A Dr's View of Gunshot Wounds [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : A Dr's View of Gunshot Wounds


DonGlock26
09-06-2012, 10:51
A Dr's View of Gunshot Wounds


http://youtu.be/tku8YI68-JA

You can fast forward to 7:30

Warning! Graphic photos and videos.
_

uz2bUSMC
09-06-2012, 12:03
Good insight on a few things. Limeted view on terminal performance.

smokin762
09-06-2012, 14:03
Very interesting. Thank you for posting this. :wavey:

cowboy1964
09-06-2012, 15:43
Good video.

.40 cal example at 17:00. Insufficient penetration. Unfortunately he didn't specify the weight but I suspect it was a light one. Perfect example of why penetration matters and the 12" thing isn't just some made up crap.

DonGlock26
09-06-2012, 15:51
Very interesting. Thank you for posting this. :wavey:

You are quite welcome. :cheers:

DonGlock26
09-06-2012, 15:52
Good video.

.40 cal example at 17:00. Insufficient penetration. Unfortunately he didn't specify the weight but I suspect it was a light one. Perfect example of why penetration matters and the 12" thing isn't just some made up crap.

Excellent point. I was scratching my head over that one. Perhaps, it was a 135gr .40.

RustyShackelford
09-06-2012, 16:10
The image of the leg-wound (self afflicted by accident?) at about 8:30 sure was horrible. Tumble, indeed.

maestrogustav
09-06-2012, 17:18
Excellent point. I was scratching my head over that one. Perhaps, it was a 135gr .40.

Seems very unlikely that nothing else interfered.

I would not be surprised if the round first struck the guy's arm or something..

Glk30
09-06-2012, 17:36
Seems very unlikely that nothing else interfered.

I would not be surprised if the round first struck the guy's arm or something..

Yeah, what is NOT being said is always more important than what is being said. We don't know if the bullet went through glass windshield, a wall, car door, etc before striking the individual. I can't image a .40 hitting someone cleanly in the chest and it not penetrating enough.

cowboy1964
09-06-2012, 18:32
It's unlikely the .40 passed through an external barrier. Typically that results in proper expansion not occurring and more penetration, not less. The bullets in this case were expanded, apparently.

I still say it was just a light .40. But the point is, underpenetration is bad, regardless of the reason.

Brucev
09-06-2012, 18:49
Good post. Good video. Shot a lot of deer, etc. When you dress out the carcass, you quickly learn just what happens when a bullet goes through flesh... and when it hits bone. Dr. is right... even a low-velocity rifle is far more powerful than a handgun. His statement that most handgun rounds do not exit is odd. Would like to see any post-shooting data as to whether or not a round fired penetrated completely. Recent incident in NYC would seem to indicate that common pistol rounds will easily penetrate completely.

uz2bUSMC
09-06-2012, 19:38
Good post. Good video. Shot a lot of deer, etc. When you dress out the carcass, you quickly learn just what happens when a bullet goes through flesh... and when it hits bone. Dr. is right... even a low-velocity rifle is far more powerful than a handgun. His statement that most handgun rounds do not exit is odd. Would like to see any post-shooting data as to whether or not a round fired penetrated completely. Recent incident in NYC would seem to indicate that common pistol rounds will easily penetrate completely.

They missed...a lot. Google the video.

uz2bUSMC
09-06-2012, 20:08
Yeah, what is NOT being said is always more important than what is being said. We don't know if the bullet went through glass windshield, a wall, car door, etc before striking the individual. I can't image a .40 hitting someone cleanly in the chest and it not penetrating enough.

Exactly right. Doctors see the end result of the gun fight. That bullet most likely hit something first. Penetration does not always increase because it strikes something first. Drywall, sure, an arm which may have already caused some expansion...not so much. The velocity will be lower and the sectional density would be lower making it more difficult to penetrate the sternum. Since the bullet was already expanded it wo have been moving along fast enough to be within it's velocity window or contacted a hard barrier causing deformation prior to impacting the sternum.

Tiro Fijo
09-06-2012, 20:48
...Recent incident in NYC would seem to indicate that common pistol rounds will easily penetrate completely.


I would guess that far more bystanders were hit with missed shots than with "through & throughs" with the 124 gr. +p GD. However, since I don't know the details I am speculating. It is however safe to assume that every single bullet fired did not hit its intended target.

M 7
09-06-2012, 22:04
DonGlock26,

Thanks for the video.

Besides the educated and very thorough perspective on gunshot wounds, it was incredible to see the "magic" those surgeons perform on their patients in the OR.

Copied for future reference. :cool:

Berto
09-06-2012, 22:09
Very interesting, a local guy too.

DonGlock26
09-07-2012, 07:50
The image of the leg-wound (self afflicted by accident?) at about 8:30 sure was horrible. Tumble, indeed.

I've seen it happen. It's horrible.

seanmac45
09-07-2012, 11:03
Great video Don.

Thanks for sharing.

Eric2340
09-08-2012, 06:14
Very interesting, VERY informative. Here's what I got from it handgun caliber wise, and something I have been looking at more and more as of late -


1. BIG holes that go DEEP work best, expansion and penetration appear to be the answer. (Love the video of the guy shot twice in the CHEST w/ the 9mm who runs away............. :( ).

2. Big bullets make BIG holes, the bigger the better, the more likely they are to make contact w/ something inside the need to hit to do damage. If a small bullet barely misses something it needs to hit, a bigger bullet in the SAME place is more likely to hit it just due to the fact it has more area to contact said place with.

3. I am DAMN glad I have long guns for HD I go to before my handguns. Long guns are king in the world of fight stoppers (NOT that was a news flash).


As I said in another recent thread I started, REALLY makes me rethink that whole, "just carrying a .380 ONLY" thing. :(

Handguns are comforting to carry, not COMFORTABLE. Make whatever means and adjustments to carry the biggest thing possible that you can shoot WELL.

Glad I'm carrying my G21 now, and that G20 is looking better and better every day...........


Thanks OP, GREAT video. :)

English
09-08-2012, 09:37
It was interesting and informative but very limited.

He took the Wound Ballistic Workshop's opinion as gospel without considering contrary evidence.

He showed significant slow speed video of the temporary cavities produced by 5.56mm, 7.62mm and .50 Cal Browning rifle rounds, but did not show comparissons between .38Sp, 9mm, .40S&W, 10mm, .357Mag or .44Mag. Just because they produce smaller temporary cavities than rifle rounds, it cannot be assumed that the differences have no significance or that all handgun rounds are equally feeble.

In essence he is a very competent surgeon who is used to dealing with the more normal range of handgun bullet wounds without going further into their differences. This was a practical lecture for trauma surgeons and not a significant examination of different hangun cartridge and bullet wounding effectiveness.

As an example, big buillets make bigger holes but faster bullets also make bigger holes. The effective diameter of tissue incapacitation and the average rate of blood loss is created by a combination of these two primary characteristics and is not a simple matter of expanded bullet diameter and depth of penetration. He pointed to the differences of the energy levels of different loads but failed to draw significant conclusions beyon the fact that rifles often have bigger cartridges with higher energy levels. Is there anyone here who did not know that?

Anyone who relies on his bigger bullet being able to miss a vital organ by an extra millimeter and still achieve a major effect is a fool. It is an old idea and is as stupid coming from him as it ever was. Even the heart is some 100mm wide. How much extra chance does a .45 give you over a 9mm? Nothing worth considering!

As Eric says above, the G20 looks better and better, but it is not its extra 1mm over the 9mm that does it and you would not conclude this from the video.

English

unit1069
09-09-2012, 09:51
The image of the leg-wound (self afflicted by accident?) at about 8:30 sure was horrible. Tumble, indeed.

It certainly was a brutal wound and the doctor pointed out it was a self-inflicted negligent discharge. He then identified the victim as a SWAT officer and why the wound entered at the knee and traveled through the calf area.

These incidents reinforce my current decision to carry C3. If these NDs happen with highly-trained SWAT members they can certainly happen to me.

WiskyT
09-09-2012, 11:28
It certainly was a brutal wound and the doctor pointed out it was a self-inflicted negligent discharge. He then identified the victim as a SWAT officer and why the wound entered at the knee and traveled through the calf area.

These incidents reinforce my current decision to carry C3. If these NDs happen with highly-trained SWAT members they can certainly happen to me.

I can tell you with absolute certainty that not all SWAT Officers are highly trained, or even capable of responding to training.

unit1069
09-09-2012, 13:11
I can tell you with absolute certainty that not all SWAT Officers are highly trained, or even capable of responding to training.

I would assume you're correct just because of the many large law enforcement agencies there are. But I'm also certain that if someone is designated SWAT and he is issued a fully automatic assault rifle he should know what he's doing. In fact, anyone authorized a weapon for official law enforcement use should know what he/she is doing.

The ND shown in the video didn't specify if the wound was incurred during an operation or from carelessly handling the weapon. If it was during the heat of an operation I would be far less inclined to fault the officer. At any rate the fellow sure paid dearly for his mistake.

uz2bUSMC
09-09-2012, 13:18
I would assume you're correct just because of the many large law enforcement agencies there are. But I'm also certain that if someone is designated SWAT and he is issued a fully automatic assault rifle he should know what he's doing. In fact, anyone authorized a weapon for official law enforcement use should know what he/she is doing.

The ND shown in the video didn't specify if the wound was incurred during an operation or from carelessly handling the weapon. If it was during the heat of an operation I would be far less inclined to fault the officer. At any rate the fellow sure paid dearly for his mistake.

Some SWAT teams are part time. There alotted time for serious team training and weapons handling can be as little as one or two days in a month.

cowboy1964
09-09-2012, 13:41
I would guess that far more bystanders were hit with missed shots than with "through & throughs" with the 124 gr. +p GD. However, since I don't know the details I am speculating. It is however safe to assume that every single bullet fired did not hit its intended target.

AFAIK, all bystanders were hit with shrapnel, not direct hits from the bullets.

cowboy1964
09-09-2012, 13:43
If "bigger holes" are the answer (or even part of the answer) then why would you consider a 10mm over an 11.4mm (a .45)?

uz2bUSMC
09-09-2012, 13:55
If "bigger holes" are the answer (or even part of the answer) then why would you consider a 10mm over an 11.4mm (a .45)?

Temp crush cavity = bigger hole.

WiskyT
09-09-2012, 13:58
Some SWAT teams are part time. There alotted time for serious team training and weapons handling can be as little as one or two days in a month.

Some even less than that and not all the training is with live fire either.


Because some dude sends a round down his leg isn't a good reason to run an empty chamber. Also, the Dr. giving the lecture is teaching about how to treat gunshot wounds. He didn't investigate the specifics of the how the wound he showed occurred. We don't even know if that particular wound is one that he treated. The point he was making was to show what a rifle round does at close range (or probably even long range) to the body. It isn't exactly useful in determining the efficacy of carrying a gun with an empty chamber.

uz2bUSMC
09-09-2012, 14:04
Some even less than that and not all the training is with live fire either.


Because some dude sends a round down his leg isn't a good reason to run an empty chamber. Also, the Dr. giving the lecture is teaching about how to treat gunshot wounds. He didn't investigate the specifics of the how the wound he showed occurred. We don't even know if that particular wound is one that he treated. The point he was making was to show what a rifle round does at close range (or probably even long range) to the body. It isn't exactly useful in determining the efficacy of carrying a gun with an empty chamber.

Agreed

Green Mountain Boy
09-09-2012, 14:12
This tells me that accuracy is the most important thing I can control. Also frankly it reinforces my shotgun for HD.

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

JW1178
09-09-2012, 18:36
This video makes you realize how important it is to get to a rifle when available.

In a shooting the #1 factor is the shooter, because they control the weapon and how it's used, this includes where they shoot it.

The #2 factor is the weapon system, which means the type of weapon and what round it fires, weather a rifle, handgun, shotgun, or even a RPG for that matter.

The weapon however can be no mor effective than the operator.

#3 factor is the performance of that round. A bullet can only perform to the limits of its physics.

Seems a lot of people have it backwards, they obsess about the bullet they choose. Bullet technology can not defy physics. They give some thought on the weapon, which I will say generally most at least on here do give adequate thought on that. Finally what is most neglected is training and practice.

The fact is that the SEAL team could have raided OBLs compound dressed in civil war uniforms armed with muskets and OBL would still be dead. If Obama had been on that SEAL team as he seems to claim to have been... well...

Tiro Fijo
09-09-2012, 19:28
...The fact is that the SEAL team could have raided OBLs compound dressed in civil war uniforms armed with muskets and OBL would still be dead...


Little heavy handed with the literary license, eh? :whistling: :supergrin:

uz2bUSMC
09-09-2012, 19:41
Little heavy handed with the literary license, eh? :whistling: :supergrin:

Well, that's funny.

JW1178
09-09-2012, 20:26
Little heavy handed with the literary license, eh? :whistling: :supergrin:

Has my license been provoked? :supergrin:

unit1069
09-09-2012, 21:27
Because some dude sends a round down his leg isn't a good reason to run an empty chamber.

It's a good enough reason for me to consider my current lifestyle situation and choosing whether to carry C1 or C3.

Also, the Dr. giving the lecture is teaching about how to treat gunshot wounds. He didn't investigate the specifics of the how the wound he showed occurred. We don't even know if that particular wound is one that he treated. The point he was making was to show what a rifle round does at close range (or probably even long range) to the body.

But according to the doctor/lecturer the ND was the result of a law enforcement officer's shooting himself, from the visuals and doctor's testimonial presented.

It isn't exactly useful in determining the efficacy of carrying a gun with an empty chamber.

I agree the condition to carry a personal firearm is best left to the individual.

So what if the LEO is part-time and doesn't have extensive training? The point is the jurisdiction has certified individuals as law enforcement officers who should be familiar with their issue weapons; and the state issues CCW licenses to individuals who should be totally familiar with their chosen weapons.

As time passes I've transitioned from C3 to C1 and back to C3 based on my personal circumstances and anecdotal accounts like shown in this video and quite a few testimonials regarding NDs from Glock Talk members. When my circumstances warrant it I carry C1, but in my normal routine it's usually C3 these days.

There is no right-or-wrong in my opinion; there's only an individual's evaluation about what's best for him/her.

cowboy1964
09-09-2012, 22:16
Temp crush cavity = bigger hole.

http://www.firearmstactical.com/pdf/fbi-hwfe.pdf

WiskyT
09-10-2012, 04:02
It's a good enough reason for me to consider my current lifestyle situation and choosing whether to carry C1 or C3.



But according to the doctor/lecturer the ND was the result of a law enforcement officer's shooting himself, from the visuals and doctor's testimonial presented.



I agree the condition to carry a personal firearm is best left to the individual.

So what if the LEO is part-time and doesn't have extensive training? The point is the jurisdiction has certified individuals as law enforcement officers who should be familiar with their issue weapons; and the state issues CCW licenses to individuals who should be totally familiar with their chosen weapons.

As time passes I've transitioned from C3 to C1 and back to C3 based on my personal circumstances and anecdotal accounts like shown in this video and quite a few testimonials regarding NDs from Glock Talk members. When my circumstances warrant it I carry C1, but in my normal routine it's usually C3 these days.

There is no right-or-wrong in my opinion; there's only an individual's evaluation about what's best for him/her.

It's simple, the only way a bullet comes out of the gun is if the trigger is pressed, and the only thing that bullet hits is what the muzzle was pointed at. If you can't be trusted to keep your finger off of the trigger and the muzzle in a safe direction, you shouldn't be putting your hands on a gun in the first place.

uz2bUSMC
09-10-2012, 04:38
http://www.firearmstactical.com/pdf/fbi-hwfe.pdf

Sorry man, I have to give you one of these.:upeyes:

dixietoo
09-10-2012, 09:17
Highly informative! What I take away from it is go for the headshot with a lighter caliber, or follow my plan a carry a 10mm, because I would rather react with 2 snapshots and then take cover, if possible, evaluate and aim. 2 HPs of 10mm in the chest ought to a least make the assailant stop and think about what is happening.
Does that make sense? I have done a lot of shooting and killed whitetail deer, but I never been in a gunfight, so I know it's a coin toss on what I would actually do!

Brucev
09-10-2012, 09:36
Nice video. The Dr. says what needs to be said to his audience. Those devoted to SD/HD, etc. will find it lacking. So what? They are not his intended audience.

His information is very good. Experience confirms what he says about the power, etc. of rifle rounds, and the relative ineffectiveness of pistol rounds. Again, this will tweak those who preach the gospel of SD/HD with pistols. But, he is not trying to sell a particular caliber or handgun. He is addressing how to treat gun shot victims with side observations as to what he has seen to be the results of hand gun rounds while treating patients.

unit1069
09-10-2012, 10:58
It's simple, the only way a bullet comes out of the gun is if the trigger is pressed, and the only thing that bullet hits is what the muzzle was pointed at. If you can't be trusted to keep your finger off of the trigger and the muzzle in a safe direction, you shouldn't be putting your hands on a gun in the first place.

I agree, so let me first emphasize what I wrote in my last post:

When my circumstances warrant it I carry C1, but in my normal routine it's usually C3 these days.

In my normally staid and routine life I calculate the chance of a negligent discharge is greater than my coming under deadly attack. When that calculation changes towards greater unknowns I carry C1. I really don't think responsible CCW demands an either/or approach.

uz2bUSMC
09-10-2012, 11:41
I agree, so let me first emphasize what I wrote in my last post:



In my normally staid and routine life I calculate the chance of a negligent discharge is greater than my coming under deadly attack. When that calculation changes towards greater unknowns I carry C1. I really don't think responsible CCW demands an either/or approach.

But it can build bad habits going back and forth. For instance, trying to chamber a round when you need it right now not remembering you were C1, or worse, attempting to fire because you need it now but forgot you were C3.

There's not much reason to handle your weapon during the course of the day, if there is, just take the extra time when you reholster so you dont get glockleg.

unit1069
09-10-2012, 16:00
But it can build bad habits going back and forth. For instance, trying to chamber a round when you need it right now not remembering you were C1, or worse, attempting to fire because you need it now but forgot you were C3.

Maybe, but then there's a lot of serious shooters who transition from cocked-and-locked 1911 platforms to manual safety to DAO-DA/SA to revolver, etc ... without any apparent difficulties.

I personally prefer short-reset DAO striker-fired pistols without manual safety, needing only to know the condition I'm carrying.

uz2bUSMC
09-10-2012, 16:43
Maybe, but then there's a lot of serious shooters who transition from cocked-and-locked 1911 platforms to manual safety to DAO-DA/SA to revolver, etc ... without any apparent difficulties.

I personally prefer short-reset DAO striker-fired pistols without manual safety, needing only to know the condition I'm carrying.

The difficulties aren't when you are carrying or doing simple range work it's when an encounter happens. I know you rersearch a lot and probably have heard tachy psychia, fight or flight or whatever you want to call it. Under that kind of stress there is a good chance you will not have your mind about you. Fine motor skills and the ability to think usual give way to just simple reaction. I.e Pulling the trigger over and over again on a pistol with a manual safety that must first be disengaged or pulling the trigger on an empty chamber. I train a lot and consider myself to be well skilled in a variety of engagement scenarios but I don't put my cognitive ability on the line by doing different than what I am used to. If I have a weapon with a manual safety, it stays off because I don't trust that I will simply remember to disengage. I presume that I will subconsiously atempt to draw and fire since my primary platform is a Glock.

Things go to $--- under extreme stress. I can't speak for you, you may be stone cold under pressure but it happens to the best of them. That's why it's a well known subject.

JuneyBooney
09-10-2012, 18:44
Good video.

.40 cal example at 17:00. Insufficient penetration. Unfortunately he didn't specify the weight but I suspect it was a light one. Perfect example of why penetration matters and the 12" thing isn't just some made up crap.

I agree. Very interesting video. It shows why you hear about people being shot numerous times and living to tell about it.

SCmasterblaster
09-12-2012, 14:15
Good posting!

Mattkcc
09-13-2012, 01:07
I worked as a cop at a college and medical center in an urban environment during the 90's. We got gang and drug shootings on a daily basis sometimes several a night. .When we went to the 40 cal from 9mm I thought great, however the 40 didn't perform any better then our 9mm did. When a shooting victim came to the trauma room, normally a banger or drug related shooting. I would go to the trauma room to collect evidence or get information from the victim encase he didn't make it. I got to see tons of bullet wounds up close and it wasn't till you got up to deer rifle calibers or close range shotguns that you would see a lot of damage. A lot of the wounds were fmj AK rounds and unless they hit bone they would punch a 30 cal entrance wound and a slightly larger exit wound. Didn't see a lot of .223 wounds and certainly nothing like in the video. I was surprised by how many people survive gunshot wounds to the head from 9mm,40,45 and even 357. One exception was the 22, don't remember anyone surviving a 22 to the head. Makes a very small entrance wound ,bounces around and often fragments. The little entrance wound plugs up and pressure in the brain rises and it's lights out. We got a cop in by helicopter who was shot several times in the chest by a 44 special he was able to return fire and took out the bad guy with his 357. The cop survived and was able to return to duty. My job was much easier if the guy died, then all evidence remained with the body and went to the coroner. This saved me a lot of paperwork and court time, after the guy was called the medical students would get a opportunity to pock around before the body was wrapped. This also gave me the opportunity to get a closer look, often the chest has been cracked and you could see the bullet path. I get a kick out of people debating endlessly which is better 9, 40 or 45 when none of them are reliable stoppers and often fail. The good news is it often doesn't matter because simple getting shot or shot at will put the bad guy into flight mode, whether 22 or 45. Many self inflicted gunshot wounds would survive. People who used a pistol would often put it to the temple, when they shot the bullet would exit the opposite temple. They often survive but their optic nerves would be cut. People who used rifles or shotguns would put the muzzle of the gun under their chin. These I didn't care for a close look, the jaw and face would be blown away and they would survive, the lucky ones would be blinded by the blast.

ricklee4570
09-13-2012, 03:00
Interesting video. Everyone knows rifle and shotgun is a better stopper. Shot placement is still the key.

JW1178
09-14-2012, 07:15
I worked as a cop at a college and medical center in an urban environment during the 90's. We got gang and drug shootings on a daily basis sometimes several a night. .When we went to the 40 cal from 9mm I thought great, however the 40 didn't perform any better then our 9mm did. When a shooting victim came to the trauma room, normally a banger or drug related shooting. I would go to the trauma room to collect evidence or get information from the victim encase he didn't make it. I got to see tons of bullet wounds up close and it wasn't till you got up to deer rifle calibers or close range shotguns that you would see a lot of damage. A lot of the wounds were fmj AK rounds and unless they hit bone they would punch a 30 cal entrance wound and a slightly larger exit wound. Didn't see a lot of .223 wounds and certainly nothing like in the video. I was surprised by how many people survive gunshot wounds to the head from 9mm,40,45 and even 357. One exception was the 22, don't remember anyone surviving a 22 to the head. Makes a very small entrance wound ,bounces around and often fragments. The little entrance wound plugs up and pressure in the brain rises and it's lights out. We got a cop in by helicopter who was shot several times in the chest by a 44 special he was able to return fire and took out the bad guy with his 357. The cop survived and was able to return to duty. My job was much easier if the guy died, then all evidence remained with the body and went to the coroner. This saved me a lot of paperwork and court time, after the guy was called the medical students would get a opportunity to pock around before the body was wrapped. This also gave me the opportunity to get a closer look, often the chest has been cracked and you could see the bullet path. I get a kick out of people debating endlessly which is better 9, 40 or 45 when none of them are reliable stoppers and often fail. The good news is it often doesn't matter because simple getting shot or shot at will put the bad guy into flight mode, whether 22 or 45. Many self inflicted gunshot wounds would survive. People who used a pistol would often put it to the temple, when they shot the bullet would exit the opposite temple. They often survive but their optic nerves would be cut. People who used rifles or shotguns would put the muzzle of the gun under their chin. These I didn't care for a close look, the jaw and face would be blown away and they would survive, the lucky ones would be blinded by the blast.

Interesting perspective. It makes me think of an EMT I know who has seen a lot of car accidents as well as shootings and she says it's incredible what people can survive and also incredible how easily someone can be killed. She has seen someone survive being run over by a dump truck yet then another person who died tripping over the curb. Saw someone survive a 12G buckshot to the chest and then another die of a .40 to the hip.

ricklee4570
10-31-2012, 04:59
It is not an exact science.

I like the .45 only because I have some accurate guns in .45 and I shoot them well. I have nothing against the 9mm or .40 but I feel comfortable with the .45

cowboy1964
10-31-2012, 05:32
Temp crush cavity = bigger hole.

Permanent cavity. Not to be confused with temporary cavity.

purrrfect 10
10-31-2012, 06:04
Just another reason why I carry a G20 10mm with Underwood 200grain XTP JHP ammo. Thank you Glock for such a fine pistol:perfect10:

uz2bUSMC
10-31-2012, 09:06
Permanent cavity. Not to be confused with temporary cavity.

Meant temp cavity=bigger hole

SCmasterblaster
10-31-2012, 09:29
That side view of the bullet that failed to penetrate an extra centimeter to the heart after going through the sternum was very informative. It makes me wonder if I should switch from my 115gr JHP 9mm +p+ load to a 124gr bullet or heavier.

uz2bUSMC
10-31-2012, 15:58
That side view of the bullet that failed to penetrate an extra centimeter to the heart after going through the sternum was very informative. It makes me wonder if I should switch from my 115gr JHP 9mm +p+ load to a 124gr bullet or heavier.

There's no way it only penetrated that far without some type of interference.

Darkangel1846
10-31-2012, 16:07
Its simple.....carry the best handgun you can, shoot the biggest fastest high tech bullets you can, be proficient, and remember .....a handgun is only good to give you time to get to your rifle. How simple is that?

SCmasterblaster
11-01-2012, 13:25
There's no way it only penetrated that far without some type of interference.

Maybe some heavy clothing or something in a shirt pocket.

uz2bUSMC
11-03-2012, 06:29
Maybe some heavy clothing or something in a shirt pocket.

It would have to be something fairly substantial. Maybe a winshield and a forearm for example. Heavy clothing would probably only help it penetrate further by clogging the cavity; taking away the expansion ability.

SCmasterblaster
11-03-2012, 11:41
It would have to be something fairly substantial. Maybe a winshield and a forearm for example. Heavy clothing would probably only help it penetrate further by clogging the cavity; taking away the expansion ability.

I never thought of a forearm!