lawyer shot/small arms bullet choice

Status
Not open for further replies.
H

HABU

Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2002
Messages
536
Location
Western Washington
No doubt most of us have seen the footage on the hellivission of the lawyer getting lit up at close range. He took 5 .38 bullets to the neck, arm and torso and lived to return to work mere days later.:what:

story and video

I have been toying with the idea of buying a toy gun in the guise of a 380 Mustang. I pack a .45 when I carry and was thinking of a Mustang for easier concealment during summer or when the occasoin demanded.

My question is this: What are your thoughts on expansion/power dump vs penetration with a small calliber? Hollow points may not penetrate well and ball ammo won't do as much damage (necessarilly), but it will travel further.

As I watched the video of the guy getting shot as he tried to hide behind a small tree I couldn't help but say "good thing it wasnt a .45".
 
Where did you hear it was a .38 Special? I looked in vain to find details on the firearm used. I thought it was a smaller semi auto, not a .38 Special.

I wouldn't expect much from any concealable handgun. Shot placement is critical. "Energy dump" in the sense of a bullet stopping and doing extra damage by "dumping" energy after it stops is nonsense. The raw energy deposited by any bullet in this manner can easily be absorbed by the human body. Indeed, you absorb that energy yourself everytime you fire the weapon. Tissue damage is the key. There are only two ways of killing a person quickly. Destroy a key part of the CNS or cause so much blood loss so quickly that shock results. Either way destroying tissue in the right place is the key, not "dumping energy" into random spots.
 
Hmmm...
From local and national TV news, I heard it was not a .38 Spl .
I keep on hearing it was a .22 or a .32 revolver.
However, I keep on hearing different reports on the exact location of the wounds.
Supposedly, the real shots taken to his body were in the arms and a grazing to the neck area.
Inital reports stated he took multiple shots to the head, I don't think that was the case.
If it was just the arms, I don't believe it would have mattered what the caliber was. It was'nt hitting anything vital.
Anyone have the real dope on what happened?
 
I'm most comfortable with ball ammo in .380.

Yah…I know that some of the hp gets decent penetration in gelatin, but gelatin don’t duck behind things or hold it's arms in front of it's self. It takes penetration into a vital blood holding organ or central nervous system to stop a BG.

If you do go with hp, I suggest Corbon. If you go with ball, look for something with more of a rounded nose, because the bluntness crushes more tissue in the wound channel where as the pointy stuff seems to cut a wound that closes up.


Why not look at some of the compact .45's?
 
I am not sold on the information either. When the lawyer got out of the hospital, he was interviewed on TV and I watched the interview. He noted he had 5 shots to the arm and one in the neck. This means NONE to the torso or not he disclosed in his interview. With that said, whether any of the wounds were duplicates is not known/disclosed. Those 6 hits could have been produced in as few as 4 shots where in two cases one shot would create two wounds. So we don't know how many times the guy was actually shot, just the number of bullet wounds. He did not disclose the caliber at the time of the interview.

The shot to the head appeared to be frags, at least partially. He had the big goose egg mark in the center of the head and then a peppered face. These were all scabs when he left the hospital. He made no mention of them as being a bullet wound, although I would guess they are probably splinter and maybe bullet splatter from a round that hit the tree first, and then ending up with no bullet penetration (if these wounds were from the bullet and not splinters). As such, the head wound made for good bloody TV images, but was inconsequential.
 
This video is one of the best things to have happend. There have been people charged for using to much force by having to shoot some attacker several times to stop them. Most juries only know what they see in the movies and think a single gunshot will cause a person to fly back ten feet and be split in half. The shooter in this incident was an ??????? but at the same time did a big favor for all future use of force trials.
 
The lawyer was interviewed on TV last night (NBC Dateline), said it was a .38. He took 5 shots, four in the arm and one in the neck. He was a very lucky boy as the shots to the arm didn't hit any major blood vessals and the shot to the neck missed his spinal cord by an inch and a half. They went into detail about his defensive tactics of putting a small tree between himself and the shooter and moving about constantly. They also went to a range with an "expert" shooter and compared shooting at moving targets and still targets. Moving targets have a much wider dispersion (as one would expect). No mention of type of ammo other than that it was a .38.

I think the outcome of the shooting was a combination of good unarmed defensive tactics, bad shooting by the shooter and just plain good luck.
 
Why not look at some of the compact .45's?
Click to expand...
I have a compacat in the form of a Colt Defender. Its easy to carry and runs flawlessly. It's not practical to put it in a pocket though.

Where did you hear it was a .38 Special? I looked in vain to find details on the firearm used. I thought it was a smaller semi auto, not a .38 Special.
Click to expand...
Like Ron, I saw it on Dateline. They reported it as a .38. They showed some X-rays and I thought they showed film of a bullet in his chest and they commented how lucky he was it missed his lungs and heart. They also showed the film of his neck with the bullet in close proximity to his spine.

Any other thoughts on bullet types in mouse guns?
 
It doesn't sound like a .45 would have been much more effective. The fellow just got lucky. Plus, by hiding and dodging he was thinking like a lawyer :D

That's the way to act if you're trying to avoid getting shot, BTW. If you stand tall and challenge the nogoodnick with the force of your manhood, you're likely to end up DOA.
 
The caliber with the most kills in the US is still the .22. The size of the round doesnt help if you still don't have good shot placement.

I saw a video where a SC trooper put 5 .357 Mag rounds into a man who was in stable condition when the paramedics arrrived, but the trooper died from a single .22 shot which entered his armpit and cut his aorta.
 
"good unarmed defensive tactics"? Try to hide behind a tree? Failing to make a grab for the weapon after it is repeatedly thrust within near-contact range?? eh.
I'd heard / read .22lr, but might have been a writer guessing because the lawyer wan't 'thrown back 10' and cut in half' ;)
 
If the bad guy had moved closer to the tree he could have reached around and shot the lawyer - bizzare that he let the tree stay in his way and danced, but then again, the whole thing is bizzare.

I feel that the lawyer should be given the same gun, same tree, and number of shots and given HIS chance on the perp.
 
BTW. If you stand tall and challenge the nogoodnick with the force of your manhood, you're likely to end up DOA.
Click to expand...

My MANHOOD!?!?
Noooooooooo! Not My Manhood!

I'm sorry, I could'nt resist...:evil:
Yeah, I'm silly, I know...
 
Using the tree assured the shooter that the lawyer was never going to be too far away. In short, the lawyer was never able to remove himself from the danger. Given how the shooter did, the lawyer could have been out of aiming skill distance in a matter of steps, but he chose to plant himself with the tree. He got very lucky.

Why the lawyer never grabbed the gun and why the shooter never grabbed the lawyer are mysteries. Either participant could have radically altered the outcome by grabbing the other and effecting a change in the gun's disposition to causing harm.

Lawyers don't have manhood, do they?
 
I guess I started a thread that begged to get hijacked.:D

My question remans:
My question is this: What are your thoughts on expansion/power dump vs penetration with a small calliber? Hollow points may not penetrate well and ball ammo won't do as much damage (necessarilly), but it will travel further.
Click to expand...

Ballistics are nowhere near as fun as lawyer bashing.:evil:
 
I'll take a swing at your remaining question - For small / weak calibers, I'll stick to ball and HOPE for good penetration. With larger more powerful calibers, I'd use HP, and hope for a more grievous wound channel and total energy dump / no over-penetration.
 
I disagree strongly with the "he should have grabbed the gun" theory. Unless you have special ninja skills this is an ideal way to ensure you get shot, and in the struggle you may end up helping to keep the handgun centered on your chest! Given the handugn could not penetrate the tree, and that the tree kept the goblin shooting to one side or the other, I think it was excellent thinking on the lawyer's part. This business of charging forward to grab the gun is exactly the kind of macho nonsense I was talking about. It's a great way to get killed quickly.
 
It depends on what type of weapon you are attempting to grab. On most semi-auto handguns, being able to push the slilde out of battery by even an 1/8th of an inch will prevent the weapon from firing. This should never be your first option, but in a last ditch effort, or against someone who is not real comfortable with the weapon they are using, it can be effective.
 
I disagree strongly with the "he should have grabbed the gun" theory.
Click to expand...
That guy was well within grabbin range and what the heck, he already has been shot anyway. Cant say what I would do in the mouthpieces shoes, but I was yelling at him to grab the gun.:neener:
 
Gunshot survivablity in the real world is about as predictable as cow chip bingo. I've seen people I would swear are just grazed keel over and die, and I've been tempted to ask some why they weren't dead (wouldn't do it). Once I figure out how to make a Claymore mine look like a fanny pack it will be a moot point anyway.
 
Getting back to the original question...


One of the guys I personally respect the most (he's been in several armed conflicts, is currently in law enforcement, was an armorer in the military, and an instructor in the law enforcement world) haandloads his own self-defense rounds:

.38 semiwadcutters, loaded backwards over very moderate powder charges. He says while off duty, he's more than comfortable carrying his old 5-shot revolver this way. Go figure.




(echoing) Shot Placement..............Shot Placement.............Shot Placement................
 
Originally Posted by Cosmoline



I disagree strongly with the "he should have grabbed the gun" theory. Unless you have special ninja skills this is an ideal way to ensure you get shot, and in the struggle you may end up helping to keep the handgun centered on your chest! Given the handugn could not penetrate the tree, and that the tree kept the goblin shooting to one side or the other, I think it was excellent thinking on the lawyer's part. This business of charging forward to grab the gun is exactly the kind of macho nonsense I was talking about. It's a great way to get killed quickly.
Click to expand...

I am not in the least thinking macho, but I would have attacked the attacker full bore in that scenario. (At least, I like to think so)

If someone attacks you with a firearm, and you are unarmed, (As most law abiding citizens are in California) it seems that you have two options.

1) Get outside the range of the weapon. Obviously the most preferable, and I agree that running away while zig zagging may have resulted in no hits.

2) Get real close, inside the range of the gun. Everything I have ever read about firearms tactics points out that it is a bad idea to get too close to an aggressor with a firearm. One should maintain a decent distance at all times. Well, that works both ways, right?

Lastly, I made an agreement with myself in my teens after having been bullied on a number of occassions. I decided to be like the Badger. I mind my own business, but if someone tries to take me out, I make it as unpleasant as I can for them. It's the same here. I have tried to program myself to attack viciously, if attacked. I think it is a better survival mechanism.

Please note that I do not advocate violence. It is never the best solution. It is a solution dictated by the nature of some in our world. If I can retreat, I will always take that option, regardless of ego.

Oh, and lets not go down the lawyer bashing road again.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top