that we're "supposed to" fall down when shot... a steer wouldn't "know" that).

MacPherson did extensive mathematical modeling to calculate exactly what happens when a bullet hits flesh, how it impacts and destroys flesh, how the flesh acts on the bullet to distort and deform it, and how the various bullet shapes contribute to how wounding occurs (i.e., a round ball is a much less effective wounder than a flat-faced cylinder like a true wadcutter). He then presents formulas for calculating how much tissue is destroyed by any given bullet, once you know how far the bullet penetrates and how large it expands to. He then "weights" that calculation against penetration factors, discarding damage that happens too shallow to be of any consequence, and discarding penetration that would be too deep and would likely represent overpenetration. And the grand result is what he calls the MacPherson Wound Trauma Indicator. It's a number that represents how much tissue was actually destroyed, where it counts, which would have an impact on disabling an attacker.

Based on relative weights of steer vs. humans, and how much tissue destruction it took to bring down a steer, he figured that it would take about 40 grams of tissue destruction to potentially cause an incapacitating hit on a human through shock and trauma. That's about equivalent to carving a hot dog out of a human body.

The nice thing about this idea is that it really doesn't care about caliber, nor contribute to caliber wars. It cares about the amount of tissue destroyed. Now, it's true that a 9mm FMJ is smaller than a .40 FMJ, which is smaller than a .45 FMJ, so caliber does play a very obvious role when discussing non-expanding bullets. But, if you had a case of a 9mm that expanded to .50", and a .45 that didn't expand and remained .45, and they both penetrated the maximum, then obviously the 9mm would create more tissue damage in that scenario. So it's not about "caliber", it's about amount of tissue damage.

Second, it doesn't all have to be done with one bullet. Damage is damage; if you have a bullet that does 25 grams of WTI, you could just shoot twice (and hit twice) to bring the level up to 50 grams of total trauma done. And, therefore, it includes inherently the more damaging aspect of a shotgun; 5 pellets of 000 buck would result in 80 grams of tissue destruction total, per pull of the trigger.

Now, this theory is disputed as well; since many 9mm hollowpoints are capable of delivering a WTI factor of 40 or more, and many .45 hollowpoints are capable of delivering a WTI of 60+, then by MacPherson's calculations, just about any hit with a 9mm or .40 or .45 hollowpoint should result in involuntary incapacitation -- and clearly they don't. So perhaps his calculation of the level of damage necessary was off? Or, perhaps the whole idea is wonky and there is no actual threshold of generalized, non-vital trauma that will result in immediate involuntary incapacitation? I don't know.

But I do know that it's a very useful and well thought out way for at least comparing the relative damage level of various projectiles. And I do firmly believe that the more damage done, the better. Obviously, the priority is to do damage to the vitals, and every shot should be attempted to hit the vitals as your first and sole priority. But not every shot will hit the vitals, and for those that do happen to still hit the body but miss the vitals, I'd rather that the non-vital shots were doing more overall destruction than less, and the WTI factor helps to figure out what the differences are in damaging capability between different rounds.
 
#14 ·
I think someone got bored and decided to stir the pot.
 
#32 ·
So I'll add my big spoon.

Grenade them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OD* and tdave
#15 ·
I have a slightly different perspective. Coming from a scientifically trained background, I have looked at all the differing tests, and all the scientific testing of every parameter done by people with many points of view. I realized that well meaning people from different backgrounds, using well thought out testing processes, came to different conclusions. Often arguing over which type of bullet, caliber, and speed would give the quickest stop to a threat.
While scientific method is almost always the way to get the answer, there are times when it can
lead to more confusion.
So, I surmised the answer was best found in actual street gunfights by people who did this all the time and survived.
Among the gunfighters I examined, there were some more modern guys who spent years in law enforcement, and described what worked for them. Almost to a man, they seemed to favor speed and shot placement above all else.
But I went back a bit further to find someone who has been described as perhaps the deadliest gunfighter recorded.
John Wesley Harden could very well be considered my best source, as he faced gunfighters who were very often bent on killing him first.There is dispute as to how many kills he racked up, but historians agree he was one of the deadliest.
He attributed his success to constant practice to attain speed and accuracy. And he preferred head shots as the only guarantee of the first shot stop.
I have decided that, for me, that guiding philosophy works.
 
#17 ·
Perhaps 1890 ballistic data is a bit outdated? As for "headshots", I'm just not that good. Unless the Hardin reference was humor, the Wild West bravado stories are 90% bovine exhaust; not evidence. Lets leave them in the dime novels.

Bigger is better, but you have to be able to deploy that round competently, and cycle your sidearm reliably.
 
#19 ·
A more accurate statement would be that, absent a hit to the CNS, "stopping power ~ blood loss."

The problem is that you can destroy the heart and drop blood pressure to essentially zero, yet still have enough oxygen in the brain and muscle tissues for 20 seconds or more of voluntary action. Which is plenty of time for the BG to hurt or kill you before ultimately expiring himself.

When a BG can take 14 hits from .45 JHPs (6 to supposedly vital areas) and continue firing at a police officer, you realize all handguns are, at best, inconsistent tools for causing rapid cessation of hostilities. Which is why I keep repeating the mantra of 2-3 to the torso (to hopefully stop or at least slow them down) followed by 1-2 to the head as needed.
 
#21 ·
Even in my old beloved .38s, bullets of the heavier end of the range of available weights are chosen. In my personal "heart of hearts" non-magnum .44 and .45 caliber arms throwing heavy lead represent the best, most effective possible means of obtaining personal self-defense with handguns.

Bullet weight itself looms greater in significance than many recognize.

Only a hunch.
 
#22 ·
Bullets, heavy light fast slow in the real world in real humans as often as not do weird things. Hit, glance the edge of rib, divert course, dont penetrate, over penetrate, go in the front chest and exit the left butt cheek and on and on.

Which is probably why after 100 yrs nobody can say with any degree of certainty what result any caliber handgun bullet will be from shot to shot.

Guys sometimes take a 22 to the chest and drop graveyard dead. Others take take 8 9 com hits from the vaunted 45 and still survive.

I tend to believe that a lot of the " he took 17 9mm hits to the chest before he dropped" is more because someone or several someones as in LEOs but that many rounds in the guy before he had TIME to fall. 2nd may have dropped him but he simply was shot 17 20 etc times by multiple LEOs all firing at once.

As far as 0 BP and still being able to kill someone for 20 seconds?? There may be oxygen in the brain but I would be very interested in one cited case of a human with a destroyed heart killing anyone from that point on barring a convulsive blind luck gun shot that happened to hit their opponent by luck.

Have experienced sudden BP drop due to a sudden backlash from a heart medication Id taken for years that instantly dropped my heart rate to 30 bpm from normal 80 bpm.
My BP wasnt 0, but I couldnt have killed anyone, nor moved with any degree of controlled movement, much less aimed a gun or knifed someone. That is sort of hard to do with the world spinning, you knees buckling and your vision the equivalent of looking thru a glass of milk. I might have been able to pull a trigger with a finger but not in any sort of fashion that would have hit anything except for blind luck.

And that was with a still functioning though very slow heart. And no other trauma like a gun shot wound. I dont think anyone can cite one case where a human with a destroyed heart was physically still effectively attacking anyone from that point on. And I simply flat out dont believe anyone ever did it for 20 seconds after. Brain may have oxygen but nothing else works very well with 0 to very very low BP.
 
#23 ·
You say a 10mm FMJ will do nothing if it doesn't hit a "vital area". The internet is full of people saying things they don't believe and I imagine that is the case here. If not get a video camera and record someone shooting you with a 10mm loaded with FMJ. If it actually does nothing I will believe there is something of value here. If you hit the ground screaming I will continue to have the opinion that having holenof any size punched in your body sucks.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I527 using Tapatalk
 
#28 ·
Sigh.

Once again, the argument "if you don't want to get shot by it, it must be good" raises it's ugly head.

Honestly, I find this to be the silliest statement used in these discussions, and it seems to me that the people who use it have never really put any thought into it before throwing it out there.

Of course he won't volunteer to get shot--by anything. Heck, if it's me, I won't volunteer to get shot by a red ryder BB gun--does that make it a good choice for defense?

No, the reason we won't volunteer to get shot is because we know what will happen; we know that getting shot--by anything--is going to hurt, and other very bad things will likely result.

However--why do you assume that this applies to someone who is actually trying to hurt you? (see my previous post regarding psychological stops)

His statement--that a 10mm (or ANY bullet) that passes through non vital structures is not going to stop anyone who doesn't WANT to stop (consciously or subconsciously, doesn't matter)--is 100% correct.

If you dispute it, please come up with some facts backing up your position--and "well, YOU don't want to get shot with it" doesn't count.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OD* and DetChris
#24 ·
OK lets start with morbidity and mortality on gun shot this subject is discussed by Dr's and reports are written on every gun shot wound. I don't think any thought is put into trauma when you say a full metal jacket puts a nice clean hole through some one.

There are enough reports out there to come up with a better thread and supposition. Factors affecting mortality and morbidity in patients... [Injury. 2000] - PubMed - NCBI Surveillance for Fatal and Nonfatal Firearm-Related Injuries --- United States, 1993--1998

Remember for every graduating class of Dr's somebody was at the bottom and barely got through. figure competency into the statistics if you can.

Bill
 
#26 ·
@Ghost1958 - Research "ambulation after death." There was an off duty NYPD officer who emptied his back up gun into two burglars...after he sustained an ultimately fatal shot to the heart himself.

And hunters can entertain you all day long with tales of animals that ran off for long distances with their heart and lungs pulverized by rifle fire.

@ Glockman - how do you explain the reputation of the .357 Magnum? (An honest question as I'm about to swap my PM9 for a SP101)
 
#29 ·
I believe the 357 magnum is as close to a "magic" bullet as has ever been devised, in the 125 weight Lead tipped HP, or a good premium HP like the XTP, ect.

The combo of velocity, together with bullet density and construction gave the very best values of impact, penetration, and tissue destruction of it's time. Even if the bullet failed to perform or penetrate, the impact was so great that it literally worked.

It set the standard for what we have today. The only problem is no one can get bullets with lead tipped HP's to feed reliably in semi's.
 
#27 ·
Given equal placement and bullet technology: 9 < 40 < 45
Then we have to include the other two less popular calibers that people carry:
9 < 357 Sig / 40 < 10mm / 45

Bigger bullet diameters have an advantage.
Higher levels of velocity / KE matter (think 38 Special vs 357 Mag)
The difference in potential incapacitation (or trauma) between some of them.....:confused:
For example, a 40 S&W 180 JHP Hydra Shok @ 969 fps versus a 357 Sig 125 JHP HST @ 1,358 fps
How about a 10mm 155 gr XTP JHP @ 1,278 fps versus a 45 acp 230 Hydra Shok @ 807
^Actual chrono data from my pistols^
 
#34 ·
Agree with cuda, way back when I carried a Colt Trooper along with many an it was not speed that ruled rather deliberate well placed shots. On the other side the bad guys also carried revolvers those who practiced and could deliver hits won. I believe it was the bad guys who started the trend of hi-cap spray an pray which drew departments into it. The decline of marksmanship was evident when at the range, many had problems qualifying an lots had much lower scores than they were used to. We had grown up around revolvers an the new fangled Glocks an Smiths were not received well by the old guard.
 
#40 ·
One time in about 1987 I was at the PD range practicing for an upcoming PPC match with my 6" 686 (duty gun). This guy was watching as I shot. As we walked up to the target from 50 yards he asked " Don't you feel outgunned with all the dope dealers using 9mms?" I told him not really, then he saw my target and said " I guess not".

I shoot my Glocks and 1911 the same way, deliberate shots, not as fast as spray and pray, but they are all in there.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top