Anyone tried Devastator ammunition?

Homesteader

unread,

Oct 21, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/21/99

to

Has ANYONE here on this group tried the Devastator ammunition? If so, what
caliber and what do you think of it as a defense round versus the Cor-Bon or
the Hydrashock, etc.

Thanks,

Homesteader

--
"Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims
may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons
than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may
sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who
torment us for own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the
approval of their own conscience."

- C.S. Lewis, God in the Dock

Jed Brulen

unread,

Oct 21, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/21/99

to

I don't know HS but I might give corbon the edge. Let you know after the
30th predator or so (if they don't get me first). In this instance shot
placement may be a better indicator of performance. I assume however you
are female? thus, if you shoot for the crotch you have a distinct
advantage whichever round you use.

Geoffrey L. Hardin

unread,

Oct 21, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/21/99

to

Homesteader wrote:

> Has ANYONE here on this group tried the Devastator ammunition? If so, what
> caliber and what do you think of it as a defense round versus the Cor-Bon or
> the Hydrashock, etc.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Homesteader

Is this the same Devastator that's an incendiary round?

If it is, then I know that it causes a massive shock to the system, but tends to
fail to penetrate very deeply. While some will argue that you need a large
temporary cavity for rapid incapacitation, I (and the evidence) disagree. Yes,
a large temporary cavity does shock the shooter, but if you want to kill them
you need a large PERMANENT cavity. This means that your bullet must remain
largely intact to tear it's way through the body. Large permanent cavities
cause massive blood loss which aid in permanent incapacitation.

I'd stay away from anything that detonates on impact in a human body. If you
want to stop your aggressor, you have to hit a part of the central nervous
system. This means you have to go deep if you aim for center mass (unless
you're one of them Olympic-level marksmen who can shoot an egg balancing on a
pool cue. . . .while it's moving around. . . if you can, then aim for the eyes).

Stick with the Hydrashok. Go for what's proven. Don't put your hopes on a
gimmicky ammo.

Just some thoughts, hope it helps.

Geoffrey L. Hardin,
geo...@abcs.com

Homesteader

unread,

Oct 22, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/22/99

to

This particular ammo I saw a ham shot with it. First, they stuck this big
ol' ham up on a stool and shot it with .45 ACP ball ammo (copper jacket
Geneva Convention stuff) and the ham just kind hopped a bit and then they
showed the damage at the back of the ham and it was minimal.

Then, they shot another ham with a Devastator round and the darn thing
practically exploded off the stool. The back of the ham was gone!

Gimmicky; possibly. I don't know. Thats why I'm asking! :)

Anyway........keep comments coming,

BTW, here is a link for the actual street affectiveness of different sized
rounds and the type of rounds. I think you will find it interesting.

http://www.evanmarshall.com/towert/stoppingpowerfigures.htm

I am researching this because I want to get a small gun that packs a hell of
a punch, equal to or greator than a 357 mag, with decent mag capacity and,
as Ted Nugent would put it, "Blow the balls off a charging Rino at sixty
paces".

I became concerned about the TYPE of round as well when I read the "real
story" of an actual encounter at a pawn shop robbery in the last issue of
Guardian. The good guy had a 357 mag, but he sure could have used more
rounds than a revolver and I wonder what kind of rounds he had. I've come to
the conclusion that a concealed carry will have to hit fast, hard, and if
nessecary, continuosly. Yet, I want this in a tight, light package. I think
ammo type is just as imprtant a pick as the caliber and the gun as well.

Opinions?

Homesteader

Geoffrey L. Hardin <geo...@abcs.com> wrote in message
news:380FCA97...@abcs.com...

The Gunrunner

unread,

Oct 23, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/23/99

to

Homesteader wrote:
> Has ANYONE here on this group tried the Devastator ammunition?

I carried a .380 Colt Mustanf as backup for about 10 years. In spite of
the dept telling me I must carry some "politically correct" POS hollow
point, I carried Devastators in it. To test them out, we took a killed
pig (300#) and, with one shot behind the neck, REMOVED THE HEAD!!

This shit's potent. No ifs, ands or buts.

I still like my 1911A1 with Hydroshok, but the Devastator ammo is the
perfect ammo for the little pocket guns we all need to carry from time
to time.

And guess what? Survival Enterprises sells Devastator ammo too!

--
The Gunrunner
"The meek may inherit the Earth, but they won't keep it past Saturday
night!"
http://www.survival.com.mx/gunrun.html (personal page)
http://www.survival.com.mx/ (Corporate entrance page)

Homesteader

unread,

Oct 23, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/23/99

to

Thanks for the response, but as a add-on to my previous string of questions,
how will the courts view using this stuf in defense? Over kill? (pardon the
pun)

Homesteader

The Gunrunner <gunr...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:381169...@earthlink.net...

Geoffrey L. Hardin

unread,

Oct 23, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/23/99

to

Homesteader wrote:

> Thanks for the response, but as a add-on to my previous string of questions,
> how will the courts view using this stuf in defense? Over kill? (pardon the
> pun)
>
> Homesteader

Pardon my buttin' in between you and Gunner's conversation, but . . .

I would think that there could be no good that would come of an attorney (either
prosecuting for the state or representing the other person's family in a civil
case) showing one of these bullets with the name in bold letters (dripping
blood might be a good touch, too) DEVASTATOR.

Oh no, Mr. Homesteader was not satisfied with the round carried by his local
police department and other law enforcement agencies. No, Mr. Homesteader found
the Hydrashok and Golden Sabre bullets insufficient for his needs.

So, Mr. Homesteader went out to find the most DEVASTATING ammunition available.

Let me explain to you, members of the jury, what exactly this bullet, this
flying missile with an explosive warhead means :

First, this bullet is designed to not only shoot a person, but deliver an
explosive device INTO their body to detonate, ravaging and shredding the
internal organs so severely, that the attacker is literally blown apart.

Imagine that, ladies and gentlemen of the jury. Imagine Mr. Homesteader walking
the streets of your town with a pocket full of bombs. Bombs. No, he wasn't
content with just shooting the victim (ed. note : remember that the prosecutor
or civil action attorney will make the attacker look like butter wouldn't melt
in his mouth) with a piece of lead. NO! He wanted to blow him up from inside.
He knew what these bullets would do, that's why he chose them. He WANTED to
blow up something.

Now, we all know how some people like to shoot at inanimate objects. Heck, I
even shot a few watermelons with my .22 pistol when I was a kid. I'll admit
that I got a kick when those watermelons or waterjugs or whatever burst apart.
It was sort of fun.

But Mr. Homesteader didn't find the results of regular ammunition satisfying
enough. So he decided to use Explosive Tipped Bullets to satisfy his bloodlust.

These bullets are named, again, DEVASTATOR bullets. Mr. Homesteader, obviously
being a literate person, knew full well what he was doing when he loaded his
pistol with those rounds.

Heck, let's take a look at what Webster's dictionary says of the word
"Devastator."

(he opens Webster's Dictionary)

Let's see. . . Devastator. . . . Okay, Mr. Daniel Webster states that the word
"devastator" is a noun, rooted in the word "devastate."

The word "devastate" comes from the Latin "devastatus" which is the past
participle of "devastare."

To those among us who aren't conversant in Latin, "devastare" means. . ."To lay
waste."

The modern verb "devastate" means "1 : to bring to ruin or desolation by violent
action - or - 2 : to reduce to chaos, disorder, or helplessness."

There it is, in modern English. "To bring ruin. . .by violent action."

Yes, a simple word that captured Mr. Homesteader's bloodlust and fomented it
into a boiling fury of hate and violent action against his victim. Punching
holes into the victim's body wasn't enough. No, like a cowardly terrorist, Mr.
Homesteader satisfied his desire to create chaos and helplessness by placing a
bomb into the chest of the victim.

The shock of the bullet entering the victim's body was enough to stop him. We
have numerous, no countless, cases where other bullets have been used that
killed people. Our own police departments use these bullets and they go into
harm's way every day. Time after time, the regular bullet stopped the
attacker, just from the shock.

But in this case, the bullet did much, much more than shock. It did what it was
designed to do. . .it exploded, it detonated, it erupted like a well-placed
bomb.

I remember when I was a little boy, I had a neighbor kid who did terrible things
to helpless stray animals. Cats and dogs were mercilessly used in this kid's
obscene and repulsive experimentations. I remember, one day I heard muffled
explosions, sort of like what you'd hear from a firecracker but almost. . .sort
of flat.

I. . .I remember that my curiosity got the best of me and . . .I . . .looked
around the tall fence that seperated our two yards.

Oh God. . .I'm sorry, it's difficult for me to say this. . .I found. . .a stray.
. .cat.

I can't describe the scene. . .no. . .I WON'T describe what I saw. . .the memory
of it is etched in my mind's eye forever. I will take that horrible. . .evil. .
.sight to my grave.

But that neighbor boy _was_ using an M80. . .a small bomb. And he was placing
it inside the body of an animal.

You can imagine the rest.

<shudder>. . .wiping of forehead.

And this. . . man <pointing a trembling finger> . . .did the exact same thing to
his victim.

I told my parents then of my neighbor's actions. The court took my neighbor kid
away for treatment and I have never seen him since. He was considered a menace
to society. . .his acts indicative of his violent and abusive nature. I just
thank God that he was stopped before he acted on people. Before he decided to
place his bombs, his explosive devices in the bodies of human beings.

But Mr. Homesteader? This . . .man. . .who took it upon himself to acquire and
use a bullet with a bomb in the tip to satisfy his vigilantic fantasies. This
man intentionally placed a BOMB into the victim's chest. Right about here
<pointing at his own chest> where it exploded, ripping at the victim's lungs,
heart, stomach, spleen, esophagus and diaphragm with tiny bits of razor sharp
schrapnel, just like those artillery shells you see on World War 2 movies that
killed hundreds of soldiers, or the mortar shells you see dropping on our brave
soldiers in VietNam.

I ask you. . .would any proper citizen, any responsible person make this same
choice?

I am not against an individual having the right to defend themself from an
attacker, but I do question the intentions of a person who uses exploding
ammunition to maim and DEVASTATE the body of anyone.

I just thank God that Mr. Homesteader wasn't anywhere near a group of children.
I couldn't stand before you and speak with any level of civility had he missed
and hit a child.

I'm sorry. . .Your Honor. . .I . . .I request a 15 minute recess.

: Gavel bangs

Yeah, I don't care how justified you are. A good attorney (heck, even a 2nd
year law student) can turn this into a case where just the name of the bullet
will convict you.

I know you're probably tired of me saying it, but stick with one of the regular
rounds. Imagine the attorney trying the same thing with "Hydrashok", "Golden
Sabre" or (even better) "Glaser Safety Slug."

If you use the same round as your local LEO's do, then you have tons of
supporting documentation. I would get my attorney to subpoena the Chief LEO for
that agency (or the person who made the decision on their ammo type) and explain
why it was chosen. You could go so far as to subpoena the manufacturer to serve
as a professional witness on your behalf (think about it, what ammo manufacturer
would want to go through what Winchester did with their Black Talon? Just the
merest possibility of a liability suit would get them on your side if the
shooting was justified in the first place.)

I'll shut up now after saying this : go with what the big boys use. There's a
reason why the FBI uses the bullets they do. . .they've investigated and tested
and decided.

But don't make it easy for the other side's attorney, any way you go.

Just some thoughts, hope they help.

Geoffrey L. Hardin,
geo...@abcs.com

The Gunrunner

unread,

Oct 23, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/23/99

to

Geoffrey L. Hardin wrote:
> Pardon my buttin' in between you and Gunner's conversation, but . . .

(such a nice and long story, but I had to snip a bit)

Normal "Joe six pack" can use ANY ammo he wants (except in States where
this or that's illegal) and get away with a shoot, as long as all his
"ducks are in a row".

As long as the shoot's fair and square; nothing's hinkey ("But I really
didn't know he was my wife's boyfriend!), the DA could care less about
the ammo.

Your rather eloquent scenario of "he really intended to kill him dead,
dead, dead!" has never played out.

I know a (let's just call him "The Homeowner") who, upon arriving home
Thanksgiving eve a few years ago, saw lights in his house, which
shouldn't be. He sent his wife and kids across the street to safety
and, arming himself with his AR15, entered his house.

What ensued was rather devasting for all envolved.

He came across two third-world POS gang members breaking into his gun
safe in his bedroom. He ordered them to freeze, and they choose,
instead, to die. He punched'em both twice (after they both pulled guns)
with some hairy .223 armor piercing ammo.

After forensics got done, it was determined a rightous shoot and "The
Homeowner" was released. Now, realize, this was at the height of the
"armor piercing=cop killer bullets" craze of the Democrats.

The type of bullet he used never came into play.

LEO's are controled, not by what works the best, but by the city or
county that contols them. If the city determines they can only afford
110 FMJ for their officers carrying 9mm's, then that's what they get.

Also is the liability factor, which the city watchs closely. In the
days of the wheel gun (4" S & W model 10 in .38 Special), the LAPD were
only allowed to carry 125 grain lead bullets. The city determined that
this bullet wouldn't punch through cars, or do too much damage that the
city would have to pay for.

It's like in "Murphey's Rules of Combat". I think it was rule #17:
"Always remember that the weapon you're using was made by the lowest
bidder!"

It has held up in court that, if a LEO uses nasty, "more deadly"
bullets, he can be held over on "premeditated murder" charge. The LEO's
job is to STOP the action of the bad guy, not necessarialy put him in
the ground.

It's all a figment of some demented, geneticly deficient, morally void
creature some call a "Democrat".

Gunner

unread,

Oct 24, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/24/99

to

"Geoffrey L. Hardin" <geo...@abcs.com> wrote:

>
>Pardon my buttin' in between you and Gunner's conversation, but . . .

Hey Hey! Don't count me in, in this thread. I KNOW better than to
carry Devastators in any weapon I might have to shoot someone with.
Yes, they work well, Tried em a couple times for fun, but even the
well known RKBA pro-selfdefense DA in my county might have to push a
prosecution if the shooter used a lead azide tipped bullet on a perp.
Gunner.... the real one. <G>

>
>I would think that there could be no good that would come of an attorney (either
>prosecuting for the state or representing the other person's family in a civil
>case) showing one of these bullets with the name in bold letters (dripping
>blood might be a good touch, too) DEVASTATOR.

---------------------------------------------------------

"A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an
invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write
a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort
the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone,
solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program
a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die
gallantly. Specialization is for insects." Robert Heinlein

SkullyWV

unread,

Oct 24, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/24/99

to

> Anyone tried Devastator ammunition?
>From: "Geoffrey L. Hardin" geo...@abcs.com

>Pardon my buttin' in between you and Gunner's conversation, but . . .
>
>I would think that there could be no good that would come of an attorney
>(either
>prosecuting for the state or representing the other person's family in a
>civil
>case) showing one of these bullets with the name in bold letters (dripping
>blood might be a good touch, too) DEVASTATOR.

Damn, Mr. Hardin, is u wanna them thar loyer fellers?<G>

I think you've hit the proverbial nail on the head. This is the same method
used in the big media lie about "cop killer" rounds, and the evil black talon
round.
I personally prefer the Hornady XTP's for defense, in .45ACP.
20 rounds (230g) handloads (factory spec) for 8.99.
The name/model "XTP" leaves no "bloodlust" in mind for a prosecuter to use to
make a robber/attacker/murder/rapist look like a poor victim. And they do a
fine job. As far as personal experience, I've only seen the Glaser "safety
slug" in action on a human. A guy at the range shot himself, from the holster
(tactical) in the knee area. It entered, did tons of damage and stayed there.
But I don't think it would be a practical round for carry.
Skully
-=(Tyrants grow on trees.
Ever nourished by the dung of defenseless herds of docile sheep.)=-
............................Skully

Gunner

unread,

Oct 24, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/24/99

to

skul...@aol.com (SkullyWV) wrote:

>The name/model "XTP" leaves no "bloodlust" in mind for a prosecuter to use to
>make a robber/attacker/murder/rapist look like a poor victim. And they do a
>fine job.

It stands for "Extreme Terminal Projectile"..... hehe, think that is
gonna go past the jury well? (I do carry them in the 9mm), but I
generally use Gold Dots.... hell, it sounds like biscuit mix....<G>

Timothy Puckett

unread,

Oct 25, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/25/99

to

Clap Clap Clap! Encore! That was a brilliant piece of penmanship! I felt as
if I was in the courtroom myself, heart pounding as the jury glares at me,
chomping at the bit to scream Guilty! Guilty! :)

Certainly food for thought.

There IS, however, the old adage: Better to be tried by twelve than carried
by six.

You DO understand that my reason for wanting to carry the round was so I
could get by with a smaller caliber, and therefore a much smaller gun. I
simply do not have much faith in a gun with a holding capacity of six or
less rounds and a caliber less than a .40 or 45ACP. At the same time, I do
not feel like carrying a massive cannon around with me to do the job. A
smaller round with more punch would seem to be the ticket.

Since when does fighting back in fear of your life have to be "fair"? Maybe
just the last few rounds in the mag maybe?

Homesteader

Geoffrey L. Hardin <geo...@abcs.com> wrote in message
news:381283BE...@abcs.com...

Geoffrey L. Hardin

unread,

Oct 25, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/25/99

to

Timothy Puckett wrote:

> Clap Clap Clap! Encore! That was a brilliant piece of penmanship! I felt as
> if I was in the courtroom myself, heart pounding as the jury glares at me,
> chomping at the bit to scream Guilty! Guilty! :)

Well, sometimes I can't help myself. I have the dream of becoming a published
fiction writer someday. I just can never seem to find the tenacity to sit down
and write anything but shortish stories (I know. . .if I could channel the same
drive that I put into responding to posts into writing a novel, I'd probably
have half a dozen on the shelves right now).

> Certainly food for thought.

I can't find the response that someone posted wherein the respondant stated that
this never happens in actual life. I hope they read this (my Netscape reader
seems to be acting weird, I lose some articles within a day or two but keep
others for 6 - 8 months), but it actually does happen. Not necessarily in this
exact case. But I know of a couple of cases where lawyers tried to use similar
tactics to punish persons shooting handloaded ammo in self defense.

They basically threw the same arguments forth : That the shooter wasn't happy
with what was available on the market, that they wanted "SUPER KILLER AMMO"
instead of the specialized self-defense oriented rounds available.

Massad Ayoob wrote of one instance recently wherein the prosecutor tried this
very tactic and the defense was able to show that the handloaded rounds were
loaded to the exact same specs as the local police department's carry rounds
(same velocities, same bullet, same performance when fired).

So it does happen. I'm not saying that it will happen or that it's right
(remember, lawyers will be the first against the wall when the revolution comes.
. .to paraphrase Shakespeare), but it's something that you should take into
consideration right now, before you need to use the stuff and while you still
have a choice.

>
>
> There IS, however, the old adage: Better to be tried by twelve than carried by
> six.

Well, there is always that, but I'd rather try and make all the choices before
I'm put into either situation. Devastator ammo may be a good choice, I
personally don't think so, but I come from the school that believes in using no
gimmicky ammo. The limits of my gimmicky ammo stands for my house pistols which
are loaded with the first two rounds being Glasers (up until recently, I lived
in apartments and wanted to reduce the penetration concerns) and my carry
pistols which are loaded with Hydrashoks.

FWIW, some of the better pistol instructors (e.g., Clint Smith at Thunder Ranch)
even suggest that you forego the hollowpoints and stick with regular ball ammo
to further reduce any potential of a misfeed. Their belief is that you should
practice enough that you can hit that at which you aim (the Central Nervous
System of an attacker) and keep shooting until the threat no longer exists.

> You DO understand that my reason for wanting to carry the round was so I
> could get by with a smaller caliber, and therefore a much smaller gun. I
> simply do not have much faith in a gun with a holding capacity of six or
> less rounds and a caliber less than a .40 or 45ACP. At the same time, I do
> not feel like carrying a massive cannon around with me to do the job. A
> smaller round with more punch would seem to be the ticket.

Okay, I gotta say it. . .a gun is not supposed to be Comfortable. . .it's
supposed to be comforting.

That bit of dogma aside, perhaps I should ask if something along the lines of a
S&W Airweight in .38 Spl or Airlite in, say a .32 H&R Magnum would be something
you'd consider?

They are both a bit on the expensive side, but are extremely light in weight and
are very concealable.

> Since when does fighting back in fear of your life have to be "fair"? Maybe
> just the last few rounds in the mag maybe?

Hey now. . .I never said anything about fighting fair when your life is at
stake. The old adage "all's fair in love and war" says it all.

However, keep in mind that not only will the other guy think the same way, so
will the lawyers afterwards if you should survive.

It is an unfortunate fact that the battle isn't over when the smoke clears from
a shooting. It's just begun. Anyone with common sense realizes that it is only
wise to take precautions _now_ before you find yourself facing a civil jury.
Just as you choose your tools to get you through a TEOTWAWKI scenario, so should
you choose them for a self-defense situation.