FBI article: Handgun wounding factors and effectiveness

[Mekkie]

I just red this PDF that I found on the firearms tactical website and I wanted to see what the rest of you all thought about it.

This is the link to the article, if you haven't read it: http://www.firearmstactical.com/pdf/fbi-hwfe.pdf

It's really interesting and made me rethink a lot of things about shooting and bullets, etc. Although there are some parts that are a little misleading (in my opinion) it definitely changed my mind about what self defense rounds to use.

What do you all think?

[Philbert]

What did you think was misleading?

[Mekkie]

After reading it over, the only thing I really thought was misleading was the comparison of the falling masses to the impact energies of the bullets. I'm sure the math is right, but the effects are so different that I wasn't sure the point was valid.

But the article was good, I don't mean to imply otherwise. It made me wonder if maybe round nose bullets are better for self defense than JHP. Is that the case? Or did I read too much into what he was saying? Can someone let me know if there is a place where I can look at penetration data for different bullets?

Thanks.

[phillykev]

I didn't read that report, but noticed it's more than 20 years old. I would imagine there's better data available.

[LittleRedToyota]

After reading it over, the only thing I really thought was misleading was the comparison of the falling masses to the impact energies of the bullets. I'm sure the math is right, but the effects are so different that I wasn't sure the point was valid.

the point was only that "being shot will not actually physically knock you down". and that point is valid...it won't.

It made me wonder if maybe round nose bullets are better for self defense than JHP. Is that the case?

it depends...if the JHP offers adequate penetration, though, the answer is "very probably not". there are two things to keep in mind:

1. that article was written about 20 years ago. JHP technology has come a long way in 20 years. the better JHPs on the market today (HSTs, gold dots, etc.) expand much more reliably than JHPs from 20 years ago (hydrashoks, etc.) they also offer adequate penetration in calibers from 9mm on up.

2. the worst case with JHPs that offer adequate penetration when they do expand is that they will not expand and will act just like an FMJ. so, with good JHP ammo fired from a 9mm or "more powerful" caliber, you either get the same effect as FMJ or you get a better effect than FMJ. there isn't much of a downside given that they do penetrate adequately even when they do expand.

[LittleRedToyota]

I didn't read that report, but noticed it's more than 20 years old. I would imagine there's better data available.

it's worth reading. 95% of it is still completely relevant and on point for today. it is mostly about the wounding mechanism of handgun bullets and that has not changed in 20 years (nor will it change until someone invents a handgun that fires rifle bullets at rifle velocities)...and it dispels many internet myths about the wounding mechanisms of handgun bullets.

today's JHPs do expand more reliably and offer better penetration than JHPs from 20 years ago, though...so that part needs to be taken with a grain of salt. but that is a very small portion of what the report is about.

[Rosco the Iroc]

What did you think was misleading?

Last parargraph of pg 13.

People fall down when shot!
Wow I think it's a GOV lie.

[Mekkie]

Awesome.

@LittleRedToyota: Thanks a lot for your responses!