FMJ Ball For Self Defense?

[unclejames]

If you are ever in court for a self defense shooting the use of factory ammo can be to your benefit as it applies to coroborating your account of the distance between you and your attacker. Powder burns on the attacker from a factory round can be tested and verified, thus adding to the credibility of your statement. Also try to retain the the factory box of ammo you use or sd carry. Masad Ayoob is an excellent source of sound info for protecting yourself from the aftermath of a shooting, another source is Marty Hayes.

[tt11758]

If you are ever in court for a self defense shooting the use of factory ammo can be to your benefit as it applies to coroborating your account of the distance between you and your attacker. Powder burns on the attacker from a factory round can be tested and verified, thus adding to the credibility of your statement. Also try to retain the the factory box of ammo you use or sd carry. Masad Ayoob is an excellent source of sound info for protecting yourself from the aftermath of a shooting, another source is Marty Hayes.

Agree 100%.

Not to mention that if you find yourself in court you don't want to have to answer some smarmy-ass layer's question, like, "Why did you feel it necessary to carry custom-loaded ammunition?  Weren't factory bullets deadly enough for you?"  As sure as Obama is a scumbag, you'll hear some form of that question if you carry reloads for SD and wind up using them.

[MikeBjerum]

Keep in mind that there may be a day you need to carry handloads.  I have done it!  When ammo is of short supply you make the decide if you want a loaded gun or not.  I could not get reliable ammunition for my gun.  I had plenty of handloaded jhp at factory spec.  I'd rather explain to a judge and jury that I used that ammunition because there was no reliable ammunition in the area available at the time, and that I have the reloading specs by ABC company and my records and chrono results to back it up than to have my wife crying on the evening news because for the first time in a decade I was unarmed and that was the day I needed it.

I am not advocating that we totally change and get reckless, but as I say in many other cases - we need to quit letting the other side set the bar.  Some day I might have to explain why I felt it necessary to use a .45 when I own a .40, a .38, a .380, and a 9.  Why did I feel the need to use a massive .45 when the local police are fine with a .40 and the military is satisfied with 9 mm.  We can't let them make our choices for us!

Anybody for Jersey, New York, Chicago or D.C. care to chime in here?

[Majer]

if it's a good shoot it shouldn't matter in a criminal case,BUT in a civil case you might get hung out to dry.Best thing would be to find out what round your local or state PD carry and use that same type round in your Carry gun.That  way you can say if it's good enough for them it's good enough for me...

[GeorgeCook]

Just to play devil's advocate:

If FMJ ammo is such a bad choice for killing people, there are lot of dead Germans and Japanese who would beg to differ with the conventional wisdom.

As has been brought up before, I think it's shot placement and the number of shots on target that make the difference. I can tell you from personal experience that using HP ammo for self defenese ( this was against a drug dealer's pit bull ) is not a 100% man/dog stopper. But that .45 HP ammo sure did change its mind though....

For the record I do carry HP ammo and prefer it because I want to do the most damage I can possibly do in the shortest amount of time. I think the fellow who is basing his decision on self defense based strictly on cost is focusing on the wrong variable. He should be looking at what is the most effective round for saving his life.

Cheers!
-G

[Sponsor]

[mkm]

I prefer factory hollow points for my edc guns under most circumstances.  There are very few times I would recommend ball: it's all you've got being the primary reason.  I have carried ball while swimming to avoid hollow points expanding in a very wet (or submersed) barrel.  It may be best if you're in the wilderness and your primary concern is penetrating large critters.  I also carry a magazine or two of 9 NATO in the truck just in case I find myself wanting to try and get some extra penetration through a car, etc.; however, I will likely have gone through a magazine or two of JHP's before I get to that point.  And, that is definitely a point I never ever want to get to.

[tombogan03884]

Just to play devil's advocate:

If FMJ ammo is such a bad choice for killing people, there are lot of dead Germans and Japanese who would beg to differ with the conventional wisdom.

As has been brought up before, I think it's shot placement and the number of shots on target that make the difference. I can tell you from personal experience that using HP ammo for self defenese ( this was against a drug dealer's pit bull ) is not a 100% man/dog stopper. But that .45 HP ammo sure did change its mind though....

For the record I do carry HP ammo and prefer it because I want to do the most damage I can possibly do in the shortest amount of time. I think the fellow who is basing his decision on self defense based strictly on cost is focusing on the wrong variable. He should be looking at what is the most effective round for saving his life.

Cheers!
-G

With the understanding that you are simply stating an opposing view, not necessarily your own, I submit that your highlighted comment is meaningless because there is no data to show that the additional 60 years of development would not have led to many more dead Germans and Japanese for the same expenditure of ammunition.
Another reason the highlighted quote is meaningless is because it is comparing high velocity rifle  ammunition, (apples) to lower velocity hand gun ammunition, (oranges )
Thirdly, it is a historical fact that soft nosed expanding bullets manufactured at the Dum Dum Arsenal in India were in fact more effective against South African Boers than were FMJ bullets until outlawed for military use as being "inhumane".
It is a further fact that military forces continue to use FMJ ammunition because of treaties signed in the early 1900's, not because of any relationship to the effectiveness of 21st century expanding ammunition.

[GeorgeCook]

With the understanding that you are simply stating an opposing view, not necessarily your own, I submit that your highlighted comment is meaningless because there is no data to show that the additional 60 years of development would not have led to many more dead Germans and Japanese for the same expenditure of ammunition.
Another reason the highlighted quote is meaningless is because it is comparing high velocity rifle  ammunition, (apples) to lower velocity hand gun ammunition, (oranges )
Thirdly, it is a historical fact that soft nosed expanding bullets manufactured at the Dum Dum Arsenal in India were in fact more effective against South African Boers than were FMJ bullets until outlawed for military use as being "inhumane".
It is a further fact that military forces continue to use FMJ ammunition because of treaties signed in the early 1900's, not because of any relationship to the effectiveness of 21st century expanding ammunition.

Let me clarify what I meant about FMJ ammo and dead enemy soldiers. I was referring to pistol caliber rounds fired from a Thompson Submachinegun for example. And on the opposite side there are many dead American, British, French, and Russian soldiers due to  well placed 9mm rounds from a MP 40. Sorry for not being more clear about that...

My point is FMJ may not be the most efficient ammo for killing people but it sure is a far cry from being an absolute inferior option if that's all you have.

Can you provide the sources for your statements above? I would not mind reading what these authors had to say, as I like reading up on ballistic effectiveness over history.

Thanks!
-G

[Timothy]

1899 Hague Convention Tom!

silliness...

[WatchManUSA]

Let me clarify what I meant about FMJ ammo and dead enemy soldiers. I was referring to pistol caliber rounds fired from a Thompson Submachinegun for example. And on the opposite side there are many dead American, British, French, and Russian soldiers due to  well placed 9mm rounds from a MP 40. Sorry for not being more clear about that...
quote]
I'll contribute to the tread drift.

The Thompson is essentially a rifle using .45 ACP ammo.  It is not a pistol.  I suspect the velocity of a .45 round through a Thompson would be greater than that of a 5 inch barrel of the 1911 handgun.  Also, the Thompson was not very accurate in full auto due to muzzle raise.  It was used as a suppression weapon and not precision shooting.