Guns + Super Slow Motion = Awesomeness

Yup. Just like Black Talons. My CCP instructor was an attorney (ex MP and 15 year LEO) and he educated us heavily on the legal ramifications of a legit shoot. Juries look at videos like that and defense attorneys cringe.

What is funny is Black Talon was just renamed to Winchester Ranger ammunition.
 
ensuring all the energy is transferred without over-penetration.

Without over-penetration? This is bunk. I am sorry man, but over-penetration is a concept that only exists in a lab environment, not the real world.

In the real world, a round that over-penetrates is the one that goes through the back of a chair and still kills an enemy.

In the real world, a round that over-penetrates is the one that goes through a door and still kills an enemy.

In the real world, a round that over-penetrates is the one that goes through one bad guy and still kills the one behind him.

The real world is not filled with ballistic gel, it's filled with real bad guys and bullets work best when they can over-penetrate objects and still kill them.
 
Being completely illegal under the Geneva Convention for military use, as inhumane, is this really something we need flooding the streets of the USA?

Mercury filled bullets are illegal, everywhere, and have similar behavior.

Well the thing is as an American I believe the streets should be flooded with this Ammunition because it is my right to own it... Secondly if it truly were a "War crime" to use these or cause injury and not just kill an enemy a lot of snipers would be in prison because a lot of times a Sniper doesn't go for a kill shot instead a wounding shot to play a little psychological warfare.... They don't even enforce these supposed Laws of War anyways..
 
That's retarded. There's even certain game that you can't hunt without expanding bullets, as its considered more humane to have a more instant kill. I wonder what their logic could have been.

LIES! Just googled:

Yes I did get my conventions mixed up.
 
Well look at the article 35 that was pointed out earlier.
Article 35 bans weapons that "cause superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering"...

Yes, lets.

We can start with the word superfluous. In this context it would mean or be synonymous with unnecessary injury. So how do you define that in war. If a standard rifle round is good enough to take a soldier out of combat, wouldn't artillery be superfluous? Heck, we should just go back to settling disagreements with rapiers right?

The US didn't sign onto that protocol because it was written stupidly and that's really all there is to it.
 
Ohh, I am mistaken, the US is signatory now to all of the Protocols of th Geneva Conventions. We just didn't follow through with formal ratification.

And our reasons for not signing the second protocol were because it placed restrictions that amount to an application of international law to internal conflicts within a sovereign nation. it's a basic problem.
 
Ballistics 101:

No bullets are "designed" to tumble as it goes through the air within it's effective limits. Some bullet "may" tumble in the air due to twist rates of rifling, velocity of bullet, mass of bullet, length of bullet, air temperature, and air density, but is not "designed" to do so in the air between the gun and the target because tumbling absolutely ruins accuracy and hitting your target is always of the highest importance.

When a bullet encounters a dense medium (flesh or ballistic gel) at the target end, it "will" generally tumble, simply because the majority of a bullet's mass is at the rear and the basically the lower mass of the front end wants to slow down in a dense medium while the rear wants to continue forward as it has more momentum. Since the spin rate is also abruptly slowed by the dense medium (spin keeps the bullets front forward), it cannot generally overcome the tendency of the rear of the bullet to make the bullet start to tumble (hence why the paths through ballistic gel tend to veer off initial impact course a lot).

Bullet construction, then determines whether the bullet fragments in the dense medium. For example, the original Vietnam era 5.56 55 grain military loading and a slow original m16 1/12 twist rate 20" barrel would tumble and fragment (because of its weak construction) in flesh causing much more damage, than than the later 68grain AP load in the faster 1/7 twist newer military M4 carbines which would drill thin holes right through people like the skinny Somali's and barely cause any damage. AP is armor piercing, which means tough construction so it doesn't fall apart when it hits a hard target. This is an important consideration if like the military you are restricted to solid, non-expanding bullets. Since you are not (unless you live in New Jersey) restricted to solid bullets, hollow points, which expand the bullets effective diameter, are better for pistols because it is more likely to cause more physical contact damage as it travels through a body.

Ballistics 201:

Compared to a rifle, a typical pistol bullet driven at typical pistol velocities is never a guaranteed man-stopper regardless of how it is made. Unlike rifles, the pistol-fired bullets just don't have the energy to cause any real hydrostatic damage and mainly depend on physical contact damage to cause internal bleeding. A typical .30 caliber rifle-fired bullet (like a 308 or 30-06) "does" have enough energy to cause serious hydrostatic effects "along" with the physical contact damage from point blank to 700 yards so that the bigger the bullet and the faster it goes makes a big difference. Bullet design in more "marginal" (aka smaller/weaker) rifle calibers like the 5.56 (.223), means that in some designs, the bullet can do a great deal more terminal damage (as the Vietnam era loading in a slow twist rifle barrel versus versus an AP bullet in a fast twist rifle). In addition, effective range limitations on how the bullet will perform comes into play depending on all the factors I gave in Ballistics 101 depending on caliber and muzzle velocity.

What a particular design bullet will do to a body at point blank range is much different than what the same design bullet will do to a body at the far end of any given distance, hence bigger and faster tends to simply extend the range and conditions at which the bullet continues to perform well for the task of wounding/killing.

Ballistics 301:

Because a pistol's bullet performance is much more widely varying than a rifle's and is more dependent on contact tissue damage, the FBI standard is to ensure that a pistol-fired bullet will travel a minimum of 12" to 18" in ballistic gel. Why a "minimum" of 12 inches? Because you want the bullet to be able to reach and damage the interior vital organs and blood pathways regardless of the angle the bullet enters the body, even if the person is a big guy. Why a "maximum" of 18 inches? Because you don't want the bullet, even if it pierces the target completely, to have a lot of leftover energy to hurt someone else. Once a bullet meets these criteria, then they look at other areas like reliability, expansion size, etc to determine what they consider a "good" bullet design.

Stupid 101:

As to Hague conventions and other BS about what or not the military vs civilians should and could use, "you" are the immediate and determinant protector of yourself. If you are one of the unlucky life lotto winners, you will probably only have one chance to save yourself. If you want to double down on the lottery game and depend on someone else to save yourself who might be minutes away, then by all means you go ahead and wait for the red and blue flashing lights. The rest of us don't mind if you feel that others have to protect yourself. Just stop crying about how and what those of us use in getting through the unlucky life lotto. There are no participation awards in life and death scenarios, just winners and losers. Sometimes the winner in unlucky life lotto wins unarmed, sometimes with 100 rounds of .50 caliber, either way I'd rather stack the odds a bit in my favor, so I'll just keep loading all the nasty hollow points I can.

If I could lift a 40mm bofors cannon shooting mini-nukes to ensure that my life and my loved ones are safe, then I would do so. Since I can't, I have to resort to my pistol/shotgun/rifle, with as many of the nastiest bullets as I can have loaded. If it becomes a three-person unlucky life lotto game with you, myself, and a bad guy demanding someone's life, I'm going to hand the bad guy yours and you aren't going to have a say in the matter since you're busy waiting for the boys in blue. The bad guys might take me and mine regardless of how I am armed, but not before he takes yours. When the boys in blue finally get there, I will proudly state how you threw yourself at the bad guy, giving me precious moments to fill him with lead.
 
If I could lift a 40mm bofors cannon shooting mini-nukes to ensure that my life and my loved ones are safe, then I would do so. Since I can't, I have to resort to my pistol/shotgun/rifle, with as many of the nastiest bullets as I can have loaded.

I like this man's thinking.

See, some lawyer might try to sell a jury on the idea that my choice in ammo was all about killing some poor smuck who robbed the wrong house cause his kids needed new school clothes. But my attorney is going to remind that same jury that my motivation was the lives of my kids and their mother and I don't give a damn if my lawyer leaves the jury with the distinct impression that I value their lives far more then I value that smuck's because I sure as hell do, and so would they.
 
What was the purpose of shooting through the drywall? To show that yes you still can kill your family if you're shooting at an intruder who runs in front of a bedroom wall?

He wanted to see whether or not the bullet (petals) would expand after contacting the drywall. He concludes that it doesn't. In the video he states, "a lot of concerns from people were that if they were to shoot something it could go through the wall and you could have like fragments going all over the place." But as you can see in the video, contacting a hard surface before the ballistic gel effectively nullified the petals.
 
These things are a highly overrated. expensive money making boondoggle.

What I want in a pistol bullet is a projectile that retains as much of it's mass as possible, while creating the largest permanent wound channel as possible (by expanding to it designed diameter even after penetrating heavy winter clothing) while penetrating as far as necessary, that being, through the vitals of my target.

this bullet does none of that. this reminds me of the ultimate "bullshit bullet" the Le Mas ltd "blended metal technology" projectile. millions were spent by the military and assorted law enforcement agencies to determine that it was, indeed, bullshit. at least the RIP is a "real" bullet, the Le Mas bullet turned out to be off the shelf bullets made by another company entirely.
 

I use FMJ in my .45 because it's cheap, reliable, and will definitely penetrate optimally for the caliber through cover and make it to the important bits.

I find the whole fantastic hollowpoint fascination to be a little pointless. Excess penetration is a non-issue. Most shots in a fight miss anyway, and anything that hits a thin target like a limb or a glancing shot is going to overpenetrate. If your kid is behind a bad guy, you probably shouldn't shoot whatever you've got.

"Stopping power," the marginal difference in the diameter of a wound from a round nose vs expanded bullet isn't going to do much in the short term where defensive shooting matters. If someone drops from low blood pressure in 30 seconds vs 40, not a big deal. Keep shooting until bones or nerves are hit and they drop immediately.

Plenty of people get shot repeatedly with high power rifle rounds and keep fighting for an hour. JHP vs FMJ pistol rounds is pbbbt, who cares.
 
I use FMJ in my .45 because it's cheap, reliable, and will definitely penetrate optimally for the caliber through cover and make it to the important bits.

I find the whole fantastic hollowpoint fascination to be a little pointless. Excess penetration is a non-issue. Most shots in a fight miss anyway, and anything that hits a thin target like a limb or a glancing shot is going to overpenetrate. If your kid is behind a bad guy, you probably shouldn't shoot whatever you've got.

"Stopping power," the marginal difference in the diameter of a wound from a round nose vs expanded bullet isn't going to do much in the short term where defensive shooting matters. If someone drops from low blood pressure in 30 seconds vs 40, not a big deal. Keep shooting until bones or nerves are hit and they drop immediately.

Plenty of people get shot repeatedly with high power rifle rounds and keep fighting for an hour. JHP vs FMJ pistol rounds is pbbbt, who cares.

There was a statistical compilation of street shootings by police (and others) using various calibers and bullets - jhp, fmj, etc - and statistically jhp rounds were definitely more likely to result in a one-shot stop on a torso hit, a "stop" being defined as the individual hit stopping their activity within 10 seconds. For example, .45ACP Federal Hydra-Shok resulted in a 96% chance to stop the person with 1 hit, vs 75% with a FMJ. For lesser rounds, like the .380ACP, that was 75% with a JHP vs 59% (if I remember correctly) for a FMJ. I'll dig up the study and post a link if I have time later, but I read it years ago in hard copy form so I don't remember the name of it and I don't have time to dig right now. I know this much though. If someone's such a poor marksman under pressure that only 1 round out of 7-16 (depending on magazine size) is going to hit I'd suggest that person use whatever would inflict the most damage as possible for that single hit, and penetrate the least into surrounding structures so as to not hit their sleeping family members, neighbors, or birds nesting in the attic.

Expansion and overpenetration are definitely not myths, and deforming bullets (hollow points or expanding FMJ in the case of Federal Guard Dog) vs non-deforming bullets is not a non-scientific discussion. There's hard data to back up the effects of both, and both have their proper place and use. You can check with the FBI and any police ballistics lab, and if you want to see for yourself there are plenty of tests posted on Youtube of various rounds into ballistic gel, into ballistic gel behind denim, and into ballistic gel behind ribs behind denim, to simulate an actual rib cage. I've even seen hog hearts and ham hocks shot with various rounds, and there's an unmistakable difference in a 9mm or .45ACP FMJ and a JHP such as Winchester PDX or Hornady Critical Defense.

Sure, there's hype, but there are facts in there too. If you're looking to protect yourself and your family, follow the facts, not rhetoric, and don't dismiss something without doing research first. Don't believe me? Good. Talk to certified instructors. Talk to law enforcement. Do your own research, as objectively as you can, then make an informed judgement call. That's what I'd encourage everyone to do. Proceeding from ignorance, especially willful ignorance, is adding unnecessary risk where you need it least.
 
Back
Top