Hollow Points for Safety or Extreme Damage
This is a discussion on Hollow Points for Safety or Extreme Damage within the Defensive Ammunition & Ballistics forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Why do most of you keep hollow points in your gun?
We had a murder case locally ( a teenage girl no less ), and ...
March 2nd, 2008 11:20 AM
Hollow Points for Safety or Extreme Damage
Why do most of you keep hollow points in your gun?
We had a murder case locally ( a teenage girl no less ), and the prosecuter kept stressing that the shooter loaded her gun with hollow point bullets to inflict as much damage as possible.
I use them mostly to control how far the bullet will travel after it hits something, like not going through walls.
Nothing Wrong With Shooting as Long as the Right People Get Shot.
Clint Eastwood, Magnum Force, 1973
March 2nd, 2008 11:35 AM
Dumb prosecutor, bad (unethical?) practice. Any defense attorney worth his salt can shoot that argument down in a second, but it stinks that some prosecutors are still trotting out that BS.
We use controlled expansion ammunition because it is, by and large, the most effective, high quality ammunition out there - the same reason every single police agency that I can think of uses it.
A man fires a rifle for many years, and he goes to war. And afterward he turns the rifle in at the armory, and he believes he's finished with the rifle. But no matter what else he might do with his hands - love a woman, build a house, change his son's diaper - his hands remember the rifle.
March 2nd, 2008 11:50 AM
Harold Fish in Arizona went to prison, partially for exactly that unrefuted bafflegab by the State Perecutor.
TV reporter was questioning the jurors and that was a major point in their thinking.
Nevertheless, a COMPETENT defense attorney should be able to dispatch such deceipt. (one would hope!)
March 2nd, 2008 01:00 PM
"the prosecuter kept stressing that the shooter loaded her gun with hollow point bullets to inflict as much damage as possible."
Well, the whole point IS to inflict as much damage as possible to immediately STOP a grave threat of severe injury or death.
The perp's departure is an unfortunate by-product.
I would like to think that if the "shoot" was lawful in the first place, these issues wouldn't come up. But, I know that is a naive view of the world.
Quite a few participants here think in 380, ball ammo works better than hollow point. Since my favorite carry gun is a 380, cases like this could influence my choice in 380 carry ammo.
Last edited by Hopyard; March 2nd, 2008 at 01:01 PM.
March 2nd, 2008 01:13 PM
Do you know any other facts of this case?
Maybe the prosecutor decided "I'm not going to tell that girl's parents that her killer walked free if I can help it..."
He/she may have known dam well what JHP were for, but he used the tools available to win a case.
I'd expect you would want the prosecutor to fight for the victim...or am I mistaken?
Yes, it can be torn apart by a competent defense attorney...provided the defense attorney is familiar with firearms or can be show the proper information.
Still, its an effective tactic. Not always a winner, but effective none-the-less.
March 2nd, 2008 01:22 PM
I absolutely compare features. The pros/cons of a hollow-point bullet design is far better suited for an urban environment, all things considered.
Originally Posted by Hivoltage
In a lethal contest over my life, I'm going to be defending it as aggressively as I know how, until the threat is eliminated. That means, primarily: not wasting the bullet's energy by zipping through the attacker and striking the proverbial 3yr old child three walls away from my living room. I, and my community, would far rather that bullet stop inside the violent attacker who is attempting to murder me, doing the job it's supposed to do. I want the violence ended now. I want no bystanders injured. It's the whole point of using an effective bullet, in such a situation. But, to claim that using such a tool constitutes, in and of itself, murder? Ludicrous.
Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
self defense (A.O.J.).
How does disarming
the number of victims?
Reason over Force: Why the Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos)
NRA, SAF, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.
March 2nd, 2008 01:32 PM
Good attorney: "I'd like to call ____ (name of local law enforcement firearms trainer) to the stand."
"Sir, are you familiar with ____ (insert name of local police department)?"
"Can you tell me about the ammunition issued in that department?"
"I see. So they are using hollowpoints, just as my client did when she defended her life. Interesting."
"Moving on, I'm wondering about the hollowpoints used by the ____ police department. As the firearms trainer, can you tell me some of the reasons a police department might choose to issue hollowpoint bullets rather than traditional round-nose bullets?"
"I see. Based on your expertise, you believe that hollowpoints provide better safety for innocent bystanders and a lower number of overall shots fired per incident. Thank you for your time."
March 2nd, 2008 01:32 PM
It is not the ammo but the sitatuion in which it is used that is different...
If hollow points are used in a crime, then I think it should be argued that they do inflict more damage than ball ammo. It is why Declaration III of the Hague Convention of 1899 prohibits its use in warfare, and why most militaries (including the US) won't use it.
However, in a self-defense situation I do not think it should be a consideration, as the shooter does not set the events in motion but is reacting to them. It is no different than arguing that using a .45 is more damaging as it is a larger round. It doesn't matter if I shoot someone with a .25, a 7.62x39 or a shotgun slug, if you are defending yourself, your family and/or your property you should have the right to use every means possible to do so!
Bottom line, I don't let the fear of possible litigation determine what kind of SD ammo I use. I'll address that if and when the time comes, and at least I will be around to address it!
March 2nd, 2008 01:54 PM
I don't know of any bullets that do 'minor' damage, or 'some' damage. The simple fact of a piece of metal entering your body at 1000+ fps is 'extreme' damage, regardless of how the bullet is shaped.
March 2nd, 2008 02:46 PM
I use a mix of Black Talon, Starfire and Hydrashock, interprersed in each mag. Th only time that I use ball ammo is at the range or driving through California, (with my pistol properly disabled to do me no good).
March 2nd, 2008 02:49 PM
Originally Posted by armado
Doesn't that give you inconsistent recoil, points of aim and function?
Why not just go to one kind of JHP?
March 2nd, 2008 02:56 PM
1. JHPs are less likely to penetrate all the way through the target, hence less likelihood of a shoot-through hitting an unintended target.
2. JHPs are less likely to ricochet, hence less likely to hit an unintended target.
3. JHPs are likely to stop an attacker with fewer hits, hence fewer holes in the target, hence the target is more likely to reach medical care and survive before he bleeds out.
Conclusion, JHPs are safer for everybody involved in a shooting---the shooter is likely to neutralize a threat more quickly, bystanders are less likely to be hit by accident, and the BG is more likely to survive his wounds.
(This line of argument brought to you by Mas Ayoob's LFI-1 course.)
“What is a moderate interpretation of [the Constitution]? Halfway between what it says and [...] what you want it to say?” —Justice Antonin Scalia
SIG: P220R SS Elite SAO, P220R SAO, P220R Carry, P226R Navy, P226, P239/.40S&W, P2022/.40S&W; GSR 5", P6.
March 2nd, 2008 03:20 PM
There are a lot of problems with the Prosecutors position. He/she has established precedent that may come back to bite the local law enforcement agencies in any law suites araise out of an officer involved shooting.
It is not uncommon for an attorney to become so focused on the case at hand they ignor the long time term effects their arguements may have.
Clearly this prosecutor has a prejudice against guns to begin with. Why else would they resort to demonizing the gun and ammunition. The problem was the shooter as always. But heck, why not play into some of the jury memembers beliefs that all guns and ammunition are possessed by some demonic spirit?
March 2nd, 2008 03:29 PM
My official answer to any DA is this:
I use JHP ammunition from a high quality manufacturer that was recommended by Law enforcement as some of thir duty load ammo.
My answer to you:
Yes, I carry them because i want to safely inflict as much damage as possible on my intended target.
"Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined". - Patrick Henry
March 2nd, 2008 09:52 PM
I carry hollowpoints because all the cool guys are doing it. I do it because my wife thinks they look pretty when they're expanded. Like a flower. I do it because they use flash suppressing powders, have better quality control, and are more accurate than ball ammo. Also, because they are designed for self defense - which is what I use them for.
By NDN-MAN in forum Defensive Ammunition & Ballistics
Last Post: March 31st, 2011, 05:42 PM
By Coder in forum In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
Last Post: December 3rd, 2010, 11:36 AM
By dbraves8 in forum Member Buy, Sell & Trade
Last Post: April 30th, 2009, 05:30 PM
By elrey718 in forum Defensive Ammunition & Ballistics
Last Post: August 30th, 2006, 11:10 PM
Search tags for this page
.45 hollow point
.45 hollow point damage
9mm hollow point damage
do hollow point bullets do more damage
extreme hollow points
hollow point bullet damage
hollow point damage
most damaging 9mm hollow point
most damaging hollow point
most destructive 9mm round
most destructive hollow point
why do hollow points do more damage
Click on a term to search for related topics.