why b 9 mm?

[Alchase]

With modern ammo, most of this argument is moot.

Quick question

If you had to make a choice, wich would you rather be shot with?:

A) a .45 cal military ball ammo
B) a 9mm PDX1

IMHO, ball ammo should be for paper only, reguardless the caliber.

[mountainman]

With modern ammo, most of this argument is moot.

Quick question

If you had to make a choice, wich would you rather be shot with?:

A) a .45 cal military ball ammo
B) a 9mm PDX1

IMHO, ball ammo should be for paper only, reguardless the caliber.

Thats the point I've been waiting to see someone make. Bullets kill from hydro-static shock. Doesnt matter if bad guy is hopped up on anything, you send that shock  wave thru the liquid body mass, hit those nerve endings, thats it...bad guy down! And he will not know the difference between a 9mm or 45. Guarantee it! The rest IS moot...

[Smossy]

From my understanding, once explained to me from some gun experts. When it comes to close quarters self defense. The 9mm is more reliable because in close quarters the 9mm has less penetration than a higher caliber,  It gives the bullet a chance to expand, or in the case of a hollowpoint - the chance to do its job, mushroom out and cause more trauma. A round like a .40 or higher will more then likely just penetrate through your intended target and be less lethal at the same time still leaving a big hole. We all know with gunshot wounds, part of the danger comes with not being able to remove a bullet. Passthroughs are considered safer because theres nothing to remove. This varies on circumstances on situations but this is basicially how it was explained to me. So if the facts differ dont yell at me just passing knowledge and giving something to think about.

[Bofire]

 
Pistol rounds do not have enough velocity to create "hydrostatic" shock. a bullet going thru tissue kills, "hydrostatic shock" is Bull in rifle cartridges let alone pistol.
my 2
Carl

I would have no fear defending my self with a 9, I'd like a 45 but???  22 rifle would work too!

Another thing is every qualifying target I have ever seen has the 10 ring center mass. no head shots or 2 body and 1 head. I was always taught center mass and keep shooting until the threat is ended.

[mountainman]

Pistol rounds do not have enough velocity to create "hydrostatic" shock. a bullet going thru tissue kills, "hydrostatic shock" is Bull in rifle cartridges let alone pistol.
my 2
Carl

I would have no fear defending my self with a 9, I'd like a 45 but???  22 rifle would work too!

Another thing is every qualifying target I have ever seen has the 10 ring center mass. no head shots or 2 body and 1 head. I was always taught center mass and keep shooting until the threat is ended.

Huh?? You serious?? LOL! Have you ever shot thru ballistic gel? Or better yet, a plastic gallon jug full of water?? 

[GrainfedMuley]

Another thing is every qualifying target I have ever seen has the 10 ring center mass. no head shots or 2 body and 1 head. I was always taught center mass and keep shooting until the threat is ended.

I guess you have never shot at a FBI Target.

[Bean Counter]

Another thing is every qualifying target I have ever seen has the 10 ring center mass. no head shots or 2 body and 1 head. I was always taught center mass and keep shooting until the threat is ended.

What if they're wearing body armor?

With the higher incidences of druggies and drunks out there, I prefer shots to the  waist. Plenty of blood vessels for them to bleed out quickly (common iliac, descending aorta, femoral artery, femoral vein, etc), plus you can drop them to the ground with most hits to the pelvic bone and its prominences (femoral head, lower spine, etc).

[Biggerhammer]

Here's a good read that will get one up to speed on bullet induced wounds. Static  shouldn't even be used when describing trauma to tissue caused by a bullet.

Definition of Static.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/static


http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/myths.html

[Biggerhammer]

Another thing is every qualifying target I have ever seen has the 10 ring center mass. no head shots or 2 body and 1 head. I was always taught center mass and keep shooting until the threat is ended.

What if they're wearing body armor?

With the higher incidences of druggies and drunks out there, I prefer shots to the  waist. Plenty of blood vessels for them to bleed out quickly (common iliac, descending aorta, femoral artery, femoral vein, etc), plus you can drop them to the ground with most hits to the pelvic bone and its prominences (femoral head, lower spine, etc).

Hence the expression "Low in the groin or high in the head". Gets the job done in a hurry, center mass is over rated.

[huntnphool]

What if they're wearing body armor?

Not a problem.

[magnanimous_j]

Pistol rounds do not have enough velocity to create "hydrostatic" shock. a bullet going thru tissue kills, "hydrostatic shock" is Bull in rifle cartridges let alone pistol.
my 2
Carl

You are probably right. The jury is still out on whether hydrostatic shock exists at all. They've found shooting victims who've suffered aneurisms and have not been shot in the head. My opinion is that it does exist, but the conditions are so unreliable that it can't be counted on.

I think what's important to remember is that NO pistol round has the horsepower to be the 100% 1-shot mankiller that we think they are. You need a rifle round for that. Handgun rounds are deadly, obviously, but placement is absolutely critical with whichever caliber you choose.

I like 9mm because my compact handgun holds 14 of them and the recoil is light. I like .45 ACP as well because I gravitate to low maintenance, low pressure machines (I prefer Huge V-twin motorcycle engines over tiny high reving 4cyls, for example). But I think that a well placed shot with a 45 is going to kill a person just as well as the same shot with the 9mm. Likewise, a non-vital shot with a 45 isn't going to kill any better than the same shot with the 9mm.

I would rather be shot in the leg with a .500SW then shot in the temple with a .22lr

[Biggerhammer]

Love your above last sentence Mag.

[mountainman]

Lots can be found by either side of the debate of "shock" value, by anyone who would rather define by what is available on the internet, rather then first hand experience. All one has to do is google it..I love those who look for the oppurtunity, to debate for the sake of debate. Semantics can make a debate either way. Hydro static, hydraulic, etc... doesnt really matter. They are just words used to describe. The effect is the same. An expanding bullet of strong construction, put in the right place, will put things down in a hurry, whether 2 or 4 legged. Leave the fmj and ball for the practice range.

[mountainman]

Pistol rounds do not have enough velocity to create "hydrostatic" shock. a bullet going thru tissue kills, "hydrostatic shock" is Bull in rifle cartridges let alone pistol.
my 2
Carl

You are probably right. The jury is still out on whether hydrostatic shock exists at all. They've found shooting victims who've suffered aneurisms and have not been shot in the head. My opinion is that it does exist, but the conditions are so unreliable that it can't be counted on.

I think what's important to remember is that NO pistol round has the horsepower to be the 100% 1-shot mankiller that we think they are. You need a rifle round for that. Handgun rounds are deadly, obviously, but placement is absolutely critical with whichever caliber you choose.

I like 9mm because my compact handgun holds 14 of them and the recoil is light. I like .45 ACP as well because I gravitate to low maintenance, low pressure machines (I prefer Huge V-twin motorcycle engines over tiny high reving 4cyls, for example). But I think that a well placed shot with a 45 is going to kill a person just as well as the same shot with the 9mm. Likewise, a non-vital shot with a 45 isn't going to kill any better than the same shot with the 9mm.

I would rather be shot in the leg with a .500SW then shot in the temple with a .22lr

 

[Bofire]

I do not know what an "FBI" target is, I shot the ones we had to shoot to "qualify", I think all of Washington PDs use the same target. but do not KNOW that. Not being an expert at gun fights, never having survived one, I would not try to comment on that.
Carl