I couldn't care less what other people want to use for defense against a grizzly, I have my preference and that's what I use, I had a customer buy a .380 for grizzly defense, I thought she was an idiot but hey, she had a friend that was an expert tell her that the .380 was the perfect cartridge for grizzlies because it would just scare them off without really hurting them.
I always enjoy reading the experts claim that they know better than everyone else, even though they never seem to provide any proof, they just repeat the same crap over and over. Formidilosus, I don't know if you're just a troll or another incompetent federal employee but how about providing some kind of proof for your claims or is not providing proof for your claims something that you've learned working for the FBI? I'm not an expert but it only took me about 3 minutes to find a study that was written by two experts from Israel ("Wound Ballistics and Tissue Damage" by N. Rozen, Chief of Orthopaedic Surgery, Emek Medical Center, Afula, Israel and Bruce Rappaport Faculty of Medicine, Technion, Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa, Israel and I. Dudkiewicz, Head of Orthopaedic Rehabilitation Unit, Department of Rehabilitation, Tel Aviv Sourasky Medical Center, Tel Aviv, Israel) who say;
Additionally, you state that nobody can tell the difference in the size of a bullet wound but according the study the authors say;
Other studies state that bullets of differing calibers that have the same Kinetic Energy can create the same wound damage if they both shed energy at the same rate. So yes, it's possible to say that different bullets can create similar wounds but it's also true that energy is the key to creating the wound. Combine the fact that the Red Cross uses a comparison system that is based on the size of the entrance wound then I would say that it's a pretty good bet that while most doctors would never allow themselves to be quoted making a statement about what caliber was used to create a wound I'd guess that a lot of experienced doctors will have a personal opinion about what caliber was used that would be pretty accurate in most cases. I know for a fact that you can easily tell the difference between a .22LR (pistol) and a .357 magnum pretty easily by just looking at the entrance wound. I've seen both and it's pretty obvious and based on that I could probably tell the difference between a 9mm and a .45 of some kind pretty easily.
I always enjoy reading the experts claim that they know better than everyone else, even though they never seem to provide any proof, they just repeat the same crap over and over. Formidilosus, I don't know if you're just a troll or another incompetent federal employee but how about providing some kind of proof for your claims or is not providing proof for your claims something that you've learned working for the FBI? I'm not an expert but it only took me about 3 minutes to find a study that was written by two experts from Israel ("Wound Ballistics and Tissue Damage" by N. Rozen, Chief of Orthopaedic Surgery, Emek Medical Center, Afula, Israel and Bruce Rappaport Faculty of Medicine, Technion, Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa, Israel and I. Dudkiewicz, Head of Orthopaedic Rehabilitation Unit, Department of Rehabilitation, Tel Aviv Sourasky Medical Center, Tel Aviv, Israel) who say;
Projectile or bullet injuries may be classified as “lowenergy” or “high-energy,” which describe the amount of damage to the tissues. The factor that most affects the injury severity is the amount and the efficiency of energy transfer [1–5], which is mostly related to kinetic energy...
Additionally, you state that nobody can tell the difference in the size of a bullet wound but according the study the authors say;
The modified Red Cross classification for civilian injuries, [11] which incorporates the ballistic and clinical aspects of gunshot injuries in civilians, is based on energy dissipation, vital structures injured, type of wound created, severity of bony injury, degree of contamination, and the modified Gustilo–Anderson open fracture classification system in which low velocity gunshot wounds are designated as Grade I or Grade II, based on the size of the skin wound and high velocity gunshot injuries are designated as Grade III injuries, regardless of wound size
Other studies state that bullets of differing calibers that have the same Kinetic Energy can create the same wound damage if they both shed energy at the same rate. So yes, it's possible to say that different bullets can create similar wounds but it's also true that energy is the key to creating the wound. Combine the fact that the Red Cross uses a comparison system that is based on the size of the entrance wound then I would say that it's a pretty good bet that while most doctors would never allow themselves to be quoted making a statement about what caliber was used to create a wound I'd guess that a lot of experienced doctors will have a personal opinion about what caliber was used that would be pretty accurate in most cases. I know for a fact that you can easily tell the difference between a .22LR (pistol) and a .357 magnum pretty easily by just looking at the entrance wound. I've seen both and it's pretty obvious and based on that I could probably tell the difference between a 9mm and a .45 of some kind pretty easily.