PDA

View Full Version : True stories stopping man or beast


rimfireman
March 28, 2006, 12:54 AM
Does anyone have a real life experience stopping either man or beast, and what caliber did you use. I am looking to see if size matters. I keep reading opionions, but I would love to see experience. Can a 22 stop anyone or has anyone missed with larger more powerful weapons since they can be more difficult to shoot? Just wondering.

Dwight55
March 28, 2006, 09:18 AM
Whenever this question arises, I always remember the story in a little town about 10 miles from where I live.

Two guys got into a rukus in one of the rougher bars there and were ushered out of the place by the bouncer and bartender.

Once outside, they both pulled out handguns, . . . one a .357 mag, . . . the other a .22.

The guy who got shot with the .357 died there in the street, . . . the guy who got shot with the .22 died an hour or so later in the hospital.

Conclusion: placement is what counts, . . . not caliber.

May God bless,
Dwight

Wisby
March 28, 2006, 09:36 AM
There is the Cop one with a video and everything someone posted about it here a few months ago...

You see the guy get shot a 4 or 5 times with a .357 from the Cop and the BG shot's the Cop with a .22 in the armpit. The BG live's IIRC and the Cop dies because the .22 hit a Main Artiery. Maybe someone can link the storm to this link.

mete
March 28, 2006, 10:44 AM
I stopped and killed a feral cat with my 1911 and the bullet never entered his body !! He was facing me and the bullet impacted his spine fatally without ever penetrating his skin, just shaved a little fur off. Now do you see why we love the 45 acp ??:D

threegun
March 28, 2006, 01:57 PM
If size didn't matter than everyone would shoot a .22lr. They are generally tack drivers easy to shoot fast etc.

Hook686
March 28, 2006, 05:28 PM
The shooting or Trooper Mark Coats, if anything, points out that "Size" has not much to do with it ... it seems to me Trooper Coats had everything on his side, but ....

http://www.rcfop.com/video/reality/warning-troopercoates.html

JCC2
March 28, 2006, 06:39 PM
as most people want to believe...

Remember reading a case a few weeks ago LEO stopped a guy for traffic violation... Things got out of control and ended up in big fight in parking lot. LEO pulled gun and shoot BG once in stomach but ended up taking the worst part of the fight... a CCW passer by went to help LEO and shoot BG for times and BG still kept going for LEO... It took a fifth shot (sixth on yhe BG actually) to kill the attacker......

Don't remember specific calibers but I believe LEO was at least .40 and CCW was .45....


Stay safe,

Juan Carlos

jamaica
March 28, 2006, 11:52 PM
In my youth I lived and breathed to hunt. Started out with a Daisy bb gun at age six. Graduated to a .22 single shot at age 12. Back then there was no restrictions on youth having guns.

I don't have any idea how many big game animals I have killed, but it is considerable. Thousands of small game and varmints.

However, I have to say this; before you can kill or stop anything, you have to hit it, and it helps to hit it in the right spot. A bullet in the brain or spinal cord in the area of the neck will imediately bring the animal down. And it will almost always stay down, not even a twitch, just plop, down like dropping a wet dish rag.

I have also seen deer run 150 yards with a 30 cal hole through the heart.
That is why I like head shots. You don't have to chase the critter.

I have seen the lowly .22 LR take animals from the size of mice up to elk and 2000 lb. bulls. No doubt in my mind the small calibers can kill.

I have used a number of rifle calibers including .22 LR 22 Mag, 30-30, 222, 243, 30-06, 308, 270, 270 Weatherby Mag, 300 Mag.

I have killed many deer with one shot with the 222 to the head.
I have twice made a body shot on deer with the 222 and both times I wounded the animal and had to track it down The one was hit in the lungs, the other a little too low in the front shoulder. On the shoulder shot, the little pill stopped before getting into anything vital. Now hits like that with the 270 will usually go clear through and knock the deer down immediately. They won't usually get up. Of course the 222 delivers much more energy than the 45 auto. So see what you are up against?

If the animal is already spooked and moving out sometimes you can put a bullet through the heart or lung area and they will run a considerable distance before dropping from lack of blood. In other words if it was coming for you, it would get you before it died.

Though the light loads can kill, it quickly becomes evident that the more powerful loads are better for stopping and/or killing the animal. Absolutely no question about it. Size matters. It is a fact.

I have only owned 22 and 44 Spl revolvers. Let me just say that the 44 is very, very, much more effective, regardless what animal you may be after.

I have never shot at a man, nor do I want to, but I am sure that what I have learned about stopping animals will apply if needed.

My advice: what ever gun you decide to use, learn to shoot! Practice, practice, practice.

jamaica
March 29, 2006, 12:16 AM
Quote:
Can a 22 stop anyone or has anyone missed with larger more powerful weapons since they can be more difficult to shoot? Just wondering.
End quote

More difficult to shoot?

I think that most of us are thinking in terms of calibers like 9 mm up to 45 Auto and .40 S&W for carry weapons. From where I stand, I can't see any of these calibers being difficult to shoot or having un-manageable recoil.

A 44 mag could be a bit to much for comfort though. Although if I had to engage in a gunfight or take out a bear at close range, a 44 Mag would be fine with me.

I can believe that some pistols and revolvers might be difficult to handle because of the design of the gun, but nothing to do with the caliber. Try a variety and settle on one that feels good in your hand, has good balance and points good. It should point just as easy as pointing your finger.

Yes, a .22 can stop anyone, *IF* you can carefully place one bullet directly between the eyes of your assailant.

threegun
March 29, 2006, 06:35 AM
JCC2,

a CCW passer by went to help LEO and shoot BG for times and BG still kept going for LEO... It took a fifth shot (sixth on yhe BG actually) to kill the attacker......

Don't remember specific calibers but I believe LEO was at least .40 and CCW was .45....



It was a 45acp. If 4 torso hits with a 45acp and a belly wound from the officers gun failed to stop, why on earth would anyone choose a caliber on the other end of the spectrum........unless it was all they could handle and shoot effectively.

You see the guy get shot a 4 or 5 times with a .357 from the Cop and the BG shot's the Cop with a .22 in the armpit. The BG live's IIRC and the Cop dies because the .22 hit a Main Artery.

A 357 mag in the armpit would have severed the same artery plus smashed other stuff. Shot placement is the key of course. However once your shot placement is the same bigger is usually better.

JCC2
March 29, 2006, 03:54 PM
But....It is a lot easier for most people (stress on MOST :rolleyes: ) to place a shot where they want to if they are shooting a smaller caliber for several reasons, just to name a couple:

- Less recoil of course, allowing for faster/more accurate subsequent shots

- Cheaper cost of ammo (normally) allowing for more practice....

Under equal shot placement, of course Bigger IS Better :D

Stay safe,

Juan Carlos

threegun
March 29, 2006, 04:47 PM
Hits on a badguy in a life and death dual are difficult with any caliber. Just look at the hit ratios for law enforcement while in training and in L&D struggles. I believe the hit ratio is in the 20 percentile range. With stress, moving badguys, obsticles, ect even the better shooters tend to shoot poorly. These are guys many of whom shoot the heavier calibers great under normal conditions.

David Armstrong
March 29, 2006, 05:00 PM
Can a 22 stop anyone or has anyone missed with larger more powerful weapons since they can be more difficult to shoot?
The answer to both questions is "yes". A .22 can stop anyone, and has been shown to be quite adequate for defensive puposes over the years. And some people have missed the shots because they were using a large gun that they could not control. There are no absolutes in the defensive shooting world, only probabilities. So the better question might be "how likely is a .22 to stop an attacker, and how likely is it to miss with a more powerful weapon?"

armedandsafe
March 30, 2006, 09:58 PM
Most folks generally will not discuss their shootings of people in detail on boards like this.

This is true, in general, and I am no exception. However, I will make an exception in this thread.

The first one was with a 1917 loaded with hardball. I fended his bayonet thrust with my weak hand and hit him twice, in the solar plexus and upper chest. He was no longer a threat.

The second one was at about 150 yards with the 03A3. My team was armed with 1911s and 38spl revolvers (and my 1917 .45.) The group we stopped to arrest were armed with rifles. I went back to the car and retrieved the 03A3 and started disabling trucks and drivers. At 1 of ours wounded and 3 of theirs down, they decided to surrender. That was good, as I had only 3 rounds left.

Those are the times I have fired and hit.

The third was not mine, but my son-in-law's father. As local police chief, he served a warrent and the reciepient charged him. His .357 entered the BGs forehead and stayed just under the skin until it exited out the back of his head. Not a serious injury, but the BG decided to lie down, anyway.

Size matters for stopping a threat quickly. Placement counts for stopping the threat at all.

Pops

isa268
March 31, 2006, 10:16 AM
ture stories of citizens defending themselves with guns.

http://www.kressworks.com/Politics/Gun_Control/dgu/defensive_gun_uses.html

JCC2
March 31, 2006, 01:12 PM
Regarding armedandsafe´s comment (last para) about a .357 shot to BG´s head with really minor damage, I have heard and read many similar stories all over....

It seems to be that the hardness/shape of the skull bones doesn´t make head shots as effective as one would have thought, unless the shot comes at a very specific angle......

Anyone has any additional info on this subject?

Stay safe !!!!

Juan Carlos

threegun
March 31, 2006, 01:46 PM
Erick, I will look for the source. If some agencies are that high then others must be horrible, if my stats are in the ballpark.

David Armstrong
March 31, 2006, 02:05 PM
I keep hearing folks reference this 20% figure for hits in OISs. Not sure where it comes from.
It comes from SOP9, from New York City, and is a good example of people tossing around numbers without really understanding them. The 20% statement is accurate, and is probably fairly close for a national number also according to research Greg Morrison and I have done, but it probably is somewhat misleading also. Within LE there are many groups and some agencies that have a hit rate much higher (some in excess of 90%) and the lower number also includes instances of obviously unusual incidents that tend to skew the figures, such as a barricaded suspect call where over 1000 rounds are fired.

Eghad
March 31, 2006, 02:05 PM
My most harrowing encounter with a frenzied beast was on my paper route one day. I stopped to put the old lady's paper outta the rain. Her 2 pound chiuaha had gotten loose and proceeded to bite the back of my ankle. Luckily I still had the rolled up newsaper which I used like a cricket bat. The dog tumbled head over heels through the air and promptly retreated. My ankle was safe and the dog learned some manners.

threegun
April 1, 2006, 03:49 AM
I agree that the figures are skewed by special circumstances. Still I can't tell you how many times I hear police and suspect exchanging multiple shots without hits. Just recently here in Hillborough County an officer exchanged gunfire and yep missed. Tons just like this only in this area.

An Inverness police officer fired a shot at a fleeing suspect Sunday after the man took something from his back pocket that resembled a gun.

The suspect, Shane Andrew Little, 18, was not hit.


The badguys are even worst it seems.

DunedinDragon
April 1, 2006, 05:42 AM
I agree that the figures are skewed by special circumstances. Still I can't tell you how many times I hear police and suspect exchanging multiple shots without hits. Just recently here in Hillborough County an officer exchanged gunfire and yep missed. Tons just like this only in this area.


An Inverness police officer fired a shot at a fleeing suspect Sunday after the man took something from his back pocket that resembled a gun.

The suspect, Shane Andrew Little, 18, was not hit.


The badguys are even worst it seems.

I agree these statistics aren't terribly meaningful. What would be meaningful would be statistics related to hit rates for people that PRACTICE their gun skills (range, IDPA, etc.) versus those that don't...whether they're cops or not. I suspect you'd find a MUCH higher hit rate as evidenced by the video of the guy working the hotel desk that shot the robber...3 out of 3 hits while the guy was moving. Impressive.

Pointer
April 1, 2006, 06:10 AM
Once outside, they both pulled out handguns, . . . one a .357 mag, . . . the other a .22.

The guy who got shot with the .357 died there in the street, . . . the guy who got shot with the .22 died an hour or so later in the hospital.

Conclusion: placement is what counts, . . . not caliber.

Dwight
Your conclusion is non-sequiter...
It is reasonable to assume that both shooters hit the "ever-magical" center-mass. ;)

My story is...

My friend had had his hand and arm severely damaged in WWII by a 7mm Jap. from palm to elbow.
Therefore, he thought a .22LR would be sufficient for home defense...

He woke up in the middle of the night to sounds of illegal entry at his front door.

He grabbed his trusty .22 and headed for the front room and found two intruders...

One was blocking his view of the other...

He double-tapped the first one center-mass, at less than 10 feet, and the other one "quickity-split"...

After about two minutes... my friend called the police...

More minutes passed and he got an answer...
(There was no 911 line in those days and the response was a little better.)

10 more minutes and one squad car arrived with two LEO's...

After several minutes the two LEO's began looking around the neighborhood for the wounded perp...

After about 25 minutes of searching they found the perp hiding under a parked vehicle.

After that they "walked", (My friend said, "...not particularly in a hurry.") back to their car and called for an ambulance.

After about 8 or 10 more minutes the ambulance arrived and they talked with the police a little and loaded the perp onto the gurney. (My friend said, "...not particularly in a hurry.") and then they headed for the hospital which was at least ten minutes away...

The emergency trauma team "prepped" him for surgery... more minutes...
And after 8 hours of surgery he survived to be tried and sent to jail. He tried to sue my friend but in those days they had sensible judges... and the case was "thrown out of court". (Now there's a phrase you don't hear much anymore.)

My friend, knowing my experience with hand guns, told me this story and asked me to help him get a 1911 .45ACP. :)

Ya'll can draw your own "conclusions"... sequiter or not... :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Blackwater OPS
April 1, 2006, 01:24 PM
It seems to be that the hardness/shape of the skull bones doesn´t make head shots as effective as one would have thought, unless the shot comes at a very specific angle......

What you want to do is hit between the upper lip and the top of the eyes, this area is soft tissue leading directly to the brain. No fancy angles needed, just good shot placement. Even a .22 will penetrate the sofe tissue there, although it won't make it out the back of the skull....

Derius_T
April 1, 2006, 07:46 PM
Alot of people throwing numbers around and talking of hits and such. For those that are unaware, it is completely different to hit perfectly in a non-dangerous, controlled environment, as to making perfect COM shots when your life is in critical danger, and bullets are flying around your ears.....not nearly as easy.....


As for oddest critter shot, was deer hunting, and had my 12 gauge loaded with slugs of course. Unknown to me, the first shell I loaded was a 00 buck load. Long story short, shot nice big doe. Fell almost in her tracks. When we checked her out, we couldn't find a wound ANYWHERE on her. Absolutely no reason for her to be dead. Upon much closer examination, we noticed one of her eyes was busted. 1 single steel shot (as near as we could tell) had entered her eye, and must have went directly into her brain.

Weirdest thing I have ever personally seen....

JohnBrowning
April 1, 2006, 08:07 PM
The SOB who shot up the post office in Royal Oak Michigan in 1991 was armed with a 10/22 which he obtained because of the then lack of background checks. He shot 10 people, and 5 of them died on the scene. I don't know how many shots he fired total, but in any case, that tragic and stupid instance is a good example of the lethality of any caliber of bullet.

Pointer
April 1, 2006, 11:47 PM
The point is that if he'd used a 9 or .45 there would be more people dead.

It is also a point that the dead MIGHT have died faster.

Read the original message of the thread-start... PLEASE. :rolleyes:

Derius_T
April 3, 2006, 01:34 AM
Pointer wrote:

The point is that if he'd used a 9 or .45 there would be more people dead.

How can you say that? That doesn't make sense. If he hit 5 people in the right spot to result in a kill, it doesn't matter if he hit them with a .22, .45, an rpg, or a freakin howitzer.....dead is still dead.

It would stand to reason that a .22 would give you greater range, more ammo capacity before reloading, and much greater accuracy due to little or no recoil.

So there is absolutely no fact to your statement that a larger caliber results in more deaths. :confused:

enidpd804
April 3, 2006, 03:55 AM
In reference to Mark Coats, he was tragically unlucky but also made one critical tactical error. Trooper Coats asked his murderer if he had any weapons. The murderer responded in the affirmative, but Coats didn't hear/listen. Such a small error, which any of us could have commited, cost a brave young life.

Pointer
April 3, 2006, 08:06 PM
dead is still dead.

There are only three ways a bullet kills...

Bleed out - requires time

Nerve center shock - incapacitates immediately

Destruction of vital organs - speed of death falls somewhere between the first two.

I can't help but wonder why the other 5 victims didn't die??

Please see my post #24 above


That's how I can say that... :)

riverrat66
April 3, 2006, 08:44 PM
What you want to do is hit between the upper lip and the top of the eyes, this area is soft tissue leading directly to the brain. No fancy angles needed, just good shot placement.
Blackwater OPS,

How do you know that? I said almost the exact same thing awhile back and got into quite a debate with someone on this forum because he replied with this:
Then you were told by a person who enjoys blatant over-simplification or has an amazingly poor understanding of terminal ballistics.
Actually this is what I said:
I was told once that a sniper will aim for a spot just below the nose and that will shut off a man like a light switch.
And it turned into a not so nice discussion and I have not heard a peep out of him since. :confused: I know I was correct but I was just wondering where you got your information.

Derius_T
April 3, 2006, 09:12 PM
Pointer, while I am in agreement personally that a higher caliber weapon tends to be a bit more destructive percentage wise, (which is why I carry a .45) I can't honestly say that I know for a fact hitting a guy 2x com with a .45 would kill him any quicker than 2x com with a .22. I mean, it stands to reason that the .45 would kill more efficiently, but I couldn't call it an etched in stone fact. Not when people have survived both, for unknown reasons.

I just can't buy into the idea that a higher caliber weapon automatically results in more deaths.....

Blackwater OPS
April 3, 2006, 10:01 PM
How do you know that?
Well the way I said it, it is a medical fact. I am not claiming to know all possible results of such a shot, but the area I mentioned is "soft tissue", in other words not bone, and behind that is the brain. That is an objective statement, but as to it being an instant kill everytime or something, thats conjecture.

Pointer
April 3, 2006, 10:22 PM
automatically results in more deaths.....

I don think so either...:rolleyes:

I simply believe in taking every edge I can get...

That's why I want MOA... and bolt action... and non-shiny rifles... and camo quiet clothing... and a bigger drill when I'm looking for a gusher... :D :D :D

riverrat66
April 3, 2006, 10:47 PM
After following this thread I feel compelled to share my "real life experiences" about the effects of larger caliber weapons. Having witnessed many men shot during my two tours in Vietnam some with the M-14 (7.62/.308) the smaller M-16 (5.56/.223) and myself with the AK47 (7.62x39). I can say the larger round is definately more destructive. While the 5.56/.223 bullet enters the body, it quickly turns sideways after passing through only 4" of flesh, then breaks in two major pieces, as well as many smaller fragments. On many occasions shooting an enemy soldier with the M-16 did not kill as quickly as the 30 caliber weapons. Instead we would follow a massive trail a blood a few feet away from where the enemy soldier had been hit to find him dead from massive blood loss.
On the other hand the 7.62/.308, upon entering a fleshy target, the 7.62 bullet travels straight nearly six inches before the massive shock wave ahead of the bullet transfers incredible energy into the target as the bullet begins to tumble. Thus the bullet can exit before the maximum shock wave expansion can occur. The 30 caliber rifle bullets of this type are known to knock men down, and throw them off their feet back some distance and make an incredible wound. During my entire tour in country I chose to carry the M-14.
The 7.62x39 while not quite as devastating as the 30 caliber rounds is still quite deadly having an unusual tendency to remain intact even after taking unusual deviations upon contact with bone.
A remarkable story is about my son's father-in-law who was a medic with the 5th Special Forces Group when he was shot by a sniper behind the right ear and the bullet (a 7.62x39) exited thru the roof of his mouth! He recovered and returned to Vietnam for his second tour of duty. In fact he has written several books about his experiences in Vietnam including this one HERE (http://www.randomhouse.com/catalog/display.pperl?isbn=9780804117647).

Now as far as using a .22, well it's been known that "hitmen" have used .22's as the weapon of choice. Ya know, a couple in the ear or in the back of the head, up close and personal. That would do the job and not get real messy.

Riverrat66

markj
April 4, 2006, 10:37 AM
Out in the country we all know all bullets can kill.

I hunt a lot, kill a lot of large animals. Most with a .22

Hunted wild pigs years ago with a pack of dogs, they would hold a large pig until Icould shoot him with my yep .22

I was about 11 or so when I got my first .22, a single shot, I went out and shot a deer, killed him one shot. Dad kicked my butt and took it away.

I am a big fan of the .22, love it, seen a bear killed with one. Tricky but it is done all the time.

Derius_T
April 4, 2006, 01:40 PM
Pointer.....point taken. :D :D

Markj, while I do believe in the killing power of the .22 and have hunted with it ALOT (and still do) for small game, I think I would want something a bit larger for....uhmm.....BEAR.....:eek:

Talk about betting your life on shot placement.....sheesh....:confused:

psycho nut
April 4, 2006, 10:21 PM
I once killed a 'possom with a .177 10-pump BB gun. I was really close and hit him in the eye. Also doves.

RsqVet
April 5, 2006, 08:28 AM
Well folks as an emergency vet I have seen a fair number of unlucky animals shot with a variety of weapons and I think that the following 2 conclusions apply:

1. Have an adequate round
2. Put it in an appropriate anatomic locations

The most memorable cases I have seen are:

1. Pit bull shot at close range between eyes --- weapon recovered by PD was a 357, however the bullet we recovered was a lead SWC, it had skimmed the bone and lodged under the muscles on top the head --- A target 38 load I suspect as I can’t imagine any serious 357 or 38 defense load doing that or not traveling further but then who knows, some damage to one of the eyes that required removal, adopted by a colleague of mine.

2. Pit bull (see a trend here) shot 3 times by PD with 40 cal service ammo, all 3 entrance wounds in the chest area, noting vital hit by any of them, 1 slug recovered from under the skin in the area of the abdomen (still have it sitting on my desk somewhere), animal survived with minimally intensive supportive care, no surgery required, had about 8 beer bottle caps in it’s stomach as an incidental finding on x-ray, barfed these up while in the hospital, found new home.

3. Yellow lab shot point blank in chest with 410 shot gun, patient again lived with minimal intensive care however required surgery after about 3 weeks of recurrent wound infection, the plastic shot wad was recovered from within the thorax, x-rays revealed a bird shot load and are very impressive as all of the pellets can be seen in the external thoracic muscles --- no appreciable penetration at all even from this close of a range. Animal adopted by the officer investigating the shooting who nailed the SOB in court.


So I’m sure my case selection is biased as a I don’t see the ones that die in the field, however I thought it might be interesting to some of you out there. Also of interest about 2 years ago I attended a seminar by an Army vet on their tramatology research --- you see time was that trauma surgeons looked at the size of a shock cavity that a given round made in gelatin and figured all of that tissue is toast and would take it out during the initial treatment if possible --- this lead to many radical surgeries that often produced a lot of disability and dysfunction and turns out was WRONG, tissue is surprisingly elastic and repairable and the size of the shock cavity means almost nothing --- to prove this they showed their experimental model which involved raising a flap of skin in a pig --- still attached and supplied by the pig’s blood vessels, shooting it, then stitching it back (basically a plastic surgery technique for experimental inquiry) and observing heeling --- they also had high speed photos of the shots – 223 would stretch and sling the tissue this way and that --- and in the end there would be local inflammation from the stretch damage and a 223 sized hole that healed rather well with appropriate treatment ---- I know it’s kind of looking at the whole thing from the reverse angle but I don’t know of a better way of illustrating that it’s going to be what anatomic structures are in the path of a projectile that determines it’s lethality --- which again leads back to use an adequate projectile and put it where it needs to be.

Pointer
April 5, 2006, 08:12 PM
Talk about betting your life on shot placement.....sheesh....

:D :D LOL

+1
skimmed the bone and lodged under the muscles on top the head --
A LEO friend on the Oakland Motor Squad was called to a bar to pick up a violent drunk... Everyone on the force knew who this guy was and when he was sober he was a pretty nice guy... When drunk he was unmanageable.

He was so big that, more often than not, it usually took severl people to hold and cuff him and get him into the patrol car...

My friend arrived first with his fellow motor man and they waited for the backup... soon it became obvious that they could no longer wait and they attempted to cuff the drunk without additional help... whoops!

They did eventually succeed and the guy kept fighting even though he was cuffed... My friend slammed him against the nearest vehicle and couldn't hold him there... His partner was watching their "six" and could help very much..

So... my friend told the perp that he was going to knock him out if he didn't calm down... He had to knocked him one (I think he hit him his .357) and then told the drunk if he didn't calm down he was going to shoot him...

He said, "Oh Yeah?" and he tried to turn his head against the muzzle of the gun... Still no backup and these guys were very tired and surrounded by very
anti-cop "on-lookers" and he fired the .357 muzzle against hism skull and the guy crumpled...

My friend was very broken up about it because he didn't want to "reallY" shoot him but there he was...

When the ambulance came to take the guy...who was remarkably, still alive!! my friend insisted on riding with him to the hospital.

There was a hole in the back of his head and a hole in his forehead and blood all over the place... In the ambulance the drunk came to... :eek:

As it turned out the bullet had entered at just the right angle and followed the scalp over the top and busted out fron his forehead...

My friend and the drunk are "friends" on a first name basis to this day... some 25 years after he retired!

:cool:

JohnKSa
April 5, 2006, 08:26 PM
The 30 caliber rifle bullets of this type are known to knock men down, and throw them off their feet back some distance...Absolutely and demonstrably incorrect and a physical impossibility.

If the recoil doesn't knock the shooter down or throw him "off his feet back some distance" then it can't do that to the person soaking up the bullet either.

This was tested with a "man-sized" pig carcass hung precariously from an easily dislodged toggle. The only firearm capable of making it "drop" (none of them even came CLOSE to knocking it backward) was a 12 ga shotgun. Even then, it just jiggled the carcass a tiny bit--just enough to dislodge it from the toggle.

At one point, four people were all shooting it simultaneously with various calibers (including a .45ACP Thompson on full auto) and it never even moved. A 30 cal rifle of some sort (.308 or 30-06) was tested--the carcass wasn't knocked back and didn't even fall.

riverrat66
April 5, 2006, 08:27 PM
Pointer,
I have heard of things like that happening. That is truly remarkable but I'm wondering has that guy sobered up? ;)

riverrat66
April 5, 2006, 09:13 PM
JohnKSa,

I will not get into a debate with you over this subject but let me ask you something. Did you ever shoot a man with a 7.62/308 cal. (M-14) or any kind of a firearm for that matter? I have many times and while it did not happen every time, there were times it did knock them down and throw them off their feet some distance. I don't mean throwing them thru the air like in the movies but knocking them off their feet as in backward several inches maybe even feet. If I shoot you in the chest with a M-14 do you think you'll just stand there and clutch your chest and then lay down like in the cowboy movies? I can guarantee you you're gonna move. You're gonna move backward, sideways, in some direction besides down! You're not going to just stand there and take the full impact of the shot.

If you've had real personal experiences like the one I described please share them with us. I know what I did experience as fact whether you believe it or not. Shooting a dead pig as opposed to a living man is not quite the same regardless of how many "tests" one does.

Pointer
April 5, 2006, 09:23 PM
has that guy sobered up?

Unknown??? :eek:
But I doubt it... :rolleyes:

It's been so long he might even have died... ;)

JohnKSa
April 5, 2006, 09:43 PM
If I shoot you in the chest with a M-14...I can guarantee you you're gonna move.It is entirely possible, even probable, that a person hit with a rifle round will REACT by jumping, dodging, clasping one's chest, diving for cover, reflexively jerking, etc. It is NOT physically possible for them to be thrown around by the force of the impact.Shooting a dead pig as opposed to a living man is not quite the same regardless of how many "tests" one does.Shooting a dead pig is a perfect test for showing that the force of bullet impact alone is insufficient to cause any significant movement. Which forces us to the conclusion that if a live person moves significantly from being shot, it is a REACTION--a movement caused either by voluntary motion, reflex action or the interaction of damaged nerves and muscle. NOT simply the force of the bullet acting upon them.

AND, getting right to the heart of the matter (and the topic of this thread), since the FORCE of the bullet impact is not what's actually moving them, the caliber used is either totally or largely irrelevant to the amount of REACTION.

I'm not necessarily questioning your experience or veracity, but I am telling you that your interpretation of your observations is contrary to fact.

Blackwater OPS
April 5, 2006, 11:07 PM
If you've had real personal experiences like the one I described please share them with us. I know what I did experience as fact whether you believe it or not.
Generally I don't answer questions like this, I think think it is rude to ask, but I suppose it is valid in this case. Yes, I have been in combat and I have seen people shot. They ALWAYS fall in the same direction they are moving when hit, if they fall at all.

I have used and m14, an m249, as well as an m16 and I have NEVER seen a person knocked back, although I have seen a sort of whiplash effect on head shots. I have seen a person hit with a Mark 19 shell as close range, it was an HE round which had not armed, and it went though him without exploding. He was not knocked back, so I think it is fair to say what you are suggesting is impossible.

One thing I can tell you from years of LE work and interviewing witnesses to the same events, memory can be a funny thing sometimes, I do not doubt that you belive what you are saying, but perhaps it was not what it appeared to be.

riverrat66
April 6, 2006, 12:13 AM
If you think it's "rude to ask" which BTW the question was not directed at you don't you think it's rude to make a statement like this? "memory can be a funny thing sometimes, I do not doubt that you believe what you are saying, but perhaps it was not what it appeared to be. "
Maybe you should read this HERE (http://www.bobtuley.com/terminal.htm)
They ALWAYS fall in the same direction they are moving when hit, if they fall at all.
I just gotta ask. What do you mean "if they fall at all"? Everyone I ever shot ALWAYS fell. What happens if the enemy is standing still? Did he fall straight down or is it too rude to ask that question?
So in other words you have seen men shot and other then dying they have not reacted at all. I mean to not even fall backward but in every instant, you say 100% of the time "I have NEVER seen a person knocked back". I think it is fair to say what you are suggesting is impossible.
This was the statement I made and why is it so had to believe?
You're gonna move backward, sideways, in some direction besides down! You're not going to just stand there and take the full impact of the shot.
I did not say one would do back flips or go flying through the air. What is so difficult about understanding what I meant.

JohnKSa
April 6, 2006, 12:46 AM
So in other words you have seen men shot and other then dying they have not reacted at all.1. Not everyone who is shot dies.
2. It is common for shooting victims to say that they didn't even know they were wounded until later. That is quite consistent with someone getting shot and not reacting at all.I did not say one would... go flying through the air.Yeah, actually you did.throw them off their feet back some distanceBut it sounds like at this point we're all in agreement that the force of a .308 bullet impact won't knock someone to the ground, or throw them off their feet and backwards, or make them fly through the air.

riverrat66
April 6, 2006, 01:27 AM
Correct, not everyone who is shot dies but when shot with the M-14 which is what we were talking about there is a very good chance of that. But then I'm sure you'll disagree about that also.

It is common for shooting victims to say that they didn't even know they were wounded until later. That is quite consistent with someone getting shot and not reacting at all.
Absolutely 100% wrong! I have NEVER seen anyone shot with a M-14 that did not know it!

And finally,

"go flying through the air" AND "throw them off their feet back some distance" aren't even close to being the same thing!

You certainly do like to put your own spin on things don't you?

Blackwater OPS
April 6, 2006, 02:57 AM
So in other words you have seen men shot and other then dying they have not reacted at all.
I have, in fact, seen men shot and not die at all. It is true that some did not know they were shot (people I knew) and some that did not seem to react at all(other side).

If someone is off their feet and at that point travels some distance in a rearward direction, I would have to say "flying" is what they are doing. Perhaps floating, I don't know what you saw.

Simple physics here, an object weighing as little as a bullet needs a certain amount of energy(velocity) to move something as big as a person who weighs thousands of times as much. There is no gun on earth that can do this. The difference in weight of a .308 to a .223 in respect to a human body is trivial. The flesh may be damaged or destroyed but the bulk of it is not going to move.

As it has been said, if you could make the bullet move fast enough to do this, you would be moved an equal amount in the oppsite direction. This is an object fact I'm afraid. If you could disprove it, you could make a great deal of money authoring physics books.

Pointer
April 6, 2006, 04:22 AM
JohnKSa
It is NOT physically possible for them to be thrown around by the force of the impact.

I generally agree with your posts but I have trouble with this statement.

If one is smacked with a softball at say, 860 fps it won't penetrate through one but it is very likely that it will "knock" you off your feet by the force of impact... as opposed to a BB at the same speed with the same POI...

Therefore, A bigger projectile is more likely to move the "target" than a smaller projectile...

On that hypothesis... somewhere between 100fps and "penetration speed" and somewhere between .223 and 30mm... it is possible for a projectile to "throw" one around...

riverrat and Blackwater
when shot with the M-14

They will most likely "know they've been hit" much sooner than with a .223 if they are not killed outright. Regardless their mental state.

There is a reason that many, many soldiers in Vietnam "chose" the M-14 over the .223 and it was not just because they didn't like, or didn't trust, the AR.

There is also a reason why the military is currently working on a new BIGGER round for the AR.

IF and I repeat, IF either one can "move" the target or rip up bone and flesh better than the other... it is the 30 (7.62) over the 22 (5.56).

That is why the bigger bullets are used against thick hides and heavy bones and why some countries in Africa and some states in the US and elsewhwere, have legal requirements for minimum bullet sizes.

If the bullet is moving really fast it will punch right through... but if it hits a heavy bone off center it could at least turn the individual a little bit.

The right projectile with the right velocity will push you back...
witness, a medicine ball at 5 miles an hour.

CONCLUSION? We are arguing semantics like "impossible" or "never" as if they are absolutes without room for argument... :rolleyes:

So far, I have been able to agree with the principles each of you have proffered and I can do this if I don't pick at your choice of words and phrases and simply try to understand you.

Thank you all for being gentlemen in this discussion... It is refreshing to learn from such people.

Does anyone know where I can get a CCW that shoots medicine balls?

:D :D :D

mfree
April 6, 2006, 10:44 AM
For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.

The force of a bullet striking a target can inflict no more overall force than that taken by the shooter and the weapon. The target may be *moved*, but definitely not *knocked* down, but may fall or appear to be moved or leap due to neuromuscular response.

Plain and simple physics, and inviolable.

Lurper
April 6, 2006, 11:56 AM
My two cents:
Physics - for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. A bullet cannot knock a man down. It does not posses the necessary mass or velocity. The reaction you see is physiological.
While shot placement is critical, advocating the use of a .22 for self defense is suicidal/homicidal. Bigger bullets increase the chance of incapacitating your attacker (killing them is not what is important). Nothing is 100%, you can only strive to stack the odds that you control in your favor.

Here is data supporting the eficacy of larger calibers by the world's foremost expert:

Fackler, Martin L., M.D.: "FBI 1993 Wound Ballistics Seminar: Efficacy of Heavier Bullets Affirmed." Wound Ballistics Review, 1(4): 8-9; 1994.

Fackler presents findings from the 1993 FBI Wound Ballistics Seminar. The following is a short extract:

"The Firearms Training Unit of the FBI held a Wound Ballistics Seminar from 19 through 22 January 1993 at the FBI Academy.

"Thirty-seven forensic pathologists, trauma surgeons, law enforcement trainers, firearms examiners, and ordnance engineers met to discuss handgun bullet effects and bullet testing. This group unanimously affirmed the principles set down by the FBI workshop of 1987: primarily among these was that a bullet must possess the capacity to penetrate deeply enough to reach and disrupt vital body structures if it is to stand any chance of performing reliably in the variety of circumstances a law enforcement officer might meet in a gunfight. Since the 1987 workshop, most law enforcement agencies have adopted the more deeply penetrating heavier bullets. At the 1993 symposium, trainers from five large departments (California Highway Patrol, Indianapolis PD, San Diego PD, Louisiana State Police, and Amarillo PD) reported data showing excellent performance from bullets chosen using the FBI penetration criterion. Several of these trainers had polled their counterparts in other departments and found that their highly favorable observations and impressions of the heavier bullets were widely shared.

"The findings of this symposium are especially timely since it appears that three gunwriters have recently attempted to trump up a 'controversy' by claiming that the heavier subsonic bullets used by the majority of law enforcement agencies have been turning in a poor record in 'street' shootings. The story of how several senior trainers exposed this attempted fraud by these gunwriter/bullet salesmen was the subject of IWBA Bulletin No. 1, which accompanied the third issue of the Wound Ballistics Review."

Newgard, Ken, M.D.: "The Physiological Effects of Handgun Bullets: The Mechanisms of Wounding and Incapacitation."

samoand
April 6, 2006, 01:00 PM
The law of conservation of momentum (and yes, it's momentum that moves things and not energy) says that momentum equal to the one of the bullet is also delivered to the shooter. If you see a person hit flying (or even visibly moved) back, it's bodily reaction. Otherwise, the shooter would be flying (moved) in the opposite direction just as much as that unfortunate guy on the receiving end.

riverrat66: I'm not sure that "I have seen people shot and you didn't" rhetorics applies here. You don't have to see people shot to know physics for fifth graders, just like you don't have to see people jump a bridge to their death to know about laws of gravity. I thought Blackwater spoke accurately about how facts may differ from interpretations. Regards!

riverrat66
April 6, 2006, 03:59 PM
In a highly charged and chaotic atmosphere like combat each combatant will have different recollections of exactly what took place. Your experiences may differ from mine but that does not mean they did not happen nor does it mean it is impossible for them to happen. Out of all the millions of men killed in combat is it not possible that a few may have been knocked off their feet by the impact of the bullet? Some of you are saying that no, physics will not allow it, one can not be knocked off their feet just because they've been shot, it just isn't allowed, period.

You guys are making a mountain out of a mole hill. I made the statement that:
The 30 caliber rifle bullets of this type are known to knock men down, and throw them off their feet back some distance and make an incredible wound.

Please show me where I say anyone went "flying through the air"? I did not say that. I said it was known to knock them down etc. and I did not say it happened every time or often. Many strange things happen and I could tell you more but God forbid I did because you guys would pick it to death because you read somewhere that it's not supposed to happen like that.

samoand,
It's not "I have seen people shot and you didn't" rhetorics" and wasn't meant that way.
If you see a person hit flying (or even visibly moved) back,
Please re-read the post and try to get it right. I never said flying.

CONCLUSION? We are arguing semantics like "impossible" or "never" as if they are absolutes without room for argument...
Obviously that's the way it is around here. Unless it's on the internet so some of these guys can read it, then it's impossible and can never be done!


"Thirty-seven forensic pathologists, trauma surgeons, law enforcement trainers, firearms examiners, and ordnance engineers met to discuss handgun bullet effects and bullet testing.
The world's "foremost expert" was talking about handguns.

It is true that some did not know they were shot (people I knew) and some that did not seem to react at all(other side).
Well, I could say something inappropriate and that I did not believe it but I won't. There are some individuals here that would not believe it because they have not read it on the internet or there has not been a study been done on it. I was shot with a AK47 and I knew immediately that I had been shot because it hurt like hell! No I did "fly thru the air" and I have no idea where that phrase came from. But I was knocked to my knees as I was shot in the lower back and that's all I'll say about that.

I spent two years in combat in Vietnam and would have liked to share some of my experiences with you guys as it's a form of therapy for me to talk about them. Some of my experiences are really unique as they are unbelievable but after this experience I'm afraid to do that because some of the people around here would challenge me on everything I said.


Some people around here take all the pleasure out of posting on the FiringLine because they feel the need to pick on every word someone says just to show everyone what an expert they are on all subjects. They imply things that were never said. They edit their posts hours after they were originally posted to make themselves look better. Those people know who they are. Some people disagreed with what I said and that's OK but even with the knowledge of the so-called tests that everyone is throwing around that does not mean that what I said is impossible. To say that is being too narrow minded to say the least. If you were punched in the chest hard enough you would probably move back a step as you would if hit with a medicine ball as suggested by one poster. Why is it so difficult to think that maybe one could be moved back a step or two by being shot by a large caliber weapon? Just because a dead pig didn't move or some other vet didn't see the enemy move that someone else shot doesn't mean that it isn't possible.

I'm sorry if I'm rambling but at this point I'm very disillusioned about this entire experience.

Lurper
April 6, 2006, 04:13 PM
Rat, I think the point about the comments is that a bullet can't knock someone down. It doesn't change what you saw or your experience. I'm sure you saw many people appear to get knocked down, but it wasn't the bullet. Does that mean that they didn't get knocked down? No. I too am a veteran and I appreciate your service and sacrifice. I don't believe anyone here is attacking you personally, they are just expressing different opinions.