|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
November 26, 2008, 12:53 PM | #26 | |
Junior member
Join Date: January 24, 2005
Location: SW Louisiana
Posts: 2,289
|
Quote:
|
|
November 26, 2008, 05:11 PM | #27 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: November 4, 2000
Location: Tarheel
Posts: 199
|
Quote:
I do stand corrected. Quote:
__________________
slow is fast Last edited by heyduke; November 26, 2008 at 06:31 PM. |
||
November 26, 2008, 08:32 PM | #28 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 26, 2005
Posts: 355
|
Quote:
|
|
November 27, 2008, 12:26 AM | #29 | |||
Staff
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 24,930
|
Quote:
If there were absolutely no other factors affecting the outcome of a shootout other than terminal ballistics then your approach would be reasonable. However nothing could be farther from the truth. One quick example from this situation: Gordon McNeill might very well have ended the fight before any agents were killed had he posessed a gun with a few more rounds of capacity. He expended all the ammunition in his revolver, tried to reload it with a badly injured hand and ended up being shot at close range & paralyzed before he got it back in action. Clearly capacity can sometimes play an important role in surviving gunfights. Yes, if big & fast can be had without trading ANYTHING else that might be useful or make a significant difference in a self-defense situation then go for it. Unfortunately that's not the real world. You can't isolate a single factor and pretend that it's the only one that matters. Quote:
Dove fired 20 rounds. Had he connected with a 6 or 7 shots (a third of his rounds instead of only about a tenth of them) I think it's quite reasonable to assume that the outcome would have been quite different. So is it really logical to say that the problem was one round that supposedly "underpenetrated"? Or would it be more logical to say that the problem was the other 18 rounds he shot that missed entirely? Quote:
__________________
Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?
|
|||
November 27, 2008, 07:48 AM | #30 | ||||
Senior Member
Join Date: November 4, 2000
Location: Tarheel
Posts: 199
|
Quote:
I did not draw my conclusion of "bigger and faster is always better" speciffically for this gun battle, but as a general statement overal pertaining to bullets, and the effect they would have. That said, I can't help but think that if the exact same location were hit on living tissue with the same type of bullet, increasing both the bullet weight and velocity of the bullet, would cause more tissue damage. Would I be incorrect in this opinion? Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
As mentioned, it was brought to my attention by more than a couple of people (not on this forum) that it was this gun battle that was the deciding factor of determining that the 9mm was just plain "weak".
__________________
slow is fast Last edited by heyduke; November 27, 2008 at 08:17 AM. |
||||
November 27, 2008, 12:03 PM | #31 | ||
Junior member
Join Date: January 24, 2005
Location: SW Louisiana
Posts: 2,289
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
November 27, 2008, 12:31 PM | #32 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 24, 2008
Location: Orange, TX
Posts: 3,078
|
To me, the critical failure in Miami was the agents' decision to engage Platt and Matix while woefully underarmed. They knew that these two were using long arms in their robberies; there was every reason for the agents to make sure they had equivalent (preferably superior) firepower before making a felony stop. They were specifically looking for these two, and knew they had used long arms in their crimes in the past. They entered into this encounter criminally underarmed for what was to follow.
Last edited by csmsss; November 27, 2008 at 12:36 PM. |
November 27, 2008, 12:33 PM | #33 | |||
Senior Member
Join Date: November 4, 2000
Location: Tarheel
Posts: 199
|
Quote:
Quote:
Which one do we "assume" will do more damage to a human being if shot placement is in the exact same location in the chest area? I guess the question I now have is what is considered the "optimal" speed for a JHP bullet to do the most tissue damage? Or say, we take a 180gr .400 JHP bullet and a 200gr .400 JHP bullet. Both traveling at the same speed. Which would do the most damage, again if both hit the same location on tissue? (at the same distance) I could be wrong, but I'd guess the 200gr would do more damge. Keep in mind, I realize the question is moot if you can't hit your target, and I realize a lot of "what ifs" Quote:
Read it on the internet, and it must be true! I can't even remember the dewey decimal system now
__________________
slow is fast Last edited by heyduke; November 27, 2008 at 12:45 PM. |
|||
November 27, 2008, 05:54 PM | #34 | ||||
Senior Member
Join Date: March 31, 2005
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,775
|
Quote:
Quote:
Now, I am not an expert in civilian firefights and perhaps you are John, but considering the conditions (agents were in bright sunlight, dust and BGs were in shadows) adrenline high lots of movement and cover I think Dove did pretty well considering until a lucky shot put his gun out of commission. Do you think poor marksmanship was the cause? Maybe, but I don't think so. Quote:
The lurid fiction David talks about is urban legend and I will not repeat it. However, if you read the letter to SAIC Gordon McNeillby from SA Edmundo Mireles on page 3 he mentions that there were agents that day that were not able to respond to the firefight that had both MP5s and a full auto M-16. Reference page 122 Forensic Analysis of the April 11, 1986, FBI Firefight by W. French Anderson, MD. Quote:
__________________
"God and the Soldier we adore, in time of trouble but not before. When the danger's past and the wrong been righted, God is forgotten and the Soldier slighted." Anonymous Soldier. Last edited by Tennessee Gentleman; November 28, 2008 at 12:31 AM. |
||||
November 27, 2008, 06:09 PM | #35 | |
Junior member
Join Date: January 24, 2005
Location: SW Louisiana
Posts: 2,289
|
Quote:
Everybody needs to keep in mind this was 20 years ago, it was a very different time, and the agents, just like LE everywhere, were trained to do things very different than we train them today. The agents didn't decide to engage the BG's, they they were forced into the altercation and were trying to make the best of a situation they didn't want and hadn't planned for. |
|
November 27, 2008, 06:15 PM | #36 | |||
Junior member
Join Date: January 24, 2005
Location: SW Louisiana
Posts: 2,289
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||
November 27, 2008, 07:33 PM | #37 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: November 4, 2000
Location: Tarheel
Posts: 199
|
Quote:
Kind of reminds me of the argument that the 5.56 round was designed to cause serious injury and not to kill, because an injured soldier cost more to take care of to his country (again, no sarcasim intended). All I know is no matter what the bullet weight, type or velocity, I wouldn't want to be hit with it. Quote:
__________________
slow is fast Last edited by heyduke; November 27, 2008 at 07:43 PM. |
||
November 27, 2008, 08:58 PM | #38 | |
Junior member
Join Date: December 16, 1998
Location: Titusville, FL, USA
Posts: 1,030
|
Tennessee Gentleman writes:
Quote:
While walking and looking at the bottlebrush trees on the grounds of where I work, I sometimes think about the FBI shootout. On sunny, bright days I notice that, while Platt and Matix were technically in a shadow, they were also backlit by sunlight on the other side of the shade. This is different than looking into an open garage (or aircraft hanger in my case) when there's bright sunlight. The garage is an enclosed cavern of darkness in which it can be difficult to see what's inside. Compare a garage with a carport. The difference is startling. The bright sunlight/shadow effect encountered by the agents that day would have been more like a carport than an enclosed garage. Cheers! |
|
November 27, 2008, 09:57 PM | #39 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 31, 2005
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,775
|
Quote:
PS I see you live in Titusville. I lived at Patrick AFB while attending Florida Tech about 20 years ago. Loved going there to get that fresh OJ!
__________________
"God and the Soldier we adore, in time of trouble but not before. When the danger's past and the wrong been righted, God is forgotten and the Soldier slighted." Anonymous Soldier. |
|
November 27, 2008, 10:58 PM | #40 |
Staff
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 24,930
|
Tennessee Gentleman,
I think you and I are mostly in agreement. I believe that the Miami fiasco was the result of a confluence of circumstances. Fiascos generally are. I believe it's a mistake to try to focus the "blame" narrowly onto one or two aspects of the situation.
__________________
Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?
|
November 28, 2008, 12:30 AM | #41 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 31, 2005
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,775
|
Agreed. John, I just wish it hadn't happened to those agents. Duty can be a heavy burden but they bore it well.
__________________
"God and the Soldier we adore, in time of trouble but not before. When the danger's past and the wrong been righted, God is forgotten and the Soldier slighted." Anonymous Soldier. |
November 28, 2008, 10:11 AM | #42 | |
Junior member
Join Date: January 24, 2005
Location: SW Louisiana
Posts: 2,289
|
Quote:
|
|
December 5, 2008, 11:29 PM | #43 |
Junior member
Join Date: December 4, 2008
Posts: 119
|
there's significant contrast in skill sets between tactical operators and field investigators.
the former constantly trains for armed engagements, thereby increasing the likelihood of correct shot placement, the use of cover, and the ability to close ground effectively to stop a conflict. the latter visits the range, standing statically, firing 100 rounds a month. leo's, and the agencies they represent, often fall into the mindset of "we have badges, legal authority, and power of the agency behind us. nobody can challenge us." unfortunately, the bogies don't always know those rules. had p and m been confronted by 1 single trained operator who was both mentally prepared and physically trained for said engagement, they would've been neutralized in short order. this was anything but a product of ballistics. |
December 6, 2008, 12:22 AM | #44 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 24, 2008
Location: Orange, TX
Posts: 3,078
|
Quote:
|
|
December 9, 2008, 06:55 AM | #45 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 29, 2005
Location: Orlando FL
Posts: 1,934
|
Kinetic energy
The Kinetic energy a 2000lb big Ford or Gm vehicle at say 40 MPH, probably surpasses some artillery shells! It was a company car yes?
The vehicle they were following was a match to the info they had, and going at a slow speed, weapons observed, IMO it should have been seat belts tight, swing wide, nail drivers door! Windows open on passenger side of FBI vehicle, shoot from inside, driver and rear seat passenger exit. Advice to the shooters in FBI car, do not shoot the ones with FBI on their backs! A friend of mine, for some 35 years (he can retire any time) works for a Police Dept. that has 870s and AR15s in the shop, he is the only one on the shift who books one of each out every day he works, the same two he has shot a bunch of rounds through. They can only ride in cases in the trunk. He tells his Buddy's he has a fire extinguisher as well, but does not intend to start a fire! In fact I will email this to him, Charlie come in! |
December 9, 2008, 09:39 PM | #46 | ||
Junior member
Join Date: December 16, 1998
Location: Titusville, FL, USA
Posts: 1,030
|
csmsss writes:
Quote:
CARGUY2244 writes: Quote:
Last edited by Shawn Dodson; December 9, 2008 at 09:57 PM. |
||
December 9, 2008, 10:45 PM | #47 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 24, 2008
Location: Orange, TX
Posts: 3,078
|
Quote:
I don't disagree that ballistics gelatin is as good an objective simulacrum as we have for examining how bullets perform in soft tissue; however, it is still extremely imperfect when it comes to making ironclad predictions as to how a bullet will perform when it strikes a human being. There are just far too many other variables which enter the picture and which cannot be perfectly accounted for when designing a bullet. If my "argument" (if you want to call it that) is so irrelevant, then why do bullet wounds, even from the same firearm firing the same cartridge, create such disparate effects from shooting to shooting? |
|
December 9, 2008, 10:59 PM | #48 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 20, 2004
Posts: 3,150
|
Quote:
Last edited by Nnobby45; December 11, 2008 at 03:57 AM. |
|
December 10, 2008, 04:09 PM | #49 | ||
Junior member
Join Date: December 16, 1998
Location: Titusville, FL, USA
Posts: 1,030
|
csmsss writes:
Quote:
Extract from “Wound Ballistics Misconceptions.” (Duncan MacPherson, Wound Ballistics Review, 2(3): 1996; 42-43)Is lung tissue going to deflect a bullet from center punching the heart, as would have been the case with wound Dove inflicted on Platt? No. IMO, the the other factors you present are of little practical relevance. Quote:
Extracts from “The Wound Profile & The Human Body: Damage Pattern Correlation.” (Martin L Fackler, MD, Wound Ballistics Review, 1(4): 1994; 12-19)Cheers! |
||
December 11, 2008, 01:31 AM | #50 | |
Staff
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 24,930
|
Quote:
__________________
Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|