Guy did his own data collection and analysis, and I can't argue too much with it.

summary: buy a rifle or shotgun. If using a handgun, bigger is okay, but most "stops" seem to be psychological rather than physical.

https://www.buckeyefirearms.or...ndgun-stopping-power

Yes, but I find it difficult to CC a rifle in my waistband.

But seriously, sure the rifle or shotgun is better if available. The handgun is there to help, CC, and fight to the longgun.

The problem with large amalgamations of stats is they become useless in looking at any given incident. I tried to track the same data in my own investigations of people shot and quickly learned there are so many variables it becomes difficult to draw any meaningful conclusion.

1) Shot placement matters. A lot. No matter what handgun caliber, if you don't hit the right gibbly bits, it's a psychological stop. Even wounds that prove fatal later, such as shots to the heart, don't always stop someone immediately (Even heart shot in an ambush, we had an officer fire over half of his magazine and hit his attacker before going down

2) Bullet construction matters. Common thug calibers will be over represented with cheap ball ammo. Whatever the local cops carry will be over represented with quality hollow points. Nobody with any sense is claiming Winchester White Box is the same as Federal HST.

3) "Incapacitated" is difficult to tell, even with a case file. People take awhile to decide to stop shooting, and some people panic fire. Just because someone shot 4 times doesn't mean the 4th shot is the one that incapacitated their opponent, it just means that's when they decided they didn't have to shoot any more.


For me, the most valid stats are those that track a given unit or department after an ammo change. Preferably one that shoots a lot of people. The training is the same so shot placement shouldn't vary much from "old ammo" to "new ammo". Engagements are the same, often even the type of gun is the same. The only variable becomes the caliber and/or bullet construction itself.

We have information on several duty loads with a lot of shootings behind them. The differences between the common duty calibers are even lower than what's presented in that article.

I've seen this before. It seems like a riff on the old Marshall / Sanow statistical analysis that was widely discredited.

When animate beings are involved ( humans or animals ) all bets are off. Simply too many variables with condition of the specimen shot location of shot blood volume drugs or alcohol involved, etc. there will always be stories of spectacular one shot stops of people hit with a .25 and worked of people soaking up 15 45’s that keep fighting and vice versa. Most all data is essentially no different than the Thompson LaGArde test in the early 1900’s. Some targets stop and some don’t regardless of caliber

c'mon. It's a pistol. Most people have unrealistic expectations. Pistols are handy, that's about it. When you shoot people with pistols, funny things happen.

That article bears up my understanding of the matter; the author's conclusions are for the most part, accurate (I think). The cartridge doesn't matter that much so far as caliber, but shot placement does. His statistics don't show a lot of difference between any of the cartridges.

The truth is that unless the same people were hit in the same place under the same circumstance, then comparisons between shootings are still always very subjective and not repeatable, which makes them far less than scientific.

There is so much that goes into shootings you cant just say this gun with this caliber = 1 shot stop. I say dont count on a 1 shot stop with anything. Its all shot placement with adequate penetration to hit whatever vitals are in the area.

There are lies, damnable lies, and statistics.

I once watched a medical video presented by an ER Trauma surgeon. Some of you may even recall this video. Per the doctor, most patients (6 of 7) presenting with a handgun wound survive while most patients presenting with a rifle wound do not (again 6 of 7). While I'm sure this is a statistical oversimplification, it certainly speaks to the power disparity between handguns and rifles.

Can’t debate the effectiveness of the magnum calibers. 357 Magnum > making fast dirt sandwiches for over 83 years...

One shot of whiskey and I'm smoooth out.

I usually wait at least half way through my work shift before I start sippin' whiskey (I work in D.C., you understand, it's 94% liberal)

I personally know of a former Detroit PD street crimes guy who was posing as a passed out drunk. A guy tried to cut open his jacket for whatever reason. cop dumped 6 rounds of .44 mag into the guy and it didn't kill him. I also have a preference for .357 mag, but given the choice, I'll take a 870

The problem with this is that technically, a Federal HST 124 +P gets lumped in the same category as a WWB 115 target load. A torso shot can go clean through without hitting anything of note, or it could plow through the heart and strike the spinal column.

This may be the most meaningless compilation of incomplete data ever accumulated. We are all now dumber for reading it.

Whew! Haven't read it..............yet.

quote:

Originally posted by BBMW:
I've seen this before. It seems like a riff on the old Marshall / Sanow statistical analysis that was widely discredited.

That's what I am thinking too. It looks eerily similar, almost like he copied and took credit for that work as his.

You lost me at “Stopping power”...

To simplify, pistols suck for shooting people. If you are going to do it, do it a lot. Switches and Timers.

The Tpr. Mark Coates video is an eye opener. Tpr. Coates dumps five rounds of 357 magnum into the suspect's chest at point blank range. Tpr. Coates creates distance and the suspect pulls out a .22lr derringer and shoots Coates through the arm, into the chest between the vest panels and kills him. The suspect lived. There are no wonder bullets.

quote:

Originally posted by RHINOWSO:
You lost me at “Stopping power”...

Yes.