First off, you need to understand something. This is not an attempt to demean either of these gentlemen or diminish their contributions. Props and all due respect to Mr.Marshal and Mr. Ellifritz. Both did pioneering work and deserve to be lauded for that. But as time moves on, new perspectives are applied we continue to move forward.

In 1988 Evan Marshal published ‘Handgun Stopping Power: the Definitive Study,’ an examination of handgun stopping power based on the results of actual shootings rather than theories or simulated testing. While this was a major stride n the right direction it was obsessively focused on one-shot stops. Instead of asking, ‘what worked in real-life shootings?’ it asked, ‘Among shootings where a single shot ended the fight, what worked best and most often?’ Given that fights ending with a single shot represented a minority of shootings this was less helpful than it appeared at first glance.

Ten years ago Greg Ellifritz published the results of asking more relevant questions in his article ‘An Alternative Look at Handgun Stopping Power.’ Those questions were ‘In real life shootings how often were handguns of a given caliber effective regardless of the number of shots fired?’ and the equally important, ‘How often did handguns of a given caliber fail to stop an attacker, regardless of the number of shots fired?” This study found that there was little practical difference between calibers between .380 ACP and service caliber or even magnum caliber pistols in stopping an assailant.

This study produced a much more relevant set of data, given that most shootings with handguns involve multiple shots. It’s a praiseworthy effort, but it doesn’t go quite far enough to be universally applicable, because private individuals self-defense shootings and police and military shootings are often fundamentally different and require a different question, which is ‘How often do civilian shootings end with the flight or surrender of the assailant compared to Police and Military shootings?’

My impression is that flight or surrender is significantly more likely in civilian shootings than police and military shootings, and that police and military shootings are more likely to require a ‘hard’ or ‘mechanical’ stop where the assailant stops because they are physically incapable of continuing. Mr. Ellifritz does address this to a degree in the discussion, but a lot of people look at the tables without reading all of the way through so I felt it necessary to reinforce and expand upon this point.

If my impression is correct not distinguishing between police and civilian shootings might tend to skew the results in favor of calibers like .22 LR, .25 ACP, .32 and .380 ACP and .38 Special, which are used almost exclusively by civilians these days. The shootings they are involved in are less likely to require a hard stop. Shoot most criminals in the course of a robbery or assault and they are likely to flee or surrender, which exaggerates the effectiveness of these calibers. Service calibers used in the weapons of LEOs and soldiers have a greater need to produce a hard stop and therefore have a higher burden of required effectiveness. It appears that ‘adequate stopping power’ in a handgun is at least in part situational. As usual gunfights are more complicated than a simple set of statistics can express.

We often say there’s a screw for every nut, but there is definitely not a single nut for every screw. As an individual, whether you are Mr./Mrs./Ms. Citizen, a law enforcement officer or military, you need to realistically assess the threats you will face and balance their likelihood against practical considerations. As an average citizen you are, on average, likely to be OK with any gun you can carry routinely, train with regularly and shoot well. As on-duty Police or military you will probably find you want more capability; more power, more shots, better penetration etc.

Regardless of who your are telling you it’s a good idea to rely on the largest, most powerful handgun practical for your life, skill and circumstances is not bad advice… and while you are at it use proven, modern defensive ammunition.

Stay Safe and take care.

Michael Tinker Pearce, 19 January 2021

Don’t forget to check out the new Tinker Talks Guns Youtube channel! It’s early days, but I’m adding more content all the time. If you like what you see please consider clicking the link above and supporting me on Patreon.

One of the big announcements of this year’s SHOT show was a new Browning High Power. Yes, an all-singing, all-dancing new and slightly upgraded version of an 85 year old pistol, all for the bargain price of around $1400. As a special bonus they have kept the gun recognizable while somehow, in some indefinable way, stripping it of it’s elegance.

I feel like a Scrooge. All year we wait to see what’s coming down the road in the firearms world, and with each year that passes it feels like more and more of it is… *yawn* Just more of the same.

The thing is firearms are a mature technology. Here’s an example: take a modern AR15 rifle, go back in time and hand it to a Vietnam-era soldier. He’ll recognize it, know exactly how it works and be able to use it immediately. Depending on the optic that’s mounted it might take a minute or two to figure out, but that’s it. Yes, a soldier from half a century ago would find our modern service rifle familiar and completely comprehensible. We’ve been trying to replace it since the 1960s and haven’t managed it yet. Why? Because we couldn’t come up with something enough better to make it worth bothering. We’ve fussed with the details and accessories, but the basic rifle is the same.

It now looks like we’re finally getting something new, but it won’t be because we’ve made a radical leap of firearms technology. It will be because more of our potential enemies will be wearing effective armor, and the current platform and caliber cannot reasonably be stretched to defeat it. Several novel and efficient weapons have been submitted, but the only ‘new’ thing the most extreme of them boasts is a new application of an old idea for a telescoped composite cartridge.

Innovation is not dead by any means. The Laugo Alien is easily the most innovative handgun of the 21st century so far, but even that is mainly a cunning combination and arrangement of familiar features, and the principle of operation has been around for more than fifty years. It’s a very clever application of existing technologies used in new ways… and if you handed it to a soldier in WW1 suss it out in seconds.

With the base technology established the market is expanding to fill every niche, and options abound. Guns are getting better, but what we’re seeing are refinements, specialization and more affordable options. A lot of stuff coming out is cool and fills a niche that we might not have even known existed, but the underpinnings are familiar. That’s not really a bad thing; knives have been a mature technology for a couple thousand years or more, and we’ve manage to keep them entertaining. We’ll do the same with guns for as long as they remain useful, I’m sure.

It’s really not that people aren’t doing interesting things or bringing cool products to market. It’s that as new offerings get more and more specialized they are less and less likely to be applicable to my personal preferences, so it feels like there’s little of interest on offer. But the deeper I look the more I see. I just don’t care about a lot of it, but it’s there and someone obviously does.

There is an area where serious innovation can, has and will continue to occur: the user interface. Red Dot sights have become ubiquitous, and have developed into robust sights small enough to mount on a concealed-carry handgun. There’s an iPhone app that will do your ballistic calculations for you. There’s even a sniper scope that will automatically adjust for range and even pull the trigger for you. Then there’s this-

Magpul and Maztech have collaborated on a modular, integrated information and fire-control system for small arms. It features a shot counter, rangefinder, in-scope display etc., all networked and cooperating to make sure the shooter can know what they need to know to do their job and survive. It’s seriously sci-fi, and it’s coming to market.

While the big deals in firearms this year seem to be rehashes, updates and more than a few answers to questions no one was asking, there still some genuinely cool products and a few new niches being filled. I just have to dive a little deeper to notice them.

Affording them… yeah, that’s a whole ‘nuther question. *sigh*

Well, season’s greetings, and I hope SHOT-Show-Santa brings you everything on your list! Stay safe and take care.

Michael Tinker Pearce, 18 January 2022

Don’t forget to check out the new Tinker Talks Guns Youtube channel! It’s early days, but I’m adding more content all the time.

If you like what you see please consider clicking the link above and supporting me on Patreon.

There’s a classic story that float’s around the gun world about Colonel Rex Applegate and a famous self-defense shooting in Mexico. In his own words:

“Just prior to one of my regular trips to the states around 1950, I had been in southern Mexico, near the Guatemalan border, in the area of Salina Cruz in the company of a Mexican Army officer. On this particular evening the officer and I encountered a very drunk, machete-wielding Indian who seemed bent upon decapitating us both. The officer carried his .45 Automatic in a US Army holster. While he was frantically trying to get it into action, I was successful in drawing my Safety Hammerless from the Myers holster, from under my sport shirt and dropped the machete wielding Indian after putting five slugs into his torso. He finally fell to the ground about five feet from me, just as I was getting ready to throw the empty gun at him. Due to the Mexican army connection, there were no repercussions.” – Col. Rex Applegate

Typically this is cited as an instance of failing to stop an attacker, usually in support of .45 caliber. But did you notice one tiny little detail that these folks fail to bring up? He actually did stop his assailant. Determined attackers sometimes soak up a dozen or more modern hollow-points (yes, sometimes .45 hollow-points) before dropping. Given that the Colonel was almost certainly using anemic factory RNL ammo that represents some impressive shooting!

The Colonel did, in fact, decide he wanted more power. Specifically he wanted a similar gun in .38 Special. American Handgunner just posted how this incident led to the creation of the S&W Centennial revolver, and you can read about that here. That’s actually a pretty big deal; given that the best-selling self-defense revolver today is a direct descendant of the Centennial.

Stay safe and take care.

Michael Tinker Pearce, 16 January 2022