There are lots of studies from the FBI and from others that dispute that conclusion which is why every federal, state and local law enforcement agency in the country uses hollow point ammunition.Originally Posted by willtill
Military goals and personal goals are often not the same. Private citizen shootings happen most often in very close distances—most within 5 feet. At such distances, fractions of a second matter in regards to stopping the fight.
We are not looking to incapacitate the assailant so we can force multiply, we are seeking as stop the attack as close to instantly as possible. The faster a gunfight ends, the less chance there is of you getting shot, stabbed, etc.
Military personnel are not held legally responsible in war when bystanders are shot by over penetrating ammunition. Private citizens ARE, which is another reason why ball ammo is a dangerous choice for personal defense. Your explanation of why you carry ball ammunition is a recipe for conviction. My teaching, and those of other professionals, is not just for winning the gun fight, but for also winning the court fight—with a strong preference for not going getting into a shooting, and not going to court if involved in a shooting.
My preference, and the preference of every LE an Mil instructor (teaching private citizens) that I know—which is many, given my profession—is that ammo should do as much damage to the body, as soon as possible, in order to stop the ability of the attacker to continue. By definition, that is hollow points.
Ball ammunition will greatly reduce your ability to stop the attacker and will greatly increase the possibility of injuring bystanders.
Thank you for correcting my error on the Geneva Convention.
In terms of the dum-dum ammo, that has been told to me directly by several soldiers. They were older so that practice may have been before your time
Reply With Quote