"Knock-down" effect of being shot?

[stevelyn]

Rich Davis the president of Second Chance body armor has (does?) shot himself using a .44 Magnum to demonstrate the effectivness of the vests. He would place phone books under the vest to reduce blunt trauma from the impact of the bullet strike. I also remember him taking a step or two back on impact.
Remember however, the bullet is being stopped on the outside of the vest spending all it's energy on the surface imparting more of a push rather than passing through the vest and his body as would happen in a real world shooting.
It would seem that a bullet being stopped on the outside of the body, has more of a dramatic effect at moving that body than one which is passing through even with a bone strike.

 

[Keith]

I've shot well over a hundred large (human sized) game animals and seen many more shot by others - and with a variety of cartridges from .38 special up to 458 magnum and everything in between.

None - not one - was ever thrown back upon impact in the classic Hollywood style. I've seen them drop dead, jump in various directions, fall down, do cartwheels and do nothing at all. I've shot quite a few with handguns; mostly .380's and .45's as a "Coop Dee Grassy" through the neck or head at close range. The head doesn't even bob much when you do that.

With that said, one of my favorite movies is still "Last Man Standing" and part of my fondness for that movie, undoubtedly, is due to Bruce Willis levitating bad guys across the room and into the street with his twin gubmints. Movies are art (even bad or violent movies), and art sometimes requires you to suspend your disbelief and simply follow the story for it's own sake.

Keith

 

[Lancel]

Once I got educated in physics and experienced in hunting, shooting, and the military, I came to the simple conclusion that only a person's or animal's muscle reaction could account for aerial movement after being shot.

Normally, a shotgun's pellets are going to impact a lot more nerve endings than a single projectile.

I have jumped when poked with big stick, did not when shot with little bullet.

Larry

 

[Loaded]

Just remember this. It's pure hollywood. And if you don't want to believe otherwise then believe this... If the bullets/pellets are going to cause the recipient to fly backwards in mid air, or cause him to fall back with each succeeding hit, then too will the person shooting the bullets/pellets will also fly backwards in mid air and or fall back with each succeeding shot fired.

Pure hollywood my friends!

 

[SDC]

I think it's mainly a matter of what the "shootee" is expecting, or a subconscious reaction to try to avoid the shot. Mas Ayoob covered this in one of his post-shooting articles, in which someone was shot AT with a sawn-off .22 rifle, while he was responding with a .44 Special. (This happened during the robbery of a fast-food restaurant.) Even though the good guy was never hit, he SWORE he could feel the bullet impact him, and that bullet knocked him backwards. Afterwards, he was checked thoroughly and no bullet ever actually hit him, but he and everyone else who saw the event were sure that he'd been hit.

 

[Browns Fan]

Most of you probably can relate when I say that I have seen a deer jump straight up in the air when shot, even after a good heart/lung shot.

 

[brownie0486]

Once more for everyones edification on this subject.

Video of 22 - 308 rifle rounds fired at point blank range on a guy wearing a vest.

No knock-down, no knocking him backwards.

He even stands on one leg with the 308 and barely moves on impact at something like 2 feet.

Video of a perp hit by sniper with 308 at 60 yds--guy weighs 250+. At impact in the chest, he slumps to the ground like dropping a sack of potatoes. He was also very dead immediately, and never moved from the postion on the ground.

Movies are movies and real life is not the same. Imagine the movies where the BG's get shot and do nothing but fall down. No through the plate glass window, or through the closed door, that would not make for much excitement now would it.

Brownie

 

[cracked butt]

I read awhile abck in a hunting magazine an article on this exact topic. The knockdown energy idea was pretty much put to pasture. They made a model of a deer with about the same length of legs, same width and length on the footprint of the legs, a torso from a wooden box filled with rags and sand to give it a weight of about 125 lbs. They then shot it with several popular hunting cartridges such as .270, 30-06, .300 WM, .458 WM, and 12 guage slugs. They found that the torso of their deer stopped all bullets except solids from the .458. None of the cartridges knocked the deer over, and only the .458 rocked it a tiny bit.



I agree with those who say that if a shootee is knocked down, then a shooter should be knocked down as well. The shooter absorms even more recoil than the target, as they are also absorbing the recoil of xx grs of powder being ejected from the barrel in the form of gas, or shotgun wads or sabots, Plus the fact that the projectile has slowed somewhat before it hits the target.

I saw that someone mentioned the guy shooting himself in the chest to test his bullet resistant vest and taking a few steps back. If you were to do something painful and scary to yourself such as purposely smash your own finger with a hammer, wouldn't your mind almost certainly be trying to jerk your hand away from the swing of the hammer as its coming down? I remember a college biology class where we had to pick our fingers for blood- I had a difficult time doing it because my finger that waqs going to be poked kept moving away from the other hand that held the sharp poker.

 

[Quartus]

This thread illustrates why it has been so easy to sell the global warming nonsense. (And a whole host of bogus "science".) Americans don't know science. Quite a few posters on this thread clearly failed to learn a few of the most basic laws of science (which I remember learning in GRADE SCHOOL!!!!):

For every action there is an equal and opposite REaction.

Energy can neither be created nor destroyed.

The amount of energy that goes into the recoil of the weapon is EXACTLY equal to the amount of energy that is going downrange in the bullet. The weapon (and the person holding it) have a lot more mass than the bullet, so the velocity is VERY different. But the ENERGY is equal. Always.

There is a difference in the amount of time that the recoil energy is absorbed (by the shooter) and the amount of time that the bullet's energy is absorbed in the target. But the AMOUNT of energy transferred to the target (assuming the bullet stays in the target) is LESS than the energy transferred to the shooter (via recoil) because some of the bullet's energy is lost to the air via friction.


Did you get that? The target will always get less energy than the shooter. Always.

(Well, unless you are shooting a rocket of some kind. Different things happening there.)

Nope. Sorry. No knockdown. There may be physiological effects, and there certainly are differences of perception (like perceiving a pellet the same as getting hit with a 2x4) but nobody is going to fly 6 feet (or even 1 foot!) from a shotgun blast or a hit from a .44 magnum.

And no amount of personal experience or (lack of it) will change that until the laws of physics are changed.


And for those who think otherwise, I challenge you to write a nice letter to a local college physics professor.

THEN argue.

 

[Preacherman]

nobody is going to fly 6 feet (or even 1 foot!) from a shotgun blast or a hit from a .44 magnum.

Quartus, please re-read my opening post in this thread. I agree with you that the effect of a hit alone (i.e. the energy dump of the bullet) is not going to make someone levitate: but what about the examples I've seen with my own eyes, where someone - several someones! - have, indeed, "flown" several feet backward or sideways when hit with a shotgun blast? I know it can't have been the energy dump, but it happened nonetheless!

I advanced the physiological-effect hypothesis because that's what I've been told is the cause of such "flights". I don't know if it's true or not, and was hoping to get further insight from members of this forum. From a few of the posts, it seems others have observed (occasional) similar reactions.

We're not arguing here about whether or not a bullet's energy can cause such a physical reaction: we KNOW it can't, and I think we're all agreed on that. So, given that it's not the bullet, what is it???

 

[SodaPop]

I believe there is such a thing as knock down power. I learned that with a 10 pump BB gun. If you pump the gun once it knocks a can down. The more you pump the gun the more penetration you get, and the less likely you are to knock the can down.

 

[brownie0486]

The minds reaction to being hit.

In the RVN, many were shot and didn't know it at times during the heat of a firefight. Only later did they learn they were bleeding out. In these instances the mind did not perceive the damage which had ocurred and did not react at all to the "force" of penetration or energy dump.

Snipers attempt to take you in the "sweet spot" of the brain stem. If they are successful at this, the body does not even twitch, it's "lights out". Hostage situations where the perp has a cocked gun on a hostages body are examples where if the brain is shut down by hitting the sweet spot the finger of the BG doesn't move one muscle to pull the trigger. Anywhere else and the BG may die almost immediately but not before the finger has reflexed and killed the hostage.

So, if the mind [ brain ] isn't allowed to send a signal to muscles [ a resultant reaction ocurring ] the body just slumps to the ground [ see above about the 250 pounder who droped like a rock at being hit with a 308 at 60 yds.

Brownie

 

[SodaPop]

I've seen with my own eyes, where someone - several someones! - have, indeed, "flown" several feet backward or sideways when hit with a shotgun blast?

The person's upper body may have moved back but their feet probable only moved back a little..... kinda like tipping a tree over.

I would measure the distance their feet moved.

 

[telomerase]

>So all we have to do now is design a phaser-like device that makes all the muscles in the chest spasm (physically or psycologically) and knocks the bg to his butt

This has been done. Two UV lasers make twin ionized-air trails to the target which serve as the "wires" for a taser-type 13-Hertz high-voltage current; it's supposed to have a range of 100 yards or so. But it won' t shoot through obstacles (even window glass, if the dielectric is high enough).

 

[Hkmp5sd]

go back to school and learn what they failed to learn when they were originally there.

Preacherman has stated several times in this thread that he is not referring to Newton's Third Law of Motion (aka Conservation of Mass and Energy). He is talking about the human body's nervous system causing the muscles to cause the reaction.

If we are going to play the science game, let's throw in singularities, space-time and the uncertainty principle.

 

[Quartus]

Quartus, please re-read my opening post in this thread.

Preacherman, please re-read my post. I didn't direct it at YOU, but at those who are still arguing for a knock down effect. Here, take a look:

Sorry. No knockdown. There may be physiological effects...

Okey dokey?

 

[C.R.Sam]

I advanced the physiological-effect hypothesis because that's what I've been told is the cause of such "flights". ....Preacherman.

Nuther variable...Psycological effect.

killed or not...
Some drop like a stone when hit.
Some get kinda violent.
Some of the violent ones focus the violence in one general direction.
Others are more random.

Maby...."Fight or Flight" comes into play for some.
Hitee jumping or flinging themselves backwards, away from the threat.

Even a "sweet spot" hit comes with no warrenty.
Have seen the hand of a detached arm clenching briefly.

No violation of the laws of physics is involved if one takes into account ALL of the factors. Including, but not limited to, psycological and physiological. There is a lot of energy stored in the body.

Sam

 

[only1asterisk]

I know my position isn't popular, but sometime being right isn't.

Quote:
The amount of energy that goes into the recoil of the weapon is EXACTLY equal to the amount of energy that is going downrange in the bullet. The weapon (and the person holding it) have a lot more mass than the bullet, so the velocity is VERY different. But the ENERGY is equal. Always.

Wrong, incorrect, untrue. Most of the time, MORE force is delivered to the shooter than the shootee! Ever heard of a muzzle break? These have no effect on the "ENERGY" of the bullet, but reduce recoil. How ever heard of expanding gas making bullet squirt out of hollow tubes. These gases have the same mass as they did when they were powder and are now moving a hell of a lot faster. In a 25-06 or 6mm Remington with varmint loads, your powder contributes about as much to the recoil as does your bullet. This isn't passed on to the shootee!


Quote:
which I remember learning in GRADE SCHOOL!

Exactly, in Physics 101 you learn that there is a great deal wrong with the "science" you learn in GRADE SCHOOL.

Fact:

I am not talking about making people fly like they got hit by a pulling lineman. (I know this is part the opening post) I'm talking about knocking a person down by bumping them in the right place.

Facts:

A hit to a balance point is take very little force to bring a person down, Far less than a hit to the chest. A person that is prepared is harder to knock down that a person that isn't. Penetration spreads out the force of an impact over TIME.

Overwhelming fact: Pulling the trigger on a shoulder fired rifle or shotgun capable of LIFTING a person in to the air with the impact of a pure kinetic energy projectile that penetrates is going to hurt. I'm not sure we have seen one yet.

My Position: Humans, esp. when moving are unstable and prone to being tipped over and falling down in most dramatic fashion. It takes very little force to accomplish this. When striking a balance point even a penetrating bullet has a chance. When hitting COM, the more powerful rounds have a chance esp. if the projectile is stopped by a trauma plate.

What will or will not knock down a shootee has little to do with what will knock down a shooter. Apples and oranges.

I don't mean to seem testy, but I have yet to post anything that isn't true, and I don't think experience and learning should be ridiculed without defense.

Ask your friendly neighborhood physicist that knows something about the subject. I have.


David

 

[Chipperman]

Last time I was unexpectedly stung by a hornet, I jumped about 3 feet away from the spot.
I don't think the stinger's velocity was very high.

I absolutely believe that a person can be "blown back" but I think it's from their own motion, not the momentum of the projectile.

It's human nature to try to get away from a noxious stimulus.

The cases where people don't notice that they have been shot are cases where they are so ramped up, the "Fight or Flight" response wins out over the pain.

It's not a question of physics, it's a question of human neurophysiology.

 

[Hutch]

Preacherman, I've only skimmed most of the replies on this thread to make sure nobody else has already asked you....

How in the world have you managed to be witness to so much mayhem? I have gleaned that this was on the Dark Continent, but surely your experience has to be rare, even in that violent place. You should undertake to write memoirs, or Lawdog-files-like recounts of these matters. I for one would be spellbound to hear from someone who has "been there, done (or seen) that".

Thanks...

 

[Quartus]

Ever heard of a muzzle break

Yeah, usually happens after a bad porting job or because of an obstruction in the barrel.

A muzzle BRAKE is designed to redirect some of the muzzle gasses rearward and thereby reduce the rearward velocity of the weapon. Kinda like a car BRAKE system reduces the speed of a car. And yes, if there's a muzzle brake the shooter will not absorb all of the energy of the recoil, but the total energy going to the rear will STILL equal the total energy going to the front.

<sigh> Which only strengthens the original point: If the recoil of a weapon is not enough to throw the shooter back 6 feet then it isn't enough to throw the target back 6 feet. BTW, nobody is disputing that people can fall over when shot.

I don't mean to seem testy, but I have yet to post anything that isn't true, and I don't think experience and learning should be ridiculed without defense.

BTW, the quote function is a marvelous thing.

 

[Andrew Wyatt]

If the recoil of a weapon is not enough to throw the shooter back 6 feet then it isn't enough to throw the target back 6 feet.

however, imagine firing a shotgun the same time your legs and most of your upper body stops working. What happens?

 

[Quartus]

however, imagine firing a shotgun the same time your legs and most of your upper body stops working. What happens?

You fall over. You don't fly backward. You just fall over.


Sit in a swing some time and fire a shotgun. (Uh, don't try this at your local public school playground! )


You'll move a bit. That's all.

All Star Wrestling is real!

you mean it's NOT?!?!?.



Yeah, Vic, I think you nailed it

 

[Andrew Wyatt]

a 12 gauge is about as forceful as a medium shove. that'll knock me a bout two feet, especially if i don't have any way to counterbalance myself to stay upright.

 

[Preacherman]

Folks.. It can't happen!!!

... Unless it does happen, right in front of your eyes! As I said before, I have actually SEEN this happen on more than one occasion. I know that it's not the bullet's energy causing this, but what DOES cause it? It's no good saying "It can't happen" when I've seen it happen, more than once, and I know a number of other people who saw it too.

That said, do we have anything to suggest WHY it happens? Is the physiological-reaction (i.e. muscle-spasm) argument valid? Does anyone have the knowledge to address the issue?