The .32 S&W Long as a man-stopper

[unclebill]

Gentlemen, here's a link to one of the most carefully reasoned (and rational) considerations of stopping power in the self defense context that I've seen in many a moon. He discusses the concepts with almost no references to the 'best' caliber or cartridge. Great reading, and a great site too:

http://grantcunningham.com/blog_file...er_series.html

thank you.
very informative.
i like this quote: A good friend gave me a first-hand account of a battle incident wherein a fellow absorbed several very large caliber, solid torso hits, and was still able to jump from his vehicle and cross a road before finally collapsing.

The gun in question? A .50 caliber heavy machine gun.

Yes, you read that correctly. Sometimes, folks, nothing works.

[9.3X62AL]

thank you.
very informative.
i like this quote: A good friend gave me a first-hand account of a battle incident wherein a fellow absorbed several very large caliber, solid torso hits, and was still able to jump from his vehicle and cross a road before finally collapsing.

The gun in question? A .50 caliber heavy machine gun.

Yes, you read that correctly. Sometimes, folks, nothing works.

Farking nightmare.

[dualsport]

What a coincidence! I've been thinking of building a .50 BMG CCW gun, probably a single shot. CBs only, of course.

[Molly]

Farking nightmare.

If you think THAT's bad, consider this one that I read years ago in a SOF (I think) magazine. An African fellow had suposedly taken an artillery round through his chest and lived to tell it. I wouldn't have given it any credence whatoever, except that the story was backed up with photo evidence. Most massive scarring _I_ EVER saw, but the guy was walking!

Supposedly, the shell was at the extreme far end of its trajectory, with virtually no velocity remaining, but still ...

They make 'em tough over there in Africa!

[Shooter6br]

32 S&W Long is a great target round ( See my post in revlover section.)

[Shooter6br]

If you can smell the bad breath of your aggressor you are within affective 32 S&W Long range(with a break open model pistol loads)

[Molly]

If you can smell the bad breath of your aggressor you are within affective 32 S&W Long range(with a break open model pistol loads)

I've been reading a number of serious studies on handgun stopping power, and believe it or not, range hasn't even been mentioned as a factor by a single author.

There seems to be a growing consensus that there are three major factors that determine stopping power:

1. Psychological reaction of the recipient. The physics of handgun and projectile have almost no bearing on this. It is strictly determined by the way the recipient feels about getting shot, which will vary widely from man to man and from situation to situation. You can take a man who would fall down and scream for an ambulance when shot in the hand by a pellet gun one day, but on another day, he might not even notice several torso shots with a 45 ACP if high on adrenalin or narcotics. From this perspective, a BB pistol is about as effective as a .357 Mag.

2. The physiological reaction of the recipient. This is a fancy way of saying ‘the way his body flesh reacts to the shot.’ In turn, this breaks down into several sub-factors that depend largely on the choice of the bullet, but the differences are surprisingly small. Lightweight HP and other expanding or fragmenting designs will produce impressively large entrance wounds, but tend to have relatively shallow penetration. Bullets with higher sectional density and less expansion tend to provide greater penetration and a narrow but longer permanent cavity. Unless the skeletal or central nervous systems are impacted, incapacitation of the recipient is generally slow, and primarily dependent on blood loss. Even the destruction of vital organs will not immediately incapacitate the recipient of a bullet. A 44 magnum HP that shreds the heart into fragments will not provide an immediate cessation of activity for the simple reason that the cranium will already have sufficient oxygen to keep the brain alive and directing the body’s activity for 12 to 15 seconds. Fifteen seconds is a VERY long time in a gunfight.

Many shooters disparage Fackler’s ‘permanent wound cavity volume’ hypothesis. However, it seems a viable way to establish the surface area of the torn and bleeding tissue that results from a handgun wound, and therefore a way to determine the relative rate of blood loss. It is the loss of blood that will cause unconsciousness. It seems intuitive that a wound with eight square inches of bleeding tissue will lose blood twice as fast as a similar wound with only four square inches of bleeding tissue, and will produce unconsciousness twice as quickly.

3. The only factor in handgun effectiveness that offers a realistic chance of immediate incapacitation of the recipient seems to be destruction of the integrity of the skeletal or central nervous systems. A bullet with sufficient energy and mass to penetrate clothing and body tissue to shatter major bones or any part of the central nervous system will put a man down almost instantly, regardless of narcotics or adrenalin. (Note that putting a man down is not the same as incapacitating him: A man with a broken leg bone or pelvis can still shoot quite effectively. The advice to continue shooting until your aggressor is either disarmed or apparently unconscious is well founded.)

This is where the big-heavy bullet advocates stand up and shout ‘Ah HA! Told you so!
Not so. A solid copper bullet from a .22 Hornet that happens to strike the spine will do the job as well as mushroomed 44 or 45 caliber bullets.

A great deal of handgun legend has been built around the LaGrange / Thompson tests on slaughterhouse steers. Their report recommending at least a 45 caliber bullet was directly responsible for the adoption of the 45 ACP as America’s primary combat pistol, but if you read the original text of their report, there seems to be very little to justify that recommendation. Their tests seem to have consisted primarily of walking up to the pen holding the subject animal and pumping a variety of shots into its chest and waiting to see how long it would take for it to fall down. Almost none of the subjects were so obliging, so they frequently received another cylinder or clip full to sort of speed things along, generally also without noticeable effect. Calibers ranged from .30 to .45 at least, and IIRC, a few slightly larger rounds. They were remarkably unremarkable in their ability to down a captive animal.

The slaughterhouse axe was by far the most effective ‘weapon’ tested on live steers, but for some reason, an axe was not recommended for US military adoption. Actually, their recommendation appears to have been based on subjective impressions of how much sway a bullet could impart to a cadaver that was supported by rope. In other words, it was strictly a function of the relative momentum of the cadaver and the bullet, which could have been easily calculated without all the gruesomeness.

This legend of the big, heavy bullet was subsequently built up to semi-mythical status by men like Elmer Keith. Now don’t jump to the conclusion that I intend to disparage Mr. Keith in any manner, shape or form. I have an enormous respect for him and his recommendations. But there were REASONS that the big, heavy bullet recommendations were so successful. You will do well to understand them.

The LaGrange / Thompson experiments simply served to confirm that flesh wounds that don’t intersect a major skeleton bone or central nervous system may kill a steer (or a man), but will take its own sweet time in getting the job done, as discussed in part two above. But all else being equal, it seems intuitive that a 44/45 caliber slug is about 50% more likely to impact a bone or the central nervous system that a 30/32 caliber bullet just manages to miss, simply because of its greater diameter. Yes, one can go to an expanding .32 bullet, but then again, one can also go to an expanding .45 bullet: There is no inherent advantage there. The only thing that counts here is impacting the central nervous system or a major bone with sufficient energy. And the larger caliber guns have the advantage there --- in all respects but one: Penetration to REACH that bone or central nervous system doesn’t require a big heavy bullet. It requires a bullet with sufficient sectional density to get there, and sufficient residual energy to do the work. Smaller calibers offer greater sectional density for a given bullet weight. Rephrased, they can match the sectional density of the larger calibers with lighter bullets and less subjective recoil. While they cannot match the frontal area of the bigger bullets, they offer sufficient energy and penetration to get the job done when they do hit a vital area. And less recoil could mean better marksmanship, and a greater chance to hit that vital area. Is that enough to equal or overcome the big caliber advantage of diameter? I don’t know.

But I do know this:
1. I will take advantage of the bigger caliber’s diameter advantage as long as my hands will take their recoil. But when and if the time comes that I have to stop using them, I’m not going to feel extraordinarily handicapped with the smaller round, loaded hot with blunt, heavy bullets.

2. Shooting at the center of mass may give a perp a new and interesting belly button, but it is most unlikely to to put an abrupt end to his antisocial conduct. Even spinal hits below the chest area cannot be relied on to do more than put him down - still able to shoot.

3. If I ever have to shoot someone in self defense, I am going to aim to intersect the the neck and head area if at all possible. Lacking that, the spine and pelvis. Note that this target area can be defined by drawing a line from between his eyes straight down to his pelvis.

4. They have been improved in recent years, but HP bulets are notorious for erratic failure to expand. The HP can be plugged and rendered ineffective by clothing, a shirt pocket writting pad or innumerable real world factors seldom encountered in the pretty gelatin expansions so popular in the magazine advertisements. This expansion - and whether it occurs or not - is rendered irrelevant by my choice of target areas: A bullet in the head or neck won't need to rely on expansion for effectiveness.

For my part, I am most likely to chose a bullet with a very high sectional density and blunt nose over hollowpoints or fragmenting bullets for the very simple reason that this is the bullet most able to overcome chance encounters with a coat button, an outstretched hand, arm or rib bone and continue on in its intended pathway to the vitals described above.

[Von Dingo]

Two cents from my corner. As for stopping a man, there are three variables that can make it happen. Hydraulic stop, may not be so fast, hydraulic pressure may hold for long enough for damage to happen to you. Electrical stop, eliminate the wiring, you have a bag of rocks falling. Lastly, psychological stop, "I'm shot, I need medical attention, I'm gonna die", and they go into shock.

I hadn't gotten to molly's above post, before I started typing.

[dualsport]

The absence of consideration of distance is curious. Of course anything will be more impressive at point blank compared to 35 yds. Another element that you don't see discussed much is weather, or what season of the year it is. Seems to me a guy carrying for self defense might want to factor in the heavy clothing issue in his choice of bullet type, maybe have one load for winter and another for warmer times. There are other issues besides the load you carry that are at least as important. If you don't have a copy, get Jordan's "No Second Place Winner". It's an old book, but the guy makes some good points and has real world experience to back them up. Pick a reasonably sensible gun/load combo, then practice a lot. Learn to draw and shoot from the hip, trouble often comes real close. Thanks Molly for a great thread.

[Markbo]

Seems to me it is going to be hard to defend yourself for shooting someone if you have 35yds of space in which to run and hide first.

[451whitworth]

delete

[Multigunner]

Molly's comment made me remember something I read previously.

IIRC, allegedly Wyatt Earp was noted to wear a coat of some sort in even the hottest weather. He had a heavy silk vest that he also wore constantly. It was suggested that the vest functioned as body armor and that Earp also vigorously discouraged people discussing his attire, When you consider the more popular calibers of the day and the people Earp would be coming in contact with, it ties in nicely with Molly's ideas.

Layered Silk body armor was available prior to WW1, but not sure if it was contemporary to Wyatt Earp's lawman days. He may well have worn a Silk body armor in later years, these were popular though extremely expensive and only a few well heeled folk could afford one.
The standard vest was only good against pocket pistols, but WW1 era silk vests could stop a .45 ACP at a distance. Coupled with a light nickel or manganese steel breastplate the combined armor could stop some rifle bullets.

The Russians used body armor for officers during their war with Japan. Japanese officers wore similar breastplates at times, and Japanese Air Comandos had a fairly effective vest.

One reason for popularity of the M1 Carbine was that it could penetrate Japanese body armor when a .45 ACP from pistol or SMG wouldn't.

Steel vests were easier to get, many were manufactured during the Civil War era, and though they cost a fair amount they weren't beyond a lawman's pay grade.
An advancement in metalurgy of the late 19th century resulted in highly durable alloys. One of the first uses of these was a plowshare that wouldn't wear out like the older iron plows.
Reckless Ned Kelly having bounced a few bullets off such a plowshare had a blacksmith construct a 90 lb suit of armor from some stolen plows. Even Musket balls fired point blank bounced off his armor.

As for stopping power. The only certain way of putting a man down instantly is to sever the spine above the collar bones, a .32 can do that.
Men have continued shooting after a bullet in the brain, (I've met a couple of survivors of bullets through the brain, neither suffered profound disability from the experiance) and a heart shot isn't always lethal. If a man can dial 911 while having a heart attack he can certainly pull a trigger after a wound to the heart.

Energy of a .32 S&W Long is very close to that of the .36 Colt, from similar barrel lengths, but the .36 has a better rep for stopping power, at least when used with round ball over a maximum charge.
The Conical .36 had a poor rep due to it making through and through torso wounds. The conical bullet penetrated but did not dump much energy into the flesh.
Light round balls dump their energy quickly, which is one reason buck shot is so deadly.

[pmeisel]

The slaughterhouse axe was by far the most effective ‘weapon’ tested on live steers, but for some reason, an axe was not recommended for US military adoption.

Actually, I wouldn't mind having one handy for a fight. But it would be a lot heavier to carry than, as Jim Croce says, "a 32 gun in his pocket for fun".

[ChuckS1]

anyone need any 32 S&W Long brass? i have 500 new cases from my uncle's estate that i have no use for.

Sure, I can use them. How much?

[Molly]

anyone need any 32 S&W Long brass? i have 500 new cases from my uncle's estate that i have no use for.

Boy, I sure do! PM to follow.

[Molly]

Seems to me it is going to be hard to defend yourself for shooting someone if you have 35yds of space in which to run and hide first.

I'm told that in the old west, a card shark once opened fire at a distance of about 100 yards with a derringer on a cowboy armed with 'a Winchester'. The coronor's vedict was 'Suicide'.

[dualsport]

Seems to me it is going to be hard to defend yourself for shooting someone if you have 35yds of space in which to run and hide first.

Wouldn't that depend on what Mr. Bad Guy is doing? My point was just that range is bound to be a factor in 'stopping power'. Something like a .32 S&W Long will be less impressive at longer ranges than say a .44 Magnum. If a bad guy pulls out a weapon at 35 yds. and says "I'm going to kill you..." it's probably ok to open fire, even in California. Then run.

[Dannix]

Wow. Now that's an irrational response!

I'm told that in the old west, a card shark once opened fire at a distance of about 100 yards with a derringer on a cowboy armed with 'a Winchester'. The coronor's vedict was 'Suicide'.

[BOOM BOOM]

HI,
IFIR correctly the NRA did exhaustive research on this matter of handgun cal. man-stopping effectiveness in 1974, in same issue as the GREEN PAPERS,
reviewed & did statical analysis all police & military shooting reports with handguns up that time.
Very good basic reading in this area.
Yes, I realize much time has passed since then.
Lots of bullet improvements etc.
BUT THERE IS STILL A LOT OF GOOD REASONS THE 32 LONG IS CONSIDERED AN OBSOLETE CARTRIDGE.
For self defense there are a few overriding things you should consider.
1. COST, for some is a factor.
HOW MUCH IS YOUR & YOUR LOVED ONE'S LIFE WORTH?
Go with the highest quality you can get is my choice.
2. No cal. bullet is effective if you can not hit with it.
Practice a lot, make it second nature, stress destroys fine motor control . THIS IS NOT BULLS-EYE SHOOTING, BUT IT BETTER NOT BE SPRAY & PRAY ETHER!
3. Go with the biggest & heaviest cal.( & bullet in that cal.) you can shoot accurately. THIS HAS PROVED TO BE EFFECTIVE.
4. No gun is useful if left behind or unloaded when the human fecal matter hits the rotary air impeller. IF YOU ARE NOT COMFORTABLE CARRYING IT , THAN IT MIGHT NOT BE THE RIGHT CHOICE.
WHAT CAL. I CHOOSE IS A SUBJECTIVE INDIVIDUAL CHOICE THAT FITS ME, NOT YOU.
I LIKE THE 44MAG. & I AM JUST FINE WITH 250GR. FN HP.

[Shooter6br]

Handloadin even a 32 S&W in a break open is close to 380 in energy at the muzzle. About 160 or so. Not great but people love the 380 as a defence round