Because of the nature of the matter contained this is unfortunately a rather long introduction to a thread, but I hope you will bear with me. You may also see this posted elsewhere.

I have contributed to several forum discussions on the relative merits of different calibres of hand guns. Much of the input in various forums is based on personal interest and personal preference combined with misleading advice published in those forums and elsewhere. I do not claim to have the answers, I am neither a scientist, nor a doctor, not even an experienced researcher. But I have taken the trouble to do some research. I have no interest in promoting one calibre as against another, and I have handguns and rifles in a range of calibres, hopefully soon to be added to. My interest is in collecting and shooting guns, sharing information, seeking advice and seeking some proper consensus based on knowledge rather than speculation or in some cases far worse.

In the course of my research I found a chart of relative Stopping Power compiled by Chuck Hawks from data collected by Evan Marshall and Ed Sanow (M&S) and published in their book: Stopping Power: A Practical Analysis of the Latest Handgun Ammunition, together with articles published in magazines such as Handguns. The percentage of one-shot-stops in actual street shootings obtained from police records shows the highest percentage as folloows:

96% for Remington .357 Mag 125Gr SJHP,
94% for Remington Golden Sabre .40S&W 165Gr JHP and Fed HydraShock .45ACP 230Gr JHP,
91% for Cor-Bon +P 9mm (9 x 19)115Gr JHP
90% for Winchester .44 Mag 210Gr STHP

These were followed closely by (slightly abbreviated)
89% Fed .40S&W JHP
88% Rem +P .38 Super
83% Rem Med Vel .357 Mag

.45ACP FED, Rem and Win came in at 63%, lower than a couple of 38Sp +Ps, a 380ACP and level with the humble Winchester 40Gr JHP in .32ACP.

The chart is at Handgun Cartridge Power Chart - Condensed Version .

The general consensus appears to be that Chuck Hawks may not be a great expert, but he reports fairly what he sees. In this case he is relying on evidence from others.

Does anyone else have any similar comparison chart.

On seeing the works of M&S, Dr. Martin Fackler MD immediately started crying "Fraud!" and issuing encyclicals about "bullet salesmen." (Just wait)

Fackler was one of the greatest critics of the M&S results. In his book review Fackler writes:
“Fortunately, the great majority of law enforcement groups have ignored the Marshall and Sanow Definitive Study and opted for the heavier, slower bullets, which have proved far more reliable than the faster, lighter bullets they replaced.”

In the final paragraph of the book review, Fackler writes:
“Street Stoppers” (one of M&S’s books) is a compilation of fantasy: written in the arrogant, dead certain tone of the con man. Everything echoes “trust me.” The reader is constantly preached to, with
evangelistic fervor: and without equivocation implored to believe in nonsense with no basis in established fact. This book is the antithesis of honest, intelligent, scientific discourse
in which the evidence is laid out, dispassionately...”. A totally unbiased review!

However Fackler may not have been totally truthful.

A report by Michael Courtney, PhD. Ballistics Testing Group, West Point and Amy Courtney, PhD., Department of Physics, United States Military Academy, West Point, http://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0701/0701268.pdf says:

“The author of this critique (Fackler) is closely tied to an FBI committee who selected a Winchester 147 grain JHP load for 9mm use and frequently advocates other heavy and slow bullets. He has
published numerous articles, which are essentially unabashed advertisements for this kind of bullet. In addition to being the bandwagon fallacy, this argument is somewhat circular. Many law enforcement agencies simply follow the lead and standards of the FBI that Fackler had significant input in developing. Even if it were true, the fact that many law enforcement agencies are following the lead of the side of a debate that is considerably influential in law enforcement (because it is the FBI) is not compelling that experiments supporting the other side of a debate are invalid.” What did Fackler say about bullet salesmen?

They also say: “This reply is also fallacious, because it mistakenly frames the debate in terms of “light and fast” vs. “heavy and slow.” Several “heavy and slow” bullets make a good showing in the M&S OSS figures, and several “light and fast” bullets perform poorly. For many cartridges, the top
ranked loads are from Remington and Federal, two of the largest ammunition suppliers who do not “specialize in lightweight handgun bullets shot at higher than usual velocities” but rather offer an array of ammunition choices covering both the “light and fast” as well as the “heavy and slow” ends of the spectrum.”

Courtneys’ report also says: “The reasoning of M&S might not always be perfectly clear, and the content is not always perfectly organized, but their books are more dispassionately written and
contain fewer ad hominem attacks (none) than the criticism (ie Fackler’s) offered in response.”

In other words, Fackler sought to rely on unjustified personal attacks on M&S as the main weapon in his arsenal in order to try to discredit them. He is quoted as saying: “The only people who think the "Strasbourg Tests" are real are the usual crowd of crackpot "magic bullet" believers and the pathetically incompetent editors of consumer gun magazines like Guns & Ammo. (Is Guns & Ammo really that bad – I don’t live in the US and have never read it.) I suppose we'll soon see anonymous reports proving that Elvis is alive and conducting one shot stop experiments on unicorns. And, of course, someone will believe that too.” Now that is a really scientific response.

I won’t go into whether the Strasbourg Tests ever took place.

They also said in their report: “Since we (the authors, Michael Courtney and Amy Courtney) are now contributors in a field with unusually high levels of “ammonia and acetic acid,” we would like to
express our sincere hope that future debate will be characterized by more civilized discussion without
resorting to personal attacks, insults, and unrestrained rhetorical fallacies. Going beyond the accepted
boundaries of scientific discourse reflects poorly on the field, on the law enforcement interests in the discussion, and on firearms-related issues in general.”

I hope that this forum respects this sentiment.

Now go and buy, shoot or carry the guns that you like.

__________________
Kill it, cook it, eat it.

Just curious but why did you post this???

__________________
Forum consigliere

Shot placement trumps all bullet designs. A hit with 22lr is much more deadly than a miss with the #1 manstopper.

Long guns trump all hand guns.

I have received a few ill-thought-out replies in other threads in the past (ie no facts or evidence, just rhetorical statements) so I thought I would see what I could find out. I was of the opinion that some smaller calibers are just as effective as larger ones if they are well placed. If I was wrong I wanted to know rather than make a fool of myself. Also I thought if I presented a well prepared piece I might receive equally well prepared replies.

I know the issue has been aired in the past, but so have things like "Is a 1911 better than a (whatever)?". And they will both continue to crop up from time to time.

I am simply presenting the evidence I have found. Others may have evidence to the contrary.

As a lawyer you know that is how disagreements can be fairly resolved. And when the dust settles we can still all discuss other matters as friends.

__________________
Kill it, cook it, eat it.

I marked Chuck Hawks off my reading list when he wrote this trash:

The Dark Side of Smith & Wesson

The data was not prepared by Chuck Hawks. It was prepared by Marshall and Sanow and subsequently considered in the Courtney's report. Hawks merely made use of it. I think the credentials of the Courtney's are excellent.

__________________
Kill it, cook it, eat it.

The problem I see right off the top with the list given is that is a specific caliber, fed a specific load.
in a perfect world that would suffice, but this is not a perfect world, hello ammo shortage, I cant find that chamber food.

In light of the fact that we will feed a caliber of gun, that type of ammo that we can find, we are at this time better off with a general rule of thumb like 45 = better than 9MM 357 is better than 38 spec even though a particular load may cause the tables to turn on the rules of thumb, its just wiser to disregard that data and bank on the rule of thumb as the critical load part of the equation may be made of unobtainium
its just an antiquated study today

My grand pappy once told me > If you want to make friends, don't talk too loud or too much - if you want to keep them, don't bore them; when speaking, a few words will do - when writing, a coupe or three paragraphs will suffice... more than one page, you may be insulting their intelligence.

Pete

__________________
NRA, GOA Lifer

Since we're trying to be all technical and junk...

Metric rounds aren't calibers.
So, any metric rounds such as 7.65, 9mm, 10mm, etc. cannot be considered in this discussion.

No offense Allyn, but that post needs to be shortened to a couple of paragraphs...I got lost after the first one.
Also, many people don't consider Mr. Hawks a reference to be cited for same reason you wouldn't ask Mr. Zumbo for AR-15 advice. In fact, many people consider him a hack.

I have never met either of the gentlemen above and therefore cannot comment upon their character. I don't care for Mr. Hawks opinions which aren't backed up by facts in his writings and go against the ideas of shooters and firearm enthusiasts at large.

I also got to pondering the idea that many folks just simply don't give a care what someone writes in a book, article or forum- they like what they like. There is no "consensus" and certainly hope there never will be one, as I love variety and there is no need for "change" in my gun closet. After all, all my guns are gone in a horrific boating accident.

I second Cajun's question.

However, the only way to go beyond "rhetorical" on round effectiveness is to experience it yourself.
.22 Short is quite effective- that's the only one I've been shot with.

__________________
Lost it all in a boat accident

I thought that CajunLawyer asked a pretty good question. Unfortunately, it didn't get answered. Maybe I misunderstood completely. I thought that the OP was getting ready to ask some kind of a question, and was giving a bit of background, and was apologizing for the length of the background. At one point, there was a period where I expected a question mark. Anyway, apparently no question.

Now I wonder whether the OP just wanted to tell us something negative about M&S, or Fackler, or both. But surely he didn't think that he was going to say something NEW on this subject, did he? At any rate, I think that he didn't.

It appears to me that CajunLawyer's question sits unanswered.

I think I clearly replied to Cajun's question. I even quoted his question.

Just a recap of a couple of things I said.

1. I have no interest in promoting one calibre as against another, and I have handguns and rifles in a range of calibres, hopefully soon to be added to. (In fact they range from .22 through 9mm to 357 Mag in hand guns and from .22 through, 30-30, .44 Mag up to .444 Marlin in rifles.)

2. Now go and buy, shoot or carry the guns that you like.

In other words, you haven't said anything, and you quote M&S (via someone whose credentials you consider relevant) and Fackler, a moderately controversial pair, to support your non-assertions.

Like I said, you haven't answered CL's question, which, if I remember correctly, was "Why did you post this?"

It's called the KISS principle - Keep it short and simple. I did the best I could. But grand pappy obviously didn't know Samuel Langhorne Clemens and Harriet Beecher Stowe.

__________________
Kill it, cook it, eat it.

Most old gun writers were known for how high they set the sights on their typewriters. You catch my drift?

[QUOTE=Allyn;1166296]It's called the KISS principle - Keep it short and simple. I did the best I could. But grand pappy obviously didn't know Samuel Langhorne Clemens and Harriet Beecher Stowe.[/QUOTE]

Bravo! - I see you are a well-read fella, either that or you like to quote other folks - I'm guessing my grand pappy at least heard of those two very famous people, and maybe knew them. But back to Cajun's question, why?...

Pete

__________________
NRA, GOA Lifer

Anytime I see a thread or argument regrding which is best, I remember that Bobby Kennedy was assasinated by a pissant .22, his brother JFK was assasinated by a mail order surplus rifle . It AIN'T the round, it's the person who fires it. Studies by whoever mean absolutely nothing cause in real life stuff happens. I have .22's .38's. 9's 357's 44's and 45's. Knowing my abilities any of these would be one shot fight stoppers-or maybe not-if so than shoot twice.
Not meaning to flame amigo, but you post was stuff that everyone here already knows-Now, if you want to argue your choice over someone elses-than by all means do so and let the fireworks begin

__________________
Forum consigliere

I've always considered the .44 Henry Flat a great, proven manstopper.

__________________
Lost it all in a boat accident

Caj just hinted about double tap.
Again puting in a whole other host of options.
So in answer to this often asked question,it's all to old.
There is to many "What ifs".
Just prepare as best as you can.Practice often and don't start no "shlk"
Don't take a knife to a gun fight.You might not do so well.

D.G.

Now, look, these "discussions" are irresolvable by conventional protocols and analysis. Were Erich here to remind us, "shot placement is everything, the rest is angels dancing on the heads of pins," or some similar signature...

Plainly, these varying opinions can best be resolved by a controlled experiment, which eliminates the vagaries of bullet style, velocity, weight, and similar variables, and relies, exclusively, on projectile diameter as the measure of effectiveness.

To that end, I propose devising a device that can advance dowels of various diameters into the carcasses of animals approximating the physiognomy of humans, and measuring the relative degree of damage and incapacitation. I'm confident that the future-thinking participants of this forum will wholeheartedly embrace such an empirically unsullied experiment. Contributions cheerfully accepted!

HA!
Sounds a lot like the "Here's your sign" feller imitating a redneck brain surgeon.

"What we going do is..."

__________________
Lost it all in a boat accident

I believe that this definitively answers those who do not believe in resurrection of the dead.

I strongly suspect that we will soon see the 5.7 X 28 touted as the ultimate in whatever.
With the possible exception of the proposed “dowel penetration” scientific study, data from which is not yet available, there seems to be little information available which is not controversial.
M&S and F, all have generated a lot of heat. The statisticians say that M&S studies frequently lack enough data and the results are consequently suspect. The only answer to this problem is to wait for more data.

The small, light, and fast crowd fights with the big, heavy, and slow crowd.
For myself I belong to the big, heavy, and fast school.
I do not see how one can go wrong with a .44 or .45 of 250gr traveling at 1200fps.

I am not certain that anything helps with trolls.

__________________
Ipsis Rebus Dictantitbus

I looked at that rambling piece of bloviating...and just gave it a pass!

HOLY TOLEDO JONES! COME ON, GIMME A BREAK!

What the hell kind of question is that?

It's all BS!

The "question" doesn't have an answer!

End of discussion.

__________________
G.P. Charlie

Here's my theory: "two to the chest and one to the head, make sure that they're good and dead." NEVER forget the head shot. -Ed.

__________________
Shoot the CPU, not the monitor

I would never let science, research, and evidence get in the way of my opinion. Especially if it's someone else's. I would like to say that the phrase "handgun knockdown power" is almost oxymoronic, unless you're talking about swinging an N-frame upside someone's temple.

__________________
Wayne
Torn & Frayed

There's a fairly good consensus these days as to what works. Most of the arguements that one sees on the gunboards are based around the information of 20 years ago. The "old" arguement involved the legitimacy of the Quantico symposium (which took place in '89) and it's emphasis on terminal penetration compared to Marshall and Sanow's work.

Marshall is probably a decent guy. He retired to the town where I grew up, and used to go the same range I did during a brief overlap, but we never met. Sanow isn't invoked as much, perhaps owing to those with long memories recalling him writing truly... strange... things such as his claims that 147 gr JHP 9mm ammunition wouldn't even work the slide in many/most autos and suggesting that even 124 gr JHP might be better. Yeah, that was strange. He seemed to have vanished from the gun mags some years back, though I admit that I don't keep up on them.

The more recent controversy have been whether unconventional ammunition - the 5.7mm FN, various frangible designs - work as well or better than the current crop of accepted offerings.

Accepted offerings that most people are satisfied with seem to include the Gold Dots in 124gr +P 9mm, hot 125 gr GD loads in .357 Sig, mid weight GD offering in .40, and heavy to midweight .45 ACP offerings.

You can insert other premium JHPs such as the Federal HST or Remington GS or Winchester's Ranger/Talon in place of the Gold Dot.

Constrast this with 30 years ago when it was just a matter of .45 FMJ or .357 mag 125 grain being "best". Anecdotal accounts suggested both were working out.

We currently have jello science to fall back on, along with small studies conducted by various police departments. These have lead to a "general guide" as to what one wants a bullet to do. The most accepted general guide is that a bullet ought penetrate 12" or more (keep in the mind or more part, since the original standard was 18") of tissue, work reliably in a given gun, and once those are accomplished, maximize tissue damage.

Thanks Gator for taking the time to write without being hypercritical. Some people thought I was raising questions, but I was simply setting out some data for people like you to respond to. The whole point of the thread is to consider what is suitable as a self defense caliber and I suppose that leads on to what gun do you prefer to fire it from, though I never asked that. Just for the record though, which are your preferences.

Here in France we can't carry or use our guns for self defence so the problem does not arise, but I like my CZ 75B 9mm to be accessible. I don't store any guns loaded, but at least with a semi-auto all I have to do is insert a mag. French law requires me to keep handguns and ammo locked up serarately. Bit of a bitch if a burglar walks into my bedroom in the middle of the night.

I would like a 1911 in due course (centenary coming up in just over a year) but I have always though that it is not necesssary to go that big for self defence. My next gun will be a Walther PPK .32 ACP. And I have never watched a James Bond movie!

__________________
Kill it, cook it, eat it.

Allyn....
there is a reason we gravitate to the biggest practical gun in a defensive role.
If an adversary needs to be shot, it is because they could not otherwise be made to accept reason.
This condition is caused largely by drugs, mental conditions, and emotional states where pain is just not perceived anywhere near the expected manner.
a sober and rational man can be turned away, and even killed with even a 25 auto.
one police report I read many years ago involving an armed robber who was quite well spaced out on drugs to the point that he bled a greenish orange colored blood, was shot 18 times with a 357 magnum loaded with 125 grain hollow points. and took EVERY LAST BULLET in the chest and on his feet!!!!

I know what you mean. I'm sure that it was in this forum that I read of a LEO (policeman to us Brits) who put about 12 into a guy before he finally went down. I have no idea what gun or ammo the officer had. He was also shot in the incident.

I have no idea what effect drugs or alcohol have on a person who has been shot. Would it have made any difference if it had been larger/smaller caliber. It's questions like this that make for interesting conversation.

I don't think the perception of pain is relevant. Either the guy dies or he doesn't.

I would love to see the coroner's report in that case.

__________________
Kill it, cook it, eat it.

Going into shock can kill.
it is conceivable that being shot through the forearm with say, a nail gun, could induce a state of panic in someone, which can induce a state of shock which thereafter may lead to death even though the wound itself is not life threatening in any way.
the perception of pain is quite relevant as it relates to the process of shock.
Germany during WW2 had experimented with cocaine as an infantry enhancement.
German troops stoned as the rock of Gibraltar went head to head with armor ... and came back to die after the wounds caught up with them.

At this point the nature of injuries need to address a more mechanical school of thought where the target must be rendered unable to fight long enough for those wounds to catch up with his ambitions.
a man with no arms nor legs cannot fight.
the gun that makes that condition possible is ... huge.

you state a case of an LEO putting 12 into a perp before they went down ...
odds are that the caliber was either a 9MM or a 40S&W and most likely FMJ

France sux.

__________________
...east wind...rain...

I know a guy personally who was shot 7 times with a .357 mag at a
party in Austin TX and lived to talk about it. It messed him up pretty
good, and he was in the hospital for quite a spell, but he lived.
I know another guy who was shoved to the ground and shot in the face
execution style with a 12 gauge shotgun, and he too lived to talk about
it.
You just never know. I've talked to more than a few police officers
that state the lowly .22 kills as many as about anything.
.22's can be really lethal cuz they like to change directions and cause
more damage along another path. Heck, I was up at my OK place
last week, and I found a few spent .22 slugs in a tree stump I was
shooting at a few months before. With the way they deformed, you
could tell they could be really deadly in some cases. They mushroomed
out to twice their normal diameter.
Me? I'm not overly particular as long as it's loaded and goes bang... :/
But my everyday defense pistol is a .40 S&W. So I guess that puts me in
the semi heavy and slow bracket.

[QUOTE=oldfella;1166327]Forget the question. I would like to have known those two people. Especially Stowe. Brave to tackle a subject like that in those days. Bit like killing a mocking bird. Which is one of my favorites. I'm not really well-read, but I take in a bit here and a bit there. Read Harper Lee. Book is next to my bed right now. Saw the movie. Gregory Peck at his best.

Back to the plot....... If you haven't found out by now, you never will.

__________________
Kill it, cook it, eat it.

Hi,

I read all that stuff . . . back "in the day." It made good reading and many, many posts on various forums that had all sorts of folks arguing over which is best.

Today? . . . well . . . I LIKE 'EM ALL . . . and for various reasons!

The lowly .22 will get the job done, and is fun and cheap to shoot.

The .357 is an awesome round, the .40 Short & Wimpy is great for an all around cop round in a bottom feeder.

The 9mm and .38 Spl. are soft shooting but usually effective rounds.

I love the .45 for the most fun to shoot, serious "fighting" handgun round.

I've taken lots of deer with my S&W .44 Magnum . . . though I killed a buck a week ago with a broadside, through-the-heart shot from a 300 grain heavy bullet . . . and the "dead" deer ran 180 yards without pumping any blood at all. Go figure!

The .44 Spl. is as fun to shoot as the .45ACP and the .45 Long Colt is a great caliber too.

Heck, even the lowly .32 S&W Long has to rank in there also as a super accurate round that's a pure joy to shoot.

MY RESEARCH HAS PROVEN . . . (at least for me) THAT THE BEST HANDGUN ROUND . . . is the one that is currently on your PERSON when trouble comes!

In this case, it as a .38 Spl., 5-shot S&W Model 37 Airweight snubbie riding in my pocket holster!!! It is a heck of a lot more effective on a sudden threat than all the bigger hitting guns that are locked "safely" in the safe!

At this point in life, I really don't care which caliber I'm carrying on an everyday basis. I'm very comfortable and confident shooting them all . . . and like my odds of success should I ever be forced to use them.

IMHO, experience + tens of thousands of rounds of serious practice + skill + shot placement is more important than caliber size. Heck, this combination is generally only beaten by random cases of good ol' dumb luck!

T.

".40 Short & Wimpy"

consider this description stolen

"I've taken lots of deer with my S&W .44 Magnum . . . though I killed a buck a week ago with a broadside, through-the-heart shot from a 300 grain heavy bullet . . . and the "dead" deer ran 180 yards without pumping any blood at all. Go figure!"

300 grains, I feel are heavy for the task here ...
if your talking bear .. yeah its the go to freight train to load, but deer ... go on a diet and put some speed on it to generate some extra upset .. 220 - 240 seems a work of art that hand grenades well in the vitals then is too spent to destry meat on the other side. if ranges get out there I'll finesse a 276 grain cast HP to the promise land

These always proved to be great "man stoppers". Often multiple man stoppers actually. 105mm. I highly recommend....

Attached Images

105mm.JPG (75.1 KB, 55 views)

__________________
- The Federalist #46 -

Interesting discussion so far, lemme see if I can shorten it a bit..

1) "Don't bring a knife to a gunfight"

2) "A 9mm may expand, however, a 45 will never shrink"

3) " A long gun trumps a handgun"

And last, but not least...

4) "A 40 megaton thermonuclear device trumps all of the above..or...nuke 'em till they glow"

Seems simple to me....
but, in real life, it's what YOU shoot best and have confidence in.

__________________
Adopt a retired Greyhound :)

That's cheating.

As tom said: "MY RESEARCH HAS PROVEN . . . (at least for me) THAT THE BEST HANDGUN ROUND . . . is the one that is currently on your PERSON when trouble comes!" How true.

Getting some interesting comments now. Poe, have you been there?

__________________
Kill it, cook it, eat it.

I doubt it.Don't sweat the small stuff Allyn,He's probably just funning with you.Remember there are some in every crowd.

D.G.

Think you're right DG. And I was going to ask which part.

Uncle, there's a lot of truth in your comments, even if it is slightly over-simplifying my original post.

As for "Adopt a retired Greyhound " ........more useful than a retired politician.

I have just finished dinner. I keep hearing that a glass of red wine per day is good for the health. Therefore 2 must be even better. I had 2 1/2 because that was all that was left in the bottle. Just finishing the last drop now. Good health to all of you

__________________
Kill it, cook it, eat it.

All is answered here:

Evan Marshall - Handgun Stopping Power

__________________
Still Running Against the Wind

We just changed our 40 S&W duty load from 180 grn Winchester Ranger to 180 grn Federal HST Tactical. I’m pretty thrilled to get “Tactical Ammo” myself.

I think Federal had a better price point and quicker delivery time.

Emory

You have just completed the circle. I started with that in my original post.

__________________
Kill it, cook it, eat it.

Where in France are you?Maybe Google Earth would be helpful to some.
Not all is Paris to be sure.

D.G.

Not exactly You mentioned his book, not the web site (which I know nothing about)

The circle goes round and round usually in a downward spiral. What comes around, goes around. All kinds of tests and opinions with different results and answers.

As many and I have said, whatever works for the individual is probably "best"

__________________
Still Running Against the Wind

I'm in rural Normandy within an hours drive of the landing beaches and close to Hitler's disastrous counter attack route. Some of your guys visited my house in '44, leaving behind quite a few unfired 30-06s. Seems at least one german left in a hurry 'cos I found his leather belt dated 1938 in one of my buildings.

__________________
Kill it, cook it, eat it.

The message is in the . However, Marshall is an experienced policeman, and has some important things to say, and is generous enough to say them. I recommend visiting his site even if you don't agree with his published stopping power "stats."

Attention is invited particularly to his link to a piece on the dangers of intervention, at the bottom of the page linked in the quote.

A couple of days ago you said: "... and you quote M&S ..... and Fackler, a moderately controversial pair, to support your non-assertions."

M&S are Marshall and Sanow. I'm confused. Never mind, it is nice to see that you feel that they are at least worth a visit. So do I, whether they got it right or not.

__________________
Kill it, cook it, eat it.

Since when are you supposed to play fair in a gun fight?

__________________
- The Federalist #46 -

I can easily understand that you might still be confused.

This is a very old subject here in the States. I don't even see a logical contradiction between my two posts, but I understand that you kind of think that I am pro-Marshall or anti-Marshall. A more careful reading of my posts would indicate that I had (not yet) stated my side, if any, in the controversy. The controversy exists between what M&S write, on the one hand, and what Fackler writes, on the other hand. Some agree with one side, some with the other, some not completely with either.

I'm not sure why you are concerned at all with what I think, but, since you seem to be, I will tell you that I agree with those who believe that the "sample" selection by M&S borders on the ridiculous. Furthermore, I have been around long enough to observe the disappearing data occasionally referred to. I did not need Fackler or his friends to point them out to me.

I am 65 years old, not strikingly smart, but not strikingly stupid, either, and I will tell you that I have a good feeling for Evan Marshall. The obvious fact that he doesn't know s*** about statistics (I DO know a LITTLE about the subject) doesn't change that. He has a lot of good info to pass on, perhaps even about ammo choice, but a statistician he ain't. Nor is his buddy Sanow, even though he obviously has taken a few junior college courses in the subject. Still, Evan Marshall has a lot of experience, and the fact that he is not a statistician should not keep us from listening to him and learning what we can.

I don't think that anything above is inconsistent with my earlier postings.