An Alternate Look at Handgun Stopping Power

Buckeye Firearms Association ^ | 8 July,2011 | Greg Ellifritz

[marktwain]

I've been interested in firearm stopping power for a very long time. I remember reading Handguns magazine back in the late 1980s when Evan Marshall was writing articles about his stopping power studies. When Marshall's first book came out in 1992, I ordered it immediately, despite the fact that I was a college student and really couldn't afford its $39 price tag. Over the years I bought all of the rest of Marshall's books as well as anything else I could find on the subject. I even have a first edition of Gunshot Injuries by Louis Lagarde published in 1915. Are any of these better than another?

Every source I read has different recommendations. Some say Marshall's data is genius. Some say it is statistically impossible. Some like big heavy bullets. Some like lighter, faster bullets. There isn't any consensus. The more I read, the more confused I get.

One thing I remember reading that made a lot of sense to me was an article by Massad Ayoob. He came out with his own stopping power data around the time Marshall published Handgun Stopping Power. In the article, Ayoob took his critics to task. He suggested that if people didn't believe his data, they should collect their own and do their own analysis. That made sense to me. So that's just what I did. I always had a slight problem with the methodology of Marshall and Sanow's work. For consistency purposes, they ONLY included hits to the torso and ONLY included cases where the person was hit with just a single round. Multiple hits screwed up their data, so they excluded them. This lead to an unrealistically high stopping power percentage, because it factored out many of the cases where a person didn't stop! I wanted to look at hits anywhere on the body and get a realistic idea of actual stopping power, no matter how many hits it took to get it. So I started collecting data.

Over a 10-year period, I kept track of stopping power results from every shooting I could find. I talked to the participants of gunfights, read police reports, attended autopsies, and scoured the newspapers, magazines, and Internet for any reliable accounts of what happened to the human body when it was shot.

I documented all of the data I could; tracking caliber, type of bullet (if known), where the bullet hit and whether or not the person was incapacitated. I also tracked fatalities, noting which bullets were more likely to kill and which were not. It was an exhaustive project, but I'm glad I did it and I'm happy to report the results of my study here.

Before I get to the details, I must give a warning. I don't have any dog in this fight! I don't sell ammo. I'm not being paid by any firearm or ammunition manufacturer. I carry a lot of different pistols for self defense. Within the last 2 weeks, I've carried a .22 magnum, a .380 auto, a .38 spl revolver, 3 different 9mm autos and a .45 auto. I don't have an axe to grind. If you are happy with your 9mm, I'm happy for you. If you think that everyone should be carrying a .45 (because they don't make a .46), I'm cool with that too. I'm just reporting the data. If you don't like it, take Mr. Ayoob.s advice...do a study of your own.

A few notes on terminology...

Since it was my study, I got to determine the variables and their definitions. Here's what I looked at:

- Number of people shot

- Number of rounds that hit

- On average, how many rounds did it take for the person to stop his violent action or be incapacitated? For this number, I included hits anywhere on the body. To be considered an immediate incapacitation, I used criteria similar to Marshall's. If the attacker was striking or shooting the victim, the round needed to immediately stop the attack without another blow being thrown or shot being fired. If the person shot was in the act of running (either towards or away from the shooter), he must have fallen to the ground within five feet.

I also excluded all cases of accidental shootings or suicides. Every shot in this study took place during a military battle or an altercation with a criminal.

- What percentage of shooting incidents resulted in fatalities. For this, I included only hits to the head or torso.

- What percentage of people were not incapacitated no matter how many rounds hit them

- Accuracy. What percentage of hits was in the head or torso. I tracked this to check if variations could affect stopping power. For example, if one caliber had a huge percentage of shootings resulting in arm hits, we may expect that the stopping power of that round wouldn’t look as good as a caliber where the majority of rounds hit the head.

- One shot stop percentage - number of incapacitations divided by the number of hits the person took. Like Marshall's number, I only included hits to the torso or head in this number.

- Percentage of people who were immediately stopped with one hit to the head or torso

Here are the results.

.25ACP

# of people shot - 68

# of hits - 150

% of hits that were fatal - 25%

Average number of rounds until incapacitation - 2.2

% of people who were not incapacitated - 35%

One-shot-stop % - 30%

Accuracy (head and torso hits) - 62%

% actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head hit) - 49%

.22 (short, long and long rifle)

# of people shot - 154

# of hits - 213

% of hits that were fatal - 34%

Average number of rounds until incapacitation - 1.38

% of people who were not incapacitated - 31%

One-shot-stop % - 31%

Accuracy (head and torso hits) - 76%

% actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head hit) - 60%

.32 (both .32 Long and .32 ACP)

# of people shot - 25

# of hits - 38

% of hits that were fatal - 21%

Average number of rounds until incapacitation - 1.52

% of people who were not incapacitated - 40%

One-shot-stop % - 40%

Accuracy (head and torso hits) - 78%

% actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head hit) - 72%

.380 ACP

# of people shot - 85

# of hits - 150

% of hits that were fatal - 29%

Average number of rounds until incapacitation - 1.76

% of people who were not incapacitated - 16%

One-shot-stop % - 44%

Accuracy (head and torso hits) - 76%

% actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head hit) - 62%

.38 Special

# of people shot - 199

# of hits - 373

% of hits that were fatal - 29%

Average number of rounds until incapacitation - 1.87

% of people who were not incapacitated - 17%

One-shot-stop % - 39%

Accuracy (head and torso hits) - 76%

% actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head hit) - 55%

9mm Luger

# of people shot - 456

# of hits - 1121

% of hits that were fatal - 24%

Average number of rounds until incapacitation - 2.45

% of people who were not incapacitated - 13%

One-shot-stop % - 34%

Accuracy (head and torso hits) - 74%

% actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head hit) - 47%

.357 (both magnum and Sig)

# of people shot - 105

# of hits - 179

% of hits that were fatal - 34%

Average number of rounds until incapacitation - 1.7

% of people who were not incapacitated - 9%

One-shot-stop % - 44%

Accuracy (head and torso hits) - 81%

% actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head hit) - 61%

.40 S&W

# of people shot - 188

# of hits - 443

% of hits that were fatal - 25%

Average number of rounds until incapacitation - 2.36

% of people who were not incapacitated - 13%

One-shot-stop % - 45%

Accuracy (head and torso hits) - 76%

% actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head hit) - 52%

.45 ACP

# of people shot - 209

# of hits - 436

% of hits that were fatal - 29%

Average number of rounds until incapacitation - 2.08

% of people who were not incapacitated - 14%

One-shot-stop % - 39%

Accuracy (head and torso hits) - 85%

% actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head hit) - 51%

.44 Magnum

# of people shot - 24

# of hits - 41

% of hits that were fatal - 26%

Average number of rounds until incapacitation - 1.71

% of people who were not incapacitated - 13%

One-shot-stop % - 59%

Accuracy (head and torso hits) - 88%

% actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head hit) - 53%

Rifle (all Centerfire)

# of people shot - 126

# of hits - 176

% of hits that were fatal - 68%

Average number of rounds until incapacitation - 1.4

% of people who were not incapacitated - 9%

One-shot-stop % - 58%

Accuracy (head and torso hits) - 81%

% actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head hit) - 80%

Shotgun (All, but 90% of results were 12 gauge)

# of people shot - 146

# of hits - 178

% of hits that were fatal - 65%

Average number of rounds until incapacitation - 1.22

% of people who were not incapacitated - 12%

One-shot-stop % - 58%

Accuracy (head and torso hits) - 84%

% actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head hit) - 86%

Discussion

I really would have liked to break it down by individual bullet type, but I didn't have enough data points to reach a level of statistical significance. Getting accurate data on nearly 1800 shootings was hard work. I couldn't imagine breaking it down farther than what I did here. I also believe the data for the .25, .32 and .44 magnum should be viewed with suspicion. I simply don't have enough data (in comparison to the other calibers) to draw an accurate comparison. I reported the data I have, but I really don't believe that a .32 ACP incapacitates people at a higher rate than the .45 ACP!

One other thing to look at is the 9mm data. A huge number (over half) of 9mm shootings involved ball ammo. I think that skewed the results of the study in a negative manner. One can reasonable expect that FMJ ammo will not stop as well as a state of the art expanding bullet. I personally believe that the 9mm is a better stopper than the numbers here indicate, but you can make that decision for yourself based on the data presented.

Some interesting findings:

I think the most interesting statistic is the percentage of people who stopped with one shot to the torso or head. There wasn't much variation between calibers. Between the most common defensive calibers (.38, 9mm, .40, and .45) there was a spread of only eight percentage points. No matter what gun you are shooting, you can only expect a little more than half of the people you shoot to be immediately incapacitated by your first hit.

The average number of rounds until incapacitation was also remarkably similar between calibers. All the common defensive calibers required around 2 rounds on average to incapacitate. Something else to look at here is the question of how fast can the rounds be fired out of each gun. The .38 SPL probably has the slowest rate of fire (long double action revolver trigger pulls and stout recoil in small revolvers) and the fewest rounds fired to get an incapacitation (1.87). Conversely the 9mm can probably be fired fastest of the common calibers and it had the most rounds fired to get an incapacitation (2.45). The .40 (2.36) and the .45 (2.08) split the difference. It is my personal belief that there really isn't much difference between each of these calibers. It is only the fact that some guns can be fired faster than others that causes the perceived difference in stopping power. If a person takes an average of 5 seconds to stop after being hit, the defender who shoots a lighter recoiling gun can get more hits in that time period. It could be that fewer rounds would have stopped the attacker (given enough time) but the ability to fire more quickly resulted in more hits being put onto the attacker. It may not have anything to do with the stopping power of the round.

Another data piece that leads me to believe that the majority of commonly carried defensive rounds are similar in stopping power is the fact that all four have very similar failure rates. If you look at the percentage of shootings that did not result in incapacitation, the numbers are almost identical. The .38, 9mm, .40, and .45 all had failure rates of between 13% and 17%.

Some people will look at this data and say "He's telling us all to carry .22s". That's not true. Although this study showed that the percentages of people stopped with one shot are similar between almost all handgun cartridges, there's more to the story. Take a look at two numbers: the percentage of people who did not stop (no matter how many rounds were fired into them) and the one-shot-stop percentage. The lower caliber rounds (.22, .25, .32) had a failure rate that was roughly double that of the higher caliber rounds. The one-shot-stop percentage (where I considered all hits, anywhere on the body) trended generally higher as the round gets more powerful. This tells us a couple of things...

In a certain (fairly high) percentage of shootings, people stop their aggressive actions after being hit with one round regardless of caliber or shot placement. These people are likely NOT physically incapacitated by the bullet. They just don't want to be shot anymore and give up! Call it a psychological stop if you will. Any bullet or caliber combination will likely yield similar results in those cases. And fortunately for us, there are a lot of these "psychological stops" occurring. The problem we have is when we don't get a psychological stop. If our attacker fights through the pain and continues to victimize us, we might want a round that causes the most damage possible. In essence, we are relying on a "physical stop" rather than a "psychological" one. In order to physically force someone to stop their violent actions we need to either hit him in the Central Nervous System (brain or upper spine) or cause enough bleeding that he becomes unconscious. The more powerful rounds look to be better at doing this.

One other factor to consider is that the majority of these shootings did NOT involve shooting through intermediate barriers, cover or heavy clothing. If you anticipate having to do this in your life (i.e. you are a police officer and may have to shoot someone in a car), again, I would lean towards the larger or more powerful rounds.

What I believe that my numbers show is that in the majority of shootings, the person shot merely gives up without being truly incapacitated by the bullet. In such an event, almost any bullet will perform admirably. If you want to be prepared to deal with someone who won't give up so easily, or you want to be able to have good performance even after shooting through an intermediate barrier, I would skip carrying the "mouse gun" .22s, .25s and .32s.

Now compare the numbers of the handgun calibers with the numbers generated by the rifles and shotguns. For me there really isn't a stopping power debate. All handguns suck! If you want to stop someone, use a rifle or shotgun!

What matters even more than caliber is shot placement. Across all calibers, if you break down the incapacitations based on where the bullet hit you will see some useful information.

Head shots = 75% immediate incapacitation Torso shots = 41% immediate incapacitation Extremity shots (arms and legs) = 14% immediate incapacitation.

No matter which caliber you use, you have to hit something important in order to stop someone!

Conclusion

This study took me a long time and a lot of effort to complete. Despite the work it took, I'm glad I did it. The results I got from the study lead me to believe that there really isn't that much difference between most defensive handgun rounds and calibers. None is a death ray, but most work adequately...even the lowly .22s. I've stopped worrying about trying to find the "ultimate" bullet. There isn't one. And I've stopped feeling the need to strap on my .45 every time I leave the house out of fear that my 9mm doesn't have enough "stopping power." Folks, carry what you want. Caliber really isn't all that important.

Take a look at the data. I hope it helps you decide what weapon to carry. No matter which gun you choose, pick one that is reliable and train with it until you can get fast accurate hits. Nothing beyond that really matters!

Greg Ellifritz is the full time firearms and defensive tactics training officer for a central Ohio police department. He holds instructor or master instructor certifications in more than 75 different weapon systems, defensive tactics programs and police specialty areas. Greg has a master's degree in Public Policy and Management and is an instructor for both the Ohio Peace Officer's Training Academy and the Tactical Defense Institute. He can be reached at Greg1095@yahoo.com

[hiredhand]

This is what I get for being in a hurry getting out the door. I made a mess out of that Luke 22:36 ISA translation. It should read -

"He then said to them, "But now to the one who has a money bag (purse), let him take (pick) it up! Likewise also the one who has a beggars bag having no cloak, let him sell his cloak it and buy a sword"."

[Gilbo_3]

oh well, hijackin into Bible study is a *Good* thing...

its simple enuff really, when they came back and said 'Lord we have two swords' to infer that they werent speakng of figuratives...

likewise, [as Luke 22:36 was my turning point] ive searched the 4 gospels for the overall gist of the arrest at gethsemene in the very next scene from Luke 22...unless you really bastardize the text, in no way does the Lord condemn Peter for his human use of a weapon, but rather He chastizes him for attempting to alter the Fathers Plan...

all in all my earlier snippet was meant to say that we should have 'enough' armor in stock to arm those who now need, and in the future will indeed seek a 'sword'...

additionally, by being *prepared* in the worldly sense, those who have their come to Jesus moments at 2 minutes to midnight, can also find some Spiritual ammo from us as well...so by all means, happy hijackin of conversations where it is edifying...

have a great sunday Brother...

[TheOldLady]

Click the Chick

Even this baby owes thousands on the national debt

Give what you can
Or donate monthly
A sponsoring FReeper will give $10 for each new monthly donor

[hiredhand]

Got it! I didn’t figure you’d be much farther than 20 feet. A good strike to the face, or groin can buy a lot of time! Time is critical. Most people don’t realize just long 1.5 to 3 seconds is. I have a young friend who can walk away from a target and upon unannounced command, draw, get sights on target, and put three rounds in the zone in under three seconds using the 1911 .45ACP. Time is critical. :-) Thanks buddy! :-)

[hiredhand]

You and I came to the same conclusions! I had a discussion with the youngest son here about this earlier and we decided that based on context, it was taking the account out of context to consider that Jesus was talking about anything other than physical weapons (SWORDS!) in Luke 22:36. Enough people try to say that it’s figurative, but it’s too easily debunked.

The youngest son here also pointed out that Levitical law specifies death for a home invader (thief) at night, but not so during daylight hours!

This brings to mind Matt 24:43, where it reads (AV) -

“But know this, that if the goodman of the house had known in what watch the thief would come, he would have watched, and would not have suffered his house to be broken up.”

Jesus taught specifically and exclusively from Torah and He knew the law with regards to breaking into a home at night. The “goodman” wouldn’t have pummeled the thief with a bean bag. He would have run him through and sliced him and diced him with an edged weapon of some sort! Jesus knew this when he spoke this parable, and people were keenly aware of it!

Yeah... good hijack... that’s what I say! :-)

[NFHale]

You know, I used to carry “Old Slabsides” too...Say...Did I ever tell you the story of how the Glock 19 and I fell intimately in love?

I probably did, but I’ll tell you again anyway, since you asked (:^)

Originally, when PA went “Shall Issue On Demand” (gee...ain’t that a GREAT phrase to use when dealing with Public Servants?) I already had a 1911A1 Springfield Armory GI Issue .45 American Commie Popper in the gun safe.

I sez to myself - “Self”...I sez...”You should carry this heater...” as in totin’ a rod....packing heat...schlepping da Gat....

So I did. For a while. Shoulder rig. Small of back. Hip with paddle...hip with belt slide...inside the waistband (BUT - it was pointing at my crank, and THAT li’l fact was very disturbing...)

There was no comfortable way to carry “The Beast”.

So, I sez to myself “Self”...I sez, “You need another piece to carry. This rationalization took all of, oh three point seven seconds, me being the deep thinker that I am.

So I schlepped on down to the local Armory to see Fred.

Fred pointed to a just-came-in Beretta Model 85 in .380 caliber. That’s “Euroweenie Teenie Nine”. I thought - well, THIS will fit the bill nicely! Fits in the pocket, comfortable to the hand, etc., etc.

So I bought it...left the store lighter in heart and wallet, and heavier in the collection by one more piece.

So I toted the Beretta around for a bit, and I got to thinking...this is a REALLY small round, compared to the .45. I mean, it’s REEEEEEEEEEEEEALLY small. Miniscule, even...

So I sez to myself...”Self” I sez..”You need another heater...” and I went back to see Fred.

Fred, of course, smiled and was VERY happy to see me back again. I’ve given him a lot of money over the years...

Mine eyes fell upon the UBER handgun...the cool, polymer sheen - SHEEN, I tell you - of the Glock G19. THE AK47 of the handgun world.

It’s a 9mm. Of course. Bigger than the .380. Smalled than the .45 (still), but it holds a LOT of 9mm.

So....that’s how me and the Glock became compadres. Been totin’ her ever since.

And for the record, I also picked up a Glock 21 in .45 ACP. It fits all of my Glock holsters, and I occasionally carry that instead.

The backup SW642, well, that was a Valentine’s Day present for the wifey...she didn’t like it, so I inherited it. :^)

[hiredhand]

You made me laugh. :-) That was funny! :-) Thanks bro! :-)

[Gilbo_3]

Hale ole buddy, we MUST be related...the PT945 [poor boys Sig] Taurus was a present fer mrs g...and it does routine duty for me today...8^}

we need to buy the gals a few more irons...hehehehhe

[Gilbo_3]

and realistically, OT commands to raze entire cities, including evry man,woman,child and beast, as well as sterilizing the ground etc are 'real world' human actions/violence that served a purpose for Gods Glory...

today im humble enuff to realize that *if* its the Lord's Plan for a certain human being to live on for whatever reason, thers no 'best round or calibre' that i can use to make any difference anyways...

by the same token, so long as i have adequate 'swords', then any of em will be sufficient if im following Lord Jesus in Spirit...

[hiredhand]

Yep. I always think of people like Nebuchadrezzar (KJV - Nebuchadnezzar) and Senecherib (an Asyrian king). Senecherib was especially brutal against the nation of Israel. But God did indeed use him as the "arm" of His judgment! Nahum wrote all about that bunch "about" 150 years after Jonah preached at their capital (Ninveh), and they repented. It was short lived apparently. :-)

The bottom line is that we have to remember that all things were made BY Him and FOR him, and that's the focal point. Any time people try to use His precepts as an excuse for following their own desires, they'll run into trouble. A person has to be frightfully honest to do this and "most" (including myself!) have at least some degree of difficulty with it.

It's funny you should mention about "adequate swords". Most of what's stacked in the safe doesn't even belong to me. :-) I've got five long guns and two handguns and could par that down to just about nothing. I gave twice that away a few years ago when I started to feel like a pack-rat. "Stuff" just gathers dust and rust and has to be maintained. :-) Eventually, if we had enough "stuff" we'd spend ALL of our time maintaining it, or we'd have to hire somebody to do it! So I just gave it AWAY... mostly to kids and siblings. :-) Let somebody else fight the rust and dust! I've been thinking about selling some of what I have left even so. Maybe I'll put the youngest to that task. He's GOOD at it! :-)

Here's another thing and I know you'll relate to this. non-believers will just think we're nuts, but that's par for the course anyway. The Lord doesn't want us to be ignorant, or unfed, or unprotected. I'm not talking about junk like that Olsteen fellow teaches with his "Doctrine of Prosperity". I'm talking about blessings better than money and "stuff". The "default setting" for the man of God is to be righteous through The Lord and a leader, high priest, and protector of his house and family and those under his authority. If this means perforating a bad-guy, or even hordes of them, then so be it. But his focus isn't on this world. It's on something that the "world" doesn't perceive... they don't "value" things of God. By the same token, if The Lord sends this same man to deliver a word knowing it's going to mean his death, then The Lord will GIVE it to him to do this. So it's all good no matter what! :-)

But that "default setting" is to be armed, as well as righteous leaders over our own houses. I agree with The Lord... a couple of swords are sufficient.

Good stuff buddy!

[ctdonath2]

Making the rounds:

---

“Stopping Power”

A new study of pistol, rifle, and shotgun “stopping power” has just been
published by Ohioan, Greg Ellifritz.  You can see it at
_http://www.buckeyefirearms.org/node/7866_ (http://www.buckeyefirearms.org/node/7866)

This is a respectable study, and I like the way Greg describes his own
data. No sweeping conclusions, just good, general advice.

“Incapacitation” is the hard point to pin down! We’re usually relying upon
witness statements, and the prime witness is nearly always the one who did
the  shooting. Well documented perceptual errors/distortions are common, as
are  personal agendas. How fast one was actually “incapacitated” after
being struck  by bullet(s) varies widely with the pair of eyes involved in the
description!

Although not listed, I’m confident that there is a even respectable
stopping percentage emanating from situations where the criminal was shot at,  not
hit at all, but unilaterally elected to immediately disengage and run away
anyway!  Probably a significantly higher percentage with loud guns than
with relatively muted “mouse-guns.”

Greg himself acknowledges that his study doesn’t factor in bullet type, nor
brand.  Hardball is lumped in with high-performance ammunition, such as
Gold-Dot and DPX.  As he points out, getting a credible handle on those
details is nearly impossible, and, even when you do, the sampling of involvement
of each bullet type/brand will be so small as to be statistically
insignificant.

For example, most actual self-defense shootings involving 40S&W and  357SIG
probably involve high-performance ammunition, since neither is a  “military
caliber.”  Conversely, a much higher percentage of 9mm shootings  probably
involve hardball ammunition, because there is so much of it around, and
also because its use is mandated for military employment.

My conclusions:

When you’re forced to defend yourself with gunfire, using any combination
of gun/ammunition, shoot with surgical precision, and even then, don’t
expect  any perceptible behavioral change on the felon’s part for at least
several seconds, maybe longer!  Be fully equipped, trained, and prepared to  hit
him in the torso/neck/head multiple times, move, re-evaluate, and then
re-engage at once when necessary.

We carry pistols because they’re convenient, not because they’re  “
effective.”  We carry pistols constantly as a means of dealing with  “unexpected”
threats.  We carry rifles and shotguns on those occasions when  we’re
compelled to confront “expected” threats.

I hate talking about “typical” shootings!

“At least once, everyone should have to run for his life, so he will know
that eggs don’t come from stores, that safety does not come from police, and
that ‘news’ is not something that happens to other people.”

Robert Heinlein

/John
_______________________________________________
Dtiquips mailing list

[grobdriver]

Ping!

[antiRepublicrat]

It certainyl isn’t going to be fatal or a one-shot-stop if hit in the shin.

Maybe if in doing that you blew off the perp's lower leg with a ten gauge slug. He did note that shotguns are very good for immediate stops.

[antiRepublicrat]

A while back some gunsmith made a .700 Nitro Express pistol for the hell of it. How's that for stopping power? There's a video out there of the idiot who tried to shoot it though. It almost took off his face flying backwards.

".700 Nitro Express bullet and case with .45 ACP cartridge (centre) for comparison"

[antiRepublicrat]

The best gun/caliber combination is the one a person can use most safety and confidently. The rest is just fodder for magazine sales.

That's why I always tell anyone who asks, "It's what YOU are comfortable with." This article just gives more credence to what I tell them because the caliber "sweet spot" is obviously a spread, not a specific round. Our local gun stores have ranges with loaners in all the popular calibers, so a new shooter is bound to find something he or she likes.

Funny thing, for home defense people seem to often forget the humble shotgun, and this shows how much better they are than pistols for that purpose.

[EdReform]

Bookmark

[WKUHilltopper]

“Caliber really isn’t all that important.”

“Caliber really isn’t all that important.”

But Caliber + Shooter ability is important!

“That’s a factor I did not see in his report. One Shot stopping power is something that Vietnam Vet’s will tell you first hand when facing “Charlie” at point blank range - or a WW II or I Vet - although the WW I are gone now - but a trained shooter that has experienced in high threat - high stress - environments - can use the .45 semi auto effectively with a one shot stopping capability...I , however was issued a 9mm in Iraq (officer) - and felt very inadequate with that sidearm in a heavy irregular warfare environment and wished we had the .45 cal!”

My grandfather fought Moros in the Philippines (later lost his right arm in action against Poncho Villa). Said they were issued .38’s at first—and those Moros would get so drugged up—they’d keep coming at you. But the .45, they later got, did the trick just fine.

[stevie_d_64]

Take your index finger, point it towards someone or something, with your thumb pointed up, make a sound like it is shooting something and cock your thumb at every shot...

That to me is a “handgun”...;-)

[SJSAMPLE]

They gave you 15+1 rounds vs 7+1 rounds and you felt inadequate?

You’ve got 2x the chances for a nominal hit, which is by far the most important factor in, well, HITTING your target. I’ll give an edge to the 1911 trigger, but take away points because most shooters don’t carry the 1911 in Condition One.

I carry my Glock 19 in Condition One almost daily (depending on the clothing) and I never worry about being ready to use it and never worry about the caliber.

[SJSAMPLE]

Then way are modern PDW weapons, like the P90 and the MP-7 using small, fast AP rounds? They penetrate ballistic materials better than big and slow, but the terminal performance on the body is questionable, at best.