13-year old not allowed to fly American flag at school.

[Man Afraid of his Shoes]

FMJ are designed more to wound than kill....

Full Metal Jacket rounds were developed so that the bullet can be fired at higher velocities without dorking up the barrel. The fact that they do less damage, for the most part, than soft or hollow point bullets is secondary. I've heard the whole "fmj's are designed to wound thus taking three people out of the fight instead of one" myth forever, but I've never once seen any evidence to back it up. Same thing with "Hydrostatic Shock" killing people after being shot in the hand.

 

[Subcommander R.]

FMJ are designed more to wound than kill....

Full Metal Jacket rounds were developed so that the bullet can be fired at higher velocities without dorking up the barrel. The fact that they do less damage, for the most part, than soft or hollow point bullets is secondary. I've heard the whole "fmj's are designed to wound thus taking three people out of the fight instead of one" myth forever, but I've never once seen any evidence to back it up. Same thing with "Hydrostatic Shock" killing people after being shot in the hand.

Historically, its a matter of military doctrine. Whether that was the first intent or not, it was a major factor. Wounding is preferable to death because it is more demoralizing and it ties up resources to get the wounded to the rear. Thats a huge reason for it. Soft points do a hell of a lot more damage (and are probably cheaper to produce) but take a look at WW2. For example, the Soviets didn't use them and they never signed the Geneva Convention.

If you don't believe the results, get two watermelons. Buy a box of soft point and a box of FMJ. Then fire them. You'll find that the FMJ wound is much smaller.

Hydrostatic shock is a bit iffy. I have no doubt that its effective on chest shots, but that is probably about it.

 

[Man Afraid of his Shoes]

FMJ are designed more to wound than kill....

Full Metal Jacket rounds were developed so that the bullet can be fired at higher velocities without dorking up the barrel. The fact that they do less damage, for the most part, than soft or hollow point bullets is secondary. I've heard the whole "fmj's are designed to wound thus taking three people out of the fight instead of one" myth forever, but I've never once seen any evidence to back it up. Same thing with "Hydrostatic Shock" killing people after being shot in the hand.

Historically, its a matter of military doctrine. Whether that was the first intent or not, it was a major factor. Wounding is preferable to death because it is more demoralizing and it ties up resources to get the wounded to the rear. Thats a huge reason for it.

Again, I've heard people say that for years, but I've never seen any evidence that any of that is the reason for it.

Soft points do a hell of a lot more damage (and are probably cheaper to produce) but take a look at WW2. For example, the Soviets didn't use them and they never signed the Geneva Convention.

Hague Convention.

If you don't believe the results,

I do believe the results. I just don't believe it's by design.

...get two watermelons. Buy a box of soft point and a box of FMJ. Then fire them. You'll find that the FMJ wound is much smaller.

Maybe with handguns, but I'll guarantee you if you do that experiment with a military rifle, it wouldn't make a bit of difference on a watermelon.

 

[Subcommander R.]

Again, I've heard people say that for years, but I've never seen any evidence that any of that is the reason for it.

Hague Convention.

I do believe the results. I just don't believe it's by design.

Maybe with handguns, but I'll guarantee you if you do that experiment with a military rifle, it wouldn't make a bit of difference on a watermelon.

Given the lengthy period of time, I'd say it certainly qualifies as a reason.

I knew it was one of those conventions. But any which way, I don't see the Soviets following it out of a sense of fair play.

I did do that experiment with an SMLE and a Mosin Nagant. The difference is huge, a fist sized exit wound as opposed to a complete melon-disintegrating explosion. Needless to say, soft points are more fun.

 

[Vanyel]

So, how exactly did this turn from a debate about a boy not being able to fly the US flag to school into a 2nd Amendment, gun debate?

 

[scotpens]

So, how exactly did this turn from a debate about a boy not being able to fly the US flag to school into a 2nd Amendment, gun debate?

Any discussion pertaining to Constitutional freedoms is likely to bounce from one amendment to another.

Besides, flags are boring. Guns rock!

 

[RJDiogenes]

I like the Amendment that repeals Prohibition. That one's awesome.

 

[Man Afraid of his Shoes]

Again, I've heard people say that for years, but I've never seen any evidence that any of that is the reason for it.

Hague Convention.

I do believe the results. I just don't believe it's by design.

Maybe with handguns, but I'll guarantee you if you do that experiment with a military rifle, it wouldn't make a bit of difference on a watermelon.

Given the lengthy period of time, I'd say it certainly qualifies as a reason.

Not necessarily. There are plenty of gun myths with long legs. "If you shoot someone with .12 g buck/.50 BMG, they'll shoot ten feet straight up." "An AK-47 will never jam" "An auto-loader shoots faster than a revolver". I actually heard a cop say the last in court.

I did do that experiment with an SMLE and a Mosin Nagant. The difference is huge, a fist sized exit wound as opposed to a complete melon-disintegrating explosion. Needless to say, soft points are more fun.

Well, I've shot a pumpkin with a .308 ball, and exploded it as well.

 

[Subcommander R.]

I like the Amendment that repeals Prohibition. That one's awesome.

Amen.

Not necessarily. There are plenty of gun myths with long legs. "If you shoot someone with .12 g buck/.50 BMG, they'll shoot ten feet straight up." "An AK-47 will never jam" "An auto-loader shoots faster than a revolver". I actually heard a cop say the last in court.

The problem is that Hollywood gave us the first one (and we all know how stupid they are) and gullible people believed it.

Of course AK-47s don't frequently jam, but it depends on quality of production and maintenance of course.

I'd say the old autoloader vs revolver debate is a matter of personal opinion. The double action on revolvers is a bit too stiff for me, I prefer single action triggers. So maybe for him it was true, but it certainly isn't a fact across the board.

Well, I've shot a pumpkin with a .308 ball, and exploded it as well.

I used surplus 7.62x54R Bulgarian light ball for my Mosin and Remington Soft points for my Enfield.

The FMJs punched a hole in the melon, but the soft points completely blew it up into chunky salsa.

Maybe its our choice of targets that needs work. Or maybe we just send this into Mythbusters.

 

[Man Afraid of his Shoes]

I'd say the old autoloader vs revolver debate is a matter of personal opinion. The double action on revolvers is a bit too stiff for me, I prefer single action triggers. So maybe for him it was true, but it certainly isn't a fact across the board.

It's not a matter of opinion. It's a matter of mechanics. A double action revolver will fire as fast as you pull the trigger, no matter how fast you pull the trigger.

An auto-loader, on the other hand, is out of battery and (I should hope) has the disconnector engaged between the time it takes to fire one round and chamber the next. If you pull the trigger during this time, nothing happens.

This is why all competition speed shooters (that I'm aware of at least) shoot revolvers.

Having said that, I also prefer a single action trigger.

Well, I've shot a pumpkin with a .308 ball, and exploded it as well.

I used surplus 7.62x54R Bulgarian light ball for my Mosin and Remington Soft points for my Enfield.

The FMJs punched a hole in the melon, but the soft points completely blew it up into chunky salsa.

Maybe its our choice of targets that needs work. Or maybe we just send this into Mythbusters.

That's a whole lot of energy being dumped into the mellon for it just to poke a hole through it. How far away were you?

At any rate, try the same experiment with your Enfield again, but this time use surplus military ball .303. That particular round, along with 5.56Nato, is the exception to the "Hollow point/soft point does more damage than jacketed" rule. It was intentionally designed to be back-heavy so that it more easily yaws when it hits a medium. I suspect the result of it hitting a watermelon would be pretty spectacular.

 

[Goliath]

I like the Amendment that repeals Prohibition. That one's awesome.

That is a good one.

Personally, I like the fact that the Titles of Nobility Amendment is technically still pending before state lawmakers, two hundred years after it was passed by Congress, and could, in theory, still become law if enough state legislatures passed it. It's important not to rush these things.

The fact that crazies on the extreme right think that this "original thirteenth amendment" was actually ratified, and has somehow fallen victim to some kind of monstrous revisionist-historical conspiracy, just makes it funnier.

 

[Subcommander R.]

It's not a matter of opinion. It's a matter of mechanics. A double action revolver will fire as fast as you pull the trigger, no matter how fast you pull the trigger.

An auto-loader, on the other hand, is out of battery and (I should hope) has the disconnector engaged between the time it takes to fire one round and chamber the next. If you pull the trigger during this time, nothing happens.

This is why all competition speed shooters (that I'm aware of at least) shoot revolvers.

Having said that, I also prefer a single action trigger.

That's a whole lot of energy being dumped into the mellon for it just to poke a hole through it. How far away were you?

At any rate, try the same experiment with your Enfield again, but this time use surplus military ball .303. That particular round, along with 5.56Nato, is the exception to the "Hollow point/soft point does more damage than jacketed" rule. It was intentionally designed to be back-heavy so that it more easily yaws when it hits a medium. I suspect the result of it hitting a watermelon would be pretty spectacular.

The problem with double-action revolvers and speed isn't mechanical, its a matter of how you handle the trigger. If you ask me, that DA is too stiff and it makes me jerk the gun around too much. I'm sure that for people who feel the same way autoloaders are faster to fire accurately.

But like most bits of shooting in practice it boils down to the marksman.

I'd be glad to try it with surplus if I could find any. But .303 is so damned expensive now. And if you do find any its usually POF. Or its more expensive than buying another SMLE.

I did have some Wolf soft point for the Mosin, but I forgot to bring it that time. C'est la vie.

 

[tharpdevenport]

What I want to know ... who were these goddamn students complaining?

 

[Davros]

So, how exactly did this turn from a debate about a boy not being able to fly the US flag to school into a 2nd Amendment, gun debate?

Any discussion pertaining to Constitutional freedoms is likely to bounce from one amendment to another.

Besides, flags are boring. Guns rock!

What about a gun that fires flags instead of bullets?

 

[Lindley]

This American has never known anyone who owned a gun (that they've shown off or told me about, anyway).

Excluding BB guns.

 

[RJDiogenes]

What about a gun that fires flags instead of bullets?

"Bang."