testtest

3 Myths About Handgun Stopping Power

You're right. Here is the physics the author missed. The author confuses conservation of momentum with Newton's third law, the "action-reaction" law. When I pull the trigger I will get the same force coming back at me, but here's the rub. Newton's second law then comes into effect: Force = mass x acceleration. Since I have way more mass than the projectile, I and my firearm will accelerate back very little due to the reaction force, but the bullet will head downrange at a great velocity. We approximate this with my students in a lab using roller office chairs. (Numbers are examples only.) Have a 100 kg football player push off another student who is 50 kg and see who rolls further. If the action-reaction force is 100 newtons then per the equation the football player accelerates back at 1 m/s2 while the other student accelerates at 2 m/s2. I.e., the lighter student goes further.

Momentum is different. Momentum = mass x velocity and is why a small chunk of metal traveling at high velocity can have more momentum than a bowling ball going down the alley. Momentum is conserved when the bullet hits the target and has nothing to do with the shooter (see above). The projectile may have enough momentum to pass on this momentum to the target to penetrate tissue or an object or move it, etc.

OK, now pick up your worksheets and I'll go through the first two problems with you. The rest is homework and is due tomorrow. Merry Christmas. 😅
Was waiting for someone who could explain the physics (better than me). The article's physics were defiantly flawed.
 
At least here (training wise) it's always "until the THREAT has stopped" , anyone who echos the mentality that they need to shoot to kill or has the mentality that a dead aggressor is better than a living one is going to have a very bad time defending themselves in court for a self defense case as they will pick apart that character if that mentality is posted online. Because if you keep shooting after the threat has stopped, they will say you were no longer in "imminent danger" after that Nth shot, and would no longer be a self defense case.

I feel like people need to recognize they're shooting to "stop a threat", not shooting to warn, to wound, to kill, but to "stop a threat" however far the aggressor keeps being a threat.

The Bias Bit : I also live in a state where we have a duty to retreat, not a stand your ground state, there's no castle doctrine here. We're only supposed to fire if we're in immediate danger and have no ability to retreat. We're also not allowed to use deadly force to protect property (and personally I don't feel like any property is worth someone's life).
My point was, if you absolutely need to use lethal force to stop a target, it is best to have good aim to immediately stop a threat, and if they are merely wounded and stopped, you’re the one who is probably worse off. If using lethal force to stop a threat, and if it isn’t actually lethal, you did not need to use lethal force and even if legally in the right, you are hosed.
 
I have a lot to say about this one. First and foremost, I couldn't agree with you more on the "spray & pray" mentality. In my day of being LE, a very brief day I might add, we did not have semi autos readily available. Some neighboring departments issued the new S&W semi auto 9s. We had wheel guns with a minimum two speed loaders hanging on our belt. We trained, practiced, and drilled relentlessly because the spray and pray option didn't exist. You had 6 shots. Every single one had better count.

As for the "stopping power" argument - As most before me have stated, shot placement makes all of the difference in the world. I have zero doubt that I can effectively defend myself with a 9, 45, 357, etc. However, one study most of the pundits avoid talking about discusses the mental impact of being shot. This article touched on it but didn't really peel the onion back. I speak from experience in that during my short lived LE career, I was involved in three shootouts and sustained gunshot wounds in two of them. Jokingly nobody in the department wanted to be a backup on any of my calls because I seemed to always end up on the calls that ended 11-99.

What I can tell you from experience is that when you sizzle 4 rounds of 9 through a hopped up tweaker, more times than not he'll keep advancing. However, hit the same dude with 2 rounds of 45, he goes into shock pretty quickly. In, or about 1995ish, the S&W Model 457 was approved for carry by my department provided you could qualify with it. I've carried a Model 457 as my EDC since the first time I personally witnessed the difference between the 9 and the 45 when trying to drop a hopped up tweaker.
While I won’t ever argue a 45 is ineffective and I carry one quite a bit. Your reference to the 457 I presume you are talking mid 1990’s?

While the 45 is still a great round and several that have hit folks with 230 HST report it’s like using deer slugs they all are better these days (partly because of engineering) and partly because we have learned a lot more about tactical anatomy since 1986.

So the terminal ballistics are better but I feel the 9 has benefited the most (speed, metallurgy, ballistic coefficient etc)

However all that said most folks that have not been in some form of LE have not seen the amount of blunt force trama a person (especially a hardened street thug that’s been shot and stabbed before multiple times or in a narcotic) can take.

So while skne scoff at the failure drill (or Mozambique drill if that’s your thing) having a plan B is neber a bad thing. (And pelvic shots don’t work like the movies might anchor yjen but they can still be a threat watched our agency shoot one with an M4 and yeah he dropped but there was a struggle to get cuffs on him. Round entered his back travelled through his pelvis/ball joint down his femur and exited above his knee)
 
Last edited:
My point was, if you absolutely need to use lethal force to stop a target, it is best to have good aim to immediately stop a threat, and if they are merely wounded and stopped, you’re the one who is probably worse off. If using lethal force to stop a threat, and if it isn’t actually lethal, you did not need to use lethal force and even if legally in the right, you are hosed.
Yes , not debating that, need to have good aim within an acceptable margin or you need to plan for some more effective means.

Not much sense in arming yourself with the tool if you can't effectively use the tool.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GPS
I have to take exception to some of this. "the majority of research supports the idea that the most effective way to stop an attacker with a handgun is to deliver multiple rounds quickly into vital areas."... Multiple rounds? Guess we all need to be experts with the "double tape". Given the light plastic guns these day even police have some trouble with this. A single well placed .45 does not require a second shot. End of story.
"higher capacity"? Are you stopping an attacker or fighting a war? Very (let me emphasize that) very few incidences will ever require 15+ rounds in the gun. If you find yourself in that situation, there is a big chance your going to go to jail. If you can't stop an attacker with a couple of shots, you are in way over your head. You better have body armor and a rifle, and someone watching your back.
 
I have to take exception to some of this. "the majority of research supports the idea that the most effective way to stop an attacker with a handgun is to deliver multiple rounds quickly into vital areas."... Multiple rounds? Guess we all need to be experts with the "double tape". Given the light plastic guns these day even police have some trouble with this. A single well placed .45 does not require a second shot. End of story.
"higher capacity"? Are you stopping an attacker or fighting a war? Very (let me emphasize that) very few incidences will ever require 15+ rounds in the gun. If you find yourself in that situation, there is a big chance your going to go to jail. If you can't stop an attacker with a couple of shots, you are in way over your head. You better have body armor and a rifle, and someone watching your back.
Well in theory no however real life as my blunt force trama statement. I have seen subjects take a well placed 45 acp JHP and while iyt of breath the Deputy still had to grab for his arm to cuff him.

There is no absolute with thugs uiu have to shoot plus as mentioned they don’t exact atand still so there is that.

As far as multiple shots yes sure however that’s where folks get in a pickle rapid follow up shots don’t mean .16 split times. That’s faster than you can absolutely make hits you need any A will steike where they need (he’s probably moving remember) and B are the second third 4th rounds needed and js so where (plan B failure drill of a couoke to the thoracic are not stopping him fast enough the circuit breaker might be the thing as he’s taking to long to bleed out)
That’s why we see some LE shootings that are mag dumps they think rapid follow up shots are “cyclic” and it is not.
Watch the ones that are successful they have a 1/2 second cadence to the and shoot 2,3-6 rounds anything over 8 rounds sounds like a machine pistol and is a mag dump!

Why a lot of high level teams like LAPD have 1/2 second split standards and they shokt a lot of folks. Both as swat (with handguns) and as uniform patrol as a large number are Metro division and referred from Gang Bangers as the Gunfighter Division

Also is tha additional shots justified (link of one LAPD officers that her case took over 4 years to get cleared because of the last 2 rounds out of 6


 
I have to take exception to some of this. "the majority of research supports the idea that the most effective way to stop an attacker with a handgun is to deliver multiple rounds quickly into vital areas."... Multiple rounds? Guess we all need to be experts with the "double tape". Given the light plastic guns these day even police have some trouble with this. A single well placed .45 does not require a second shot. End of story.
"higher capacity"? Are you stopping an attacker or fighting a war? Very (let me emphasize that) very few incidences will ever require 15+ rounds in the gun. If you find yourself in that situation, there is a big chance your going to go to jail. If you can't stop an attacker with a couple of shots, you are in way over your head. You better have body armor and a rifle, and someone watching your back.
I feel like the majority of civilians are going to be too frazzled to check after a single shot to see if it was effective. Also don't think that most civilians are going to easily hit their intended spot in a surprise.
 
Speed Beez for loading magazines (and revolvers) make it super easy and efficient. LOVE my Speed Beez stuff, especially the revolver boxes for taking to the range. LOVE them.
 
2. incentive to shoot better, boxes upon boxes of ammo given iyt as profeciency practice AND it was a real environment in Saturdays to shoot PPC matches throughout the area representing your agency a small the agencies took turns hosting matches.

Sadly enough I know one group of LEO’s that do this 2 times a year and they belong to the Marine Corps League. I even asked my local detachment and it was mentioned that it was a big thing. If wasn’t working insane hours, I’d make that hump up to do it at 06:30 from doing my 2nd shift job.
 
I feel like the majority of civilians are going to be too frazzled to check after a single shot to see if it was effective. Also don't think that most civilians are going to easily hit their intended spot in a surprise.
That is true... the majority won't. But that brings up my point, expecting a civilian to "deliver multiple rounds quickly into vital areas" is high expectation for someone who hits the range once a year... or less. Still, very rare for a civilian shooting to use more than a couple of rounds. In most cases, the attacker flees.. hit or not. In other cases the attacker is less than an arms reach away, two shots maybe required from a 9mm even at that range, but pretty sure one shot will do it from a 40S&W or .45. All that being said, the #1 most important thing to ensure an attacker is incapacitated is shot placement. I will run with my 40S&W or .45 where the odds are in my favor for a single shot stop. When you get to court, and you have to explain why you used 6,8,10,12+ rounds to stop someone, there's going to be a lot of doubt in the jury box and the prosecutors are going to try to make you look like a blood thirsty nut job.
 
That is true... the majority won't. But that brings up my point, expecting a civilian to "deliver multiple rounds quickly into vital areas" is high expectation for someone who hits the range once a year... or less. Still, very rare for a civilian shooting to use more than a couple of rounds. In most cases, the attacker flees.. hit or not. In other cases the attacker is less than an arms reach away, two shots maybe required from a 9mm even at that range, but pretty sure one shot will do it from a 40S&W or .45. All that being said, the #1 most important thing to ensure an attacker is incapacitated is shot placement. I will run with my 40S&W or .45 where the odds are in my favor for a single shot stop. When you get to court, and you have to explain why you used 6,8,10,12+ rounds to stop someone, there's going to be a lot of doubt in the jury box and the prosecutors are going to try to make you look like a blood thirsty nut job.
And one from a 9mm won't? It's a 1mm difference between a 9mm and 40SW (aka simplistically a 10mm short).

1766704651912.png
 
And one from a 9mm won't? It's a 1mm difference between a 9mm and 40SW (aka simplistically a 10mm short).
Both the 40 and the 45 entry points are 40% larger, and that is due to a lot more energy being transferred. You can't think of those wound channels in two-dimensions. They are three-dimensional. They don't look al that significantly larger in 2-D, but rotate those channels 180' around the center axis and that add up to a lot more damage, a lot more blood loss, and a hit that feel like a mule just kicked you.

I had a friend that was shot with a 22lr (from a 20" barreled rife). He said it felt like someone lightly slapped him on the belly. The bullet lodged in his liver. He was going to walk out (1-2miles) to the car, but his friends had the good sense to tell him to sit and wait and they would go for help. Had he walk out of the foothills to his car, he most certainly would have bled to death. Years later I had had a table saw throw a 2ft length of lumber in to my ribs. Did not penetrate, but I felt as if I had just been hit by a car. Left me dazed for 10-15 seconds. When I finally came to my senses I had to assess just how badly I was hurt because it was not clear just what the damages were. Cracked a rib and my whole side was badly busied for weeks. The point here is the the impact of the bullet plays a part in how the body, the nervous system reacts. Tissue damage in its self is not the only thing that dictates whether a hit is incapacitating. Brain fog, the inability to movement, shock, all play a part in whether the attacker can press his attack... or not.
 
Last edited:
KBlessing:

Concur. SCOTUS has also ruled that shooting someone for property theft is not the same as to save human life. "Shoot to stop the attack of an aggressor OR aggressors!" is very different than stopping theft of a lawn chair.
 
I've seen plenty of cops shoot the nutz off a squirrel especially since 2003. I seen a cop take a single headshot from across a freeway while dodging cars. These ain't barnely fife cops anymore in a lot of cities. They are extremely well trained combat vets. Lotta fudd in here when it comes to cops not a shocker between the tin foil hate right and the idiot left in here/shrug.
 
I've seen plenty of cops shoot the nutz off a squirrel especially since 2003. I seen a cop take a single headshot from across a freeway while dodging cars. These ain't barnely fife cops anymore in a lot of cities. They are extremely well trained combat vets. Lotta fudd in here when it comes to cops not a shocker between the tin foil hate right and the idiot left in here/shrug.
I have been involved in training as both the Feds as a Fed at FLETC and now as a local at my state LE Academy and have seen several thousand LEOs from all over

While there are some squared away LEO’s the ones that are nobodies squared away with extreme firearms proficiency is outnumbered compared to coppers in the late 80’s and 90’s as I have lived it and seen it.

If that makes me a FUDD (not sure if I was covered with that brush) that OK

I won’t even get into how the spike in shootings increasing is because cops don’t know how to physically handle business anymore or simply won’t.

Like I have said there is a 10/80/10 breakdown and the bulk of the 80% group are the ones that barely qualify and are the ones in the the shootings that look bad (many because they can’t go hands on and de escalate the incident (if aomeone was trying to fight and you punched them in the face and they stopped and it didn’t become a shooting you de escalated it (as de escalation is not always talking)

The example of cops
Aware of rule 4 issues and making long shots are the top 10 and a few of the top of the 80% crowd.

And seeing academy powers rhat be not fail a baby cop for failing to qualify at an academy when I was doing a day of guest instruction some organizations are not as serious as they were when they failed folks out of both the academy or the FTO program

So my reference to the age of no cop left behind theses days also sort of means all cops Win a trophy.

But only about 60% deserve it!
 
Last edited:
Back
Top