Clothing matters?

Discussion in 'Concealed Carrying & Personal Protection' started by Kain, Sep 12, 2009.

  1. Kain

    Kain Member

    155
    0
    16
    I've read several people mention wanting to carry larger calibers for personal defense in the winter in colder climates to counter act the effects of additional clothing an attacker would likely be wearing. I just got to wondering...does the extra clothing really matter? I mean even a heavy winter parka is mostly just air. With the possible exception of leather it seems to me that most clothing materials would have a negligable effect on ballistics if any. Further more wouldn't you more worry about an attacker being fatter or more muscular than average? Seems physical bulk would have a greater overall impact on slowing a bullet. Has any real testing been done on this topic, or is this just heresay?
     
  2. IGETEVEN

    IGETEVEN New Member

    8,358
    4
    0
    If you have to shoot an attacker within a 8-15 foot radius or closer, in a life threatening defense situation, any caliber of carry weapon, from a .38 to .45 with JHP preferred, and FMJ is acceptable for ammunition, it will stop and detour any attacker, even if he's wearing 2 parkas, muscular or fat. Bullet placement is the key and a double tap, if possible is preferred, in different locations of the body. Preferable center mass, upper chest, neck, and head. Under drug influence, until the threat stops. You want tissue and internal organ damage sustained by separate bullet placement. To achieve this and to function properly under stress, pressure and adrenaline influx, it all boils down to practice, practice, practice and more practice and knowing your carry weapon. Did I mention practice. JMHO and a little real experience. If anyone else knows or has experienced anything else different to the contrary, please share your comments on this subject, mine is not the gospel by any means.

    Jack
     

  3. Kain

    Kain Member

    155
    0
    16
    I understand that, but you didn't really answer my question.

    Does extra clothing make a difference to ballistics? Or is this just a myth?
     
  4. Dillinger

    Dillinger New Member

    23,972
    1
    0
    Well, let me ask you this. Is real world experience enough for you?

    The Tacoma PD switched from a .40 cal Glock/Beretta to the .45 ACP 1911 because they were having problems in shoot outs with wannabes in Tacoma.

    Tacoma is a seaport, and the have both a heavy wind off the Puget Sound, and the temperature in the winter months drops into the low 30's with wind chill pushing it into the teens....

    On several occassions of police reports, prior to the switch, showed that Tacoma PD officers, in shoot outs, had rounds that did not penetrate deep enough to cause fatal wounds, or failed to penetrate through exterior clothing at all.

    Tacoma's Hilltop Neighborhood was one of the more "violence" prone sections of Western Washington for many, many years...

    With FMJ ammo, I do not believe that clothing makes that big of a difference. But with hollowpoints, as soon as you encounter resistance, the round begins to expand.

    Food for thought...

    JD
     
  5. Kain

    Kain Member

    155
    0
    16
    If there is scientific data I'd love to see it. (I've been searching for almost an hour and still haven't found anything) But real world experience is signifigant data. I guess I didn't really take the full metal jacket vs hollow point argument into account. But even with that story there are several pontentially fouling variables:

    1. New firearms
    2. Possibly more training to familiarize with said new firearms
    3. More accurate shooting
    4. Simple statistical variance
    5. Shooting distance

    Still a strong argument for clothing stopping a bullet.
     
  6. Dillinger

    Dillinger New Member

    23,972
    1
    0
    Well, would the FBI and a US Patent be enough??

    US Patent number 6805057
     
  7. Kain

    Kain Member

    155
    0
    16
    More info, but still not really concrete.

    In fact near the end it says that the denim test (the only clothing used) actually caused the hollow point to OVER penetrate due to blocking the hole in the bullet. Though who wears 4 layers of denim is a good question... but I digress. It would seem any clothing would have the same effect. Especially if it were away from the body, thus giving it time to have an effect on the bullet.

    So, now I'm more confused than ever.
     
  8. Dillinger

    Dillinger New Member

    23,972
    1
    0
    Well, I suppose you could take some hollowpoints to the outdoor range, put some Northface Jackets/Carhardt Jackets on a couple of phonebooks and see what develops....*shrug*

    There is a reason gang members took to wearing big, heavy, winter, jackets of their favorite sports team.

    I have some data on FBI tests for handguns, but it's late and quite frankly it's been a long day. I have no idea what laptop I have that stuff on, but I will look.

    I think the best thing you could do, is find an outdoor range, take a couple of phone books, wrap them in some old clothes and test it for yourself....

    JD
     
  9. rifleman1

    rifleman1 New Member

    2,007
    1
    0
    this is great advice
     
  10. Franciscomv

    Franciscomv New Member

    1,257
    0
    0
  11. Kain

    Kain Member

    155
    0
    16

    That test seemed to agree with the previous FBI tests.

    Full Metal Jacket rounds vs. Clothing: Clothing dosen't make a difference.
    Hollow point rounds vs. Clothing: Bullet acts like a full metal jacket round

    So, it seems like heavy clothing signifigantly effecting ballistics is more myth than fact. It may reduce the lethality of hollow point rounds, but does so regardless of caliber. So, carrying a higher caliber round in the winter time is apparantly unnecessary. Moreover in the case of hollow point ammunition larger caliber may even be counter productive, as the greater surface area drags more passing through clothing.
     
  12. feedsasquatch

    feedsasquatch New Member

    260
    0
    0
    Based on the box of Truth, I think it would be MORE effective to carry .45 ACP than other rounds, because .45 ball is better than any other FMJ round available.

    I figured clothing would hurt expansion somewhat, but I didn't realize that JHP didn't expand at all with thick clothing... Man I need to get a 1911 for my concealed carry. KY winters get bitter cold.
     
  13. Franciscomv

    Franciscomv New Member

    1,257
    0
    0
    Luckily for me in Argentina, the nice folks at the federal government made my life easier by banning hollow points for self defense. We're stuck with FMJ or LRN. :(

    Anyway, if winter clothes are going to keep the bullet from expanding, then you might want to use ammo that makes bigger holes. There's some truth to the saying "a 9mm might expand, but a .45 won't shrink".
     
  14. hogger129

    hogger129 New Member

    259
    0
    0
    Not really sure. I would think a bullet would kill someone all the same, regardless of how heavy they are or what clothing they were wearing. Can a normal person buy body armor anywhere? Or is that illegal too?
     
  15. hogger129

    hogger129 New Member

    259
    0
    0
    I'm a 1911 .45 fan at heart, but would 9mm FMJ be a good round to carry for concealment? 9mm FMJ has excellent penetration and it's accurate. Only problem with it is it lacks stopping power compared to .45.
     
  16. feedsasquatch

    feedsasquatch New Member

    260
    0
    0
    Isn't the point of carrying any round to get "stopping power"? I want the best stopping any pistol round can get me. And historically, .45 ACP FMJ is much better than 9mm FMJ...
     
  17. hogger129

    hogger129 New Member

    259
    0
    0
    And that's half the reason why I prefer a .45 to a 9mm. 9mm from what I hear overpenetrates, at least with FMJ. Plus side with 9mm is its availability, lower cost compared to other calibers, plus should you have to use your CCW, you're less likely to get nailed to the wall by lawyers and such because 9mm is what police carry, it's not as lethal of a round as .45ACP or something bigger, therefore the average citizen is more justified in self defense with a 9mm vs. something more lethal like a .45ACP. Still when you weigh in the upsides of 9mm, I still would rather have a .45ACP. More stopping power. I mean really, for a conceal carry, are 10 or more rounds really necessary? Nice to have, but is it a necessity? No. 8 rounds is plenty. Especially with .45ACP where one shot can take your target down as opposed to a few shots with a 9mm FMJ.

    If it were me, I'd go 1911 all the way, no questions asked. Colt is #1 in my book. If a .45ACP round isn't enough, go for a .38 Special snub-nose because you can put .357 Magnum rounds in it. I'm sure you can also get revolvers made for .357 or .44 that have really short barrels like a snub-nose.
     
    Last edited: Sep 14, 2009
  18. hogger129

    hogger129 New Member

    259
    0
    0
    Still, accuracy is a factor to a point too. Availability, cost and the question of whether or not should you have to pull your CCW, are you legally justified in using that amount of force? I have heard of people getting in trouble because they had a 10mm or something of bigger caliber where the state said they did not need to use that amount of force. It sort of eliminates the point of conceal carry, but still, I can't afford a good lawyer and don't want to get prosecuted by the state.
     
  19. Dillinger

    Dillinger New Member

    23,972
    1
    0
    Do you have any sources on that claim?

    I have never heard of anyone, in a legitimate shoot, that was taken to task on the size of their weapon in respect to an otherwise clean case. Never once.

    Fact is, many police departments ISSUE .45 ACP as their carry gun of choice. Tacoma PD happens to be a department local to me that does so. Many other agencies issues the .40S&W to their officers.

    The .40 was basically designed to be a hi-cap attempt at .45 power for smaller handed FBI agents. ( and any lawyer with a halfway decent understanding of the problem at hand can make that arguement all day long.

    Even if you shot someone with a shotgun, if it was a justified case of self defense, they are not going to turn the case into "non-justified" because the guy is "twice as dead". :rolleyes:

    JD
     
  20. hogger129

    hogger129 New Member

    259
    0
    0
    Read it somewhere on the web. Don't recall where exactly. I don't know if anyone else knows or has this law in their state, but I heard here in Wisconsin, it's illegal to pull a gun on a home invader unless they are also carrying a gun. Like you can only respond with equal force or something? Anyone heard of this before? I don't know if such a law exists, it was just a rumor going around at work that we were talking about.