Self Defense ammo...as seen by the eyes of one who knows

Isn't there a problem with a medical examiner's POV in that they only see cases where the gunshot/s resulted in death? I would think that a comparison to cases of survival would be necessary.
 
I go with the "box of truth" point of view. Handguns are handguns, use them to get to your rifle. All projectiles are lethal in the right place, place projectiles accordingly. If you are a bad shot, fire more projectiles.

There's really no more to discuss.
 
Canuck44 said:
Yes, but you can't make a five column article for a gun rag and just say that can you? :D

Take Care

Bob
Click to expand...

I totally agree. Gun magazines make too much money comparing and disecting self defence ammo because it makes for good reading. Dr. Martin Fackler has summed up as much in his reports of handgun wound ballistics.
 
5440fight said:
I go with the "box of truth" point of view. Handguns are handguns, use them to get to your rifle. All projectiles are lethal in the right place, place projectiles accordingly. If you are a bad shot, fire more projectiles.

There's really no more to discuss.
Click to expand...

Damn, that was good!
 
misanthropist said:
Following the link in my sig will take you to a direct explanation from a legitimate, legendary expert on terminal ballistics in humans on what works.

Dr. Gary Roberts has seen more bullet wounds and knows more about shooting deaths than almost anyone on this planet.

His advice: all the standard service calibers (9mm, .40, .45acp) work as well as you can reasonably expect a pistol round to work.

The advantage of the heavier rounds is not that they perform better on humans, particularly - there is in fact very little difference. It's that they handle intermediate barriers better.

On the other hand, 9mm and other fast, light cartridges tend to do better on soft armour.

Rifles and shotguns loaded with buckshot work better than pistols.

Nothing works if the person is not hit in a vital organ.

Shot placement is everything. Caliber is a small factor and not worth worrying much about if you're defending yourself against another person.
Click to expand...

Quoted for its absolute truth. But misanthropist, don't you ever get tired of having to post the same thing over and over again?... ;)
 
Misanthropist, the first post in the link in your sig line shows the terminal ballistics in gel which basically says that all defensive calibers are the same.

Shot placement is supreme....couldn't agree more to this.

Gel is probably the closest thing current science has to human tissue, but the subject article of this thread really is saying that the human body is not gel. The author who claims to have seen first hand, is saying that for best results, use the bigger heaviest baddest bullet, which for him would be a .40 - .45 caliber.

So to sum up the best ideas in both articles, if I were to prepare myself for a theoretical zombie home invasion, I will stack the cards in my favor by first choosing the best defensive handgun caliber.

That would be one that starts with a 4, in truncated cone or flat point, weighing in the heavy side for that caliber, in a +P loading. The firearm will hold and shoot reliably, as many rounds as technically and legally possible.

Then I will practice techniques and tactics that will give me the highest chance of a one-shot stop, as I know my physical limitations will keep me from firing double taps accurately with .4X +P ammo.

Further, I will have a legally stored 12 gauge pump, stoked with at least 6 rounds 00 buck, within a few steps reach.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom