Is anything really known about handgun stopping power?

[Questor]

There seems to be plenty of speculation, but does anyone really know, for example, whether a light fast bullet is more effective than a slow heavy bullet? Are large diameter bullets known to be more effective than smaller diameter bullets?

What are the facts? We must know something that is generally true.

I'd like this discussion not to be just another rehash of tired old truisms and the same ancient speculation that gets kicked around over and over again.

[Lone Star]

Good luck.  There are two very chauvanistic camps on this issue, both sides will present their own experts and reams of data to support their own cherished opinions.  About all that we know to be true is that both camps can be right.

However, why would a thinking man expect to be able to quantify stopping power?  Looking at the sharp division in the hunting fields on what is best to kill large animals - light and fast or big and slow - there will never be any concensus, IMO.  These discussions border on religious arguments....nothing I want to be a part of.  

[Old Griz]

:cb2: What's really known . . . ? Sometimes they do, sometimes they don't.  Just keep on squeezin' that trigger til the threat is nullified!  :eek:

Sorry, I've heard so much garbage on this issue that I can't really take it seriously any more.  :shock:

[unspellable]

1. Shot placement.

2. Shot placement.

3. If you are worrying about caliber, you're still confused, see rule 1.

[Questor]

Ol Griz:

You just gave the most authoritative and applicable answer I've ever seen on this topic.  I knew that if the truth were to be told it would be told here.

If you could just write a 300 page book that says that same thing in a way that makes people want to buy it, you'd be able to go on the lecture circuit for law enforcement people.

Some things are just so disarmingly simple.

[Old Griz]

:cb2: Naw . . . The only ones dumb enough to read it would be some of the nimrod gun magazine writers.  

[Glanceblamm]

Still a Fascinating Subject Though...
I believed in (still do) the large & slow for several years till I personally got to see the light & fast work.
This gave new meaning to the old saying of..(dbl the bullet weight, dbl the energy/dbl the velocity, quadruple the energy.

One Graybeard response I like claimed a couple ways to do the harvest.
One is tissue & blood loss and the other to shock the central nervous system (CNS).
I agree with this and believe that (CNS) is a bonus associated with a close range or high velocity impact.

None of this can happen though without good shot placement so I am sending (unspellable) the Cigar.

[Old Griz]

:cb2: In my ignorant bliss, I see the problem with coming up with a definite conclusion is not the energy, velocity, etc., etc., etc., but the recipient. Everybody is different. We are not all going to be shooting into the same set of conditions.

I heard--don't know if it is true--that the Illinois State Police shot a big dude on PCP 33 times (9mm) and he still kept coming. They finally put him down with a shotgun. Whether this incident is true or not, body size, condition, extra chemicals in the system, et al., does make a difference.

Why do we have the 1911 and the .45 ACP today? Because of the Philippines and the .38 S&W. Couldn't stop 'em. Drugs involved here. And the infamous FBI Miami tragedy? No drugs, just one tough guy who didn't know he was dead yet.

On the other hand, you could bring down my weak 84 year old father with a pellet gun.

We can run all kinds of tests with all kinds of bullets, big, fat and slow, small and fast, but it really is going to depend on the person on the other end, and where you hit 'em.

[Redhawk1]

1. Shot placement.

2. Shot placement.

3. If you are worrying about caliber, you're still confused, see rule 1.

Sound good to me...

[harrygunner]

I'm assuming you are wanting to discuss stopping a human about to initiate
an act that would warrant deadly force to stop.

These are my thoughts. I understand that shot placement is a different,
unrelated issue. For example good shot placement with a BB gun won't get
the job done.

Good shot placement is obviously the right thing to do, now, how about
what ammo to use. No one has THE answer, but, there are tried and true
ways to get closer to that.

The complexity comes from the physiology of the human body and the
mental state of the perp.

A physicist looking at collisions of bodies understands there are two
independent parameters: energy and momentum.

One can't do the math focusing on only energy or only on momentum. But,
gun forums spend a lot of time wanting to do that.

A physicist could calculate the 'impulse' the BG receives if the bullet and
the BG were simple objects and conclude that comes from the heaviest,
fastest bullet that REMAINS in the body.

But, the complexities of how the bullet interacts with the non-trivial
properties of the human body dominates. How does one relate 'impulse'
to a BG stopping his/her heinous act?

Scientists have alway had to deal with complex processes. If they can't
model the process, they use statistical analysis to gain practical
information.

But, gun forums poopoo attempts at that. Start talking about "one shot stop"
and it quickly goes down hill.

An analogy would be the weather and predicting rain.

Humans can't do that yet. But, we do our best by collecting data
on measurable parameters associated with weather. Then, we look
for correlations to occurrences of rain.

On a given day, the weather person gives a probability of rain.
If it rains, the probability does not jump to 100% nor does it
go to zero if it does not rain. But, I'm sure we've all heard
someone say that.

To me, it's smart to model a parameter like the "one shot stop",
then, collect data on measurable aspects of the shot.

The "one shot stop" would then be a parameter like the probability
of rain. Scientists could collect measurements as best we can with
every shooting, then, look for correlations. We could use it as a
measure of the effectiveness of ammo.

But even if the name were changed, someone would find out about
the "one shot stop" part and start the never ending talk about
how you're dumb to expect a BG to stop with one shot.

For now, I use the biggest, fastest bullets that remain in the
body. I carry fast .40 S&W and .45 ACP.

[Questor]

Ol Griz:

Small world department: I used to work in the building in Miami where those FBI agents were gunned down in the parking lot.  About a year later, and in an unrelated event, we noticed a bad odor in that same parking lot and called the cops. They found a rotting corpse in the trunk of a car.

You may think that this was a rough part of town, but it was really one of the nicest areas of Miami.  

Not long after that I was driving home and noticed a police sniper on the roof of my apartment building. I then realized it was time to leave.

My old buddy George used to drive a tow truck and had a contract with the police to tow crime vehicles. Man, did he have some stories of messed up cars. Machine guns sure were popular back then. To hear his stories, those machine guns were VERY effective on their human targets too.  I guess the machine gun is the mechanical incarnation of your doctrine that you need to pull the trigger and just keep pulling the trigger until the threat is stopped.

[unspellable]

As far as I am concerned, all the debate about stopping power is a tempest in a tea pot for the following two reasons.

1. For a household intruder, a 12 gauge trumps any handgun you can name.

2. For CCW, concealability dominates and I typically end up with a 32 ACP or a 380 ACP.  Go ahead and laugh, but the reality is that if you flash or print, you're going to have a really big hassle you don't need.  Sure, I'd prefer something with more horsepower, but it has to be concealable!

The caliber debates really only apply to open carry service sized side arms.

[Arc Angel]

How come I've never heard of anyone walking away from a torso hit by a 50 BMG round?    Other than this there's always that, 'magic corridor' between the neck and pelvic girdle.  It's kind 'a narrow:  Just 2" on each side of the backbone; but, if you can put 'em in there, that should do the job!  (Ayoob likes anywhere on the pelvic girdle, and I'm inclined to agree - but only for follow-up shots!)  

And then there's that old gunman's expression, 'Freight 'um down with all the lead they can carry!'  

[harrygunner]

The original poster asked for non-conventional responses, not
the usual Internet stuff.

My first post was about the usefulness of gathering statistical data.
Once this data is gathered, it could help develop a mathematical
model of a human being shot.

There are certain effects the models should confirm.
Intuitively, a fast, small bullet should cause tissue near
it to tear immediately. The tissue would not have time to
transmit tensile forces to adjacent areas before its limits
are exceeded. A slower bullet may cause a larger section
of tissue to be affected before tissue is torn.

We all take advantage of this when we yank a loose thread knowing
if we do it fast enough, that one thread will break, leaving
other threads in the garment intact. If we pulled slower, we
know other threads would come undone.

Physicists have been using computer modeling to simulate
complex processes for decades.

One could define a lattice of points in three dimensional
space. Each cube would have characteristics representative
of the portion of the body it lies in, i.e the percentage of
fluid, tissue tensile strengths, densities, viscosity, etc.

Essentially the program would iterate through all the lattice
points, first calculating pressures, velocities and tensile
forces where the bullet is. Then, using those results to calculate
the same parameters for adjacent cells. Then, next outer and so on.

Fluid dynamic equations do as I said one must, conserve energy
AND momentum. The same principals would apply to tissue absorbing,
stretching or tearing. Funny how many Internet discussions only
want to consider one, momentum OR energy.

Interestingly, skin, bones and denser organs would cause delayed
effects as pressure waves reflect off these organs.

Finally, one must model all the ways a human can become incapacitated
by the effects a bullet can cause.

I'm sure a 50 BMG bullet kills by a different mechanism than a .380.
But, all methods need to be modeled so that a simulation run can
assess the performance of a particular shot.

This kind of modeling is expensive. The team would have to have
members from a number of disciplines. Don't know who would want to
pay for something like this. Ammo companies may only model
fluid dynamics in an unbounded, simple fluid.

Universities tend to be less open than they should be, so, a
professor may have trouble getting funding. Ammo companies are
selling product, so, there is little incentive for them to fund
something like this. Maybe some government agency has.

[John C-S]

You can approach 2K fps. Like the .30 M1 Carbine. Some Soldiers liked it and others thought it was a pea shooter in WWII. The ones who thought it (the M1 Carbine) was a pea shooter liked the .45 auto for war needs (killing the enemy w/o fuss to shoot again). In a war I would want either a .45 auto or 16 shot 9mm Luger. In a hunt I would just use the .44 Magnum in a decent six-shooter revolver. Humans and deer weigh about the same. What works on a deer is preferable because humans are not as resistant to bullets of any caliber. So, given your quest I would choose the .44 Magnum six-shooter because of bullet diameter and weight over smaller cal. For both. However, a 9mm with plenty of accuracy and firepower (like the Army's M9) is not a bad choice for war (against enemy). But if you are hunting deer, just consider a .44 Magnum that you like and know is better than any nine for anything.

[rockbilly]

:roll: Questor, Everyone has an opinion, talk to a hundred different people, you will get a hundred differen answers.  I think the only thing certain, is no one is certain...........    

[Guy]

How come I've never heard of anyone walking away from a torso hit by a 50 BMG round?  

I have. I heard or read somewhere of people surviving them. Seems like I read of an incident i the Vietnam War of a guy taking two or three torso hits from the Soviet equivelent of .50 BMG (a 14.5mm or some such) and surviving. SHort of taking out the central nervous system, there are no guarantees.

[jerkface11]

A bullet has as much stopping power as the person getting shot thinks it does. I've seen videos of rubber shotgun slugs putting someone on the ground stiff as a board thinking they're dead. And i've seen videos of rubber shotgun slugs not having any effect at all when the guy knew they were rubber.
  Krochus has an interesting theory on this. According to him stopping power is psychological. If you read the history of the northfield minnesota raid you'll see that the Youngers were shot a dozen times each with .45s and both rode away and served out their prison terms. People didn't start falling over when they got shot till movies and TV shows started showing that sort of thing.

  That's why some people stop in their tracks from a single round from a .25 auto. And why others take a full clip of .40 and keep coming. Or at least that's my 2 cents worth.

[rockbilly]

jerjface11.  You can't really compare the incident with the Younger brothers with current times.  First, in that period the ammo was loaded with a solid lead bullet over black powder.  The firearms of that period did not develop the energy that modern firearms do.  Second, What was the Younger brothers wearing?  If they were wearing heavy wool or leather jackets they would act as a protective vest does today.  The bullet would penetrate, but most of the energy would be expended penetrating the jacket.

I agree, stopping power is psychological to some degree, but there are many other factors involved too.  Some people have a higher tolerance for pain than others, the adrenalin may be pumping and prevent the immediate pain from the shot.  And of course, what did the bullet hit as it entered or passed through the body?

In Vietnam I seen guys hit in the arm, and they were worthless afterwards, one guy went int a panic, jumped up, took off running, shouting "I am gonna die, I am gonna die."  While others took center mass hits that did extensive and they still tried, or wanted to fight.  As I said in the above post:

  "The only thing certain, is no one is certain."

[Questor]

That's very thought provoking, Jerkface.  Perhaps movie shootings should be modified so that the actor goes into histrionics instead of falling over. Perhaps a five minute soliloquy about cruel fate and the end of it all would make a better model for gunshot hits.  It sure would be nice to have a bad guy be distracted at length like that. It would give me plenty of time to leave.

[Buffalo_Hunter]

Is there any hard and fast truth about stopping power,I don't think that there is and here's why:
Targets are all constructed differently with multiple factors that make them different. What body type is the person? slim,heavy muscle,obese? What is the climate,and what type of clothing is being worn? What is the person's overall level of conditioning? What is the person's mental state prior to and during the event? What are the details of the event? What are the particulars of the event? What if any training for weapon control and stress management is involved? What types of weapons and ammo are being used?
I think that the best advice that anyone of us to take as a general rule and guide is to strike your adversary with the largest weapon available that you are able to operate is such a manner as to hit vital targets multiple times very quickly and to keep this effort up until the threat is stopped.In short shoot vital spots like the central nervous,and cardiac systems  as many times as you can,as quickly as you can and keep that up until the threat has been stopped. If you think about it the most effective systems seem to rely on multiple hits in milliseconds (shotgun and machine gun),and they seem to work most of the time.
I think that all of us would certainly hope that we never have an event where we need to use a weapon of any kind to defend ourselves,but at the same time I'm almost certain that we will want the most effective means to stop the event in a hurry with us left standing unscathed,and I really don't believe that there is a magical answer in regards to a specific weapon and or calibre,although there are folks out there who seem to feel that they have what they need.Pick the gun and load that makes you feel comfortable and practice,practice,practice and hope you never need to use your skills.

[gino]

Another factor to consider is "The dead man's 10 seconds" or in other words even with the heart destroyed the brain & body will still function for another 10 seconds or so. Gabe Suarez <sp?> had an article about this recently http://www.warriortalk.com/
gino

[MS Hitman]

The post originally started off regarding stopping power.  There is a BIG difference between stopping and killing.  The human or animal one has just killed is often capable of inflicting damage or killing the shooter prior to expiration unless it is stopped or nuetralized.  Stopping does not have to equate  killing.  In fact, when dealing with dangerous game, I'll take stopping over killing everytime.  Once an animal has been stopped, I can kill him at my "leisure" and not with the stress of having to keep it off me.  This, in my opinion is best accomplished by using slow heavy bullets which are capable of penetrating deep enough and are capable of breaking bone.  Breaking bones(shoulders, legs, and spines) weakens the body's support and thus impedes movement.

This is my 2 cents worth, fire away.

[Guy]

jerjface11.  You can't really compare the incident with the Younger brothers with current times.  First, in that period the ammo was loaded with a solid lead bullet over black powder.  The firearms of that period did not develop the energy that modern firearms do.  Second, What was the Younger brothers wearing?  If they were wearing heavy wool or leather jackets they would act as a protective vest does today.  The bullet would penetrate, but most of the energy would be expended penetrating the jacket.

I respectfully disagree. A 250 grain bullet isn't going to stop for just anything, certainly not the ordinary clothing worn by the outlaws in this incident. Just lead and black powder? As Darth Vader said, "Do not underestimate the power of the Dark Side!" I believe the ballistics on the original .45 Colt was a 250 grain bullet at somewhere in the 800 - 900 fps range. That'll easilyl plow through both clothes and the man wearing them.

[wyocarp]

This will be an easy test.  Get two volunteers.  Have one hit by a fast motorcycle traveling 80 mph and the other hit by a train traveling 30 mph.  Observe the results and decide which is more effective.

[Savage]

CNS hits are reliable stoppers. Anything else -----------too many unknown variables to reliably predict results.
Savage

[jeager106]

Well I just happen to have considerable experience on this subject.
Which means I don't have any answers, only more questions.
But experience I do have.
Sooooooooooooo.........
For what it's worth.
When you compare 'power' of projectile weapons, i.e. rifles vs. handguns, handguns SUCK as one shot stoppers as a general rule.
ALL HANDGUNS> SUCK.
MOST handgun wounds are survivable.
That's not to say they won't cause permanent and irreversible damage, just that most (statisically speaking) are survivable.
I've seen mucho shooting victims, done seven autopsies, witnessed many others.
I've NEVER seen a person shot with a .45 acp. or 9mm!
Most were shot (quite nicely dead thank you very much) with the lowly .25 auto, .22 l.r., .32 acp, .38 S&W.
Yeah guys the mouse guns DO kill.
The ONLY people I've seen shot with the .38 spl were shot by MY COPS.
the boolits ripped up all hell. Don't sell it short.
You ever do an autopsy of a perp shot in the face and pull teeth out of his LUNGS???
Yeah, hunnies, a .38 spl.TWO INCH! did that and more!
We all know that placement is paramount.
IN A PERFECT WORLD you sharpshooters would drill any threat right between the eyes at 100 yards and we all know it.
Hell you'll tell us won't 'cha?
However us mere mortals that KNOW what it's like to duck real boolits, know that we mere mortals can't shoot straight and crap our pants at the same time! :-D  :-D  :-D  :-D
The bottom line is for us mere mortals to defend ourselves with the biggest nastiest gun, loaded with the biggest nastiest hollow points, that will shoot as many times as the ammo holds out and shoot the son-of-a-bitch as long as he keeps twitching.
THEN reload and shoot  'em again!

Now anyone got any paper ballistics they want to impress me with?

[Savage]

Dr. Jeager,
I'm impressed! Never performed an autopsies, or dug any boolits
out of a body, (other than deer). I do agree that handgun bullets are poor stoppers on a deterimed assailant.
Savage