More Evidence Against FMJs

[mack]

Deanimator wrote:

"Why would anyone NOT want to take reasonable measures to lessen the likelihood of that happening?"

There are times penetration is a good thing - like shooting a perp who is behind concealment or partial cover of a door or doorway. So why not assume your rounds will penetrate anyway since hp does not always expand reliably and take that as a given before you shoot and retain the ability to penetrate reliably if you should need it.

 

[huntsman]

I can understand the LEO's need for HP but in SD the only time you should pull you gun and fire is when you feel threatened with loss of life so in that situation collateral damage has to be accepted.

No responsible shooter would go to one of the older indoor shooting ranges that has a warning poster saying “LEAD BULLETS ONLY, JACKETED BULLETS CAN PIERCE BACKSTOP” and then proceed to pump hard-jacketed bullets into that frail backing.

What do you shoot at the ranges who don't allow FMJ and don't allow lead?

 

[Deanimator]

"Why would anyone NOT want to take reasonable measures to lessen the likelihood of that happening?"

There are times penetration is a good thing - like shooting a perp who is behind concealment or partial cover of a door or doorway. So why not assume your rounds will penetrate anyway since hp does not always expand reliably and take that as a given before you shoot and retain the ability to penetrate reliably if you should need it.

I'm not a cop and am no longer in the military.

I plan for the MOST likely scenarios.

If I want to shoot through something to hit somebody, I'll use my CAR15 or my Garand.

I'm not worried about not being able to shoot through something in order to defend myself, either at home or in the street.

I AM worried about harming an innocent (and losing my behind in civil court) because I recklessly chose to not take a TRIVIALLY EASY step to lessen the likelihood of getting a through and through which harms a bystander.

Here in Ohio, I have civil immunity from MY ASSAILANT in a good shoot. I don't have ANY immunity from MY VICTIM if I get a through and through due to my own recklessless in using FMJ and maim or kill a bystander.

 

[Shawn Dodson]

There are calibers in which FMJ bullets are the only choice to ensure reliable, adequate penetration.
.380 ACP
.32 ACP
.25 ACP

The classic stereotype of overpenetration is a bullet that squarely hits center mass and then passes completely through a criminal offender's body. However most cases of "overpenetration" are not the result of square, center mass hits. They are the result of hits along the periphery of the body, in which the bullet has a short penetration path through tissues before it exits.

 

[Deanimator]

I can understand the LEO's need for HP but in SD the only time you should pull you gun and fire is when you feel threatened with loss of life so in that situation collateral damage has to be accepted.

Are you saying it's ok for YOU to shoot a toddler standing behind your assailant, but it's NOT ok for a cop to do it? I fail to see the connection between the NEED to defend yourself and the LACK of need to take MINOR steps to lessen the danger to innocent third parties.

You can go right ahead and "accept" the "collateral damage" if you use FMJ, get a through and through and hit ME. You'd better be willing to accept me (or my survivors) taking everything you own too.

I don't know about where you live, but here there's no such thing as a "justifiable accidental shooting", at least not in civil court. You own ALL of your fired bullets, no matter where they go, or why you shot them.

 

[Deanimator]

There are calibers in which FMJ bullets are the only choice to ensure reliable, adequate penetration.
.380 ACP
.32 ACP
.25 ACP

That's why I'd NEVER carry a .25acp or .32acp firearm for self-defense, and would be HIGHLY reluctant to carry a .380acp.

 

[Wheeler44]

Deanimator.....Some folks risk/reward analysis will be different than yours.....That is a fact of life....Some folks lives have conspired to leave them believing that a .380 or .32 or even the lowly .25 auto would be sufficient for their needs....Maybe it's all that they could afford....

Your solution may not match anyone else's solution....yet still be most acceptable for you....

As others have mentioned...there is an equal chance of a missed HP round inflicting the same collateral damage......

IF...I am ever in a situation as dire as that....I don't want ANY secondary emotion (such as concern about the endless possibilitiesof the outcome) to distract from the immediate task at hand.....I hope that I wouldn't blaze away with impunity....I do hope that I would blaze away though....

 

[Shawn Dodson]

Ragnar Danneskjold writes:

Do any of the gelatin tests people use to determine over-penetration simulate a person with 50-75(or more) extra lbs of body fat and a winter coat?

Adequate penetration depth between 12 - 16 inches is a performance standard that was established by informed medical opinion.

Ordnance gelatin tests are an engineering evaluation tool to observe bullet terminal performance in a realistic soft tissue simulant.

 

[Deanimator]

Deanimator.....Some folks risk/reward analysis will be different than yours.....That is a fact of life....Some folks lives have conspired to leave them believing that a .380 or .32 or even the lowly .25 auto would be sufficient for their needs....Maybe it's all that they could afford....

Faulty analytical skills don't excuse you in criminal or civil court.

Failure to exercise due diligence doesn't excuse you in criminal or civil court.

You get what you pay for, including greater or lesser risk. That I know of, "I couldn't afford a decent firearm." isn't a defense in civil court, either to getting a through and through because your firearm wouldn't function with proper ammunition or to negligently shooting somebody because it was difficult to properly manipulate.

 

[TCB in TN]

In a .32acp, enough gun would seem like a good thing. I've never owned a .32acp firearm. I can't say I'd never own one. I can say I'd never carry one for self-defense. The smallest thing I carry is a J frame smith loaded with 158gr. LSWC-HP +Ps.

I'm not interested in a bad solution to a self-created problem.

I spent several years working in a company with a no-guns policy. Not law mind you but company policy. I complied for a few years, but after a couple of real problems with irate spouses trying to get into the plant, so threats to other members of management, etc I went out and got the most concealable option I could. (Keltech .32). It wasn't my first choice, but beat the heck out of not having anything.

A pea shooter in the pocket beats a cannon in the car!

 

[Deanimator]

I spent several years working in a company with a no-guns policy. Not law mind you but company policy. I complied for a few years, but after a couple of real problems with irate spouses trying to get into the plant, so threats to other members of management, etc I went out and got the most concealable option I could. (Keltech .32). It wasn't my first choice, but beat the heck out of not having anything.

When you make certain choices, you accept certain risks. You have no legal right to shift those risks onto innocent third parties.

If you shoot and stop a violent assailant with your .32, absent other factors, I'd NEVER find you guilty or civilly liable.

If during that defensive shooting you get a through and through and wound or kill a co-worker because you CHOSE to use FMJs, I would just as matter of factly find you civilly liable to the victim or his survivors.

 

[RainDodger]

Anybody read that mid-80s FBI analysis that concludes with the finding that the only thing that really matters with a pistol round is that it penetrates deeply?

Anyway, regardless of that report, I carry FJMs for numerous reasons. Using the same bullets all the time precludes readjusting reloading dies, they're generally a little less expensive, and they generally function more reliably in most pistols than bullets with other shapes. They give ME 100% confidence that the cartridge will not cause a malfunction in my various pistols. In many years (decades) of handloading, I have worked up my preferred load for each caliber, with a standard RN FMJ, and that's what I carry.

Don't get me wrong though - it's fun to vary things and I do occasionally shoot light and fast HPs in my 9mm or .38 Super, but when it comes to carry, I almost always go back to the heavier FJMs. In my .45, it's always 230 gr. FMJs.

As for what's behind whatever I have to shoot at - it doesn't matter what kind of load I'm shooting - I have to consider what's behind the target at all times. I'm a former federal LEO and there are certain things ingrained in my mind from a lot of training. I'm not going to think, "Ok, I can shoot at this guy because I'm shooting a light hollow point and it's not going to go thru and thru."

Bottom line: I don't care about any findings by Mr. Ayoob about any kind of bullet. There's simply not that much difference when you get to the end. It just matters that you get penetration (in my view) and you punch as many holes in the guy as you can. If you're looking into the muzzle of my carry piece, it's not going to matter much if it's an FMJ or a HP.

Something to note: Got no kids in the house to worry about and no close neighbors, but it would not impact my choices anyway. The handguns are locked up and there's a 12ga. by the bed, with OO Buck in it.

 

[TCB in TN]

When you make certain choices, you accept certain risks. You have no legal right to shift those risks onto innocent third parties.

If you shoot and stop a violent assailant with your .32, absent other factors, I'd NEVER find you guilty or civilly liable.

If during that defensive shooting you get a through and through and wound or kill a co-worker because you CHOSE to use FMJs, I would just as matter of factly find you civilly liable to the victim or his survivors.

The likelihood of over penetration with your little J frame with expanding ammo is just as high as it is with a fmj .32. I agree that the .32 is a less than ideal round, so giving it a chance to be MORE effective is a good idea. I would just take my chances!

And has been pointed out on multiple occasions, I would rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6.

 

[mack]

"Why would anyone NOT want to take reasonable measures to lessen the likelihood of that happening?"

There are times penetration is a good thing - like shooting a perp who is behind concealment or partial cover of a door or doorway. So why not assume your rounds will penetrate anyway since hp does not always expand reliably and take that as a given before you shoot and retain the ability to penetrate reliably if you should need it.

I'm not a cop and am no longer in the military.

I plan for the MOST likely scenarios.

If I want to shoot through something to hit somebody, I'll use my CAR15 or my Garand.

I'm not worried about not being able to shoot through something in order to defend myself, either at home or in the street.

I AM worried about harming an innocent (and losing my behind in civil court) because I recklessly chose to not take a TRIVIALLY EASY step to lessen the likelihood of getting a through and through which harms a bystander.

Here in Ohio, I have civil immunity from MY ASSAILANT in a good shoot. I don't have ANY immunity from MY VICTIM if I get a through and through due to my own recklessless in using FMJ and maim or kill a bystander.

Most "realistic senarios" don't include taking time out to go get your alternate firearm to shoot through something. A long arm in a self-defense situation is fine if you are at home in certain circumstances - but fairly difficult to carry daily and/or carry concealed.

There are plenty of documented cases of people needing to shoot through something in self-defense both at home and in public - just read through a few Armed Citizen's in American Rifleman. A good many talk about armed perps breaking down a door with the homeowner on the other side - and the homeowner shooting through the door before the they've broken through it. I recall a number also involving cars and shooting through glass or a car door.

How many cases can you reference involving innocent bystanders shot with a fmj that went through when a hp wouldn't have?

You do know that police are far more likely, as in ten times more likely, to shoot or injure an innocent person or bystander than a citizen shooting in self-defense is.

And hp's are not a magic talisman, they do fail to expand and can overpenetrate and so how do they in anyway excuse or relieve a person of being aware and responsible of where they are shooting in terms of their target and what lies beyond it. In otherwords, fmj or hp you still have to be aware of your target and what lies beyond it. Are you going to shoot with a hp becasue it will probably expand and probably won't overpenetrate when you wouldn't shoot with a fmj - how responsible is that.

Hp's actually make more sense for police - as a citizen and not a police officer - I am content to allow the attacker to leave if they wish and don't have to pusure them to effect an arrest or capture them - thus I less likely to find myself in a situation involving innocent bystanders who might come in the line of fire.

Edit to add:

1. If we follow this train of logic then one should never carry a hangun of sufficient caliber that could penetrate through a perp - to not take that trivial step would be irresponsble.

 

[Deanimator]

1. If we follow this train of logic then one should never carry a hangun of sufficient caliber that could penetrate through a perp - to not take that trivial step would be irresponsble.

There's a difference between, "It could" and "It could, so I don't care if it does and won't take ANY steps to lessen the likelihood." You can be good and sure there's a LOT of difference in court.

The JHP MAY not expand.
The FMJ WON'T expand.

A properly expanded JHP will PROBABLY not exit the body, and if it does, is LESS likely to fatally penetrate a bystander than a substantially intact FMJ.
A properly designed JHP will PROBABLY penetrate adequately.

Now explain again why I'd be unwilling to take a TRIVIAL measure to lessen the risks of overpenetration without meaningfully increasing the risk to my own safety?

 

[Shawn Dodson]

A properly expanded JHP will PROBABLY not exit the body...

A stereotype expectation based on a solid, center mass hit.

 

[Deanimator]

A stereotype expectation based on a solid, center mass hit.

What's MORE likely to exit the body and cause injury to an innocent third party?

Why would I want to use THAT when there's an acceptable alternative?

Stubborn?
Cheap?
Malicious?

 

[mack]

Now explain again why I'd be unwilling to take a TRIVIAL measure to lessen the risks of overpenetration without meaningfully increasing the risk to my own safety?


Uh, because of this in my previous post -


"There are plenty of documented cases of people needing to shoot through something in self-defense both at home and in public - just read through a few Armed Citizen's in American Rifleman. A good many talk about armed perps breaking down a door with the homeowner on the other side - and the homeowner shooting through the door before the they've broken through it. I recall a number also involving cars and shooting through glass or a car door.

How many cases can you reference involving innocent bystanders shot with a fmj that went through when a hp wouldn't have?"

and this -

"And hp's are not a magic talisman, they do fail to expand and can overpenetrate and so how do they in anyway excuse or relieve a person of being aware and responsible of where they are shooting in terms of their target and what lies beyond it. In otherwords, fmj or hp you still have to be aware of your target and what lies beyond it. Are you going to shoot with a hp becasue it will probably expand and probably won't overpenetrate when you wouldn't shoot with a fmj - how responsible is that."


I also object to your characterization of it as a trivial measure - because - one, you don't seem to think it is so trivial - and two, because I understand that the ability to penetrate can be important. Heck using your logic one would be irresposible to rely on a rifle, a magnum caliber handgun, or a shotgun loaded with anything more than rock salt or birdshot.

 

[Deanimator]

I also object to your characterization of it as a trivial measure - because - one, you don't seem to think it is so trivial - and two, because I understand that the ability to penetrate can be important.

Anybody who thinks that loading their magazines with proper JHPs ISN'T a trivial task is perhaps unsuited to the use of machinery in general or the use of firearms in particular.

 

[Shawn Dodson]

What's MORE likely to exit the body and cause injury to an innocent third party?

It depends on caliber. A blanket statement condemning all FMJ ammo is not credible.

 

[mack]

Well your unwillingness or inability to address the points I made twice now in my last two posts makes it painfully obvious that either you can't or won't address the substance of my objections. So I see little point in continuing this discussion. I believe individuals who read this thread will see that for what it is.

Also, please don't be obtuse - obviously my point in using trivial was in referrence to the choice of using fmj or hp and not about physically loading a magazine with cartridges. Or to put it more plainly, neither of us think the choice of fmj or hp is trivial.

 

[Zoidberg523]

I can understand the LEO's need for HP but in SD the only time you should pull you gun and fire is when you feel threatened with loss of life so in that situation collateral damage has to be accepted.

Are you JOKING??? Seriously? "Collateral damage has to be accepted"? I would say that in a self defense scenario, any collateral damage involving injury to a third party is a FAILURE. If you, in defense, shoot through an assailant and into a child, killing the child, is that acceptable collateral damage to you? I think that you need to reevaluate your self defense policy, or quit carrying a firearm.

 

[TCB in TN]

Anybody who thinks that loading their magazines with proper JHPs ISN'T a trivial task is perhaps unsuited to the use of machinery in general or the use of firearms in particular.

Please show me the data that shows that a FMJ bullet out of a .32 will penetrate further than a JHP out of a .45 or .357 or 9mm!

http://www.brassfetcher.com/index_files/Page921.htm

The .32 ACP cartridge is most commonly found in the smaller-sized mouseguns and can be expected to offer adequate penetration from any size handgun, when using FMJ ammunition.

This situation changes when using expanding ammunition like JHPs. Unless using a JHP that is optimized for the caliber (these exist, but are not offered commercially), you can expect good expansion and insufficient penetration or no expansion and satisfactory penetration.

Just a thought.......

 

[Bubba613]

I dont see that as a failure. I would see it as tragic and unfortunate but not a failure.
I would see failing to stop the bad guy as a failure. And if a small caliber HP round lodges in the arm or shoulder instead of making its way into the boiler room then someone made a bad decision about ammo.
The only time someone needs to be shooting at someone else is in dire fear. If he has time to consider angle of entry and possible exit and people behind him then he probably doesnt need to be shooting at all.

 

[huntsman]

Are you saying it's ok for YOU to shoot a toddler standing behind your assailant, but it's NOT ok for a cop to do it? I fail to see the connection between the NEED to defend yourself and the LACK of need to take MINOR steps to lessen the danger to innocent third parties.

You can go right ahead and "accept" the "collateral damage" if you use FMJ, get a through and through and hit ME. You'd better be willing to accept me (or my survivors) taking everything you own too.

I don't know about where you live, but here there's no such thing as a "justifiable accidental shooting", at least not in civil court. You own ALL of your fired bullets, no matter where they go, or why you shot them.

Ok I should have said the risk of collateral damage should be accepted.

You are putting an awful lot of confidence in the HP as far as penetration or lack there of.

All I'm saying is when you get to the point of discharging your gun it's because you would die if not so all that counts is stopping the threat to you, not what may happen to someone else who may or may not be near you.