Why do you want penetration? - Page 3
Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com > Handguns > Concealed Carrying & Personal Protection > Why do you want penetration?

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-26-2011, 04:53 AM   #21
WDB
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
WDB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Nonya,WA
Posts: 3,991
Liked 2 Times on 2 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IGETEVEN View Post
And as a happy medium and something I have done for a long time, is why I stagger load my carry weapon's magazines (usually a .45) with ball and HP rounds.

Now school is out.


Jack that is a great point, I don't know if most do this but it's something I do simply because I don't know the girth of the person, the clothing they may be wearing or the stance they will have in advance if I need to use my firearm.
__________________

Those who hammer their guns into plows will plow for those who do not." ~ Thomas Jefferson

Quote:
Originally Posted by Benning Boy View Post
If you're really bored, I'm your huckleberry. If you really want a challenge, I'm the one.

If you're really smart, you'll just peddle your paint.
WDB is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2011, 12:04 PM   #22
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Wambli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 947
Liked 46 Times on 28 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cory2 View Post
Honestly, I don't understand why a round having more penetration is a good thing. As long as a round can get through clothing plus 6-8 inches of flesh it seems like that would be more than sufficient for self defence purposes.

Usually when I see this brought up, it is when people are comparing the .45acp to the 9mm, and the 9mm people say the 9mm has more penetration... Why do you want more penetration than a .45? The .45 has plenty enough to do the trick and seems like any more is just risking over-penetration and potential collateral damage. I always thought that the ideal round would expend all of its energy inside of the target, if you have a round with 13 inches of penetration (i.e. a 9mm) than you arent going to succeed in that endeavor. I have a 43inch chest and its only ~11 inches deep, so 13 inches=overpenetration. Or is there something I am overlooking in this?

Also, I don't want this to become some debate about which round is better than another, Lets keep it on terminal ballistics please
Because it is rare to have a bad guy standing squarely in front of you naked. Rounds have to go through clothing, sometime veary heavy winter clothing including things like leather etc. In some cases you assailant is not a 150 guy. Can you imagine how much material and tissue a bullet has to go through to get to the good stuff on a 300lb dude standing sidewways wearing heavy winter clothing?

And last but not least the BG might be shooting at you from behind stuff like overturned table, doors, drywall, a couch, your flatscreen TV (which by the way we xeperimented with and the one I shot stopped a 200gr 45acp Hornady TAP round dead on it's tracks from 10 feet) or other type of cover.
__________________
Wambli is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2011, 02:19 PM   #23
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Wambli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 947
Liked 46 Times on 28 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quest50 View Post


Good information to know. Next chance I get, I'm gonna have to do a little "test" with various items that could be potential cover...

On a related note, I know for a fact that a 7.62x39 fmj will go straight through a lone cinder block.



This.
You'll be surprised how many things around a house will stop an HP bullet dead on it's tracks... A little extra info, it was a plasma screen. I did not have an LED or LCE to play with.
__________________
Wambli is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2011, 03:53 PM   #24
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Recon 173's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 191
Liked 3 Times on 3 Posts
Likes Given: 2

Default

It's not a matter of over-penetration. It is a matter of getting any effective penetration. There are reports of people being shot in the head only to have the bullet deflected by the bones of the skull and slide around to the other side of the skull under the skin. Some of these reported bullets were small caliber and a number were of medium and large caliber pistol ammunition. A bullet that has good penetration gives the shooter a slight tactical advantage when it comes to effective shot placement. Now that means many things but going through thick/dense bone is one reason why some people want penetration. Penetrating a car door or other defensive shield could be considered a substitute for what the skull bone does: deflect or stop bullets that have little or no penetration abilities. If you can penetrate a car door AND get good shot placement when doing so, guess who wins the day? Guess who is going to have a bad day? The ability to penetrate a target is a form of added tactical option that allows a shooter more choices in some situations, not all. If you are afraid to use ammo that might over-penetrate, don't carry a gun at all. The reason I say this is because any bullet can over-penetrate a chosen target to hit something else down the road. And it doesn't matter what kind of ammo you use. Over-penetration is always a potential problem but it is a very rare problem as far as police shootings indicate. So you either carry a gun or you don't carry one if over-penetration is a major concern for you.

__________________
Recon 173 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2011, 11:27 PM   #25
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Mt Airy,NC
Posts: 155
Liked 1 Times on 1 Posts
Likes Given: 5

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dillinger View Post
Let me ask you all this:

How many rounds fired by police officers in shoot out conditions HIT their intended target??

1 out of 4? Meaning a police officer under duress hits 25% of the time?

2 out of 4? Meaning a police officer under duress hits 50% of the time?
Actually, Police Officers hit under 15% of the time. MUCH worse than you'd ever hope .
__________________
victorzamora is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2011, 12:38 AM   #26
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
CHLChris's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Portland,Oregon
Posts: 2,523
Liked 190 Times on 129 Posts
Likes Given: 89

Default

Talking about overpenetration 85% of the time!

__________________
.45acp, .40 S&W, 9mm, .38 Spl, .380 acp, 22lr
12 gauge, .223/5.56x45mm, 30-30 Winchester


2 Chron. 7:14 Christians must seek His face
CHLChris is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2011, 12:51 AM   #27
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Birmingham,AL
Posts: 300
Liked 5 Times on 5 Posts
Likes Given: 45

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by victorzamora View Post
Actually, Police Officers hit under 15% of the time. MUCH worse than you'd ever hope .
Actually, the average has gotten some better...to around 20% on the last FBI report I saw (last year I believe). While still dismal, at least it is inching up. Many police agencies still don't TRAIN their officers to shoot, but merely to "qualify" even though the SCOTUS mandated that firearms training include multiple targets, moving targets and low light shooting as well as metal judgement. In short, police firearms training is supposed to be REALISTIC. The FATs program has, I think helped in the judgement area anyway.

Officers (and civilians) who care about their lives as well as those they care about (and those they've sworn to protect) seek training from one or more of the training academies, i.e. Thunder Ranch, Gunsite, Front Sight, etc. at best, or the best local training they can obtain at a minimum.

Most of the departmental " firearms training" I've received as a patrol officer over the years has been on a static range with maybe 10% having multiple targets, 2% in darkness and 2% moving targets (clay pigeons with a shotgun).In contrast, the firearms and force-on-force training I received while with the tactical team was real training. I wouldn't trade it for anything.

There is a push among all of the prominent police trainers and training organizations towards realistic close and extreme close quarters training including shooting. But, as always, budgetary, liability and safety concerns keep raising their ugly heads as well as a resistance to change, even when proven it's for the best, not to mention being mandated by the Supreme Court.

The POST minimum standard for firearms qualification is just that...MINIMUM. As a result, most "firearms training" offered at many agencies is based on that minimum standard, not reality. The times are unrealistic as are the courses of fire, i.e. why is 5 yards the closest officers shoot targets when they qualify, when 85-90% of all OIS occur at less than 10 FEET! There have been a LOT of OIS within 10 feet where neither the officer or his/her opponent hit each other! And, sadly others within that distance where the officer missed and the BG didn't.

Most officers I ask 9in person or in police forums) don't do any shooting much less training except when they HAVE to, although there are exceptions. We exceptions are sadly in the minority though. The subject of LEOs seeking and paying for advanced firearms training on their own time and out of their own pocket has been discussed in more than one police forum I'm a member of with the majority either whining about it "costing too much" (even though they post about their vacation(s), lake houses, etc.) or boasting that they "already know how to shoot" and denying they need any advanced training.

*I'll close my rant with the observation that a great deal of the very LEOs who say they don't need or won't seek any advanced training also speak the loudest against concealed carry in particular and 2A topics in general in the same police only forums...and most seem to live and work in blue states, or blue cities.
__________________
Davo45 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2011, 01:14 AM   #28
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Mt Airy,NC
Posts: 155
Liked 1 Times on 1 Posts
Likes Given: 5

Default

I can't imagine being a police officer. Free ammo, and yet the majority of them don't take advantage of it?? I'll take it!!!

__________________
victorzamora is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2011, 01:16 AM   #29
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Mt Airy,NC
Posts: 155
Liked 1 Times on 1 Posts
Likes Given: 5

Default

I do have to say that I was unaware that the number had gone up. I'm glad that it has!

__________________
victorzamora is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2011, 04:03 AM   #30
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Birmingham,AL
Posts: 300
Liked 5 Times on 5 Posts
Likes Given: 45

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by victorzamora View Post
I can't imagine being a police officer. Free ammo, and yet the majority of them don't take advantage of it?? I'll take it!!!
Not unless you're at a large agency, and then probably have to be a Fed. My current agency buys each officer 50 rounds of Speer 155 gn GDHP (duty ammo) a year, we shoot those 50 rounds and get another box at our 2nd qualification and get no more than 100 rounds of 155-180gn FMJ unless somebody didn't qualify. We also get 100 rounds of 5.56mm Ball ammo to train and qualify with (qualify once a year with the patrol rifles). We aren't issued new duty ammo for the rifles every year or bean bag rounds for the orange stocked 12 gauge pump shotguns marked and designated as "Less Than Lethal" every year.

This is actually the first agency I've worked for what actually bought duty ammo or rifle ammo. My 1st and 2nd paid agencies didn't provide ANY ammo, we had to buy our own, including qualification ammo.

When I started as a Reserve Deputy with Mobile county in 1990 I learned that the county commission bought 100 rounds of .38 or 9mm per sworn deputy per month....and that only a handful of folks went to the range. The result, we got to shoot 50 rounds a DAY and as much as we wanted during the last week of the month...provided we bring our brass back. Mobile County had what I thought was a sweet range back then....steel pop up targets of various sizes, dueling post targets, shoot/no shoot targets.

One of the regulars was a Gunsite graduate and took me under his wing. We both had 1911's and reloaded, so I'm sure that had something to do with it.
He taught me a lot more about combat pistol craft than I ever learned at the POST academy, which was not much. Even there it seemed like they were mainly interested in ensuring we could shoot enough holes in paper targets on a static range. We had a whole 1 hour of low light shooting (when most OIS shootings occur).

Three guys on the Sheriff's PPC Team in my class didn't even hit their flipping targets in low light! Why? They couldn't see their black sights on their PPC revolvers! They used their PPC revolvers during the practice run and qualification runs, and one of them was awarded Top Gun! I was the only trainee they'd EVER had to: 1. qualify with both DAO (Glock 17) and SA (SA 1911-A1 .45) and revolver (a borrowed S&W model 19), and 2. shoot a 100/100 with an auto loading pistol (the Glock).

With the budget cuts happening all over the country I doubt many state or local agencies are buying very much ammo. The Federales of the other hand, just put in a requisition form in quadruplicate and send it through the system and presto! They get what they want, even if the Federal Reserve has to print up a few more million to cover it.
__________________
Davo45 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Firearms Forum Replies Last Post
Penetration - velocity vs size planenut Ammunition & Reloading 7 03-19-2010 10:52 PM
Penetration Power pacman Revolver Handguns 10 10-23-2009 12:59 AM
Apartment wall penetration? cko Concealed Carrying & Personal Protection 8 08-17-2009 01:59 PM
Handgun Penetration xxxmikey General Handgun Discussion 22 07-10-2009 02:56 AM