Gun Appreciation Thread

[javyn]

HK P7 M13

 

[globetrotter]

Originally Posted by Arethusa

I can't tell if this is a joke or not, but none of this is true. Bullets do not bounce. Take a look at some terminal ballistics studies. A .22LR weapon is not a self defense weapon. If you get one, use it for range shooting or maybe hunting rabbits.

bounce is not the correct term, but effectivly that is what happens. the round will follow the path of least resistance, and will rickochet off bone and hard material, and will create a path that isn't a straight line but cuts every which way. effectivly, you either kill by the shock of the impact, or by draining blood - the more you can create channels though the body, the more you drain blood. this is part of the theory behind the small rounds used in an m-16

 

[globetrotter]

Originally Posted by JLibourel

Having an enormously pricey solely as an object of aesthetic contemplation seems like a perversion of the firearm's purpose. Guns were meant to be used--the harder the better, IMO. If I just want something pretty to look at, I'd get a painting or a vase of something. Guns belong out in the field, working for a living!

couldn't agree with you more.

 

[imageWIS]

Originally Posted by JLibourel

Having an enormously pricey solely as an object of aesthetic contemplation seems like a perversion of the firearm's purpose. Guns were meant to be used--the harder the better, IMO. If I just want something pretty to look at, I'd get a painting or a vase of something. Guns belong out in the field, working for a living!

I don't like killing things...

Jon.

 

[Connemara]

Originally Posted by imageWIS

I don't like killing things...

Jon.

What are you, a woman or something?

 

[imageWIS]

Originally Posted by Connemara

What are you, a woman or something?

I think not. I don't see any glory in taking down a beautiful deer simply for "˜sport'.

Perhaps I'll cry myself to sleep about it...

Jon.

 

[Edward Appleby]

Originally Posted by imageWIS

I think not. I don't see any glory in taking down a beautiful deer simply for "˜sport'.


Do you eat meat?

It may not be glorious, and if you don't like hunting, fine, but I think that everyone who eats meat should kill at least one animal and eat it at some point, just so you appreciate what's behind all those tasty meals.

 

[whodini]

Originally Posted by Arethusa

I can't tell if this is a joke or not, but none of this is true. Bullets do not bounce. Take a look at some terminal ballistics studies. A .22LR weapon is not a self defense weapon. If you get one, use it for range shooting or maybe hunting rabbits.

Originally Posted by ms244

http://www.theboxotruth.com/

whodini this guy shot a bunch of different guns to see their terminal effects. A 22 simply doesn't have much power behind it, its a 40 grain solid lead slug traveling at maybe 1100fps (subsonic) at the muzzle. A 9mm will be traveling at about 1300 fps (slightly above supersonic) and will weight at 124 gr to 148 gr. So the power difference is pretty big.

What I meant was that typically with a 9mm and at least with a .45 you're going to have a through-and-through. But as .22's are essentially pellets with gunpowder they would definitely penetrate the abdomen but would not come out hence the theory that they'd cut up more organs instead of only poking a small hole with a through-and-through of a 9mm.

I am in no way advocating .22 as a self defense weapon. My .38 on the other hand, yes.

 

[Arethusa]

Originally Posted by globetrotter

bounce is not the correct term, but effectivly that is what happens. the round will follow the path of least resistance, and will rickochet off bone and hard material, and will create a path that isn't a straight line but cuts every which way. effectivly, you either kill by the shock of the impact, or by draining blood - the more you can create channels though the body, the more you drain blood. this is part of the theory behind the small rounds used in an m-16
No, it isn't. Look at some wounding profiles for .22LR. It's a soft round with minimal penetrating power. The only case in which it would ricochet is if it hit a bone and deflected (and in the case of .22LR, it's just as likely to simply stop). The only time you kill by "shock of the impact" or "hydrostatic shock" or other such internet myths is when you fire a powerful round that passes very close to CNS nerve tissue, destroying it with overpressure (essentially represented by temporary cavity on a wounding profile). Other than that, there are two ways you kill someone: blood loss and CNS disruption. .22LR is ****** for both. A .22 is not useful for anything larger than a ground hog. And the 5.56x45mm round used in M16s functions completely differently. A soft lead .22LR round behaves nothing like a jacketed rifle round designed to fragment by destabilization at high speeds.

Originally Posted by whodini

What I meant was that typically with a 9mm and at least with a .45 you're going to have a through-and-through. But as .22's are essentially pellets with gunpowder they would definitely penetrate the abdomen but would not come out hence the theory that they'd cut up more organs instead of only poking a small hole with a through-and-through of a 9mm. I am in no way advocating .22 as a self defense weapon. My .38 on the other hand, yes.
If they don't come out, they're causing less blood loss than they could, which means less killing. It does not mean that they're doing more damage to internal organs. If your objective is to kill, there is no shot from a .22 that would not be more lethal from basically anything larger. The idea that a .22 is somehow more lethal because of "ricocheting" or "bouncing" is pure internet myth. Don't buy one for anything more than doing drills or shooting squirrels.

 

[Saucemaster]

But if I need a gun to protect me from bands of marauding squirrels, I'm still cool with a .22, right?

 

[globetrotter]

Originally Posted by Arethusa

The idea that a .22 is somehow more lethal because of "ricocheting" or "bouncing" is pure internet myth. Don't buy one for anything more than doing drills or shooting squirrels.



dude,


lets take a little poll - how many guys have you shot?

I didn't say that the 22L acts this way, I have no little personal knowledge of a 22L round. I said that this was the way an M-16 round acts.


btw, I agree with you - I wouldn't buy a 22 for defence, myself. but when you decide to lecture me on how bullets work, think for a few seconds where you information comes from.

 

[Arethusa]

From people like Martin Fackler.

I knew a SEAL who thought that 9x19mm only slowed guys down while .45ACP killed in a single shot. He had far more direct experience than me, and it didn't make him any less wrong.

 

[Manic]

Originally Posted by Arethusa

The idea that a .22 is somehow more lethal because of "ricocheting" or "bouncing" is pure internet myth.

I'm not going to disagree with you. But as a firefighter/emt, I have seen .22 gsw's on both ends of the spectrum. Moslty, they are an annoying injury that don't require much more than a cleaning after removal.

But, a few years back, I responded to a triple homicide. 3 big bikers... lots of blood... brains essentially leaking out of their heads.

The weapon.... .22 cal revolver.

All three were done with close range head shots (within 12 inches, back of the head). The bullet did quite a number on the brain.

Official report back from coroner was that the cavitation, and ricochet, essentially liquified a large portion of the brain (same reason the .25 is popular when executing someone).

I never thought a little .22 could do that till I saw it with my own eyes.

I wouldn't want one as a self defense pistol. But in a pinch, I think it could do the job.

M

 

[dkzzzz]

Originally Posted by Huntsman

Lastly, Tokyo, I like HKs as well, this is a quiet Tactical. I live in a great state.

Regards,
Huntsman

Disclaimer - all firearms are owned in accordance with Federal, State and Local regulations.

Silencers are illegal.

 

[Arethusa]

Originally Posted by Manic

I'm not going to disagree with you. But as a firefighter/emt, I have seen .22 gsw's on both ends of the spectrum. Moslty, they are an annoying injury that don't require much more than a cleaning after removal. But, a few years back, I responded to a triple homicide. 3 big bikers... lots of blood... brains essentially leaking out of their heads. The weapon.... .22 cal revolver. All three were done with close range head shots (within 12 inches, back of the head). The bullet did quite a number on the brain. Official report back from coroner was that the cavitation, and ricochet, essentially liquified a large portion of the brain (same reason the .25 is popular when executing someone). I never thought a little .22 could do that till I saw it with my own eyes. I wouldn't want one as a self defense pistol. But in a pinch, I think it could do the job. M
I'm not saying a .22LR can't kill. I've also seen a news story of a woman shot with two mags (about 30 rounds, in this case) of .380ACP and left for dead, after which she dragged herself to her car and drove to a hospital. Strange things can happen, and we can be both remarkably fragile creatures and astonishingly resilient ones. I don't doubt that a .22LR or .25ACP can kill (especially at point blank range), but so can a pen or a power cord. My only points are that a .22 is not a reliable combat or defensive round and that myths about its ricocheting lethality are simply that.

Originally Posted by dkzzzz

Silencers are illegal.
And you're not a lawyer. But one of us right.