"Big Boowits bad!" What was first clue?

Status
Not open for further replies.
O

Onward Allusion

New member
I chuckle every time I read stuff like this. Why won't everyone just agree that aside from shooting sports (target, clay, hunting...etc), guns are tools that were created to KILL stuff. ;)
 
D

DaleA

New member
It found that — regardless of the time of day, the number of wounds or the circumstances of the crime — the size of the bullet affected which gunshot victims lived and which ones died.
Click to expand...

In other breaking news...sun hot, water wet.
 
D

DaleA

New member
In all seriousness there is a quote in the article from Gary Kleck, a professor emeritus of criminology at Florida State University, that is very, very telling. The quote is:

"The authors' implied claim that lethality of the shooter's intent has no effect on victim death is bizarre."
Click to expand...
Professor Kleck, IMhO, correctly points out that the authors of the original article do NOT consider as a factor whether or not the shooter's intent was to ACTUALLY KILL the victim. That is, they ignored the factor of whether the shooter wanted the victim DEAD or didn't particularly care. As Professor Kleck says, "Bizarre."

This was discussed some last summer in these threads, which bring up some other, IMhO, idiotic points made in the JAMA article:

https://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=597292

https://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=597447&highlight=jama
 
T

Tom2

New member
I posted it for the irony of them claiming that cheap small caliber guns being banned was a bad idea after all, as they assume that you would prefer to get a .22 thru the heart, and more fuel for the arguments I have seen popping up about banning ammunition. Sort of like the NJ ban on HP ammo. And the pipe dreams about serializing bullets and requiring a license to buy ammo, etc. Just ignorant stuff, like the comments from people that say "hunting deer with an assault rifle? Do they want to blow the deer to shreds?!" as if .223 is .50 in their minds.
 
T

TXAZ

New member
And again we have ignorant (fill in the blank) who might not grab a gun by the safe end.

As a firsthand account to the contrary of his account, here is a picture of a thick catalog shot by a 5.7, a 9mm and a .50 BMG rounds.

OeYoBvb.jpg


The biggest hole was from the smallest round.

The .50 is within the dotted circle in the lower middle. The 5.7 is the top right, the 9 in the dotted square.
 
A

Armed_Chicagoan

New member
.357 and .38 are literally the same caliber, and they have .38 listed as "medium" and .357 listed as "large".

Can't let facts get in the way of propaganda!
 
B

buck460XVR

New member
Armed_Chicagoan said:
.357 and .38 are literally the same caliber, and they have .38 listed as "medium" and .357 listed as "large".

Can't let facts get in the way of propaganda!
Click to expand...

Not literally, they are the same caliber. Difference between .380/9mm is also only .002". Still most of us that shoot handguns literally consider a .357 a "larger" caliber than either. I personally didn't see much of anything that was not true or relevant in the posted article. Most of us that use handguns for SD/HD use the largest caliber we can handle, conceal and shoot accurately. For the most part, we also use expanding type bullets to give us the largest hole possible. IOWs, big bullets are bad to get shot with.......when you're on the other side of the barrel, they are good.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top