View Full Version : 9mm as used by US and foreign agencies
Some big and not so big (NYPD, DC, Philadelphia, NJ State Police are the big ones that come to mind) departments have stuck with the 9mm.
Are the line troops satisfied? Do the unions clamor for caliber upgrades?
A general circulation gun magazine published a series of articles on the elite units of foreign countries. I think almost all used a 9mm pistol. I would assume elite units could push for any sidearm they want. What do they know that we don't?
citizensoldier16
01-05-09, 23:17
What do they know that we don't?
Since when have the NYPD or Kalifornia Highway Patrol been able to shoot as well as any military unit? I do recall the CHP getting into a gunfight with an AK-wielding perp in a suburban at PBR, firing over 87 rounds, and not hitting the suburban once.
SF worldwide know it's about shot placement, not caliber. "Fast is slow; slow is fast. Front sight focus, and pull the trigger with purpose."
NYPD: "Blow your wad, then run for cover." (apologies to any LEOs in here)
I think if you do some research you will see that across the board police depts. have pretty bad qualification scores. For most of the military branches the pistol isn't something that gets alot of attention. Obviously with the Spec Ops types units it is viewed differently because they actually train with and use their handguns and do transition drills.
You also be surprised to know that (2) very famous Spec Ops units stll use 9mm pistols most of the time.
Alpha Sierra
01-06-09, 05:05
You also be surprised to know that (2) very famous Spec Ops units stll use 9mm pistols most of the time.
Special Air Service and...........?
John_Wayne777
01-06-09, 07:23
Some big and not so big (NYPD, DC, Philadelphia, NJ State Police are the big ones that come to mind) departments have stuck with the 9mm.
Are the line troops satisfied? Do the unions clamor for caliber upgrades?
I'm sure some unions have, but generally that's not something unions would get in too much of a tizzy over unless the department was dropping from a larger caliber. Secondly, the NYPD makes a lot of decisions that have zero to do with officer safety or officer preference, so you really shouldn't look at them as a model for decision making...they only recently approved the use of hollowpoints.
The NJSP issued the H&K P7M8 and then later the P7M13 while I lived in New Jersey some years ago. The troopers I knew liked the weapon and at least one of them was saved because he lost control of the weapon during a fight with multiple bad guys and the ringleader couldn't figure out how to make the thing go boom. I don't recall hearing a lot of complaints about the performance of the 9mm from the NJSP troopers I knew.
The 9mm is issued or authorized by a lot of agencies in the country because it's an effective round when loaded properly. 9mm performance today is the best it has ever been with several loads that offer excellent performance offered by a number of manufacturers. It's also the cheapest centerfire handgun chambering to feed.
Some agencies end up with a 9mm gun by accident. The Indiana State Police tried to buy .40 caliber Glocks some years ago and encountered so many problems with the weapons that they made Glock take back all the .40 guns and issued Glock 17s instead. You also need to realize that a number of agencies issue the .357 sig which offers basically the same performance of good 9mm ammo...it's just a more expensive way to get to the same destination. ;)
While 9mm performance isn't identical to the performance of the .40 or .45, it's still darn good by any measure. To be honest, most departments would be better off with 9mm weapons and more money for training than by issuing the .40 or .45...but that's another matter.
A general circulation gun magazine published a series of articles on the elite units of foreign countries. I think almost all used a 9mm pistol. I would assume elite units could push for any sidearm they want. What do they know that we don't?
9mm is the world's standard pistol. You have to understand that to them that's a big gun. If you look at police and military forces around the globe who now have the 9mm and what they USED to have before adopting 9mm handguns as sidearms, you'll notice that for the majority of them the 9mm is a major upgrade. Take the German police. I have an ex-German police gun...a Walther PP in .32 ACP. The weapon was carried and shows evidence of life in a holster...but hardly any sign of being shot. They now issue 9mm H&K handguns. The Walther PP was a very popular police weapon in a number of countries.
The obsession with bigger calibers in handguns is mainly an American phenomenon.
What do they "know" that we don't? Nothing. US law enforcement taken as a whole more likely has more gunfights than the whole of European LE put together. Heck, some cities in the US may have more LE shootings than the whole of European LE put together. LE in other nations isn't the same as LE here. The culture is different, the politics are different, and the laws are different.
Business_Casual
01-06-09, 08:35
So we haven't had our quota of caliber war threads for January or is it for 2009?
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=19887
M_P
Special Forces, i.e. Green Berets use Beretta's. What troops don't like is the 9mm ball round.
Special Air Service and...........?
Despite what the gun rags will print CAG and Navy SEALs still use the 9mm pistol in many cases. So do Air Force Spec Ops personnel and a host of others. I have a friend in CAG who carries a modified G19 and I know more than a few SEALs that used Sig P226's.
Special Air Service and...........?
Mabye I am missing something, but I do not feel like "under powered" with a 9mm. The simple fact remains that a pistol caliber is still a pistol caliber and what really matters is shot placement. Seeing how the 9mm is the softest shooting, has higher capacity and the fact that it is more affordable to shoot (meaning more practice) makes it the best choice IMHO.
For the record I am also a 1911/45 fan, but see the merits in the 9mm.
C4
If an officer shoots a BG with a 9mm and the BG fails to disintegrate, the caliber gets blamed. If an officer shoots a BG with a .40 and the BG fails to disintegrate, the choice of bullet gets blamed. If an officer shoots a BG with a .45 and the BG fails to disintegrate, the officer gets blamed. (everyone shot by a 357 actually does disintegrate)
As JW777 pointed out, the perceived need for >9mm ammunition is a wholly American phenomenon. It's directly related to the fact that our country's standard issue military sidearm for 75 years was a .45 Auto.
I have watched plenty of departments switch from 9mm to .40, 357, or .45 with varying degrees of difficulty and success. Each department had its own reason, many of them based on very little knowledge and a great deal of testosterone.
But the #1 reason for the switch from 9mm to .40 in this country is ... GLOCK. Quickly followed by other gun companies, Glock pioneered the art of telling 9mm wielding departments that they needed to upgrade to more powerful guns. This gave them a way into departments issuing competitors' guns, and gave them a reason to sell a second set of guns to existing Glock departments. The idea worked so well that every other pistol manufacturer jumped on board and soon all of the gun company reps were telling FIs and Chiefs just how weak and dangerous the 9mm was.
So while the Miami shootout may be the Genesis of the .40, Glock played the role of disciple proselytizing to the masses.
Those Glock muthers are sneaky smart! :eek:
John_Wayne777
01-07-09, 10:48
So while the Miami shootout may be the Genesis of the .40, Glock played the role of disciple proselytizing to the masses.
...and offering sidearms at a low, low price thanks to a nice profit margin didn't hurt that plan any either...
...and offering sidearms at a low, low price thanks to a nice profit margin didn't hurt that plan any either...
Actually, Glock in particular did one better. With the '94 AWB, the value of used pre-ban G17 and G19 magazines in LE inventories was huge. Glock traded out brand-new G22/G23 models in exchange for a department's used G17/G19's at no cost whatsoever to the department. Glock refurbished the used LE guns (a practice copied by other companies today) and sold them at a premium because they came with a legal standard-capacity magazine during the 10rd limit days.
It seems obvious today, but back then it was absolutely brilliant.
DANGER CLOSE
01-07-09, 11:52
force recon issues m9 when the 1911 meusoc pistols are deadlined.
Special Forces, i.e. Green Berets use Beretta's. What troops don't like is the 9mm ball round.
Exactly. This was indicated in the detailed poll that was taken a couple years ago, where they surveyed 2600 troops across all branches, and asked about the main calibers and weapons being issued. Regarding the 9mm, there's nothing in the poll that indicates an overwhelming majority is against the 9mm specifically, but 48% indicated some level of dissatisfaction with the ammo, and another 20% indicated distrust in the M9 itself (reliability issues). While a few respondents specifically requested a larger caliber, it appears that most were simply requesting ammo with better effectiveness.
The study states:
"M9 and M4 users requested armor-piercing and hollow-point am-
munition. The use of hollow point bullets is illegal for military use.
However, these requests should be interpreted as a desire for in-
creased stopping power/lethality. "
Here's a link to the article and the poll:
http://www.defensetech.org/archives/003515.html
If all of our troops were using quality HP loads such as Federal Tactical Bonded 135gr, or Speer Gold Dot 124 +P, or Federal HST +P 124gr or 147gr, etc., it's likely the majority would have no problem with 9mm.
SloaneRanger
01-07-09, 12:25
Brit 21/22/23 SAS and SBS as well as (AFAIK) the newer SRR & SFSG use 9mm Sig P226 std issue which replaced the BHP. Smaller platforms are carried for covert uses like the P7.
They all train to use double taps so 2 rds would be hitting almost simultaneously. As with your own 1SFODD/DevGru and other elite units the degree of pistol training is such that shooting is instinctive and incredibly effective. The difference between their pistol skills and the average infantryman's is night and day.
Hence shot placement under duress is infinitely better which is more important than ballistics. Before anyone jumps my ass I know that our very own LAV was a D sgt for years and I believe that the D boys now use Ed Brown 1911's so there is a reason for that, but my point is that 9mm with well placed shots is more than adequate.
As civilians we can use non ball ammo which makes the 9mm less inferior to the 45acp than if comparing nato 9mm vs nato 45acp.
The FBI article was interesting but I found it didn't really make a conclusion. The guy presented lots of info but seemed to basically take 13 pages to say that shot placement is more important than anything else but under duress in life and death struggles could not be relied upon, so ballistics play a role where penetration is the most vital factor and that temporary wound cavity, fragmentation, kinetic energy and 'knock down' power were basically irrelevent and that at 9mm with the advances in modern ammo is more than adequate but all that notwithstanding, a bigger hole is always better....
So back to square one... 9mm is fine but bigger seems to have an advantage.:rolleyes: Thanks for laying the debate to rest......
Oh well..what the heck do I know..
I'm still on the fence. USP45 or Sig P226 in 9mm.
...and I believe that the D boys now use Ed Brown 1911's ...
No.
I'm still on the fence. USP45 or Sig P226 in 9mm.
If I had to choose between those two, I'd either get a HK45 or M&P45 in .45 or a G19, M&P9, or P30 in 9mm. :cool:
CAG are still fielding the Glock 22 amongst others I think...............
Business_Casual
01-07-09, 13:38
Dude, just let it go. You are out of your lane on what they are using.
M_P
My dept. had P226 when the 94 AWB came into effect. A well known Police Firearms supplier in the area traded our used p226 and all hi cap mags even for new p220's. We had some reliablity issues and after a couple years went with G22's. Then in 99 switched to railed G22's. This year we went with G17's. The G22's had the reliabilty issues with lights mounted. Not all, but enough to cause concern. Today's 9mm ammo is not the ammo of 1988. Our dept. qual scores have improved and we can afford to shoot much more for the same budget. Ammo that is as effective as a larger caliber, more reliable and durable system, more ammo on board and less expensive. We did not find a down side.
Cagemonkey
01-07-09, 13:50
IMHO 9mm is a great caliber if you a not restricted to FMJ ammo. Unfortunately the Military doesn't have that option due to the Hague convention. Maybe a FMJ round that is more blunt and has a wadcutter type edge might cause a more effective wound and still be technically Hague legal. Just a thought
dennyAC170
01-07-09, 22:22
I thought that the FMJ restriction only applied to those opponents that signed
that document. I don't recall any terrorist organization being present at that
convention. Since we are not fighting a country that signed that document, the
U.S. is free to use hollow-point bullets.
Is this correct?
Actually I believe it is defined that you can not use JHP against the uniformed military of another country. We are not fighting a recognized military.
sigmundsauer
01-08-09, 06:53
The U.S. military chooses to not use hollow point ammunition, not necessarily because of the Hague Convention per se.
Tim
J.A.G. chooses to not use hollow point ammunition, not necessarily because of the Hague Convention per se.
Fixed that. :cool:
Cagemonkey
01-08-09, 18:34
It seems that being PC and avoiding international condemnation is more important than playing games over technicalities. Against confirmed Al Queda it may be possible to bend the rules and use HP's in certain situations. Against guerrillas/insurgents it would be advisable to use FMJ's since winning the support of the population is critical in a counterinsurgency(winning hearts and minds). If you want to really push the debate. Shouldn't non uniformed combatants, ie guerrillas/insurgents, be considered saboteurs/spy's. I thought that the Geneva Convention states that saboteurs and spy's can be shot on sight and executed if captured?
SloaneRanger
01-08-09, 22:06
Dude, just let it go. You are out of your lane on what they are using.
M_P
Done. Sorry I had second/third hand info and evidently old/inaccuracte:rolleyes:
Limey- CAG are still fielding the Glock 22 amongst others I think...............
G22 of all things. I'd have never have believed it! I just got rid of mine due to all the info on how problematic the .40 cal Glocks could potentially be with their under supported chambers and flexing frames with a light. Simply amazing.
I suppose the Glocks would have to be more reliable in a sandy/dusty environment than a tight 1911 but if you're going Glock and not in 9mm why not just go .45 and not worry about a new calibre?
...(everyone shot by a 357 actually does disintegrate)
roflmao ;p
I have to say I do feel all warm and fuzzy carrying my snub wheelie. ;p
I have to say I also think in todays economically driven society the 9 is at least in part driven by cost factors. Couple that with you can carry XXXXXX rounds per magazine so you MUST be gtg, psychology. Throw in a little it's easier to shoot(perhaps read, train to shoot well (esp them little folks that weigh about a buck twenty five)) than a snappier 40,357sig and there you go.
I've always thought the damn ammo debates were silly now a days. Bullet technology is freaking awesome now. I carry 357,9, and 45 and don't give a whit to which it is.
The only reason off the top of my head I could see this caliber question having any relevance is if you
a)have no input to ammo (brand/type)selection, or
b)have no input to gun selection
THEN, I... MIGHT...., have to stop and think a second.
''If an officer shoots a BG with a 9mm and the BG fails to disintegrate, the caliber gets blamed. If an officer shoots a BG with a .40 and the BG fails to disintegrate, the choice of bullet gets blamed. If an officer shoots a BG with a .45 and the BG fails to disintegrate, the officer gets blamed. (everyone shot by a 357 actually does disintegrate)''
Great quote, Todd. Mind if I use it?
FWIW, our dept recently switched from glock 40's to M&P 45's. We let everyone shoot 40's and 45's and the vast majority shot the 45's much better, and liked the percieved softer recoil of the 45. I argued that we should have two calibers, 9mm and 45. I've never really warmed to the .40 for a lot of reasons (hard on the guns, harder to shoot, never saw one as accurate as a 45...until Big D's CCF frame on a 34...)
To be honest, most didn't even care because their gun will be in the trunk, desk drawer, or lost anyway. Those that did prefered the 45...
Since we have an aggressive training program to make sure people hit what they shoot at (not waste the first half of a 16 round mag, because there you 'can'); and since LEO engagements are typically much fewer bad guys than Tier 1 SOF units...magazine capacities may not be as important. Mission drives the gear kind of thing.
Great quote, Todd. Mind if I use it?
Well, I'm normally so shy about that sort of thing ... :cool:
until Big D's CCF frame on a 34
Tell him if he shoots that while I'm at the MTOA Conference in May, I will personally make sure he never lives down the shame.
Agreed on the .45/.40 thing ... the .45 is usually substantially easier to shoot than the .40 on an identical platform. The tradeoff is size and capacity.
FYI, and I'm sure most already know, but the Mk262 Mod1 5.56mm round is a 77gr BTHP. Even though a hollow point bullet, the argument for use was that it provided better accuracy at distance.
AwaySooner
01-09-09, 23:25
What hallowpoint? :rolleyes:
http://www.giwera.pl/artykuly/2005/11/09/efmj/efmj440.jpg
What round is that?
Any thoughts on these new Hornady (http://www.hornady.com/story.php?s=786) rounds?
Pretty sure it's a Federal EFMJ. Expanding Full Metal Jacket.
AwaySooner's pic is of Federal EFMJ. A mediocre option for folks who cannot use true JHP ammo but otherwise totally outclassed by modern premium JHPs from the Big Three.
Hornady's Critical Defense line is too new for anyone to have significant data, but it appears to follow the old XTP approach of extreme penetration with limited expansion.
SloaneRanger
01-10-09, 08:42
FYI, and I'm sure most already know, but the Mk262 Mod1 5.56mm round is a 77gr BTHP. Even though a hollow point bullet, the argument for use was that it provided better accuracy at distance.
I believe JAG makes the distinction between "Open Tip" and "Hollow Point", the former being approved for use on the battlefield in M118LR and Mk 262 mod 1 form since the rounds design promotes accuracy rather than maximizing trauma/injury.
http://www.loc.gov/rr/frd/Military_Law/pdf/08-2006.pdf
Department of the Army Pamphlet 27-50-399. August 2006 p19
with reference (2) to Memorandum, W. Hays Parks, Colonel, USMCR, Special Assistant to The Judge Advocate General of the Army for Law of War Matters, to Commander, United States Army Special Operations Command, subject: Sniper Use of Open-Tip Ammunition (Sept. 23, 1985), available at
http://www.thegunzone.com/opentip-ammo.html [hereinafter Parks Memo].
Sloane,
Yes are correct. IIRC, the distinction was being made that though the round has a "hollow point" it is classified as an OTM= Open Tip Match round and it's design was to enable better accuracy and not to cause more injury or undue suffering.
I believe that the JAG has also stated in previous opinions that certain other types of "hollow points" for pistols are in fact legal if they are used in anti-terrorist/counter terrorist operations. I assume that they define that as a specific type of OP against terrorists who have possibly kidnapped American citizens or something similar. I know for a fact there are a few types of such ammo in the supply system.
As for Delta/ CAG using .40 Glocks, I find that rather surprising myself. It is my understanding that they have G19/G17's as well as some 1911 style handguns.
I believe JAG makes the distinction between "Open Tip" and "Hollow Point", the former being approved for use on the battlefield in M118LR and Mk 262 mod 1 form since the rounds design promotes accuracy rather than maximizing trauma/injury.
http://www.loc.gov/rr/frd/Military_Law/pdf/08-2006.pdf
Department of the Army Pamphlet 27-50-399. August 2006 p19
with reference (2) to Memorandum, W. Hays Parks, Colonel, USMCR, Special Assistant to The Judge Advocate General of the Army for Law of War Matters, to Commander, United States Army Special Operations Command, subject: Sniper Use of Open-Tip Ammunition (Sept. 23, 1985), available at
http://www.thegunzone.com/opentip-ammo.html [hereinafter Parks Memo].
To answer the original question. When I lived in the DC area I knew quite a few MPDC officers and Paramedics. Their Glock 17's were still fairly new and they had just started using 125gr Hydro-Shoks. Everyone seemed to be convinced that the new combo was doing the job. The Paramedics had responded to a few officer related shootings. When hit center mass the BG would go down.
Not a scientific study - just the word on the street.
Sloane,
Yes are correct. IIRC, the distinction was being made that though the round has a "hollow point" it is classified as an OTM= Open Tip Match round and it's design was to enable better accuracy and not to cause more injury or undue suffering.
I believe that the JAG has also stated in previous opinions that certain other types of "hollow points" for pistols are in fact legal if they are used in anti-terrorist/counter terrorist operations. I assume that they define that as a specific type of OP against terrorists who have possibly kidnapped American citizens or something similar. I know for a fact there are a few types of such ammo in the supply system.
As for Delta/ CAG using .40 Glocks, I find that rather surprising myself. It is my understanding that they have G19/G17's as well as some 1911 style handguns.
They are infact using G22's (that have most likely had a lot of work done to them in order to make them reliable with a white light attached). Their backup HG is a G19 (excellent choice I think).
Before they went to the G22, they were running STI 2011's chambered in 40S&W.
C4
We hear alot that "the love affair with the .45acp is almost exclusively an 'American' mindset", but what the ones who advocate that rationale need to consider is that very, very few european/supposedly free developed nations afford their citizens the right to own firearms, especially handguns. If that wasn't the case maybe the .45acp round would be more prevalent over there.
Sorry, I just can't swallow that.
The cultures which brought us the Glock, HK, Beretta, & Browning know enough about guns that their products dominate our LE/mil markets but they don't know enough to choose a decent handgun caliber for their own use?
The .45 came into existence because some under-powered .38's were failling to provide fast enough incapacitation to drugged-up warriors. It then became standard .mil issue in this country for 75 years. To this day there are people who still chant "They all fall to hardball!" whenever a discussion like this comes up.
The .40 came into existence because a single 9mm round designed for maximum rapid expansion failed to penetrate deeply enough into one guy's chest after a through-and-through wound of his arm. If the Miami shootout had ended with that shot being fired, the whole chain of events that led to the .40's domination of the US LE market never would have happened.
Cagemonkey
01-10-09, 13:04
Sorry, I just can't swallow that.
The cultures which brought us the Glock, HK, Beretta, & Browning know enough about guns that their products dominate our LE/mil markets but they don't know enough to choose a decent handgun caliber for their own use?
The .45 came into existence because some under-powered .38's were failling to provide fast enough incapacitation to drugged-up warriors. It then became standard .mil issue in this country for 75 years. To this day there are people who still chant "They all fall to hardball!" whenever a discussion like this comes up.
The .40 came into existence because a single 9mm round designed for maximum rapid expansion failed to penetrate deeply enough into one guy's chest after a through-and-through wound of his arm. If the Miami shootout had ended with that shot being fired, the whole chain of events that led to the .40's domination of the US LE market never would have happened.Concerning the reasoning in adopting the .45ACP. I just recently read an article, in which the author (Patrick Sweeney), insists the .45ACP was adopted to meet US Calvary specs. for a caliber powerful enough to takedown an enemies horses. I just thought this was an interesting piece if trivia, especially if true. The .40 S&W evolved out of the downloaded 10mm ammo the FBI was using. Seems the full power load was too much for many agents (females in particular). S&W developed the .40 to fit 9mm sized weapons and duplicate the FBI 10mm loadings wound ballistics. As for the Europeans, they seem to like puny calibers like .32 ACP, 9mm Kurtz and .30 Mauser.
Sloane -- I think there are far too many variables to say that one caliber is absolutely best. What I do know is that the folks who study this stuff for a living always gravitate towards placing caliber selection at or near the bottom of any consideration when choosing a sidearm.
Will a single round of the best .45 have a greater chance of causing fast incapacitation than a single round of the best 9mm? I don't think anyone can give you a scientific answer.
But let's suppose arguendo that the .45 is slightly more effective in those terms. Obviously, the advantage is small enough that we can't easily measure it. Against that you have to weigh the measurable benefits of having more ammo on board, faster and/or more accurate follow up shots, more training ammo for the same budgetary expenditure, etc. Choosing a gun based solely on its "one shot stop" (O my God, I am heartily sorry...) is like choosing a car based solely on its 0-60 speed. You may get a fast accelerating car but it might not corner, get good gas mileage, be comfortable to drive, or have a decent stereo.
Concerning the reasoning in adopting the .45ACP. I just recently read an article, in which the author (Patrick Sweeney), insists the .45ACP was adopted to meet US Calvary specs. for a caliber powerful enough to takedown an enemies horses. I just thought this was an interesting piece if trivia, especially if true.
The story of the .45 ACP/M-1911 being developed/adopted to stop otherwise unstoppable Moros in the Philippines is a long-standing myth. Most of the world's standing armies were developing self-loading pistols to replace their service revolvers during that time. When the .38 Long Colt revolver wasn't working out well in the Philippine jungles, it was replaced by the M-1873 .45 Colt revolver. This was in 1902 -- nine years before the adoption of the M-1911.
For the record, I didn't say the .45 Auto was adopted for that reason, but simply that the .45 was adopted for that reason. It's hard to argue that the Philippines experiences had no influence on the Army's desire to have JMB rework his gun into a .45, though.
FWIW, I have an article and book written by Evan Marshall (yeah, I know) that claim the actual stopping rate between .45acp fmj and 9mm fmj are nearly identical. This may be true, it may not I do not know either way but if I served in a role which limited me to fmj's in a handgun I too would choose the .45. Thankfully I don't have that problem. I have been on the 9mm bandwagon for many years now, and yes I've tried many others. I've had 12 differnt .45acp's, about a half dozen differnt .40's a couple of .357 Sig's and about six different .357 mags and still I came back to the 9mm. Why? IMO, the 9mm is plenty powerful enough when the better ammo makes are used, it is by far the cheaper to train with when using fmj's, in comparable sizes it holds more ammo. I've never felt under guned when carrying a 9mm. I like all the above calibers and do not have a problem with any of them. I find that when people put down some paticular caliber it is mostly because it is not their favorite. To me the ammo/caliber debate has become near pointless, I'm always looking for reviews and opinions on the newest loadings to come out but have long since given up on the caliber wars. I'm not a professional, I'm only a backyard 'expert' :p. Again, take this FWIW.
As stated numerous times previously, basically all the standard service calibers work when fed good quality ammunition, with the caveat that the .40/.45 offer a slight edge at defeating auto windshields. The platform picked tends to dictate the caliber. For example, Glocks and Sigs tend to run best in 9 mm; the S&W M&P is the first .40 S&W pistol that seems to offer an ideal ergonomic and shooter friendly package; while a properly customized 5" steel-frame single-stack 1911 in .45 ACP is a superb, unparalleled choice for the dedicated user willing to spend a significant amount of money to get it properly initially set-up and considerable time to maintain it. For folks who want a .45 ACP pistol, but don't want to invest the funds and effort into getting a good 1911, they would be better served with a S&W .45 ACP M&P or HK45.
At this point in time, the 1911 and G19 are what I qualify with and carry--if I didn't have 25 years already invested with the 1911, I'd probably go with a .40 M&P w/ambi safety (or .45 M&P for those living in states with asinine restrictions on magazine capacity)...
The .40 came into existence because a single 9mm round designed for maximum rapid expansion failed to penetrate deeply enough into one guy's chest after a through-and-through wound of his arm.
Out of curiosity, what sort of 9mm round was this? Thanks.
Matt Edwards
01-11-09, 09:46
Not Todd, but if I recall correctly it was a Whinchester Sliver tip hollow point in 115 grains. (of course, I may not recall correctly...)
Not Todd, but if I recall correctly it was a Whinchester Sliver tip hollow point in 115 grains. (of course, I may not recall correctly...)
You did. :) Winchester 115gr.JHP SilverTip.
I think the Silvertip issue is way overblown. Its always nice to have a scapegoat. But hey lets not rehash the Feebee's training limitations of the past again.
Just a question but would the Federal EFMJ, Expanding Full Metal Jacket, be legal according to the Geneva convention? After all it's a full metal jacket.
I have no experience with it but do you suppose it might give marginally better terminal performance than reqular FMJ? Again, no experience with it, just random thinking while reading this thread.
Primary and secondary are different calibers? Odd. That and rifle make three different calibers they would have to hump.
I had heard about the STI's which kind of surprised me since I've seen whole lot of wonky STI's. Wonder if they kept the big magwell.
They are infact using G22's (that have most likely had a lot of work done to them in order to make them reliable with a white light attached). Their backup HG is a G19 (excellent choice I think).
Before they went to the G22, they were running STI 2011's chambered in 40S&W.
C4
Its actually the Hague convention of which we are not signatories. Military police and certain spooky units are allowed to carry JHP's but others aren't even though it is not illegal by any law of land warfare that we subscribe to. But no one has had the guts to say our military should go ahead and carry JHP rifle and pistol. It's especially stupid when so many weapons can tear people to pieces to worry about expanding rounds.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dum-dum
Just a question but would the Federal EFMJ, Expanding Full Metal Jacket, be legal according to the Geneva convention? After all it's a full metal jacket.
I have no experience with it but do you suppose it might give marginally better terminal performance than reqular FMJ? Again, no experience with it, just random thinking while reading this thread.
The historical record clearly shows the .45 ACP was designed for horse cavalry.
For the record, I didn't say the .45 Auto was adopted for that reason, but simply that the .45 was adopted for that reason. It's hard to argue that the Philippines experiences had no influence on the Army's desire to have JMB rework his gun into a .45, though.
It would be really interesting to know why they chose the Glock 22 espcially given the non-standard .40 ammo.
G22 of all things. I'd have never have believed it! I just got rid of mine due to all the info on how problematic the .40 cal Glocks could potentially be with their under supported chambers and flexing frames with a light. Simply amazing.
I suppose the Glocks would have to be more reliable in a sandy/dusty environment than a tight 1911 but if you're going Glock and not in 9mm why not just go .45 and not worry about a new calibre?
I think the Silvertip issue is way overblown. Its always nice to have a scapegoat. But hey lets not rehash the Feebee's training limitations of the past again.
Really? Well, whatever you think of the FBI's training prior to 1986 or afterwards, the fact remains that Matix and Platt took 18 rounds between them (with Platt taking 12 of them) before finally succumbing. Objective analysis has concluded that the FBI agents shot pretty accurately that day.
Even the modern 9mm cartridge, like the Speer GD 124gr.+P round has some issues with stopping power. In the Sean Bell shooting, Joseph Guzman was hit 19 times and lived to talk about it.
The 9mm is a fine choice for armed professionals and it is in use around the world.
Other choices are valid also such as the 45.
I believe the misunderstanding comes more when considering the ammunition its self.
Yes comparatively speaking the 45 has more weight and strike energy but if you are using a well suited counterterrorism round of defensive round the 9mm can transmit the desired strike energy also. FMJ in either caliber is a waste of time. Its a throw back to geneva convention rules of war sillyness. The 9mm offer a bit more accuracy at longer ranges, less recoil for follow shots potentally more rounds carried which means less reloads if properly trained. It works fine. The key is training and ammunition selection. G luck
Primary and secondary are different calibers? Odd. That and rifle make three different calibers they would have to hump.
I had heard about the STI's which kind of surprised me since I've seen whole lot of wonky STI's. Wonder if they kept the big magwell.
They have the flared magwell (have held the issued 2011 in my hand). ;)
C4
Really? Well, whatever you think of the FBI's training prior to 1986 or afterwards, the fact remains that Matix and Platt took 18 rounds between them (with Platt taking 12 of them) before finally succumbing. Objective analysis has concluded that the FBI agents shot pretty accurately that day.
Even the modern 9mm cartridge, like the Speer GD 124gr.+P round has some issues with stopping power. In the Sean Bell shooting, Joseph Guzman was hit 19 times and lived to talk about it.
You know as well as I do, Training is not always about proficiency with a handgun or other weapon. Frankly they decided to do a Felony stop on know extremely bad guys, they knew these guys had used Carbines and shotguns consistantly..
The Agents had an M16, HK MP5 and 4 Remington 870's with them that day and yet they execute the stop with revolvers and 9mm semi Auto's.
Remember two of these Agents were SWAT guys.
Mattix fired 7 ineffective shots total. Platt basically took on eight Agents single handedly with a Mini 14 and two revolvers, he was ex military Ranger Qual'd and skilled at arms (May he rot in Hell !!!).
The first hit on Platt was a Silvertip penetrated the bicep entered the chest, dropped a lung and caused a hemothorax with around 1.5 litres of blood in the chest. It was not a survivable wound.
I have seen quite a few people shot over the years myself. Handguns are all pretty anemic and similar in service calibres, You see lots of dead folks and a number with quite a bit of fight. Rifles and shotguns not so much of an issue.
I stand by my assertion, despite much good coming out of the event for Law Enforcement, there 'was' definately a training issue.
Clearly no issue with shooting ability of the Agents that day.
You know as well as I do, Training is not always about proficiency with a handgun or other weapon. Frankly they decided to do a Felony stop on know extremely bad guys, they knew these guys had used Carbines and shotguns consistantly..
The Agents had an M16, HK MP5 and 4 Remington 870's with them that day and yet they execute the stop with revolvers and 9mm semi Auto's.
Remember two of these Agents were SWAT guys.
Mattix fired 7 ineffective shots total. Platt basically took on eight Agents single handedly with a Mini 14 and two revolvers, he was ex military Ranger Qual'd and skilled at arms (May he rot in Hell !!!).
The first hit on Platt was a Silvertip penetrated the bicep entered the chest, dropped a lung and caused a hemothorax with around 1.5 litres of blood in the chest. It was not a survivable wound.
I have seen quite a few people shot over the years myself. Handguns are all pretty anemic and similar in service calibres, You see lots of dead folks and a number with quite a bit of fight. Rifles and shotguns not so much of an issue.
I stand by my assertion, despite much good coming out of the event for Law Enforcement, there 'was' definately a training issue.
Clearly no issue with shooting ability of the Agents that day.
And where, exactly, did you get that the agents had an M16, an MP5 and 4 shotguns that day? There were only two shotguns on scene and no rifles. Other agents in the area had long guns, but let's be clear that the 8 agents on the scene did not choose to engage with handguns while having access to long guns. They didn't. Only two had 870s.
If you haven't read Dr. Anderson's work on the Miami shootout, you should. There's very little question that, whatever else you believe, the fight very likely would have ended differently if that one round did indeed penetrate a bit further.
I don't think you can fault the training of the individual agents. They handled a pretty hairy situation at great risk (and loss) to themselves in order to make sure innocent citizens weren't endangered. Ed Mireles in particular demonstrated the kind of mindset most can only hope for. I've met SA Mireles a few times and it's always an honor.
Now, did the FBI as an agency have some stupid policies back then which prevented the agents from being geared up for a fight the way officers would today? Sure. But judging the individual agents with the 20/20 hindsight granted by almost 25 years of tactical evolution is unfair.
If you haven't read Dr. Anderson's work on the Miami shootout, you should. There's very little question that, whatever else you believe, the fight very likely would have ended differently if that one round did indeed penetrate a bit further.
I don't think you can fault the training of the individual agents. They handled a pretty hairy situation at great risk (and loss) to themselves in order to make sure innocent citizens weren't endangered. Ed Mireles in particular demonstrated the kind of mindset most can only hope for. I've met SA Mireles a few times and it's always an honor.
Now, did the FBI as an agency have some stupid policies back then which prevented the agents from being geared up for a fight the way officers would today? Sure. But judging the individual agents with the 20/20 hindsight granted by almost 25 years of tactical evolution is unfair.
Well said Todd. And yes, I've read his work (among others). I've met him several times and its always interesting. ;)
The FBI still has some stupid policies btw.
John_Wayne777
01-11-09, 18:32
You know as well as I do, Training is not always about proficiency with a handgun or other weapon. Frankly they decided to do a Felony stop on know extremely bad guys, they knew these guys had used Carbines and shotguns consistantly..
The Agents had an M16, HK MP5 and 4 Remington 870's with them that day and yet they execute the stop with revolvers and 9mm semi Auto's.
Remember two of these Agents were SWAT guys.
IIRC the only weapons they had that day were 9mm pistols, .38 revolvers, and 870 pump shotguns.
Also remember that LE agencies, even federal ones, have guidelines and rules about the deployment of long guns. Some of the officers who visit this board regularly can't deploy a carbine....EVER....and it's AFTER the Miami shootout and the NH shootout and a plethora of active shooter incidents.
The HK45 is a much refined version of the USP45. HK took everything it had learned from years of producing USP/P2000 series guns, ran it through a small arms supercomputer named Larry Vickers, and out popped the HK45 concept.
The HK45 is much more ergonomic than the USP45, if nothing else.
Outlander Systems
01-11-09, 19:10
Thanks for the info. I've been waiting to bite on one, since I was miffed the mags weren't interchangeable with the USPs.
My brief chance to manhandle one at the local dealer's shop was nice. Considering the pedigree, the asking price isn't that steep, and it was indeed a cozy little piece.
I am definately digging the Picatinny rail instead of the proprietary HK setup.
No offence intended to my Fed LE brothers. I know the Agents did a fantastic job once the dirt hit the fan. We could all hope to do as well.
I have read Andersons report. The squad did have four 870's an MP5 and an M16. I remember going over this a few years ago on a training course (LE). There were two 870's at the scene though only one was used.
The Two vehicles in the squad with the MP5 and M16 were across the street when they executed the Felony stop. My apology for passing on erroneous information.
You can read the entire FBI report on the incident. Great companion to Andersons work. You will find the 870's, M16 and MP5 referenced in section 2.
http://foia.fbi.gov/foiaindex/shooting.htm
http://foia.fbi.gov/shooting/shooting2.pdf
No offence intended to my Fed LE brothers. I know the Agents did a fantastic job once the dirt hit the fan. We could all hope to do as well.
I have read Andersons report. The squad did have four 870's an MP5 and an M16. I remember going over this a few years ago on a training course (LE).
You can read the entire FBI report on the incident. Great companion to Andersons work. You will find the 870's, M16 and MP5 referenced in section 2.
http://foia.fbi.gov/shooting/shooting2.pdf
The squad DID have access to the weapons. The whole squad was not present at the scene of the shooting. There were only two 870s on scene.
And you can read a redacted FBI report on the incident. See what I'm saying? ;) And by the way, redacted or unredacted, there were still only two 870s at the scene
The squad DID have access to the weapons. The whole squad was not present at the scene of the shooting. There were only two 870s on scene.
And you can read a redacted FBI report on the incident. See what I'm saying? ;) And by the way, redacted or unredacted, there were still only two 870s at the scene
Agreed Brother hence............"My apology for passing on erroneous information..."
My apology once again, not meaning to badmouth the good guys.
we use 9mm in nyc with no issues at all.:D
we use 9mm in nyc with no issues at all.:D
You guys use Gold Dots?
Even the modern 9mm cartridge, like the Speer GD 124gr.+P round has some issues with stopping power. In the Sean Bell shooting, Joseph Guzman was hit 19 times and lived to talk about it.
Stopping Power being the BS mythical beast it is, the issue you bring up is one of poor shot placement, not an inability to get things done by 124gr+P GDHP.
Stopping Power being the BS mythical beast it is, the issue you bring up is one of poor shot placement, not an inability to get things done by 124gr+P GDHP.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ny_crime/2008/04/02/2008-04-02_bell_pals_agony_doc_describes_joseph_guz.html
Guzman (scum that he is) took a lot of those 9mm rounds to the torso. Those are center mass hits. I wouldn't hold him up as example of the 9mm round working very well.
Guzman (scum that he is) took a lot of those 9mm rounds to the torso. Those are center mass hits. I wouldn't hold him up as example of the 9mm round working very well.
And all the times a single round of that ammo has dropped someone in his tracks is just a statistical anomaly compared to this one extreme case. :rolleyes:
Until the technology exists to determine whether a .40 or .45 would have had any better effect, all we've got is speculation.
Handguns are anemic. They are convenient, not effective.
This guy took 17 center mass hits and 5 additional hits of .40 S&W Ranger SXT's for a total of 22 hits.
http://www.lawofficer.com/news-and-articles/articles/lom/0412/the_peter_soulis_incident.html;jsessionid=10BDC02F0CF4D0B083E43EA06A47B949
And all the times a single round of that ammo has dropped someone in his tracks is just a statistical anomaly compared to this one extreme case. :rolleyes:
Until the technology exists to determine whether a .40 or .45 would have had any better effect, all we've got is speculation.
My response was to Limey who was saying that it was more about the training and less about the round. The point was that in 1986 the Silvertip didn't quite do the job effectively in stopping the threat and that even today, with the advent of new technology, there are many other cases where someone has taken a torso full of modern 9mm rounds and also failed to be stopped.
I'm not sure where you think I said another caliber would have been better. I didn't. I'm well aware of just how effective pistol rounds of all calibers really are. If only the general public and probably more importantly, the media, realize that as well, then maybe they'd understand why 50 rounds sometimes end up getting fired in a shooting incident.
As Todd points out, these discussions devolve into pointlessness when individual examples start entering the picture. There is no way of knowing if a suspect shot with 10 9mm rounds would have stopped with only 5 .45s, or if a suspect shot with 5 .45s may have stopped with an equal number of 9mm. And who's to say that the shooter would have STOPPED SHOOTING at only 5 rounds? Do you think Amado Dialo would have only been fired at 39 times instead of 41 if the officers involved had been using .45 instead of 9mm? (obvious capacity limitations aside).
To continue the de-evolution...
A central Florida LE agency used to (no idea if they still do) issue the Glock 20 in 10mm. I know this because I was selling LE supplies in the area at the time, and tried to help a lot of guys find off duty holsters for them. One of our customers was involved in a shooting with his duty weapon and the round penetrated a car door, the suspects left humerus, a rib, a lung, and lodged near the heart (it's been 10 years, and I didn't write the story down). The suspect drove away. IIRC he lived.
Who's to say that a 9mm wouldn't have encountered less friction in the door, bone, and lung and might have penetrated the heart and stopped him. Who's to say that a .45 wouldn't have opened a bigger hole in the lung and caused him to lose more oxygen? Who's to say that the old .357 semi-wadcutter wouldn't have penetrated all the way through both lungs and the heart?
We'll never know, and discussing weather or not the 10mm is a good round for this agency based on this one single incident is pointless.
As Todd points out, these discussions devolve into pointlessness when individual examples start entering the picture. There is no way of knowing if a suspect shot with 10 9mm rounds would have stopped with only 5 .45s, or if a suspect shot with 5 .45s may have stopped with an equal number of 9mm. And who's to say that the shooter would have STOPPED SHOOTING at only 5 rounds? Do you think Amado Dialo would have only been fired at 39 times instead of 41 if the officers involved had been using .45 instead of 9mm? (obvious capacity limitations aside).
To continue the de-evolution...
A central Florida LE agency used to (no idea if they still do) issue the Glock 20 in 10mm. I know this because I was selling LE supplies in the area at the time, and tried to help a lot of guys find off duty holsters for them. One of our customers was involved in a shooting with his duty weapon and the round penetrated a car door, the suspects left humerus, a rib, a lung, and lodged near the heart (it's been 10 years, and I didn't write the story down). The suspect drove away. IIRC he lived.
Who's to say that a 9mm wouldn't have encountered less friction in the door, bone, and lung and might have penetrated the heart and stopped him. Who's to say that a .45 wouldn't have opened a bigger hole in the lung and caused him to lose more oxygen? Who's to say that the old .357 semi-wadcutter wouldn't have penetrated all the way through both lungs and the heart?
We'll never know, and discussing weather or not the 10mm is a good round for this agency based on this one single incident is pointless.
yer no fun...
For the record, I didn't say the .45 Auto was adopted for that reason, but simply that the .45 was adopted for that reason. It's hard to argue that the Philippines experiences had no influence on the Army's desire to have JMB rework his gun into a .45, though.
Todd:
I didn't direct that post towards anyone in particular. Sorry if it seemed that I did. I just put it out as a general point of order. Actually, the U.S. military had tried self-loading pistols in other calibers, even 7mm, and found they lacked "stopping power", too. The .45 ACP was a shoe-in based upon previous, positive experience with the .45 Colt. Where the Philippine experience did influence the M-1911 was to provide it a jump start because the U.S. military didn't like having to go back to the single-action Colt revolver so, they pushed even harder for a new self-loader -- the M-1911.
FYI, and I'm sure most already know, but the Mk262 Mod1 5.56mm round is a 77gr BTHP. Even though a hollow point bullet, the argument for use was that it provided better accuracy at distance.
I thought it was for better terminal performance at distance.
The .40 came into existence because a single 9mm round designed for maximum rapid expansion failed to penetrate deeply enough into one guy's chest after a through-and-through wound of his arm. If the Miami shootout had ended with that shot being fired, the whole chain of events that led to the .40's domination of the US LE market never would have happened.
Wanted to talk about this earlier point.
Somebody else pointed out how the .40 was developed by the FBI, which was that basically they tried the 10mm, but some agents had issues with controlling it, so they downloaded to the .40, which has become the .40 S&W.
Those facts explain how the .40 was developed. But I believe ToddG's comments above are an accurate summary of how the .40 was widely adopted.
It seems like very rarely in history, whether in the field of ballistics or any other field, are decisions made strictly on a rational, objective, scientific basis. Rarely does anyone say: What is the best-possible overall performing round? We'll go with that.
Instead, a host of human factors come into play: departmental budgets, politics of one company or school of thought versus another (such as the "big-and-slow" versus "light-and-fast" ballistics people), 'tipping point' incidents like the Miami shooting, fads, or sometimes, it can even be something as simple and trivial as boredom and a desire for change.
I honestly have nothing against the .40 S&W at all, and think it is a fine round. But I've never been able to understand why it is so widely adopted by LE, given the available performance of 9mm and .45 ammunition, the trivial differences in performance/results between these calibers, and the higher cost of the .40 caliber in terms of higher pistol wear, higher ammo costs in dollars, and sharper recoil. The best way that I've been able to understand why the .40 was so widely adopted, is that as Todd argued, the Miami incident was the initial trigger for the movement away from 9mm. And then I suspect, after that discussion was started, at least some of these other factors that I mentioned above came into play. For example, department 'X' wants money for some new pistol upgrades. How better to justify the money than to say: "We think our current caliber pistols are inadequate for incapacitating criminals, and we need new pistols in .40 in order to keep the community safe."
And then the thing starts to take on a life of its own, and becomes self-justifying. So today, you hear comments like this. What's so great about the .40? Well, most of the police are using it, so that tells you it must be pretty effective.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ny_crime/2008/04/02/2008-04-02_bell_pals_agony_doc_describes_joseph_guz.html
Guzman (scum that he is) took a lot of those 9mm rounds to the torso. Those are center mass hits. I wouldn't hold him up as example of the 9mm round working very well.
Actually, that article mentions alot of gut trauma. As I said before, that instance wasnt a failure of the round, it was a failure by the officers to put their round CoM. Last time I checked, which is as I type this, the gut isnt CoM. In my opinion, CoM is heart, lungs, and assorted vessels, veins, arteries, not the gut.
I stand by what I said in my original post.
You do realize he was seated in a car, right? And the vehicle was moving and had already struck one officer, right? Look where YOUR center mass goes when you sit in your car. And while I'm sure you could stand and accurately fire at a vehicle moving towards you at the heart, lungs and CNS, these rounds hit the torso (which is pretty darned good under the stress and situation these guys faced) and again, Guzman ended up with 19 9mm holes in him and lived.
I'm sure that a shot to the CNS would have been a different story, but THIS is what happens on the street and under stress and he was hit multiple times and was sticking kicking and screaming when they pulled him from the vehicle. Had he been in the driver's seat, that threat wouldn't have been stopped.
What you're really saying is that 9mm is effective, but only with near perfect placement.
I dont care if he was sitting, standing or doing god damned cartwheels. Center of Mass never changes. It is, and always will be, between the nipples. The fact that these officers did not put their rounds there is proof positive that this was a training issue, not a failure of the 124gr+P GDHP.
No LEA trains for gut shots. Atleast not one with an ounce of common sense. Training for gut wounds is counting on bleeding out, and guess what, that takes time, a long time, too long. Guess what can happen in that time. Good guys can be hurt or killed. The gut offers small and large intestines, the stomach, and pancreas. Center of Mass offers more vital things like, oh I dont know, maybe the heart, lungs, liver, and a myriad of major blood bearing vessels, veins, and arteries, you know, things that people cannot live without.
What I'm saying is if you do not put the rounds where they need to go, it doesnt matter if it was 9mm or .45acp, the outcome would more than likely be the same. I am also saying that ALL common service duty rounds need to be placed properly to stop a violent encounter. 9mm, .40S&W, .45acp, it matters not, they are all pistol cartridges and there require accurate placement.
John_Wayne777
01-16-09, 18:58
I dont care if he was sitting, standing or doing god damned cartwheels. Center of Mass never changes. It is, and always will be, between the nipples. The fact that these officers did not put their rounds there is proof positive that this was a training issue, not a failure of the 124gr+P GDHP.
Uhhh.....dude....hitting center mass through an intermediate barrier like a moving vehicle isn't exactly an easy feat with a handgun, especially since rounds can be deflected by the windshield or by bits and pieces of the vehicle.
No LEA trains for gut shots.
No, they don't...but accuracy under gunfight conditions isn't an easy feat.
What you're really saying is that 9mm is effective, but only with near perfect placement.
I don't think anyone is (or should) be saying that.
The point is that you cannot focus on this one instance and just ignore the results seen by NYPD and LAPD and plenty of other departments. The fact is that quite a few LEAs issue 9mm pistols and use them to good effect.
We all know that sometimes some bad guys simply do not die when we want them to. Assuming -- without any sort of proof or analysis -- that somehow a different caliber would have saved the day is just wishful thinking.
Todd, again, I'm not arguing one caliber is more effective than another. I'm just saying that even modern 9mm rounds have issues with getting the job done (which for some here who don't know - is stopping the threat, not necessarily killing the threat). In fact, all handgun rounds have issues with stopping threats. But LEOs don't routinely cart around rifles so they do the best they can with pistol rounds when faced with a deadly threat. In the Miami Shootout 9mm didn't stop the threat until it was too late. And I provided a recent example of the another threat that 9mm didn't stop. The 9mm DID kill Sean Bell in the same shooting so you're right, the 9mm can be very effective.
Seems like every couple weeks we have to have a thread to remind each other that shot placement matters more than all else. Can we just put that in a sticky and move on?
Fail_safe, how many times have you trained to shoot through the windshield of a car that is advancing upon you? At night. With headlights shining in your face. With people in that car who you believe to be armed and who just ran into your partner with that same car? Did you manage to get all your rounds "between the nipples"?
I doubt it.
As disasterous as this incident was for everyone involved, from a purely objective standpoint looking solely at how many rounds were put on target under those conditions, its hard to scoff and say "poor training in shot placement." Except I guess for you.
Coming from a military background the issue is killing the threat. I was under the impression it was the same for LEO's? That if you had to shoot you shot to kill? Not trying to fork the thread or make an issue just asking the question.
Todd, again, I'm not arguing one caliber is more effective than another. I'm just saying that even modern 9mm rounds have issues with getting the job done (which for some here who don't know - is stopping the threat, not necessarily killing the threat).
You shoot to stop the threat. That means disrupting vital functions to the extent that the assailant is unable to continue his actions. If he dies, tough shit.
John_Wayne777
01-17-09, 10:39
Coming from a military background the issue is killing the threat. I was under the impression it was the same for LEO's? That if you had to shoot you shot to kill? Not trying to fork the thread or make an issue just asking the question.
*GENERALLY* in the civilian world you shoot until the threat stops. When the bad guy is no longer able or willing to pose a lethal threat to you the justification for the use of lethal force is over. If the bad guy doesn't stop until he's dead or if he dies from his injuries, that's life.
In practical reality there may not seem to be much of a difference.
toasterlocker
01-17-09, 22:59
Sorry, I just can't swallow that.
The cultures which brought us the Glock, HK, Beretta, & Browning know enough about guns that their products dominate our LE/mil markets but they don't know enough to choose a decent handgun caliber for their own use?
The .45 came into existence because some under-powered .38's were failling to provide fast enough incapacitation to drugged-up warriors. It then became standard .mil issue in this country for 75 years. To this day there are people who still chant "They all fall to hardball!" whenever a discussion like this comes up.
The .40 came into existence because a single 9mm round designed for maximum rapid expansion failed to penetrate deeply enough into one guy's chest after a through-and-through wound of his arm. If the Miami shootout had ended with that shot being fired, the whole chain of events that led to the .40's domination of the US LE market never would have happened.
The funniest thing about this is that it was a shot from a .38 that finally ended the Miami shootout. Go figure.:D
Todd, again, I'm not arguing one caliber is more effective than another.
Then I completely misunderstood your comments above. I thought you were suggesting that the .40 (or whatever) would have been better than the 9mm.
I certainly agree that no common LE handgun cartridge is particularly devastating. Hearing stories of double-digit hits without immediate effect, while rare, should be sobering to those who get their terminal ballistic advice from Lethal Weapon.
Uhhh.....dude....hitting center mass through an intermediate barrier like a moving vehicle isn't exactly an easy feat with a handgun, especially since rounds can be deflected by the windshield or by bits and pieces of the vehicle.
Oh, I understand it isnt an easy feat. I understand that in the instance quoted by Federale, it wasnt the 124gr+P GDHPs fault that the badguy didnt perish or cease his activities. I also understand that it really wouldnt make a difference what service caliber round was used, the outcome would likely have been the same. I maintain that this wasnt a failure by the 124gr+P GDHP, but a product placement failure.
a product placement failure.
Now that's funny!
Fail_safe, how many times have you trained to shoot through the windshield of a car that is advancing upon you? At night. With headlights shining in your face. With people in that car who you believe to be armed and who just ran into your partner with that same car? Did you manage to get all your rounds "between the nipples"?
I doubt it.
As disasterous as this incident was for everyone involved, from a purely objective standpoint looking solely at how many rounds were put on target under those conditions, its hard to scoff and say "poor training in shot placement." Except I guess for you.
Nice attempt at deflecting the conversation, but to answer some of your questions, I have shot car windshields, its one of the many benefits of having friends who own scrap yards. No, I have not had to shoot a people in a moving car who may, or may not have, attempted to run my partner over. Does it really matter though? My experiences arent up for debate, so get back on target.
The fact of the matter is you, for some absurd reason reason have brought "stopping power" up, and you blame 124gr+P Speer GDHP because the rounds fired didnt kill or stop a man who was not in control of the vehicle he was in. You seem to think the man should be DOA, or at the scene, from 19 wounds to the abdomen, none of which struck anything more vital than the intestines. While the puntures to the abodomen are important, they are not the CNS, the heart, lungs, etc.
Now that's funny!
I was thinking about gas stations and restaraunts, ya know, "What are the three things for success?". Location, Location, Location. Business and bullets do mix!
A friend and I are talking about opening a restaraunt.
Oh, I understand it isnt an easy feat. I understand that in the instance quoted by Federale, it wasnt the 124gr+P GDHPs fault that the badguy didnt perish or cease his activities. I also understand that it really wouldnt make a difference what service caliber round was used, the outcome would likely have been the same. I maintain that this wasnt a failure by the 124gr+P GDHP, but a product placement failure.
You are clearly the one speculating here. You have no idea whether another caliber would have had a different effect.
Nice attempt at deflecting the conversation, but to answer some of your questions, I have shot car windshields, its one of the many benefits of having friends who own scrap yards. No, I have not had to shoot a people in a moving car who may, or may not have, attempted to run my partner over. Does it really matter though? My experiences arent up for debate, so get back on target.
So this is the long way of saying "no, I have no experience trying to hit the CNS through the windshield of a moving car, at night, under stress and with the headlights shining in my eyes."
The fact of the matter is you, for some absurd reason reason have brought "stopping power" up, and you blame 124gr+P Speer GDHP because the rounds fired didnt kill or stop a man who was not in control of the vehicle he was in. You seem to think the man should be DOA, or at the scene, from 19 wounds to the abdomen, none of which struck anything more vital than the intestines. While the puntures to the abodomen are important, they are not the CNS, the heart, lungs, etc.
No, I provided a modern example of a 9mm not stopping a threat even after multiple hits. You chimed in with a comment that the hits were poorly placed. And I asked you about your experience because I'm reading your posts as being filled with a rather condescending view of where these officers managed to put their bullets that night. If you stuck to your only valid point that shot placement matters, then we'd be in complete agreement. I'm well aware that a .22 to the right spot can stop a threat immediately, but they're not exactly effective outside that spot and therefore its not an effective duty round. The 9mm (and most handgun rounds) suffer from the same problem, instant stops are highly difficult and that translates into many more rounds being fired than otherwise might need to be.
Making precise hits standing on a square range or your buddy's junkyard isn't the same thing as trying to make hits under real stress. Your point is that the 9mm is perfectly capable as long as the hits are to the CNS. Well sure it is. But a police officer is likely going to be trying to hit that area under stress, on a moving target, in poor lighting and possibly under fire. 16 hits of 9mm to the torso didn't stop the threat here and your implication that with better shot placement the 9mm would have been more effective is simplistic and doesn't really translate to the situations that police officers face.
While we're at it, it's worth noting that what bullets do to stationary cars isn't the same as what they do to moving cars. Once above a certain fairly low velocity, the movement of the car itself diminishes the effectiveness of small arms fire.
the movement of the car itself diminishes the effectiveness of small arms fire.
This doesn't apply to the .357 does it? :p
Gutshot John
01-21-09, 10:00
While we're at it, it's worth noting that what bullets do to stationary cars isn't the same as what they do to moving cars. Once above a certain fairly low velocity, the movement of the car itself diminishes the effectiveness of small arms fire.
Can you expound a bit? I'm curious how performance is affected.
I'm not a physicist and cannot explain it in any kind of detail. Essentially, past a certain speed, the fluid dynamics involved (turbulence, etc.) creates what one fed agency referred to as a "force field" around the car that dramatically decreased the ability of most small arms rounds to penetrate as well as they would against stationary vehicles.
They actually rigged up a device that would tow a car at certain speeds across a firing range. At x-mph there was a marked difference in the ability to reach into the passenger compartment.
Gutshot John
01-21-09, 10:40
So the bullets impact, they just don't penetrate with as much force?
My guess -- and the guys I was dealing with didn't get into the why's if they knew them themselves -- is that the bullets are tumbling in the turbulence and no longer striking nose first. But that's just conjecture on my part. I don't have the equipment necessary to test it.
sigmundsauer
01-21-09, 16:37
I, too, am not a physicist. But the "force field" protecting a car is generally due to sheer forces working in opposition to a bullet's direction of travel. This generally begins to be a factor at even moderate speeds and becomes more pronounced as the vehicle moves perpendicular to the direction of bullet travel. As a bullet attempts to penetrate windshields/body panels the barrier itself is moving along a different path than the bullet's and will steer the bullet in that direction ever so slightly countering the bullet's inertia and ability to maintain a straight line of penetration. This has been known to prevent through-and-through penetration of door panels by even high powered rifle cartridges. Similar principles are used in designing bullet proof barriers that use opposing layers of different material that are designed to disrupt the bullet's initial direction of travel at opposing angles and can significantly reduce depth of penetration.
I suspect that a faster bullet like the .357 SIG would be slightly more resistant to this effect simply because of the reduced time exposure. It is one of the reasons why it is often recommend to bug out (pedal to the metal) ASAP during an vehicular ambush.
Tim
You are clearly the one speculating here. You have no idea whether another caliber would have had a different effect.
Talk about speculation! You are specualting that the result of this shooting is the fault of a round which is a proven performer in the lab and on the streets.
So this is the long way of saying "no, I have no experience trying to hit the CNS through the windshield of a moving car, at night, under stress and with the headlights shining in my eyes."
Last time I checked, this thread hasnt got a thing to do with what my experiences are. What you are trying, and failing, to derail this thread.
No, I provided a modern example of a 9mm not stopping a threat even after multiple hits. You chimed in with a comment that the hits were poorly placed. And I asked you about your experience because I'm reading your posts as being filled with a rather condescending view of where these officers managed to put their bullets that night. If you stuck to your only valid point that shot placement matters, then we'd be in complete agreement. I'm well aware that a .22 to the right spot can stop a threat immediately, but they're not exactly effective outside that spot and therefore its not an effective duty round. The 9mm (and most handgun rounds) suffer from the same problem, instant stops are highly difficult and that translates into many more rounds being fired than otherwise might need to be.
Making precise hits standing on a square range or your buddy's junkyard isn't the same thing as trying to make hits under real stress. Your point is that the 9mm is perfectly capable as long as the hits are to the CNS. Well sure it is. But a police officer is likely going to be trying to hit that area under stress, on a moving target, in poor lighting and possibly under fire. 16 hits of 9mm to the torso didn't stop the threat here and your implication that with better shot placement the 9mm would have been more effective is simplistic and doesn't really translate to the situations that police officers face.
No, what you have done is state that because the rounds didnt destroy a more vital organ like the heart, or the ever important CNS that this is somehow the fault of the 124gr+P Speer GDHP. It makes zero sense to blame the bullet. Its not the bullets fault it didnt rupture the heart or destroy the CNS. Furthermore, you have stated that because these rounds didnt strike something more vital than the abdomen, it has something to do with "stopping power".
Talk about speculation! You are specualting that the result of this shooting is the fault of a round which is a proven performer in the lab and on the streets.
Last time I checked, this thread hasnt got a thing to do with what my experiences are. What you are trying, and failing, to derail this thread.
No, what you have done is state that because the rounds didnt destroy a more vital organ like the heart, or the ever important CNS that this is somehow the fault of the 124gr+P Speer GDHP. It makes zero sense to blame the bullet. Its not the bullets fault it didnt rupture the heart or destroy the CNS. Furthermore, you have stated that because these rounds didnt strike something more vital than the abdomen, it has something to do with "stopping power".
You know, a well placed BB can kill you. It doesn't make it a highly effective round.
In a LE shooting situation, the idea is to stop the threat, not to necessarily kill the threat. (I think this has escaped you). In the Miami shootout, the 9mm failed to stop the threat before the threats could inflict grievous damage and death on the FBI agents. In the Sean Bell shooting, the 9mm managed to stop the threat (by killing the driver), but the passengers were both hit multiple times and stopped only because the driver was dead. Had they actually ended up being armed (as the officers believed), both threats would not have been eliminated. Both men were kicking and screaming when pulled from the vehicle. They didn't exactly give up.
There is no doubt that CNS shots will eliminate the threat. The point I'm making (and you're missing) is that most of the time, a CNS shot doesn't easily present itself and that leaves the shooter with the more likely scenario of trying to put rounds into the target until the threat is stopped. The handgun isn't all that great of a choice for this, more likely scenario, and as has been seen time and time again, the 9mm isn't all that effective stopping threats when the CNS shot isn't easily managed.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.