Originally Posted by CMSpecs

fivehourfrenzy,
I didnt know which of your posts to quote man lol. I don't even know where to begin here. But, I'm not gonna go on & on about this. Not even worth the typing anymore now. I tell ya what, you go ahead and shoot your family with JHPs,FMJs,Glasers,buckshot, and live by whatever rules you feel okaying the nill THOUGHT of even shooting in their direction let alone at their bodies. I've threw in my hand on this here.

I don't see where fhf is advocating firing at his family or anything remotely like that. Let's stick to the technical issues here instead of personal attacks.

A bullet that exits creates two holes instead of one. This theoretically increases the chance of pneumothorax/hemothorax, which may be more likely to cause death than the slightly greater permanent wound cavity created by an expanded JHP, depending on the location of the wound.

Originally Posted by submoa

I've read several articles by Ayoob suggesting modelling your SD weapon choices after LE is a good idea when you need to testify in a SD shooting.

Expanding bullets and large wound channels might not be considered humane by the politically correct. So I can understand why the politicos would limit LE and military to ball ammo.

On the other hand assholes who threaten my life and/or those of my family are not deserving of humane treatment.

Would'nt an instant death be more humane than hours or days of suffering pain and or bleeding to death???
I use several different loads for my 9mm's. For plinking I use Monarch (Barnaul) or Winchester, or Blazer 115gr FMJ, but for defence my wife carrys Federal Premium 124gr "Hydra-Shoks" in her Kel-Tec P-11 and I carry Winchester Personal Defence 147gr JHP in my TZ99. Both guns will eat anything you care to feed them, but the heavier bullet seems to be a bit more accurate in my TZ, not to mention penetration and knockdown power. BTW, I also carry my TZ as a back-up when I go hunting. Wild hogs don't go down easy!

Originally Posted by CMSpecs

fivehourfrenzy,
I didnt know which of your posts to quote man lol. I don't even know where to begin here. But, I'm not gonna go on & on about this. Not even worth the typing anymore now. I tell ya what, you go ahead and shoot your family with JHPs,FMJs,Glasers,buckshot, and live by whatever rules you feel okaying the nill THOUGHT of even shooting in their direction let alone at their bodies. I've threw in my hand on this here.

Shoot my family? Dude man bro buddy you need to grow up. Just because I can justify my reasonings while you can't doesn't make room for irresponsible, immature posts like that.

Originally Posted by Mike Barham

Okay, please cite the case. You know, a case name (State of Arizona v. Jane Doe, Estate of Joe Scumbag v. Jane Doe, etc.), or even a link to a newspaper article? I live in Arizona and work in the gun industry, and never heard about this. I find it very difficult to believe that a lone woman would get in trouble for shooting an intruder, no matter what gun she used, in a solidly pro-gun state like Arizona.



Lawsuits abound in litigious America, and you're very likely to be sued no matter what weapon you use to shoot someone. But you're certainly no more likely to be sued if you use a shotgun or a .357 than if you use a 9mm or a .40.

I'm a graduate of Mas Ayoob's LFI school. A lot of the stuff you hear bandied about regarding guns and criminal charges and lawsuits is stuff that people heard fourth-hand and claim that "Well, Mas Ayoob said..." Mainly it's exaggerated crap, and no better than any other gun store gossip or misinformed stuff you see on the Errornet. I blame Combat Handguns magazine, and its sensationalist covers, for a lot of this.

I remember what i read, but never can remember names or specifics. The point is, it happens. Some DA gets on the case and is a hard ass. Plain and simple. It's the risk you take with you. I know there's more problems with shooting someone than there should be. Especially when it's on your property and the person is unwanted and uninvited.

I don't claim to be some sort of expert, but I have read things that make me think seriously about the topic.

I guess my whole point is you can't just go and shoot someone who you suspect an intruder and everyone says "ok sir, no problem". That's all I really mean to say. There is more that goes along with it after the incident.

Originally Posted by Dredd

The point is, it happens.

And my point is, it doesn't happen with anywhere near the frequency people on the internet claim it does. How can you expect us to believe "it happens" if no one can produce any actual evidence that it happens? You can tell us to believe in UFOs, too, but unless you can produce some evidence, you're not going to get very far.

The only person who can ever seem to actually cite real-life instances of this is Mas Ayoob, and most commonly even in the cases he cites, the particular gun used only has a peripheral involvement to the charges being brought, or the lawsuit being filed.

I'm not saying to use a Browning 1919 for HD, but something like a shotgun or .357 revolver is perfectly fine and totally defensible.

There is more that goes along with it after the incident.

I agree that we have to think about Problem Two in advance, but we shouldn't unnecessarily handicap ourselves when it solving to Problem One, by ignoring easily-defensible weapons because of some unfounded rumors circulating on the internet and in gun shops. If we don't survive the lethal encounter, then what happens in court is a rather moot point.

Originally Posted by Mike Barham

And my point is, it doesn't happen with anywhere near the frequency people on the internet claim it does. How can you expect us to believe "it happens" if no one can produce any actual evidence that it happens? You can tell us to believe in UFOs, too, but unless you can produce some evidence, you're not going to get very far.

The only person who can ever seem to actually cite real-life instances of this is Mas Ayoob, and most commonly even in the cases he cites, the particular gun used only has a peripheral involvement to the charges being brought, or the lawsuit being filed.

I'm not saying to use a Browning 1919 for HD, but something like a shotgun or .357 revolver is perfectly fine and totally defensible.



I agree that we have to think about Problem Two in advance, but we shouldn't unnecessarily handicap ourselves when it solving to Problem One, by ignoring easily-defensible weapons because of some unfounded rumors circulating on the internet and in gun shops. If we don't survive the lethal encounter, then what happens in court is a rather moot point.

I'm confident that I can pop 2-3shots in COM with my pistol calibers much more than I am to hit on target with my 12 guage. Simply because I rarely shoot the shotgun and have alot of practice time in on the pistol. That's important too, confidence in your ability.

For a 9mm It will depend on what pistol I've got out of the safe. My Sig 226 seems to like the 147 jhp (speer) a little more than my Springfield 1911 that shoots a 115 a lot better. IU usually use a Federal Hydro Shok in it.

I reload a lot but find it a lot less troublesome for me to not reload my carry ammo. I shoot with some local and state LEO and they get a little bent about reloaded carry ammo. The judges will too stating that reloading a hp for carry you are thinking ahead about killing someone. I really do not understand the mind set but I don't use near as much carry ammo so it's not a big deal.

fivehourfrenzy: I'm not too far away from you (Rockcastle Co). That castle doct. really don't mean much of anything new to Ky residents. On paper it does saying things like the person no longer needs to be inside the house but there have been several people hung in court trying to practice it. If it were me I'd just stick to old school thought and wait them out till they are a good way in the door.

My reloads are HP as well being I want to be able to know exactly what the slug is going to do and switching back and forth to me just don't make as much sense. FMJ ammo can indeed pass through a human target. That is one of the reasons I don't carry a 9mm much anymore. I learned from personal experience. I most the time have a 45 ACP with me but have been known to carry a 40 S&W or a 9mm at times. Sure the 45 makes a big mess but it usually wont pass through being a slower slug to begin with and with a HP slows down a lot faster.

I do have a 12 ga that I use for home defense. I prefer a pistol mainly because I am more comfortable with it but I still keep one next to the bed.

Originally Posted by Dredd

I'm confident that I can pop 2-3shots in COM with my pistol calibers much more than I am to hit on target with my 12 guage. Simply because I rarely shoot the shotgun and have alot of practice time in on the pistol. That's important too, confidence in your ability.

I have no problem with that at all. A shooter should definitely use what (s)he's comfortable with. But don't discourage the use of better, more potent weapons - that many people find easier to use - by saying those users will go to jail or lose their assets for using something as prosaic as a shotgun or a revolver. Especially when those statements can't be back up with facts.

Originally Posted by DevilsJohnson

fivehourfrenzy: I'm not too far away from you (Rockcastle Co). That castle doct. really don't mean much of anything new to Ky residents. On paper it does saying things like the person no longer needs to be inside the house but there have been several people hung in court trying to practice it. If it were me I'd just stick to old school thought and wait them out till they are a good way in the door.

Nice to meet someone else from KY. Yeah the Castle Doctrine says you can use deadly physical force if they're clearly attempting to break and enter. I still wouldn't try to blast them through the door...that's foolish in my opinion, especially if you can't 100% positively identify the person on the other side. I sat crouch behind a couch or table, set the sights on the door, and wait. That gives you a bit of time to identify the person entering so you don't go blowing your friend's head off, and if it takes a moment to get an ID, you're somewhat hidden as opposed to standing in broad view.

When it applies to me, there aren't any "circles" or dead-ends in my apartment. Nothing branches off. You walk in and you have the kitchen on one side, the living room, then the steps going up behind you. Up the steps are two bedrooms. Pretty simple. I'll let them have whatever they want from downstairs. Once they come up those steps, lives are in danger, and after having 100% confidence that it's a home invader, they'll take 9mm JHPs in the forehead, or 00 buckshot in the forehead. My so-called "sniper's perch" is right outside my bedroom, and looks straight down to almost the first step, and a few feet beyond the steps are visible. Nobody would see me unless they looked straight up upon entering the stairway, and it would be pretty dark up there. We keep a light on right next to the stairway but it doesn't come up into where I'd be waiting. You can see a person in total light when they get near the steps or come onto them, but someone looking over the wall-rail thingy from just outside my room is damn near invisible.

Oh yeah and I played football for Boyle County. BOTH years when we laid the smack down on Rockcastle at state.

Originally Posted by Mike Barham

A bullet that exits creates two holes instead of one. This theoretically increases the chance of pneumothorax/hemothorax, which may be more likely to cause death than the slightly greater permanent wound cavity created by an expanded JHP, depending on the location of the wound.

In reference to this and other previous posts re. degree of penetration, my personal experience in the operating room is that for a given energy, a bullet which expands and stops, expending all of its energy inside a body, will do more internal damage. Those which do not and continue out of the body in a through-and-through fashion without expansion and a sizeable exit wound do not cause meaningful additional bleeding with the exit wound. In the absence of a large exit wound, the most important and lethal sources of flood loss occur internally as caused by damage to arteries and well perfused organs, e.g. heart, kidney, spleen, liver, lungs. I've excluded the brain from that list for an obvious reason. It is entirely possible to hemorrhage most of ones total blood volume (~ 5L ) into the abdomen alone.

Originally Posted by Arcus

In reference to this and other previous posts re. degree of penetration, my personal experience in the operating room is that for a given energy, a bullet which expands and stops, expending all of its energy inside a body, will do more internal damage. Those which do not and continue out of the body in a through-and-through fashion without expansion and a sizeable exit wound do not cause meaningful additional bleeding with the exit wound. In the absence of a large exit wound, the most important and lethal sources of flood loss occur internally as caused by damage to arteries and well perfused organs, e.g. heart, kidney, spleen, liver, lungs. I've excluded the brain from that list for an obvious reason. It is entirely possible to hemorrhage most of ones total blood volume (~ 5L ) into the abdomen alone.

Very good point. And, internal bleeding is much more difficult to stop than a surface wound, and many times impossible.

I think it would be safe to say that a FMJ that does damage or rupture arteries or other vital organs necessary to maintain life in a human being, and that does exit would be a more lethal bullet.

On the flip side, I think it would also be safe to say that a JHP, in the grand scheme of things, is more lethal in that its expansion and total energy transfer inside the human body gives it a MUCH higher chance of causing damage to arteries or other vital organs (i.e. it expands and takes out the aortal wall when the FMJ does not).

It's a compromise. If the FMJ hits the right spots and exits, it's deadlier. If it misses where an expanded JHP would hit or doesn't expend enough of its energy to cause significant damage where an expanded JHP would, it's not deadlier. However, the chance of a JHP causing fatal damage and/or blood loss is more likely than a FMJ. In actuality they are two different arguments.

Maybe I am misunderstanding the physical mechanisms involved, but how does "expending its energy in the target" do anything? Energy is just the ability to do work - in this case, making a hole and expanding the bullet. A bullet that penetrates to the same depth and expands to the same diameter will do the same damage to the body, regardless of how much energy it uses to do so.

I agree with the point about internal bleeding, hence my comment about it depending on the location of the wound.

Originally Posted by Mike Barham

Maybe I am misunderstanding the physical mechanisms involved, but how does "expending its energy in the target" do anything? Energy is just the ability to do work - in this case, making a hole and expanding the bullet. A bullet that penetrates to the same depth and expands to the same diameter will do the same damage to the body, regardless of how much energy it uses to do so.

I agree with the point about internal bleeding, hence my comment about it depending on the location of the wound.

I think the energy transfer is a valid point. If a non-expanding FMJ perforates a target, it has kinetic energy carrying it through, and then further once it exits. While an expanding JHP offers a larger, wider wound channel, the expansion acts as a brake to stop it from exiting.

Think of it this way. Say you have two 124gr bullets, one FMJ, one JHP. Say both have equal terminal velocity, energy, sectional density, and momentum. The only difference is that one expands, and one does not. Say the FMJ perforates the person and exits with exactly half of its original terminal V, E, SD, and M. Because it did not expand, it didn't have the increased SA (surface area) to expend all of its energy. Say the JHP expands and stops in the person. Because of expansion, the SA is increased, so being that it's wider, it can cover a larger area of body tissue and expend its energy. Similarly with snowshoes. If you jump on two feet of snow in boots, you'll punch through. With snowshoes, the weight (like the energey of the bullet) is spread over a wider area, and you stay on top. Higher sectional density means it has less SA to actually hit resistance (body tissue).

So in essence, you could have a non-expanding 9mm (.36) FMJ that expends 300ft/lbs and exits with 150ft/lbs of energy (450ft/lbs total). Or, an expanding 9mm (.36) JHP that mushrooms to .55-60 and expends all 450ft/lbs into the body. The high sectional density of the FMJ doesn't give it enough SA to stop in the body...there isn't enough resistance on its frontside to bring it to a halt in a person. The JHP that mushrooms increases its SA, meaning it has more tissue to punch through with the same V, E, and bullet weight, so the extra tissue it crushes causes it to lose all of its energy.

I think the whole thing about energy transfer is that full energy transfer means it has contributed all of its kinetic energy into crushing bodily tissue and/or organs, meaning maximum internal damage.

Originally Posted by Mike Barham

Maybe I am misunderstanding the physical mechanisms involved, but how does "expending its energy in the target" do anything? Energy is just the ability to do work - in this case, making a hole and expanding the bullet. A bullet that penetrates to the same depth and expands to the same diameter will do the same damage to the body, regardless of how much energy it uses to do so.

I agree with the point about internal bleeding, hence my comment about it depending on the location of the wound.

Ok, just to make sure I'm communicating precisely and also not misunderstanding Mike or anyone else... the energy I'm referring to is the same as muzzle energy except inside the body of the target BG. It's the energy the bullet retains upon arriving at the target. Kinetic energy I believe is = one half times the product of mass times velocity squared. (sorry there doesn't seem to be an equation editor on this forum ) That's why the .45ACP is a better SD round than a .22LR - more energy to be expended in and do damage to a BG's arteries and internal organs.

As for ball vs. JHP, expansion inside the body, yadda yadda yadda... Mike makes the point that energy can be converted to work, or in geekspeak, force over a distance. In a gunfight, a bullet's energy is best spent forcing its way through vital structures. A larger bullet, or one which has deformed to become larger, will strike more structures on its way into a body if it has enough energy to continue its forward progress.

Hmph, as is my habit I went and made that more complicated than it needed to be. Rephrasing, if a bullet exits a BG that means it still had kinetic energy which could have been converted to internal damage had it deformed to a greater degree and come to a stop inside the BG. That sounds clearer.

Originally Posted by Arcus

Hmph, as is my habit I went and made that more complicated than it needed to be. Rephrasing, if a bullet exits a BG that means it still had kinetic energy which could have been converted to internal damage had it deformed to a greater degree and come to a stop inside the BG. That sounds clearer.

The way I see it, "energy transfer" itself does not cause more internal damage. The fact that it is able to transfer 100% of its kinetic energy is because it made contact with enough tissue and/or organs to completely stop the bullet, which means it induced maximum internal damage to the body.

In other words, complete energy transfer does not mean the bullet caused maximum damage. It's the other way around...the bullet causing maximum damage means the bullet transferred all of its kinetic energy. The only way a bullet can transfer 100% of its energy to a person is when the bullet has enough resistance to come to a complete stop. And the only way it can have enough resistance is if it engages enough tissue to bring it to a stop.

Say a 9mm bullet expanded to 300% diameter upon impact. It would demolish a huge portion of tissue, but wouldn't penetrate very far. All of its energy would be contained within a few inches, creating a very wide, disgusting wound, but not a deep one. The same 9mm that does not expand and exits the person would cause a straight-through wound, but would still have energy left over that could've damaged more tissue had it expanded. The trick to JHPs is finding one that expands to a maximum to damage the most tissue, but is still able to penetrate far enough to hit vital organs and/or the CNS.

Originally Posted by Mike Barham

Maybe I am misunderstanding the physical mechanisms involved, but how does "expending its energy in the target" do anything? Energy is just the ability to do work - in this case, making a hole and expanding the bullet. A bullet that penetrates to the same depth and expands to the same diameter will do the same damage to the body, regardless of how much energy it uses to do so.

I agree with the point about internal bleeding, hence my comment about it depending on the location of the wound.

Perhaps it's enough energy deposit to cause an involuntary muscle reaction and in a best case circumstance cause the bad guy to collapse? I'm no doctor or physicist so I don't know. It probably has more to do with the mythological 1 shot and he's down idea.

Originally Posted by fivehourfrenzy

The way I see it, "energy transfer" itself does not cause more internal damage. The fact that it is able to transfer 100% of its kinetic energy is because it made contact with enough tissue and/or organs to completely stop the bullet, which means it induced maximum internal damage to the body.

In other words, complete energy transfer does not mean the bullet caused maximum damage. It's the other way around...the bullet causing maximum damage means the bullet transferred all of its kinetic energy. The only way a bullet can transfer 100% of its energy to a person is when the bullet has enough resistance to come to a complete stop. And the only way it can have enough resistance is if it engages enough tissue to bring it to a stop.

Say a 9mm bullet expanded to 300% diameter upon impact. It would demolish a huge portion of tissue, but wouldn't penetrate very far. All of its energy would be contained within a few inches, creating a very wide, disgusting wound, but not a deep one. The same 9mm that does not expand and exits the person would cause a straight-through wound, but would still have energy left over that could've damaged more tissue had it expanded. The trick to JHPs is finding one that expands to a maximum to damage the most tissue, but is still able to penetrate far enough to hit vital organs and/or the CNS.

Your last sentence is exactly what the FBI tests. They test various pistol calibers and check the results they obtain in both expansion and penetration. They also examine the possible wound channel created. They then recommend certain bullets be used by field agents. I believe (please don't quote me) that the FBI seeks a bullet that can expand reliably and retain a majority of it's weight after expansion while penetrating 12"-14" and not much further (due to risk of exiting).

They recommend Speer Gold dot 124gr +p, Winchester Ranger T 127gr +p+ among others.

Here's a link to some of their test data. I don't know how complete this test is and I understand the information obtained is a few years old, but here it is. Click on the Tactcal Brief Links for some personal defense ammo ballistic results with pictures of the expanded bullet. http://www.firearmstactical.com/tactical.htm

Originally Posted by fivehourfrenzy

...The fact that it is able to transfer 100% of its kinetic energy is because it made contact with enough tissue and/or organs to completely stop the bullet, which means it induced maximum internal damage to the body...

...Say a 9mm bullet expanded to 300% diameter upon impact. It would demolish a huge portion of tissue, but wouldn't penetrate very far. All of its energy would be contained within a few inches, creating a very wide, disgusting wound, but not a deep one. The same 9mm that does not expand and exits the person would cause a straight-through wound, but would still have energy left over that could've damaged more tissue had it expanded. The trick to JHPs is finding one that expands to a maximum to damage the most tissue, but is still able to penetrate far enough to hit vital organs and/or the CNS.

Bingo! One of my biggest faults in this type of conversation is being too technical and unclear. You've captured it well here. The greater the muzzle energy of the round the more it needs to deform to keep the energy inside the BG and not something or someone behind him.

Originally Posted by Arcus

The greater the muzzle energy of the round the more it needs to deform to keep the energy inside the BG and not something or someone behind him.

And when a bullet transfers all of its energy to the BG, that means it's damaged the maximum amount of tissue possible with the given bullet. Once that's accomplished, a big determinant of how effective the bullet is is to look at penetration versus expansion. More expansion = less penetration, and less expansion = more penetration. Once you have enough penetration to make the bullet stop in the BG, then you work with expansion properties. If it's not penetrating far enough, decrease expansion. If it's penetrating more than necessary, increase expansion.

I believe the FBI standards are as follows:

6" or less = insufficient
7-12" = sufficient
13-16" = optimal
16"+ = sufficient, but not if it overpenetrates

I think I'm a bit off on my numbers, but it's pretty close.

Gold Dots pwn.

Okay, I agree with the energy transfer statement the way it's been rephrased. Again, it's just the ability to do the work of expanding the bullet and burrowing through the body. If we mean that "maximum energy transfer" means expanding the bullet as much as possible while still stopping in the body at a depth that damages the maximum number of vital organs, then yes, it is a good thing.

I just don't think there's anything magical about "energy transfer," which was one of the silly "stopping power" buzzwords (buzz phrases?) of the 1980s. It's more about the size of the wound cavity, which is directly related to the size of the expanded bullet and the depth of penetration.

I carry JHPs and encourage everyone to do the same.

Originally Posted by Mike Barham

I carry JHPs and encourage everyone to do the same.

How are Hydra-shoks different than standard JHPs? I know Gold Dots use uni-core technology to keep the jacket from separating from the core, which is the most common cause of a JHP failing to expand.

Hydra-Shoks use a central post in the hollow cavity that supposedly channels pressure better for expansion. However, they don't seem to do any better or worse than other modern JHPs. For a while, they were the hot thing, but now they're just another bullet.

Originally Posted by Mike Barham

Hydra-Shoks use a central post in the hollow cavity that supposedly channels pressure better for expansion. However, they don't seem to do any better or worse than other modern JHPs. For a while, they were the hot thing, but now they're just another bullet.

Then you have the famous "Black talon" from Winchester that was taken off the market and had the black coating removed. Current Winchester Ranger T rounds are this same bullet. Some claim it's better than before. It was labeled as a "cop killer" bullet for a while I believe.

There is also the Barnes X Bullet used by Corbon in their DPX line which some people claim to have success with in testing.

Yet, there is no actual evidence that any of these are better at stopping a person than the others. I say, find a load you can group well, fired reliably in your gun, feeds reliable, doesn't have failures, and you can get easily. Then you use that one. I don't have enough time to test every single thing out there

Personally I like Gold Dot, some people only use Corbon, some people only use Federal or Hornady or Winchester Ranger. Then you have different weights. Some people like a light and fast bullet, some people like a heavier and slower bullet. You have +p and +p+ etc as well. It's enough to make you go crazy trying to decide what to use. So my solution was to get a few of each and shoot a grouping of about 5 rounds at a target. Which one felt best to me, was there any issues? Did I hit my intended target?

The answer was yes to each question with every load I tried. I don't have means to test ballistics and expansion etc. However, I could use some online resources to get an idea of what worked well. Based on that information I made a decision based on what I could easily obtain, what the price was, how well I shot it, and if it worked reliably in my gun.

Dredd is on the money. People spend way too much time poring over the minutiae of one premium bullet versus the next. They all work well if they are shot well.

There are more important things to think about when it comes to self-defense. I suggest everyone just pick the premium round that works in their gun and move on.