stopping power

Originally posted by Greg1911:
How good is the .223 for stopping attackers at close range the two legged types? I would think a close range a good .45 hp would be better can that small narrow slug do alot of damage or is it built to be shot at long distances?

Click to expand...

Not a single caliber - pistol, rifle, or shotgun (gauge) - is a guaranteed manstopper. For any caliber you care to mention, someone can tell a horror story about how some scumwad took five hits from a .50 Browning and kept coming.

However, the .223 is far superior to the .45 in whatever sort of stopping power you wish to measure. At the relatively low velocities of pistol calibers, the only wound channel that really counts is the permanent hole that the bullet drills through the body. At rifle velocities (3000 fps or so) that little .223 bullet stirs up quite a fuss, and blows comparatively HUGE holes through tissues, organs, etc, particularly if/when the bullet yaws inside the body or if you're using soft point ammo.

There is zero question that the .223 is the better caliber to take to a gunfight, given the choice.

Originally posted by Greg1911:
yeah 3000 fps is quick its just the size of the slug doesn't look like much .223 hollow points would probably be a good idea for defense also.

Click to expand...

Having shot stuff with both (but no people) I would not characterize the .223 as vastly superior to the .45...in fact in deer it has proven inferior in the cases I have seen (but that is explainable and does not make it a bad defensive round). I must hasten to point out that a few or even a few dozen cases does not a "study" make.

It truly depends on the bullet, the location of the hit and the physical/mental state of the subject.

Even the 55gr. FMJ bullet will tumble in 5 or 6" and expand or fragment leaving a large wound about 75% of the time (according to Dr. Fackler)... unless the twist of the barrel is so fast that it makes the bullet too stable. On the other hand it has been known to tumble and come back out the same side it went in.

On the whole, I regard it as a good defensive round, somewhat superior to ball in a .45 in most cases (but not all) but less predictable...of course that is why we shoot more than once

Of course that is just one perspective. Others have probably had different experiences.

Best regards,
Jim Higginbotham

I don't know the ballistic differences as far as stopping power/performance, but I'm gonna buy myself a Springfield M1A Super Match for Xmas....I like a 165-gr. or so bullet much better than the lighter zingers in the .223. F=MA and all that...

Incidentally, I own a mini-14 (used exclusively for plinking) and I love it. Great bang for the buck, it's about 18 years old now, and still shoots 4" groups at 100 yds., which is all I'd expect from it under the best of circumstances.

Another small size/big bang weapon to consider if you're stuck in Kalifornia is the HK SL-7 series. It's the HK 91 action on a wooden sport stock, carbine length. Oh, it's available in .223 or .308.

I do remember reading somewhere, I don't know if it was Evan Marshall's work or elsewhere, that in US police application, both the .223 and the .308 were the only two calibers where every single reported use resulted in a 1-shot stop. Every. Time.

/TCP

------------------
Measure Twice....Cut Once

This may be a silly reply, and if it is disregard it.

But...It seems to me that "scaring the hell" out of a two legged is worth something.

For example, whenever I go to the range, it takes me a minute ot two to "adjust" to the gun fire.
The point is , it wouldn't matter whether someone was shooting at me w/ a 9 or a .45, either way I'm probably going to blitz out and run!!! (or trip and fall

It might make more difference on an animal than a human, i.e. needing to make a greater "impression" on an animal.
But, everytime I have been shot/attacked during simulations w/ 9mm simunitions, even the paultry effect of that has been confusing and stunning.

If you get shot in the hands (which seems to happen a lot) then you realize "Gee, I would be in a whole world of hurt right now if this was real"

Too, if someone shoots you, then zip!, they are gone. It is very confusing. You stand there feeling kinda "out of place". I'm trying to make a point about tactics. Meaning, if someone pops out and hits you 3 or 4 times w/ a .22LR, then zip! they are gone! The effect is magnified.
It's very confusing. You would have to be in an altered state of consciousness on drugs, sheer meaness, or perhaps have a lot of training to overcome this and continue fighting in a cogent fashion, I believe.

Just my observations. I could be wrong.
All things being equal though. Why not hit as hard as you can , i.e. .45, .308, 12ga. ?
(By the way, I am a total sissy 9mm, .223, 20ga. )

[This message has been edited by elsworth (edited 11-29-2001).]

Elsworth:

Your average citizen would react pretty much the same as you do. Problem is, your average citizen is not the kind of person who breaks into your home with hostile intent. Those types of far-below-average citizen often "get their courage up" through the use of drugs, and they are quite a different animal. I once read a report about some dirtbag strung up on PCP in LA whom about 6 policemen were trying to take down. He leapt onto the hood of a police car, put his fist through the windshield to get at the officer inside who was calling for backup, missed, then pulled his fist out and put it through a second time, grabbed the officer, and was throttling him before another officer from behind put some sort of choke old on the perp and cut off the blood flow to his brain. The guy finally passed out. Supposedly, he broke most of the bones in his fist the first time he smashed it through the windshield. My martial arts instructor at that time told me that against such guys, your best bet is to take out their knees so they can't chase you as you run away, because you're not likely to take them out before they take you out. Nowadays, the dirtbags often wear bulletproof vests.

The best first line of defense is a German Shepherd or some such type of dog. 24/7/365, plus you can walk it around the neighborhood and let folks know you're protected, something frowned upon if you do that with your firearms. A good backup (because the dog can't do everything), of course, is a firearm.

Which leads me to wonder why all the interest in .223 and .308 in terms of home defense. I know of only long arm applications for those rounds, and if I'm going to use a long arm it's going to be a shotgun--plenty o'power and difficult to miss. However, a long arm can be difficult to navigate through your home, thus the need for a pistol.

Are there .223 or .308 pistols out there?

__________________________________________

In the immortal words of Harpo Marx: " ."

I'm going to have to echo the "right tool for the right job" mantra here. The ultimate home defense gun, bar none, is the shotgun. Inside of 20 yards, you aren't going to match the knockdown power, lethality, "oh crap" factor, or controllability of a two handed 12 or 20 g pump gun with a ghost ring and flashlight grip. Outside of 20 yards and you don't have much of a self defense case.

The .308 is very nice for popping someone from 3 blocks away, but do you really want that much lead with that much snot behind it going through walls in your house? Just the possibility of collateral damage (let alone the possible liability) is enough for me to disqualify it entirely as a home defense gun.

The .223 is pretty nice in this regard. It does relatively little collateral damage, is very controllable, and offers more than adequate lethality. I am a particular fan of the M4, but can see plenty of other possibilities as well.

I am a bit surprised no one has mentioned the AK considering both the fact that it is inexpensive AND an outstanding home defense gun. It has the ballistic properties of a 30-30 and can be had in a number of very usable CQB configurations.