Originally Posted by curl
What do you think you learn from such a small sample size, or is it just you want to be right about something in this discussion, no matter how irrelevant to the actual fmj vs hp topic? Like I said a loooong time ago, bullets do weird shit inside the body, and I have seen .44 penetrate less than .380. So what?
I accept that your estimation is probably closer than a random number generator in the case of GSW #2. Please explain to me how you could apply the same math to arrive at a conclusion for the depth of penetration of GSW #15.
You do make a decent point; any one bullet can do "weird" things in a body. However, the FBI made REALLY A LOT out of failure of ONE bullet to penetrate sufficiently in ONE individual! The fact is that even if that 115 gr. 9mm ST penetrated 12" or 13" in gel (instead of under 9") it still would not have been enough if Platt's arm was not close to his body when he was shot by Dove (let alone if, in addition, the bullet hit his humerus and/or rib) -- the widely accepted notion that 12-13" JHP penetration -- in gel--- is adequate, notwithstanding. That's why some, including me, prefer FMJs over JHPs that have a significant risk of under penetration.
Using geometry to calculate penetration depth based on entry and exit points only works if the bullet track in tissue is in a straight line; as noted earlier, bullets do NOT always follow a straight path in the body...
Secondly, when evaluating penetration depth characteristics, it is important to know what intervening obstacles the projectile might have struck prior to hitting tissue--that information is often missing from surgical and postmortem medical reports.
While hitting the humerus or femur and have a significant effect on bullet penetration depth, ribs tend to have much less of an effect (ex. see Dahlstrom and Powley's RCMP handgun study)
Last edited by DocGKR; 01-02-2016 at 11:11 AM.
Facts matter...Feelings Can Lie
Is that a random number generator with a range of 7.1-7.5, or a random number generator from 0 to infinity? Narrow it down, to add a bit of clarity. Where's significant or probable uncertainty outside of 7.1-7.5" range?
Human nature, I suppose. It's a lot easier to blame a bullet than fundamental flaws in training and tactics. Beyond the scope of this thread.
I don't think anyone is arguing FOR a JHP that has a significant risk of under penetration. This is not the forum where people subscribe to the latest bullet fad, recommend glaser safety slugs, are enthralled by ultralight fragmenting bullets because they post high ME numbers, etc. I don't presume to speak for everyone, but the general consensus seems to be along the lines of "carry a heavy for caliber bullet that retains mass" for everyone including you. So at this point who are you arguing against?
Regarding the relevant shooting, I have seen the video. Clearly, there were no obstacles or barriers between the shooter and the deceased. Based on autopsy detail, bullet #2 travelled essentially in a straight line, undoubtedly as straight as most gel shot tracks I've seen.
The topic here is FMJ vs. JHP; my position, backed by well-established facts, has been that the commonly accepted notion that 12" or so JHP penetration -- in gel-- may not be sufficient in many cases and, in those cases, an FMJ may perform more effectively.
#15, please? You have been avoiding this for some time.
Gladly as soon as we settle #2, as stated previously. Do you accept that penetration path length of #2 is most likely 7.1"-7.5", and if not, why not? It would certainly help the discussion if you gave a straight instead of "random" answer to this simple question.
I've just re-watched the video as well; looks like it is possible some projectiles struck the pavement prior to entering tissue--hard to tell without the full crime scene data and photos, including photos of the recovered projectiles, as that can offer information on potential intermediate barrier strikes and eccentric upset.
Last edited by DocGKR; 01-02-2016 at 11:47 AM.
Facts matter...Feelings Can Lie
