Low Handgun Lethality Rates?

[Handgun Hunter]

Often the subject of lethality rate of handguns in self-defense and law enforcement shootings comes up on forums like this one. Usually the poster will come up with a number something like a lethality rate of 15%, and then will add that handguns are too weak to kill fast or efficiently and that’s why we all need at least 15 rounds in our handguns and two or three spare magazines. Add to that criminals usually hunt in packs and, they say, you need all the firepower you can get, especially since cops miss most of the time and so do all those untrained gun owners. Certainly, there is some truth to all that. But…

I’ve been shooting 55 years and hunting almost as long, and my experience with magnum handguns on animals about the weight of men has been very different. In fact the lethality rate of handguns on deer and hogs I’ve shot has been 100%. They all died so soon after being shot I wouldn’t have had time to call 911 on a cell phone if they had been criminals I was forced to shoot. In fact most were dead before I got out of the tree stand, or if I was on the ground when I shot, before I had time to walk up to them. Many of them never took a step after being shot, most ran only 5 to 20 yards. One did run about 40 yards before dying on his feet, but he was shot with a 45/70 rifle. It doesn’t take a buck long to run 40 yards.

Yes, deer and hogs are not men, but from what I understand wild animals generally can tolerate more trauma and blood loss than humans can. And, of course, animals can’t shoot back, but that has nothing to do with the lethality of handguns.

I’ve never shot a deer or hog with a 9mm. In fact I’ve never used a 9mm on any living thing. Now the FBI says the 9mm works as well as any other handgun because of advances in bullet design. Well, if these new bullets work as well as a .44 magnum SWC does on deer and hogs, I would be very surprised. Maybe next season I’ll hunt with a Glock 17 and see. Do you think I can expect 100% lethality within a minute, usually 30 or so seconds?

 

[427mach1]

And, of course, animals can’t shoot back, but that has nothing to do with the lethality of handguns.

No, but it might affect the accuracy of your shot placement if you know there is the possibility that your target is shooting back!

 

[Handgun Hunter]

No, but it might affect the accuracy of your shot placement if you know there is the possibility that your target is shooting back!

The first post changes the subject. Do you think a 9mm will have a 100% lethality rate over many decades and dozens of hogs and deer?

 

[GatorFarmer]

Something like 17 or 18 percent of all shootings by all handguns prove fatal in the United States. So yes that number includes .22lr bullets taking off pinky toes, but I believe it also includes suicides.

The lethality rates for rifles and shotguns are much higher.

I like magnum revolvers, I really do, but conditions of having to shoot an animal and an armed man likely differ.

 

[Rpg]

Can't speak to 9mm but I've killed deer with a 1911 45acp.

Each dropped and died pretty promptly. One did run about 20 yards before dropping, but I've had deer run as far when shot with a 270 or 308.

 

[ContinentalOp]

I don't care about lethality in self defense ammo. If I'm forced to shoot someone in self defense it's because I want to stop the attacker from killing or seriously injuring me or someone else. I want them to stop. If I shoot an attacker and he stops his assault on me and runs away, that's a successful stop. If I shoot an attacker and he's able to injure or kill me before dying, that's not a successful stop, even though my shot was lethal.

That's why I prefer to carry self defense ammo that has a good track record of quickly stopping attackers, or at the very least performs similarly to ammo with a good track record. That's why I carry 135gr Speer SB-GDHP in my 642. It's why if I were carrying a semi-auto I'd probably carry HST or Gold Dot.

Other thoughts...

You're also ignoring mindset. Someone who attacks me has already made that intention in his mind. He knows what he's going to do. Chances are he's got some adrenaline (and possibly other non-naturally-occuring substances) pumping through his body, which can mitigate the effects of pain. At the same time, chances are I will have little to no warning of an imminent attack (yes, practice situational awareness, but one person cannot catch everything, everytime); I'm behind the curve. Of the animals you've shot, how many ambushed you in a surprise attack? You also mention that some of the animals you've shot ran "only" 5 to 20 yards. In the same amount of time an attacker could shoot at you or close the distance with a knife, injure you or kill you, and then die.

There's also the role that EMS plays. One of the reasons the homicide rate has gone down since the 70s is improvements in emergency medicine.

So, to sum up, for self defense purposes, lethality doesn't matter to me.

Of course, that's my opinion, and worth what you paid for it. I'm sure there are people who will disagree with me.

 

[ISCS Yoda]

I agree with ContinentalOp - lethality is NOT what we even teach in LTC courses. The purpose of deadly force is to stop aggression. Killing your attacker is a plus in most circumstances but is NOT the main objective.

 

[Cal44]

I think the above EMS comment is key.

Most likely the deer won't call 911 and have a paramedic show up.

 

[Adk.IBO]

My daughter works in a brain trauma unit, as a physical therapist with a neurology certification. She has seen FAILED suicide attempts (to the head) with firearms from poor aim or bad shot placement causing mostly permanent damage. My conclusion from this info and my practice is that shot placement is key and harder to do with a handgun, not impossible, just harder and takes more practice. People that don't shoot (train with) their handguns regularly can't expect to be effective (in my opinion) in defensive scenarios. I was one of them for years. It took formal training to wake me up. And yes an injury like this will most likely stop the threat and agree that this is the main objective in a defensive scenario.

Stay safe, John

 

[Handgun Hunter]

I don't care about lethality in self defense ammo. If I'm forced to shoot someone in self defense it's because I want to stop the attacker from killing or seriously injuring me or someone else. I want them to stop. If I shoot an attacker and he stops his assault on me and runs away, that's a successful stop. If I shoot an attacker and he's able to injure or kill me before dying, that's not a successful stop, even though my shot was lethal.

That's why I prefer to carry self defense ammo that has a good track record of quickly stopping attackers, or at the very least performs similarly to ammo with a good track record. That's why I carry 135gr Speer SB-GDHP in my 642. It's why if I were carrying a semi-auto I'd probably carry HST or Gold Dot.

Other thoughts...

You're also ignoring mindset. Someone who attacks me has already made that intention in his mind. He knows what he's going to do. Chances are he's got some adrenaline (and possibly other non-naturally-occuring substances) pumping through his body, which can mitigate the effects of pain. At the same time, chances are I will have little to no warning of an imminent attack (yes, practice situational awareness, but one person cannot catch everything, everytime); I'm behind the curve. Of the animals you've shot, how many ambushed you in a surprise attack? You also mention that some of the animals you've shot ran "only" 5 to 20 yards. In the same amount of time an attacker could shoot at you or close the distance with a knife, injure you or kill you, and then die.

There's also the role that EMS plays. One of the reasons the homicide rate has gone down since the 70s is improvements in emergency medicine.

So, to sum up, for self defense purposes, lethality doesn't matter to me.

Of course, that's my opinion, and worth what you paid for it. I'm sure there are people who will disagree with me.

This is what I expected. You're changing the subject.

 

[Handgun Hunter]

I think the above EMS comment is key.

Most likely the deer won't call 911 and have a paramedic show up.

As I posted, the deer and hogs I have shot died before I would have had time to get a cell phone out of my pocket, much less before help could have arrived. Yes, if they had been armed men some of them would have had time to get more rounds off, but that's not what I posted about. I posted about lethality. Certainly those who lived over being shot ten times by cops could also have gotten more rounds off.

 

[Handgun Hunter]

There are two important factors involved. One is those who hunt with handguns tend to shoot a lot more than most cops and concealed carriers. They tend to be much better shots and can shoot at much longer ranges. They want the shot to be placed in a much smaller area. The other important factor is hunters tend to use much more powerful handguns than cops and concealed carriers.

And, yes, it may be easier to snipe a deer or hog from a stand than to shoot a running, ducking criminal who is partly behind cover and shooting at you, after all, there is no "getting off the X when hunting," but it's also a lot easier to hit a criminal at arm's length, where many shootings happen, than it is to shoot a deer at 100 yards. The shortest range I've shot a deer or hog was about 30 yards, much farther than most defensive shootings happen.

 

[Handgun Hunter]

I agree with ContinentalOp - lethality is NOT what we even teach in LTC courses. The purpose of deadly force is to stop aggression. Killing your attacker is a plus in most circumstances but is NOT the main objective.

Dead deer don't run off and dead men don't shoot back. As I posted, the deer and hogs I've shot died before I would have had time to get a cell phone out of my pocket. Even the one that ran 40 yards died in less than a minute.

I agree with the poster who said rifle calibers do not kill deer and hogs much faster than handguns. I've used 30-06; 25-06; 30-30; 7.62X39; 45/70, and all the older magnum revolver rounds, and the real world results were about the same.

 

[jlrhiner]

I understand what your stating, and the question your asking.

Without going into a bunch of comparative statistics, (revolver vs. auto, barrel length, ballistic differences etc.) the answer would be NO.

Having said that, your comparing two completely different tools and surprised at the outcome. A 9mm is not now, or never has been considered a hunting round. Would you feel uncomfortable carrying a 9mm as a backup on a hunt? (I probably wouldn't either, as I'm not a 9mm fan) But for many years the .38spl was a standard backup for many outdoor activities. Different applications for different tools.

I do know that there are very few running around out here that could qualify on a LEO timed qualification course shooting full house .357, .41 or .44 magnum loads, regardless of platform. Add into that the smallest FBI agent and you can see the issue they're facing. As it is (and I'm not slamming the Feds here) I understand that most Agents recruited are Lawyers or Accountants. So likely they're starting from scratch not being gun people. I could teach a 4'9", 100lb female to shoot a 9mm a lot easier than a .357!

As I said, I understand the view that the 9mm might seem like a step backwards. But until all Feds are 6'2"+ former gunfighters, I don't see it going in another direction.

 

[roscoepc]

Just a quick suggestion: Check yer local hunting law's as a 9mm might NOT be legal to hunt deer/larger game with! The best I remember in Fla. a .357 mag was the smallest pistol caliber allowed.....

 

[Handgun Hunter]

Just a quick suggestion: Check yer local hunting law's as a 9mm might NOT be legal to hunt deer/larger game with! The best I remember in Fla. a .357 mag was the smallest pistol caliber allowed.....

You can hunt hogs with anything in most states, even spears and swords.

 

[Handgun Hunter]

I understand what your stating, and the question your asking.

Without going into a bunch of comparative statistics, (revolver vs. auto, barrel length, ballistic differences etc.) the answer would be NO.

Having said that, your comparing two completely different tools and surprised at the outcome. A 9mm is not now, or never has been considered a hunting round. Would you feel uncomfortable carrying a 9mm as a backup on a hunt? (I probably wouldn't either, as I'm not a 9mm fan) But for many years the .38spl was a standard backup for many outdoor activities. Different applications for different tools.

I do know that there are very few running around out here that could qualify on a LEO timed qualification course shooting full house .357, .41 or .44 magnum loads, regardless of platform. Add into that the smallest FBI agent and you can see the issue they're facing. As it is (and I'm not slamming the Feds here) I understand that most Agents recruited are Lawyers or Accountants. So likely they're starting from scratch not being gun people. I could teach a 4'9", 100lb female to shoot a 9mm a lot easier than a .357!

As I said, I understand the view that the 9mm might seem like a step backwards. But until all Feds are 6'2"+ former gunfighters, I don't see it going in another direction.

I pretty much agree with most of your post, but I knew a lot of LEOs back in the 70s and 80s who shot .357s just fine and qualified several times a year with them. But this was before they removed all size requirements for recruits. Now they hire four-foot tall, eight-foot wide men and women. They also use to have a maximum age cutoff of around 27, now they seem to be hiring people on their second and third careers. I would have no trouble qualifying with my 627s.

 

[chevy95]

Please clarify

Are you simply asking whether the 9mm will work for you hunting animals? You started with a lot of other things and I want to understand what your question is. From what you have said - you seem to be a really good shot with a handgun. So you tell me, with your very accurate shot placement will a 9mm make the kill or not?

 

[427mach1]

The first post changes the subject. Do you think a 9mm will have a 100% lethality rate over many decades and dozens of hogs and deer?

I wasn't changing the subject; I think shot placement has a lot to do with lethality. Most self-defense shootings are made under a lot of stress. When someone might be returning fire, the stress rises even more, causing poorly placed shots. I think that has more to do with the low lethality of self-defense shootings than caliber choice. I think it should be obvious that the 9mm would not be a good choice for deer or hogs and you would not have 100% lethality.

 

[Handgun Hunter]

Are you simply asking whether the 9mm will work for you hunting animals? You started with a lot of other things and I want to understand what your question is. From what you have said - you seem to be a really good shot with a handgun. So you tell me, with your very accurate shot placement will a 9mm make the kill or not?

No, I do not think any 9mm round will kill a deer or hog as fast and cleanly as a .44 mag or even .357. This comes from my experience of the .44 mag being about twice as effective on game as the .357. Yes, a 9mm will kill a deer or hog if it's put in the right place and it gets past the ribs, so will a .22. I doubt it would do the job as fast and may take way too long, and let the animal get away to die slow and the meat wasted.

As for head shots, the .22 has been known to slide along the skull of men under the skin and never get past the bone. It's possible a 9mm might do that on hogs and deer if the angle is wrong. There was a dentist who was shot by a druggie something like five times in the head with a .22 handgun. The dentist took the gun away and beat his brains out with it. Not to say the .22 fails to get past the skull 100% of the time.

Memories of law enforcement shootings of decades past when the criminals went down and out fast back when magnum revolvers were still in use by some agencies coupled with all the shootings nowadays where the criminal is hit many times and stays in the fight is what prompted me to post (that and my experience with handgun hunting). I saw a vid out of South America where a man with a knife killed about four cops armed with handguns and rifles! At least one cop died within seconds of being stabbed. Finally, a cop shot the nut several times but he lived! He was able to stay awake and sit up while most of the cops died before they could get them in a car to haul to the hospital. It was the result of no training, but that's not the point.