Over penetration and risk to bystanders

For clarity, the FBI 12-18" penetration requirement is in ballistic gelatin, NOT in people. There is no direct comparison between gelatin and people.
+1

Additionally, modern premium defensive ammunition in most handgun calibers will not have enough residual energy after passing through one person to inflict much injury to a second.

As to bystanders, if a bad guy is in a clump of innocent people you do not pull the trigger. That will greatly lower your odds of hitting the wrong person.
 
If only Law Enforcement is involved, a missed or over penetrate shot attributed to Law Enforcement, is hung on the bad guy for starting the problem. His illegal actions caused the chain of events which injured innocent people. What is different if civilians are involved.
 
I agree with those saying that a miss is more concerning than over-penetration.

For those who say that over-penetration is a big concern, please cite a case where it actually happened and an innocent was harmed.

Three events from my personal experience;

A man (retired high school principal) shot a dog that was barking at a little kid in a parking lot, the bullet went through the dog and hit another little kid, did not kill either of his targets, but the kid was more seriously injured than the dog. I responded to the call and the shooter was absolutely devastated!

A man in my home town decided to shoot himself in the head, the bullet went through his skull, the wall to his house and into his neighbors house through another wall and hit a friends baby laying in a crib. Fortunately it just caused a bruise.

On one of my first deer hunts I shot a nice buck, walked to him and there were two deer laying dead. I never saw the second deer that had been standing behind him. I learned a life long lesson right then.
 
Three events from my personal experience;

A man (retired high school principal) shot a dog that was barking at a little kid in a parking lot, the bullet went through the dog and hit another little kid, did not kill either of his targets, but the kid was more seriously injured than the dog. I responded to the call and the shooter was absolutely devastated!

A man in my home town decided to shoot himself in the head, the bullet went through his skull, the wall to his house and into his neighbors house through another wall and hit a friends baby laying in a crib. Fortunately it just caused a bruise.

On one of my first deer hunts I shot a nice buck, walked to him and there were two deer laying dead. I never saw the second deer that had been standing behind him. I learned a life long lesson right then.
"Bullet" is a very general statement. A 9mm bullet from a 357 has very different balistics than a 9mm bullet from a 380
 
Like others have mentioned I'd be more worried about hit ratio, (LE is about 20%.) But if you're really concerned about it then carry a 380acp. Current 380 loads have very good expansion and struggle to meet the 12 inch penetration mark. Before the Miami shooting the optimal penetration for bullets was 6-8 inches, it was changed for considerations like angle shots and going through forearms and other barriers.
 
In a situation where you have the possible advantage of surprise, and are not the "current victim" would your hit ratio would go up? In the situation I first described at the start of the thread was an actual terrorist attack where the terrorist came in with a sword and started hacking at people, you might have the advantage of a less pressured first shot.. so the hit probability should increase. Still the over penetration factor is relevant...

There are so many factors to consider before pulling that trigger! And each situation is unique.
 
I respect your thought process in thinking this through, but I think you are way over thinking it. Unless you are really cool under stress, most folks are fixated on the threat and/or cover.

In your hack hack situation, I would tell you to close the distance. With a sword, he isn't much of a threat outside contact distance. The closer they are, the easier they are to hit. Faced with a firearm, I would tell you to get cover immediately, unless you had no time. From cover, you can assess the situation and act.

In regards to your thought process, I tell my men they have to figure out now what they will do in every conceivable situation (like you are now). If you have to think about it when the time comes, you have already lost.
 
Three events from my personal experience;...
So, a dog, a guy that had a gun less than an inch from his head and a deer with a high power rifle? Yeah, still looking...

I'm sure it has happened. It's just really rare.

The concept of over-penetration is real. I'm not trying to minimize that. We still need to be cognizant of rule #4: Be aware of your target and what's in line with it. All I'm getting at is over-penetration is not as huge an issue as some make it out to be.
 
Mass Ayoob was just covering this topic and said to take your shot low aiming up in case it goes through your target that hopefully it will continue up and over non targets. He explained it way better but that's what I got out of it.
 
I carry a 44 special or a 45 ACP with fragmenting rounds because 44 and 357magnum in a SD situation in a crowded room could OP. I even carried Glazer rounds for awhile. You adjust to the environment you travel in. If in the wilderness with grizzly bear or mountain lion, 44 magnum is a good thing and OP is not an issue. It would be hard to fathom any jury or law enforcement holding a civilian accountable for OP when people are being hacked to death... but crazier things have happened. (There are insurance policies available to protect you from legal costs.) The potential lives saved makes me think, take the shot... but don't miss. It is a situation all of us should consider before having fractions of a second to make that decision. Perhaps some folks should consider not carrying if they can't answer this question.
 
Mass Ayoob was just covering this topic and said to take your shot low aiming up in case it goes through your target that hopefully it will continue up and over non targets. He explained it way better but that's what I got out of it.

The training I received instructed us to close in on the threat and angle the shot downward, (movie theater scenario.) Either one, angled up or down, it's good to have a plan ahead of time.
 
The comparison between the rifle rounds mentioned in some posts and any handgun round has no real value. Any rifle round has much more likelihood of much deeper penetration and exit from the target than does any handgun round. Yes, it can and has happened. But we must recognize the significant difference between rounds fired from a rifle and a handgun.

The greatest protection against over penetration is to actually hit a substantial portion of a body with your handgun. And yes, a potentially expanding bullet is a much better choice compared to an FMJ or round nosed lead slug for the kind of shooting being discussed here. On the other hand, lack of sufficient penetration is the most likely cause of failure to stop a predator, followed very closely by the lack of a bullet strike in the area with the most potential for maximum "stopping power".

We can either try to make the shot or we can stand by and wring our hands. In either case, we (hopefully) must live with the consequences of either choice. So we each must make our own choice!
 
While ballistic gel and human flesh are different, the use of bg to standardize testing is completely accepted. FBI penetration standards are minimum 12" and maximum 18". Most expanding ammo from a defensive handgun does right at 12"-14".

I worked at Barnes Bullets and we set up a chronograph on the far side of a 12" ballistic gel block. Most expanding defensive ammo of any caliber 9mm-45ACP will now perform similarly to meet the FBI specs. We shot some 9mm Barnes TAC-X (solid copper, expanding) bullets through 12" of gel. Those that exited after full expansion were traveling less than 300 fps max, most much slower. Since they were already expanded, penetration at that slow velocity would be minimal, or non-existent. This exit velocity is also decreasing very rapidly over a short distance. BTW, a 91 mph fastball is going about 200 fps, but the ball having greater mass retains more velocity and energy than a little bullet.

The fear of making a decent defensive shot, having the bullet expand, penetrate deeply enough to exit, and then travel further and have enough energy left to kill an innocent is so very remote that it is of no concern to me.

If someone is worth shooting because he is in the act of killing innocents, shoot the bugger. Call Masaad as an expert witness if you need to, but you won't.

Rastoff has it right--document a case of a common self defense bullet expanding, penetrating completely through the perp, striking and killing an innocent down range.

Not rifles, not dogs, not missed shots, not special angles up or down, just plain and simple defensive handgun bullet over penetrating causing death beyond the target. Even if there are one or two out of many thousands of such shootings, statistically, it is not a concern compared to watching a lunatic (man, woman or child) kill person after person.

This is, IMO, one of these "let's sell magazine articles and books" topics that in truth is a non-issue. Hypothetically possible, sure. Reality? Not.
 
Last edited:
For those who say that over-penetration is a big concern, please cite a case where it actually happened and an innocent was harmed.

The Kennedy Assassination

The first round that struck President Kennedy also struck Governor Connally . . .

I would contest that case as being an innocent, more like "two birds with one stone"

...calm down, it's just a joke :)

To the op,
Would you rather see the perp continue to kill or would you rather just pull out your CCW and stop the threat (especially if he pointed the gun at you or your loved ones). Either be situationally aware and get away or stop the threat.
 
Frangibles

Solving the non-problem of over penetration by using an inferior projectile that does not penetrate deeply enough to reach vital organs evidences a lack of understanding of the requirement for penetration, with expansion, for relatively wimpy self defense handgun rounds to be effective.

Frangibles have been tested by major LE agencies and always found wanting. I don't know of any agency that puts lives at risk by using shallow penetrating bullets.

A majority of expanding handgun bullets shot center mass do not exit. Those that do pose little risk to humans beyond the target. Substituting a solution that makes a problem worse (stopping a threat) just doesn't make sense to me.
 
I thank you all who have put in your knowledge, experience, and opinions on this topic...

I raised this issue because I feel compelled to stop such an brutal and horrible attack. I am not LEO or Military trained/ experienced... I'm just one of the many citizens who believe "The Only Thing Necessary for the Triumph of Evil is that Good Men Do Nothing" So I enter this "calling" at a much greater disadvantage than those in professions that offer the needed training. I try to put myself in different scenarios and think them through.. and hopefully, it will make me more prepared if I'm ever in such a situation.

From what we've discussed here, I better understand the risk of over penetration, and can factor that realistically into this, and other, scenarios.

I hope those in the military or law enforcement, can appreciate how serious many of us take this responsibility. I've never faced a more serious decision than carrying concealed and the responsibilities / consequences involved. It is a lifelong endeavor of learning and training. We unfortunately, do not have easy access to the training we need. Forums like this, help fill this need.

Thank you again for your comments..
 
I think first you are not on guard to protect everyone if you are ccw even if people are being sliced up unless they are your family. Now if you feel threatened or are being threatened you will need to maneuver into a position for what ever it is your going to do. If they have a sword keep tables between you, throw a chair at him keep moving if he charges you shoot in defense but I don't think opening up across a crowded room a good thing even if people are being hacked.

Dave
 
I think first you are not on guard to protect everyone if you are ccw even if people are being sliced up unless they are your family. Now if you feel threatened or are being threatened you will need to maneuver into a position for what ever it is your going to do. If they have a sword keep tables between you, throw a chair at him keep moving if he charges you shoot in defense but I don't think opening up across a crowded room a good thing even if people are being hacked.

Dave

It is true there is no legal duty for a CCW to protect anyone. Carrying a gun for the preserving the life of innocents is a choice based on personal moral commitments. These vary from one person to another.

Under many circumstances it is wise to retreat and preserve life that way.

On the other hand, with good scenario based training and confidence in one's ability and equipment, going after a mass murderer is a justifiable decision.

Exact circumstances will never be the same. One must have the confidence to adapt and overcome if attacking is the choice.

New CCW'ers and those with insufficient training, lack of confidence, or a higher loyalty to one's own family, can live comfortably with their decisions not to engage.

It's a tough choice, and those who imagine scenarios and outcomes ahead of time are wise.

To FederalHST, good on you for thinking this through and asking for guidance. Unfortunately, there are some influential people in the gun community who prey on the negative legal aspects of self defense shootings. If you have a justifiable shoot and don't shoot your mouth off without an attorney present, you will most often be fine with the law. Bad shoot, though, and stupid misstatements afterward = different outcome. It does take time (years) to get enough knowledge and training to feel confident in your decisions.
 
Back
Top