Originally Posted by N/Apower
According to ME's, I have heard it doesn't matter, visibly. Tissue is elastic, and 1400fps is going to look identical to 800fps, provided the slug is the same size and there is no fragmentation.
Medical Examiners. Like the guy that everyone here gave so much flack when he told them what he saw in the real world when it didn't jive with what they THOUGHT happened. What was his SN "Lookin4U" ?
I've seen pics that say different, not to mention what the person who saw first hand had to say. Clearly a difference. Not to mention the testimony of others here on GT based on animals.
Don't know what the medical examiners think they claim to have seen, but I have yet to hear of a medical examiner who had any clue what handgun round a BG (or GG I guess) was shot with and only had a clue from recovered bullets where they could simply measure caliber size if they cared to. I say this based on what others have said who claim to be in a similar medical background profession as you.
Are these special MEs you refer to that are privy to more info than the average emergency room visits encountered?
Is there anyone out there that can verify what I'm saying about more visible wound damage in animals when using 357SIG over 9mm?
Preferably when comparing 125gr 357SIG loads @ 1350fps - 1450fps to 147gr 9mm loads at 800fps - 900fps. I only put this in bold and larger type for the idea that maybe more will notice it than may have otherwise.