DEA Agent: Suspect Fired At Me, Bullet Went Down My Barrel

And. . . "Robin Hooding" arrows?

It isn't as hard as you might think. I have yet to use good Montec G3's on such a test - they're expensive - though it would make for an impressive picture. Field points with aluminum arrows? You push the plastic nock down the shaft and swage the two metal tubes (which usually split almost imperceptibly).



This brought to mind the infamous DEA "Expert" demonstration clip from a while back. . .

The older incident the OP refers to happened in Baltimore. Baltimore PD had the gun on display. I've seen it. The police bullet lodged in one of the chambers on the BGs revolver.

Well, I know that folks who post "wild" stories trying to top everybody else doesn't have a chance, but here goes anyway.

I knew an old guy who had an EXTENSIVE collection of Civil War artifacts, some of which he had collected and some of which he had bought and/or traded for. (Collection was later sold to a university.)

His collection had in it (which I saw with my own two eyes!) two lead bullets which had collided in mid-air and fused together. Very interesting happening.

I guess odds catch up when so very many folks are firing at each other all at once.

I do remember the Mythbusters tests. The scope test failed as stated, because they were too close and using modern scopes. After viewers called them on it, they re-did the testing with a Mosin rifle and the correct type scope, and it worked. I don't remember if they switched to FMJ ammo or not.

And I remember them doing a test on a revolver too, but it seems they were trying to hit an exposed chamber, not the barrel.

They do take on a lot of "myths", but sometimes their methods aren't very accurate, or replicate the original event very well. They could do better, but I'm sure the network is more interested in entertainment value than accuracy.

His collection had in it (which I saw with my own two eyes!) two lead bullets which had collided in mid-air and fused together. Very interesting happening.

Click to expand...

Mythbusters did this one too, and succeeded in making two balls into one.

I beieve that Carlos Hathcock brought the rifle and papers that were on the other sniper back to HQ after the kill. It was common practice to remove any pertinent and useful intel items from a kill, if possible. Very common SOP for soldiers in combat. His story may very well have been verified if persons involved handled the rifle and scope.

Not as astounding as it might seem. Reports I have read is that your opponent's firearm tends to be your focus in a gunfight, and if you are not well-trained/practiced you'll shot at what draws your focus. This would likely be more so for criminals.

Just another reason to have a backup firearm, in case your primary is disabled by gunfire.

Mythbusters did this one too, and succeeded in making two balls into one.

Click to expand...

I have seen these at 2 different Civil War museums and probably read about another 3 or 4.

Not supposedly, definitely.

Read Gunny Hathcock's book.

Click to expand...

I did, but it's been awhile and I couldn't remember where I'd read it. I was going to attribute it to White Feather, just because it sounded like something the Gunny had done, but I wasn't sure. (Guess I was too lazy to google it also -- thanks)

Thanks for the link, PSY.... Interesting.....

Here's one from the history books.

FW Mann did this experiment back in January 15, 1902.



The top numbers got cut off when I took the picture but the bullets are in order, left to right.

What he did was shoot a 30-40 bullet out of a .32 caliber Pope barrel that was cut down to ridiculously short sizes (the bullets in some cases actually sticking out the end of the barrel, using barrels ranging from 3/16", 5/16", 5/8", 1", 2 5/8", 3", and 5/8"). He found the bullets, when shot from short barrels and recovered intact from a box of oiled sawdust, would expand from the BASE and flatten out.

Curious as to the effects of what would happen if he shot those IN TO another short barrel, he did so.

What he found out through experimentation is that:

• 
  When fired, the bullet from a short barrel would expand at the base. (This is at RIFLE velocity, not handgun, so it doesn't happen to our slower, harder jacketed bullets we use today)

• 
  That expanded bullet, when entering an unchambered barrel, would RE-conform to the bore of the barrel and come out the other end at bore diameter.

• 
  That expanded bullet, when entering a chambered barrel from the muzzle end, would first re-conform to the bore of the barrel, then AGAIN change and conform to the CHAMBER of the barrel, before exiting the chamber.

Weird stuff.

Just thought I'd toss it out here for an historical perspective. FW Mann was kind of the "mythbuster" of the late 1800's / early 1900's.

But it's not that he WAS AIMING for the barrel, trying to shoot down it.

So it was more of a lucky miss than a lucky shot.

It would be an easier shot to puit a 9mm in a .45 barrel than vice versa.

Click to expand...

That needs to be introduced into the next caliber war.

Bullet fired from one gun enters another gun

There are many accounts of this occuring during the Civil War. I know of at least two instances immediately-

1- You can see an illustration of this in the Osprey book on the Battle of Petersburg (1864-1865). There were many muskets recovered in the vicinity of the Battle of the Crater that had a bullet travel the rifle or musket barrel. One of the illustrated ones was of a Confederate soldier who had fired his minie ball and while travelling down the barrel actually impacted a Federal minie ball traveling up the barrel. The barrel mushroomed (but I dont think burst) approximately midway between the first and second barrel bands. This rifle is still on display at the park museum and I have seen it while stationed at Ft. Lee. At the crater thousands of Federal troops were trapped inside the crater while Confederate reinforcements rushed and surrounded the rim of the crater. The fighting was at extreme close quarters and as ammunition ran out the Confederates resorted to fixing bayonets and even harpooning the Federal troops below them in the crater. You can see this incident depicted at the begining of the movie Cold Mountain. Those scenes are factually accurate.

2- Siege of Vicksburg (1863) rifles have been found with bullets lodged in them perfectly- specifically around the 3rd LA redan and the 2nd TX lunette where there was also severe close quarters fighting.

Given the amount of lead flying and the close quarters I think it would have happened a lot more than just these few anecdotal occurences. Just in most instances the guy with the gun it occured to- probably didnt live to tell the tale. Think of the close quarters fighting in WWI or on the Russian Front.

psyopspec said:

Very cool. I find it interesting that we're not the first to ponder such unlikely events. In most of my gun owning years, whenever my mind wandered to these events I basically considered them damn near impossible. Bullets into barrels, or revolver chambers, or striking one another...

FW Mann appears to have been both a mythbuster and a "box o' truth" experimentalist.

While an initial google search didn't reveal a decent bio of Mann, his book is available on CD-Rom for anyone interested. It would be cool if they would bring this back as a downloadable e-book for a tablet. http://www.amazon.com/Bullets-Flight-F-W-Mann/dp/1879356732

Click to expand...

Yes, he was very much a mythbuster. In fact, here's an excerpt verbatim from his introduction to the book, penned in 1909:

Recorded experiments in the field of rifle work, particularly the unsuccessful ones, have been very meager, and no doubt many of the same mistakes here described have been and are being made by thousands of enthusiastic riflemen far and wide.

A detailed and descriptive record of such personally performed, made with one of the most fascinating mechanisms, the rifle, it is hoped will add to the rifleman's comprehension, and prevent repetition after repetition of the same errors.
...
Keeping in mind the conjecturing and theorizing so prevalent in rifle literature, speculations have been omitted in the following pages, except where they may add to the interest of the reader, and only such conjectures have been allowed as are afterwards either proved false by actually recorded tests, or fully substantiated by recorded experiments.

Click to expand...

(I own the original first edition print of his book.)

I will caution you, if you buy it and read it, that the information is VERY outdated and (if you are knowledgeable about modern ballistics) you will cringe at some of the experiments. (We take many things for granted that he was trying to prove, sometimes with quite spectacular failures).

It's interesting in that his book covers the transition from black powder to smokeless powder; during the process they discover that concentrated ammonia can neutralize the primer "salts", etc. (They were ruining MANY barrels prior to that, due to corrosion.)

Once they get to testing smokeless powder, it's actually fascinating because - as they're able to hit higher velocities, he discovers that alloy composition to shoot harder bullets is required. Eventually he has to transition to jacketed bullets only, as velocities exceed the construction of lead rounds. (They hadn't discovered "gas checking" to shoot lead out of rifles, and other concepts yet).

Issues such as runout, seating depth affecting velocity, bullets of BORE diameter being more accurate than GROVE diameter (which was standard at the time), paper patching being unnecessary, etc all were proven by him and went against the grain of current accepted philosophy.

Anyway I'm rambling. It's an interesting book, but surely not for everyone. It's really only really interesting for a deeper understanding and perspective of how modern interior and exterior ballistics developed through the development and transition of blackpowder and smokeless arms.

(To this day, we're all STILL experimenting with ballistics; we're still debating concepts on the reloading section on this very forum, arguing about various methods of ladder testing, the cause of X,Y,Z variations in whatever, etc.)

When I was taking my concealed carry class the instructor told a similar anecdote. He was on the subject of legal ramifications of a self-defense shoot and how police and prosecutors have to determine whether the defensive shooter had reason to believe their life was in danger. That's when he told this story of a man in a convenience store who was forced to shoot to defend himself, and they absolved him of any wrongdoing right away because one of the bad guys' shotguns had a bullet lodged in it from the shooter. Pretty obvious the guy was threatened!

I can't verify the story but the instructor is a lawyer and I would certainly hope he knows what he's talking about.

I've had the front of a revolver cylinder hit by a Code Eagle during a FOF exercise.

Red goop to clean off.

And. . . "Robin Hooding" arrows?

It isn't as hard as you might think.

Click to expand...

I think it is possible. Think of the billions and billions of shots that have been fired at opponents in wars and skirmishes throughout history. Like the occasional golf hole-in-one, it is perfectly reasonable that more than a few bullets have been shot down the barrel of an opponent. You are, after all, shooting at each other. The sheer number of rounds fired (in history) makes it likely to have happened.