And that's a "Northernism". Means nothing down here. Never heard it before. Put your big girl panties on Missy and suck it up.
I've got plenty of the Hydra-Shok...just in case.
21 years Army (retired)
...been everywhere, seen everything, done almost everything.
IBA 80537
There is lots wrong carrying 45ACP ball for personal defense.
It is correct that the military used ball ammunition for decades, but it was not because of its effectiveness, it was required to by treaty. Ball is an informal name for full metal jacket, or FMJ bullets. These round-topped, solid bullets are commonly used today for range practice because of their lower costs.
Hollow point bullets are designed to mushroom upon hitting soft tissue, dramatically expanding their width. The wider the bullet, the larger the temporary and permanent wound cavities it creates. An expanded hollow point may double its width or more.
Hollow point bullets are designed to remain within the body, thus transferring all of its energy within the body. This greatly increases its terminal effects.
Compared to hollow points, ball ammunition creates a relatively slim permanent wound channel and very minimal temporary wound cavity. Ball ammunition tends to go through bodies, with far less damage than hollow points, and they pose a real danger to people behind the intended target due to over penetration. Because ball ammunition tends to pass through the body without expansion, it does not transfer much of its energy into the body and its terminal effect is far lower than hollow point bullets.
Soldiers used to cut Xs into the head of ball ammo to help them separate upon impact in order to increase their effectiveness. They were called dumdums.
Over penetration is highly dangerous and never a good thing. Ball ammo is a dangerous choice for self-defense. Hollow points are far better.
Attachment 22701 Attachment 22702 Attachment 22703
If you are not part of the solution, YOU are the problem.
Where the people fear the government you have tyranny. Where the government fears the people you have liberty.
Yes David, I understand the limitations of ball ammunition. It's intent is to wound; rather than kill. It takes more soldiers to evac a wounded comrade from the battlefield; rather than to evac one whom has been killed; thus reducing the effectiveness of the force (force de-multiplier). That is the real basis for our military's use of small arms ball ammunition.
Contrary to what you stated about the military's non-use of hollow point ammunition; that is incorrect. The United States is one of the major powers that did not agree to that portion of the Geneva Convention. The United States is not bound by any treaty which prohibits the use of hollow tip; or frangible small arms ammunition. Here is a cite for you:
https://www.quora.com/Why-cant-the-M...-hollow-points
And as personal rebuttal to another comment you made; in my 21 years of being in the military and consistently using/operating small arms/crew served weapons; we never modified ammunition in the manner that you stated. It's not a common practice.
I can goldarned guarantee you that almost anything hit by .45 ACP ball is going to go down and be stopped in it's tracks. It's a freight train... hitting and passing through. I want my targets to bleed out (Deer as an example ....though I don't hunt them with a .45). As far as over penetration goes with ball ammunition; I want that extra availability/punch with my M1911A1... it's my personal preference for other reasons. It's not like I'm using people for cover...
21 years Army (retired)
...been everywhere, seen everything, done almost everything.
IBA 80537
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.
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
If you are not part of the solution, YOU are the problem.
Where the people fear the government you have tyranny. Where the government fears the people you have liberty.