Scary Incident

[DWS]

My wife and I were out with our 3 week old baby. While we were stopped to put gas in the car, I was bent over in the back seat helping my wife make some adjustments to the car seat when this *&%hole jams a knife against my ribs and demands that I hand over my keys and all of my money. I carry a Taurus PT-111 in a pocket holster in my front pocket and we keep a Ruger P-95 in the map pocket where my wife can reach it. I told the guy I was going to reach into my pocket for the money and keys. (the moron let me!). When I did I nodded to my wife and since she was blocked my body she reached for her gun at the same time. As I am pulling the gun out of my pocket the magazine catch snags on my pocket and up comes the gun and out drops the mag onto the ground. I don't know who was more scared, the BG that we were both armed or me for my stupid move.

Evidently someone had seen what was going one and called 911 and the police showed up right at that moment. They did what they do best and got everything sorted out, took out statements, then hauled him away.

Luckily everything worked out in our favor but when that mag dropped I knew that I was a dead man. thank God I talked my wife into getting her CHL. I am now looking for new holster and won't be carrying in my pocket anymore.

[ 12-10-2001: Message edited by: DWS ]

[ 12-10-2001: Message edited by: DWS ]

[Friday]

What exactly did he need your keys for?


Happy ending to a close call!


Friday

[DWS]

Originally posted by Friday:
What exactly did he need your keys for?
Friday

Take the car I guess.

[Friday]

Yikes! With or without baby in carseat?


An armed citizen is a safe(r) citizen!
Two armed citizens are even better!
What was the baby carrying?

(By the way, I would never carry a weapon that releases the mag on a clothing snag! Just my personal preference!)


Friday

[ 12-11-2001: Message edited by: Friday ]

[DWS]

Baby was carrying a dirty diaper !!!

The funny thing is that I have practiced drawing from that holster thoudands of times without a hitch...I might be looking into a revolver...at the least a different carry method.

[LAWCOP]

DOES the Taurus have a magazine disconnect? If not you would have had at least one shot.
If you make it good you wouldn't need more.

After carrying concealed for over 30+ years have learned a few things, first is, you have to decide on what sacrifices you are willing to make. Are you going to carry and offensive weapon, or, a defensive weapon?

an offensive weapon would be one defined as something you wouldn't worry about going into make an arrest on an armed subject if you had to.
My personal cut off for an offensive was NOTHING smaller then a .357 model 19 2 1/2"if a revolver or 9mm(rarely) if an auto.

if I carried anything smaller (going to the beach, playing golf etc)then the defensive mind set came into play.
a defensive gun is anything that beats a fist at 10 feet.

you have to decide what capability you want to have then decide if it requires sacrifice to comfort, then decide if the sacrifice is worth it, then act and dress accordingly.

In your case you were pretty well covered but the pocket carry wasn't the best choice for that particular weapon in that situation.

you were very fortunate.

where I used to work was an extremely violent city. Took a lot of ribbing for ALWAYS carrying a .45 with extra mags and cuffs on me ALL the time. Yep it sure was a pain in the A**, but I believe in having it and not needing it rather then needing it and not having it. Had just finished my 8p-4A shift on a quiet Sunday morning and was going to the 7-11 in a good part of town for a morning paper, when I came to an intersection and found myself in the middle of a shooting involving 2 Mexicans males and a girl. just stopped at a stop sign and all of a sudden a fight then shots.
because of what I carried I had no hesitation in getting involved because I carried what I safely considered an "offensive" sidearm.
If I had been carrying just a pocket .25, would not have had the option other then to use it defensively to get out of there.

Ther is nothing wrong with carying smaller sized weapons, just don't make the mistakes that have cost lots of lives in thinking that you can declare war on someone because you are armed and it doesn't matter that it is a North American mini revolver in .22 short.
THAT mindset will get you killed. Have seen lots of cops get hurt, stabbed and shot because they thought it didn't matter what gun you had so long as you were armed. Real world doesn't work that way.

Just think carefully about what you want to accomplish in the way of security, and the sacrifice you are willing to make for it and the rest will work itself out because it's hard to put a full size .45 in a pants pocket.

[Mitzi]

Oh my gosh, I would have been so scared. When our son was 3, we took him to a park here. We were merrily waling along when this guy steps out from behind a bush. It was a summer day but he was in a black trench coat. I was so scared but my husband told me to stay calm. My husband told me to get our son and get on his right side. He never took his eyes off the guy. I sure was praying! Luckily, the guy was a small guy and I guess my large husband gave him pause to think. At least, I hope that's what it was. About that time, my son wrenched out of my hand and tried to run ahead. I never saw my husband move so fast but he never took his eyes off the man. He handed our son to me and edged us out of harms way. He even walked backwards, with his eyes on this man.
It was SO scary. Now that we look back, we should have called the police. He sure was wavering on what to do when he saw my husband. We could tell.

[ 12-11-2001: Message edited by: Mitzi ]

[Delta_V]

Originally posted by LAWCOP:
My personal cut off for an offensive was NOTHING smaller then a .357 model 19 2 1/2"if a revolver or 9mm(rarely) if an auto.

As long as you select good ammo and can place your shots, a 9mm will do its job just as well as a .45 will. While it's true that a .22 or .25 doesn't pack much punch, as long as you pick a caliber and a brand of ammo that has proven penetration in ballistics tests, you'll be fine.

[LAWCOP]

Originally posted by PatrickM98:


As long as you select good ammo and can place your shots, a 9mm will do its job just as well as a .45 will. While it's true that a .22 or .25 doesn't pack much punch, as long as you pick a caliber and a brand of ammo that has proven penetration in ballistics tests, you'll be fine.

NOT to get that .45 v 9mm started BUTTTTT,
if you have REALLY good 9mm ammo and it opens and expands well.....it HOPES to get to the diameter that a .45 starts at. and if it doesn't perform it is a .355. that is why I rarely carried a 9mm and the ammo I carried in the .357 was MAX load for the frame..

besides, the point I was making was the break off point between an offensive vs a defensive weapon..I really hope you aren't suggesting that someone bet their lives on .22s and .25s as fight stoppers? Because unless someone is really good at hitting eye sockets for an easier path to the brain..it ain't the thing to bet on.

[Delta_V]

Originally posted by LAWCOP:

it HOPES to get to the diameter that a .45 starts at. and if it doesn't perform it is a .355.

Bullet expansion has very little to do with wound trauma. Good 9mm ammo such as Golden Saber and Gold dot expands to anywhere between .5 and .6 inches, while maintaining adequate penetration. A good .45 round may expand to .75". Now how will an extra couple hundreths of an inch make a signifigant difference in incapacitation? The KEY thing in effecting wound trauma is penetration. If the bullet can't make it to the vital cardiovascular structures that need to be destroyed/damaged, then it makes no difference how much the bullet will expand. That's not even considering the fact that bullet expansion isn't guaranteed in ANY situation since there are so many varibles that can cause a bullet not to expand. Expansion is meerly a luxury that will not in itself cause incapacitation.

Originally posted by LAWCOP:
I really hope you aren't suggesting that someone bet their lives on .22s and .25s as fight stoppers?

Of course not. These calibers don't achieve adequate penetration in ballistics tests (from pocket pistols), and incapacitating someone with one of them would be unlikely. That being said, people do get killed by these small calibers on a regular basis (more people die as a result of being shot by a .22 than by any other caliber). I'm sure you're familiar with the Trooper Coates shooting in SC, he was killed by a single round from a .22 that struck him above the vest. No, I wouldn't suggest going into a gunfight with a pocket pistol, but they shouldn't be laughed at either.

[ 12-11-2001: Message edited by: PatrickM98 ]

[LAWCOP]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by PatrickM98:
[QB]

"Bullet expansion has very little to do with wound trauma."

AH, not exactly correct. Everyone who does ballistics studies and effectiveness evaluation is in agreement the the more frontal area of a projectile, the greater the damage to tissue etc, because of the greater frontal surface the more energy is used or transmitted to the area of impact thereby making the projectile more efficient in it's use of it's energy.


Good 9mm ammo such as Golden Saber and Gold dot expands to anywhere between .5 and .6 inches, while maintaining adequate penetration.

AGAIN it is IF it works and was not plugged by an intervening substance..which is why the FBI did their tests with clothes, glass, wood, dry wall, between the shooter and the target gellatin. some of the rounds HPs plugged and turned to hardball

"A good .45 round may expand to .75". Now how will an extra couple hundreths of an inch make a signifigant difference in incapacitation?"

ASK a trauma surgeaon what that kind of difference makes when an artery or spinal cord is just "nicked" versus being missed.(those critical hundreths of an inch) Again go back to previous that wider,bigger does more damage just because it does

"The KEY thing in effecting wound trauma is penetration. If the bullet can't make it to the vital cardiovascular structures that need to be destroyed/damaged, then it makes no difference how much the bullet will expand."

YES and no, at a certain stage velocity comes into play. The greater the velocity the less necessity for the projectile to hit a "vital" because of the attendant shock from the greater velocity. (the effectivness of a .223 traveling at 2800fps for example, a .22 cal bullet weighing 55 grains) There are rounds out there that can be fired from a handgun that will NOT exit the back of a full pop can shot at 15 feet, they will not fully penetrate a pumpkin or melon. If you had a target behind the pop can or melon when shot it would be unholed....BUT....because of velocity and energy transference, on a torso hit you would be dead a long time before you hit the ground. On the pop can the bullet literally disintegrates but in doing so transmits or transfers ALL of it's energy in that miniscule distance it travels before total bullet failure. Instead of having the effect of energy transference as it travels along the wound channel as a traditional bullet would, the energy is transfered in totality in that minimicro-second of contact. total energy dump. THe effect on living tissue is akin to having a surface detonation of a shaped charge explosion yet there is NO actual bullet penetration.

THe down side to a deep penetrating round is lack of efficient energy transference. Sure you can carry a round running 1200fps but if it completely penetrates and goes through the target and exits at 1100fps, very little energy has been absorbed or transfered to the target.

"That's not even considering the fact that bullet expansion isn't guaranteed in ANY situation since there are so many varibles that can cause a bullet not to expand."

go to the above, bigger bullets will always do more damage simply because they start out big.

Expansion is meerly a luxury that will not in itself cause incapacitation.
see above


"Of course not. These calibers don't achieve adequate penetration in ballistics tests (from pocket pistols), and incapacitating someone with one of them would be unlikely. That being said, people do get killed by these small calibers on a regular basis (more people die as a result of being shot by a .22 than by any other caliber)."

YES they do BUT the REALLY critical part about that is how fast they die, or at least become incapacitated as far as LE application is concerned. . Having investigated at least 200 homicides and easily over 1000 shootings(a very conservative number) in my career I have seen people running around REALLY upset about having been shot with .22s, .25s, .38s, 9MMs, and then have them die later.

Probably the most notorious incident of round failure although the BG took a fatal hit was the FBI shootout in Miami with Platt and Maddox. Autopsy and forensics indicated that Platt received a fatal 9MM silvertip wound early on in the fight, after receiving that fatal hit, he killed agents Grogan and Dove and proceeded to wound 2 other agents...all while he was "dead" on his feet.(one of the reasons why the FBI and other Fed agencies transitioned to autos and allow the option of carrying .45s)

I'm sure you're familiar with the Trooper Coates shooting in SC, he was killed by a single round from a .22 that struck him above the vest.

NO, not familiar with the unfortunate incident.

"No, I wouldn't suggest going into a gunfight with a pocket pistol, but they shouldn't be laughed at either."

Wouldn't laugh at anyone pointing one at me, but would never bet my life on the performance of one either.

[lone ranger]

DWS

Glad to hear all of you are OK!

Nice when the good guys win.

I know that the pistol I carry off-duty will fire at least once even if the magazine drops out

The one department I work for issues a S&W 5906 and they call the magazine disconnect a "safety feature." I always thought it was one more thing that could go wrong when you need it to work.

[Delta_V]

Originally posted by LAWCOP:

Everyone who does ballistics studies and effectiveness evaluation is in agreement the the more frontal area of a projectile, the greater the damage to tissue etc, because of the greater frontal surface the more energy is used or transmitted to the area of impact thereby making the projectile more efficient in it's use of it's energy.

Actually, the idea of 'energy transfer' is something that the respected ballistics experts such as Dr. Fackler and the FBI debunk as myth. You may be interested in reading about this at http://www.firearmstactical.com/briefs3.htm

Originally posted by LAWCOP:
ASK a trauma surgeaon what that kind of difference makes when an artery or spinal cord is just "nicked" versus being missed.(those critical hundreths of an inch) Again go back to previous that wider,bigger does more damage just because it does.

First, if they've made it to the trauma surgeon, then they probably weren't stopped in the first place. Since someone can function between five and 15 seconds AFTER their heart is COMPLETELY destroyed, meerly nicking an artery probably won't help very much.

Originally posted by LAWCOP:
YES and no, at a certain stage velocity comes into play. The greater the velocity the less necessity for the projectile to hit a "vital" because of the attendant shock from the greater velocity.

Again, energy transfer and hydrostatic shock are not acceptable means of incapacitation and are not accepted as such by any reputed ballistics expert (no, gunwriters don't count). First off, velocity has NOTHING to do with penetration. Rounds such as the Glaser Safety Slug have very high velocities, yet they don't get very good penetration in gelatin tests. Rounds such as a 230 gr. .45ACP have low velocites, yet achieve adequate penetration in tests.

Originally posted by LAWCOP:
THe down side to a deep penetrating round is lack of efficient energy transference...very little energy has been absorbed or transfered to the target...bigger bullets will always do more damage simply because they start out big.

Frankly, it doesn't matter how much energy is transferred to the target. If a bullet goes through a person, and on the way severs the aorta or destroys the heart, then it has done its job. It's true that compared to a smaller bullet, if a larger bullet followed the EXACT same trajectory, there is a small chance of more damage being done. Whether or not that amount of damage would be signifigant enough to immediatly stop someone is anyone's guess.

Originally posted by LAWCOP:
Probably the most notorious incident of round failure although the BG took a fatal hit was the FBI shootout in Miami with Platt and Maddox.

Then it's doubtful that being shot with a .45 would have made any difference. Like I said before, someone has at least 5 to 15 seconds of useful life in them after the heart has been completely destroyed. That's not just a fatal wound to the heart, that's the heart not beating at all. If a round doesn't penetrate to vital structures, then there is no way that incapacitation can be guaranteed.

It sounds like we believe different schools of thought when it comes to wound ballistics. There are three accepted ways of incapacitation: central nervous system disruption, cardiovascular disruption, and psychological reasons. While I tend to focus mostly on the first two methods of incapacitation, you like the third. Yes, most people who are incapacitated from being shot are stopped because of psychological factors, but that is not a reliable way to incapacitate people. You talk of someone being stopped from the shock of being shot...that's because of psycholoical factors. There is NOTHING medically proven that says someone will be incapacitated because of hydrostatic shock or energy transfer. The ONLY two medically sound and tested ways of incapacitation are CNS and cardio disruption. Why are PCP users and animals so hard to incapacitate? It's because they cannot be psychologically incapacitated.

Wound ballistics is an extremely interesting topic, but there is a lot of bad information out there. Most of this misinformation comes from everyday gun magazines and respected gunwriters such as Marshal, Sanow, and Ayoob. While these people may be good writers, even experienced in shooting and self-defense, they aren't scientists or real experts on wound trauma. If you have a chance, I'd suggest that you look around the Firearms Tactical Institute's website (http://www.firearmstactical.com) and the International Wound Ballistics Association's site (http://www.iwba.org) and read the scientific arguments about the field.