Quote:
Originally Posted by Out West
Safearm can you document your claim that agencies using 9mm 147 grn loads switch to 40 caliber? And if you can back it up, why did they change?
I tend to go with the heavy bullet. I want the penetration. Puts me in the David Sinko camp.
In the gravest extreme, I'm not going to worry much about secondary or tertiary consequences. Besides, where is the evidence that through and through shots endanger third parties? Even the civil liability case offered up by HD 38-40 doesn't change my mind. I am only going to shoot to defend my life or the life of another innocent. When I do, winning is the only outcome I care about. It doesn't make sense to compromise that outcome. Despite the fact that some civil action could result.
Check the stats on police shootings. The number of shots fired compared to shots hitting the target. On average, way more shots fired than that actual hits on target. Why aren't there more unintended consequences?
Perhaps we are overthinking.
Out West
|
I can give you one solid one,..... NYSP. Trooper used the 147 grain 9mm in a gunfight and for whatever reason the bad guy was not neutralized and the Trooper was killed. They went to a .45 Caliber round,.. a GAP if I am not mistaken and then ultimately the .45 ACP.
My agency went to the 147 grain round because as I was told, " the FBI is ". It did not perform as expected and we went to a 124 Plus P which is issued to this day. It's usually not the caliber. It's where and how many of the projectiles strike the aggressor but you all know that.