tapehoser
Master Class
My point exactly. I'd opt for the Hornady Critical Defense ammo so that I don't slice through a family member on the other side of that wall.
Super confused by his conclusion.
5.56 vs. Drywall: Is Your Home Defense Gun Dangerous?
- Thread starter Mike H.
- Start date
Super confused by his conclusion.
Bassbob
Emissary
If you think that Hornady CD won't go through studs and drywall you better think again.
The fact of the matter is pretty much anything will go through drywall. Including birdshot, .22, hollow points, FMJ, whatever. People who load their HD shotgun up with birdshot to avoid over penetration are fooling themselves and tying one hand behind their back at the same time. Use something that will do the job, aim well and situate your house so that you aren't going to ever be shooting at a wall your family members are on the other side of.
HansGruber
Ronin
Ideally, you don’t want to hit the second block…so be aware of where your bullets are going to go.
People seem to forget Rule 4 ALWAYS applies.
tapehoser
Master Class
But that is my point. The dude who did that article picked one of the ammo which not only penetrated the first gel block AND the sheetrock, but it also penetrated 10" into the second gel block. He even states, "This gel block is a member of your family." So why would I want a bullet that would penetrate 10" into my family member vs. another ammo which only penetrates 3" into my family member?
Know what I mean?
And yes, I know that ANY ammo is going to penetrate into that second gel block and buzz RIGHT through sheetrock, but his choice seemed at odds with the point he was trying to make.
Bassbob
Emissary
I did not watch the video. Lots of people make videos. Most of them are shite.
Pitdogg2
Professional
Well a LEO just found out the hard way in California.I agree with everything about this article.
I think the whole " Overpenetration" conversation has only become a talking point in the last several years or so. And frankly I think statistically it's a non-starter. I haven't found anyone who could provide me of an example of a home defense scenario where an innocent person was injured due to over penetration. Like the author says, it has to be able to penetrate walls if you want it to penetrate bad guys.
Frankly I agree with this guy too.
Why overpenetration is nonsense
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not trying to tell you that bullets don’t go through things. Obviously, they dowww.police1.com
The comments are gold. Like this one.
"I'm working on a round that reaches out just far enough to get to the bad guy, then hugs him, and only him, to death."
KillerFord1977
SAINT
I was going to say the same thing.
Super sad what happened to the family and the Officer
Keystone19250
SAINT
And changing room walls aren’t Sheetrock, usually just a thin plastic.
That whole situation is heartbreaking.
Keystone19250
SAINT
It has already been determined that the bullet came from an officer’s gun which will no doubt haunt him for the rest of his life.
Recusant
Hellcat
And it could happen anywhere. Years ago, state troopers fired on a guy in a pickup truck with their ARs. They had the guy corned in a cul-de-sac in a neighborhood and tried to run over them. They not only shot up the guy's truck and killed him, but also riddled the house that was behind the truck. Luckily the folks who lived there had hugged the floor and were not hit. Having to shoot in a crowded place is a marginal endeavor at its best. Just too many bad things can happen.
Yes, that much is known: that the cause of death was an officer's bullet.
But that's not what I meant - and my apologies for not having been more specific.
Here, I think that the details matter even more than who to assign blame to. Details specifically as to whether if it was a clean shot on (and thus through) the backstop that caused the child's death, or if it was a skip off the floor surface of the store, or if it was even a through-and-through.
Absolutely - but if we as everyday citizens are to be held accountable for "stray shots," it is, in my opinion, unconscionable that our law-enforcement is not held to the same standard, particularly when it's often and loudly argued by the "antis" that the reverse should be the case, i.e. that armed citizens should be held to some supposed level of "police training standards," where it comes to the use of firearms in self-defense.
Yes, in the real-world, bad things can -and do- happen.
But with the mission of the police being "to serve and protect," and with the lives of innocents at the top of the sacred Priorities of Life ranking, any casualty among those held hostage or are bystanders are simply never acceptable.
It's not war.
So when those bad things happen, it should not just be chalked up as the cost of doing business. Instead, those who fail at preserving that highest of lifesaving standards should be held accountable.