1986 Miami-Dade: .357 Magnum or .38 Special?

[Old_Grouch]

It also seems strange to take your gun out of the holster and lie it on the seat beside you so it would be "readily available"

I've always been under the impression that that's what holsters are for; to keep the gun readily available.

 

[sgt127]

Bet being in a holster was almost foreign to some of them.

Paddle holster on. Drive to work.

Sit at desk, toss gun in drawer.

Go to lunch, take gun out of drawer, slip it on….

Crap. I may need it. Let me set it beside me…

 

[JohnKSa]

I think it's just a human nature thing. You know something is about to happen and so you want to get ready for it. So you do SOMETHING. Drawing the gun in advance seems to make sense--it's going to speed your ability to get to it--at least that's what I'm sure they were thinking. The problem was that they didn't/couldn't keep it in their hands and that was a problem.

There are very good reasons to leave a gun holstered until you actually need it. Which means there are equally good reasons for practicing getting unholstered smoothly and quickly when necessary. The really good thing is that draw practice can be done very effectively without live fire which means that lack of range time is no excuse for not practicing it.

 

[Shawn Dodson]

Ok, here's my "analysis" based on the pictures.

"The bullet went through the upper arm on an angle for 3-4" of penetration, exited unshored (equivalent to 2-4" of penetration) under the arm, entered the chest from the side already expanded and then penetrated 7-8" into the chest."

What part of it do you disagree with?

The arm wound is about 5-inches in length.

The exit wound from the arm at the armpit is a hole, which reveals the skin at the exit point was shored against the side of the chest. The bullet crushed the skin as it exited.

(Whereas stellate tears are evidence of unshored skin, in which the bullet stretches skin until it tears. The tears can be folded back in place with almost no missing tissue.)

The x-ray shows the wound path in Platt’s chest is about 6-inches deep.

 

[freedom arms .45]

so, just out of curiousity, what does the fbi carry now?

and, for those who might know, do most LE departments require you carry a specific firearm, or just a certain caliber, or do you have some leeway on personal choice?

 

[DR505]

so, just out of curiousity, what does the fbi carry now?

and, for those who might know, do most LE departments require you carry a specific firearm, or just a certain caliber, or do you have some leeway on personal choice?

Standard issue for FBI currently is the Glock Model 19M. Duty ammo is Hornady Critical Duty 135 grain +P 9mm. There used to be more leeway with Personally Owned Weapons (POW) in the FBI but that has been drastically scaled back. Authorized POWs include the Glock 43 and 43X, as well as the G19. I do not know if the G17 is still approved, but it was when I retired. The list seems to change constantly.

 

[golden]

The FBI carries a GLOCK similar to the model 45. It is a GLOCK 19 barrel and slide on a GLOCK 17 grip frame.
My agency went with a GLOCK 26, GLOCK 19 and GLOCK 45 as well.

Most federal agencies specify and issue which gun and ammo you can carry. When I started in law enforcement in 1991, it was with the I&NS. We were issued left over S&W model 13's that the FBI ordered, but no longer wanted. It was a nice carry gun, but fragile. In my academy class, several guns had to be replaced. My issued gun had the sideplate torqued so much, you could not remove it. It was fine with the issue 110 grain .357 magnum load, but one cracked the barrel when loaded with 125 grain ammo which is much hotter.
We had the option of personal purchased weapons and I tried a few. I bought 2 S&W model 66's with 4 inch barrels and neither was acceptable to me. No improvement in scores. I then bought a S&W model 681 (the fixed site variant of the 686) and had it tuned. I still have it and it is a fine gun, but heavy.
I then bought a GLOCK 19 and carried it after qualifying and used the issue +P+ 9m.m. ammo. I wanted better scores on my qualification, so I also bought a ASIG 226. My scores went up 10 points on average, but the extra weight of the SIG lead me back to the GLOCK 19, which I had borrowed from my ex-wife!. I gave it to her as a divorce present because I had promised her one when we were still together and then borrowed it back to carry. When we go back together, she bought me a GLOCK 17 as a birthday present and I carry that till we went to an agency issued BERETTA 96D Brigadier. A really large and powerful pistol. It was dead reliable and very accurate. I took it to the range and shot at the 100 yard slot and hit the target. I was impressed, more with the gun than my own shooting.

I left I&NS and went to another agency. Now we are carrying GLOCK 19's again.

Jim

 

[DR505]

The FBI carries a GLOCK similar to the model 45. It is a GLOCK 19 barrel and slide on a GLOCK 17 grip frame.

Jim

This is incorrect.

See my post above yours (#107).

 

[9mmepiphany]

for those who might know, do most LE departments require you carry a specific firearm, or just a certain caliber, or do you have some leeway on personal choice?

It is highly dependent on the department...and usually it's size.

My department was a moderately large at 1200 personnel (1600) when I retired.

We were issued revolvers, first the M-15 and later upgraded to the M-13, but had the option of carrying a personally owned (POW) 1911. As the 9mm high-cap craze hit the department they added a larger list of POW that listed 34 different models.

Our union finally got the department to spring for semiautos and they offer the option of an issued SIG 225, 229, or 226. SWAT had the option of carrying the 220. But they never rescinded the "Approve" list of POW...so depending on my mood, I'd carry a H&K P7, SIG 220, or Beretta 96. New hires had their POW restricted to a SIG model.

By the time I retired, the department was switching over to the Glock 22/23. A few years later, they switched to the G17/19 when they went for .40 to 9mm

 

[JohnKSa]

The exit wound from the arm at the armpit is a hole, which reveals the skin at the exit point was shored against the side of the chest. The bullet crushed the skin as it exited.

(Whereas stellate tears are evidence of unshored skin, in which the bullet stretches skin until it tears. The tears can be folded back in place with almost no missing tissue.)

Based on the angle of the arm wound, the exit point on the arm and the point of entry into the chest there's obviously no way the arm could have been against the chest. Plate II-A and II-B on page 46 of French's book show this clearly. The skin at the arm exit had to stretch at least 2.5" and that definitely used up energy that could have otherwise been used to penetrate the chest.

A fully unshored exit would be equivalent to about 4". Because the skin didn't stretch to the point of breaking but did stretch between 2" to 3", I didn't use the 4" figure but reduced it to a range of 2" to 4".

The x-ray shows the wound path in Platt’s chest is about 6-inches deep.

That looks a bit shallow. I guess if Platt's chest was a bit on the narrow side for a 173lb 6 footer that could be right.

However, your assessment only works out to 11" if there is zero accounting for energy loss due to the skin of the arm not being pinned and having to stretch. If you allow even an inch of equivalent penetration for that stretch, it puts the bullet's penetration into the range of the FBI's spec established after the shooting.

 

[WrongHanded]

Based on the angle of the arm wound, the exit point on the arm and the point of entry into the chest there's obviously no way the arm could have been against the chest. Plate II-A and II-B on page 46 of French's book show this clearly. The skin at the arm exit had to stretch at least 2.5" and that definitely used up energy that could have otherwise been used to penetrate the chest.

A fully unshored exit would be equivalent to about 4". Because the skin didn't stretch to the point of breaking but did stretch between 2" to 3", I didn't use the 4" figure but reduced it to a range of 2" to 4".That looks a bit shallow. I guess if Platt's chest was a bit on the narrow side for a 173lb 6 footer that could be right.

However, your assessment only works out to 11" if there is zero accounting for energy loss due to the skin of the arm not being pinned and having to stretch. If you allow even an inch of equivalent penetration for that stretch, it puts the bullet's penetration into the range of the FBI's spec established after the shooting.

Does anyone happen to know how this load performed in gelatin, on e the t sting protocols were established?

 

[murf]

regardless the ammo, mereles, shooting a revolver, finished the encounter with a spine shot to each of the perps:

not suggesting we all go back to revolvers,

murf

 

[Shawn Dodson]

Based on the angle of the arm wound, the exit point on the arm and the point of entry into the chest there's obviously no way the arm could have been against the chest. Plate II-A and II-B on page 46 of French's book show this clearly. The skin at the arm exit had to stretch at least 2.5" and that definitely used up energy that could have otherwise been used to penetrate the chest.

I didn't say the arm was against the chest.

The bullet pushed biceps muscle and skin against the chest as it exited. The bruises show the temporary cavity caused muscle and skin to slap against the side of the chest as the bullet passed through and exited the arm.

A fully unshored exit would be equivalent to about 4". Because the skin didn't stretch to the point of breaking but did stretch between 2" to 3", I didn't use the 4" figure but reduced it to a range of 2" to 4".That looks a bit shallow. I guess if Platt's chest was a bit on the narrow side for a 173lb 6 footer that could be right.

4-inches of penetration resistance applies to the thicker skin of the back. Skin thickness varies throughout the body. Skin in the armpit isn't as thick as skin on the back.

 

[Shawn Dodson]

Does anyone happen to know how this load performed in gelatin, on e the t sting protocols were established?

Winchester 9mm 115gr STHP, FBI test data 2/14/89:
Bare gelatin: Penetration 10.5-inches, Expansion .63-inches
Heavy Clothing: Penetration 11.8-inches, Expansion .58-inches
Test gun: SIG P226, barrel length 4.25-inches.
Velocity: 1091 fps

 

[SDGlock23]

I see both sides, 38's are easier to shoot and that is a thing to a LOT of people...because let's face it, most people aren't good AT ALL with handguns so the more blast and recoil you get, the worse they do. However, I think pretty much anyone would agree the 357 Mag is a better defensive round. Seems to me that in order to solve this riddle, there should be a happy middle ground load, a 357 Mag basically loaded to less than full power but still delivering better than 38 Special performance. There are some of these rounds on the market today, like the 125gr Golden Sabre and 125gr Winchester PDX, more than 38 but not full on 357 either, less recoil for better follow ups but still putting down decent power. I'd like to see something a little heavier, say in the 135-140gr class that was moving around 1200 fps, like a 357 Mag Federal HST, good expansion and the added weight would help with penetration.

 

[9mmepiphany]

Seems to me that in order to solve this riddle, there should be a happy middle ground load.
...I'd like to see something a little heavier, say in the 135-140gr class that was moving around 1200 fps

That's why Speer put out their Gold Dot 135 grain 357 Mag Short Barrel load.

I personally prefer the Speer Gold Dot 135 grain 38 Special + P Short Barrel loading for general use...reliable expansion, reduced muzzle blast, and faster accurate followup shots...in everything from a 1.875" J-frame (which it was designed to expand in) to a 4" K-frame

 

[WrongHanded]

For what it's worth to anyone, I did buy and read that book by Mireles, 'FBI Miami Firefight'. And when I say I read it, I mean I skipped a bunch of the emotional fluff. Overall, I came away with the opinion that the author thought they (he and the other FBI agents) did pretty much everything right and to the best of their ability (which he claims was high), but that "cosmic dominos" kept falling the wrong way. He did blame the 9mm Silvertip for not doing it's job, but did not blame the agents for not putting more than one shot into Platt's vitals (until the point he and Matix were sitting in one of the FBI cars, trying to make a getaway).

WrongHanded says: "I would not recommend this book to others."

 

[9mmepiphany]

I came away with the opinion that the author thought they (he and the other FBI agents) did pretty much everything right and to the best of their ability (which he claims was high), but that "cosmic dominos" kept falling the wrong way. He did blame the 9mm Silvertip for not doing it's job, but did not blame the agents for not putting more than one shot into Platt's vitals

I would say that he was writing from his POV and as a product of the training they had been given up to that point.

One's claim that their ability was high when they have nothing to compare it to...also when your trainers tell you that what you are learning is the best available.

This reinforces the importance of review of incidents by professionals not within the same agency

 

[WrongHanded]

I would say that he was writing from his POV and as a product of the training they had been given up to that point.

One's claim that their ability was high when they have nothing to compare it to...also when your trainers tell you that what you are learning is the best available.

This reinforces the importance of review of incidents by professionals not within the same agency

I agree, he's certainly writing from his personal POV.

There's a section in the book, after the details of the firefight, where he addresses the claims/accusations made against the team, their performance and their actions. Some of these claims were made by superiors within the FBI. He seems to refute almost all of them, and does so in a manner I took to be defensive (on a somewhat emotional level).

I'm honestly not sure how a person could read all of that back, after having wrote it, and not come to the conclusion that they'd made some huge mistakes.

 

[9mmepiphany]

I'm honestly not sure how a person could read all of that back, after having wrote it, and not come to the conclusion that they'd made some huge mistakes.

Sometimes folks who have been in a Critical Incident need to do that to survive the mental stress...most don't put it on display in a book...Survivor's Guilt is a very real thing

It likely played a large part in his retiring

 

[Agsalaska]

regardless the ammo, mereles, shooting a revolver, finished the encounter with a spine shot to each of the perps:

not suggesting we all go back to revolvers,

murf

This is the most important part. As Paul Harrell said in his presentation, the two problems were 1. Marksmanship and 2. Preparedness, in that order. They shot and missed entirely too much and brought handguns to a rifle fight.

 

[WrongHanded]

This is the most important part. As Paul Harrell said in his presentation, the two problems were 1. Marksmanship and 2. Preparedness, in that order. They shot and missed entirely too much and brought handguns to a rifle fight.

Having read that book, I have the following to add regarding preparedness: They had body armor, and they had long arms. They just didn't bother to prepare themselves to use that gear, because they seemed to believe they would have time later in the morning. Clearly wrong.

Marksmanship was obviously a huge failure, which is why I originally asked if they were using .357 magnum ammo. If they were, it could have explained why those with revolvers failed to make good hits up until the getaway attempt. But that was evidentially not the case.

Tactics appear to be an even bigger failure. Only one person brought a shotgun into the fight, and he ran head first into rifle fire in an attempt to get there quickly. Consequently, he was shot early on. One other person attempted to retrieve a shotgun, but did so once Platt was mobile, and got shot a paralysed for the attempt. A car that arrived after the fight began, with two agents inside, parked 45 to 50 yards away, so they could fire from the cover of their vehicle. No attempt to get closer, and no long guns were brought into play by them. Three guys huddled behind one car, all lost sight of Platt at the same time due to lack of communication on reloading. All three were gunned down when he came around behind them.

So yeah, massive failures other than ammunition choice. And apparently shooting .38 Special +P rather than .357 Magnum didn't reduce recoil enough to improve marksmanship a whole lot. Except maybe for Mireles at the end, shooting one handed.

 

[Shawn Dodson]

Having read that book, I have the following to add regarding preparedness: They had body armor, and they had long arms. They just didn't bother to prepare themselves to use that gear, because they seemed to believe they would have time later in the morning. Clearly wrong.

It has always seemed to me that the agents' mindset that morning was that they were engaged in a useless fishing expedition, as the chances were small that they'd spot Platt and Mattix driving down Dixie Highway.

 

[WrongHanded]

It has always seemed to me that the agents' mindset that morning was that they were engaged in a useless fishing expedition, as the chances were small that they'd spot Platt and Mattix driving down Dixie Highway.

However, the book describes it differently. They believed there was a good chance they might get a sighting of one of the several vehicles involved in the recent robberies. They believed that because it had been a few weeks since the last one, the robbers had taken a rather small amount of cash from it, and they usually hit on that day between 9am and noon in that general area. They came up with the idea at the gun range whilst practicing.

 

[Agsalaska]

Having read that book, I have the following to add regarding preparedness: They had body armor, and they had long arms. They just didn't bother to prepare themselves to use that gear, because they seemed to believe they would have time later in the morning. Clearly wrong.

Marksmanship was obviously a huge failure, which is why I originally asked if they were using .357 magnum ammo. If they were, it could have explained why those with revolvers failed to make good hits up until the getaway attempt. But that was evidentially not the case.

Tactics appear to be an even bigger failure. Only one person brought a shotgun into the fight, and he ran head first into rifle fire in an attempt to get there quickly. Consequently, he was shot early on. One other person attempted to retrieve a shotgun, but did so once Platt was mobile, and got shot a paralysed for the attempt. A car that arrived after the fight began, with two agents inside, parked 45 to 50 yards away, so they could fire from the cover of their vehicle. No attempt to get closer, and no long guns were brought into play by them. Three guys huddled behind one car, all lost sight of Platt at the same time due to lack of communication on reloading. All three were gunned down when he came around behind them.

So yeah, massive failures other than ammunition choice. And apparently shooting .38 Special +P rather than .357 Magnum didn't reduce recoil enough to improve marksmanship a whole lot. Except maybe for Mireles at the end, shooting one handed.

This may have been covered, but To further the preparedness point, pretty sure two agents had double stacked 9mm pistols and at least one was a very accomplished shooter. He missed 24 times, apparently because his glasses flew off in the wreck leading up to the shootout. It is reasonable to believe that had he had a $2 strap for his glasses the end result may have been very different. Pretty sure he was one of the fatalities as well.