TexasCHLforum.com

I have no dog in this fight, and neither does the author, but this is a truly fascinating study:

http://www.buckeyefirearms.org/node/7866" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

No matter which caliber you use, you have to hit something important in order to stop someone!

Great read, good to see some actual data based claims.

Interesting seems to bear out shot placement is more important than hole size. What ever you are comfortable with and can put the lead on target with can get the job done.

Very interesting! I wish there was some actual data showing real life over-pentration rates by caliber.

Good information. I'll stick with my 9mm, accuracy, and 13 bullets...that is until I get my .45

terryg wrote:Very interesting! I wish there was some actual data showing real life over-pentration rates by caliber.

This doesn't show over penetration rates, but it does show various calibers and bullets penetration rates in gelatin.

http://www.brassfetcher.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

If you do not see your specific ammo, check the "Old Website" link on the top right hand corner, there is a good chance it is there.

I was comfortable with a .380 when that was all I had for (unlawful) carry in California. Later, when I owned my first carry pistols for lawful carry, I carried either a .45 or a .40. Didn't particularly like shooting the .40......sold it and got another .45. But for pocket carry, ever since bailing on .380 as a viable caliber choice for me, I at first went with a .38 Special +P. When I had the chance to upgrade to a pocketable .357, I took it. And now, my most frequently pocketed gun is a 9mm.

I have confidence in the stopping power (to the extent that such a thing exists), in ascending order, of .38 Special +P, 9mm, .357 magnum, .40 S&W, .45 ACP. ALL of them require good shot placement, but I also believe that the bigger the boolit, the more fudge factor you have in there.

you can only expect a little more than half of the people you shoot to be immediately incapacitated by your first hit.

Well that's a wierd way of saying that.

Maybe the best stopping power thing we can do is practice.

Now if we could only conceal long guns legally. What a surprise :) the rifle and shotgun had double or better "stopping power", or at least permanent stopping power. Honestly I thought it would have been even better with a long gun but still no real surprises here.

Based on that study, .22LR is looking pretty good

Actually, there was a story in this months Armed Citizen where a rapist was killed by a homeowner's .22

Those little .22 LR can penetrate and we know shot placement is pretty easy with no recoil.

Rex B wrote:Based on that study, .22LR is looking pretty good

Actually, there was a story in this months Armed Citizen where a rapist was killed by a homeowner's .22

Reread the study. He says exactly the opposite of that.

Greg Ellifritz wrote:Some people will look at this data and say "He's telling us all to carry .22s". That's not true. Although this study showed that the percentages of people stopped with one shot are similar between almost all handgun cartridges, there's more to the story. Take a look at two numbers: the percentage of people who did not stop (no matter how many rounds were fired into them) and the one-shot-stop percentage. The lower caliber rounds (.22, .25, .32) had a failure rate that was roughly double that of the higher caliber rounds. The one-shot-stop percentage (where I considered all hits, anywhere on the body) trended generally higher as the round gets more powerful.

It is true that of all the people I saw shot dead in the 5-6 years that I worked in an ER, .22LR was the most commonly used caliber. BUT........ very few of them died right off the bat. Some perished after beating the crap out of the guy who shot them. Others perished after running several blocks, jumping into a car, and attempting to drive off. The real reason they were shot with .22s is because the guns are cheap, the ammo is cheaper, and that's what the hood rats who carried them could afford—not because of any inherent faith in the caliber. They're like anyone else, if they could have afforded to buy and shoot a 9mm or a .45, they would have.

Would have been interesting to see the data separately for hollow point rounds. [Author mentions this briefly in the "Discussion" section, but does not provide any details on what % of his data points are from JHP/FMJ and how the results of each type vary within each caliber.]

IMO an 9mm JHP is a better defensive round than a .40 FMJ.

Interesting article however... Thanks for posting.