If you were 5 ft under water, which would you rather be shot at with?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sounds like an idea coming from computer games... where a bolt-action 30-06 Springfield will be a one-shot-kill to the torso, but a 30-06 Garand can't kill unless there's two to the torso. And a .45 ACP revolver is a one-shot-stop, but a 1911 takes two.

not to point out the obvious, but that argument fails when you get to different types of guns in the same caliber. A 1911 and and AR with a .45 upper do very different things.
 
I choose whatever caliber that has a better chance to kill me. Since I can't swim for crap, I'm going to drown anyways. So bullet > water for me. lol
 
Right, regardless of the angle, the .50 as well as the other rifle rounds, were hitting the water destabilizing and turning broadside as a result as would happen in soft tissue, and became structurally disconbobulated (fragmented) in the process. This is part of what happens when the projectile travels at such velocities and is destabilized where the heavier tail end tries to switch to the lead end when hitting something 1000 times more dense than air, water.

Regardless of the angle, the relatively thick/stump shaped 9mm rounds were NOT going to fragment, and while destabiliized (tumbling), the tumble not affecting the loss of energy anything like flying apart does on the rifle rounds, hence getting better penetration.

I would feel much safer from a .50 BMG than a 9mm at 5 ft of depth.


And this explains why in war, when people were strafed in water by aircraft, diving DID seem to work! Rifle rounds are made to tumble, not to mention with sharp points their weight is at the back, not the front, of the bullet, by a wide margin!

The test my Mythbusters impressed me. I only wish they hand used JHPs and some old RN FMJ WW1 ammo (like that 6.5 mm Carcano they had on the set!)
 
I remember the show, but it took this thread for me to remember an employee complaining that her drunk husband went out to their pool and emptied his rifle into it. She was being sued by a neighbor because the leaking water flooded their home (downhill). Now makes me wonder what he had or how true her story was.
 
If it was an above-ground pool and he shot into the side, I'd believe it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top