Welcome to MGO's Internet Discussion Forums…Please Consider Becoming a Dues-Paying Member of the ORG…Click >>>>>HERE<<<<< for more info…………****DONATIONS**** can also be made toward MGO's Legal Defense Fund and/or MGO's Forums >>>>>HERE<<<<<

KROGER

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 22
  1. #11
    I am a Forum User
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Spring Lake
    Posts
    686
    I think these kind of rounds and the Leighigh rounds work really well for the .380 caliber.

  2. #12
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Midland
    Posts
    7,479
    Quote Originally Posted by Jackam View Post
    Kinda like being shot with a .22 long rifle? I've seen the damage that caliber does inside a human body. Those things go everywhere inside, putting gashes in organs, tissues and arteries. There's no predicting that a nipple shot won't end up in the liver.
    Doesn't mean it's a good choice.

    I don't want to stand in front of a piss filled super soaker.
    That doesn't make it an effective defensive weapon.

  3. #13
    MGO Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Metro Detroit
    Posts
    895
    Quote Originally Posted by midlandshooter View Post
    Doesn't mean it's a good choice.

    I don't want to stand in front of a piss filled super soaker.
    That doesn't make it an effective defensive weapon.
    Just so you know, I've read this about four times and laughed out loud all four. Super soaker definitely not an effective weapon against R Kelly.

  4. #14
    MGO Board of Directors

    Trustee


    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Now far south of the city: FAR.
    Posts
    11,433
    Quote Originally Posted by midlandshooter View Post
    Doesn't mean it's a good choice.

    I don't want to stand in front of a piss filled super soaker.
    That doesn't make it an effective defensive weapon.
    if you tell me that you have a peepee soaker, i'm running away.
    so... rethink your strategy.
    DISCLAIMER: Disclaimer. The opinions expressed in this post are those of the author, DrScaryGuy. They do not purport to reflect the opinions or views of MGO, its board of directors, or its members.

  5. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Location
    My house
    Posts
    107
    Ok....but does it penetrate things such as windshield glass etc effectively? Wound channels and tissue damage blah blah...does that really equate to stopping the threat more rapidly or just being the eventual more lethal?

    Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

  6. #16
    I am a Forum User
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Brighton
    Posts
    3,805
    Quote Originally Posted by Citoricx View Post
    Ok....but does it penetrate things such as windshield glass etc effectively? Wound channels and tissue damage blah blah...does that really equate to stopping the threat more rapidly or just being the eventual more lethal?

    Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
    This. Stopping vs killing is a distinction almost none of the general public makes, and it's only marginally better in the firearms community

  7. #17
    I am a Forum User
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,003
    Quote Originally Posted by Starvin48 View Post
    Just so you know, I've read this about four times and laughed out loud all four. Super soaker definitely not an effective weapon against R Kelly.
    Change pee to skunk cover scent.

  8. #18
    MGO Board of Directors

    Trustee Jackam's Avatar


    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Flint, Mi
    Posts
    15,217
    Quote Originally Posted by Citoricx View Post
    Ok....but does it penetrate things such as windshield glass etc effectively?
    Did you watch the video? Not only penetrated but was more accurate on target.

    Stopping power after the windshield? I have no idea.
    "But then there are plenty of gun folks who think no one should rock the boat because it might piss off the anti gun crowd/politicians and cause even more gun control." - Bikenut
    Submissive gun rights advocates need to lose their submissiveness before we lose our 2A rights.

  9. #19
    I am a Forum User
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Sturgis
    Posts
    351
    "Thus the sonic wave precedes the projectile in tissue. Contrary to popular opinion (3, 30), this wave does not move or injure tissue."
    http://www.rkba.org/research/fackler/wrong.html

  10. #20
    I am a Forum User
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Sturgis
    Posts
    351
    Quote Originally Posted by 10x25mm View Post
    This concept might have some validity once the projectile drops below supersonic speed, but above supersonic speed it is the shock wave which actually displaces almost all tissue. The actual shape of the projectile nose above supersonic speed only affects tissue displacement to the extent that it modifies the shape and size of the shock wave which rides the nose of the projectile.
    THE WOUND PROFILE - UNDERSTANDING THE PROJECTILE-TISSUE INTERACTION
    A projectile crushes the tissue it strikes during penetration, and it may impel the surrounding tissue outward (centrifugally) away from the missile path. Tissue crush is responsible for what is commonly called the permanent cavity and tissue stretch is responsible for the so-called temporary cavity. These are the sole wounding mechanisms. In addition, a sonic pressure wave is generated by projectiles traveling faster than the speed of sound. In air this wave trails the projectile like the wake of a ship. The sonic boom experienced after passage of a supersonic airplane is an example of a sonic pressure wave. This pressure wave travels at the speed of sound in the medium through which it passes, and sound travels four times as fast through tissue as it does through air. Thus the sonic wave precedes the projectile in tissue. Contrary to popular opinion (3, 30), this wave does not move or injure tissue. Harvey's exhaustive experiments during WW II showed clearly the benignity of the sonic pressure wave (31). The lithotripter, a recent invention that uses this sonic pressure wave to break up kidney stones, generates a wave five times the amplitude of the one from a penetrating small arms projectile. Up to 2,000 of these waves are used in a single treatment session, with no damage to soft tissue surrounding the stone (32,33). It would be difficult to imagine more convincing confirmation of Harvey's conclusions.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
only search Michigan Gun Owners Forums
MGO's Facebook MGO's Twitter