Střelivo Federal EFMJ

Hello. I have a question about the optimal ammunition for a gun intended for personal protection. After much deliberation, I bought a Glock 19. I carry the gun all the time, the caliber was chosen with regard to the effectiveness and price of the ammunition. So far it is loaded with S&B Subsonic ammunition. While perusing other sources I came across information about Federal EFMJ ammo. It should be a legal full cased expansion round in this country, silicone and some soft lead inside the jacket in the tip. I would like to ask for the experience and opinions of the experts of this forum.


Sources of information: http://www.ammolab.com/federal_efmj.htm

Well, I don't know how legal something is when it's an expanding missile with an increased wounding effect.


He and the semi-sheath are borderline legal (it's in the law as legal, but I don't know....).


So, is it allowed for sale in the country as ammunition, or does it need an exemption. If you need an exception, the question is hopefully passé...

I made a practice call to the Holek shop on Šumavská Street in Brno. On my inquiry whether the mentioned ammunition was in stock, at what price and whether it was legal, I received the following information from a helpful lady:
- it is legal (there was no exception),
- price 1280 CZK incl. VAT / 50 pieces.


I'm not a lawyer, but in my opinion the ammunition fits the wording of legal ammunition, because it's a whole cartridge. On the mentioned website it is stated that this ammunition was designed specifically for markets where expendable ammunition is banned. I'll try to look somewhere else for some info.

Here's the definition from the Arms and Ammunition Act of Category A ammunition
...
ammunition
1.
with a projectile that is penetrating, explosive or incendiary,
2.
... for short-bullet weapons with a shock projectile or a projectile designed to increase the wounding effect,
...


and from the decree:
...
ammunition with a full jacket, half jacket, lead, plastic, rubber or marker bullet. The core of the projectile may only be of soft material, and the jacket of the projectile may be steel, tombak, plastic, Teflon or soft metal plated
...


I don't know, but the wording of the law doesn't quite fit together. Let's wait and see where Fantan stands on this. Maybe I'm more papal than the Pope.

El, I have to disappoint you. In my opinion, this is not a legal issue, but a technical one. (This is called “solving the preliminary question.) First, the technician (expert) must determine what the design of the projectile is and whether its features fall into the category, then it is only possible to rule in court.
The opinion of the lady in the store is not decisive. However, before I put so much money as a patron, I would ask the seller for a piece of paper from a sufficiently strong authority (such as a weapons testing laboratory or the Ministry of Industry and Trade) to make it clear that this ammunition is being released for civilian use. The store should dispose of this paper.
There are a lot of different missiles circulating here (for example for reloading) and I wouldn't put my hand in the fire for all of them.
I tried to call an expert friend, but it doesn't bother me. As soon as I get the grounded information, I'll get back to you.
The description "full-shell expansion projectile, silicone inside the shell and some soft lead" says nothing to me at all - I don't know how it can or will work.
As I say, there should be a certificate for that. I would not want to rely on my "expertise" to assess any technical question. We all know that what the official in the department of weapons and ammunition, it has a different "legal opinion". And the train doesn't go through it.

I'll see if the store has that document. In the meantime I found more information here:
http://www.geocities.com/goldenloki2/9mm/gel9.html - very interesting
http://www.patricks-home.de/efmj/EFMJ1.html
http://greent.com/40Page/general/EFMJ.htm
and here (German):
http://www.patricks-home.de/efmj/index.html


In my opinion, this ammunition is optimal for personal defense, because it minimizes the risks associated with bullets and has a stopping effect very similar to the classic, not allowed in our country, expansion bullets. However, only if it's allowed that ...

One more picture that might tell the expert how the ammunition is constructed.

So I finally called and a friend - a forensic expert, after I described the ammunition to him (the projectile's face is made of a composite jacket - similar to a bullet, under which a lead core is embedded in silicone, which penetrates further after hitting the target), based on the description and the picture on
www.federalcartridge.com
said this:
If it is a projectile that splits at the target into a core that continues and its function is penetrative - increased penetration - and a jacket that remains at the beginning of the projectile channel after the core leaves it, it is undoubtedly a projectile designed to increase the wounding effect, which he would place in that category.
Incidentally, ammunition considerably more dangerous is also produced for use by the police in SB, but it is not released for use outside the armed forces - which is not to say that it could not appear commercially at all.


When I wrote this post, I found that Rom had put new pictures on the forum which show that the bullet remains intact. In that case, I mystified my friend (thanks to my poor command of English).


The responsibility for using legally permitted ammunition undoubtedly lies with the shooter. The dealer is not responsible for what purpose the ammunition is used for.


To make a long story short: if the bullet splits into two parts, the core and the jacket, after hitting the target, it is Category A ammunition.
If it stays whole, it's the equivalent of a half shell. If a half-shell is allowed, this ammunition should also be allowed.
But as I stated above, for my peace of mind, I would check wherever the decision is eventually made. The impacts can be painful.

To Fantan, elephantus: Thanks for your time and information.


Does anyone have a contact to an authority that is able to rule on the legality of this ammunition? Is it a correct assumption that if the ammunition has passed a state testing facility (though I don't know what the output of that facility is actually supposed to be), it is legal to use? The bullet certainly remains in one piece. Which is the right paper to wave when needed?


Is there a prescriptive procedure somewhere that outlines the process by which the ammunition approval process is followed (I may be using the wrong terms)? I naively assumed that what I could buy at retail based on the groups on the submitted firearms license, I could also use. If I want to buy something that is exempt, or is for collector purposes only, I should be made aware of that fact. Maybe that's too much of an alibi, I admit...

There is a testing laboratory (i.e. a state inspectorate, called the Czech Bureau for Testing of Weapons and Ammunition). This is the office that decides (in my opinion) by law in cases where there are doubts about what kind of ammunition it is (point 3 of section 3 of the Z and S Act).
But to cool your enthusiasm: If there were any problems. You used the ammunition, the first person to come after you will still be the local police marshal and choke you. If you manage to get a piece of paper on the subject (and I'd ask at that office), let us know. I personally (even though it's ku....ky expensive manuce) would reach for it to carry too. And to you I would owe undying thanks for finding it and blazing the trails...
But I wouldn't rely on the nice lady from Brno at all.

I'll try to get that paper. I'm sure decent people don't want to kill a bystander in defense, and this could be a way...

So he's got an update. The Czech Firearms and Ammunition Testing Authority has not yet responded to the email, but I managed to get an unofficial opinion from a shooting instructor. I don't have it on paper, but hopefully it won't be denied. During a visit to the GunClub in Brno, I learned that the ammunition is considered legal because it complies with the decree (all-jacketed, soft-cored bullet) and the barrel stays in one piece and is therefore traceable. I've come to the conclusion that I would much rather risk a subsequent misdemeanor charge (in my opinion it should be a misdemeanor if I'm wrong, correct me if I'm wrong) than the life of a random bystander when I use the weapon legally. So I join the group of individuals whose opinion is that they have it in the magazine.

Well, well, well...
It's not about misdemeanor proceedings, it's about the revocation of a Firearms License (weapons, ammunition and explosives offense - hence loss of reliability). And I don't think I'd risk that. But let others comment on this. I'm not an expert in this.

Rome, you're excellent, thanks for the info.
I'm just mystified by the zigzag nature of human thought. There is a pistol with power amply sufficient for defense and slow ammo designed by design to be ballistically miserable with high cross-sectional loads - it's the Makarov (and our 82). Yet people get guns far more powerful, capable of shooting through a crowd, and then spend enormous brainpower and a sea of money to find a way not to.
Good thing I'm afraid to carry a gun. I know of very few cases where it has improved the situation. But I know of many tragedies that would not have happened if the gun had not been available.
I don't think the life of an armed person is easier than an unarmed person, and I don't think it's better.

To elephantus: You scared me a bit. Is that as far as it can go? Well, it's not really funny.


To all: Anyone have any experience with the S&B Subsonic? How's that ammo doing?

To Fantan: I agree, and I'm a bit . I've been dealing with this for a long time. Whether to buy and wear, and if, what to buy and wear. I finally decided to accept the responsibility, and based on recommendations from friends in the police and literature, I bought a Glock 19. Now I just try to minimize the risk to the casual passerby. For now I carry S&B Subsonic, but I'm still looking for ammo even more suitable for public shooting. And I'm probably hoping I never have to use the gun...

Subsonics are (in my opinion) perfectly legal. Just as semi-substance is legal under the law.
Other constructions are borderline or illegal.
By the way, as a defensive weapon (since one has to carry something and is asking for trouble - sorry gentlemen) I'd argue for the Makarov too. As well as the 9mm Short (.380 Auto). I personally only take a gun when I know I'm going to the range and can't make it home. Otherwise, I leave the gun where it is (in the safe).

To elephantus: Subsonics are definitely legal, but probably still piercing enough to put bystanders in danger if shot. The thing is, I haven't found the results of any really valid research anywhere that examines the differences in effectiveness between an ogival and a comma cone. I naively expected the manufacturer to do this themselves...

He can't even state it. Anyone who knows a bit about terminal ballistics knows that any conclusion regarding the shape dependence of the projectile after it enters the body is misguided (unless there is an expanding projectile in play).
In principle, these situations are simulated on a lot of materials (lately on gelatin, for example), but nobody gets anywhere because, for example, the body has different densities and penetrations. It just depends on where you hit, what you shoot with, and so on.
Personally, I like semi-shells the best (S&B made ones are my favorite). Too bad there isn't an indignity called a subsonic semi-sheath.
Personally, I think the FEMJ one would probably be legal. But I like my guns and ZP too much to take any chances.
Kind of a schizophrenic situation.