OP states he’s a 16 year police officer, now doing crime scene investigations. Apparently he’s worked a lot of shootings and has been privy to autopsies as well. Sounds like for a busy department or agency. In the thread he states that there is no difference between major calibers, i.e. 9mm, .40, or .45. From the results he has seen, that if the bullet doesn’t strike vitals, it doesn’t matter what your shooting, even rifle rounds. Bottom line, as most of us already know, is that shot placement is key. States the wounds between the major calibers are indistinguishable.
I was surprised to read that, he calls pistol hollow points “marketing hype” and prefers FMJ based on what he has seen from various shootings because they feed better and they are going to penetrate more. He states that the wounds from hollow points do no more damage than FMJ. A line from the thread, “I know I’ll upset a lot of people, but I think Hollow Point ammunition is a very good idea that just doesn’t match up with reality.”
If the comments by “Lookin4U” are read closely, I’d say that his posts are quite reasonable and for the most part are in concordance with what we see and what has been reported here and in the wound ballistics literature.
if nothing else, HPs still offer a better chance of striking vitals- when expanded, they’re bigger, and therefor hit more shit- even if it’s just a small-percentile thing, it’s still “better.”
Again, you have to CLOSELY read what he has written:
“Usually the miscreants we deal with have a vast assortment of different rounds in their magazines - sort of “whatever you can find” kind of arrangement. It is not uncommon to find at least three separate head stamps in a given pile of spent casings when there was only one shooter.”
Given that context, then yes, most of the JHP’s he is coming into contact with are likely older designs/poor performers so FMJ’s would probably work just as well.
On the other hand, when talking about punching through intermediate barriers and preventing shots from deflecting, then a modern robust expanding JHP offers some benefits over FMJ. In addition, over the past decade in this area, the majority of the handgun JHP hits landed by good guys in OIS incidents have remained in the suspects, contrary to the experiences related by “Lookin4U” in his commentary. Based on our experiences, we choose to use well designed JHP’s.
Exactly. Pretty much every service caliber will pass right through the body in FMJ form damaging only a small path of tissue in its wake. It’s kind of like target arrow being shot into an animal. Only a small hole is made as most of the tissue is stretched around the arrow pushing its way through. A flat frontal area such as a semi-wadcutter, wadcutter, or JHP catches on the surrounding tissue and causes more tearing and cutting in the bullet path and thus more damage and a larger hole. Combine that with an expanding JHP and you have even more tear, crushing, and cutting and an overall larger wound volume. A bullet that exits the body has wasted a lot of work energy, while a bullet that has optimal penetration depths and expanded to its fullest has destroyed the greatest amount of the badguy’s body that the caliber is capable of doing. You’re looking at almost double the wound volume. This is a concept that has been realized in wartime and hunting for well over a hundred years. Using a reliable JHP is a measurable and likely, a significant improvement over using a FMJ loading.
16yrs seems like a long time to be on the job…but it really isn’t and is a relatively small sample of data. Dr. Fackler’s work incorporates probably a couple of centuries worth of gun shot wound experience when you account for all the players involved…and all that experience goes well beyond the simple crime scene investigator(I’ve done CSI work and it really isn’t that thorough when it comes to GSW) level. Doc makes a great point regarding non officer shootings. The ammunition is usually of poor quality and reliability and because that it is hard to distinguish any advantage in using a poorly made FMJ and a poorly made JHP. OIS with quality JHPs are a different story though. The guy does get the big picture though. A well placed 9mm FMJ is better than a poorly placed .45acp JHP. However, a well placed .45acp JHP is better than a well placed 9mm FMJ.
"I’ve become a fan of penetration, as the post I was typing when you posted will show. Since I have begun attending autopsies, I really think there is a lot more marketing hype to FMJ vs. JHP.Our department currently issues, at officer’s preference, Glock G17’s with 124gr Speer Gold Dots or Glock G22’s with 165gr Speer Gold Dots. In 2009 I observed three autopsies of officer involved shootings, all three with the .40S&W 165gr Gold Dots… I can’t honestly say that the damage looked any different than any other major caliber shooting I have seen.
From what I have observed, the damage done by all “major caliber” handguns (i.e. 9X19mm and up) looks very close to identical inside of the human body (Sorry guys, and I see a lot of .45ACP shootings). " --Lookin4U
It would seem that in the three autopsies that the poster described, the wound tracks from the .40 165 gr Gold Dot JHP’s did not appear any different than those caused by other handgun projectiles–sounds quite reasonable in inline with what the forensic literature repeatedly reports.
Don’t over-think this subject; projectiles, particularly handgun bullets, simply poke holes in things, just like arrows, spears, daggers, or shivs. The only difference is that bullets allow you to poke the holes from further away…
As always, the most important things are:
– Cultivate a warrior mindset
– Invest in competent, thorough initial training and then maintain skills with regular ongoing practice
– Acquire a reliable and durable weapon system
– Purchase a consistent, robust performing duty/self-defense load in sufficient quantities (at least 1000 rounds) then STOP worrying about the nuances of handgun ammunition terminal performance.
Are you advocating that an FMJ is just as good as a premium JHP from the standpoint of stopping an assailant? Why waste money on JHPs if this is the case? I am a bit confused as this isn’t in-line with what I think you have been saying previously.
(Note–sorry about your post getting damaged, it was not intentional; I am not sure what happened with the software–gkr)
“Are you advocating that an FMJ is just as good as a premium JHP from the standpoint of stopping an assailant? Why waste money on JHPs if this is the case? I am a bit confused as this isn’t in-line with what I think you have been saying previously.”
I don’t think I have ever stated any such thing. In fact, in my post above I stated the exact opposite and in fact recommended the use of modern robust expanding JHP’s:
“On the other hand, when talking about punching through intermediate barriers and preventing shots from deflecting, then a modern robust expanding JHP offers some benefits over FMJ. In addition, over the past decade in this area, the majority of the handgun JHP hits landed by good guys in OIS incidents have remained in the suspects, contrary to the experiences related by “Lookin4U” in his commentary. Based on our experiences, we choose to use well designed JHP’s.”
Having said that, keep in mind that a hit in a critical zone with an FMJ is far more effective than a peripheral hit or frank miss with a JHP–shot placement is king!
I am not sure why you are confused; it is all basic anatomy, physiology, and physics. Due to tissue elasticity, there is no way to reliably observe the macroscopic differences between a 0.355" FMJ projectile wound track compared with an expanded 0.65" JHP bullet track in live tissue–in no way does that fact negate the potential benefits of a JHP, as previously discussed.
The subtleties of ammunition selection are way down the list of important factors when discussing shooting results, as we have repeatedly emphasized (see my post above).
I think that Doc has made it clear in the past that handgun bullets are poor tissue destructors. They basically only destroy what they touch. In the big spectrum a .355 hole is not that much smaller than a .671 hole, and thus even if a bullet does expand, the tissue destruction from bullets under 2000FPS is largely limited to what it actually crushes.
I heard from an emergency room surgeon on another site that stab wound victims have a much lower survival rate than gun shot wound victims. the bleeding is much more pronounced.
That actually goes back to Doc’s .38 special recommendation where he states that a cutting edge on a low velocity bullet can actually speed up exsanguination. Perhaps that is where we need to be looking as an additional wounding effect in handgun bullets
There are numerous reports in the medical and forensic literature that show a higher mortality rate with stabbing victims vs. those shot with handgun projectiles.
I think the general point being communicated here is that where a bullet ends up is vastly more important to the end result than what type of bullet (providing we are discussing service calibers here) is used. The potential effect of a good shot can be maximized using modern JHP that penetrates deep enough to hit vital structures and expands reliably to cause as much damage as possible.
Given that handguns are limited platforms it makes sense for those of us who are interested in using a firearm to stop the hostile actions of an attacker to focus on selecting a reliable platform in a reasonable caliber that we can best use to put bullets exactly where they are needed under the stress of a life or death encounter. Using myself as an example, I can shoot an M&P in 9mm under stress better than I can shoot an M&P in .45 ACP. Thus it would be irrational of me to trade in the performance I have with the 9mm version of the M&P solely to gain the little bit of extra permanent crush cavity offered by the .45 ACP. In reality my efficiency (measured by speed and accuracy) with the 9mm is more likely to provide a measurable difference in the fight than the bigger bullet.
I made a comment in that thread. It is a pity that I am stuck here in London, because I feel that he and I could probably collaborate with some success on the technical aspects of these shootings (pre and post admission to hospital).
this is exactly why i finally made the switch to 9mm after a decade of 45-or-nothing mentality. though i shot my 1911 well enough, and shot my USP quite well (or so i thought, until i started shooting 9emem), i can get twice as many rounds COM with 9mm in the same time it takes to put controlled pairs COM with even the USP. and still have 13-14 rounds left in the weapon. twice as many shots means twice as many opportunities to hit important things.
the idea that a blunt/jagged expanded JHP through the skull won’t have a greater effect than a connical FMJ is kind of absurd. through other vitals, as well- especially the lungs. i don’t disbelieve Looking4u’s account- i just think that’s totally A-typical. also, while i’ve never bought into the “deadly shockwave” and “hydrostatic shock” gimmics, i do still think, even if only a small-percentile thing, that the “shoch wave,” or “pressure wave,” or whatever you want to call it, of an expanded JHP smacking and pushing through wet tissue is going to cause some kind of temporary disruption of surrounding sensitives- nerve signals, secretions, blood flow, etc- even just a temporary disruption of normal functioning, seems to me, might be enough to at least slow your assailant down enough to prevent him getting the one shot off that kills you. i’ve never been superficially shot, but i imagine it can still suck really bad, even in the heat/endorphine rush/chaos of a firefight.
My confusion arises from the fact that you agree that an FMJ .40 wound looks like that made from a GDHP .40. Since there is no magical shock-wave damaging multiple organs (Having watched multiple laproscopic surgeries, I agree, organs are very spaced out), the bullet only destroys what is in it’s path, and if the paths look to be of the same size, what is gained from the JHP other than lower penetration? They both have been stated to make the same-size hole according to people who have seen the two holes made by the various rounds. .40" and .75" would be visibly different, imho. Sorry, feeling a bit lost here.
I disagree with the premiss that hole size does not matter. Almost every piece of ballistic literature I’ve read indicates that it is indeed an advantage to use larger projectiles and also to use well designed expansion bullets. There are few that deny the logic behind it.
The push for smaller calibers comes from the operator end of the spectrum and is strictly focused on ease of use. It is generally easier to shoot a 9mm than a .40 or .45. In the grand scheme of things, the primary advantage to you is not caliber selection, but tactical aspects such as putting your opponent in a position of disadvantage while you retain a position of advantage. I would rather have a .22 with a POA for me and a POD for my opponent than have a M4 and have those roles reversed.
For me, given my selection of duty weapons I shoot 9mm best, .40S&W(180gr) second best, and .45acp worst when you take into account likely scenarios and overall weapon handling. Caliber size is important, but so is weapon handling. So, I split the difference and carry .40. The .40 also does better in the FBI barrier tests with a wide range of bullet types.
…however, I’ve often wrestled with the temptation to just standardize on 9mm because it does make life so much easier in many other ways.
Too many variables in crime related shootings. Ballistic data acquiered in such investigations are deemed invalid, due to the fact that the majority of those involved are involved in their first, and last, only shooting incident. A skilled and properly trained shooter that has reacted to actual combat, is much more efficient with all said calibers.
