[willbond]

I'm a believer in the FBI's "Penetration First" Philosophy. I don't think I have to worry about adequate penetration with my 357 Sig, or .44 mag., or 7.62x25 Tokarev ammo, but my question is this:

For smaller caliber/lower powered rounds such as .380 auto and the .32 auto, would anyone consider going with hardball ammo, rather than hollow points as a personal defense round, in order to (hopefully) insure adequate penetration?

I've considered it, even though I still have Starfires and Hydrashocks in my Kel-Tec P3AT magazines.

 

[Nickle1]

I'm a believer in the FBI's "Penetration First" Philosophy. I don't think I have to worry about adequate penetration with my 357 Sig, or .44 mag., or 7.62x25 Tokarev ammo, but my question is this:

For smaller caliber/lower powered rounds such as .380 auto and the .32 auto, would anyone consider going with hardball ammo, rather than hollow points as a personal defense round, in order to (hopefully) insure adequate penetration?

I've considered it, even though I still have Starfires and Hydrashocks in my Kel-Tec P3AT magazines.

Those rounds have plenty of penetration power for a conceal carry purpose. Most attacks you would need to use your ccw for are going to be with in 20 feet.

You only need 2 inches of penetration in order for the wound to be lethal, .380 has 200 ft lbs. at the distance which is plenty of force. Penetration doesn’t mean the bullet has to pierce the skin, common myth about kevlar vests. Just becasue you don't bleed outside doesn;t mean your not dying on the inside. Transfer of force is key, hollow points prove they have a very high transfer rate.

 

[MrTuffPaws]

For two inches of penetration to kill someone, you would have to hit them either in the head or the heart, and even then, it would be questionable.

The last time I checked 380's ballistics, it had about 5 inches of penetration with JHP. If you want more, then FMJ is the way to go.

 

[Nickle1]

For two inches of penetration to kill someone, you would have to hit them either in the head or the heart, and even then, it would be questionable.

The last time I checked 380's ballistics, it had about 5 inches of penetration with JHP. If you want more, then FMJ is the way to go.

Where else do plan on shooting an attacker? Not limited to the heart and head. Terminal penetration for the human body is 6cm or 2 inches, at least that’s what my brother in-law says, he should know, vascular surgeon.

"You can lacerate a kidney, spleen, stomach, intestines, liver, sever and artery, all without even breaking the skin. All of those injuries can be life threatening and would defiantly cause enough pain to incapacitate an attacker. "

 

[orc4hire]

Huh.... I didn't think it would even let you post here if you forget to log in. Oh well.

 

[Nickle1]

You only need 2 inches of penetration to have a terminal wound, meaning that is the minimum. The .380 has enough force to 3 times that, unless your shooting the guy a block away. I would feel completly safe with carrying a .380, I have one a pa-63. As far as that 300 pound jackass in the pizza place, you would have been close enough to stop him with a .22 let alone a .380.

It doesn't take as much as people think to cause a terminal wound.

 

[orc4hire]

It doesn't take as much as people think to cause a terminal wound.

Yes, the person may bleed out on the operating table some hours after stomping you to death, for whatever comfort that might be to your widow.

The issue is not what will cause a terminal wound, but what will cause sufficient immediate damage to stop the fight. The opinion of every professional I've ever heard from on the subject is that the .380 cannot be depended on to do so.

 

[willbond]

I agree with orc4hire. My question is this: Would it not be better for a .380 not to expand, thereby making it more likely to penetrate far enough to go through something vital and immediately incapacitating?

 

[agalindo]

I posted as Guest with the links to Firearms tactical. According to some of the test done by the site there are several .380 JHP rounds that come very close to meeting the 12 inches of penetration some with 11.5 inches on several shots. If you can get 11.5 to 12 inches and have an expanding bullet to create a larger wound channel then that is optimal.

 

[Shnozzer-xd-9]

IMO, I believe no matter what ammo you use, if you actually shoot someone, they're gonna be so surprised that you shot them, they'll prolly flee right then. I do not carry because I don't feel the need to, but if I did, I would more than likely use WWB since that is what I normally shoot and I'm fairly accurate with it. I have enough confidence in my shooting skills to be able to fire two rounds off in his chest at the normal range an attack occurs. Like I said before, the attacker would probably be stunned that he's actually been shot, to actually carry on the attack. Just my .02 though.

 

[whtvrsclvr]

IMO, I believe no matter what ammo you use, if you actually shoot someone, they're gonna be so surprised that you shot them, they'll prolly flee right then. I do not carry because I don't feel the need to, but if I did, I would more than likely use WWB since that is what I normally shoot and I'm fairly accurate with it. I have enough confidence in my shooting skills to be able to fire two rounds off in his chest at the normal range an attack occurs. Like I said before, the attacker would probably be stunned that he's actually been shot, to actually carry on the attack. Just my .02 though.

a whole lot of probably wouldn't make me very confident.[/b]

 

[[TASF]Overkill]

Part of using JHP is hoping it doesn't rip right through them and kill 6 people in the house behind them.

 

[parawiss]

I'm a believer in the FBI's "Penetration First" Philosophy. I don't think I have to worry about adequate penetration with my 357 Sig, or .44 mag., or 7.62x25 Tokarev ammo, but my question is this:

For smaller caliber/lower powered rounds such as .380 auto and the .32 auto, would anyone consider going with hardball ammo, rather than hollow points as a personal defense round, in order to (hopefully) insure adequate penetration?

I've considered it, even though I still have Starfires and Hydrashocks in my Kel-Tec P3AT magazines.

Those rounds have plenty of penetration power for a conceal carry purpose. Most attacks you would need to use your ccw for are going to be with in 20 feet.

You only need 2 inches of penetration in order for the wound to be lethal, .380 has 200 ft lbs. at the distance which is plenty of force. Penetration doesn’t mean the bullet has to pierce the skin, common myth about kevlar vests. Just becasue you don't bleed outside doesn;t mean your not dying on the inside. Transfer of force is key, hollow points prove they have a very high transfer rate.

I have been hit with body armor on in iraq and they dont play any games with that ****. They medevac you urgent no matter what, to ensure there is no internal bleeding. I also have known a couple people (1 was FBI, 1 personal security) that died after being hit with vests on. the FBI guy was hit with a .357 that ruptured his heart, the personal security guy had ateuma neurothorax as a result of a close range shotgun blast. he took 4 out of 9 balls of shot in the mid torso that ruptured his diaphragm and caused his lungs to collapse. a very painful way to go.

 

[Delija]

Overkill]Part of using JHP is hoping it doesn't rip right through them and kill 6 people in the house behind them.

Knowing what's behind them is crucial. Forget about "ripping right through them"...what about MISSING? Which happens a LOT!!!

Peace,
D.

 

[parawiss]

I agree with orc4hire. My question is this: Would it not be better for a .380 not to expand, thereby making it more likely to penetrate far enough to go through something vital and immediately incapacitating?

you do not need to penetrate something vital to do lethal damage. a nice hollowpoint is more likely to take the fight out of someone than a ball round because the energy transfer happens over a shorter range. even when dealing with body armor a hollowpoint takes away the ability of the impact being slowed over a longer distance reducing that sudden impact and actually will be more likely to knock a person back. This is only true with soft armor types though. Ball rounds in soft tissue also will not have good stopping power. and since about half is soft and half is hard (on a average person) hollowpoints would still be better for eliminating the threat. compare it to being hit with a sledge hammer or a ballpeen hammer. sure the ballpeen hammer can kill or hurt a lot if you hit some hard tissue but in soft tissue it aint a thing. now take a sledgehammer and that mofo is going down no matter where you hit them. so the penetration factor is not really of much concern in a defense situation. you hit them with a HP and they are going down, and its going to do more damage in either hard or soft with the trauma factor included. a ball type round (non HP) is really only good against harder tissues, so unless you can hit the head or high center torso, or pelvis even, you are not going to do much.,

 

[parawiss]

Overkill]Part of using JHP is hoping it doesn't rip right through them and kill 6 people in the house behind them.

Knowing what's behind them is crucial. Forget about "ripping right through them"...what about MISSING? Which happens a LOT!!!

Peace,
D.

this is also very true. you miss and hit someone, you are criminally liable for negligence, unless you have johnny cochran. and the average hit % in most firefights. less than .5% so where are 99.5% of the rounds going? use non HP ammo and you may never know. with HP it may hit a house or car but at worst it will only hurt a bystander. and HPs do not ricochete like ball rounds. They more or less bounce to a stop and are all deformed. So for your saftey and others use HPs for defensive purposes. It is also harder to trace a round that is all deformed then a ball round which remains mostly intact.

 

[[TASF]Overkill]

actually will be more likely to knock a person back.

Like in the movies when someone gets shot and flies out a window?

 

[Shnozzer-xd-9]

IMO, I believe no matter what ammo you use, if you actually shoot someone, they're gonna be so surprised that you shot them, they'll prolly flee right then. I do not carry because I don't feel the need to, but if I did, I would more than likely use WWB since that is what I normally shoot and I'm fairly accurate with it. I have enough confidence in my shooting skills to be able to fire two rounds off in his chest at the normal range an attack occurs. Like I said before, the attacker would probably be stunned that he's actually been shot, to actually carry on the attack. Just my .02 though.

a whole lot of probably wouldn't make me very confident.[/b]

And if he isn't stunned, I'd probably shoot him again.

 

[Delija]

[ unless you have johnny cochran. .

Johnny Cochran died today or yesterday so forget that plan!!!

Peace,
D.

 

[parawiss]

[ unless you have johnny cochran. .

Johnny Cochran died today or yesterday so forget that plan!!!

Peace,
D.

what ****. i am screwed then. damn that sucks