Originally Posted by N/Apower
I skimmed his paper when I first saw it, saw that there was a sample size of 10, noted that he included no real data, and threw it out as unacceptable work based on lack of data/information. It would have gotten an "F" in any intermediate college class he chose to turn it during.
When you asked your question, I half-heartedly went looking for it, and didn't find it, and didn't worry about it.
The numbers above would have you believe that the answer to the problem is the shotgun loaded with bird-shot at close range. However, real-world use of this proves it's fallacy.
On the same hand, it would make one think that hard-cast solids are horrible bullets to use on nasty animals like cape buffalo, etc--yet we know that this is not the case.
Sure, BPW exists, but what does it DO? Whatever it does (or doesn't) do, it's mighty un-predictable. I would much rather choose my tools based on something predictable, like penetration and expansion.
Given the numbers/percentages of probability of BPW, there is a lot wrong with it if you review some OIS's and look at how people kept trucking after multiple shots.
This sticky from this forum shows as much.
You can talk about BPW all you want, throw all the equations out there you want, etc. but that doesn't make it any more effective.
It appears skimming
is all you're capable of, clearly explaining you lack of knowledge/understanding of anything you've commented on in this thread thus far. It's no wonder everything you question is such a far reach for you to understand.
And again, not to rush you, but I did ask you specific questions in my post #376 you haven't answered. I'm expecting to hear from you on them unless you're simply acknowledging you were wrong by ignoring them.
I've offered you a wealth of information directly pertaining to much of your misunderstanding. There's more but I feel you have enough to digest at one time. But since skimming seems to be all you're capable of it seems I may have wasted my time.
And on top of all that you've done nothing but skim Dr. Courntey's original work (I have to assume at this point you haven't a clue he's furthered his studies) and yet have the audacity as you claim above to make such uneducated statements as; "The numbers above would have you believe that the answer to the problem is the shotgun loaded with bird-shot at close range."
To say/believe anything that far off base shows you are void of any intelligent knowledge reguarding Dr. Courtney's theory of BPW, as has been recently pointed out to you already by at least 3 other GT members.
Oh, and again, since skimming is your trade signature I should remention - not to rush you, but I did ask you specific questions in my post #376 you haven't answered. I'm expecting to hear from you on them unless you're simply acknowledging you were wrong by ignoring them.
As for that link you posted which I've read more than once over the years now, please point out what it claimed toward BPW being a falsehood (I don't mean directly, indirectly is fine). I'm assuming you're mostly leaning toward the one-shot-stop stuff? Help us out here. The charts showing death certianly don't tell us anything toward temporary incapactitation. Nor does the literature itself which I read. Please show me what I clearly must have missed.
And again, since you're a self-admitted skimmer and I have no way of knowing where you'll start reading again, you should know - I did ask you specific questions in my post #376 you haven't answered. I'm expecting to hear from you on them unless you're simply acknowledging you were wrong by ignoring them.
Hopefully the next time you post back it will show that you know what you're talking about as you now have the info to do so. How anyone can skim anything and come away believing they understand the full content of what was discussed is far beyond my comprehension! Arent' you the one who claimed they work in/around ICUs???
I'm surprised uz2bUSMC put up with you as long as he did! His patience generally don't extend that far. Maybe he thinks there's hope for you. Well, lets all hope there is. Then there's KenB22...
Let's hope he's learning now too.
Are we clear?