Bullet damage - Page 3

sgtD · October 20th, 2006, 12:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lew

I read the published work of another doctor 10 or 12 years ago, who said that for GSW victims that did not die right away, from the wound itself, the leading cause of death was infection from the victims clothing. He seemed to think the bullet was "sterilized" in the barrel, ( I doubt this but for the sake of discussion will let it go...) and the infection was caused by the bullet carrying small amounts of clothing into the wound with it. These containing germs and other bad stuff leading to infections and then death....
...

I think this WAS true during the civil war, and WWI before we had effective anti-biotics. However, if someone is trying to kill me, I need to stop them quickly. I don't want to wait for infection to set in.

Other than that, I agree with the hear we go again sentiments so I'm going to avoid the

Texas Yankee · October 20th, 2006, 02:35 AM

The question really shouldn't be what will kill the BG but what will stop him. Almost any caliber above .17 can kill: the problem is that while the BG is bleeding out or dying of infection, he will kill you as well.

However, no matter what the caliber of handgun there is no guarantee that even a well placed COM shot will stop the BG and hitting the head in the right place is a pretty difficult task. That's why you should bring a shotgun or rifle to a gunfight rather than a handgun. Failing that, you should keep shooting the BG until he stops or you are out.

The idea of a one shot stop with a handgun is really kind of foolish whichever camp you are in.

Tangle · October 20th, 2006, 10:04 AM

I didn't get the impression that any one was saying that energy wasn't important. I thought the point was that there isn't enough energy in a handgun bullet to produce hydrodynamic damage or "shock" like a rifle bullet can.

But, I think it's beginning to surface that increasing the energy in a handgun round doesn't mean it will stop a threat faster.

But it appears that there are some energy thresholds for handgun bullets that is needed for a bullet to be effective.

Vulthoom · October 22nd, 2006, 03:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tangle

You're assuming that a larger caliber will penetrate to an equal depth as the smaller caliber. What if the smaller caliber penetrates deeper? If the smaller caliber penetrates more deeply, the volumetric damage could be the same or more than the larger caliber.

His post stated "Assuming all things equal", so I assumed penetration depth would be equal. Besides, if the target is say 14 inches thick, which is more than the average chest thickness of an adult male, then neither of the rounds can penetrate more than 14 inches of him. The bigger caliber still does more damage.

CeltKnight · November 16th, 2006, 02:26 AM

Hey, guys, I'm new here, but I gotta chime in on this one. I've seen 2cases in the last year where a .22 to either the chest or head caused instant incapaciation. Granted, both were suicides, but then I've seen an attempted suicide with a buckshot loaded 12 bore to the chest where the vict. lived, recovered, and later prospered. He did a lot of lung damage but missed his heart. Also had a case where a shot from about five paces or so to the face with a .25 auto dropped a man in his tracks. Again, shot placement IS the key.
I've noticed a lot of folks look at gelatin and bore size and all and forget one key thing: The human torso is not solid. There is some skin, muscle, fat, and maybe bone, then air, then some organ tissue (if you hit one) or venus or arterial walls (if you hit them), some more air, some more stuff here and there, etc. In short, that bullet is not carving a tunnel, it's punching a hole, moving about some, maybe even tumbling a bit, then hitting something else, and so on. The down side to the teeny-weinie calibers (lack of overall penetration) is also sometimes their saving grace: They can ricochotte off a rib or other bone and go back into the vitals where a stouter round might pass on. Not something I wanna count on, but certainly a factor.
I personally prefer big ol' fat, slow pistol bullets (but currently must carry a not-quite-as-big-but-close and somewhat faster bullet at work). BUT, if for some reason (injury, or concealment being paramount to performance) I wouldn't whine too much about a smaller caliber, but I'd make sure I practiced even more.
--- Just my $.02

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

October 20th, 2006, 02:35 AM	#22
Texas Yankee Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Dallas, Tx Posts: 229	The question really shouldn't be what will kill the BG but what will stop him. Almost any caliber above .17 can kill: the problem is that while the BG is bleeding out or dying of infection, he will kill you as well. However, no matter what the caliber of handgun there is no guarantee that even a well placed COM shot will stop the BG and hitting the head in the right place is a pretty difficult task. That's why you should bring a shotgun or rifle to a gunfight rather than a handgun. Failing that, you should keep shooting the BG until he stops or you are out. The idea of a one shot stop with a handgun is really kind of foolish whichever camp you are in.

October 20th, 2006, 10:04 AM	#23
Tangle Senior Moderator Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Chattanooga Posts: 5,783	I didn't get the impression that any one was saying that energy wasn't important. I thought the point was that there isn't enough energy in a handgun bullet to produce hydrodynamic damage or "shock" like a rifle bullet can. But, I think it's beginning to surface that increasing the energy in a handgun round doesn't mean it will stop a threat faster. But it appears that there are some energy thresholds for handgun bullets that is needed for a bullet to be effective.

November 16th, 2006, 02:26 AM	#25
CeltKnight New Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: An Outpost of Paradise Posts: 8	Hey, guys, I'm new here, but I gotta chime in on this one. I've seen 2cases in the last year where a .22 to either the chest or head caused instant incapaciation. Granted, both were suicides, but then I've seen an attempted suicide with a buckshot loaded 12 bore to the chest where the vict. lived, recovered, and later prospered. He did a lot of lung damage but missed his heart. Also had a case where a shot from about five paces or so to the face with a .25 auto dropped a man in his tracks. Again, shot placement IS the key. I've noticed a lot of folks look at gelatin and bore size and all and forget one key thing: The human torso is not solid. There is some skin, muscle, fat, and maybe bone, then air, then some organ tissue (if you hit one) or venus or arterial walls (if you hit them), some more air, some more stuff here and there, etc. In short, that bullet is not carving a tunnel, it's punching a hole, moving about some, maybe even tumbling a bit, then hitting something else, and so on. The down side to the teeny-weinie calibers (lack of overall penetration) is also sometimes their saving grace: They can ricochotte off a rib or other bone and go back into the vitals where a stouter round might pass on. Not something I wanna count on, but certainly a factor. I personally prefer big ol' fat, slow pistol bullets (but currently must carry a not-quite-as-big-but-close and somewhat faster bullet at work). BUT, if for some reason (injury, or concealment being paramount to performance) I wouldn't whine too much about a smaller caliber, but I'd make sure I practiced even more. --- Just my $.02