Oh, so I committed terminal ballistic blasphemy that required a bunch of quotes from "experts". I didn't down play it, I called it what it is. All ammo testing is controlled science experiments that only compare one projectile to another in a controlled setting. Do you think I don't know what the "experts" say? I sure do. I've read it over and over again and seen it regurgitated over and over again.
Ammo testing and the various other "scientific experts" have skewed and brain washed people so much that I honestly think some folks don't really view FMJ as a lethal projectile. They see a bullet "fail" a test and say it's no good, it won't work. The only bullet that "won't work" is one that under penetrates and the vast majority of defensive bullets will typically do the opposite. Even if a bullet has zero expansion and it penetrates 200 inches it's still not going to fail. In the world of science experiments it fails but in the real world it punches a hole through someone's vitals and causes a serious/fatal injury. People forget FMJ has been killing people, and firearms in general, have been killing people for hundreds of years before we invented reliably expanding ammunition.
Over penetration. Oh this little gem of garbage always makes me chuckle. "The bullet exceeded 18 inches of penetration and is a risk of over penetrating your target and killing fifty children in the school house 3 miles away" says internet ammo tester experts. Over penetration is some over-hyped garbage. Over penetration is a mere foot note in the world of collateral damage compared to complete misses. In a gun fight most people will hover around a 25% connection rate. Worth a few seconds of thought, but that's about it.
.380. Plenty of folks are going to regurgitate the total bull**** they're fed on the internet and in gun rags and dismiss the 380 because JHP's only get 8 inches or so in gel. Well, .380 has been killing folks for a long dang time. .380 JHP is a lethal projectile. Is it an optimal round for duty or military use? No, there are better options. Will it work at 3 yards at "o'dark thirty" in a poorly lit parking lot after you scored some smack (sarcasm)? Sure, no better or worse than any other round. The proficiency of the driver behind the gun is more important. (Just a few years ago small 380's were all the rage. Then the industry introduced comparably sized 9mm pistols and 380 get hated on again. Internet "ammo tester experts" hold the 380 to the same standards as duty cartridges, then complain about their lack of penetration and expansion, blah blah blah, which is insane because 380 pistols (modern guns, for the most part, generalizing here) are not designed to be duty guns or shoot through barriers and stuff like that.)
The next huge bunch of total bull**** to hit the internet/gun world is "surgeons can't tell the difference between wounds from 9mm, 40, and 45." Are they even looking to tell a difference? No. This is the absolute dumbest thing I've ever heard. A surgeon is looking at a gunshot would like this- "S*** this guy is messed up. He has a hole in his left lung, a slice through his heart, his aorta is nicked, dang how do I save this guy?" They aren't in the OR going "geez I just can't tell the difference between 9 and 45 any more. A few years ago I really could tell when those 45 wounds came in. Denise, be a doll and hand me the forceps." That is the biggest bunch of bull**** ever spewed and I don't care who spews it. Can they tell the difference between a 45 and a 32acp? I doubt it, maybe, but we'll never know because THEY DON'T GIVE A... (ETA: Before some smarty pants comments on here "this surgeon idiot actually did this, here's the forum post to prove it, or this "expert doctor that almost failed med school wrote a forum post about the autopsies they studied", I'm sure some scientifically qualified person may have studied this... I just think it sounds insanely dumb.)
Its only in the past four years or so the 9mm has become "acceptable" again. This is another bunch of bull**** spewed to us by the "trainer gods" so they can sell more classes (Nothing wrong with propaganda to make sales, I believe in capitalism). 9mm has its merits, don't get me wrong, I see no issue with it. I find issue with the bull**** arguments people give to make the use of 9mm acceptable. "Oh, modern bullet technology has made 9mm so much more effective." Again, total BS. The 9mm has been performing just fine for over 100 years. Gold Dots have been around for a good while and they work very well and reliably. The only reason this garbage about surgeons and gel testing has been spewed everywhere is cost. Cost, that's it. 15 to 20 years ago most "trainer gods" only advocated .45ACP. Now, a case of .45ACP runs about $100 more than a case of 9mm which means less shooting and less ammo for classes. Like I said, not that its a bad thing. Getting more trigger time is always good, just call it what it is and don't make up BS reasons why something is "just as good". 9mm is cheaper to shoot, cheaper to train, and cheaper to teach unenthusiastic recruits how to shoot. Everyone wins, just call it what it is.
Now, back to the issue at hand. These Golden Sabers are just fine. Even if they plug with denim and don't open up they're going to penetrate. Even if the core and the jacket separate (Oh No! Another failure! -Uh, no.) it's still going to produce a lethal wound.
Ok, rant off. I just couldn't resist. The regurgitation of internet firearm dogma just split me open. Back to the main topic :wavey:
For those of you who are extremely dense or take these forums too seriously, this post was supposed to convey my points in a humorous manner and I hope some of you had a good chuckle... maybe it was only funny to me. who knows... this is the internet"
И еще прекрасное оттуда же.
"I read in guns magazines by historian experts that back in Great Patriotic War, the evil Nazis couldn't kill the audacious and righteous Worker's Party Soviet soldiers with their 9mms because the bullets bounced off the great Coats that these fine Workers of the Soviet Union wore."