Liver Shot

[Shadow 7D]

Art take a cows liver (its easy to get hence why I suggest it)

punch it
cause you can punch a persons liver, the stomach will deform that far, Dr. touch it every time they do a physical, trace the outline, size etc. that's what they are doing when they are pushing up under your ribs.

So we establish that you can punch the liver
think about a deer, you can make the organs move quite a bit.

Now take the same liver, tape it to the side of bucket full of water, shoot the bucket...
now tell me, what do you see.

 

[ArtP]

You're making me guess about the vulnerability of the liver.

It's already been established that the liver will lead to massive hemorrhaging. Are you saying a bullet passing close to the liver, and the associated hydrostatic shock is enough to disrupt the liver and cause it to massively hemorrhage, therefore causing a slow death by bleeding out through the liver?

I'm not exactly sure I understand your point. No offense.

But if I do, I'm going to start loading up Barnes "X" tipped bullets in .243 80 grain and launching them at 3250fps and hope a shot between the liver and lungs disrupts them both via hydrostatic shock.

Now of course I'm being a "smart-Art". But really, why not, based on that theory?


(note: that may not be fair, since this topic got off on other topics to include hydro static shock etc)

 

[Shadow 7D]

sorry, but if the fluids are transporting the bullets shock wave, shouldn't you see something rather dramatic happen to the liver taped to the bucket, after all the bullets energy, it's shockwave is being directly transmitted to it, in a medium MUCH better suited to it than the human body.

BTW, I never said that the temporary cavity isn't dangerous to the liver, it's actually one of the organs most vulnerable to that form of injury do the fact that it can't stretch and deform like other tissues.

Rather I'm saying that one of the most blood filled, stiff, non elastic organs doesn't seem to pop every time someone is shot from some mysterious shockwave.

cavitation is VERY dangerous to the liver, only problem is, you still have to TOUCH it, have it within the bullets path.

 

[ArtP]

Shadow,

PM sent

 

[Shadow 7D]

But if I do, I'm going to start loading up Barnes "X" tipped bullets in .243 80 grain and launching them at 3250fps and hope a shot between the liver and lungs disrupts them both via hydrostatic shock.

Careful, at that speed you just might make the poor animal explode...

OK, we're splitting hairs

Shoot the bucket, the liver will be fine, MAYBE a little tenderized but not some dramatic damage.

Reminds me of a mythbusters episode where they tenderized meat with C4, lets just say, acid and time do a better job.

 

[beatledog7]

A liver shot would destroy a lot of the organ, rendering it inedible. That would be a bummer.

 

[Bobson]

I've read before that if a bullet destroys the liver of a game animal, it's considered a vital or semi-vital organ and can incapacitate quickly.

From what I know about anatomy, and that might not be much, the only way to quickly incapacitate is to disrupt oxygen to the brain or damage the central nervous system.

From what I've read and been told regarding liver shots on deer (for bowhunting - may be different for rifle, but I wouldn't think so), one should wait four hours minimum (six to eight hours would be best) to attempt to track the animal.

That being said, it is considered a lethal shot; you just need to give the animal sufficient time to expire. A liver shot sure wouldn't be my goal.

 

[JimPage]

When discussions get testy like this ridiculous argument, I usually leave the thread.

I find neck shots (sometimes head shots) are sure stopping shots. I use them almost exclusively. Doesn't matter to me whether it's shock or not that does the job.

 

[Art Eatman]

We know that a neck shot or a heart/lung shot is generally very quickly fatal. Commonly in my experience, almost instantly fatal in a DRT condition.

Sure, a hit in the liver will be fatal, but I don't know how long that would take--and I really, really hate to chouse all around a pasture looking for a dead deer. Besides, I already know almost exactly where the heart/lungs are--and Bambi's neck is real obvious.

 

[GJgo]

At least in elk hunting, a single lung shot can leave you with a very empty freezer- you have to be careful with that one. Bullets do funny things once they get inside, and having to penetrate 2 organs as opposed to 1 can be a more complicated thing for a bullet to do.

I don't aim for the liver, but on a long shot if the animal takes a step forward or you mis-judge the wind that's often where the round ends up. Internet-hunting aside, I can say I've had more meat in the freezer from liver shots than I have from lung shots.

 

[Steel Talon]

Rhino, have you never heard of "hemorrhagic shock"? Let me define it for you. "Hemorrhagic shock is a condition of reduced tissue perfusion, resulting in the inadequate delivery of oxygen and nutrients that are necessary for cellular function. Whenever cellular oxygen demand outweighs supply, both the cell and the organism are in a state of shock."

Now not only do you have "hemorrhagic shock" but you also have "Hydrostatic shock". Let me define this for you as well. Hydrostatic shock or hydraulic shock describes the observation that a penetrating projectile can produce remote wounding and incapacitating effects in living targets through a hydraulic effect in their liquid-filled tissues, in addition to local effects in tissue caused by direct impact.

BOTH kill. As a matter of fact both kill more frequently than CNS disruption because CNS disruption is not a "favored" shot option in most cases. Before you attempt to discredit someones opinion, try boning up on some facts.

QUOTE]

FWIW, This^^^^

 

[X-Rap]

I try to place my shots between the back of the shoulder blade and the last rib. This minimizes the damage to edible meat and results in fairly quick kills. As GJgo stated, things happen and I have often hit liver as opposed to lungs and the results have been very similar so having seen hundreds of BG animals down over the years I can say conclusively that a liver shot will bring one down as quickly as anything beside CNS disconnect.
Admittedly many of the shots I have seen and taken myself have been quartering or the bullet deflected or broke up causing damage to more than the liver alone so we are certainly talking multiple organs damaged in many cases.
Liver IMO is classified as a gut shot but the only one that will usually drop one within the same distance as a lung shot.

 

[BCCL]

ALL deaths occur from lack of blood to the brain "hemorrhagic shock"....."hydrostatic shock", (assuming it's real), cannot cause death by itself, but is only one more mechanism that causes/aggravates a direct injury that results in death by "hemorrhagic shock".

 

[H&Hhunter]

Hydrostatic shock in the classic terms as defined by the Weatherby clan in the 40 and 50's is little more than marketing hype. yes hydrostatic shock has an effect on some animals generally smaller lighter built animals. Hydrostatic shock doesn't have the slightest effect on large heavily built animals. Some of the old Weatherby claims are laughable. "Shot him in leg and the hydrostatic shock from my fine Weatherby rifle exploded the deer's heart." Or my favorite "I shot a cape buffalo with my .257 Wthby and the little 100 gr bullet created such massive hydrostatic shock that it dropped him in his tracks!"

Blow a hole through anythings heart and it will die but it isn't due to magical shock waves. It's due to massive blood loss and the inability of the heart to profuse blood.

Hypovolemic shock is something else entirely and is caused by low volume of fluid in a circulatory system causing massive systemic organ failure. One of the causes of hypovolemic shock is massive blood loss. This is a common cause of death for an animal in a hunting situation.

As far as liver shots I'll just say this. I shot a nice whitetail buck a few years ago. He was quartering away hard. I got liver and one lung. I lost that deer for over 5 hours. Later that day and just by luck I found him again and he was still alive. He was about out of blood and sick but he was still alive.

 

[RhinoDefense]

Hydrostatic shock exists and has been debunked several years ago as a factor in incapacitation. Marshall and his sidekick were proven wrong over and over again. As of recent, Dr Michael Courtney has tried to bring this theory back into the light and is once again proven for it to be untrue, though he tries to perpetuate it on gun forums instead of scientific venues. This theory has been ripped apart many times.

Yes I'm familiar with hemorrhagic shock. Hemorrhage is the wounding mechanism of bullets in tissue. Most people on gun forums mention shock to mean "hydrostatic or hydraulic shock". If you want to get technical and use the four medical classes of shock, then yes. Hemorrhagic shock kills. Hydrostatic/hydraulic shock does not. Hypovolemic shock is the most common type of shock humans incur, but this isn't about humans.

The liver definitely has a lot of blood in it, but look at its function: it's a filter. Why go after the filter when the pump is better? I've made poor shots on big game that missed the heart/lungs and completely destroyed the liver. The animals took many hours to die. Heart/lung shots have never made me track an animal past 100y.

Is the liver a vital organ? Yes. If destroyed will you survive? No. Is it a faster death than a heart shot? No.

There are three targets that are reliable for quick incapacitation: heart, lung, CNS. Stick with those. Liver shots are never as quick as the others. The sentiment on this board is that animals should be killed as quickly as possible. A liver shot goes against the grain with that ideal.

 

[castingdonkey]

My 2 cents, I have seen several animals liver shot. Not one of them survived including 3 elk this year. I would not discount a liver shot for a second unless it was just a nick. A direct hit liver shot is a dead animal within seconds not minutes or hours. I saw it just last night on a cow elk. She was hit way back but didn't start running off just stood there for about 10 seconds then tipped over. I love to eat the liver so I aim for the head or heart but since guys have a tendency to jerk the rifle the liver gets shot.

 

[buck460XVR]

There are three targets that are reliable for quick incapacitation: heart, lung, CNS. Stick with those.

Most deer experts recommend avoiding shooting any deer in the CNS as this tends to multiply the chance of exposure of hunters to the prions that cause CWD. I agree the liver is not a desirable point of aim, but have seen many deer recovered when this was the only vital organ hit. My oldest pulled his shot on a large ten pointer this year bow hunting and thought he wounded and lost a nice trophy. But halfway across the alfalfa field the big buck stumbled and went down. Upon field dressing the deer the body cavity was full of dark red blood with a perfect X from the broadhead on the liver. Boiler room shots have always been the most effective and gives the largest target with the smallest chance of missing. This should always be the first choice when shooting at a deer.

 

[d2wing]

I agree with Freedom fighter 100%. I've shot dozens of deer with a wide variety of weapons and cartridges. There is no doubt in my mind that there is hydrostatic shock related to energy of the round and shot placement. For you CNS only guys, why is Gabby Giffords alive and why do so many people survive serious head trauma? This is not news. Military research has proved this true for over 100 years. For the many on this forum that still think the world if flat, I hope that works for you.

 

[Freedom_fighter_in_IL]

Some of the old Weatherby claims are laughable. "Shot him in leg and the hydrostatic shock from my fine Weatherby rifle exploded the deer's heart." Or my favorite "I shot a cape buffalo with my .257 Wthby and the little 100 gr bullet created such massive hydrostatic shock that it dropped him in his tracks!"

I too find those claims completely retarded and hold no credence to them. But I do have to look at things from an objective standpoint given my unquenchable thirst for knowledge. You shoot an animal, or anything with liquid inside it, and you will have shock waves throughout that liquid. Simple thing about this rule "liquids can NOT be compressed" makes the theory sound. Bullet strikes, creates a wound channel, where does the liquid that could NOT be compressed go? It goes OUTWARD in a high velocity pattern. Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. The high velocity liquid will rupture cells and cause severe damage. How else could one explain the many deer and elk that I have dressed out and seen the liver all busted up yet the bullet struck dead center lung? Makes one think now doesn't it. Anyone that says Hydrostatic Shock does not exist and has no factor in wounding/killing an animal has absolutely no knowledge of physics or anatomy. The temporary wound cavity is caused by hydrostatic shock. Plain and simple. Now those advocating that you can kill an elk by hitting it in the leg and the hydrostatic shock will kill it are foolish at best and are one of the main reasons that the theory is debunked so often. There is plenty of hard scientific data on the subject and it has been proven time and time again.

 

[caribou]

Elders in the Arctic advise us youngins (mid 40's ~LOL!~) that if, in a true survival situation, a Moose or Black Bear is all you can come up with and you have a .22LR or a shotgun with small shot, the Liver is the place to put the shot. They will run and bleed out, but Death is sure and better than shooting the head or neck.

Ive never done so, but I understand the thin skin and a hole through that blood organ will get results within the 1/2 hour.

As well, a Harpoon is thrown on Beluga and large seals is placed in the liver when possible to make a killing thrust and bouy the animal same time.

 

[RhinoDefense]

The thinking behind the hydrostatic shock/ballistic pressure wave theory has plausible foundation (liquid cannot be compressed, only moved or vaporized) however apply that to terminal ballistics and it loses ground as an effective means of incapacitation. The physical phenomenon of it does exist and, as you said, is how the temporal wound cavity is created, along with fragmentation if it occurs. What hasn't been proven to be accepted by the wound ballistics experts and scientists is that it is a factor directly causing the incapacitation of living beings. HS/BPW has as much to do with killing something as the ambiant air temperature during the time the damage occurred.

 

[Art Eatman]

Back fifty or sixty years ago, there was a photo in a hunting magazine of an eland that Roy Weatherby killed with a .257. It was claimed that it was an instant drop-dead kill. The hit was across the hindquarters (ruining a bunch of meat) with an exit wound that was larger than fist-size.

The claim, of course, was for "hydrostatic shock".

 

[bison]

A couple of weeks I hit a 200 lb sow with my 30-30. She took off running and didn't stop for 5 minutes and about a half mile before I caught up with her and put her down. Based on the amount of blood loss I can't imagine she'd have survived more than a few minutes more. Certainly not a clean kill or the shot I wished I'd have made, but lethal nonetheless.

 

[H&Hhunter]

Back fifty or sixty years ago, there was a photo in a hunting magazine of an eland that Roy Weatherby killed with a .257. It was claimed that it was an instant drop-dead kill. The hit was across the hindquarters (ruining a bunch of meat) with an exit wound that was larger than fist-size.

The claim, of course, was for "hydrostatic shock".

Yep ole Roy spun up some tall tales but they sure sold a lot of rifles.

 

[RevGeo]

Well, this has all been interesting in a forensic kind of way. I found caribou's post fascinating. It's not often that we get to hear about true subsistance hunting where reducing the animal to possession is the business at hand, not a sporting proposition.
Most of us in this day and age sport hunt. Sure, we eat what we shoot, but should we fail we will not go hungry. One of my hunting partners lived in northern Canada for quite a while and he talked of natives hunting moose using a single shot .22 loaded with .22 shorts. One old man he knew would get as close as possible to the moose and shoot it between the ribs with the 22. Then he would just wait for the moose to die. It may have taken all day, but the moose eventually died and the hunter's family would have something to eat.

Sport hunting is obviously a whole 'nuther thing all together. Probably the most heavily stressed ethic in sport hunting is the concept of killing the animal in the quickest, most 'humane' way possible. A shot to the liver is obviously going to cause massive hemorrhaging which will result in the death of the animal. A shot to the heart lung area is going to result in massive hemorrhaging plus a pretty good chance of cardio-vascular damage and simultaneously destroying the respiratory system. Three vital systems have been destroyed or, at the least, rendered inoperable causing a death rivaled in speed only by a direct hit to the central nervous system i.e. the brain or spinal cord. Fortunately the heart lung target area is pretty large and relatively easy to hit from a broadside or quartering shot.
But let's be honest here. A large number of hunters would take almost any shot that they thought would be incapaciting to the point of allowing any follow up shot(s) to be placed in a truly vital area. How many times have you been hunting and heard in the distance BOOM..BOOM.....BOOM? Probably some one taking shots at a running animal or trying to incapacitate the game and then killing it with more shots.
I will not choose the liver for my target if I have any other option. Not because I doubt the lethal results of the shot, but because I love to eat liver and onions.

George