Mike Irwin
Staff
You missed, and are continuing to miss, the critical point that Fackler proved, through many years of research, that testing in ballistic gelatin very closely matched how the same bullet would perform when hitting a human.
Ballistic gelatin delivers results that far more closely match actual shooting results far better than any other testing medium -- by a WIDE margin.
It does NOT say that bullet X will guarantee a one-shot stop in a rampaging human.
What it does say is that bullet X, when fired into a human target, has significant chance of both expanding AND penetrating to the depth considered necessary to reach vital internal structures.
Again, no other repeatable testing medium has shown to the same level the ability to predict, with fair certainty, how a bullet will perform when it hits a human target.
You're getting hung up, and are continuing to get hung up, on the "OMG NOT THE SAME SO IT DON'T MEAN CRAP!" premise.
Ballistic gelatin delivers results that far more closely match actual shooting results far better than any other testing medium -- by a WIDE margin.
It does NOT say that bullet X will guarantee a one-shot stop in a rampaging human.
What it does say is that bullet X, when fired into a human target, has significant chance of both expanding AND penetrating to the depth considered necessary to reach vital internal structures.
Again, no other repeatable testing medium has shown to the same level the ability to predict, with fair certainty, how a bullet will perform when it hits a human target.
You're getting hung up, and are continuing to get hung up, on the "OMG NOT THE SAME SO IT DON'T MEAN CRAP!" premise.