Welcome to GateWorld Forum! If this is your first visit, we hope you'll sign up and join our Stargate community. If you have questions, start with the FAQ. We've been going strong since 2004, are we are glad you are here.
range & accuracy less important in densely populated areas eg. school premises
If you are walking the halls, range is less of an issue, but accuracy always is.
you really don't think it's possible to kill 17 people with a couple of handguns?
Sure you can, it will take longer, and the body count will be lower due to the differences between rifle rounds and handgun rounds.
Also, it's harder to control an environment with a pistol, you don't have the "spray and pray" option you can employ with a rifle (yes, even a semi-auto) to keep yourself "safe"
sigpic
ALL THANKS TO THE WONDERFUL CREATOR OF THIS SIG GO TO R.I.G.
A lie is just a truth that hasn't gone through conversion therapy yet
since heavier bullets tend to conserve more of their kinetic energy (in other words more penetration & less transfer) wouldn't the most damaging round be lightweight & hollowpoint instead of a heavy & hollowpoint
Wouldn't the most damaging round be a heavy hollowpoint style? As the hollowpoint goes through the body, it mushrooms out, greatly expanding its surface area. The dense normal round could go thru the target, but as the surface area spreads out, it would transfer more energy to the target, just as the lightweight round. The heavier round contains more kinetic energy though, and would destroy a wider swath of tissue.
Too damned bad Mythbusters got cancelled. This would be an interesting one for them.
(And no, what's currently on the air using the name isn't Mythbusters)
Wouldn't the most damaging round be a heavy hollowpoint style? As the hollowpoint goes through the body, it mushrooms out, greatly expanding its surface area. The dense normal round could go thru the target, but as the surface area spreads out, it would transfer more energy to the target, just as the lightweight round. The heavier round contains more kinetic energy though, and would destroy a wider swath of tissue.
Too damned bad Mythbusters got cancelled. This would be an interesting one for them.
(And no, what's currently on the air using the name isn't Mythbusters)
It depends on at what stage the bullet mushrooms. If you get halfway through the target before it does, it would probably do less damage than if it penetrated and immediately mushroomed, yes?
Either way, hollow points are bad news for anyone shot with them, they serve no purpose but to do maximum tissue damage, which is no good for a game hunter, but real good for killing people.
sigpic
ALL THANKS TO THE WONDERFUL CREATOR OF THIS SIG GO TO R.I.G.
A lie is just a truth that hasn't gone through conversion therapy yet
One bullet to put them down, sure, but not to kill. rifles are simply better at killing due to the way they work.
Yep, you can pull the trigger pretty quick, and unless you are firing "from the hip", you will be far more accurate.
Pistols are by definition semi auto, I didn't think you were speaking about revolvers
don't rifle rounds typically have more piercing power? not necessarily deadlier against unarmoured human targets
I may have got the definitions mixed up - I meant handguns (pistol or revolver w/e) that automatically reload the next bullet after the last bullet was fired so that all the shooter has to do is pull the trigger & not touch anything else until they run out of ammo (= "semi-automatic" right?)
don't rifle rounds typically have more piercing power? not necessarily deadlier against unarmoured human targets
Yes, which is why you only need a low calibre rifle, such as an AR-15.
I may have got the definitions mixed up - I meant handguns (pistol or revolver w/e) that automatically reload the next bullet after the last bullet was fired so that all the shooter has to do is pull the trigger & not touch anything else until they run out of ammo (= "semi-automatic" right?)
right.
sigpic
ALL THANKS TO THE WONDERFUL CREATOR OF THIS SIG GO TO R.I.G.
A lie is just a truth that hasn't gone through conversion therapy yet
hmpf......any kid walking out of any class of mine (were I a teacher) would receive an automatic failing grade....you come to school to learn, not whine and moan
In several middle schools you're not allowed to give a kid anything below a 50% for anything. Do you really think administrators like the one Lt.col mentioned will let you? That's the problem I am describing. People often forget that a school is more than the teachers in the classrooms. It doesn't matter what a teacher does if the building's/community's culture is broken.
In several middle schools you're not allowed to give a kid anything below a 50% for anything. Do you really think administrators like the one Lt.col mentioned will let you? That's the problem I am describing. People often forget that a school is more than the teachers in the classrooms. It doesn't matter what a teacher does if the building's/community's culture is broken.
I know my district tried to do something like that. We weren't allowed to give grades below a 50%. I was like WTF...if a kid does no work he/she still gets a 50? What about the kid that works and is genuinely only earns a 50? Thankfully, the teacher's union pointed out that it is illegal for school administration to mandate what grade a teacher has to give a student.
A broken community is what we deal with in my district. Teachers bend over backwards for students, but a majority of the parents don't care. If the parents don't care, how can we expect the kids to care? All of my students have lofty dreams, which is great. Unfortunately, they don't put in the work to attain those goals.
Comment