3 ms·

Interesting article. I would note a couple of points though... 1)Notice the drywall collapsing? That's what is going to happen to a person getting shot at clos

by jqm 12y ago

Interesting article. I would note a couple of points though... 1)Notice the drywall collapsing? That's what is going to happen to a person getting shot at close range with a 12 gauge.. even with birdshot. It would be something like getting smacked with a sledgehammer. I'm less interested in penetrating vitals than flat out knocking the person down. A person who's arm, or even lungs are penetrated cleanly by a high caliber round might still be functional for a bit... functional enough to shoot back. 2)Even though the #4 buck did penetrate multiple layers of drywall in this guys test, what is the lethality after 2 or 3 layers? You say yourself that #4 buck is less likely to penetrate vitals in the first place. Your 45 on the other hand will likely easily penetrate multiple layers of drywall, then completely penetrate the person on the other side. Anyway, different strokes and all that. A firearm is a good home defense weapon in general. Always nice to meet another person who doesn't feel owning a firearm makes one a Neanderthal of some kind. Where I live, I wouldn't be without one in the home. I sleep much better at night and feel I could protect my girlfriend and our belongings against invasion. I also have a number of other firearms including military type rifles, hunting rifles and some handguns, but the shotgun is the one I keep in bedroom for defense.

hga 12y ago
As someone who follows Dr. Martin Fackler on interior ballistics, I believe that at worst case the incapacitating mechanism has to be sufficient blood loss. That is, for a subset of perpetrators, simply being shot is not sufficient (I gather as many as half will desist when that happens), and you can't count on being lucky enough to make a disabling CNS hit (spinal cord or brain). If so, you need penetration to the vitals causing a lot of blood loss ... and you need to stay alive until that takes effect. The debacle of the FBI Miami shootout is perhaps the most notorious example of all this, see e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1986_FBI_Miami_shootout https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1986_FBI_Miami_shootout I don't believe the kinetics you're posting will work on a human. F = mv^2, force = mass * velocity squared, so velocity is a big factor (although much less so on the target unless it usefully dumps energy before exiting). The recoil you feel will be significantly greater than the impact the target gets unless at contact range, because in addition to the lead, higher velocity gasses exit the muzzle (although a muzzle brake will mitigate that at a cost of visual and aural ergonomics, see Obama's famous shooting picture). The target is only going to get the impact of the lead. The only mitigating factor is that the recoil you feel is spread across what's initially a larger area, although it won't take many yards for the areas to be equal, following the ~1 inch spread/yard of distance rule of thumb. And you're welcome. I grew up hunting and shooting, and after going to college in fact got my first guns after getting a girlfriend to protect in the Boston area, which was and still is pretty high crime.

by jqm 12y ago

hga 12y ago

As someone who follows Dr. Martin Fackler on interior ballistics, I believe that at worst case the incapacitating mechanism has to be sufficient blood loss. That is, for a subset of perpetrators, simply being shot is not sufficient (I gather as many as half will desist when that happens), and you can't count on being lucky enough to make a disabling CNS hit (spinal cord or brain). If so, you need penetration to the vitals causing a lot of blood loss ... and you need to stay alive until that takes effect. The debacle of the FBI Miami shootout is perhaps the most notorious example of all this, see e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1986_FBI_Miami_shootout https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1986_FBI_Miami_shootout I don't believe the kinetics you're posting will work on a human. F = mv^2, force = mass * velocity squared, so velocity is a big factor (although much less so on the target unless it usefully dumps energy before exiting). The recoil you feel will be significantly greater than the impact the target gets unless at contact range, because in addition to the lead, higher velocity gasses exit the muzzle (although a muzzle brake will mitigate that at a cost of visual and aural ergonomics, see Obama's famous shooting picture). The target is only going to get the impact of the lead. The only mitigating factor is that the recoil you feel is spread across what's initially a larger area, although it won't take many yards for the areas to be equal, following the ~1 inch spread/yard of distance rule of thumb. And you're welcome. I grew up hunting and shooting, and after going to college in fact got my first guns after getting a girlfriend to protect in the Boston area, which was and still is pretty high crime.