I can see what you're saying too. I'm just sharing a one-off opinion. There's not enough data in front of me to conclude that knife attacks are more or less dangerous that gun fire.
For instance, a fmg round would definitely cause less damage than a hollowpoint
Hollowpoints only expand like 25% of the time. Maybe 20%? I forget now. I think the clothing wads up in the tip and prevents the expansion, so about 80% of the time the hollowpoint is just an FMJ anyways. I don't have the study link. There's probably an encyclopedia of arguments back and forth about it, knowing my fellow gun owners.
Shot placement is what really matters. Heart, lungs, head.
I worked at the Cabela's store in Glendale, AZ about 10 years ago and we took several brands in different pistol calibers, tested them, and framed the results. Remington Golden Sabers were also pretty reliable, as were Federal Hydro-Shocks.
Right. Ballistics are complex for sure. I've always found it interesting (and I don't currently have any sources and willing to accept that I'm wrong), that a .22lr can cause a lot of damage because it apparently has the tendency to hits your bones and can follow them through your body, causing more damage.
Fuck that, it's why I'm a guy that has a shot gun with a chamber full of rotation
00 buckshot, slug, 00 buckshot, slug, and so on.
Pepper, maybe death, and certain death 12 guage slug for follow up...maybe clean up, or maybe the next dumb ass in line next in line.
Bright light on front with strobe function to disorient.
I can see what you're saying too. I'm just sharing a one-off opinion. There's not enough data in front of me to conclude that knife attacks are more or less dangerous that gun fire.
For instance, a fmg round would definitely cause less damage than a hollowpoint
Hollowpoints only expand like 25% of the time. Maybe 20%? I forget now. I think the clothing wads up in the tip and prevents the expansion, so about 80% of the time the hollowpoint is just an FMJ anyways. I don't have the study link. There's probably an encyclopedia of arguments back and forth about it, knowing my fellow gun owners.
Shot placement is what really matters. Heart, lungs, head.
115gr 9mm is what I understand to be the better choice for HP. As well as quality ammo, as you say.
124 and 147 actually.
I worked at the Cabela's store in Glendale, AZ about 10 years ago and we took several brands in different pistol calibers, tested them, and framed the results. Remington Golden Sabers were also pretty reliable, as were Federal Hydro-Shocks.
Right. Ballistics are complex for sure. I've always found it interesting (and I don't currently have any sources and willing to accept that I'm wrong), that a .22lr can cause a lot of damage because it apparently has the tendency to hits your bones and can follow them through your body, causing more damage.
Hits your arm, comes out your shoulder or elbow.
That's some grade A gunshop talk right there. Firearms community is a place full of magical wonders.
A trauma surgeon’s experience says to use a rifle if possible.
https://www.policemag.com/374542/a-trauma-surgeon-talks-about-wound-ballistics-and-stopping-power
What he said is correct, and a 40gr hollow 22lr does plenty damage. Would I choose it over 9mm? no.
Fuck that, it's why I'm a guy that has a shot gun with a chamber full of rotation 00 buckshot, slug, 00 buckshot, slug, and so on. Pepper, maybe death, and certain death 12 guage slug for follow up...maybe clean up, or maybe the next dumb ass in line next in line. Bright light on front with strobe function to disorient.
The problem there is that 00 buck and slugs typically have way more penetration than a non-FMJ .223/5.56.
Here's some interesting tests on drywall for a range of calibers and bullet types:
http://how-i-did-it.org/drywall/results.html