Doug M.
Member
I doubt it is - the ammo is too expensive when bought in semi-truck loads as my client agency does. There are probably individual authorized purchase users in agencies that din't have stupid uniformity fetishes.
F.B.I. why .10mm. over .45ACP. ?
- Thread starter DC3-CVN-72
- Start date
SnidelyWhiplash
Member
Most law enforcement agencies buy the same brand ammunition..."low bid". A few...like the FBI does tests for ammunition to fit their specific criteria for performance. Other agencies will piggy back on that thinking if it's what the Feebs use...it's good for them...whether it fits their needs or not.
I don't know why they didn't stay with the .357 magnum.
Always been a 357 fan. My first purchase was a 6904 but when I got a 19-3 I fell in love. I carried a 627 for duty until they told me that I could no longer carry a 357 for work. Never had much of a desire for the 10MM but was very curious about the 400 CorBon but it never took off.
I know that there are very smart people at the FBI but never understood why shooting jello was the be all/end all with testing. They used to shoot sheep that closely resembled us but I understand why they stopped that. Who thinks that shooting a block of gelatin give you a good perspective on how a bullet will work on a 2 legged beast. Just like rolling the dice on a craps game, shooting a person is so much different than shooting gelatin.
I'll carry whatever they tell me and rely on location instead of caliber.
I know that there are very smart people at the FBI but never understood why shooting jello was the be all/end all with testing. They used to shoot sheep that closely resembled us but I understand why they stopped that. Who thinks that shooting a block of gelatin give you a good perspective on how a bullet will work on a 2 legged beast. Just like rolling the dice on a craps game, shooting a person is so much different than shooting gelatin.
I'll carry whatever they tell me and rely on location instead of caliber.
Yes!
Here I offer an explanation that satisfied my mind on this question.
The FBI took a sampling from their records of successful life or death combats. We have not been shown this raw data, but others have tried similar analysis.
The rounds identical to those that had behaved satisfactorily in shootings, were shot into the ballistic gelatin and provided the basis for the penetration and expansion requirements in gelatin.
No person involved at any level ever said or thought that the 11 inches to 18 inches of penetration in gelatin corresponded to any measurement of penetration in any real shooting of any criminal human whatsoever.
No one at the FBI ever said or thought for a moment that performance in ballistic gelatin would assure satisfactory performance in a fight.
That particular agency decided that for their purposes, under-penetration is a thing. Many experts disagree.
That particular agency decided that for their purposes, over-penetration is a thing. Many experts disagree.
If someone wants to agree with them, that is all well and good. However there is no reason to think that performance in clear gelatin, or in water jugs, or wet phone books or anything other than properly BB calibrated ballistic gelatin has anything to do with what the FBI did in their testing.
Please correct me with my thanks.
Kind Regards!
BrianD
SnidelyWhiplash
Member
Shooting into a medium such as ballistic gelatin only gives a comparison of various calibers, bullet designs and loadings against one another in that medium. The best extrapolations of the performance in a human body is guesswork at best no matter how scientific the methodology. We use ballistic gelatin because it's nicer than shooting into real bone and flesh of a live target.
No ballistic gelatin can take into account the potential human target's state of mind...bone structure...body mass...whether drugs are in the system...whether thick clothing is being worn...whether barriers are involved...too many variables to count.
A late friend and firearms instructor said he relied on what he called "observed reality"...not placing excessive reliance on lab tests.
The FBI has its own set of criteria a handgun round must meet...whether it's real world or applicable to others is a question only time and lethal incidents can answer.
No ballistic gelatin can take into account the potential human target's state of mind...bone structure...body mass...whether drugs are in the system...whether thick clothing is being worn...whether barriers are involved...too many variables to count.
A late friend and firearms instructor said he relied on what he called "observed reality"...not placing excessive reliance on lab tests.
The FBI has its own set of criteria a handgun round must meet...whether it's real world or applicable to others is a question only time and lethal incidents can answer.
Doug M.
Member
The FBI did not pull that work out of thin air. It started with Dr. Fackler. I am pretty sure that Dr. Roberts has some historical info you can find. The calibrated gelatin testing is a crude effort to predict performance. Its kind of like the development of Cooper test for LE fitness, which are far as I know was first used at my academy in the mid-80s. The run is not a test of running - it was validated against a treadmill based test for oxygen uptake, because it is a LOT cheaper than such a formal test. The standards were abysmal - the passing grade was between "poor" and "fair".
