Any high velocity hunting round would be worse than the bullets from a “military grade” bullets as many military bullets are meant to incapacitate and create logistics logjam vs. outright killing someone.
Where as hunting rounds are meant to kill as quickly as possible to prevent animal suffering.
This used to be my understanding as well, but I’ve since learned that it wasn’t the reason the military selected the 5.56/.223: http://anarchangel.blogspot.com/2007/02/okay-so-why-did-we-choose-556.html
Bingo! “military bullets are meant to incapacitate and create logistics logjam”
A wounded soldier has to be carried back behind the lines for treatment and that takes two of his comrades. So three
fighters are removed from the front lines.
That’s one of the lamest analogies ever fabricated (but that doesn’t prevent it being perpetuated on the Internet, thank you very much).
A wounded soldier who still has use of his trigger finger potentially is still in the fight. So long as he can pull a trigger, he still can kill you (unless you’re Sgt. Alvin York, and you wounded him by shooting off his trigger finger).
You also must think soldiers are too stupid to figure out how many hits it takes from any particular cartridge to produce a lethal wounding. Trust me on this, they don’t want the guy trying to kill them simply wounded, they want him dead Dead DEAD. And they without exception will adjust their tactics accordingly. For instance, when news circulated as to how ineffective the SS109 cartridge was, soldiers universally compensated by shooting every target 4-6 times instead of the customary controlled pair. Or sometimes they’d just keep shooting until the target noticeably went limp. The grunts have a saying, ounces equals pounds and pounds equal pain, but they pretty much all would opt for carrying two or three extra magazines of 5.56 rather than risk a trip home in a body bag because the ammo WAS NOT mission effective and could only “wound.”