Fishing Expedition

So, basically, .32 Long or ACP is more likely to stop them with one shot, but if not, you're better off with 380 ACP

I don't know what to make of it. The main diff between the 32 Long and the others is soft lead bullet at moderate velocity. Same as the 38 S&W. They were both popular for a long time.
Mike

They were popular until they weren't. Which was when something better came along.

......Is the 45 ACP data. 2.08 shots to stop??? I sure question that..... Chris S

According to that chart the .357 is the most reliable in the % who didn't stop category. Also the .45 ACP is one more than the 40 and 9MM??? I question all the data on the grounds that I am a.45ACP fan! P.S. I do have a 32 S&W long and love it. Chris S

I would be interested to see how the ole Hogleg stands against the others. Chris S

I will quit complaining now!  See what you started Mike!!!!! Just kidding, loved the chart. Chris S

I love the 32 Long also, but I love the 45 more. According to the author (and I really recommend reading the issue) he gathered the data from police reports of shootings. Of course, you have to factor in the situations and locations. For instance, Chros and I don't get into many arguments in crack houses.  At least I don't.
 

FWIW. I have been involved in some "caliber war" fracases . I started studying such things in the '70's . I hate to throw rocks at folks and point fingers but......... when you look at the law enforcement statistics ( And most of the stats in the FBI "Uniform Crime Report" or whatever they call it today , comes from LE shootings) there is something that folks NEVER make a connection to. If you look at the hit/shots fired ratio way back when sixguns ruled, you will see that they got more hits per shots fired than now days. It would seem, if the ability to hit goes down with the "confidence of firepower" the ability to make solid hits might just decline as well, but all hits count in the statistics. In other words you should be expecting more hits in non-vital areas if they are having more trouble getting hits in the first place.
 
I still go back to my old S&W 58 an the record they had in San Antonio of 12 consecutive one-shot stops with a couple of different versions of the old "police load" for the .41 that used a "dumb old lead bullet" and it's ballistics were not all that different (a heavier bullet) than the "wonderkind" .40 S&W today, with its super-duper expanding hollow points,  so, did the bad guys get more bullet proof or what?
 
The biggest factor isn't the arrow, it's the Indian.
 
 

I often think that high capacity adds to inaccurate shooting. When I started as a boy it was a bolt .22 and every shot had to count because I worked hard doing odd jobs to buy those 22 shells! A box of fifty went for fifty cents but earning fifty cents for a 12 year old in the fifties was a lot of money. When I got older, sixguns were my first acquisitions and here again whether 22 in my old Scout or 357 in my Python each shot had to count because I was on a limited budget. By the time I got my 45ACP I was used to shooting one shot at a time and didn't see the need to rapid fire much at all. Even on the range rapid fire gave you time between each shot to aim rather than just blast away. I think there is a reason that some full auto guns have a burst fire mode because full auto is not as accurate as some slower short bursts. I think I'll stick with my old Colt SA .45 and be happy, happy, happy!  And Mike I don't go those places either!Chris S

There is another factor that I wish I had the resources to explore and research, but I am sure there would be a lot of police administrators that wouldn't be happy about it.
I would like to go way to the 60's and work forward documenting the same stats but comparing the cases in which an officer was carrying a gun he  was allowed to select, purchase and carry versus one that was issued with no option. Caliber selection included in that as well.
Of course Jim Cirillo would skew the stats but his carry gun wasn't that different from his competition gun, and there are many cops who could care less or might choose, if given a choice, what looked "cool" on a magazine cover, but I am willing to bet that the officers who are experienced  enough to choose their own gun have  higher hit and lower rounds to stop percentages.
Way back in my early life, when Fred and Barney were reserves on the Bedrock PD, being a hunter and outdoorsman factored in the selection process. Granted academy instructors liked folks with no bad habits to break because it is easier to get them to use the official "style" of the day in large batches, but if you told those same instructors  they were going out on the street for two years with a partner in a rough district, and you asked them to choose a partner between a guy who shot "by the book" and qualified in the bottom 50% , or a guy who didn't stand right or hold his gun the way they taught but, was the top shooter in the class, I wonder who they'd pick?
That is not to pick on the agencies, academies, or instructors. Given the task they have to have a "method" to teach a large group to get consistent results. I often thought that if you really like shooting and guns, becoming an instructor at a police academy might just cure that bad habit. The same applies to issuing sidearms, but I am pretty sure my bias on the subject would pan out if we looked at actual results on the street. Someone "gunny" enough to choose their own weapon and caliber, no matter what those were, and qualify with them, has a big edge on the street. It almost seems self-evident.
 
If  we apply that to "civilians/citizens/average good folks" why wouldn't the same logic apply IN SPADES to their choices? They have far more limited parameters under which they may apply a firearm than a police officer does. They do not have the expectation of involving themselves in other's misfortunes. For the civilian a gunfight is likely to be over before he fires five shots. The "better" he hits and the faster he does it, the better his odds. Confidence and determination are the tools of the "civilian" let him choose with confidence and use with determination, if, God forbid, he has to.
 
I have quite a little true story about just that from an "historical" but little known event I researched. It only mentions the gun once in the tale so I have been unsure if it belonged somewhere around here, but the gun was a big bore revolver.
 
  
 
 

None of the caliber/"stopping power" charts ever account for the size of the victim, his state of mind, and the type of bullet.  

I wont post about it in many places, but I have been running my own informal Strassbourg tests for years for on-farm slaughter and  occasional livestock euthanasia.   I hope there are enough country people on this forum to not get out of sorts. Everything I killed was either eaten or too full of antibiotics to legally sell and killed as a mercy.

Years ago, I had two failures to properly stun with big hogs and a .22 pistol. I like hogs so I felt really bad about that.  I have since used various centerfires on hogs, goats, sheep and a couple bovines. I have no use for any round nose bullet shape on anything living. I think Elmer Keith talked about the need for a flat point or SWC over a
round nose in non expanding bullet shape, and that has been my
experience. There is a big difference between various hollowpoints. 

All .357 JHPS will open up well. Some also will penetrate a big hog's skull, run clean through the head, and penetrate the shoulder to exit in the ground.

The old lead .38 +p  Lead HP will always open up, but seldom exits the head on a big hog.

some high class 9mm JHP's actually break up inside a hog's head.

Cheap Remington 115 gr 9mm and .38 golden sabres do not always open up

Anything I ever shot with a   .45 colt  drops like it was hit with a giant sledgehammer  

With bad bulls and mean cows  a 44 or 45 is the only sensible option  

Cowdog;
Your post reminds me of a painting, I think by Charlie Russell called "when a fellow needs a 45". A cowboy is being dragged along by his horse while a longhorn is trying to gore it. He is grabbing for his pistol. And, I bet it ain't no Glock.
 
Antway, has anybody read the article that the data chart came from?

cowdog, I have to agree.
 
I my checkered past, about two decade ago I ran a hog operation as an investment. Fixed up a rundown place and got it going real nice and then got free of it at a profit. It only took one failure with a .22 in the "perfect" spot to give me notion that there was a better way. Reloading the .38 was cheap with hard cast 158 SWCs.
 
I have to wonder about something I was told by an old-timer years ago. He said that he had killed lost of cougars and had used them for food himself during the depression. His experience taught him that cats are pretty much a walking adrenaline gland and no matter how quick you kill them any shock flips their "go" button. He  told me that if you kill one and cut out two "steaks" you will find that eating one fresh will lead to all kinds of intestinal distress, but if you chill the other one down around 37 degrees for several days it will be fine. He surmised that the adrenaline was pumped through the muscles and it took a while to break down and that critter adrenaline was not a good match for the human digestive system.
Of course I had known since I was a kid about aging game but I had never connected the adrenaline to the aging process.
 
Things that make you go, "Hmmm?"