Posted: 9/3/2009 7:28:33 PM EDT
|
Ok, I know how this sounds and I'm pretty sure I'll get some interesting opinions but somewhere in this thread I'm hoping to get some real data or a link. Here it goes...
Every game has its recommended bullet energy transfer rating, usually pounds per square inch, which is recommended to kill that animal. That is, assuming that the projectile will completely stop in the animal thus transferring the total amount of kinetic energy to cause tissue and organ damage, it's recommended to use XXXXX Grain at XXXXX Feet per second or need at least XXXX pounds per square inch. SO, I got to thinking, if humans had a rating or recommended bullet energy to take down what would it be? If I was going to size up the self defense ammo available and choose a concealed carry weapon on the basis of what it actually takes to kill an assailant, what would I choose? Let me save someone some trouble here... I know that if I use a .50 BMG, regardless of how much overkill it may be, I'm pretty much guaranteed to kill an assailant. However, what I'm looking for is a way to "size" the right ammunition for the task and I don't care how "un-cool" it may be. If a .22lr would be enough (unlikely) that's fine with me. And away we go... |
|
Shot placement. Hit a guy in the head hard enough with a rock and you'll do the trick. Even with a .50 BMG, you'll just take his leg off, which will lead to death. What will do it, is cause central nervous system shock, which causes unconsciousness. Now to do that with a handgun is another thing. From what I understand most handgun loads do not carry enough power to incapacitate a person without a head/heart shot. Even if they will die, a human can fight through a life threatening gunshot. .44 mag or bigger is my thought, just my thought. Just a bitch to carry concealed. In comes the recoil/follow up shots/shot placement/capacity. I have 24 rounds of .40 with me at all times. ETA-My CCW instructor carries a 22mag. He is an ex Green Beret and claimed he could hit a hostage target(BG holding a hostage) at 50 yards. |
|
Quoted:
Ok, I know how this sounds and I'm pretty sure I'll get some interesting opinions but somewhere in this thread I'm hoping to get some real data or a link. Here it goes... Every game has its recommended bullet energy transfer rating, usually pounds per square inch, which is recommended to kill that animal. That is, assuming that the projectile will completely stop in the animal thus transferring the total amount of kinetic energy to cause tissue and organ damage, it's recommended to use XXXXX Grain at XXXXX Feet per second or need at least XXXX pounds per square inch. SO, I got to thinking, if humans had a rating or recommended bullet energy to take down what would it be? If I was going to size up the self defense ammo available and choose a concealed carry weapon on the basis of what it actually takes to kill an assailant, what would I choose? Let me save someone some trouble here... I know that if I use a .50 BMG, regardless of how much overkill it may be, I'm pretty much guaranteed to kill an assailant. However, what I'm looking for is a way to "size" the right ammunition for the task and I don't care how "un-cool" it may be. If a .22lr would be enough (unlikely) that's fine with me. And away we go... Easy. 9mm, start with a burst to the chest and work your way up to the face. |
| I don't think there is an "energy" answer to this question. It's all about shot placement. Now, it would seem that if we increase the power of the round marginally (on a test basis shot per shot), we would get a greater likelihood of incapacitation with marginally poorer and poorer shot placement (in the same test shot per sho). |