Bullet style?

[MAC702]

Originally Posted by Just Deserts

...What about using "overkill" ammo/calibers like 454 Casull or 500 S&W for example? would there be some jury bias if you used one of these powerhouse rounds for self defense?

I asked a similar question about using a licensed full auto for self defense and the concensus seemed to be a flat out, "don't do it".

Now you start seeing a difference in what things were DESIGNED to do.

Hollow-point bullets were DESIGNED for maximum effectiveness at stopping live targets. In a self-defense situation, they are clearly appropriate and easily defendable against emotions.

.454 and .500 revolvers were DESIGNED for hunting large game animals. While you might happen to have one on you in the field and can use it for defense, if you purposely carry one for human defense in urban environments, it can most certainly be used to question your motives, which is not to say you are automatically wrong for doing so. Indeed, it may be the only sidearm you own, and that should be a valid reason, to the degree that you never endangered anyone else through its use.

Similar with full-auto firearms. Since they are clearly NOT as effective or appropriate for self-defense as repeaters are, your motives can be questioned, which is not to say you can't still use one and be justified. Keep in mind, many police agencies moved back to semi-automatic firearms after satisfying their submachinegun kicks on our tax dollars.

[Felid'Maximus]

Originally Posted by MAC702

Similar with full-auto firearms. Since they are clearly NOT as effective or appropriate for self-defense as repeaters are, your motives can be questioned, which is not to say you can't still use one and be justified. Keep in mind, many police agencies moved back to semi-automatic firearms after satisfying their submachinegun kicks on our tax dollars.

I don't think that full auto firearms are clearly less effective or appropriate for self defense.

If it weren't for the hunters, whose lobby has historically been more powerful than the self-defense lobby, I'm sure shotguns would be considered just as evil as full auto. A single 3.5" 00 buckshot shell is similar in output to an entire 20 round magazine out of the Vz 62 Skorpion chambered in .32 auto. The buckshot shell instantly fires 18 balls, each of which is at higher velocity and larger diameter than the .32 auto. Although the weight of each buckshot pellet is slightly less, the momentum is about the same due to the extra velocity and the kinetic energy is greater.

A firearm useful in close combat is useful in self-defense. If full auto fire is not effective in close combat, I would think they would have stopped making small capacity short range firearms full auto a long time ago.

In the case of the police it may also be a financial decision to stop using submachineguns. It may not be worth the cost to buy a bunch of SMGs and train all the officers to use them, based upon what small advantage having submachineguns on hand may provide. But they still might be nice to have on hand when needed. (Just a couple of years ago, I saw some police motorcycles with what appeared to be MP5 locked onto them, however.) Police and military units are also going away from submachineguns because there is increasingly a need to have a more powerful weapon capable of defeating body armor and pistol caliber rifles are not adequate for that role, and there is also a need to be able to make accurate long range shots outside of the ballistic suitability of handgun rounds.

Another factor encouraging a switch away from submachineguns by law enforcement is that free (or very cheap) M16s from government hand-me-down programs are often available, and it makes more economic sense to adopt the M16 than to buy new submachineguns, especially when the police force would still need to buy a long range rifle of some type for those situations where long range is needed.

In cases where departments are trying to avoid full auto weapons, in addition to financial reasons (training & equipment), public perception could also influence these decisions.

[vroom_vroom]

Yea gotta agree get a good Hp round and worry about the rest if you survive. Was pretty impressed with the new hydra shoks



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Thelittlegreenguy]

there was a study done a while back and I am sure it is updated.. not sure who or what agency did the study ( I dont read as much gun related stuff anymore ) but the study was on shootings... they took into consideration weapon, caliber, shots fired, and if the assailant was stopped ( IE dead ) I think they used autopsy reports...

anyway conclusion was the best round for "one" shot stops* was the .357 magnum round 125 Gr. jacketed hollowpoint with the .38 125 Gr. jacketed hollowpoin coming in a close second.. and I am sure this had a lot to do with the fact that these two rounds were the most common used by the majority of police agencies ( including the Feds ) at the time of the study ( all the cases were from 1988 and before ), and I am confident that if a similar study were to be done today ( and I dont know maybe it has ) the results would be very very different.. with most agencies using 9mm, .357 sig, .40 and or .45


personally I carry/use .45 acp gold dot hollowpoints.. its what I feel is the best for the weapon I carry and rely on to save my life... and I feel that pretty much should be anyones concern, what you feel will do the job and what you are most comfortable while shooting.. because the best bullet in the world wont do the job if you cant hit your target... gotta practice practice and practice some more...



*( I dont know if they only concerned themselves with situations where only one shot was fired or if this was the phrase that was popular )

[vroom_vroom]

Was it the one from the coroner out of Atlanta? If so was still a good read. Will try and find a link


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Gunhand]

Originally Posted by MAC702

I can confirm that is what the Air Marshals use. Sometimes I am at the range the day after they were there. It is littered with nickle-plated .357 Sig brass as well as a few dropped loaded rounds. Nothing but the most expensive practice ammo you can buy when you don't have a budget ceiling on spending tax dollars.

Federal agents train with duty ammunition, because thats what they fight with. Most really professional law enforcement agencies do the same.

When I was first hired as a U.S. Customs Special Agent, we were issued S&W model 66 .357 magnum revolvers. At that time, most of the training and qualification were done with wadcutter or FMJ .38 Spl rounds. But we were carrying full house 125 grain .357 magnum rounds for duty use.

In a number of on duty shootings, it became apparent that the agents were not use to shooting full house rounds, and their performance under stress bore this out.

In 1983, the U.S. Customs Service firearms policy changed to only duty ammunition will be used for training and qualifications. Post 1983, the problems with duty ammunition stopped.

It shouldn't be a budget issue when an agents life is on the line. Especially if that agent is keeping air travel safe from terrorists!

[Thelittlegreenguy]

Originally Posted by vroom_vroom

Was it the one from the coroner out of Atlanta? If so was still a good read. Will try and find a link


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I do believe it was.... and I dont have it any more.. but maybe its on the internet..

thanks

[MAC702]

Originally Posted by Gunhand

Federal agents train with duty ammunition, because thats what they fight with. Most really professional law enforcement agencies do the same.

When I was first hired as a U.S. Customs Special Agent, we were issued S&W model 66 .357 magnum revolvers. At that time, most of the training and qualification were done with wadcutter or FMJ .38 Spl rounds. But we were carrying full house 125 grain .357 magnum rounds for duty use.

In a number of on duty shootings, it became apparent that the agents were not use to shooting full house rounds, and their performance under stress bore this out.

In 1983, the U.S. Customs Service firearms policy changed to only duty ammunition will be used for training and qualifications. Post 1983, the problems with duty ammunition stopped.

It shouldn't be a budget issue when an agents life is on the line. Especially if that agent is keeping air travel safe from terrorists!

Shooting cheap FMJ at the same power level (and usually very sufficiently to the same point of aim) instead of one of the most expensive hollow-point points on the market is a very different comparison than shooting .38 Special and carrying .357 Magnum, which operates at twice the pressures.

[sarcasm]But you did mention terrorists, so I concede totally.[/sarcasm]