OT - Re: [SGVLUG] hp tech support! - take this!!!

[Dustin Laurence]

On Thu, Jul 12, 2007 at 03:23:15PM -0700, matti wrote:

What is it with the Linux-firearms overlap?

> Thus I believe the logic is to disable the
> opponent as quickly as possible with a firearm
> or other weapon.

In general I agree, but this argues *against* the small-caliber round.
A 7.62 is just more likely to cause immediate incapacitation than a
5.56, though I'm not sure by how much.  But that's in some sort of
imaginary ideal world--the extra ammo means sometimes you get to shoot
without getting shot back, or at least it takes fewer C-130s and trucks
to keep the troops supplied.  The 5.56 is presumably the army's best
shot at balancing those considerations.  Lord knows that they've missed
both ways--the 7.62 may have been too much gun but the .38, the .30-40,
and the .30 carbine all proved underpowered.  It must be a hard
balancing act.

> Small caliber, high velocity ammo...
> --------------------------------------
> 
> remember KE = M*V^2

Remember that this number is very deceptive--kinetic energy is a poor
predictor of what will cause the complex physiological phenomenon of
shock (otherwise, we'd all hunt moose and bear with cartridges more like
a 220 Swift or 25-06).  IIRC momentum (MV) doesn't quite do it either
(there's no special reason why the fundamental quantities of physics
should predict something as complex as shock).  I've seen people attempt
to make empirical estimates of what k should be for M*V^k to be the best
predictor, but I don't recall if they could agree on a value.

A 220 Swift (a favorite of mine) might actually have some utility on big
game, but I gather that most bullets expand too fast and also that
people say it's too unpredictable on large game.  I knew a varmiter who
absolutely swore by it on coyote, though.  He was accurate out to
several hundred yards; I think it only shot a couple of inches low at
300 yards. :-)

Also don't forget that it matters a great deal where you think you're
going to be fighting--small high-velocity rounds are easily deflected by
brush.

And finally, if we ignore practicality at longer ranges and such nothing
has ever been much better than a 12-gauge with a good load of double or
triple-ought buck. :-)  If I really thought I needed some home defense
heat, a simple Mossberg or Remington with the shortest legal barrel and
widest open choke I could get would be my choice (though I don't think
you can legally have a gun that will get much expansion at home defense
ranges anyway, so it doesn't matter), probably loaded with something
*much* lighter than triple-ought buck so as to minimize penetration.  If
I have to explain to a jury that I was acting legitimately in self
defence, I do *not* want to have to explain why I was using a round in
the city that went through my wall, a couple more houses, and an
innocent bystander or two, nor do I want to know that I hit anything but
my target no matter what the jury thinks about it.  Shot is deadly
enough at home-defense ranges--I know, we had to look at slides of
people hit by shotguns in hunter's safety when I was twelve (I hope they
still do that, too--if you're not old enough to see that you're not old
enough to hunt).  Why would you endanger anyone you don't have to?

I'm awfully glad I don't need to do that, though.  I don't even own a
weapon that is particularly suitable for defense.  The only time I ever
regretted that was long ago, in the last LA riots.  I may have loaded
the Mauser that time, I can't recall.

> with the AK74, M16 rounds, the round starts
> to tumble sooner, expending the energy in the
> target, the AK74 round being particularly
> exceptional in it's tumbling early on.

I knew the AK74 was very good at this--I didn't know the 5.56 was
designed to do it as well however.  I think my theory is probably fairly
dead.  Thanks for the reality check.

> (not, this also makes it less good for
> penetration.. )

That's just as true for expanding bullets.

> 5.45x39mm (AK 74 - new version of AK 47 used in afghanistan)
> http://www.firearmstactical.com/images/Wound%20Profiles/AK-74%20545x39.jpg

Wow.  That's *much* faster tumbling.  I wonder if they compromised
accuracy with such an unstable bullet?  Not that it matters in typical
usage anyway.

The moral of the story is that I was probably wrong--the real answer is
probably that they've gotten back much of the effect of mushrooming
bullets with the instability, so "humane bullets" aren't that much of a
handicap.  I'd like to see a comparison with genuine soft-point or
hollow-points, though.

> note - the NEW armoured vests which the US troops are wearing
> are capable of stopping penetration of even the 7.62x51mm round 
> IF it hits the most protected spot.

Yah?  I knew they were getting better.  At one point the jackets were
filled with something heavy like glass powder or something, weren't
they?

Dustin

-- 
    "Intolerance?  The *truth* is intolerant." -- le Faux

The small binary attachment on every message I send is my PGP digital
signature, not a virus.  If you don't know what that is, you can ignore it.
If you do, my keyserver is pgp.mit.edu.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://www.sgvlug.net/pipermail/sgvlug/attachments/20070712/6a908d05/attachment.bin