You don't NEED a gun simplified.

[DREDIOCK]

Havent looked at the link. But ti doesnt matter.
Just needed to read the title You don't NEED a gun simplified. to be able to adequately respond.

I dont NEED religion
But I have the RIGHT to have one.
I dont NEED to be happy either
But I have the RIGHT to pursue that goal.

Im glad all of our rights arent based on need.
Or we wouldnt have very many

[Vulcan]

Sorry, but strait out killing it and dumping its body still doesn't sit well with me. Let me get this strait, you want to kill it because it causes erosion, stinks and can't be eaten, and I'm the one with my foot in my mouth? From the quick research I've done I can't really see them being a big problem (care to provide links that prove me wrong?). As far as 'erosive damage' do you realize that they have been here for thousands of years causing erosion and this has never been a problem?

....

BTW your comments are offensive and generally negative, and show you really know nothing about me. If we are going to have a grown up discussion at least try to keep it civilized.

Here's a link have a read: http://www.doc.govt.nz/upload/documents/about-doc/concessions-and-permits/conservation-revealed/feral-goats-lowres.pdf

Goats are an introduced species in NZ, as are rabbits, hares, possums, deer, rats, cats, ferrets, stoats etc. Have a read here: http://www.doc.govt.nz/conservation/threats-and-impacts/animal-pests/animal-pests-a-z/

Reference to stinking was in regards to recovering meat. I do eat the meat if I can (basically it has to be young nannies, billy meat is not very nice), I especially like rabbit. The body gets dumped (usually down ravines, I try to keep it tidy out of sight of the farmers, they like that), but that usually gets consumed by feral pigs who do end up on the dinner plate.

I've been told off once or twice for not killing ENOUGH goats by other hunters (ie taking pity on some of them).

The more humane way our government deals with these pests is via 1080 poisoning, I suggest you read up on the effects of 1080 on animals versus a bullet to the head.

[AKHog]

Havent looked at the link.

So why do you feel the need to comment?

But ti doesnt matter.
Just needed to read the title You don't NEED a gun simplified. to be able to adequately respond.

Wrong! You can't judge a book by its cover. Reading the title does not enable you to adequately respond. If you would have at least skimmed over the article you'd have a different opinion of it. (hint: its not an anti gun article)

BTW does NO ONE use spell check anymore? 

[AKHog]

Here's a link have a read: http://www.doc.govt.nz/upload/documents/about-doc/concessions-and-permits/conservation-revealed/feral-goats-lowres.pdf

Goats are an introduced species in NZ, as are rabbits, hares, possums, deer, rats, cats, ferrets, stoats etc. Have a read here: http://www.doc.govt.nz/conservation/threats-and-impacts/animal-pests/animal-pests-a-z/

Reference to stinking was in regards to recovering meat. I do eat the meat if I can (basically it has to be young nannies, billy meat is not very nice), I especially like rabbit. The body gets dumped (usually down ravines, I try to keep it tidy out of sight of the farmers, they like that), but that usually gets consumed by feral pigs who do end up on the dinner plate.

I've been told off once or twice for not killing ENOUGH goats by other hunters (ie taking pity on some of them).

The more humane way our government deals with these pests is via 1080 poisoning, I suggest you read up on the effects of 1080 on animals versus a bullet to the head.

Vulcan I think I agree with you for the most part. It was my mistake that I overlooked your original post where you mentioned they were feral/introduced. Thanks for posting some links. I originally thought you were simply shooting these animals because they trampled fences and stunk. As silly as that sounds, people where I live shoot animals for less.

[Vulcan]

Even I've killed things with no intention of using them.  I found a mouse in one of the traps in my kitchen today, and I doubt the wife will be thrilled if I put in the refridgerator to add to our supper menu.  The fact that I don't really know how fresh it is won't help either...  I also hit a skunk on the highway, and just left it.  I didn't kill it intentionally (like I did the mouse), but I was driving intentionally, and was passing through some prime skunk habitat...

mtnman, read this you'll love it   http://www.fishnhunt.co.nz/forum/YaBB.cgi?num=1223907120/0

[DMBEAR]

AKHog, the two posts below were up before you made the following quote...

Sorry I don't have time to reply to every comment, hopefully some other logical folks will come in here and help the conversation.

I thought maybe you missed them, so here they are.

You forget that the American military is not an autonomous organization from outside the country. It's made from the same citizenry as the main population. The members of it also do not swear allegiance to the President, Congress or the Supreme Court. They swear to support and defend the CONSTITUTION, not the government. It's a concept that many don't really grasp. They also swore to uphold the amendments to the Constitution since they are a part of it. It's hardly outdated and is certainly relevant even to today's world.

Second issue. If you do not like the arguments being used by the biggest and most effective organization dedicated to maintaining the right you enjoy exercising, why don't you provide another one. All I saw you say was you didn't like it yet you bring nothing to the discussion to add to protecting your right.

When you join any branch of the Military of the United States you swear an Oath to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States against ALL enemies, foreign, and DOMESTIC.

The Second Amendment to the Constituition is not outdated and never will be; our Founding Fathers made this very clear.

[AKHog]

AKHog, the two posts below were up before you made the following quote...

I thought maybe you missed them, so here they are.

I saw those comments, just didn't really respond to Maverick.

Maverick, are you saying the military is the well armed militia that the 2nd amendment was talking about? I would disagree looking at the history that was influencing the authors of that amendment.

If the 2nd amendment was talking about a militia made up of civilians, which I think it was, then there is no arguing that we wouldn't stand a chance remaining 'free state' if our own military was used against us. In that regard the 2nd amendment is an outdated idea. I understand the military pledges to the constitution, but I think the 2nd amendment was written to prevent a tyrannical government from controlling the population using a military force, given the history. Even with such a good constitution outlining the governments role, I still think that these guys literally thought there was a chance it would eventually become a tyrannical government, and wrote the 2nd amendment to, at the extreme, allow people to have weapons to overthrow this type of government. In my opinion, to arm the people enough to discourage military control in this country hasn't been realistic for probably the last 80 years. I agree its highly unlikely the way the military is currently structured, however it was not out of the question for even the founders of this nation.

[Maverick]

actually a guy that i knew from federal prison won a huge lawsuit (i think it was about 500,000.00 but cant remember the exact amount) because he was shot in the upper humorous just below the knuckle of the shoulder by a police officer with a .45 hollow point. it tore away most of the meat and shattered the bone on impact. it left a few strands of flesh holding his arm to his body but for all intents and purposes his arm had been amputated by the bullet.

he won his lawsuit because the cop was determined to be using bullets (large caliber hollow points) that were excessive. if he had been using a copper jacket or standard round nose then the guy would have been seriously wounded but he would not likely have lost his arm. in my opinion he pulled a gun on a cop he gets what he gets, but we live in a law suit driven society.

another guy i know lost his left foot because he was shot in the ankle with a .45 hollow point. destroyed all the bone on impact leaving only a sack of mush inside the skin. they cut the remainder off when he got to the hospital. (no lawsuit his brother accidentally shot him while target shooting drunk, redneck family)

I know of a guy that lost the use of his leg because he got hit with a .22 in the knee. I still wouldn't call it an amputation round though.

yes i have known a bunch of dumbarses that have managed to get themselves shot. most of them very stupidly.

when a hollow point hits a bone it mushrooms to 10x its beginning size, makes one hell of a mess. if you still got your .45 acp get some hollow points. next time you go out target practicing take a large water melon with you. find a stick about an inch or an inch and a half in diameter and drive it through the middle of the water melon. stand back a couple of feet take aim and shoot the stick through the water melon and watch what happens. (bring a towel)

Sorry but the BS flag is WAY up here. A hollow point does not expand to 10x. That would mean a .45 would expand to over 4.5" across. That doesn't happen at all. The .45 has a hard time expanding since it's a low velocity round. It works far better when you bring it up to about 1100 to 1200 FPS but that is beyond the average pistol balistics in the Government model and clones. The experiance I had with it showed it tended to pack the hollow and then function like a plain old ball round, even when shooting it at close range into dirt. Shooting a watermelon is not a proper media to demonstrate wound effects. A watermelon is not nearly as elastic as flesh and any hunter can tell you that shooting a 150 lb deer with a .308 (far more powerful than a .45) does not cause the deer to explode like a watermelon. The amount of meat lost is minimal especially compared to your watermelon example. There is a reason that there is something called ballistics gel used for that purpose.

yes the 12 gauge is brutal at close range, i was taking nothing away from it. what i meant to imply was that the 45 although just a pistol round, was devastating in its own right. its a tough enough round that they made the Thomson submachine gun out of it. its one of the bullets that people just don't get up from.

They made the Thompson for the .45 acp as it is a short pistol cartridge that was already in the inventory in the Military. That helps a lot in getting contracts when you are using current stocks of munitions since it simplifies logistics. The Thompson is a SMG or sub machine gun, The SMG from the fact that it shoots a small cartridge. That makes it far less powerful than the Garand or BAR, other weapons from the same time period. It does aid in carrying far more ammo as the shells are less bulky and weighty than the rifle cartridges.

i found my pair of .45 rugers to be wonderful little monsters. each one holding 16 alternating rounds (1 hollow point then 1 metal jacketed)

even if a person was wearing body armor, if you put 3 into their chest it would fracture the sternum and probably stop the heart just from the concussion. the big slow round might not get inside the armor, but the transfer of the concussion into the body will usually cause internal hemraging, organ bruising or a complete organ failure.

Sorry but the BS flag is way up there again. You do realize that there are records of folks with bullet resistant vests  being hit with magnums (pistol) and rifle rounds and surviving without cardiac issues, loss of organs or other issues.

what did you do that you had building clearing training?

FLOTSOM

I was a LEO. Doing building searches was part of the job.

[FLOTSOM]

I know of a guy that lost the use of his leg because he got hit with a .22 in the knee. I still wouldn't call it an amputation round though.

loss of use and loss of limb are very different. when the bone is splintered into many tiny fragments and the flesh and meat of the limb is destroyed that is much different than a tiny wound that clipped a nerve

Sorry but the BS flag is WAY up here. A hollow point does not expand to 10x. That would mean a .45 would expand to over 4.5" across. That doesn't happen at all. The .45 has a hard time expanding since it's a low velocity round. It works far better when you bring it up to about 1100 to 1200 FPS but that is beyond the average pistol balistics in the Government model and clones. The experiance I had with it showed it tended to pack the hollow and then function like a plain old ball round, even when shooting it at close range into dirt. Shooting a watermelon is not a proper media to demonstrate wound effects. A watermelon is not nearly as elastic as flesh and any hunter can tell you that shooting a 150 lb deer with a .308 (far more powerful than a .45) does not cause the deer to explode like a watermelon. The amount of meat lost is minimal especially compared to your watermelon example. There is a reason that there is something called ballistics gel used for that purpose.

i have never heard of a .45 hollow point packing in, unless it was fired into dirt, and i cant think of why any sane person would want to fire a round into the ground at their feet. as well as the fact that compressed dirt has very different impact characteristics than flesh does.

10x was metaphorical in the sense that the round projects its pressure wave through the body at that many times the actual size of the bullet. have you ever measured the fracturing effect in the ballistic gel after firing into it? those lines will reach out 4.5 inches or more across and this is directly due to the low velocity and large diameter of the .45. and just to let you know, before the invention of ballistic gel water melons were used for testing bullets (as well as dogs and other similarly sized animals) for many years because the flesh of a water melon has the same tinsel strength as human flesh. not the same elasticity but the same tinsel strength. your .308 example is useless in this conversation, that is a rifle round (like the BAR and Garand) moving at a higher velocity through a longer barrel, and the bullet design is completely different the wounds are not even comparable in their characteristics


They made the Thompson for the .45 acp as it is a short pistol cartridge that was already in the inventory in the Military. That helps a lot in getting contracts when you are using current stocks of munitions since it simplifies logistics. The Thompson is a SMG or sub machine gun, The SMG from the fact that it shoots a small cartridge. That makes it far less powerful than the Garand or BAR, other weapons from the same time period. It does aid in carrying far more ammo as the shells are less bulky and weighty than the rifle cartridges.

actually they used the .45 because of a thing called the Blish lock, the guy who helped in the design of the Thomson created it. the .45 was found to be the round that worked best.

additionally the BAR was seen as a failure at cleaning out trenches during WWI, this failure was part of the inspiration behind the creation of the Thomson.

the garand didn't appear until many years later.

the bar is not actually a bigger round, it is 7.62 diameter round and the garand is the same (they will both fire the same bullet) the .45. is actually 11.43mm in diameter. but both the garand and the BAR are longer rifle rounds (51 and 63mm), having very different ballistic characteristics and alot more powder pushing them through a much longer barrel

Sorry but the BS flag is way up there again. You do realize that there are records of folks with bullet resistant vests  being hit with magnums (pistol) and rifle rounds and surviving without cardiac issues, loss of organs or other issues.

do some checking into bullet resistant vest (without the plates) and I'm sure you ll soon learn that the biggest issue remaining to personal body armor is the transfer of the concussion or shock wave of pressure entering the body. put three rounds in quick succession into a vest and your going to see a much different result than tests rounds being fired one at a time with time in between. only the first shockwave gets dispersed through the vest after that its your body that absorbs the rest.

there are also cases on file of people being hit in a vest by only one round from a rifle or high caliber hand gun round and dieing from organs being ruptured organ failure and from internal bleeding.

I was a LEO. Doing building searches was part of the job.<SALUTE> you may not always have my agreeing opinion, but you will always have my respect!

FLOTSOM

[mtnman]

mtnman, read this you'll love it   http://www.fishnhunt.co.nz/forum/YaBB.cgi?num=1223907120/0

Nice link Vulcan, lol!  I'm not above eating such things myself, but generally just feed 'em to one of my birds nowadays.  I don't even need to skin 'em, she'll just swallow them whole and can easily eat 8 per day...

[Maverick]

loss of use and loss of limb are very different. when the bone is splintered into many tiny fragments and the flesh and meat of the limb is destroyed that is much different than a tiny wound that clipped a nerve

You might want to go back and read what I posted. I didn’t say anything about clipping a nerve, nor did I describe the wound. When the limb is gone you have most definitely lost the use of it.

Another situation that I was present at was the shooting of an Officer on my Department by an Officer from another Department. He was shot by a .45. It damaged the spine of the Officer that was hit but didn't amputate anything. He also survived, granted as a paraplegic, but he is otherwise healthy. Since the shot was in the main part of the body it should have destroyed the internal organs and killed him according to your claims but it didn't. He wasn't wearing a vest either.

i have never heard of a .45 hollow point packing in, unless it was fired into dirt, and i cant think of why any sane person would want to fire a round into the ground at their feet. as well as the fact that compressed dirt has very different impact characteristics than flesh does.

What you never heard of would likely fill the Library of Congress. Try sticking with something that you might actually know, tried or have researched. Secondly I never said that the bullet was fired into the dirt any where near feet, mine or anyone else’s. That’s an assumption on your part. I have fired the .45 hollow point into various media. Not once did it mushroom including in dirt. Dirt is a lot closer to bone than any watermelon I have ever seen.

You might want to look over a nice article related to the subject in the November Shooting Times magazine under the "going ballistic" column. It covers testing pistol hollow points and what it took to get one to expand reliably.

10x was metaphorical in the sense that the round projects its pressure wave through the body at that many times the actual size of the bullet

Sorry but that is not what you said. I’ll quote it again here. “Quote from: FLOTSOM on Yesterday at 10:28:24 PM "when a hollow point hits a bone it mushrooms to 10x its beginning size,"

This is a patently false statement and I already explained why.

You also need to look over some of the information regarding permanent wound cavity (destroyed tissue) vs temporary wound cavity. Even ballistic gel is not perfect but it's a darn sight better than watermelons.

The rifle analogy is perfectly viable as an example of even greater power (rifle vs pistol) not creating the damage you want to attribute to smaller cartridges.

additionally the BAR was seen as a failure at cleaning out trenches during WWI, this failure was part of the inspiration behind the creation of the Thomson

The BAR wasn’t a failure in WW1. It saw limited use due to not being developed and then issued until July 1918 shortly before the war ended. It was used in the  Meuse-Argonne Offensive.

I also didn’t say the Garand was made during WW1.

BTW the Garand and the BAR fired the exact same cartridge, what civilians know as the 30-06. I don't know where you got this from.

both the garand and the BAR are longer rifle rounds (51 and 63mm)

The Thompson also wasn't used in WW1 as it was still in prototype when the war ended. If you are going to use wikpedia as a resource you might want to read the article Regarding the cartridge issue which I brought up earlier.

"By late 1917, the limits of the Blish lock were discovered, and it had been found that the only cartridge currently in U.S. service suitable for use with the lock was the .45 ACP (Automatic Colt Pistol)"

That kind of mirrors what I said about the cartridge and it's relationship to the Thompson.

If you have a link to fatalities due to trauma transfer from a vest and hand gun hits please link it. I'd like to see it. The film that i have seen with actual shots on the vest, including multiples doesn't agree with your claim. The creator of the Second Chance ballistic vest (all soft armor) proved his work by shooting himself many times wearing the vest as a demonstration. You gotta love a guy that has that much faith in his product.

Here is another resource I found earlier, you might want to look it over. http://www.firearmstactical.com/hwfe.htm The document is from the FBI training academy

[FLOTSOM]

You might want to go back and read what I posted. I didn’t say anything about clipping a nerve, nor did I describe the wound. When the limb is gone you have most definitely lost the use of it.completely and absolutely different, ask someone who has had the limb removed if they feel it is just unuseable

Another situation that I was present at was the shooting of an Officer on my Department by an Officer from another Department. He was shot by a .45. It damaged the spine of the Officer that was hit but didn't amputate anything. He also survived, granted as a paraplegic, but he is otherwise healthy. Since the shot was in the main part of the body it should have destroyed the internal organs and killed him according to your claims but it didn't. He wasn't wearing a vest either.the fact that he wasnt wearing a vest was shot only once and was shot through the back is another irrelevant and not on point discussion, what does that have to do with the concussion of three rounds into the chest of a vest? the discussion at the time was about the transfer of kinetic energy into the body, this doesn't happen the same way if the person is not wearing a vest. if you wanna quote me so strictly then start by reading that i said three rounds into the chest. obviously a center mass shot isn't gonna amputate a limb, never said it would.

What you never heard of would likely fill the Library of Congress. don't be throwing stones, Ive never met a cop who moonlighted as a rocket scientist    Try sticking with something that you might actually know, tried or have researched. Secondly I never said that the bullet was fired into the dirt any where near feet, mine or anyone else’s. That’s an assumption on your part. I have fired the .45 hollow point into various media. Not once did it mushroom including in dirt. Dirt is a lot closer to bone than any watermelon I have ever seen.what have you fired? 20 30 rounds? i have fired 1500 rounds of .45 hollow point (bought a wooden case with multiple boxes of 50 rounds each) into about everything i could find to use as a target. now i must conseed the point that i didn't go dig too many of them out to see what happened, but of those that i did find none of them had failed to expand. this could have been caused by hitting the backing 8x8's behind the targets or by hitting the dirt embankment also behind the targets. i assumed it happened when hitting the targets, but i could be wrong in some cases. i never implied that water melon was like bone, once again if your gonna quote then stick to what i said. "tinsel strength of flesh" dirt has no characteristics matching that of bone, that one you need to prove.

You might want to look over a nice article related to the subject in the November Shooting Times magazine under the "going ballistic" column. It covers testing pistol hollow points and what it took to get one to expand reliably.

Sorry but that is not what you said. I’ll quote it again here. “Quote from: FLOTSOM on Yesterday at 10:28:24 PM "when a hollow point hits a bone it mushrooms to 10x its beginning size," your right i miss spoke, i was being to simplistic in my explanation but i have since corrected what my intended meaning was so if you don't have a better argument then move on

This is a patently false statement and I already explained why.

You also need to look over some of the information regarding permanent wound cavity (destroyed tissue) vs temporary wound cavity. Even ballistic gel is not perfect but it's a darn sight better than watermelons.i have read some of this, and you really need to get over your enmity with water melons. my point to initially mentioning them was for a back yard target practicing test, no real science just fun. but if your interested, this is where i learned a little about ballistic wounds from https://oa.doria.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/2120/woundbal.pdf?sequence=1 one of the things you will find is that they put little credence into the information gained by using non-standardized ballistic gels

The rifle analogy is perfectly viable as an example of even greater power (rifle vs pistol) not creating the damage you want to attribute to smaller cartridges.completely different characteristics and yet again not on point

The BAR wasn’t a failure in WW1. It saw limited use due to not being developed and then issued until July 1918 shortly before the war ended. It was used in the  Meuse-Argonne Offensive.the BAR did not live up to the hype, there for it was a failure

I also didn't say the Garand was made during WW1. i didn't imply that you did

BTW the Garand and the BAR fired the exact same cartridge, what civilians know as the 30-06. I don't know where you got this from.not exactly the same though, one is longer than the other

The Thompson also wasn't used in WW1 as it was still in prototype when the war ended. If you are going to use wikpedia as a resource you might want to read the article Regarding the cartridge issue which I brought up earlier. again you miss state me. i did not say that the Thompson was used in WWI, the only weapon i said was used in WWI was the BAR. i will read the article you posted when i get a chance. if it is new and updated material then it will be a good read. i use wik to be certain of relevant dates and sizes that i don't know off the top of my head, is there a problem with that? is that some taboo place to look up things?

"By late 1917, the limits of the Blish lock were discovered, and it had been found that the only cartridge currently in U.S. service suitable for use with the lock was the .45 ACP (Automatic Colt Pistol)"

That kind of mirrors what I said about the cartridge and it's relationship to the Thompson.but it had less to do with what was in inventory and everything to do with the Blish lock.

If you have a link to fatalities due to trauma transfer from a vest and hand gun hits please link it. I'd like to see it. The film that i have seen with actual shots on the vest, including multiples doesn't agree with your claim. The creator of the Second Chance ballistic vest (all soft armor) proved his work by shooting himself many times wearing the vest as a demonstration. You gotta love a guy that has that much faith in his product.yes and we all know just how honest those tests are. he uses a .357 firing a under powered .38 round. i don't remember the name of the round, but its designed for paper target shooting not for bodies. maybe before you put your faith in them you should read this http://www.whistleblowers.org/storage/whistleblowers/documents/zeppetella_trial__ex-exec_says_body-armor_firm_knew_vests_degraded.pdf gives you an idea about the integrity of the company and its propaganda

Here is another resource I found earlier, you might want o look it over. http://www.firearmstactical.com/hwfe.htm The document is from the FBI training academygood article, don't know if i agree with it verbatim because its calling alot of very smart people very stupid. but it is well argued. you may also want to read this article. its about the standards for body armor http://www.cslj.net/library/dk_files/Law%20Enforcement/L%20E%20Technology/Other%20LE%20Technology%20&%20Equipment/2000%20NIJ%20Personal%20Body%20Armor%20Ballistics%200900.pdf

no matter what, be safe out there

FLOTSOM

[Nilsen]

As someone in this thread pointed out, it is an internal matter for those living in the us. If they need em to survive then let them have as many as they wish.

We dont need em to be safe from criminals or from "the government that is out to get us". Our freedom is not based on guns, but a transparent democracy and a fairly well functioning legal system. The police force may not be perfect, but if you add abit of common sense you can avoid crime

[Rich46yo]

don't be throwing stones, Ive never met a cop who moonlighted as a rocket scientist

Flotsom your on thin ice here. We see far more shooting victims then any rocket scientist. Even one like you. And of every caliber, bullet type, and gun you can imagine. I used to work with a guy who was in on a shoot where the BG was hit 14 times by a Police 9mm round, and lived, that did great in BGel but sucked on the street. And a lot of them were torso shots. I once had a guy who was shot point blank in the head with a .45 and the bullet wrapped around his skull, never entering it,  stayed inside his skin on the other side.

Kinetic energy in handgun rounds is way over-rated. You either hit the BG in the boiler room or you dont. Its that simple. The only possible exception I would consider is the 125 gr JHP .357. But everything else? Aim for the heart lung and keep pulling the trigger until you hear a click. Then run back and get a shotgun or rifle.

We have shoot-fests here. Hahahaha, I aint kidding. The kind where two or three cars pull up to a light, decide they don't like each others gang signs, and pull out handguns shooting each other as they are driving down the street. 10 mins later, after they dump the guns, a trauma unit gets 8 shooting victims. I think we investigate and see a lot of shootings Flotsom.

[FLOTSOM]

Flotsom your on thin ice here. We see far more shooting victims then any rocket scientist. Even one like you. And of every caliber, bullet type, and gun you can imagine. I used to work with a guy who was in on a shoot where the BG was hit 14 times by a Police 9mm round, and lived, that did great in BGel but sucked on the street. And a lot of them were torso shots. I once had a guy who was shot point blank in the head with a .45 and the bullet wrapped around his skull, never entering it,  stayed inside his skin on the other side.

Kinetic energy in handgun rounds is way over-rated. You either hit the BG in the boiler room or you dont. Its that simple. The only possible exception I would consider is the 125 gr JHP .357. But everything else? Aim for the heart lung and keep pulling the trigger until you hear a click. Then run back and get a shotgun or rifle.

We have shoot-fests here. Hahahaha, I aint kidding. The kind where two or three cars pull up to a light, decide they don't like each others gang signs, and pull out handguns shooting each other as they are driving down the street. 10 mins later, after they dump the guns, a trauma unit gets 8 shooting victims. I think we investigate and see a lot of shootings Flotsom.

Please by no means take anything i have said as a slander or slur against anyone in the Law Enforcement Occupation. or from any other occupation that risks it's life to preserve the lives of civilian know it all dweebs like me.

my comment about being a rocket scientist was just a funny and not intended as an insult. that is how i took his comment about the library of congress, and how my retort was intended to be taken. (the laughing character after the comment was intended to express that)

i do not doubt that you have far more experience in the RW with gun shot wounds than i do. its been many years since Ive even touched a fire arm, so modern technology and wisdom on the subject is mostly voodoo and witchcraft to me. i have read some documents and articles that over time were brought to my attention mostly for the purposes of amusement and to try to maintain a basic understanding of the topics being discussed. but we both know that what they prove in a lab is not generally worth poop in the none controlled enviorment of the RW.

my comment about the ability of the .45 to kill someone wearing a vest was based upon old logic, when it was something i felt i needed to know. 13 or 14 years ago ballistic vest were not what they are today, so three rounds from a .45 into the chest of it would kill or seriously wound the person wearing it. but again, that is old logic, and obviously i am arguing it based on out dated information.

sometimes i am too argumentative. but again do not take that as disrespect! your is a profession that in my opinion deserves only the highest of honors. (an opinion that has gotten me into more than one argument with former affiliates of mine) but that doesn't change the fact that i am argumentative. and face it who likes being wrong in an argument?

So <SALUTE> to all of you in LE and similar jobs. my parents are safe because you willing go in harms way to ensure their safety.

FLOTSOM