Guns aren't stupid, People with Guns Are.

Quote:

COLUMBUS, Ohio - An 18-year Columbus Police Officer drove himself to the hospital after accidentally shooting himself Wednesday morning.

Police say the officer was struck in the leg by a bullet around 6 a.m. in northwest Columbus, near I-270 and 33.

“He was on his way to work, was in uniform and the way our duty belts fit, if you have a car with leather seats, you won't want to wear the duty belt while driving - because it will really mark up your vehicle. So a lot of officers will just take the belt off and put it on the seat or the floor,” said Sgt. Rich Weiner of the Columbus Police Department.

Weiner adds that the weapon – a Smith & Wesson MP40 - did not have a safety.

The incident is being called an “accidental discharge.”

http://www.10tv.com/content/stories/2014/07/02/columbus-officer-accidental-shooting.html

0 Replies

Quote:

A 17-year-old boy is facing a charge of manslaughter by culpable negligence after he accidentally shot an 18-year-old man to death Saturday in suburban Palm Beach Gardens, police said.

Police say Feliciano Sabates, 18, died after he was shot in the chest with a 9mm pistol by the boy, who has been booked into the Juvenile Assessment Center. The case has been referred to the State Attorney’s Office.

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/news/crime-law/17-year-old-charged-in-accidental-palm-beach-garde/ngtYX/

0 Replies

Quote:

EAST CHICAGO | A 31-year-old East Chicago native who accidentally shot and killed himself Sunday while showing friends a shotgun had worked hard to make a better life for himself, his mother said.

Eric Zyzanski, 31, died after shooting himself in the head with a shotgun he thought was unloaded, NBC Chicago reported.

Zyzanski was in his apartment in Evanston, when he was shot, mother Joan Zyzanski said. He worked as a machinist in Elgin, and had planned to continue his education in that field, she said.

http://www.nwitimes.com/news/local/lake/east-chicago/mom-e-c-native-killed-in-accidental-shooting-was-close/article_ce18ebda-202f-5862-b210-f62ca6d5616c.html

0 Replies

Quote:

WOODBURN, Ore. (KOIN 6) – One person was flown to a Portland area hospital after an “accidental” shooting in a Safeway parking lot on Sunday.

Police said preliminary information indicated that someone in an SUV in the grocery store’s parking lot was showing the others in the vehicle a handgun when it went off, shooting a man in the back seat.

LifeFlight transported the man to a Portland trauma hospital.

Authorities said the other people in the SUV were cooperating, and the suspected shooter was very remorseful about what happened.

Police said if a person is going to show off a gun, it should be done responsibly.

http://koin.com/2014/07/20/accidental-shooting-in-woodburn-leaves-1-hurt/

1 Reply

@parados,

parados wrote:

Quote:
WOODBURN, Ore. (KOIN 6) – One person was flown to a Portland area hospital after an “accidental” shooting in a Safeway parking lot on Sunday.

Police said preliminary information indicated that someone in an SUV in the grocery store’s parking lot was showing the others in the vehicle a handgun when it went off, shooting a man in the back seat.

LifeFlight transported the man to a Portland trauma hospital.

Authorities said the other people in the SUV were cooperating, and the suspected shooter was very remorseful about what happened.

Police said if a person is going to show off a gun, it should be done responsibly.

http://koin.com/2014/07/20/accidental-shooting-in-woodburn-leaves-1-hurt/

Yes. If more people used REVOLVERS,
then fewer accidental discharges wud occur than with automatics.
Sometimes I ponder, musing qua whether
when the first amino acids came together
in the primordial oceans, that was the First Step
in Nature 's Grand Plan to invent the REVOLVER,
blessings be unto Sam Colt forever!
Thay shud put his picture on the $5 bill
instead of that other guy.

David

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

Since you think revolvers are the safest gun, let's simply restrict hand gun ownership to revolvers to make it safer for everyone.

1 Reply

@parados,

parados wrote:

Since you think revolvers are the safest gun,
let's simply restrict hand gun ownership to revolvers to make it safer for everyone.

No. It makes no difference what is safer.
Government has no jurisdiction of gun possession.

David

0 Replies

If I could have a gun I think I'd plump for an easy-to-handle .38 revolver because the calibre is not too small, not too large.
And volvers seem more friendly and reliable than autos.
PS- I hear most American police forces plump for autos which surprises me a bit.

1 Reply

@Romeo Fabulini,

.38s may well be lethal,
but thay lack sufficient STOPPING POWER.

For optimal STOPPING POWER in a handgun,
I recommend a .44 magnum revolver loaded with .44 special
with hollowpointed slugs to put the brakes on within the target,
for maximal energy dump without overpenetration.

U shud get in plenty of practice. Let me know if u can get
some socialists to hold your targets for u.

David

1 Reply

Quote:

Guns aren't stupid, People with Guns Are.

Anti-freedom Threads aren't stupid.
People who Post Run-On Sentences Are.

0 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

Dirty Harry's .44 magnum is too big for my taste, too difficult to carry around concealed.
It also has a kick like a mule and therefore difficult to hold on target.
Incidentally a lot of people in prepping/survivalist forums like .22 handguns, but I wouldn't have one as a gift because they've got hardly any stopping power.
So I'd take the middle route and plump for a .38 because it's easy to carry around, has good stopping power and is easier to handle than a .44 cannon.

2 Replies

@Romeo Fabulini,

Romeo Fabulini wrote:

Dirty Harry's .44 magnum is too big for my taste,
too difficult to carry around concealed.

No. My defensive .44 has a 2 inch barrel. Its conveniently concealable.
U can fire .44 special ammunition in a .44 magnum revolver; gentler.
Its additional weight is helpful in handling Isaac Newton 's 3rd Law of Motion
(either that, or convince Newton to change the law).

http://www.proguns.com/images/used-guns/usedguns247-904/278taurus445.jpg

Romeo Fabulini wrote:

It also has a kick like a mule and therefore difficult to hold on target.

Not if u load it with .44 special cartridges; I do.
It also helps to get used to it with plenty of practice
at your gunnery range.

Romeo Fabulini wrote:

Incidentally a lot of people in prepping/survivalist forums [shud be fora]
like .22 handguns, but I wouldn't have one as a gift
because they've got hardly any stopping power.

Thay r OK for hunting chipmunks or mosquitos.
For defensive purposes, thay r grossly irresponsible.

Romeo Fabulini wrote:

So I'd take the middle route and plump for a .38 because it's easy
to carry around, has good stopping power and is easier to handle than a .44 cannon.

Thay do NOT have good stopping power with a central mass hit
on a target in a state of frenzy and momentum.
Don t bet your life on a .38 cartridge.
For instance: in the 1970s, some NY police chased a bum into an alley.
He smashed a glass bottle, turned around and charged one of them,
who emptied out his .38 revolver into the bum's chest, who died in consequence,
but b4 he did, he jammed the ragged jagged glass into the throat of that police officer,
who also failed to survive his wounds. The moral of the story is:
its not enuf to kill him. U need to STOP him.
A .44 round has a better chance to break his charge because of its mass and charge
(ideally configured with hollowpointed slugs for optimal energy dump and avoiding overpenetration).

David

0 Replies

@Romeo Fabulini,

Romeo Fabulini wrote:

It also has a kick like a mule and therefore difficult to hold on target.

OmSigDAVID suggested loading the .44 magnum with .44 special ammo.

This is similar in effect to loading a .357 magnum with .38 special ammo.

Note though that if you are defending against bears or other large dangerous animals, you would want the full power of the .44 magnum.

The heavy recoil is a bit more manageable in a single-action-only revolver, due to the shape of the grip on such revolvers.

1 Reply

Guys, I'm only english so what the hell do i know about guns, (managed to win a few tactical PC wargaming trophies though) but why didn't that cop empty his .38 into the attackers head instead of his chest, I'm sure that would have stopped him cold no matter what state of frenzy and momentum he was in.. Wink

As for a .44, what's the point of weakening it by loading a "gentler" round with less recoil?
You might as well plump for a fullstrength .38 in the first place, right?

PS- i mentioned quite a few people swear by .22 handguns, their excuse is- "A .22 is quite good enough if you get your shot placement right".
I don't buy that myself because I suppose they mean take careful aim at vulnerable parts of the body or head.
That may be fine in theory, but if somebody's charging at you, surely you don't have time to place your shots?

Even a headshot might do no real damage, this .22 hit Serpico pointblank in the kisser and just made a hole in his cheek and left him dazed-

http://img577.imageshack.us/img577/2658/serpicoshot.gif

http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g64/PoorOldSpike/serpico-shot.jpg~original

2 Replies

@oralloy,

oralloy wrote:

Note though that if you are defending against bears
or other large dangerous animals, you would want the full power of the .44 magnum.

Yes. That 's absolutely right,
maybe even .5O caliber.

David

1 Reply

@Romeo Fabulini,

Romeo Fabulini wrote:

Guys, I'm only english so what the hell do i know about guns,
(managed to win a few tactical PC wargaming trophies though)
but why didn't that cop empty his .38 into the attackers head
instead of his chest, I'm sure that would have stopped him cold
no matter what state of frenzy and momentum he was in..

Police r instructed to aim for central body mass,
as a conservative strategy. Criminals have been known
to jiggle their heads around too much while charging at
the police or shooting guns at them, creating un-stable targets,
tho this may be indicative of poor sportsmanship.

Romeo Fabulini wrote:

As for a .44, what's the point of weakening it by loading a "gentler" round with less recoil?
You might as well plump for a fullstrength .38 in the first place, right?

RONG! A .44 special cartridge is a lot gentler than .44 magnum,
but its tremendously more powerful than a .38 round; u can feel it in the recoil.
Once, I loaded my 7.5 inch barreled .44 magnum Ruger SuperBlackhawk
with alternating rounds of .44 special and .44 magnum:
that was an interesting sensation. Try it when u get a chance.

Take a look at the ballistic gelatin studies.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1kjcoFaobeo
Thay r fun and instructive.

Romeo Fabulini wrote:

PS- i mentioned quite a few people swear by .22 handguns,
their excuse is- "A .22 is quite good enough if you get your shot placement right".

A .22 is fine, if u hit him in the eye.
THAT wud slow him down pretty well. Criminals don t like that,
but chances of getting a successful hit r not good; too risky.
Running out of ammunition, in the attempt, can bring bad luck.

Romeo Fabulini wrote:

I don't buy that myself because I suppose they mean take careful aim
at vulnerable parts of the body or head.
That may be fine in theory, but if somebody's charging at you,
surely you don't have time to place your shots?

The odds of success r un-acceptably poor,
for the reasons hereinabove set forth.

Romeo Fabulini wrote:

Even a headshot might do no real damage, this .22 hit Serpico pointblank
in the kisser and just made a hole in his cheek and left him dazed

I dont judge too much by movies,
but a cheek wound will not necessarily disable your target.
If Batman got hit in the cheek, he might just keep on going; I dunno.

The official doctrine of police n military is aiming at central body mass.

If your target is remaining reliably motionless,
then u might be moven to improvize.

David

0 Replies

Quote:

OmSig said: Police r instructed to aim for central body mass..

Yeah pouring stuff into his chest makes sense if the target is too far away to guarantee hitting his small head, but if he's charging and getting close I'd then switch to headshots where the chances of missing are much less.
Incidentally if he's wearing a bulletproof vest, chest shots wouldn't hurt him anyway.

PS- It's amazing how lots of people around the gun forums have got different opinions about what guns they prefer, and it even applies to wargaming.
For example when I'm playing as Russki, I ALWAYS take a T-34/76mm tank even though people call me mad for not taking the 85mm gun version, or for not taking a mighty Stalin tank with its 122mm gun.
Fact is, the T-34/76 has a higher rate of fire and carries more ammo than the 85, and the Stalin is so slow it's just a useless dinosaur.. Smile

0 Replies

Man Shoots Himself In The Head After Trying To Take A Selfie With A Gun
http://www.buzzfeed.com/javiermoreno/man-shoots-himself-in-the-head-after-trying-to-take-a-selfie

1 Reply

@tsarstepan,

tsarstepan wrote:

Man Shoots Himself In The Head After Trying To Take A Selfie With A Gun
http://www.buzzfeed.com/javiermoreno/man-shoots-himself-in-the-head-after-trying-to-take-a-selfie

Does the 2nd Amendment apply in MEXICO ?

FOR THE RECORD:
I do not approve of guys taking selfies using guns.

(altho, on the other hand, on my friend Donald's honeymoon
in Las Vegas [he married a medical doctorette from Red China in 1988]
we took lots and lots of pictures of ourselves in a gun store with revolvers,
submachineguns, n pistols; came out very well, indeed. Donald loves to KABA.)

David

0 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

OmSigDAVID wrote:

oralloy wrote:
Note though that if you are defending against bears or other large dangerous animals, you would want the full power of the .44 magnum.

Yes. That 's absolutely right, maybe even .5O caliber.

Depends on which .50 you mean. I'm a bit dubious of a handgun that has the same recoil energy of a 12 gauge magnum shotgun.

I think the .454 Casull is probably the limit of sanity when it comes to handgun power.

I could see using the .454 Casull for bear defense, but only if one is able to handle the recoil and still shoot effectively.

1 Reply

Guns aren't stupid, People with Guns Are.

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know