Author Topic: Too much penetration? (Read 2129 times)

Mike in Virginia · « **on:** August 23, 2012, 12:16:55 PM »

It seems over penetration and danger to bystanders is an increasing concern by ammo makers, police, and c/c folks. I was just wondering if anyone here has ever heard of an innocent person being harmed by a bullet that passed through the intended bad guy. In all my career, I never heard of a single instance. Not by police or citizens. I see warnings that the lowly 9mm (which I love) has too much penetration if the shooter chooses the 147 grain option. Good grief. What does that mean for .45 shooters, or 10mm shooters? Do you think the issue is over stressed? Is it even an issue at all?

keith44 · « **Reply #1 on:** August 23, 2012, 07:58:09 PM »

This one comes to mind:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Hollywood_shootout
it is perhaps the most studied shoot out since the O K corral. This lead to several studies about the effectiveness of various calibers and projectile designs.(a recent point of study for me as well) A condensed version of a working theory (based on work by Ed Sanow, and the Strasbourg tests conducted by Evan Marshall) is that a bullet should travel at or around 900 fps, expand at least 50%, penetrate 12 inches, and deliver about 400 ft lbs energy into a target. Non-expanding bullets push through tissue and tend to exit the far side (.45 acp 230 hardball aka FMJ) but a bullet that expands rapidly and stays inside the target delivers all of its energy to destroying surrounding tissues, and according to tests (mentioned above) incapacitate a threat quicker than a round that just passes through.

Empty Quiver · « **Reply #2 on:** August 23, 2012, 08:54:39 PM »

Less about a hit on target than a miss.

I see people who have a concern about 2 layers of wall board between them and a neighbor, especially those who live in apt's. What is it they say? A lawyer is attached to every bullet. Folks might be worried from that aspect as well.

It makes for good magazine articles and innerweb hype and discussion though.

You do read about the drive by shootings where some kid is killed while asleep on the couch. Perhaps that would qualify as an example?

williamlayton · « **Reply #3 on:** August 24, 2012, 12:39:40 AM »

If you are involved in a public shooting, you must be aware of all possible targets. YOU are responsible for the safety of ANY innocent in this situation and can be held criminally liable for their injury from your weapon. Some would say that you can be held criminally liable because of any injury to any if you are part of the shooting.
I have never heard of this being processed but it is good to be aware.
Blessings

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #4 on:** August 24, 2012, 01:22:16 AM »

There have been several in Richmond where children got shot during a shootout. Not sure if all were pass thru a human but several were thru walls. I do remember one being where the bullet passed thru another person.

kynardsj · « **Reply #5 on:** August 24, 2012, 01:51:48 AM »

There have been times when I was deer hunting that I wanted to take a doe for meat. I had to wait for another deer to move from behind her as I knew my bullet would go all the way thru the first one. Many hog hunting videos recommend lining up two or more hogs to get more with one shot. Same thing with humans. Unless the rifle/ pistol bullet is designed to expand quickly and expend all it's energy in the first 4-6 inches a complete pass thru is very possible.

Mike in Virginia · « **Reply #6 on:** August 24, 2012, 04:02:36 PM »

For sure and for certain, as williamlayton advised, we are ultimately responsible for who gets shot if we are the shooter. Personally, since retirement, I know I will never draw a weapon against another human ever again unless I must protect myself or my family. I just won't. It ain't my job anymore, I don't have to, and I won't. If I can walk or run away, I most surely will.
However, if I have to shoot at a person, who can say for sure beyond any doubt that I won't shoot through him and hurt someone else by mistake. That said, I think the danger of a bullet passing through the vitals of a felon and doing harm to someone on the other side is outside reality. It simply does not happen. Anyway, by example, you are faced with a shoot or die situation. An innocent bystander is behind your assailant. Do you shoot or die? When the moment comes, you will shoot.
I certainly don't advocate shooting if you might miss and kill someone you know is in the line of fire. But, we practice, right? We are proficient in the use of what we carry, right? I suppose there are those who obtain their c /c permit and never fire their weapon. Those people should not carry. They are a danger to others. But those who post here have already become knowledgable and proficient. The question then becomes, shoot or die, regardless of what is behind your target. I'm just saying that pass-through deaths are nonexsistent. It does not happen.
Of course it happens in military confrontations where machine guns and heavy guns blast away in every direction every day. But for the intelligent and legally armed citizen of this nation, he or she will shoot to save his or her life. Where the projectile goes after stopping the threat is a non-issue, if statistics are any indication.

keith44 · « **Reply #7 on:** August 24, 2012, 07:17:05 PM »

Mike,

It is reality that bullets pass through people. Mostly FMJ types and Hard cast that do not expand. Hollow points and soft nosed bullets that expand do not tend to pass through people.

As an example, a 230 gr .45 acp FMJ round fired at a velocity of 855 into ballistic geletin passed through 24 inches and exited the block. Federal's 230 grain Hydra shock 230 grain hollow points traveling at the same velocity penetrated 14 inches, and stopped.

Bullet design plays a huge role in how a bullet performs once it reaches the target.

You are right, and we are in total agreement on one point though. If I am ever forced to draw my weapon and fire on someone, it is not going to matter if someone is behind my assailant at THAT moment. Later, maybe, that's why we have defense lawyers

Mike in Virginia · « **Reply #8 on:** August 25, 2012, 06:29:04 AM »

Correct you are, Keith. Stay alive and fret with the legalities later. I suppose we all have a short list of the ideals or persons we would die for, but my list is extremely short. I'm going to Heaven someday, but I'll fight to stay here as long as possible. I'd die for a family member, or for Jesus, but that's about it.

45-70.gov · « **Reply #9 on:** August 25, 2012, 06:50:12 AM »

when i train
i target the high pelvic area.....or LOW center of mass
lots of solid tissue to absorb energy....lungs will be more likely to pass through
the aorta and femoral artery's are potentially hit vitals
along with the spine and support structures of the pelvis bones

but mostly a miss or pass through hits the ground not far behind

Empty Quiver · « **Reply #10 on:** August 25, 2012, 02:59:56 PM »

Quote from: 45-70.gov on August 25, 2012, 06:50:12 AM

when i train
i target the high pelvic area.....or LOW center of mass
lots of solid tissue to absorb energy....lungs will be more likely to pass through
the aorta and femoral artery's are potentially hit vitals
along with the spine and support structures of the pelvis bones

but mostly a miss or pass through hits the ground not far behind

The hunter in me says North of the diaphram, my default training.

I have read several things that lead me to believe you are correct though. A pistol round will break the pelvic girdle or shock it enough to drop the victim. As I understand it, they go down like a sack of feed, well and truely hurt. Many suggest starting at the belt buckle and work your way up, 4" - 6" at a time. Not quite sure I'll have the discipline for that, and I'm pretty damn sure the shootee will not cooperate.

keith44 · « **Reply #11 on:** August 25, 2012, 04:00:53 PM »

center of torso 3x, +1 to the head if still aggressive or a threat, next target...

Mike in Virginia · « **Reply #12 on:** August 25, 2012, 05:38:39 PM »

"Center of mass." I heard it a thousand times over my 32 years. I came to believe center of mass was my best chance of surviving a shootout. In the early 70's, we fired at different stations, all the way back to 60 yards. At 60 yards, we were prone, shooting the revolvers in single action mode. Cock, aim, and place the bullet "center of mass." The long distance shooting training faded away. Even before the revolver was replaced by the auto, maximum distance in training was 25 yards, and cocking the revolver was strictly forbiden. I could never understand that. I mean if you are in possession of a gun that can be cocked and fired for a precision shot, why not use it. I imagined hostage situations where a well placed shot could end a controversy.
Toward the end of my career, my slow-to-learn agency caught up with reality. Two shots "center of mass" and one to the head. At extremely close range, we learned to can't the weapon to the left, sort of like you see on tv where the gang members hold their gun sideways. The recoil is more manageable for repeat shots if the pistol is slanted about 45 degrees. I don't know why. The sights can still be aligned, but for whatever reason, one hand shooting up close is better managed that way. That kind of shooting is for extreme emergencies where there's not even enough time to get both hands in use.
I was told time and again that if you train a certain way often enough, when a crisis comes, you will automatically revert to that training. That is so very true. I think we have a responsibility to be trained, whether or not a professional provides said training, or you do it on your own, as long as you do it often and regularly. "Center of mass" takes on a very real meaning when you fix your head around that concept and repeat it and repeat it. The practice is important, but it's also fun. If you can afford the ammo, I think you ought to make it a priority in your life to go out and shoot. Draw from the holster and fire two rounds at "center of mass." Do it over and over. Do it at 7 yards, 15 yards, and 25 yards. Take time to look at the target after each two rounds. See if you are hitting with both rounds. lf not, keep at it until both shots strike center of mass at all distances. If you can't do it in practice sessions, you sure as hell won't do it when it needs done.

keith44 · « **Reply #13 on:** August 25, 2012, 06:20:51 PM »

A few buddies at work, and I are looking into taking a couple "classes" from a local retired LEO. Training yourself is OK and better than nothing, but a range officer combined with professional training seems to be a good check up for any preconceived notions someone may have.

Mikey · « **Reply #14 on:** August 26, 2012, 01:19:59 AM »

I wonder if the 9 innocent wounded in nyc by the police were the result of overpenetration or center of mass sightings?

Dee · « **Reply #15 on:** August 26, 2012, 03:29:47 AM »

No, I think they were the results of an idiot executing an unarmed citizen in a crowded public place, and then putting everyone in the area, in a position to be hurt, by starting a gunfight in a crowded area with police.
Would YOU stand there and let him shoot at YOU, and not shoot back because of bystanders? I wouldn't.

canon6 · « **Reply #16 on:** August 26, 2012, 05:46:51 AM »

Lets run some numbers.The two Officers fired a total of 16 rounds.10 people were wounded/killed.I believe the NYPD uses Glock 22's(40 S&W), with the evil"hollow points",I do not know what brand.
An argument can be made ,ie; firearms traning,to much gun,spray and pray,and any thing else you want.A gun fight at very close RANGE WITH ALL OF THE STRESS IS NOT A SIGHT PICTURE,SQUEEZE,IT IS A POINT AND SHOOT.
I mean no disrespect to the two officers, but to explain how such a sitiation works.Based on my experience, not reading it in a book/magazine. Doug

keith44 · « **Reply #17 on:** August 26, 2012, 06:21:07 AM »

Doug makes a good point, lots of stress, lots of movement, and WE were not there...

Dee · « **Reply #18 on:** August 26, 2012, 09:16:44 AM »

How many shots did the perp fire besides the two into the victim?

canon6 · « **Reply #19 on:** August 26, 2012, 12:29:42 PM »

As near as I can tell,from all of the newspaper report I can find,none.He" turned and raised his gun as if he was ready to fire" and the two officers fired.I stand ready to be corrected.Doug

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #20 on:** August 27, 2012, 12:49:46 AM »

If you look up stats for missed shots ( the FBI keeps such records ) you will find that a few years ago police on average hit one out of seven. Non police who did not shoot much if at all had more misses and those who engauged in shooting sports had a better score. It is important to account for all shots not just pass thru. We had a toddler get shot here when a bullet passed thur a wall . There have been more including thru people . These things happen often at parties or where there are crowds of people. Those who find themselves in places like this need to be aware of such and try to find angles of fire that will hold less people in danger. Those who are smart will be learning their surroundings and making plans in advance. Or just not put themselves in that position. I can't agree that it never happens but would guess most shoot outs (not drug related ) are in prvate to a point . Better to rob someone when a crowd is not around

.

jimster · « **Reply #21 on:** August 28, 2012, 09:07:19 AM »

Like someone already said, you are responsible for your bullet and where it goes, and the best non penetrating hollow point made will hit a person behind your target if you miss your target while under stress or with a target moving. In a crowded place where people are behind your target you may not be able to fire a shot, at least not the second you want to. I would think the background changes pretty fast with people running and screaming and hitting the floor though, so if your still not a victim after a few moments and the BG has not noticed you yet...maybe you'll get the background you need?
I like some penetration myself, especially if I can't shoot anyway because of the background. I spend very little time in crowed places, maybe I would think differently if I did.

Mike in Virginia · « **Reply #22 on:** August 28, 2012, 12:30:12 PM »

Good points, all. The thing is, we can't know in advance what the enviornment will be like. Lots of people, no people, babies, interior walls, passing vehicles, etc. We can reduce the chance of a shootout by not going certain places, but we can never eliminate the possibility.
"Don't shoot if you might miss," is easy to say and sounds like good advice, but it ain't good advice. Don't get shot for fear of missing. It all comes down to that. But still, I say the probability of hitting your target and the bullet continuing on to hit another person is almost nill. It happens in metro slums when the residents shoot at each other inside their apartments. Those people have only part of a brain and no morals at all. It doesn't happen when respectable people act to protect themselves. Or, it doesn't happen enough for it to be a concern. Don't die, that's the first rule of self defense.

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #23 on:** August 29, 2012, 01:51:40 AM »

add tunnel vesion and all bets are off on seeing anything but the threat .

45-70.gov · « **Reply #24 on:** August 29, 2012, 03:15:18 AM »

Quote from: SHOOTALL on August 29, 2012, 01:51:40 AM

add tunnel vesion and all bets are off on seeing anything but the threat .

every one says and trains new shooters to focus on the front sight!!!!!!

i have always said this is BS [brovo seaira]

i NEVER focus on the front sight.....never have

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #25 on:** August 29, 2012, 03:42:15 AM »

I disagree , it is good to know where you are pointing your weapon if possible. But I was talking about seeing the threat not the front sight. I have read where often the bad guys gun gets hit because the focus is on his gun . What I was taught is its good to see the front sight in the tunnel . I guess instructors know most will focus on the threat be it gun or what ever and if you can get that front sight in the picture you are doing good. And yes sometimes you are to close and things happen way to fast so point shooting is needed also. With a plain old shotgun some wrap a white rag around the front end to index on for the same reason.

Mike in Virginia · « **Reply #26 on:** August 29, 2012, 05:07:05 AM »

Yes, you gotta see that front sight. I remember the plain old Model 10 service guns. Now they were truly point and shoot. At 7 yards, you didn't need the sight. Just crouch a little, extend the gun in both hands, and you would hit as dead center as often as you might standing erect and using the sights.
That's not as easy with the autos everone carries now. Except for maybe the 1911, squared off Glocks and flattop slides are not conducive to good point and shoot. I suppose the best point and shoot handgun ever made is the Colt single action. But now, we gotta see that front sight against the target. Maybe we don't have time to align it with the rear notch, but it takes no more time to see the front sight than it does to point. I mean if you bring the gun up, even partially up, you can see that white dot.
Perhaps that's not the case with everyone. It certainly is for me. The art and beauty and natural feel of modern defensive handguns no longer exists. We had it in the revolvers and in the 1911, but that's about it, IMO.

45-70.gov · « **Reply #27 on:** August 29, 2012, 05:23:41 AM »

crouching changes the angle of bullet flight in a dangerous way

seeing your sights assumes you will not need your gun ever after dark
so your better spend time practicing those stupid fast magazine changes

when i was young and trained alot
i could hit you in room distance listening to your foot steps
no i didn't practice this with live ammo....i was confident in it...[no any more,,,not enough practice]

when i practice ''point shooting'' i hold the gun as if i were useing the sights
that way muscle memory stays the same

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #28 on:** August 29, 2012, 05:34:38 AM »

Now shooting in the dark with out a light to ID a target might lead to those shots that hit innocent people .

Better to train with a light and know how to cast it on the bad guy and enough on the sights to index the front sight. Or have a set of night sights installed

Mike in Virginia · « **Reply #29 on:** August 30, 2012, 02:04:09 AM »

Yep, night sights are the way to go, IMO. When my dept. went to those, I got better scores at night than I did in the day. I think that was because all we could see were the sights and a vague outline of the target. The only light available was a flashing blue light somewhere behind us.
When I was a kid, my dad taught me a trick for shooting offhand at a bullseye target. Turn the paper over and just shoot at the middle of it. Fewer misses that way.
I think the night firing is sort of related to that. All you can see is a vague outline of the target, and your sights. When the sights are so clear and bright, I think it's easier to line 'em up just right. Your brain picks the center of the target while your eyes make the sights work.