|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
July 21, 2013, 09:07 PM | #26 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 26, 2013
Posts: 159
|
Figure don't lie, liars can figure, and blah, blah, blah. Do your homework and you'll discover that in the real world of real people being shot by real bullets, it doesn't matter much what they're hit with. Maybe your odds of a one or two shot stop are a little better with a big bore heavy bullet, or super fast mid size magnum, but the inconvenient fact is that an astounding percentage of people shot once with a .22 are either killed or quickly incapacitated. Don't shoot the messenger. Thanks.
Velocity, foot pounds, penetration and expansion are like sports stats. We have all seen a football game where the team with the least time in possession, the least yards rushed and passed, even suffered the most turnovers and penalties, still beat the team that maxed out the stats. They just managed to score more points. Happens all the time. If your bullet hits just right, you win. It doesn't matter much what caliber it is, jacketed or hollow point, wad cutter or round nose. So, what's the deciding factor here? Accuracy, or bullet placement, followed by luck. Luck? Yep. Maybe while you were shooting at your probably moving target he moved just right, aligned his skeleton just so, that when your bullet entered his body it went to the right place. Or it didn't, and despite the quality of your ammunition, you needed multiple shots to get the job done. No battle plan survives first contact with the enemy and in CQB there is no nuclear option. So, you practice, practice and practice some more, equip yourself as best you can given your finances, physique, overall health and wardrobe requirements, and if the poo-poo hits the oscillating blades, you do what you can and hope for the best. Each day I venture forth, armed with my NAA Mini Revolver, .22WMR, with the long, way out there, 1 5/8" barrel. At self-defense range-7 yards or thereabouts, I can put 5 rounds in a 3" circle well inside of 5 seconds. Taking my time, I can shave a half inch off of that. Yeah, I practice quite a bit. Do I feel under gunned? Well, for an across the parking lot shoot out, yes. Against a lunatic armed with a modern sporting rifle? Sure, unless I'm behind him when I open fire. Am I the guy to stop a bank robbery? Nope. But for my intended purpose, I feel well armed and confident. The stats be damned. |
July 22, 2013, 03:42 AM | #27 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 2, 2005
Location: Where the deer and the antelope roam.
Posts: 3,082
|
Carry the biggest, most powerful gun you shoot well and can conceal. Most days it is my customized Glock 27 Converted to 357 Sig) and 14 rounds on board. Some days it is my Performance center 629, or it could be the 1911.
Moral of the story: Friends don't let friends carry mouse guns.
__________________
Retired Law Enforcement U. S. Army Veteran Armorer My rifle and pistol are tools, I am the weapon. |
July 22, 2013, 05:47 AM | #28 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 28, 2006
Location: South Central Michigan...near
Posts: 6,501
|
Quote:
|
|
July 22, 2013, 08:02 AM | #29 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 28, 2006
Posts: 4,342
|
Quote:
|
|
July 22, 2013, 10:33 AM | #30 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 28, 2006
Location: South Central Michigan...near
Posts: 6,501
|
Quote:
|
|
July 22, 2013, 03:22 PM | #31 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: August 20, 2009
Posts: 903
|
Quote:
And this chart can also be misleading... I never said ALL data seemed inaccurate but some seemed questionable. And I don't think it's necessarily wise to accept certain results (even from reputable sources) as gospel. By the way, the whole permanent cavity issue you keep posting over and over, Massad Ayoob argues the other way in some of his handgun combat books. So who's to say Ellifritz is right and Ayoob is wrong? There are plenty of "experts" out there. Who can say which experts are most expert? Last edited by idek; July 22, 2013 at 03:47 PM. |
||
July 22, 2013, 04:09 PM | #32 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 24, 2008
Location: Orange, TX
Posts: 3,078
|
My opinion? This notion of "one shot incapacitation" is a fable and exactly the wrong animal to be dissecting. Does it happen? Certainly. Can it be measured in an accurate, repeatable fashion producing predictable results? Not that I've seen. Every shooting poses its own unique circumstances that defy easy categorization, which is why these accumulations of shooting data (to my mind at least) produce less and less valid results the more "macro" they become.
For example, most don't seem to exclude (or make any allowance for) the firearm(s) used in the shooting. Many cartridges, including the beloved .22LR, are commonly chambered in both rifles and handguns. You would expect a .22LR round fired out of a 20" barreled rifle to have markedly improved performance compared to one fired from a 2" barreled revolver - but the studies don't make any distinction between the two. |
July 22, 2013, 05:13 PM | #33 | |||
Staff
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,471
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
The body is a machine, and it can be made to stop working in only certain ways: enough blood loss; enough damage to the central nervous system; or enough damage to key skeletal structures. And if you make a big hole in something the amount of direct damage will be based on how big the hole is. The real debate, which might never be completely settled is where the velocity threshold is above which a bullet's passage will have a significant enough shock effect to meaningfully contribute to the tissue damage causing physiological incapacitation. But there are still two stopping mechanisms: psychological and physiological.
__________________
"It is long been a principle of ours that one is no more armed because he has possession of a firearm than he is a musician because he owns a piano. There is no point in having a gun if you are not capable of using it skillfully." -- Jeff Cooper |
|||
July 22, 2013, 05:53 PM | #34 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 20, 2009
Posts: 903
|
My primary point was/is that one needs to be careful of how they look at data. In many cases, including firearms, statistics can't tell the whole story. I think we'd agree on that. Apparently, we're aren't reading some data quite the same way (or focusing on the same aspects), and that's okay.
By the way, I rephrased some of my original wording in post #31 shortly after submitted it, because I realized it sounded snarky, but I see it was included in your quote before I changed it. My apologies for that. Last edited by idek; July 22, 2013 at 06:16 PM. |
July 22, 2013, 07:32 PM | #35 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 26, 2013
Posts: 159
|
Quote from Nanuk: > Moral of the story: Friends don't let friends carry mouse guns.
NONSENSE! Mouse guns, because of their small size and light weight, are supremely adaptable to any wardrobe not even needing a belt and sometimes not even a holster. And because of that, they are the only guns that have a chance of never, ever being left at home. A CCW gun left at home might as well be on the moon. Truth be told, most (not all) people who carry anything larger than a mouse gun, will confess that at some time, for some reason, they decided against carrying. Don't panic - "Te absolvo a peccatis tuis..." For your penance, repent, and don't let it ever happen again. Rule No.1 - "Have a gun!" Not most of the time, not when it's easy to carry because of what you're wearing - but all the time, every time, with no exceptions. For the vast majority of us, to meet that requirement, only a mouse gun will do. As for you caliber queens out there, relax. No handgun is a "nuclear option" and to the confusion of some, and delight for the rest of us, the record of one shot stops and even kills by the diminutive .22LR is far better than anyone believed until the research was done and the results tabulated. A casual reading of the "Armed Citizen" column in The American Rifleman magazine (NRA) will reveal an astounding number of successful self defenses accomplished with it. But don't worry about me -I'd never settle for a .22LR CCW gun. I like my bases covered, and for that, I carry a .22WMR. To quote Yosemite Sam, "Say yer prayers, varmint!" |
July 22, 2013, 08:00 PM | #36 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 2, 2005
Location: Where the deer and the antelope roam.
Posts: 3,082
|
Quote:
It depends on your commitment level. I always carry a fighting gun, have for almost 40 years and will continue to do so.
__________________
Retired Law Enforcement U. S. Army Veteran Armorer My rifle and pistol are tools, I am the weapon. |
|
July 22, 2013, 09:30 PM | #37 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 26, 2013
Posts: 159
|
Nanuk, I sooo agree with you about commitment to carry. But that's the problem. Commitment is very hard to find. One of my best friends went through the whole process of getting a CCW permit - even though it's unnecessary here in Arizona, and more often than not he leaves his gun in his car or in his house. GRRRR. I chew his butt regularly, to little avail.
Anyway, the nice thing about mouse guns is they require very little in the way of commitment. If only commitment was as easy to get as a gun. By asking for no accommodation in return, no sacrifice beyond practice and cleaning, a mouse gun is very easy to commit to. I'd rather see millions more people carrying mouse guns than the very few committed people who are carrying larger, heavier weapons today. Thank you for your commitment. Good job. |
July 23, 2013, 06:34 AM | #38 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 15, 2001
Location: Caldwell, Idaho
Posts: 511
|
Commitment is right. My ccw is a hybrid SIG P250sc 9mm (15+1) and I always carry at least 1 reload.
However, there are times when it's simply too big to carry w/the wardrobe of a special occasion. At those times I carry a Kahr CM9 holsterless w/a Covert Carrier combo grip/clip and 2 reloads in a Recluse back pocket mag carrier: But I don't turn my nose up at someone who carries less than a 9mm just because it's below my personal comfort level. Tomac
__________________
"His Universe, His rules." - Tomac |
July 31, 2013, 06:48 PM | #39 |
Member
Join Date: November 10, 2012
Posts: 71
|
No shock?
"Kinetic energy does not wound. Temporary cavity does not wound. The much-discussed "shock" of bullet impact is a fable"
Really? I always though if there was enough of a shock to system by a large temporary cavity it would send the body into shock or if its violent enough rupture soft organs like a heart or intestines even if the bullet doesnt directly come in contact with the organ. Is this not true, some please pm on this if you can confirm or debunk this. |
July 31, 2013, 07:19 PM | #40 | |
Staff
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,471
|
Quote:
__________________
"It is long been a principle of ours that one is no more armed because he has possession of a firearm than he is a musician because he owns a piano. There is no point in having a gun if you are not capable of using it skillfully." -- Jeff Cooper |
|
July 31, 2013, 07:45 PM | #41 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 26, 2013
Posts: 159
|
CONFIRMED. I have read of a case where a person wearing a bullet-proof vest was killed when he was shot with a magnum handgun - even though the vest was not penetrated, the shock to the body was sufficient to separate his aorta from his heart, killing him almost instantly. Merely shaking a baby can kill it. Of course a sufficient shock can kill.
|
July 31, 2013, 08:39 PM | #42 | ||||
Staff
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,471
|
Quote:
On one hand we have Urey Patrick and John Hall who are (from post 9): who in their book quote Dr. V. J. M. DiMaio (DiMaio, V. J. M., M. D., Gunshot Wounds, Elsevier Science Publishing Company, 1987). We also have the paper Patrick wrote for the FBI and to which I linked to, above. On the other hand we have you, an anonymous denizen of cyberspace who read something from an unknown source. So on that basis, why should we pay any attention to you unless you can back up what you claim with some solid evidence? In any case, the sort of blunt force trauma is in no way comparable to a piercing injury by a projectile. Quote:
Quote:
__________________
"It is long been a principle of ours that one is no more armed because he has possession of a firearm than he is a musician because he owns a piano. There is no point in having a gun if you are not capable of using it skillfully." -- Jeff Cooper |
||||
July 31, 2013, 09:59 PM | #43 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: April 18, 2011
Posts: 540
|
Quote:
__________________
QUANTITATIVE AMMUNITION SELECTION |
||
July 31, 2013, 10:47 PM | #44 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 26, 2013
Posts: 159
|
I have no idea. I read it in a gun mag 20 (or was it 30?) years ago, and just never forgot it. Just one of those things you read that leaves you "scarred for life."
|
July 31, 2013, 10:53 PM | #45 | |
Staff
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,471
|
Quote:
So (1) it's worthless; and (2) your posting it tells us something about your credibility.
__________________
"It is long been a principle of ours that one is no more armed because he has possession of a firearm than he is a musician because he owns a piano. There is no point in having a gun if you are not capable of using it skillfully." -- Jeff Cooper |
|
August 1, 2013, 12:49 AM | #46 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 26, 2013
Posts: 159
|
Now, now. Relax. If you had a truly open mind, you would be intrigued, and you would feel compelled to strap on a bullet-proof vest and have someone fire a .44 magnum at your chest. Then you'd know for sure. That's what a true scientist would do. Or, you could just believe me. Or not. Or whatever.
|
August 1, 2013, 01:08 AM | #47 | |||
Staff
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,471
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
On the other hand, based on this discussion I would not accept anything you might claim without solid, verifiable evidence. As Carl Saga said, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."
__________________
"It is long been a principle of ours that one is no more armed because he has possession of a firearm than he is a musician because he owns a piano. There is no point in having a gun if you are not capable of using it skillfully." -- Jeff Cooper Last edited by Frank Ettin; August 1, 2013 at 01:14 AM. Reason: clarify |
|||
August 1, 2013, 03:12 AM | #48 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 30, 2011
Location: New England
Posts: 1,449
|
Good post on this one. I'm torn as I have first hand experience that does not conform with some of the theories, but every situation and offender is different. Offenders motivated by deep core issues may react differently than one motivated by greed or fear when struck by a bullet. In my experience having enough bullets trumps the diameter of the bullet. Having a firearm with you trumps not having firearm with you, regardless of the magazine capacity or diameter of the bullet. More research needs to be done on time after hit and incapacitation, (they can cause much damage before they sucumb to their injuries.) The quality of defensive ammunition these days is truly amazing and I wouldn't feel inadequate with any appropriate defensive pistol caliber.
|
August 3, 2013, 05:41 AM | #49 |
Junior member
Join Date: October 19, 2004
Location: michigan
Posts: 578
|
Gel is only so good. To many variables to take into consideration.
Heres an example. A researcher did studies on blackpowder wounding. REAL cases were used. From the current time period. It was in the 90s. The ex rays discovered that a small round ball from a 1860 colt may not have much energy, at short ranges a hit to the head would fracture the entire skull and basically make it clobber the brain. No one survived the wounds. Now you can find reports of 'intruder shot in head with 9mm, will be prosecuted" |
August 3, 2013, 10:20 AM | #50 | ||
Staff
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,471
|
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
"It is long been a principle of ours that one is no more armed because he has possession of a firearm than he is a musician because he owns a piano. There is no point in having a gun if you are not capable of using it skillfully." -- Jeff Cooper Last edited by Frank Ettin; August 3, 2013 at 10:27 AM. |
||
Tags |
expansion , penetration |
|
|