Why one cop carries 145 rounds of ammo

[Aaron1776]

I guess you can train and plan to the aberration. How many shootings will take that many rounds OR GIVE YOU ENOUGH TIME TO FIRE THAT MANY ROUNDS? Not many. You can carry more rounds, but you can't make more time.

I wonder if he'll switch back when his 9mm fails to sufficiently penetrate an intermediate barrier, or hits safety glass and prematurely fragments causing minimal damage to the target.

THIS

Also, having a long gun immediately accessible sounds great, but I can tell you the ones saying that aren't cops. If you are immediately confronted by a violent suspect, trying to get your gun out of even the fastest racks is a good way to die. The whole fight took less than a minute. Spending 10 seconds of that stationary getting a gun out of the racK? You died.

If it turns into a pursuit, I'd rather not have my shotgun unsecure flopping around in the passenger seat, and if its a foot bail I'd rather not have my shotgun unsecure for just anyone to reach in and steal it.

This is a good point. I can see why you wouldn't want the long gun flopping around the front seat/floor if you had a wreck. But knowing you're going into a hot situation, would you want to think about risking it? This is an actual question, not a statement.

The officer first engaged with his handgun (which he had to do right away because of the nature of the conflict), that makes sense. But if the rifle had been in the passenger seat, he could have grabbed it when he bailed. This seems like a good thing? Why or why not?

 

[canav844]

And remember this was a single alleged gang member involved in a crime, gang members tend to operate in groups. With only 4 rounds left after one, I can only imagine how bad off things would have been with 2,3,4 or more. Let alone considering factors such as a jam, faulty mag or starting off with bullet setback issues and being left with only his BUG.

9 v. 45 is not as big a gap as I think most people make of it. Thoughts on Service Pistols, along with Duty and Self-Defense Ammo Recommendations - M4Carbine.net Forums

However what I do see in his adaptations, is now his BUG and his primary can share mags and ammo. And his AR is now up front. i really never understood what good a gun in the trunk does an officer in the front seat.

As far as application to EDC, there is an important fact to distinguish here, and that's that this officer had a duty to follow and fight, where as citizen EDC, it's more about being able to get to safety. That's not to say we can't come across someone who won't stop being a threat. And there is certainly prudence in planning for it, but I don't see this as every individual LTCH holder needs to carry 145 rounds minimum 100% of the time; and I still feel confident that 59-63 rounds depending on which BUG, should be plenty to get me to a place I'm not under threat, and leave me a few to get back to a long gun or home to reload.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

THIS



This is a good point. I can see why you wouldn't want the long gun flopping around the front seat/floor if you had a wreck. But knowing you're going into a hot situation, would you want to think about risking it? This is an actual question, not a statement.

The officer first engaged with his handgun (which he had to do right away because of the nature of the conflict), that makes sense. But if the rifle had been in the passenger seat, he could have grabbed it when he bailed. This seems like a good thing? Why or why not?

Sometimes you have time, usually you don't. I'm not taking it out of the rack every time I find out there's a suspect in my area. I have taken it down when I was behind the right vehicle, I was far enough back they didn't know I knew, and traffic was safe enough to let me steer with my knee for a second while I got it down. However, that's the more rare situation. Usually when you just wander across someone, like the cop in the story did, you aren't going to have all of those luxuries. You don't know for sure its the right car, you're traveling too fast to safely manipulate the rack, or you find yourself hip deep in poo before you can get to it.

Then keep in mind the area you are in and the availability of back up. Leaving your shotgun in the floor board on the interstate with two other cops cars there? well, its probably there when you come back. In a densely populated area with no one by your car? You may have just armed someone who's now behind you.

 

[Aaron1776]

Sometimes you have time, usually you don't. I'm not taking it out of the rack every time I find out there's a suspect in my area. I have taken it down when I was behind the right vehicle, I was far enough back they didn't know I knew, and traffic was safe enough to let me steer with my knee for a second while I got it down. However, that's the more rare situation. Usually when you just wander across someone, like the cop in the story did, you aren't going to have all of those luxuries. You don't know for sure its the right car, you're traveling too fast to safely manipulate the rack, or you find yourself hip deep in poo before you can get to it.

Then keep in mind the area you are in and the availability of back up. Leaving your shotgun in the floor board on the interstate with two other cops cars there? well, its probably there when you come back. In a densely populated area with no one by your car? You may have just armed someone who's now behind you.

Ahh now I see. Thanks!! Rep inbound.

 

[Aaron1776]

And remember this was a single alleged gang member involved in a crime, gang members tend to operate in groups. With only 4 rounds left after one, I can only imagine how bad off things would have been with 2,3,4 or more. Let alone considering factors such as a jam, faulty mag or starting off with bullet setback issues and being left with only his BUG.

.

Cop or no, if you're alone against multiple opponents in a gunfight, the only thing you should be doing is laying down suppressive fire and getting the heck out of there. Otherwise you're just asking to get pinned and flanked. Even the stupid bad guys will figure this out if they're as determined as the guy was in this story.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

9 v. 45 is not as big a gap as I think most people make of it. Thoughts on Service Pistols, along with Duty and Self-Defense Ammo Recommendations - M4Carbine.net Forums

Holy crap, I'm tired of that picture. Yes, there's little difference when you shoot a block of ballistic gel at 90 degrees from the surface and with no intermediate barriers. If its an ideal shot into a block of consistent density block of goo that's attacking you, great.

However, there's a very real difference on non-ideal shots. Shots that hit bone at odd angles, shots that have to go through glass first, shots that hit a bicep and start to tumble/expand before entering the torso, etc. etc. Then there can be a dramatic difference. Real world data simply doesn't bare out the "all calibers are basically the same", which is why you see so few departments issuing 9mm any longer. If the performance was the same, and with budgets the way they are, 9mm would be the hot ticket. However, real world events show that IT SUCKS WHEN YOU HAVE TO SHOOT THROUGH A BARRIER. For civilian EDC, that's fine, your odds of being attacked by a mugger with a large sheet of safety glass between you is basically none. For a uniformed patrol officer who is ROUTINELY in contact with potentially violent subjects in automobiles, its a stupid choice.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Holy crap, I'm tired of that picture. Yes, there's little difference when you shoot a block of ballistic gel at 90 degrees from the surface and with no intermediate barriers. If its an ideal shot into a block of consistent density block of goo that's attacking you, great.

However, there's a very real difference on non-ideal shots. Shots that hit bone at odd angles, shots that have to go through glass first, shots that hit a bicep and start to tumble/expand before entering the torso, etc. etc. Then there can be a dramatic difference. Real world data simply doesn't bare out the "all calibers are basically the same", which is why you see so few departments issuing 9mm any longer. If the performance was the same, and with budgets the way they are, 9mm would be the hot ticket. However, real world events show that IT SUCKS WHEN YOU HAVE TO SHOOT THROUGH A BARRIER. For civilian EDC, that's fine, your odds of being attacked by a mugger with a large sheet of safety glass between you is basically none. For a uniformed patrol officer who is ROUTINELY in contact with potentially violent subjects in automobiles, its a stupid choice.

You mean we don't live in a perfect world where everything works just like the brochure says it should? Say it isn't so!

 

[Aaron1776]

Holy crap, I'm tired of that picture. Yes, there's little difference when you shoot a block of ballistic gel at 90 degrees from the surface and with no intermediate barriers. If its an ideal shot into a block of consistent density block of goo that's attacking you, great.

However, there's a very real difference on non-ideal shots. Shots that hit bone at odd angles, shots that have to go through glass first, shots that hit a bicep and start to tumble/expand before entering the torso, etc. etc. Then there can be a dramatic difference. Real world data simply doesn't bare out the "all calibers are basically the same", which is why you see so few departments issuing 9mm any longer. If the performance was the same, and with budgets the way they are, 9mm would be the hot ticket. However, real world events show that IT SUCKS WHEN YOU HAVE TO SHOOT THROUGH A BARRIER. For civilian EDC, that's fine, your odds of being attacked by a mugger with a large sheet of safety glass between you is basically none. For a uniformed patrol officer who is ROUTINELY in contact with potentially violent subjects in automobiles, its a stupid choice.

You and me both pal. That picture shows nothing but ideal circumstances, which aren't real life. I work in an ER where I see the end result of those "non-ideal" shots all of the time. Is 9mm OK for civilian EDC? Sure, But I wouldn't be so sure that you're going to have a clear path to your target. Non-LEOs also have a decent chance of shooting their assailents at odd angles and through crap like objects in their home, thick jackets, through their own car window, (ever been stuck in traffic with a road rager?) etc.

Good luck with the 9mm performing the same way the .45 does.


If you want to carry a 9mm, there are valid reasons to do so. Saying that it does the same damage on average as a .45 isn't one of them.

 

[lrahm]

One Glock 21 with two spare mags on the belt. One AR with a grab 20 round mag. One "maxipedition" bag with two spare glock mags and four 30 round mags for the AR. An 870 (just in case). I would bet that I am about average for officers.

 

[Frank_N_Stein]

Cop or no, if you're alone against multiple opponents in a gunfight, the only thing you should be doing is laying down suppressive fire and getting the heck out of there. Otherwise you're just asking to get pinned and flanked. Even the stupid bad guys will figure this out if they're as determined as the guy was in this story.

Last I knew cops weren't allowed to use "suppresive fire" or warning shots. We are taught to shoot at the threat, not fire off rounds in order to keep the bad guys' heads down.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Last I knew cops weren't allowed to use "suppresive fire" or warning shots. We are taught to shoot at the threat, not fire off rounds in order to keep the bad guys' heads down.

 

[canav844]

Holy crap, I'm tired of that picture. Yes, there's little difference when you shoot a block of ballistic gel at 90 degrees from the surface and with no intermediate barriers. If its an ideal shot into a block of consistent density block of goo that's attacking you, great.

However, there's a very real difference on non-ideal shots. Shots that hit bone at odd angles, shots that have to go through glass first, shots that hit a bicep and start to tumble/expand before entering the torso, etc. etc. Then there can be a dramatic difference. Real world data simply doesn't bare out the "all calibers are basically the same", which is why you see so few departments issuing 9mm any longer. If the performance was the same, and with budgets the way they are, 9mm would be the hot ticket. However, real world events show that IT SUCKS WHEN YOU HAVE TO SHOOT THROUGH A BARRIER. For civilian EDC, that's fine, your odds of being attacked by a mugger with a large sheet of safety glass between you is basically none. For a uniformed patrol officer who is ROUTINELY in contact with potentially violent subjects in automobiles, its a stupid choice.

You're right .45 is so magical and 9mm sucks so bad that a firearms instructor and sharpshooter put 37 rounds of it, into vital organs of an aggressor, before they stopped shooting back. Not to mention the fact the the movies have made .45 just as effective as Glocks that you can get the hammer pull back sound and 1911s that have 27 round magazines that don't extend below the grip. Yet you read interviews with agencies like the FHP, and the individuals that were part of the selection process that decided on legend alone that it was going to be some sort of .45, be it ACP or GAP, and then they would test only guns chambered in the mythical caliber, but never gave testing other calibers consideration. That doesn't even get into companies pushing to get rid of guns at little to no cost, and going with the cheapest available gun. Not to mention many departments buy their ammo in bulk well ahead of running out and are typically not effected by the box price of ammo the average Joe is.

Based on the calculations here: Bullet Kinetic Energy Calculator

124gr 9mm at 1181 ft/s gives 383.95 ft-lb of energy
230gr .45 at 875 ft/s gives 390.92 ft-lb of energy

The physics between the rounds is fairly negligible. 7ft-lbs is about 1/3 of the force applied to spark plug. The expanded bullet makes the difference of less than 1/10th of an inch. Give account for manufacturing inconsistencies and the physics behind them puts them to within 5% of function, and both carry enough power to travel the same distance in the same medium. If that 1/10th of an inch is what you miss a major artery or spinal cord by, then yes the caliber will have made a difference.

Now I understand these facts may be frustrating then trying to defend the mythical .45 as being so vastly superior. But we can consider passing through multiple mediums and at less than ideal angles, as they are hitting with the same force, and doing equal jobs of moving the same materials out of the way; having put the bullets through the same situations there is going to logically be the same negligible difference in performance between modern bonded reliably expanding jacket hollow point rounds. If you have facts, studies and evidence to disprove this then by all means please share them.

Now as was mentioned, shot placement, and getting to a rifle round are two elements that are far more key than which handgun round is being used. Hitting many of the organs center mass can lead to a person bleeding out in time, however that can take 2-4 minutes, this was a gunfight which lasted roughly one minute; it was brought to an end by the disruption of the central nervous system. Rifle rounds hit the same rough weight but with about 3 times the speed, resulting in much more force, that can tear much larger holes than just what the bullet physically touches.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dOYPxiRldaE[/ame]

The temporary cavity hopefully tearing these vital organs and causing that bleeding out to happen quicker than 4 minutes from now and stop the threat sooner.

62 grains at 3,100 ft/s hitting with 1,322 ft-lbs of force

Move to a shorter length barrel and a hypothetical 2900 from a 16" and you still have more than 1100 ft-lbs of force.

Those who disparage science and laboratory methods are either too short sighted or too bound by
preconceived (or perhaps proprietary) notions to see the truth. The labs and scientists do not offer sure
things. They offer a means of indexing the damage done by a bullet, understanding of the mechanics of
damage caused by bullets and the actual effects on the body, and the basis for making an informed choice
based on objective criteria and significant statistics.

http://www.firearmstactical.com/pdf/fbi-hwfe.pdf


Furthermore they go on to state

The factors governing incapacitation of the human target are many, and variable. The actual
destruction caused by any
small arms projectile is too small in magnitude relative to the mass and
complexity of the target. If a bullet destroys about 2 ounces of tissue in its passage through the body, that
represents 0.07 of one percent of the mass of a 180 pound man. Unless the tissue destroyed is located
within the critical areas of the central nervous system, it is physiologically insufficient to force
incapacitation upon the unwilling target. It may certainly prove to be lethal, but a body count is no
evidence of incapacitation.

http://www.theppsc.org/Staff_Views/Aveni/OIS.pdf

Discusses the hit probabilities and shows that just connecting with the assailant is a difficult prospect in and of itself. So again this would reaffirm having the caliber that an LTCH holder or an officer is most accurate with is going to be paramount, and if you are equally accurate with multiple calibers, then having more rounds on hand to make more connections with the assailant in the right places is going to increase the odds of incapacitating the threat.

Now I realize when defending a mythical caliber like the .45ACP, which lets face it .45 in a 1911 is the equivalent of the American flag to some in the gun culture and anything questioning it's effectiveness, like 34 rounds into the vital organs of a bad guy that's still fighting, is the equivalent of burning the flag. After all the .45ACP has one shot knock down power, works every time, is in video games, is cool, is what XYZ agency uses (same can be said for .40 S&W and 9mm, many departments use each and some use all 3), is what the US Military uses and so on. But realistically it's still a handgun caliber.

It would be more important to put the efforts of debating which caliber is superior into developing a more readily accessible method of getting an AR out of a rack from the drivers seat while keeping it secured, or increasing the availability of SBRs (given the reasoning a 10 or 12 inch barrel with .223 or .556 round would still produce substantially more force than a handgun but be easier to maneuver and access)


I personally own and carry a number of calibers as during the shortages caliber diversity makes it easier for me to locate something to practice with and maintain a stock of defensive ammo.

 

[Aaron1776]

Last I knew cops weren't allowed to use "suppresive fire" or warning shots. We are taught to shoot at the threat, not fire off rounds in order to keep the bad guys' heads down.

That sucks for you.

I think you have the wrong idea about supression though. A pistol isn't going to have the same psychological effect as a machinegun. You'd still have to aim at his position to be effective, not firing wildly. If I have three BGs with guns I'm engaging them each with aimed fire into their position, alternating between each one, as I get the heck out. But then again I'm not a LEO, so I'm not bound by departmental procedure.

This also assumes of course that this is a variation of the situation in the OP where the bad guys are taking hits and still kicking /or are behind cover. Obviously if you can hit them while getting out, do so.
But oath or not, if I were a LEO I fail to see where I would be duty bound to die in a bad tactical situation. I would leave pronto....which was the point of my post. Esp when you're not a LEO, the idea that you're going to make a stand like a super tacticool ninja in a street fight is stupid. It's not like defending your home, a VIP, or some sort of valued objective.

 

[Aaron1776]

You're right .45 is so magical and 9mm sucks so bad that a firearms instructor and sharpshooter put 37 rounds of it, into vital organs of an aggressor, before they stopped shooting back. Not to mention the fact the the movies have made .45 just as effective as Glocks that you can get the hammer pull back sound and 1911s that have 27 round magazines that don't extend below the grip. Yet you read interviews with agencies like the FHP, and the individuals that were part of the selection process that decided on legend alone that it was going to be some sort of .45, be it ACP or GAP, and then they would test only guns chambered in the mythical caliber, but never gave testing other calibers consideration. That doesn't even get into companies pushing to get rid of guns at little to no cost, and going with the cheapest available gun. Not to mention many departments buy their ammo in bulk well ahead of running out and are typically not effected by the box price of ammo the average Joe is.

No one claimed the .45 was magical. In fact I admitted to carrying both a 1911 and a M&P 9mm, depending on the situation.

Based on the calculations here: Bullet Kinetic Energy Calculator

124gr 9mm at 1181 ft/s gives 383.95 ft-lb of energy
230gr .45 at 875 ft/s gives 390.92 ft-lb of energy

The physics between the rounds is fairly negligible. 7ft-lbs is about 1/3 of the force applied to spark plug. The expanded bullet makes the difference of less than 1/10th of an inch. Give account for manufacturing inconsistencies and the physics behind them puts them to within 5% of function, and both carry enough power to travel the same distance in the same medium. If that 1/10th of an inch is what you miss a major artery or spinal cord by, then yes the caliber will have made a difference.

Now I understand these facts may be frustrating then trying to defend the mythical .45 as being so vastly superior. But we can consider passing through multiple mediums and at less than ideal angles, as they are hitting with the same force, and doing equal jobs of moving the same materials out of the way; having put the bullets through the same situations there is going to logically be the same negligible difference in performance between modern bonded reliably expanding jacket hollow point rounds. If you have facts, studies and evidence to disprove this then by all means please share them.

Actually, there's this thing called "momentum". It's this concept in physics that allows objects to keep moving through space. Bigger, heavier rounds like the .45 maintain it. Lighter rounds, especially when they hit an interfering medium, do not. The 9mm bleeds out more energy faster despite having nearly the same energy as there is less mass in the bullet. Thus they don't penetrate as far/ are effected by interveneing mediums a lot more. Thus they do less damage. Thus they don't get the take down as reliably. (See hatcher study below the quote)


Now as was mentioned, shot placement, and getting to a rifle round are two elements that are far more key than which handgun round is being used. Hitting many of the organs center mass can lead to a person bleeding out in time, however that can take 2-4 minutes, this was a gunfight which lasted roughly one minute; it was brought to an end by the disruption of the central nervous system. Rifle rounds hit the same rough weight but with about 3 times the speed, resulting in much more force, that can tear much larger holes than just what the bullet physically touches.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dOYPxiRldaE

The temporary cavity hopefully tearing these vital organs and causing that bleeding out to happen quicker than 4 minutes from now and stop the threat sooner.

62 grains at 3,100 ft/s hitting with 1,322 ft-lbs of force

Move to a shorter length barrel and a hypothetical 2900 from a 16" and you still have more than 1100 ft-lbs of force.


http://www.firearmstactical.com/pdf/fbi-hwfe.pdf


Furthermore they go on to state



http://www.theppsc.org/Staff_Views/Aveni/OIS.pdf

Discusses the hit probabilities and shows that just connecting with the assailant is a difficult prospect in and of itself. So again this would reaffirm having the caliber that an LTCH holder or an officer is most accurate with is going to be paramount, and if you are equally accurate with multiple calibers, then having more rounds on hand to make more connections with the assailant in the right places is going to increase the odds of incapacitating the threat.

Only if you have the time to make those extra shots will the extra 9mms give you any advantage, and that is statistically unlikely for most people outside of the military. Most people simply don't have the time to use 17 rounds in a shooting.
Furthermore, just because you connect with a "vital area" with a handgun round doesn't mean the round will always penetrate and do enough damage to incapacitate your assailent. The .45 has a better chance of doing so, as on average they maintain their momentum longer due to their heavier weight. You can talk about foot lbs of energy all you like, but that stored energy is meaningless if it bleeds off before the bullet can go deep enough to do the proper amount of damage.

Now I realize when defending a mythical caliber like the .45ACP, which lets face it .45 in a 1911 is the equivalent of the American flag to some in the gun culture and anything questioning it's effectiveness, like 34 rounds into the vital organs of a bad guy that's still fighting, is the equivalent of burning the flag. After all the .45ACP has one shot knock down power, works every time, is in video games, is cool, is what XYZ agency uses (same can be said for .40 S&W and 9mm, many departments use each and some use all 3), is what the US Military uses and so on. But realistically it's still a handgun caliber.

It would be more important to put the efforts of debating which caliber is superior into developing a more readily accessible method of getting an AR out of a rack from the drivers seat while keeping it secured, or increasing the availability of SBRs (given the reasoning a 10 or 12 inch barrel with .223 or .556 round would still produce substantially more force than a handgun but be easier to maneuver and access)
This was my original point to begin with. However, 10-12" SBRs really lose their ability to kill fast unless you're using really good 75grain ammo.

I personally own and carry a number of calibers as during the shortages caliber diversity makes it easier for me to locate something to practice with and maintain a stock of defensive ammo.
As do I. No one here has once stated the that .45 was a supperior round. We merely pointed out that people who are drinking the "9mm does just as much damage on average" kool aid are deluding themselves and ignoring statistical real world data of people getting shot.
Ballistic gel and energy calculations only show part of the story.

For further evidence of how they aren't similar, you need to look up the Hatcher Value of the two rounds.
For those of you who are unaware, the Hacther value was a formula created by General Julian Hatcher, who was also a noted forensic pathologist among other things, to calculate the theoretical stopping power of a handgun round. (I believe he may have also been in charge of military study where they were litteraly shooting dead bodies and measuring the damage done, but I can't remember) He developed this formula through compiling data on thousands of real shootings and ballistics tests, and it has withstood the test of time as being a valid measurement of odds. Basically, the higher the value, the better your odds of stopping a man. There is a law of diminishing returns beyond 55. Front Sight informs their students to be readily prepared to take a head shot if the round's value is below 50, due to the round's statistical likelihood of stopping a man.

If the rating of your handgun cartridge is under 30, it only has about a 30% chance of producing a one shot stop. Hatcher Ratings of 30 to 49 raise a one shot stop to approximately a 50% chance. Ratings of 50 or higher produce a one shot stop about 90% of the time.



The 9mm is 39.9
The 38 special is 39.7
The .380 is a mere 18.3.

The .45 is a 60.7


What matters when you're talking about calibers in general are averages and odds. A 9mm is classified as a "minor caliber" range 30-49 (in relation to handgun cartridges) and statistically these rounds have approx a 1 in 2 chance of stopping a man (on average) with each hit.

.45 and .40 are considered "major" calibers. These rounds have a statisical likelihood of stopping a man approx 18 times out of every 20 shootings, or 9 out of 10.

My own experiences in the ER, which admittedly are not remotely scientific, have been about on par with those averages.

This is just history and empircal evidence doing the talking here.
And don't bring out the "modern hollowpoints are soooo great!!!" comment. Modern .45 JHPs are just as well made. Plus you can't rely on the round actually expanding. Even well made rounds fail to mushroom more than I'd like to think about.

Now you'll always hear about the guy who took 14 rounds of .45 before finally dying, just like you'll always hear about the marine who wiped out 5 taliban with one shot from his 9mm FMJ each. These are abberations, just like the guy in the above story. Not the normal.

Again there are valid reasons to carry a 9mm. Ammo capacity can be one. If you shoot with it better, that's a good reason too. The idea of the 9mm delivering the same or a similar amount of damage as a .45 is simply not true and thus not a valid path of reasoning.

You are deluding yourself if you think otherwise.

Like I said. I carry a 9mm too. A controlled pair with a 9mm gives me a 75% chance of success. I don't like 3/4, so I do three shots. (Very easy with an M&P) A triple threaded shot from a 9mm will produce a stop aprrox 87.5% of the time. I'm ok with that. Of course, I love my new 1911 operator. A single hit gives me a 90% chance, a controlled pair (which is what I train) gives me a 95% chance of success, and it's really easy to hit with.....which is why it's better than your suxor, 9mm, limp-wristed, european, pansy gun.

Which brings us back to the original lesson of the OP.

If you just connected with 2 or more .45 JHPs to a guy's chest and he's still moving, it's likely he has fallen into that 5% of BAMFs who require a head shot to be taken down. Choose a gun that will allow you to make that hit the best.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

You guys can "lab rat" and "mental exercise" the crap out of it. You can pick statistical outliers that prove your point. I don't care. Your ballistic gel and math formulas won't convince me to the contrary of literally hundreds of real people shot that I've investigated.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

You mean we don't live in a perfect world where everything works just like the brochure says it should? Say it isn't so!

Shocking, isn't it?

 

[Aaron1776]

You guys can "lab rat" and "mental exercise" the crap out of it. You can pick statistical outliers that prove your point. I don't care. Your ballistic gel and math formulas won't convince me to the contrary of literally hundreds of real people shot that I've investigated.

It would seem we have another man's experiences confirming Hatcher's findings.

Can we start calling it the "Hatcher Law" now?

 

[Mark 1911]

Amazing someone could take that many hits from a .45 and not go down. I carry 9 rounds in my sidearm and two spare 8-round mags. I hope I never need them, but to think that it could actually not be enough.... Time to get another 2-magazine carrier.

 

[VUPDblue]

I get made fun of routinely for (among other things) the number of mags and firearms I carry. This story kind of proves my case...

 

[9mmfan]

After much thought, I have decided to give up carrying my 642 and start carrying my G19 with at least 2 spare mags on me. This may sound like not much of big deal to some here on INGO, but I wear scrubs during the week, so this will take some thought on my part. I am currently trying out a shoulder holster for this. May have to spring for a G 26 if they shoulder holster doesn't work out.

Glad is thread as generated some interest.