As much as common folk using common sense is a good thing, I would caution everyone from drawing too many conclusions from that pdf. First of all, it was very poorly written, it was just hodge-podge of repetitive information. I'm not a medical examiner nor a cop, so I don't have that kind of experience to pull from, but the problem with talking to someone like a medical examiner about bullet performance is that his sample is pretty skewed--he only sees the dead guys. He lacks any sort of balanced overview of victims of gunshot wounds. Also, the callous attitude on display by someone in the "medical" profession is pretty atrocious, too, which makes me question his objectivity. He reminds me of all the medical examiners who despise motorcycles because they are such death machines, all the while missing the fact that millions of people ride motorcycles without getting killed on them and he just never sees those examples.

So whatever. Hollowpoints or hardball, or whatever. There's nothing scientific there, it's all anectdotal. Interesting, but not really that useful.