[ExSoldier]

A friend of mine sent this to me. He is associated with Air Rescue here in Miami Dade and is himself both a former US Army Officer as well as being fully EMT qualified.

We've hashed this question out endlessly here on FR as well as on countless gun forums. Thought you folks would enjoy some sobering facts on a friday night. It's a pretty definitive presentation on the wounding effects of not only the 45 versus the 9mm but speaks to the same for rifles as well. Once more WARNING: Graphic Photos of morgue images showing the actual effects on real bodies, including the body of JFK. This little movie is about 34 minutes long so be prepared to watch and listen carefully. Plus the Dr in question is foreign born so he has a bit of an accent. But he's good with a fairly ummmm dry sense of humor.

[Psalm 144]

I will look at it later. From everything I have heard from POs and combat veterans, there is no comparison between the 9mm and the more effective .45.

Not looking forward to the images but looking forward to the information.

Thanks for posting.

[mnehring]

There is no doubt that from a ballistics perspective the .45 is better, however, it still all comes down to the shooter. Get the gun you are comfortable with and become proficient. Get a lot of range time.

I often carry a Walther PPK which is even smaller of a caliber, a .380 but after thousands of rounds on the range, I think I would line myself up against any gang banger cocking a .45 or 9mm sideways and not worry ballistics tests. (not to say I don’t also have 9mm’s (CZ75s & Walther P99) and .45s(Dan Wesson CZ 1911) as well. So some day that gang banker may get even more unlucky.

[South40]

.

[JRandomFreeper]

I was less than impressed. He played fast and loose with statistics (who hasn't), and lost me on the .223 wound damage RCA. Even cooks know what hydrostatic shock is.

His accent isn't bad, if one isn't a provencial putz. I say that as a guy that lost a lot of his hearing to firearms without hearing protection, loud music, and jets at AB, with hearing protection, up close and personal.

/johnny

[ChildOfThe60s]

Nope, there is no 100% answer. Too many other variables.

I’m way way away from being any sort of authority, but based on what I know I would vote for a 9mm with some high tech DRT frangible ammo over a 45 in most civilian carry situations.

Now if we got into a Bosnia type situation here, that’s a different matter.

[Clint N. Suhks]

Concealed Carry or Open Cary?

[BykrBayb]

Ick! But I’m sure Hubby will find it informative. Thanks for posting.

[hope]

I’ve been told by someone who knows that one hit from .45 would have knocked the Aurora shooter off his game. A 9mm would not.

[conservative sympathizer]

A .45 if attacked by a mob, and a 9mm if one-on-one (or two).

[wjcsux]

I am Old School. The U.S. Army chose the .45 ACP in 1911 to stop the raging loonie Moros in the Philippines because the .38 Colt SAA wasn’t up to the job. Nothing beats successful practical application in a stressful situation. That is all that I needed to make my choice.

[TheConservativeParty]

bookmark

[ottbmare]

bfl

[smokingfrog]

I don’t think he fully answered the question.

Cliff Notes version:

Obviously, if it makes a bigger hole, you have a better chance of causing some damage, but you also need to have some penetration. The .45 is bigger, but also slower, so may not expand as much as a higher velocity 9mm or .40 cal. But even if you have both penetration and expansion, it may not put the bad guy out of commission if you don’t hit something vital in the process. The damage that a rifle round can do compared to a handgun is significant, mosty because of the higher velocity and “hydrostatic shock” resulting in greater tissue damage.

[3Fingas]

Thanks for the posting the link to this video. It was very informative and the doctor had a good presentational style which incorporated some dry humor. What I take away from this presentation is this: Rifle > pistol and shot placement > bullet mass (especially for pistols). So, that is exactly why I switched to 9mm. Less recoil, more bullet capacity gives an edge to the trained shooter using 9mm. I like .45 and it will do the job, but I like my chances better with more bullets and less vs. .45. IMHO.

[Figment]

I’ve never seen anyone argue the destructive capability of the two rounds. I use 9mm for the simple reason of putting more rounds at the target in a convenient size gun to carry.

[2ndDivisionVet]

For self-defense: .22 beats .45
http://www.wnd.com/wnd_video/for-self-defense-22-beats-45/

[Bshaw]

Gun injury data Ping!

[running_dog_lackey]

>Thought you folks would enjoy some sobering facts on a friday night.>

Its Friday night. Who wants to be sober?

[where's_the_Outrage?]

I use this posting as a reference:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/849728/posts

[Nifster]

34 minutes long....not gonna bother