Is it true that only the meplat of a handgun bullet causes wounding in a body?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ok, then clearly there is no additional wounding possibilities caused by pressures exerted on fluids displaced within a body caused by bullets moving rapidly through them. Therefore damage I’ve observed with the ME (at both rifle and handgun autopsies) was strictly caused by the cutting and crushing of tissues by the bullet alone.... even if it was not directly in the bullets path. This area of damage was far greater with rifle bullet impacts, but it was also present to a lesser degree with handgun rounds.

So despite what was seen; I didn’t see any additional tearing of nerves, tissue and vessels (despite their natural elasticity).
I didn’t see any evidence of temporary displacement of organs/tissues by such tearing.
Meaning that what was observed...was not really there.

I have never said that a 6” hole is always blown through stuff by a handgun, all I said is there is going to be energy transfer to fluid filled “whatever” made by a bullet passing through. This varies by speed, diameter, bullet style, etc. It may be great and easily seen, as in shooting a water jug, it may be minor, as in a gut shot man shot with a .25, but it’s there at some level or another.

As for the moment of Zen;

A pebble now thrown into the water makes a splash and larger ripples, one fired into the water at 2,700 fps, greater still. o_O


We can all believe what we want to, it’s a free country. :thumbup:

Stay safe.
 
Sorry but your 45acp bullet speed is way off. 850fps works out to 579 mph not 1,240 mph.

https://www.google.com/search?q=850+feet+per+second+in+miles+per+hour&oq=850+foot+per+second++&aqs=chrome.1.69i57j0i13i30j0i22i30l8.14345j0j15&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

The math is pretty simple. Just multiply the speed of FPS times 3600, the amount of seconds in an hour. Then divide by 5280 the amount of feet in a mile.

A 30-06 bullet going 2700fps times 3600 = 9,720,000 feet divided by 5280 = 1,840.9 mph.

Two other methods are to multiply your FPS by 0.6818 and also by divide the fps by 1.467.
You’re right, I multiplied by 1.46. :thumbup:

Stay safe.
 
All I know is being shot with a .22 LR or anything bigger sucks. And meplat aside, tissue damage really doesn't matter as much as what has been plugged. Livers, kidneys, lungs, artery's and veins, etc, etc, don't do well at all when punctured by anything. And a meplat really doesn't mean much when breaking a bone. Shattered is shattered. Sometimes things can be over thought.
 
All I know is being shot with a .22 LR or anything bigger sucks. And meplat aside, tissue damage really doesn't matter as much as what has been plugged. Livers, kidneys, lungs, artery's and veins, etc, etc, don't do well at all when punctured by anything. And a meplat really doesn't mean much when breaking a bone. Shattered is shattered. Sometimes things can be over thought.
I agree to a point.
Shot placement is key.
But I have shot animals with a .452 tcfp, .358 WFN, a .401 tcfp, and a .358 rnfp.
All three did the job with various levels of speed.
The .358 WFN left a bigger wound channel than the .452 tcfp. Velocities were in the 1700-1900 fps range.
This was a small test sample. But I did notice a similar effect from the tcfp and WFN. Both designs leave a clean drilled hole. The RNFP doesn't leave as nice of a hole for blood to leak from.
 
A pebble dropped in a puddle will cause wave action, and one can see it, but it doesn't do anything

True, because the puddle is not contained, energy is disipated in all directions. We are talking about fluids contained/sealed in a body. If the container is breached by a "pebble" moving at the discussed speeds there will be HYDRO-static shock to the degree of the speed of the "pebble"
 
Gel may not reflect what happens to tissue with higher velocity handgun rounds like 10mm and 357 Sig.
The generalization that handgun bullets are not fast enough to cause damage beyond what they contact, mythbusted.
Unlike the doctors who "can't tell a difference"

Inelastic soft tissues such as liver, kidney, pancreas, spleen and brain, do not tolerate being stretched by the temporary cavity and experience permanent disruption beyond tissues that are directly contacted and crushed by a penetrating handgun bullet.

Additionally, elastic tissues can also experience permanent disruption beyond what is contacted and crushed by a penetrating handgun bullet. This additional damage is dependent on the size of the structure or if it's ability to stretch is restricted (intercostal soft tissues or a heart full of blood just before it contracts).

These facts are well documented in professional wound ballistics literature.
 
I don't think you will get a "hydrostatic shock" effect from a pistol, but I don't believe there's a specific, precise speed required for some additional damage to occur, otherwise a .357 Maximum impacting at 1600 would act no different than a .38 Special at 800. Logically it would depend on how far and fast the tissue stretches which would depend on various factors, not just a velocity barrier. Some of Dr. Fackler's thoughts are outdated, this sounds very much like Jeff Cooper, for example:

r0Y1F6O.png
 
Ok, then clearly there is no additional wounding possibilities caused by pressures exerted on fluids displaced within a body caused by bullets moving rapidly through them. Therefore damage I’ve observed with the ME (at both rifle and handgun autopsies) was strictly caused by the cutting and crushing of tissues by the bullet alone.... even if it was not directly in the bullets path. This area of damage was far greater with rifle bullet impacts, but it was also present to a lesser degree with handgun rounds.

So despite what was seen; I didn’t see any additional tearing of nerves, tissue and vessels (despite their natural elasticity).
I didn’t see any evidence of temporary displacement of organs/tissues by such tearing.
Meaning that what was observed...was not really there.

I have never said that a 6” hole is always blown through stuff by a handgun, all I said is there is going to be energy transfer to fluid filled “whatever” made by a bullet passing through. This varies by speed, diameter, bullet style, etc. It may be great and easily seen, as in shooting a water jug, it may be minor, as in a gut shot man shot with a .25, but it’s there at some level or another.

As for the moment of Zen;

A pebble now thrown into the water makes a splash and larger ripples, one fired into the water at 2,700 fps, greater still. o_O


We can all believe what we want to, it’s a free country. :thumbup:

Stay safe.


Aside from the visuals you saw that you didn't see, that Newton hack touched on that notion in one his best selling fictional books.
 
The effects of a bullet mostly depends on what tissue it hits but in all likelihood no two individuals will react the exact same. My son is an E.R. doctor and he had told me about something that had puzzled him, a 9mm Luger bullet that was stuck in a 19 year old patients spine after entering from the front of the body. He had said on an older patient it would have easily broken the spine and been lethal. He also told me, that he learnt not to guess anymore which bullet wound would be fatal without surgery. Patients that were responsive, strong and whom he had given a high chance of survival did not make it out of surgery, while some with multiple gun shot wounds and collapsed lung survived and recovered. In all cases examined by him FMJ were used, or .22 l.r. and most were gang related or suspected to be.
 
Hydrostatic; not staticshock or shockstatic

Referring to the hydro being static; not the shock beng static.

The “static” in “Hydrostatic shock” refers to a fluid which is not in motion and acted on by an outside force. “Hydrodynamic shock” would refer to the pressure force of a fluid in motion impacting on an outside body in its path.


Hydrodynamic shock could be such as sending water down a tube and the impact that occurs at the 1st elbow.

Hydrostatic shock could be such as a tube full of static toothpaate being squeezed and popping open the flip top.
 
Last edited:
Be that as it may, it doesn't change the principle.

Tube of tooth paste dropped off tall building work for you?

https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/mechanical-shock

ETA: The tooth paste lid popping open is caused by hydrodynamic shock of the tooth paste against the lid which was caused by the hydrostatic shock of the container of static tooth paste smashing into the ground or via a hammer etc
 
Last edited:
So then those "millions laying in the ground" is anecdotal evidence?
I didn't write "anecdotal evidence", I wrote "anecdotal statement" in response to your posting "millions laying in the ground". You have no factual evidence to support your theory those millions were killed by small arms fire.


I'm sure they might disagree if still living.
Sure, they'll probably say they were killed by artillery fire.


But how about you speak to a soldier that earned a Purple Heart getting shot by a FMJ bullet?
Which actually throws ice cold water on your theory.


I assure you none of them liked it. And I once served with a guy shot three different times. He didn't like any of the three and only survived because of modern medicine and helicopters.
Whether they "liked" getting shot is nonsensical blather. It has nothing to do with anything. But thanks for proving my point.....FMJ certainly isn't the best projectile for a one stop shot.
 
Diagrams of .22 LR 40gr, .38 Spl 158gr, and .30 Carbine 110gr (all solid round nose flat base bullet types) through ballistic gel show the bullets flipping 180° midpath and ending up stopped base ackwards. In those cases, that implies the whole bullet contributes to the wound channel.
 
There is nothing static about shock.

Yep.

Speaking as an engineer, I've always thought the term "hydrostatic shock" was contradictory. Almost (gasp) like someone threw together a couple fancy words to get a fancy sounding term, which they then assigned an ambiguous definition to.

I mean, what with "hydrostatic" meaning the study of fluids at rest...being in a stable equilibrium.

A better term would have been "hydrodynamic shock".

It certainly bears absolutely no resemblance to "hydrostatic pressure testing", that's for sure.
 
It depends on the speed, shape and construction of the bullet as well as the target.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top