Excaliber wrote:
Comparisons between handgun rounds and rifle rounds based on caliber alone are not valid.
The much higher velocities of rifle rounds bring temporary wound cavity effects that damage tissue well beyond the actual projectile path through tissue. This dynamic doesn't occur with 9mm, .40 and .45 handgun rounds because the bullets don't travel fast enough to cause this effect.
Inside 100 yards while the .223 is still running hot enough to cause the bullet to yaw and break up upon entry, this round is a highly satisfactory man stopper. It loses effectiveness beyond that distance as it slows down and just punches .22 caliber holes which are often adynamic wounds, but that battlefield reality is not generally a concern to a civilian. If someone is more than 100 yards away, you probably don't have any business shooting at him anyway.
I am curious about the statement that a .308 is a poor man-stopper. Most folks hit in the torso with this round go down right then and are not in any condition to continue the fight. Where did the "poor man stopper" rating come from?
I was just making a generic statement which is probably too broad. People survived small calibers shots left and right. There's no-one-shot-stopper/focus on shot placement was my point.