JN,
Seems like when the 40 has a 96% success rate of "one shot stop ",
With respect, I have to disagree with OSS statistics. They are not based on reality. The employ data that at least in part has been publically discredited by the very source represented and is based on arbitrary criteria.
First, M & S's OSS statistics have been debunked based on their data base for nearly a decade in professional journals. In several cases, the source of their
alleged shootings be it a department or individual have come forth and stated that either the incident
never happened or it happened in an entirely different manner that was reported by M & S. This is not in dispute and has been reported numerous times in professional journals. M & S's response has been to sequestor their data base or ignore the charges altogether. This is intellectual dishonety to use statistics that were either created or altered to portray a preconcieved idea.
Second, their OSS criteria is unrealistic at best. In order to be included in their
data base the shot
must have been an unobstructed torso shot. I would offer a loose percentage of 70% of police/citizen shootings are through outstretched limbs or common barriers such as doors, walls, windshields etc. To represent only unobstructed shots is to taint the results towards rounds that would normally under-penatrate in living tissue. In addition to this, they view an individual who falls down within 10 feet of point of shooting as a stop without regards to weapon used by the BG or incapacitation. For example, the situation I used earlier in which the Bg was shot in the leg, breaking the femur and fell down. Going soley on their arbitrary guidline of 'stops' this could be counted as a stop. But
only because his weapon was an edged weapon and his victim was out of range when he fell down. Had this been a firearm he would still have been capable of returning fire. So it is only a
stop if the situation permits and can change from situation to situation. It is arbitrary.
So we have a data base that only represents a small fraction of shootings in individual calibers, a data base that has questionable content of which some has been proven faulty and a shooting guidline that does not address common shooting obstacles or distinguish between incapacitation and continued threat capabilities.
I do not say this to embarras you Jonathan, I too once felt their data was
strret proven results. However, as the years went by and new information surfaced I saw the faulty assumptions on which their
definitive study was based.
Jonathan, you spoke of the 135 grain .40 S & W round. Because of it's sectional density it can be counted on to average perhaps 10 inches of penetration. In a perfect, unobstructed torso shot on an average male that might be enough penetration to reach a vital or CNS. But it is not a perfect world and one should not count on a best case senerio. One should hope for a best case but prepare for a worst case senerio such as oblique angle, cross torso, outstretched limbs and common barriers.
The 124+P Gold dot 9mm routinely has around 15 inches of penetration and has an excellent record of barrier penetration and adequate tissue penetration. We have had through and through shots
but the rounds were usually recovered feet away, not down the street as some unreliable gun rags would have you believe.
As I have mentioned earlier, no need for you to ever worry about the ammo I select. Real world results speak louder than gelatin jelly tests.
I think I am more concerned about your safety than you are mine. I am not talking about jello tests. If the lab results back up real life that is fine. But the OSS does not touch on
real life either. If it did it would have to comprise all shootings in a particular caliber/weigh/bullet type and then assess the results. This of course has not, and could not happen due to the tremendously difficult nature of the work load. The OSS is reletively small in comparision to the overall number of shootings. It has been proven that at least some of the data base was created as well as altered. I know that the 9mm by several manufacturers has done as well as can be expected from a handgun. Same with the .45 and the others as well. I no longer trust my life to ammo [regardless of caliber] that under penatrates or is the expensive exotic type that also underpenetrates. That is my choice. I want something that I know will function well in my pistol, something that has a very good change of adequate penetration and something that is accurate under stress.
St. Petersburg PD has recently gone to the G22 in .40. There qualifications in stress fire have dropped dramatically agency wide from when they used the G17 in 9mm.
Some of the sources like the IWBA give only physics to back up their statements, and yes, they are right. The guy is obviously pretty good at physics. But I believe he failed human anatomy/physiology.
With respect, you say
the guy . Could you be more specific because the IWBA comprises multiple individuals from the military, LE agencies as well as technical entities.
Glock Talk is an internet board, and many shoot for sport (matches, etc.) and with some with average experience.
Yes, but there are several forums there in which professionals post to each other as well as the public at large. Including Shawn Dodson, Gabe Suarez, Terry Murdock, Fernandez [one time of Triton cartridge] etc and even occassionally Marshal Evans etc. Specific forums such as the Caliber forum or Cop talk is a good place to inquire their input.
Good talking with you both. Stay safe.
