Handguns suck for self defense (Graphic Video)

[unshelledpilot]

I came across this presentation from Dr. Andreas Grabinsky, a surgeon in Seattle. I'll let the presentation speak for itself. It has opened my eyes a bit to what kind of damage handgun calibers really do, and how, in a self defense scenario, the rifle is king.

Good watch if you have some time.

[video=youtube;tku8YI68-JA]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tku8YI68-JA&feature=youtu.be[/video]

I'd love to hear some opinions from the EMT's and MD's on the matter.

 

[nakinate]

I've never really seen anyone say a handgun is preferable to a rifle in terms of effectiveness. But, if argue handguns do not suck for self defense. Are you really going to keep a rifle on you at all times? You're more likely to have a handgun.

 

[unshelledpilot]

I've never really seen anyone say a handgun is preferable to a rifle in terms of effectiveness. But, if argue handguns do not suck for self defense. Are you really going to keep a rifle on you at all times? You're more likely to have a handgun.

I think we can all agree that rifles are a much better choice for self defense. In my opinion, the doc shows quite well that there are no magic calibers. He shows, with clinical evidence, that shot placement is critical. It's very interesting to watch the real effects of bullets on bodies, and how, in the grand scheme of things, caliber is largely irrelevant.

 

[MCgrease08]

The doctor's presentation in the video is for people with very little knowledge of firearms other than what they see in the movies and on TV.

I appreciate the way it was presented, but it's really nothing new for anyone with a basic understand of ballistics or anatomy.

As always, shot placement is key.

 

[Snapdragon]

I wonder why shotgun was not mentioned? I would think that would be superior to rifle.

 

[Yup!]

can't watch the video yet, will later, but just a quick question. I've looked at my paper targets. When I use my .40 the bullet holes are almost 2x as large as when I use my 5.56.

So is the speed of the bullet the difference. Speed versus size?

I also agree that the firearm you have on you, is the BEST! I can ankle carry my .40, but my ankle holster for my AR limits my clothing options.

 

[lovemachine]

I wonder why shotgun was not mentioned? I would think that would be superior to rifle.

In a home defense situation, it's been tested and proved that with a 12G OO buck shot, the load can actually go thru the bad guy, and can even exit thru the home.

With an AR, and with the proper ammo, the bullet won't over penetrate, and can cause enough damage to stop the threat. 5.56 in the XM193 is the good stuff, and it's what I stock up for my own AR.


I can't find the tests that in talking about, but I know the discussion is here on INGO somewhere.

 

[Snapdragon]

In a home defense situation, it's been tested and proved that with a 12G OO buck shot, the load can actually go thru the bad guy, and can even exit thru the home.

With an AR, and with the proper ammo, the bullet won't over penetrate, and can cause enough damage to stop the threat. 5.56 in the XM193 is the good stuff, and it's what I stock up for my own AR.


I can't find the tests that in talking about, but I know the discussion is here on INGO somewhere.

Wow, that's surprising that the AR does not go through and through and the buckshot does. What about slugs?

 

[unshelledpilot]

I wonder why shotgun was not mentioned? I would think that would be superior to rifle.

It was mentioned, almost in passing. The presentation looks to be aimed at other medical professionals, so he covered what is most commonly encountered in trauma centers.

 

[lovemachine]

Wow, that's surprising that the AR does not go through and through and the buckshot does. What about slugs?

Slugs will over penetrate. That's why a lot of LEO's will carry slugs for their shotguns to shoot thru barriers. Even handgun calipers can over penetrate.

 

[Bill B]

can't watch the video yet, will later, but just a quick question. I've looked at my paper targets. When I use my .40 the bullet holes are almost 2x as large as when I use my 5.56.

So is the speed of the bullet the difference. Speed versus size?

I also agree that the firearm you have on you, is the BEST! I can ankle carry my .40, but my ankle holster for my AR limits my clothing options.

that's because the .40 cal is​ almost twice as large as the 5.56 (.22 caliber).

 

[lovemachine]

ALL handguns suck for self defense. They are all compromises. And since you can't carry a rifle and/or a shotgun on your person when out in public, a handgun is the best thing.

And since handguns are compromises, you need to ask yourself how much more are you willing to compromise? Are you satisfied with your handgun of choice to carry? Will a small .380 be enough? Will a compact single stack have enough rounds to stop a fight?

 

[Snapdragon]

It was mentioned, almost in passing. The presentation looks to be aimed at other medical professionals, so he covered what is most commonly encountered in trauma centers.

Yeah, I guess I meant why it was not compared as another option. I get it that it's not that commonly used. I saw the five seconds or so that he mentioned it. I would be curious to see a comparison of rifle injuries vs shotgun injuries, since my primary purpose would be home defense.

 

[unshelledpilot]

Yeah, I guess I meant why it was not compared as another option. I get it that it's not that commonly used. I saw the five seconds or so that he mentioned it. I would be curious to see a comparison of rifle injuries vs shotgun injuries, since my primary purpose would be home defense.

I would like to see something like that as well. Although the doc did make it seem like if someone was hit with a rifle round, there's not much he could do to help.

 

[unshelledpilot]

ALL handguns suck for self defense. They are all compromises. And since you can't carry a rifle and/or a shotgun on your person when out in public, a handgun is the best thing.

And since handguns are compromises, you need to ask yourself how much more are you willing to compromise? Are you satisfied with your handgun of choice to carry? Will a small .380 be enough? Will a compact single stack have enough rounds to stop a fight?

THIS!! I've made my decisions based on this. I carry what I can comfortably and accurately hit with 99% of the time, and I carry ALOT of it (50+ rounds). There is no such thing as a fight stopper in handgun calibers.

 

[Bill of Rights]

I've never really seen anyone say a handgun is preferable to a rifle in terms of effectiveness. But, if argue handguns do not suck for self defense. Are you really going to keep a rifle on you at all times? You're more likely to have a handgun.

I can't get the video to load due to "need to sign in" issues (forgot both password and original address used to sign up for my google ID :-\ ) but to answer this point, I'll quote the old saying: “The only purpose for a pistol is to fight your way back to the rifle you should have never laid down.” (I thought it was Jeff Cooper, but what I found said it came from Clint Smith. )

It would seem to me that each is the tool for the job, in different circumstances. The pistol is more effective in tight quarters and the most likely to have on you. The rifle is more effective if you have room to use it. The barrel is longer so it has more pressure (and thus, more speed) behind it, but if the barrel is longer than the distance between you and your enemy, y'know?

I guess the take-away is to have and know both tools and be willing and able to use them if you need them.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[Cygnus]

can't watch the video yet, will later, but just a quick question. I've looked at my paper targets. When I use my .40 the bullet holes are almost 2x as large as when I use my 5.56.

So is the speed of the bullet the difference. Speed versus size?

I also agree that the firearm you have on you, is the BEST! I can ankle carry my .40, but my ankle holster for my AR limits my clothing options.

Yup. Speed is key. Look at the amount of casing ( and by default powder) behind your rifle round versus the pistol round. Speed is a large part of the equation. What equation? : Force= Mass x Velocity

 

[EvilKidsMeal]

Wow, that's surprising that the AR does not go through and through and the buckshot does. What about slugs?

I believe the key to this is, as lovemachine stated, the right round. It's gonna be a balance of velocity, bullet weight, and bullet design. The right ammo for this situation would be ammo that, once it enters the body, either fragments or tumbles and bounces all over. That solves the straight through and through, and also has a greater potential for internal damage.

Besides penetrating soft armor, wasn't the 5.7x28 designed to do this?

EDIT: both the 5.7x28 and 4.6x30 do their damage in this way.

 

[Thor]

Yup. Speed is key. Look at the amount of casing ( and by default powder) behind your rifle round versus the pistol round. Speed is a large part of the equation. What equation? : Force= Mass x Velocity

Up to a point. Past 1900fps speed significantly limits penetration. This is why most safari class bullets are large diameter, flat meplant, lower velocity rounds.

For instance, a 540gr garrets +P Sledgehammer .45-70 round traveling at 1500fps will penetrate decades further than anything at any speed from a .223/5.56mm. You can even hit things with them at range...you just need to understand the ballistics (and pretty much ignore anything short of gale force winds...). This is also why .50bmg may not get sufficient penetration, they sometimes travel fast.

With a small diameter high velocity round hiding behind a leaf is a possibility, with a big bore hiding behind a house may not help.

 

[mondomojo]

What the doctor and this discussion fails to concern itself with is the nature of FATAL wounds and not the treatable/survivable variety. I'd be just as interested, if not more, to hear from a coroner or medical examiner about the nature of the fatal wounds from handguns vs rifles. The video example was of what I would consider a "casual" shooting [for lack of a better term] as opposed to how it would play out if you were defending yourself, aiming for center of mass and emptying the magazine. I agree with the other posts that I'm more likely to have a handgun handy as opposed to a rifle and that even a small handgun is superior to throwing rocks, so really the whole point of this topic is moot. Like everything else, the lens you view the data from colors how you view the facts. And yes, FWIW I watched the whole video.