Bigger, heavier bullets will always have the advantage because like it or not, there's a VERY real chance that how that bullet reacts to bone will be a factor in its ability to incapacitate.
There's not a bone in the human body that will readily deflect a 9mm, but not a .45. To further make a point, I've seen a .45 ACP round that entered the shoulder from the top, avoiding contact with any bone, that stopped dead in its tracks when it contacted the spinal vertebrae. Didn't even crack it. Person was avg. build female. Total distance traveled = 5-6". I've seen deflected .45 ACP rounds in various parts of the body as well. On of the "Son of Sam's" victims was shot in the back of the head with a .44 SPL at contact distance and survived. Either way you look at it...again, it's just a nonsensical way of hanging onto the argument.
With that quote above, one could argue that a deflected bullet might actually be a help, rather than detriment. Who knows...it could deflect an otherwise poor shot into a vital organ. Deflection isn't always a bad thing.
A common issue with LE/Mil folks is that they make a conclusion based on 'this or that' they perceived or heard, but do not have the resources or information to answer the most important question in the argument...which is WHY. Just saying "I've been in the military" or some LE agency does not give one any credibility as knowledgeable in ballistics and mechanisms of injury for a gunshot wound, nor does being involved in any number of shootings, unless you are somehow privileged to information that tells you why the round worked as it did. Yes, you may have seen a poorly-placed 9mm round against a guy with a totally different mindset than the guy with the .45 ACP wound. "Similar shots" are not really similar shots; one inch of variance could be a "hit" or a "miss", and you would never know that unless you somehow got the full detailed report from the medical examiner or hospital. That's not something most LEOs can just walk-in and get. Even if you do get it, you will not have the details as to why the injury caused the death, only that it did. Answering "why?" is the only way one will be able to conclusively make a statement to caliber effectiveness with any true credibility. Furthermore, it would be just as easy to make the same argument for the .22 LR round over the .45 ACP by citing similar examples. I'm sure we could dig up cases to "prove" it.
People's physiologies differ so widely, that you could shoot any 2 people in exactly the same place, with exactly the same round from the same gun, and you will NOT see the same result twice. That's the problem when you try to turn observation into fact. Some people can break a femur and patella in half and walk on it, while another with a sprained knee will be laid up in bed for a week. People are VERY different.
Anyway, the point of all this blathering is that you can NOT make an argument with only half of the story, or half of the consideration of variables. Just seeing it is not enough.
No one in the world is able to tell you what WILL work, but many can debunk some old myths, and many can also tell you what will NOT occur from a gunshot wound. Most of the "old wives' tales" when it comes to ballistics don't hold up. It's much like the old days when the "gods" controlled everything, from the weather to the miracles...or even the days when the Earth was flat and we could fall off. Now, with modern advancements, even in the past 20 years, we all just know better.
Sarge, just know I'm not trying to convince you of anything. I'm merely speaking to the rest of the crowd, as I'm respecting your wishes and not trying to change your ideas. Thought I'd add that.
