 |
What follows is an archival copy of public information. Content herein is believed to be of historical interest to Delta Green fandom and should remain untouched, as a sign of respect for the original author(s). The article must be removed on request by copyright holders, if any. Please improve the wiki with living documents inspired by the ideas here. |
 |
The following material was imported from the Ice Cave. |
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 20:30:45 -0300
From: "Roberto L. Vargas"
There is a group of surgeons on the hospital I'm going to who carry these small tote bags around and I always thought they just carried stuff there. Today I found out they carry guns, because they were bragging of the new SIG Sauer P229 .40 they had just bought and in between the bragging they said many things that I have no clue about.
I'm terribly ignorant when it comes to guns and I hope this things have not been convered before, ( I digress).
They claim it takes about 5 shots from a 9mm (they carried S&W 14+1 9mm or whatever) to make an average male stop if he is running towards you, while the .40 could make it with 2 shots. Stop, as in frozen in it's tracks. I can guess what 5 9mm shells can do as far as damage is concerned, but stopping 75 kg of moving flesh is another thing.
I guess laws for carrying guns change a lot from place to place, but they also claimed that they had licenses to carry since they are allowed to prescribe and carry drugs. They said I could get permission to carry one if I wanted one on the same basis, as long as no criminal record was found.
Who usually gets to carry a gun around, apart from the obvious law enforcement officers and the like?
This is a bit crazy
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 21:00:30 -0400
From: "Duran Goodyear"
So, these Doc's carry the guns around as they are on duty? thats wild… Hope I'm mistaken…
"Doc, I'm going to die, what can you do…?"
"well, this .40 S&W will help you along HA HA HA HA!!!"
ieep…
As for your balistics questions… It has to more with shock in my limited knowledge
(PLEASE IF SOME ONE KNOWS MORE PIPE IN!!)
If you get hit by a bullet… Your going to slow down from the shock of the impact causing bodily damage… Not the Kenetic transfer of energy… Think if you hit some one in the head with a base ball bat as they ran past you… Bam! on their ass.. From the shock… Not as much as the physical impact…
.40's are slightly bigger, around, but more importantly, they carry more poweder behind them, so they carry a bigger punch…
Again, this is not about physical kenetic transfer of energy, but your natural human response to stop what it's doing when it gets busted up…
As for a drug crazed maniac… Good luck… It's called a head shot to drop some one who is really high on amphetimines or something… I don't know the medicine behind it, but it's all about endorphines, and reduced pain reaction…
"Holy shit, who shot my arm off, hey, how long has it been like this…"
The rest of the gang snikers as snake looks around for his arm….
My two cents…
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 22:48:25 -0300
From: "Roberto L. Vargas"
So, these Doc's carry the guns around as they are on duty? thats wild… Hope I'm mistaken…
You are not. That's exactly what they do. They carry the little tote bags around all the time, except in the operating room. I guess they leave them at their lockers.
As far as the bullet question, I believe they were referring to kinetic energy alone. Now that you mention amphetamines, they did state that the man had to be loaded on cocaine. So the guy with the holes in the chest has no startle reflex to think off, or has a weird sensation instead of pain.
Thanks for the info.
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 22:53:07 -0300
From: "Roberto L. Vargas"
Oops, sorry. I think I need to rephrase my question again.
I know how bullets damage the body. What I want to know is how many bullets it takes to move the whole person, no pain or damage to the body comes into the equation.
Say he was a 75 kg dummy with a mass effect of flesh who was standing. How many bullets to push him back if he is running towards me? Roughly.
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 20:57:05 -0500
From: Mark Carroll
<Covered previously, but a quick review>
Bullets do damage in two ways — one is the wound channel, the hole the bullet makes. The second, and arguably more important, is the shock trauma, induced by the hydrostatic shockwaves that occur when the bullet hits you.
I've a friend who owns a H&K compact .40. According to ballistics statistics, the .40 round has roughly a 96%-98% chance of a knockdown when aimed at center of mass. In layman's terms, you plug someone in the chest, and the hydrostatic shock causes major organs to fail, giving them a severe motivation problem. Few drugs can counteract this, though I'd imagine PCP and the various forms of cocaine might be an exception (ever see 'Scarface', with Al Pacino?). The 9mm round has a knockdown rating of between 89-90%. Significant differences, to say the least.
Mind you, my knowledge of ballistics is somewhat limited, though I can dig out my manual on the subject and quote numbers from there, for a wide variety of weapons, if folks are interested (and this hasn't been covered already).
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 19:19:44 -0800
From: "Jeffrey Moeller"
Hooboy.
Gun control laws in the United States vary widely from state to state. The Federal Government bans possession of certain kinds of weapons, but very generally speaking not handguns.
A popular trend in some Western and Southern states has been to authorize the possession of handguns. In my homestate of Alaska, by way of example, you can get a license to carry a concealed handgun. Convicted felons and certain others with a criminal record are generally speaking not eligible (and in fact commit another crime if they do possess a firearm), but the average law-abiding citizen may be packing heat. Permit classes are taught at local firing ranges, and you have to cough up a few hundred bucks. The way that it works in Alaska is that concealed weapons are banned from most public buildings (e.g. courthouses), and from private buildings that post a sign banning them on premises.
If this sounds a little scary, it is. A colleague of mine in Anchorage had a visit two weeks from a little old crippled lady that he was defending a lawsuit against on behalf of her workers' compensation insurer. He ushered the little old lady into his conference room and she promptly produced a .22 (complete with permit, if I understand correctly) and shot him in the back. He luckily was not seriously injured and she pled guilty last week to felonious assault. But it could just have easily been a .45. For DG purposes, the upshot is that there are several states in the US where the answer to the inquiry of an arresting officer about permission to carry that .45 is "my permit's in my pocket." There are many other states though where carrying a concealed weapon is illegal, period. Check your local laws.
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 23:03:33 -0500
From: Mark Carroll
Say he was a 75 kg dummy with a mass effect of flesh who was standing. How many bullets to push him back if he is running towards me? Roughly.
Ahhh, I see what you're asking. Forgive me for being obtuse — getting late at this end.
How many bullets does it take from a pistol, say .40 caliber, to knock someone back? Tough question. For one, it depends on where you hit them — someone running at you, who gets hit in the upper torso could potentially be knocked back by several rounds, say between 4 and 6. As you get closer to the center of mass, the equation gets trickier.
There is no real 'knockback' in most gunfights involving pistols. At best, you've got movement of a few inches, perhaps a foot, even firing continuously into someone. Most movement away from the shooter is flinching, a reflex that comes naturally to someone who's got a big muthafriggin' hole blown in them. Simply put, despite the impact energy, bullets don't have the mass to shove a 75 kg mass of any sort around.
Now, that doesn't take into account automatic weapons fire, say from submachineguns or even assault rifles and true machine guns. Subguns put out enough lead that a continuous stream of fire could, potentially, push the target back, as their body loses the ability to resist impact. Rile and machinegun bullets carry significantly more powder and mass than pistol bullets, as a rule, and thus transfer a greater amount of kinetic energy to the target.
Hopefully, this's a little clearer than my last ramble, and maybe a bit more helpful.
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 01:33:36 -0400
From: "Duran Goodyear"
There is no real 'knockback' in most gunfights involving pistols. At best, you've got movement of a few inches, perhaps a foot, even firing continuously into someone. Most movement away from the shooter is flinching, a reflex that comes naturally to someone who's got a big muthafriggin' hole blown in them. Simply put, despite the impact energy, bullets don't have the mass to shove a 75 kg mass of any sort around.
You can inflict more kenetic energy on to a person whith nunchucks (sp?) then you can with a pistol, or maybe even a rifle…
I totaly forget basic physics, (slightly embarrasing) but if you do the math, you need LOTS of bullets hitting all at the same time to push some one over… let a lone throw them back a few feet… If I remember correctly…
MASS X VELOCITY = ENERGY
Mass is low, velocity is high… then see if you can move the person who is operating under the same rules.
MASS X VELOCITY = ENERGY
High mass (relitive to the bullet) Low Velocity (re the bullet)… if you can beat the ENERGY… you move him…
And thats not even taking into account the whole issue of how the impact is absorbed in to the body…
Humans are pretty spongy things, and then you have the effect of all the energy arriving at one point… Not spread evenly like two hands on your sholders.
Now, you are saying that they are running towards you… thats a lot of energy that you have to beat that is coming straight out you… So, velocity goes up… Making the High mass even more effective…
Love those Direct relations.
Now, that doesn't take into account automatic weapons fire, say from submachineguns or even assault rifles and true machine guns. Subguns put out enough lead that a continuous stream of fire could, potentially, push the target back, as their body loses the ability to resist impact. Rile and machinegun bullets carry significantly more powder and mass than pistol bullets, as a rule, and thus transfer a greater amount of kinetic energy to the target.
Rifle rounds are in general, smaller then pistol rounds, but a fair bit longer… their HUGE punch comes from the massive powder charge that is going on behind them.
9mm bullets are almost a half an inch wide… (obvious to the smart ones, but even I missed that for a while) compared to 5.56 rifle rounds (nato standard rifle round) are 1/4 of an inch abouts… (again, it didn't dawn on me right away how small that is) which is almost a .22 calliber round. But, two things make it much more devistating compared to the pistol.
1. The bullet is longer, so, it can maintain a level flight much better. helping it maintain energy by not having as much of an effect on aero-dynamics…
2. the charge of powder behind the bullet is BIG! The 9mm round has a little more then half an inch, by half an inch of charge ^3… (less cause of other things that need to go in a bullet) While the 5.56 has around 2 inches by half an inch of charge^3..
Lots more charge… and cause it's a smaller object it travels much faster, and farther.
The real damage of Rifles, isn't as much trauma, but the Hydrostatic damage talked about eariler.
When you get hit by a m16 at it's effective range, it basicly sets up a shockwave inside your body, using your natural body as a medium for it to move through your body… Brusing, breaking, and crushing… Rifle round goes straight through… Tearing a nice path… But if your heart De-fibs cause of the shock wave.. that sucks….
Pistol rounds do more damage in raw tissue damage, with bleeding, and ripped things… Rifles make big shockwaves that move around your tourso and screwthings up that way.
Again, I'm not gun shot expert, but I pay attention, and learn what I can, if someone knows more, or knows that I'm totaly wrong, PLEASE let me know Thanks.
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 10:58:04 +0200
From: "Jesper Jhne"
So, these Doc's carry the guns around as they are on duty? thats wild… Hope I'm mistaken…
The U.S.A. is a very very strange place. I hope to visit it some day.
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 16:53:49 +0100
From: Phil Ward
Duran Goodyear wrote:
<Lots of good, tehcnical gun information>
Argh, help, it's like being on tactics-digest again.
Please people, let's not eat up Nocturne's processor time with this one, it'll take forever ;)
Duran is right, no knockback, hollywood aside, any movement in a human-sized body is probably pain reflexes and the like…
Although taking a stream of .50 BMG from an M2 .50 cal is going to knock you about a lot :)
5.56 _mm_ NATO rounds are .223 calibre, almost the same size as a .22 with a lot more powder, and, I assume, length of bullet.
1. The bullet is longer, so, it can maintain a level flight much better. helping it maintain energy by not having as much of an effect on aero-dynamics…
erm, not sure about aerodynamics, but it certainly does increase the mass, and therefore the energy up.
2. the charge of powder behind the bullet is BIG! The 9mm round has a little more then half an inch, by half an inch of charge ^3… (less cause of other things that need to go in a bullet) While the 5.56 has around 2 inches by half an inch of charge^3..
there goes the velocity, and as velocity is squared in Kinetic Energy, a massive increase in KE.
The real damage of Rifles, isn't as much trauma, but the Hydrostatic damage talked about eariler.
Erg, don't mention Hydrostatic shock, ever. Period.
People who do know about guns will wade into the argument and try to prove/disprove it.
Suffice to say the .233 N rounds tend to spin end over end in the body and therefore make a nastier hole in you… and fragment when they hit bone… and go through body armour… you get the idea.
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 16:55:29 +0100
From: Phil Ward
Hooboy. Gun control laws in the United States vary widely from state to state.
Yup, might I recommend the rec.guns web-site, I don't have the URL with me, but they have links to NRA sites which keep an eye on this sort of things, including costs, etc.
PS. It's probably
www.rec-guns.com ?
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 11:59:31 EDT
From: Michael Layne
They claim it takes about 5 shots from a 9mm (they carried S&W 14+1 9mm or whatever) to make an average male stop if he is running towards you, while the .40 could make it with 2 shots. Stop, as in frozen in it's tracks. I can guess what 5 9mm shells can do as far as damage is concerned, but stopping 75 kg of moving flesh is another thing.
Well, reportedly the reason the US military adopted the M1911 (and later M1911A1) self-loading pistol was that the Army and Marines troops in the Philippines were having trouble stopping rebel Moro tribesmen. When they attacked, the Moros were many times "high" on some natural psychoactive drug, and might keep right on charging after taking a limb or torso hit from the .38 pistol that was the standard military sidearm at the time. Yes, the wound might ultimately prove to be fatal, might even kill them in a matter of minutes, but, in the meantime they were laying about with some Real Big Knives (tm) at close quarters! (It was something like the legendary Viking Berzerkers who wouldn't realize they were dead…) Shot placement could still take one down fast with a head shot, but a pistol is not the longest-ranged or most accurate of weapons, and combat is not the target range.
The US military adopted the .45 in hopes that the larger round would — quickly — stop one of these modern-day Berzerkers with a single hit to the limb or torso. Reportedly, it did just that! It dumped more energy into the target, and created a larger wound channel, with more chance of destroying something vital within the foe's body.
Despite its considerable recoil, the M1911A1 remained in service with the US military from then until the 1980s, when it was replaced by a 9mm pistol (the Beretta 92SB-F, called the M9 in US service). This was partly for commonality with NATO 9mm pistol ammo stocks, partly because the 9mm weapon held more rounds and was considered more controllable than the .45. The loss in stopping power was considered acceptable, as the more controllable pistol would (theoretically) permit better shot placement, and the role of pistols in modern warfare had diminished… Interestingly, the US Special Operations Command appears to be readopting a .45 pistol for its commandos.
You'll find lively debates going on on the Gun lists in relation to knockdown and hydrostatic shock, with some claiming there is no such thing as hydrostatic shock! A bullet strike is going to knock the target back (even if he's wearing a vest), but it is unlikely to fling him through the air as sometimes happens in action movies.
From: "Elliot A. Rushing"
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 12:19:22 -0400
Roberto:
About every 40 days or so a firearm thread pops up — you may want to check Davide Mana's "Ice Cave" archival site for more info — we've covered some of this before. You raised several issues indirectly (or, rather, your friends did) that it would be useful to quickly address, so I'll do that as they come up — my apologies if the post is long. ;)
Also, I'm working on only 4 hours of sleep, so if I seem cranky — I'm *really* sorry, I'm normally a very friendly guy. Really. ;)
Roberto (Howdy, Roberto!) wrote:
There is a group of surgeons on the hospital I'm going to who carry these small tote bags around and I always thought they just carried stuff there. Today I found out they carry guns, because they were bragging of the new SIG Sauer P229 .40 they had just bought and in between the bragging they said many things that I have no clue about. I'm terribly ignorant when it comes to guns and I hope this things have not been convered before, ( I digress).
My first question is, where in the US is this? Concealed carry laws vary state to state, but in several states if you comply with certain requirements it *is* permissible for private citizens to carry concealed firearms.
The doctors bragging about their firearms is a symptom common to firearm ownership — gun owners (particularly new gun owners) can engage in multi-hour debates about the particular virtues of their chosen weapon (much like similar discussions RE cars, women, or, yes, roleplaying games ;) ).
Like politics and religion, the values of particular makes and calibers of firearms are subjects open to considerable debate in which reasonable folks can justifiably differ strongly in their views.
The Sig-Sauer P229 is a relatively new (it's been around for several years) semi-compact model of semiautomatic pistol. It can be purchased chambered for 9mm, .40, or a proprietary .357 SIG round. These are roughly equivalent calibers, but more on that later. Sig-Sauer is a German manufacturer known to make highly-regarded quality firearms. However, the Sig-Sauer brand carries a hefty price tag. Actually, this is exactly the sort of weapon I'd expect a doctor or lawyer with money to burn to carry (I used to own 2 Sig-Sauers (different models) myself, several years ago). Several LE agencies use the P229 as a duty weapon — it's not a true *compact* weapon (there are smaller firearms of equivalent caliber out there), so I get the impression that the doctor in question is probably suffering from a mild case of gun-happiness. ;)
They claim it takes about 5 shots from a 9mm (they carried S&W 14+1 9mm or whatever) to make an average male stop if he is running towards you, while the .40 could make it with 2 shots. Stop, as in frozen in it's tracks. I can guess what 5 9mm shells can do as far as damage is concerned, but stopping 75 kg of moving flesh is another thing.
[Sigh. Doctors…]
Forgive me, but this is gun magazine hokum.
Ironically, I just re-qualified yesterday (90/95, my lowest scores ever, for which I am ashamed), so your questions hit at a time I'm most up (and irked) on this. ;)
Several points, and I'll try to be brief.
First, as a general rule never *ever* take your cue from Hollywood or TV regarding what a firearm can do. It suits Hollywood just fine for bullets to send people flying, because it's dramatically interesting. However, in real life, it just doesn't happen. Handguns, by the nature of their small calibers, short cases (limited powder), and short barrels, are regarded by the police and military as *under-powered* weapons. Rifles and shotguns are much more powerful and ultimately more effective (ask a cop what he'd *rather* have), but even they aren't going to send a person flying. They will make you very dead before you fall down, but they will *not* send you flying a la Hollywood. This is simple physics, as physicists on the list will verify.
The "5 shots to stop a man with a 9mm" stuff undoubtedly came from a gun magazine article debating 9mms v. .40s (which, buy the way, sells guns — hmm…. :) ). These numbers are taken from police and military shooting statistics, and sound great, but such statistics rarely take into account the factors that matter in a real, honest to God gunfight. By this I mean the statistics simply count the number of shots fired in a single incident and treat the shots identically, without concern or tabulation regarding accuracy of the shot or the differences in individual targets, which, as we'll see, is what *really* matters. Because of this, such statistics aren't really useful for anything more than a "which is better" argument on caliber, which, is, in the real world, ultimately irrelevant in the same way that the ongoing "Ford v. Chevy truck" argument among southern rednecks is ultimately irrelevant.
Here's the scoop.
There are three ways a bullet stops someone, from most likely to least likely.
1. Mind-set. If you *believe* or are conditioned to think that getting shot means you fall down and die, then you're likely to do just that, whether you're gut-shot or grazed. Military and police agencies spend a lot of time and money training folks to *not* buy into the Hollywood version of guns for just this reason. Let me reiterate — the mindset of the *target* regarding guns and bullets is very important. If the targets thinks "Oh, no, I've been shot, I need to fall down!," he probably will. Often, the common reaction is "What just hit me?," and the target will keep standing. Sometimes, they may not even realize they've been shot.
2. Nerve or brain damage. SWAT team snipers refer to this as "turning off the power". If you are shot in the brain, or if your spinal cord is severed, the "power" goes out, you can no longer power your limbs, and you fall down. For all practical purposes either type of shot in an average one-on-one pistol gunfight would be considered a "lucky shot". Note that with this type of shot *caliber is irrelevant.* So, now the following statistic should make sense — the most common caliber used in completed murders is, *gasp*, .22. Yep. A .22 to the brainpan makes you very dead.
3. Actual wound damage. This is where the discussion on wound size, hydrostatic shock, blood loss, and good old-fashioned trauma shock come into play. Here, caliber size *may* make a difference, since the larger the bullet, the larger the whole (if you *hit* them). Ironically, differences in pistol calibers aren't really all that great in terms of size of hole, but it *can* make a difference. However, small .22 bullets are known to bounce around inside the body shredding organs, too, so it's a toss up. Gun magazines with debates on this topic sell a lot of copies, but it really comes down to this. If there's no mindset to fall, or a good brain or spinal shot, the victim will fall *eventually* due to tissue damage and blood loss. The reason officers aim for center body mass is that (1) it's the biggest target and (2) that's where your major blood-filled organs are.
So, if you're hitting center body mass on a target that's not of a mind to go down (drug crazed, stupefied, drunk, or just tough as hell), the target will go down eventually through either shock or blood loss — when "eventually" is will depend on (1) the individual target and (2) the *ACCURACY* of the shots fired. Shots to major arteries/organs/the heart will bleed out really fast, providing a lot of shock value and immediate blood loss. Shots to the left elbow will be somewhat less effective.
Also, regarding the "force" of being hit with a bullet, my instructor gave two analogies that I think will help Keepers:
1. A bullet from a *pistol* impacting the body strikes with about 10% of the force of a well-placed punch.
2. A good way to think of bullet punctures is that, in basic terms, the wound channel is equivalent to being stabbed with an icepick of the same diameter as the caliber of the weapon. For comparison's sake, a 9mm bullet is slightly bigger around than the "big part" of an average pen. Armor-piercing bullets don't expand, but penetrate further. Hollow-point or other expanding bullets will create a larger, but *shallower*, hole.
Whew. Enough on that. Hope it helps.
By *FAR* the most important concern for the officer in a gunfight is *accuracy of the shot*. Caliber choice is secondary. A single, well-placed .22 shot will end a fight more quickly than blasting away with a .50 Desert Eagle (*THE* gamer's choice!! ;) ) and missing due to recoil.
Keepers may be interested in knowing that, on average, the average gunfight takes place at a distance between combatants of seven feet or less, and that officer accuracy is generally *halved*. So, in an average gunfight at seven feet a 100%-shooting (i.e., firearms expert) officer will *completely* miss a target with *half* of his shots!
Kinda makes you wanna re-think pointblank range, SAN loss, and all that, eh? ;)
I guess laws for carrying guns change a lot from place to place, but they also claimed that they had licenses to carry since they are allowed to prescribe and carry drugs.
OK. *If* they're claiming that the legal authority to dispense drugs inherently gives them authority to pack a piece, *that's* bullshit.
However, some states (NY springs to mind) permit folks like doctors and EMTs to apply for handgun permits if they face personal danger as part of their jobs (say, responding to heart-attack calls in Harlem). However, folks still have to complete the application process, get approved, carry ID, obey a lot of persnickety rules, and so forth.
Individual states differ, so your mileage may vary. ;) But having an MD (doctor) or JD (lawyer) does not automatically give you authority to carry concealed (and thank god for that). ;)
They said I could get permission to carry one if I wanted one on the same basis, as long as no criminal record was found. Who usually gets to carry a gun around, apart from the obvious law enforcement officers and the like?
Check into your local laws — they differ a lot. Usually, if you qualify to apply, there are forms to fill out and fees to pay, and if you have a significant criminal record, expect some annoyance or rejection.
Also, note that the authority to carry concealed does not give you authority to (1) actually use the weapon on someone or even (2) carry it anywhere you like. There are separate legal requirements covering both of those. Some states, like NC, permit concealed carry (at a cost of $100 per year in fees and a lengthy application and approval process) but also place other restrictions on actual carry, like prohibiting carry in taverns, places that charge admission, businesses with signs posted, and so forth. You should see all the "No guns allowed" signs on stores in NC. ;)
Whew. Sorry to go on about that, but something about random doctors arguing caliber choice just offends me in some way. My apologies in advance to all the doctors on the list. ;)
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 17:35:01 +0100
From: Phil Ward
Michael Layne wrote:
The loss in stopping power was considered acceptable, as the more controllable pistol would (theoretically) permit better shot placement, and the role of pistols in modern warfare had diminished…
Not to mention more rapid re-acquiring of the sight-picture and follo-wup shots. Plus the lighter recoil made it more useable to smaller/female soldiers.
Interestingly, the US Special Operations Command appears to be
readopting a .45 pistol for its commandos.
What, the H&K mark 23 SOCOM, most of the people I've discussed it with (apart from hard-core HK nuts) say it's an overly expensive, overly heavy weapon.
Some SF units are carrying customised .45's without all the bells and whistles. Sig P226 (?), and M1911 A1's (Kimber?). Mostly I'd expect them to use HK MP5-SD's and M16 A4 Carbines tho'.
Damn, I perpetuated the thread myself :( going to shut up now, honest…
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 10:16:39 -0700
From: Josh Shaw
A bullet strike is going to knock the target back (even if he's wearing a vest), but it is unlikely to fling him through the air as sometimes happens in action movies.
Newton 101. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.
A round powerful enough (remembering that a bullet is just a mode of transferring kinetic energy from A to B) to knock a well braced man off his feet would also recoil sufficiently to knock over the firer.
Which is why some weapons have to be fired from a bi-pod or a mount.
Even guys hit with .50 cal heavy machine-gun rounds don't fly back like the villain in Hong Kong action movies do, though they do tend to spin around when hit.
(Incidentally, recoil from the 1911 has been severely overstated over the years. It's nothing that a grown adult should worry about. Now the .357 off a small frame…….)
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 16:34:17 -0300
From: "Roberto L. Vargas"
Thanks to everyone for the incredibly useful info. I knew they were full of shit. I'll shut up about guns now.
My first question is, where in the US is this?
I'm in Puerto Rico. Wether it is part of theUS or a different contry (which gets my vote) is a very touchy subject and I would rather not go into it.
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 19:25:15 EDT
From: Thomas Woodall
The laws for concealed weapons in various areas are very useful for DG simulations. Perhaps they could be collected as one entry so as to be easily found. As one of those involve in the earlier gun discussion, I remember well how the theme upset some of the members of this list and would prefer not to repeat it. However, guns are a major part of an agents life and as long as the posts are on target as to their use for DG, we should continue talking about them as well as such great topics as gorilla anal rape and other useful DG subjects.
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 13:20:03 +0200
From: "Jesper Jhne"
The laws on guns in Denmark (as fare as I remember) states that it is prohibited to carry arms without a licence. I have never seen anyone carry a gun so I would think that it is very hard to get a licence. The only exceptions to the above is:
Police, other law enforcement staff and soldiers are allowed to carry arms. Hunters with a hunting permit is premitted to carry barrel-opened shotguns, if they are seperated from the ammo. (When arriving on the actually hunting area, the weapons must be used (of course)) Hunters can get a special premit to use rifles too.
Scouts are allowed to carry knives with a blades longer that the permitted 7 cm (2,76 inches), IF they are in uniform. Ordinary people are allowed to carry knives longer the 7 cm in public, if they are concelled in a parcel as a present. (Making them hard to draw out)
Some of these laws are not enforced with great eager by the police.
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 12:47:39 +0100
From: Phil Ward
The laws on guns in Denmark (as fare as I remember) states that it is prohibited to carry arms without a licence. I have never seen anyone carry a gun so I would think that it is very hard to get a licence.
I take it you mean that no-one you know has ever told you that they carry.
After all, carrying a gun in such a way that people _realise_ you carry a gun is going to have one of two effects:
1) All people avoid you like the plague (bad thing), including criminals (good thing)
2) A criminal marks you as a source of a new toy (bad thing)
Carrying (sort of) openly is a little like firing a warning shot, it tends to polarise the response of the person in question. They'll definitely do something, whether it's bad (fire back), or good (give up), is in the hands of fate.
I believe hostungs are allowed to be carried by hunters in the country (UK), but they have to carry them broken (double-barrels only here, no semi's or pumps any more, I believe), when they are anywhere near the rest of the public in general.
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 14:21:09 +0200
From: "Jesper Jhne"
I take it you mean that no-one you know has ever told you that they carry.
Hmmm, maybe I didn't make myself very clear here. What I meant was that no security guards and the likes carry guns.
After all, carrying a gun in such a way that people _realise_ you carry a gun is going to have one of two effects:
1) All people avoid you like the plague (bad thing), including criminals (good thing)
Which is the one you would like if you were a security guard. As you later state.
(double-barrels only here, no semi's or pumps any more, I believe)
The same goes for Denmark, just double-barrels.
On the illegal marked on the other hand you can get all the stuff you like. (Even knives over 7 cm :-))
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 14:00:54 +0100
From: Phil Ward
Hmmm, maybe I didn't make myself very clear here. What I meant was that no security guards and the likes carry guns.
Oh, I see…..
Ours either, ours are lucky if they get helmets with clear face-shields, and those are only the ones guarding securicorps vehicles (for picking up money from shops/banks, etc).
On the illegal marked on the other hand you can get all the stuff you like. (Even knives over 7 cm :-))
Yeah, snap, I think we have a 5cm blade limit in public (anyone?), but there's a shop in town that'll sell me swords, etc, wouldn't sell them to an indian friend who's into armed martial arts, but I could buy any time….
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 14:38:05 +0100
From: Phil Ward
I believe hostungs are allowed to be carried by hunters…. (Cut)
Please let us not get into a long thread about the damage / stopping power of different types of hostungs. Hostungs are all incredibly dangerous: in Australia they are only allowed on indoor ranges.
Heh, you're probably thinking about 12 gauge hostungs, OTOH, 20 gauge hostungs and those little .410 jobs are relatively painless. In fact, I'm looking at the damage from shooting myself in the foot with one just a few minutes ago….
From: Shane Ivey
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 08:41:16 -0500
The dreaded Alabama hostung, while as powerful as its Australian counterpart, is notoriously difficult to house-train and must be taken for regular walks in a specially-prepared hostung-run outside. If only our hostungs could reliably be kept indoors!
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 15:23:06 +0100
From: Phil Ward
The dreaded Alabama hostung, while as powerful as its Australian counterpart, is notoriously difficult to house-train and must be taken for regular walks in a specially-prepared hostung-run outside. If only our hostungs could reliably be kept indoors!
At the risk of wasting bandwidth….
"Aha, Alabama Hostung, so we meet again! And once again I shall prove that there is nothing you can possess that I cannot take from you."
Or something like that….
From: Robert Thomas
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 16:28:29 GMT0BST
I believe hostungs are allowed to be carried by hunters…. (Cut)
Could someone reply off list and explain what a 'hostungs' is /are? I'm baffled.
From: Christian Conkle
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 10:14:56 -0700
hostungs… shotguns… MY GOD! IT'S SO CLEAR TO ME NOW!! THE SHOCK! THE HORROR! THE REVELATION OF THE NATURE OF THE INFINITE AND GODLESS COSMOS!
(pant pant) sorry, failed my SAN check there. I'll just writhe here in creepy realization for a while.
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 13:34:28 -0400
From: Graeme Price
Adam wrote:
Factoid: My local hero, King Arthur Pendragon, is a practising druid and had his ceremonial weapon, Excalibur, confiscated by the Metropolitan Police whilst weaving it around at a protest demonstration, despite warnings from the rozzers. Mr. Pendragon, who believes he is a reincarnation of his namesake, eventually got his sword back from the authorities after claiming it was a religious artefact, and that Excalibur couldn't be dangerous because it was blunt.
Figures. After all, sticking it in that stone all the time couldn't have done anything for the edge on it!
Relatedly, does the Sikh community in the UK still have religious exemptions for their long daggers? I know this was a moot point a few years ago, but don't know if it has been resolved yet. (shudder: this brings back memories about a campaign I played in a few years ago which featured a cultist-run curry house which had an unusual recipe for beef vindaloo and a rather strangely stocked meat freezer. Said resturant eventually met a nasty fate at the hands of a runaway petrol tanker late one evening).
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 17:41:22 -0000
From: "Crossingham, Adam"
Phil Ward gets sucked into another gun thread:
I believe hostungs are allowed to be carried by hunters in the country (UK), but they have to carry them broken (double-barrels only here, no semi's or pumps any more, I believe), when they are anywhere near the rest of the public in general.
Don't know about a UK requirement for shotguns to carried broken open and unloaded - I always thought that was common sense. In the UK, semiautomatic shotguns were banned after the Hungerford shootings, but pump-action shotguns remained legal. However the magazine capacity is restricted to two cartridges capacity by law. That means any pump action that fires more than 3 shots (2 in the mag, and 1 chambered) is illegal.
All legal firearms have to be locked in a gun safe whilst being transported (I think), with the ammunition in a different container, and locked in a gun cabinet when not being used or transported. The Home Office have a quite good web page on UK firearm laws.
Yeah, snap, I think we have a 5cm blade limit in public (anyone?),
In the UK, 2"/apx 5cm or less is legal. Note this is _carrying_ a blade 2" or less, not just displaying in public. Anything more is illegal unless you have a good reason to have the blade (trade purposes usually). This means if the police stop and search you, your possessions or your vehicle and discover a blade longer than 2", and you do not have a legitimate reason (note self-defence is not considered a legitimate reason by UK authorities) to have it, such as a butcher on his way to his abattoir, then the police can do you for possession of a dangerous weapon. Theoretically this would include larger penknives and such. I'm not sure how rigorously the police pursue this though. And strangely enough in the weird UK world, selling and purchasing large vicious hunting/combat knives isn't illegal, just the carrying and use of.
Historical re-enactors get round the problem by putting plastic bags over the blades, spears etc. when travelling in public, which they take off when they get to the display. And the blades of such weapon are usually blunt, so they cannot be classified as dangerous weapons.
Factoid: My local hero, King Arthur Pendragon, is a practising druid and had his ceremonial weapon, Excalibur, confiscated by the Metropolitan Police whilst weaving it around at a protest demonstration, despite warnings from the rozzers. Mr. Pendragon, who believes he is a reincarnation of his namesake, eventually got his sword back from the authorities after claiming it was a religious artefact, and that Excalibur couldn't be dangerous because it was blunt.
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 22:51:09 +1000
From: Rob Shankly
Phil Ward wrote:
(Cut)
I believe hostungs are allowed to be carried by hunters….
(Cut)
Please let us not get into a long thread about the damage / stopping power of different types of hostungs. Hostungs are all incredibly dangerous: in Australia they are only allowed on indoor ranges.
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 08:46:06 +0900
From: "David Farnell"
Relatedly, does the Sikh community in the UK still have religious exemptions for their long daggers?
Dunno about the UK, but there's certainly no exemption in Japan, which also has strict controls on knives. (My friend Gurmit isn't bothered by it—he's a very "when in Rome" kind of guy, although he does wear his turban everywhere.)
Knife rules in Japan: "It's against the law to carry a knife with a blade longer than 6cm without a legitimate business reason, etc,; to carry about a knife even with its blade 6cm or shorter without a legitimate reason." (from Police of Fukuoka '98)
Longer knives fall under the sword-control laws, I believe. One is actually required to get a license to own a sword in Japan. It's possible for resident aliens to get a license, but don't even bother asking about getting a gun license. I suspect the rules on guns are similar to the current UK rules, but probably even more restrictive in some ways. Still, there are a few hunters about—I remember the police calling them into service when a small town to the east got invaded by wild boars last year. The cops handed out tranq-dart guns and they and the deputized hunters went pig hunting.