10 mm. advantages?
- Thread starter Wolfwood
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Texas
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
Exactly. Rifles "cheat" by using velocity to create temporary cavity way beyond their size along with things like fragmentation. (5.56mm is actually very nasty stuff!) "High velocity" wounds create a whole new challenge for treatment, as the tissue damage extends well beyond the hole that's punched through. Unlike a handgun.
Ted Nugent is a great American...still doesn't mean I want to swap from the .45 that I know.
When it comes to handguns, bigger is not always better...espeically if you can't put that marginally bigger piece of metal into the target...
As has already been stated, you won't normally be able to find "full power" 10mm loads on store shelves.
I was at the range with my S&W1006 shooting store bought rounds & they were actually 5fps SLOWER than
my .40 I was shooting also.....guy just happened to have a chronograph at the range & let me test them.
I was able to pick up some full power Double-Tap 10mm online & there was a HUGE difference!
I could see there would be a problem (for me) with a follow up shot with the full power ammo, but
you sure knew you were shooting something, lol.
That's all I have to add......
I was at the range with my S&W1006 shooting store bought rounds & they were actually 5fps SLOWER than
my .40 I was shooting also.....guy just happened to have a chronograph at the range & let me test them.
I was able to pick up some full power Double-Tap 10mm online & there was a HUGE difference!
I could see there would be a problem (for me) with a follow up shot with the full power ammo, but
you sure knew you were shooting something, lol.
That's all I have to add......
There, fixed it for you...now we can picture you sitting on a park bench like Forest Gump telling the story
I agree, I have shot a 10mm using full power loads, and the first shot better be dead on cause the second shot was not going to be anywhere CLOSE to it...this from a guy who can put two sets of "double tap" fire out of my .45 in a 3 inch circle at 7 yards...
Now, could I LEARN to do it? If I was 25 years younger, sure...but at my age, I'm kinda old and set in my ways, so why bother???
Texas1911:
I always enjoy reading your input. Thanks for the insights.
I think you may have misunderstood my point above. I'm in no way a single bullet theory proponent. The hypothetical I put forward was that in a confrontation whereby one has precious little time to draw one's weapon and get one round off, hopefully two, would the gentleman to whom I was adressing feel more confident - assuming something close to a center of mass hit - firing a 9mm as opposed to a .45 or 10mm (since according to him all of the above have equal stopping power, with which I clearly disagree). I have no delusions that the one round would end the fight - I was simply tring to find out if the gentleman, in a split-second encounter that could mean life or death for himself and/or family members, after all his intense research into ballistic gelatin tests, would really choose the 9mm round.
I couldn't have spelled out the three criteria above any better myself for what ends a gunfight. My opinion, and that of every LEO and military person I know who had ever been involved in one, is that the larger caliber round that transfers the most energy and creates the biggest hole - thus causing the largest degree of tissue damage - will achieve numbers 1 & 3 above with a greater likelihood.
"Anecdotal experience is actually pretty worthless". I just wanted to repeat that for the reading pleasure of every LEO, military member, or home defender who stared down the business end of life-threatening weapon and survived, so they would know that their real-world experiences, and the lessons they learned and shared in the process, according to you, are of no value whatsoever, and that all the expertise you've gleaned from reading up on ballistic gelatin testing and penetration levels is far superior to theirs when determining how to handle a life-or-death situation.
I have no desire to debate most of the other points you've made, principally because we disagree so emphatically (that and you're terribly condescending, which is uncharacteristic of this website, even though I went out of my way to be diplomatic). I will say this, however, to a couple of the points you made regarding military personell: I served in the military and know many active duty and retired military people from all branches. I also know many from the special ops community. While I would agree that most would favor the M16, and particularly the M4, over a .30 cal, you're comparing apples to oranges. Sniper units, be they infantry, Marine Corp, Ranger, etc, almost universally prefer the M4 to a more traditional bolt-action sniper rifle (of various calibers) out to 700 meters. That should tell you that comparing rifle statistics to those of handguns is silly at best. Additionally, you are also correct in your assertion that many in the spec ops community carry the Beretta M9 - the standard military issue. But in speaking at length to the four SEALs I know (who are issued, as I mentioned in my original thread, the Sig 226), there are two primary reasons for carrying the 9mm: They, and many other spec ops teams, often operate behind enemy lines and rounds available is, more often than not, the more important factor than actual stopping power (their words, not mine...although I suppose their "anecdotal experience" is probably worthless as well, according to you), and when push comes to shove, 9mm rounds are much easier to forage off dead enemy soldiers if need be; and secondly, you're referring to some of the best shooters on the planet (again, as I alluded to in my original thread). If I could spend 20+ hours/week, firing thousands of rounds at all types of targets and under all conditions, under the tutelage of the best and most experienced instructors in the world, like I mentioned above, I'd carry my P226 (or my G19, etc). Finally, the Delta Assault teams - the ones who kick down doors, clear rooms, and eliminate or arrest BG's or terrorists (i.e. those whose job it is to come into CQC, where stopping power is far more salient an issue than number of rounds available) - don't carry 9mm's. They generally train with and carry the M1911 - the military .45 standard issue - or a similar 1911. The vast majority of S.W.A.T teams in the country do the same (or carry some form of .45).
To your final question above: Yes, I do handle the .45 better than the 9mm, and I handle the 10mm better than the .40. All else being equal, however, I would trust the dozen or so active or retired LEO's and military types who have actually been in firefights, even though their experience - as you noted above - is worthless, and carry either the .45 or 10mm. Sorry - I know this flies in the face of your superior knowledge of the subject..."Because you know the truth".
A 10mm is way more recoil than I want to subject my wrist to. I would hate to find out later in life that the 10mm caused the arthritis in my wrist, due to the joint taking all of the recoil...
I would be all over it, if you could still attach a rifle stock to a pistol!
I would be all over it, if you could still attach a rifle stock to a pistol!
If I'm coming across as condescending, I'm sorry. That's not my intention at all. It's hard to convey tone over the internet.
Some raw data. Enjoy:Interpretation of FBI gelatin tests
Some raw data. Enjoy:Interpretation of FBI gelatin tests
Now take a deep breath. What M. Sage was getting at is that lack of failure does not necessarily constitute success. Just because someone has been doing something or using something one way and haven't failed doesn't necessarily mean that is the best, most efficient or effective way, or that they are even doing anything right. Their lack of failure could simply be luck, the whole roll of the dice thing. Honestly, most of this stuff is common sense and a matter of simple physics. I cannot tell you how many times I have spoken to people with more real world experience than me, people who have been shot at, people who have killed assailants, and people that have been wounded in altercations, in war, etc. Many of them have great insight and have been able to reflect back and analyze what they've done right, what they've done wrong. Occasionally, (unfortunately) some of these individuals do not care to analyze things and will argue techniques, tactics, and gear deficiencies with arguments like "Well it worked for me", "It sure put that guy down", "Hey, I'm still here and he's not" or other such similar arguments. I hate to say it but, these are invalid arguments. Real world experience goes a long way and is a very important piece of the puzzle, but we have to put it into context and use facts, scientific evidence, and common sense to come to a factual conclusion. I say that not to belittle anyone's real world experience, but instead to help everyone take a step back, drop the emotion, and look at things with a scientific mindset so we can all improve our knowledge.
Exactly. Anecdotal evidence isn't used in scientific studies for a reason.
I really hope that the gun community can, when looking at the gear side of things, focus on a scientific mindset as much as possible.
Sure, some gear is sexier than other gear, there's always that intangible that makes us prefer something. But when it comes to things like caliber effectiveness, the science is pretty solid. I can't even count how many hours I've spent searching and reading for information about it. I've got lots of anecdotal accounts, too, but gather enough of them and you start getting contradictory information a lot of the time.
I really hope that the gun community can, when looking at the gear side of things, focus on a scientific mindset as much as possible.
Sure, some gear is sexier than other gear, there's always that intangible that makes us prefer something. But when it comes to things like caliber effectiveness, the science is pretty solid. I can't even count how many hours I've spent searching and reading for information about it. I've got lots of anecdotal accounts, too, but gather enough of them and you start getting contradictory information a lot of the time.
Apology accepted. Very gentlemanly of you to offer it. Please accept mine, as well, if I went too far in my rebuttal.
I read the data and narative in the link you posted. Thank you. While it does contian a lot of interesting information - stuff that all of us should be aware of - it falls short in certain areas (IMHO). First, and not to beat a dead horse, the author completely dismisses any and all "real world" evidence or experience, either subjective or objective, from all branches of law enforcement. He doesn't distinguish between the lab (clearly his domain, and over which he is vehemently protective) and actual events, which would be fine if the disclaimer were put forth. He just flat out tells the reader that interviewing cops, FBI and other federal agents, military personell, etc, to get their stories, is worthless and a waste of time, as is collecting purely objective data on shoot-outs from LE and other departments nation wide (with regards to firearms and calibers/specific rounds used and their resultant effectiveness). He even slams "one author" (we can all probably guess who) who does exactly that. Sig-Fiend makes a very good point in that many real-world anecdotes are likely skewed or don't contain much usefull information. But to completely discount every confrontation that every officer or operator has had, and all shoot-out data from real world sources, all in the name of science? That's really pretty pathetic in my view, particularly when you consider that the "lab testing" is done in a completely controlled enviroment, with no exogenous factors effecting either the shooter or the hardware used. Secondly, the author limits his study to the projectile striking "soft tissue". What are the effects of a round striking the chest plate or one or more ribs upon entry? That's a whole different ballgame, and one that will likley happen during a center of mass shot that's a couple inches high and/or wide. Which calibers are more likely to lose mass and energy under such a scenario and not complete the author's all-important "proper penetration level"? Which rounds will stay intact, expand properly, penetrate effectively, and potentially use the shattered bone fragments as projectile extensions (i.e. pushing bone into the heart, lungs or arteries)? This would be very valuable information for us all to have, and is not addressed by ballistic gel experiments (again - collecting objective, real world forensic medical and coroner data would shed light on some of these nuances...the cynic in me suspects the author did just that, and the findings didn't support the data of his ballistic gel experiments, so he dismissed them). And thirdly, the author only addresses the temporary wound channel with regards to, again, "soft tissue". What effect does that channel have on a thoracic nerve cavity, even without a direct hit to it? I can tell you from experience with such things (in addition to degenerative disk disease I had a condition called Thoracic Outlet Syndrome, which was debilitatingly painful, and for which I underwent extremely invasive surgery, which took the better part of a year to recover from), that nerve disruption is far more traumatizing than muscle damage. The condition I had resulted from a small and simple narrowing of the area in which the thoracic center lies (in this case the shoulder). Having spent many, many hours researching these things, and having dealt with them personally, I stongly believe that if that nerve center were disrupted via the temporary wound channel of a shot to the shoulder, the connected arm would be badly impaired, if not useless (this has nothing to do with pain, as the author dismisses - only the traumatization of a nerve center). And of course there are other thoracic cavities that could effected similarly. Lastly, the author writes that the "only" one-shot stopper is to the head. Clearly if the cervical spine were severed, or even hit with sufficient force, all nerve and muscle activity would cease instantly. Also, U.S. military sniper doctrine states that a direct hit through the heart muscle will provide an instant kill. Upon leanring that I had my doubts - my belief was that of the author's...that there would still be a few seconds worth of oxygen in the blood for the BG to continue the fight. But I'm just stating facts, not taking sides on that one.
Thank you again for the info. It is fascinating stuff that I should dedicate more time to. But I hope you don't mind if I respectfully part company with you in certain areas. The friends, aquaintences, instructors, etc, I draw as much info from as possible are all LE or military with many, many experiences, not only shooting BG's and being shot at, but seeing first-hand the results of various shoot-outs that they were not directly involved in. There is only one - a retired LEO - who regulary carries a 9mm. Every other one, to a man (and woman) carries a .45, or to a lesser degree a 10mm, and usually a 1911. One in particular, a close friend who served as an LEO for 25 years in both NY and CT (and was involved in 5 shoot-outs), then worked for Colt for another 10 years testing weapons and ammunition, routinely gives me his opinion on the subject: "If there's any way to avoid a gunfight, do it...even if it means turning tail and running as fast as you can. But if not, carry the highest caliber, most powerful round you can effectively handle". That's now my mantra as well, and no lab tech, with all the ballistic gel studies on the planet, will ever convince me otherwise!
Some of the most ridiculous claims, most inaccurate and scientifically unfounded stories I've heard, etc have come from many of the people I've talked to who were/are in Mil/LE. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying completely discount anything any of them have to say. What I'm saying is take it with a grain and realize, regardless of the background, 9 times out of 10 you are probably going to get a recounted story that is embellished, reported incorrectly, or based on incorrect assumptions/data from an end user that does not understand the science and physics behind what actually occurred. I am not picking on Mil/LE here, I would say the 9 out of 10 thing applies to ANYONE. Science can explain all these things, the problem is lots of people do not understand the science and physics behind ballistic wounding factors (which are relatively simple), and they think it is some mythical black art that can't be explained. This leads to stories and explanations that are largely incorrect and do not really portray reality properly. It's just not that big of a deal.
A shot to the heart WILL NOT stop someone instantaneously. The only shots that will are to the upper spinal cord or CNS. This is a fact of science that cannot be refuted and is supported through countless documented LE shootings I have come across, and likely many military cases as well. At one point I came across a LE shooting where the suspect attempted to attack several officers (with a knife I believe), took multiple pistol rounds from a couple of officers, took a 12 gauge SLUG to the HEART, and kept fighting for another 5-8 seconds before passing out from blood/blood pressure loss, and then expired very shortly thereafter. 5 seconds may sound close to instantaneous to some people, but that is a lifetime in a gun/knife fight. If you need someone to drop 100% instantaneously like you just flipped the light switch off, upper spinal cord or CNS are the only 2 shots that can guarantee it 100% of the time. The problem here, which is nearly impossible to quantify or decipher, is the psychological factor. A true Alpha type individual that is mentally determined and mentally capable of fighting through an unequivocally fatal hit such as a bullet obliterating their heart.....those individuals are few and far between. There is the PCP fiend factor as well. As uncommon as the mental "Alpha" types can be, we can generalize and say that 99% (made up percentage) of the time most attackers taking a shot to the heart will drop like a sack of potatoes and leave you alone. Though, what if you happen to be unlucky enough to get that 1%'er, and what if he's inside 7yds, and what if he has a knife? Regardless of what you are using, mag dump him in the chest and mag dump him in the face, if they don't stop, as fast as you possibly can because giving them even 1 second could end up very bad for you.
The key being, "that you can handle". No offense but, with many of the long time LEO's I've dealt with (not all, I've known plenty that have kept up with training and learning new things) and other old codgers I always hear these things from about "no less than .45acp", I could run circles around most of them as far as shooting at speed, acquiring multiple targets at speed, etc. I'd rather be able to shoot fast as hell than shoot 50-75% slower and less consistently, for only a very few percent performance difference in bullet size. In a full size government 1911, .45acp is pretty tame, and I can shoot it just fine rapid fire and love them, so don't get me wrong. Just saying, consider the source. I've found a lot of people I've heard these things from can barely shoot 2 rounds a second (I can do 4 consistently or up to 6 at times), and barely keep them in a 2 foot group out to 7yds, which is not proficient. I would rather see people stop relying and getting stuck on caliber to help them out, and instead work on shooting proficiently at a realistic level, or if need be stepping down to a caliber that will allow them to do so. I've come across plenty of people that were incapable of handling a .45acp (or similar sized bigger .40+ caliber) as far as recoil, operating the gun (stiff sprung 1911's), etc and that would have been much better served with something simple like a 9mm Glock/M&P/XD that they could run much more efficiently. They could sacrifice that very few percent performance difference in caliber for something that they may be able to run 50% faster and more efficiently, which would ultimately be more effective. If you can shoot a .45acp 4+ rounds per second out to 7yds and still maintain a fist-sized group or so, then that's even better.
So the point of all this is, if you like 10mm and want to buy one just because you think it's cool, do it! There's nothing wrong with that. If faced with an attacker, just shoot them to the ground as fast as possible until they are no longer a threat. There is no magic "death ray" caliber that can guarantee anything.
Okay, so that's enough of an E-novel from me for today! LOL All this talk has made me realize again that I also need a full size 5" 1911 in 10mm, and also one in .45acp, both with 10rd extended mags. That will nicely compliment my 9mm Glock, and I'll alternate CC'ing each of them.
A shot to the heart WILL NOT stop someone instantaneously. The only shots that will are to the upper spinal cord or CNS. This is a fact of science that cannot be refuted and is supported through countless documented LE shootings I have come across, and likely many military cases as well. At one point I came across a LE shooting where the suspect attempted to attack several officers (with a knife I believe), took multiple pistol rounds from a couple of officers, took a 12 gauge SLUG to the HEART, and kept fighting for another 5-8 seconds before passing out from blood/blood pressure loss, and then expired very shortly thereafter. 5 seconds may sound close to instantaneous to some people, but that is a lifetime in a gun/knife fight. If you need someone to drop 100% instantaneously like you just flipped the light switch off, upper spinal cord or CNS are the only 2 shots that can guarantee it 100% of the time. The problem here, which is nearly impossible to quantify or decipher, is the psychological factor. A true Alpha type individual that is mentally determined and mentally capable of fighting through an unequivocally fatal hit such as a bullet obliterating their heart.....those individuals are few and far between. There is the PCP fiend factor as well. As uncommon as the mental "Alpha" types can be, we can generalize and say that 99% (made up percentage) of the time most attackers taking a shot to the heart will drop like a sack of potatoes and leave you alone. Though, what if you happen to be unlucky enough to get that 1%'er, and what if he's inside 7yds, and what if he has a knife? Regardless of what you are using, mag dump him in the chest and mag dump him in the face, if they don't stop, as fast as you possibly can because giving them even 1 second could end up very bad for you.
The key being, "that you can handle". No offense but, with many of the long time LEO's I've dealt with (not all, I've known plenty that have kept up with training and learning new things) and other old codgers I always hear these things from about "no less than .45acp", I could run circles around most of them as far as shooting at speed, acquiring multiple targets at speed, etc. I'd rather be able to shoot fast as hell than shoot 50-75% slower and less consistently, for only a very few percent performance difference in bullet size. In a full size government 1911, .45acp is pretty tame, and I can shoot it just fine rapid fire and love them, so don't get me wrong. Just saying, consider the source. I've found a lot of people I've heard these things from can barely shoot 2 rounds a second (I can do 4 consistently or up to 6 at times), and barely keep them in a 2 foot group out to 7yds, which is not proficient. I would rather see people stop relying and getting stuck on caliber to help them out, and instead work on shooting proficiently at a realistic level, or if need be stepping down to a caliber that will allow them to do so. I've come across plenty of people that were incapable of handling a .45acp (or similar sized bigger .40+ caliber) as far as recoil, operating the gun (stiff sprung 1911's), etc and that would have been much better served with something simple like a 9mm Glock/M&P/XD that they could run much more efficiently. They could sacrifice that very few percent performance difference in caliber for something that they may be able to run 50% faster and more efficiently, which would ultimately be more effective. If you can shoot a .45acp 4+ rounds per second out to 7yds and still maintain a fist-sized group or so, then that's even better.
So the point of all this is, if you like 10mm and want to buy one just because you think it's cool, do it! There's nothing wrong with that. If faced with an attacker, just shoot them to the ground as fast as possible until they are no longer a threat. There is no magic "death ray" caliber that can guarantee anything.
Okay, so that's enough of an E-novel from me for today! LOL All this talk has made me realize again that I also need a full size 5" 1911 in 10mm, and also one in .45acp, both with 10rd extended mags. That will nicely compliment my 9mm Glock, and I'll alternate CC'ing each of them.
That's nicely written.
5 seconds really is a long time in a fight. When I shot tactical carbine matches with my AK, I could reload in 3 seconds. It felt like forever with the timer running. 3 seconds not shooting is a loooong time when you're only worried about a score.
Five seconds is forever if someone is trying to kill you. It could be the rest of your life.
5 seconds really is a long time in a fight. When I shot tactical carbine matches with my AK, I could reload in 3 seconds. It felt like forever with the timer running. 3 seconds not shooting is a loooong time when you're only worried about a score.
Five seconds is forever if someone is trying to kill you. It could be the rest of your life.
Thanks, Sig-Fiend, for the insight and advice. Fortunately I have given all the points you made exhaustive consideration for many years. Clearly one must consider the source when collecting, and potentially employing, real-world anecdotes and advice. I have done so as well with regards to all the gentlemen, and one lady, I've alluded to (all of whom are either active duty military in combat roles, competition shooters, or firearm instructors), and don't just blindly take advice from anyone who might otherwise command my respect for service to their country or community. I left the military 20 years ago after 1 tour (although as an officer, even in a combat unit, I did not not get nearly as much range time as I would have liked) and have kept up in terms of proficiency. In addition to the old-timers one may run into at the range or gunshop, there are many excellent books on the market with combat insights from not only LEO's, but also active duty and recently retired/separated soldiers and Marines. I realize some of what they say flies in the face of the "science" that most 9mm aficianados cite whenever this type of discussion arises, but it's kinda difficult to poo-poo the real-world stories of elite cops and operators because they don't agree with some lab studies.
I will concede this, however: After reading a bunch of the ballistic gel test data and interpretations, a "soft tissue" hit with a .45 or 10mm, under pristine conditions and through relatively light clothing, even though they hit harder, make bigger holes, and generally speaking have better expansion characteristics than a 9mm, seem to be only marginally more effective in terms of permanent tissue damage. So, the next time the North TX weather is temperate and not terribly humid, there's no wind or precipitation of any sort, and I'm certain that my assailant is wearing a T-shirt and will stand perfectly still and not return fire while I shoot him in the gut, I'll happily pack one of my 9mm's!
Yes - you DO need to add a 10mm and a full-sized 1911 to your collection! Dan Wesson makes outstanding versions of each (PMZ-10 and Valor are the ones I own). I do love my Sig 1911's, though, particularly the Blackwater. I agree with you re the mild recoil of a full-sized (steel) 1911, and accuracy is the best of any style of pistol I've ever fired. They are hard to CC, though, partuclarly when you're used to a Glock (I assume a G19?), which is highly concealable. A G20 is even more difficult to CC than a 1911. Go with the G29 if CC is an issue, or a commander-sized 1911 (in either caliber). Any of the 10mm's above are awfully nice to carry in the field or mountains as well, should you decide they're over-powered for CC.
I will concede this, however: After reading a bunch of the ballistic gel test data and interpretations, a "soft tissue" hit with a .45 or 10mm, under pristine conditions and through relatively light clothing, even though they hit harder, make bigger holes, and generally speaking have better expansion characteristics than a 9mm, seem to be only marginally more effective in terms of permanent tissue damage. So, the next time the North TX weather is temperate and not terribly humid, there's no wind or precipitation of any sort, and I'm certain that my assailant is wearing a T-shirt and will stand perfectly still and not return fire while I shoot him in the gut, I'll happily pack one of my 9mm's!
Yes - you DO need to add a 10mm and a full-sized 1911 to your collection! Dan Wesson makes outstanding versions of each (PMZ-10 and Valor are the ones I own). I do love my Sig 1911's, though, particularly the Blackwater. I agree with you re the mild recoil of a full-sized (steel) 1911, and accuracy is the best of any style of pistol I've ever fired. They are hard to CC, though, partuclarly when you're used to a Glock (I assume a G19?), which is highly concealable. A G20 is even more difficult to CC than a 1911. Go with the G29 if CC is an issue, or a commander-sized 1911 (in either caliber). Any of the 10mm's above are awfully nice to carry in the field or mountains as well, should you decide they're over-powered for CC.
First lesson you learn about shooting real living objects ... ballistics testing is largely bullshit.
Thank you, Texas1911! That's precisely the point I've getting at in the last few posts without insulting the die hard 9mm crowd too badly (since clearly what happens in the lab and in physics books, they seem to always claim, is far more relevant than what happens in the real world). That's also why I made the joke about carrying a 9mm only under perfect laboratory conditions, for which I expect a salvo of rebuttals, possibly some angry ones, even though it was meant in fun.
(shrug)
Real life shoot outs are not scientific experiments. Too many veriables. To put it bluntly, you cannot compare them and make any scientifically "significant" conclusions. That is not an insult to your collegues. I'll be the first one to tell you that so many "studies" are complete BS, but good studies can make good conclusitons supported by evidence.
To put it frankly, there is a lot of bullshit out there when you get into ballistics and calibers. google "9 vs 45" and you'll get a lot stuff. Most of it complete crap from armchair warriors.
The human body is an increadibly complex and cool anatomical and physiologic peice of machinery. I've seen a .40 bullet go in one guy's hip, through the head of the femur on one side, sending some minor bone fragments into the bladder, and lodging itself on the other side without doing any "real" damage. Granted, he's going to need surgery to fix his leg (you couldn't tell on xray, only saw the break on CT . . .weird), but a foley catheter. I've seen a one go from a guys' shoulder and out in his sternum without doing any damage (though it looked like he took on in the ticker). I've seen a 9 yr old girl (in Mexico) get shot with some high velocity round that went through her scapula, body of a vertebrea, and two ribs before the bullet completely fell apart only going about 4".
You can't predict what will happen.
There is a a lot people dead from 9mm luger, 40 S&W, 45auto, 38 special, and 357 mag. I doubt the differences in the cartridges is as much as some people think. The cartridges we have now are tons better than they were 150 years ago, and they killed people back then too.
People's personal beliefs is just that, beliefs. It could be based on bias or reason. Just cause they carry a gun and are good with it, doesn't mean they are the end all. Your buddies might think that a 2.44lb empty, 100 year old gun that carries 8 round magazines is the pinacle of combat perfection . . . (oh, I'm going to get it for that statement . . . . I'm joshing you a little), but that might not be the best gun for everyone. A deadly shooter is a deadly shooter. You give some of those guys a bent BB gun and they are deadly.
Have fun. Put lead on target.
Real life shoot outs are not scientific experiments. Too many veriables. To put it bluntly, you cannot compare them and make any scientifically "significant" conclusions. That is not an insult to your collegues. I'll be the first one to tell you that so many "studies" are complete BS, but good studies can make good conclusitons supported by evidence.
To put it frankly, there is a lot of bullshit out there when you get into ballistics and calibers. google "9 vs 45" and you'll get a lot stuff. Most of it complete crap from armchair warriors.
The human body is an increadibly complex and cool anatomical and physiologic peice of machinery. I've seen a .40 bullet go in one guy's hip, through the head of the femur on one side, sending some minor bone fragments into the bladder, and lodging itself on the other side without doing any "real" damage. Granted, he's going to need surgery to fix his leg (you couldn't tell on xray, only saw the break on CT . . .weird), but a foley catheter. I've seen a one go from a guys' shoulder and out in his sternum without doing any damage (though it looked like he took on in the ticker). I've seen a 9 yr old girl (in Mexico) get shot with some high velocity round that went through her scapula, body of a vertebrea, and two ribs before the bullet completely fell apart only going about 4".
You can't predict what will happen.
There is a a lot people dead from 9mm luger, 40 S&W, 45auto, 38 special, and 357 mag. I doubt the differences in the cartridges is as much as some people think. The cartridges we have now are tons better than they were 150 years ago, and they killed people back then too.
People's personal beliefs is just that, beliefs. It could be based on bias or reason. Just cause they carry a gun and are good with it, doesn't mean they are the end all. Your buddies might think that a 2.44lb empty, 100 year old gun that carries 8 round magazines is the pinacle of combat perfection . . . (oh, I'm going to get it for that statement . . . . I'm joshing you a little), but that might not be the best gun for everyone. A deadly shooter is a deadly shooter. You give some of those guys a bent BB gun and they are deadly.
Have fun. Put lead on target.
Members online
- gamboolman
- Otto_Mation
- smittyb
- datatech2550
- Gordo
- Gorp2007
- digger
- Txhighlander
- brashears9567
- ZX9RCAM
- CajunTrooper
- tekiwap
- myroverleaks
- Big Dipper
- Buffalo Bob
- cycleguy2300
- randomthought
- A.Texas.Yankee
- toddnjoyce
- CJGarza
- andre3k
- 2ManyGuns
- Nick!
- justmax
- Coon
- Renegade
- CodyK
- HKaltwasser
- Blueengin
- gatorgrad84
- TxAgZ28
- prisondoc
- skfullgun
- Huntsman52
- Big Green
- Ingramite
- Axxe55
- Bozz10mm
- buckshot4900
- D0ntTr3@d0nM3
- Shooter74
- kbaxter60
- jlw
- jwales
- Mescobarrpls
- Tejano1951
- TwentyFive
- ULEWZ
- acidfly
- rman
