A newbie question on penetration

Joined
Oct 23, 2008
Messages
765
Likes
67
Location
Leominster
Feedback: 0 / 0 / 0
I've been doing quite a bit of reading on defensive ammo and they always refer to how much penetration a particular round will have. It seems that anything less that 15 inches is not considered good enough. My question is why 15 inches? I'm an average sized male 6 foot ~200 lbs I have a 44 inch chest. My chest is only ~8 inches front to back, 25 inches shoulder to shoulder and 17 inches arm pit to arm pit. Given those numbers even if the bullet were to enter my shoulder it would hit my heart in less than 15 inches in most cases my heart is closer to an average of 6 inches from my skin. With 15 inched of penetration a straight on shot to my chest is going to exit the body which as I understand is not desirable because 1. all of the energy wasn't deposited in the body and 2. an innocent bystander could be hit. So what am I missing?
 
In the FBI's Miami Shootout, one of the shooters was shot from the side through the arm (the round broke the bone), and it didn't penetrate deep enough to hit his heart.

Also, if you fire through a car door, wall, heavy coat, etc. etc. the bullet will slow down and have less penetration than it would against bare ballistic gelatin.
 
In the FBI's Miami Shootout, one of the shooters was shot from the side through the arm (the round broke the bone), and it didn't penetrate deep enough to hit his heart.

Also, if you fire through a car door, wall, heavy coat, etc. etc. the bullet will slow down and have less penetration than it would against bare ballistic gelatin.

Thanks. I guess ultimately my question should have been why the fixation on penetration and not force exerted/muzzle energy. It seems to me that a bullet that is capable of exerting 450 ft lbs of energy but can only penetrate 5 inches would be better than one that exerts 100 ft lbs but penetrate 20 inches. Which ultimately I guess is a rhetorical question as that can only be answered by the writers.
 
Thanks. I guess ultimately my question should have been why the fixation on penetration and not force exerted/muzzle energy. It seems to me that a bullet that is capable of exerting 450 ft lbs of energy but can only penetrate 5 inches would be better than one that exerts 100 ft lbs but penetrate 20 inches. Which ultimately I guess is a rhetorical question as that can only be answered by the writers.

I sure hope you don't mean the gun porn writers. [laugh] Most of what they say is just their opinion.

My advice is do your own research, read everything you can find on the subject, and then draw your own conclusions. You'll be the one using, carrying, and buying whatever gun/ammo combo you choose, so you should feel comfortable with it and know what it's capable of, as well as it's limitations.
 
I sure hope you don't mean the gun porn writers. [laugh] Most of what they say is just their opinion.

Yup that's who I was talking about as that's been the source of most of the reviews I've read [laugh].

My advice is do your own research, read everything you can find on the subject, and then draw your own conclusions. You'll be the one using, carrying, and buying whatever gun/ammo combo you choose, so you should feel comfortable with it and know what it's capable of, as well as it's limitations.

I completely agree which is why I asked you fine gentlemen here for some input. [grin] Thanks again for the replies.
 
Back
Top Bottom