FBI Analysis

[nedrgr21]

"Subject received approximately sixteen .223 rounds, thirteen of these rounds went completely through. "

I don't think going to a 10mm or .45 would have mattered, just a fluke. Or maybe the department got a bad lot of ammo - too little powder. Was that investigated? (just throwing stuff at the wall)

[DefensiveCarry.com]

[Spike32]

That's why I practice, practice, practice...and carry a 357 SIG G33 with at least one extra G32 mag...sometimes 2.

[GreenHorn]

"Subject received approximately sixteen .223 rounds, thirteen of these rounds went completely through. "

I don't think going to a 10mm or .45 would have mattered, just a fluke. Or maybe the department got a bad lot of ammo - too little powder. Was that investigated? (just throwing stuff at the wall)

Quality Control issue maybe??? I am confused now did the rounds go through a car door or window first.

[AlongcameJones]

I've read about a ranger and a citizen using a .40 to kill a bear in 2 different encounters. Lucky the bear wasn't driving a car. No 180 gr hp for me!

[Klaatu]

I'm still astonished at the lack of interest in the fact that in this case .40 S&W performed worse than subsonic 22lr. Nobody else interested in that fact? Or willing to speculate on what it means or why it might be the case? Is .40 S&W fundamentally flawed? Was the ammo defective? Aren't you folks out there carrying a .40S&W deeply concerned and/or worried about this?

Silence does not equal lack of interest. For my part, I lack enough data to comfortably speculate. Of course something is not right about this. I am astonished that the department in question or the FBI report has not gone into more detail about testing the ammo. I would like to have a case of ammo from the same lot used in this incident and do some testing, but that is not going to happen. Perhaps testing was done, heads were rolled and lawyers signed gag agreements. But that is just pointless speculation on my part, the likes of which I prefer to avoid.

I fire enough ammo to be confident in what I carry.

[HeadHunter]

For those who continue to insist there is no need to carry reloads, it really begs the question... What is the real reason you carry a gun?

There are three possible missions:
* Do bad things to bad people; the military mission.
* Force compliance with societal dictates as you interpret them; the law enforcement mission.
* Break contact; most people's CCW mission.

[Tangle]

This is what I find disturbing too, and after reading the article I am not sure that all rounds went through the car before hitting the BG. If not 1" penetration is horrible

I agree. There's something very wrong here. This is a total anomaly for a .40 cal bullet.

We may never hear a follow up on this but there's far more to it than .40 cals not penetrating more than an inch. It might have been a bad batch of ammo, woefully underloaded, but whatever it was, it wasn't standard .40 cal. load or as you said, the bullet went through something before hitting the BG.

[Tangle]

Mr. Tangle,

Solutions for unknown problems, those that have not occurred yet, are best inoculated against by i.e. Glock 19 with 16 rounds of WW127g Ranger's, plus a malfunction device, a Glock 17 magazine with 17 of the above.

Why not? The price is right. It ain't heavy, I carry that every day.

I never said we shouldn't, nor that it was too much trouble. I said my concern is that we think that extra ammo is an added measure of protection and hence we rely on that instead of shooting skills.

In fact, that very mind set is evident in this thread. How do people respond to these kind reports? They say, as in this very thread, "Ooooo, I need to carry more ammo." How many said, "Ooooo, I need to train more so that won't happen to me."?

[ctr]

Study after study confirms a lot of misses happens in those distances of 3 feet.

The BG who tries to kill the innocent civilian on the street are the same BG's the cops deal with. Just because you don't go looking for trouble the way police have to doesn't mean trouble isn't going to come looking for you.

And a lot of people continue to think that their once in a lifetime self defense event is always going to be against a lone bad guy. Well, BG's who rob and rape and mug and shoot you are usually of the "cowardly" persuasion and so, they often travel in packs.

Stuff happens! Even to the civilian who carries a gun but thinks he'll never need it.

There isn't a certified firearms trainer in this country who will say don't carry a reload for your weapon. If there is... I'd sure like to meet them, because I don't believe they are out there.

I don't disagree on the idea of carrying a reload or 2, it is a good idea in general. But, anyone who thinks they are going to get a reload accomplished when the perp(s) are within 3 feet is kidding themself.

My point is, for civilians, carry the reload, but realize if the weapon is fired to empty and it didn't stop the threat, it is highly unlikely that you will live to make the reload.

[socal2310]

I'm still astonished at the lack of interest in the fact that in this case .40 S&W performed worse than subsonic 22lr. Nobody else interested in that fact? Or willing to speculate on what it means or why it might be the case? Is .40 S&W fundamentally flawed? Was the ammo defective? Aren't you folks out there carrying a .40S&W deeply concerned and/or worried about this?

I'm still looking for the link, but this story proved to be anti-.40 FUD quite a while ago. No bullet could possibly fully expand with only an inch of penetration. When I find the info I'll post it.

Ryan

[nedrgr21]

Quality Control issue maybe??? I am confused now did the rounds go through a car door or window first.

The article said that the officers were in a vehicle when ambushed and also referenced another incident when the offender was in a vehicle. This particular BG was outside any vehicles - that's why the officer with the M4 was able to shoot him in the ankle. "The officer with the M-4 was able to shoot underneath a vehicle and hit the suspect in the ankle." Maybe he was stepping out of a vehicle, but the article never actually says where he was.

[Tom G]

Got another word head shot

[nedrgr21]

If you read the PDF at the end of the "concealedcarry" link you will get the FBI analysis. 40S&W performed as expected, .223 TAP did not, out of 107 shots fired (total) only 17 connected, no CNS hits, most were in the pelvic region, suspect fought while being handcuffed.

FBI basically blamed poor shot placement for results and stated that it would be impossible for the 40 S&W to expand (which they were) in only 1" of human tissue. Basically calling total BS on the article.

To address a previous question: I'm sticking with my G23 with no reservations.

[Slabsides45]

I read the FBI's retort, and was less than impressed. They went back and retested the .40 in ballistic gelatin, and simply stated that it performed consistently with previous Bureau results. They never bothered to answer how several of the rounds only penetrated 1" through a down jacket and a tee shirt. Note to self: take my down jacket if planning a police shootout in the near future...

[nedrgr21]

There's also no confirmation that the bullets only penetrated 1". The only way to verify the 1" penetration would be to read the ME's report - I don't trust reporters enough to assume they would get that correct.