The Firearms Thread (Questions and Discussions)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Ray H

Registered
Joined
May 12, 2011
Messages
22
Reaction score
1
.45 here too......

On another note: What are the most common gun-related mistakes you see in movies or read in books?

Along with the other pet peeves, I hate when a suspect in a movie is threatening a person with a semi-auto, then racks the slide to show he is serious. Then one of two things happens, a round pops out and he wastes what could be the round that saves his life, or nothing comes out meaning that the chamber was empty in the first place.

Also, I hate when the shooters in movies (cops and suspects) "throw" the bullets out of their guns by repeatedly pushing their arms forwards as they squeeze the trigger.
 

Ray H

Registered
Joined
May 12, 2011
Messages
22
Reaction score
1
Thanks, that was impressive.

Which prompted another question: does a FMJ strait to the heart kill instantaneously or would the victim still "walk" and move for a few minutes before he/she collapses? Do you guys know or is it more of a medical question?

Thanks!!

(hey, Rowan, you should be proud of me: I'm learning tons!!! ;) )

The only part of the body that causes instantaneous death would be a shot through the brain stem. That can be reached by shooting directly behind the ear, or through the fatal "T" on the face. A shot that severs the brain stem instantaneously ceases all involuntary and voluntary functions.
 

Drachen Jager

Professor of applied misanthropy
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 13, 2010
Messages
17,171
Reaction score
2,284
Location
Vancouver
I believe that "we only use 10% of our brains" line was just recycled, locally.

Well that is actually an accurate description of the reported findings. The problem is it doesn't go far enough. What should be said to be completely accurate with the original intention is "We only use approximately 10% of our brains at a time." We do use the whole brain, just not all at once.
 

Tiger

AKA: "Gums of Steel"
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 18, 2005
Messages
1,879
Reaction score
487
Location
Honolulu

Hallen

Mostly annoying
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 28, 2010
Messages
971
Reaction score
111
Location
Albany, Oregon, USA
The only part of the body that causes instantaneous death would be a shot through the brain stem. That can be reached by shooting directly behind the ear, or through the fatal "T" on the face. A shot that severs the brain stem instantaneously ceases all involuntary and voluntary functions.

Exactly.

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/05/04/army-demonstrate-new-green-ammo-maryland/

This article an the new 5.56mm round the Army is looking at has an interesting quote in it about kill shots.

"“There is not a bullet in this world that will do that,” [referring to stopping power] Dr. Martin Fackler, former director of the Wound Ballistics Laboratory at the Letterman Army Institute of Research -- who also served in the Vietnam War as a combat surgeon -- told the Army Times. “Even if you take the guy’s heart apart, he can still shoot back at you for 15 seconds because he’s still got enough oxygen in the blood in his brain to do it.”
"
 

Nivarion

Brony level >9000
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 6, 2008
Messages
1,679
Reaction score
151
Location
texas
Well that is actually an accurate description of the reported findings. The problem is it doesn't go far enough. What should be said to be completely accurate with the original intention is "We only use approximately 10% of our brains at a time." We do use the whole brain, just not all at once.

No. That statement is completely false. If you can find a link to the original intention, I'd certainly be interested in seeing it.

The original intention from what I've seen, http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=people-only-use-10-percent-of-brain, for example suggests that it entered into popular wisdom from different sources--the validity of which is questionable.

As I came to understand how that got twisted is that at any given moment about 10% of our neurons are firing. Across a second or two every one will fire, but if you freeze framed it right now it would be the 10% doing so. All the others are reloading.
 

Chase

It Takes All of Us to End Racism
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 13, 2008
Messages
9,239
Reaction score
2,316
Location
Oregon, USA
“Even if you take the guy’s heart apart, he can still shoot back at you for 15 seconds because he’s still got enough oxygen in the blood in his brain to do it.”

I'm a believer in the combat doc's observations. I've seen many animals and one person behave as if completely missed for several puzzling seconds while their hearts were shot completely away.​

For the most part -- exceptions due to the most miraculous of bullet paths -- a brain shot stops everything but gravity, and the victim crumples straight down.​
 

Chase

It Takes All of Us to End Racism
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 13, 2008
Messages
9,239
Reaction score
2,316
Location
Oregon, USA
Just saying "hi." My laptop was down for the last ten days or two weeks getting a cracked video card diagnosed and replaced. The most time was "overnight" shipping taking six days with the first replacement card cracked as bad as the one I had to replace.

Since my computer is my sole means of distance communications, I read a lot. Oh, my sweet lord, the writers who have absolutely no idea of how guns work are out there writing hilarious stuff about them.

One writer on the east coast wrote about pre-Civil War Montana. Everyone--and I mean settlers and Native Americans alike--had Henry repeating rifles. Never mind they weren't produced until 1862 in a really weak rim-fire version. Suddenly, they were all over the Rocky Mountains before the war. Close enough? Bah!

It was painfully obvious the writer had never worked a Henry (or any other lever-action), nor had ever set foot off the Interstate in the Missoula-Butte area of Montana.

Although tribal names were correct for the most part (everyone mixes up Blackfoot and Blackfeet, even the Blackfeet from Blackfoot), the natives ranged all over western Montana at will and were pretty much one big look-alike tribe.

Oh, yeah, all of them bagged whitetail deer for lunch and supper. How much research does it take to find the mule deer is indigenous to western Montana? White tails never worked their way up the Missouri or Yellowstone until 1935.

Nitpicky? Those are just the tips of the icebergs (which I'm surprised weren't described floating down the Clark's Fork River). I know those writers repeating "Google is your friend" take issue, but the constant generalizations of time and place made the book a real stinker.
 

Cav Guy

Living in the backstory
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 14, 2006
Messages
809
Reaction score
146
Location
Montana - About a century too late
Just saying "hi." My laptop was down for the last ten days or two weeks getting a cracked video card diagnosed and replaced. The most time was "overnight" shipping taking six days with the first replacement card cracked as bad as the one I had to replace.

Since my computer is my sole means of distance communications, I read a lot. Oh, my sweet lord, the writers who have absolutely no idea of how guns work are out there writing hilarious stuff about them.

One writer on the east coast wrote about pre-Civil War Montana. Everyone--and I mean settlers and Native Americans alike--had Henry repeating rifles. Never mind they weren't produced until 1862 in a really weak rim-fire version. Suddenly, they were all over the Rocky Mountains before the war. Close enough? Bah!

It was painfully obvious the writer had never worked a Henry (or any other lever-action), nor had ever set foot off the Interstate in the Missoula-Butte area of Montana.

Although tribal names were correct for the most part (everyone mixes up Blackfoot and Blackfeet, even the Blackfeet from Blackfoot), the natives ranged all over western Montana at will and were pretty much one big look-alike tribe.

Oh, yeah, all of them bagged whitetail deer for lunch and supper. How much research does it take to find the mule deer is indigenous to western Montana? White tails never worked their way up the Missouri or Yellowstone until 1935.

Nitpicky? Those are just the tips of the icebergs (which I'm surprised weren't described floating down the Clark's Fork River). I know those writers repeating "Google is your friend" take issue, but the constant generalizations of time and place made the book a real stinker.

I always love that kind of junk. And you'll find it in places you don't expect.
 

movieman

Sockpuppet
Banned
Joined
Mar 11, 2010
Messages
707
Reaction score
38
Location
Saskatchewan, Canada (ex-UK)
Website
worldsunimagined.blogspot.com
Here's a mildly weird question: what would a 19th century (circa 1850) muzzle-loader paper cartridge taste like when you used your teeth to tear it open?

As far as I can tell the paper was impregnated with chemicals and they were often sealed shut with fat, so I'm presuming the simple answer is 'pretty bad', but if anyone's used one for real I'd be interested to know a more precise answer.
 

Orion11Bravo

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Dec 10, 2010
Messages
139
Reaction score
12
Location
Albany, NY
Here's a mildly weird question: what would a 19th century (circa 1850) muzzle-loader paper cartridge taste like when you used your teeth to tear it open?

As far as I can tell the paper was impregnated with chemicals and they were often sealed shut with fat, so I'm presuming the simple answer is 'pretty bad', but if anyone's used one for real I'd be interested to know a more precise answer.

I read somewhere that the Indian army rioted when a rumor was spread that they started sealing the powder cartridges with cow fat instead of pig (it was in a book about the history of the Gurkhas). When I read it I imagined it to be like wax paper smeared with lard, with a sulfur after-taste. No personal experience, though...sorry.
 

KQ800

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Dec 26, 2010
Messages
170
Reaction score
22
Location
Sweden
Here's a mildly weird question: what would a 19th century (circa 1850) muzzle-loader paper cartridge taste like when you used your teeth to tear it open?

As far as I can tell the paper was impregnated with chemicals and they were often sealed shut with fat, so I'm presuming the simple answer is 'pretty bad', but if anyone's used one for real I'd be interested to know a more precise answer.

Hmm, I believe they were impregnated with wax, or oil to keep moisture out, but fat?

Animal fat is used in percuission revolvers to seal the chambers front end, and it was used on unitary cartridges to keep moisture out. I have not heard that fat was used on paper cartridges.

Addendum: If you go to the later period when minié bullets etc was used, the bullets had grooves in them that contained lubrication for the barrel. That might have been fat I suppose.
 
Last edited:

Steve Collins

Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 20, 2008
Messages
227
Reaction score
32
Location
Florida
OneWriter, yes, you can get full metal jacket rounds for a revolver. Correct, the cases remain in the cylinder until ejected by hand, unlike a semi-automatic. As discussed earlier, a full metal jacket round has more chance of over penetration thus leaving an exit wound, that said, if the shot was from a close distance and didn't contact bone there is a possibility a hollow-point could also go through.
 
Last edited:

gan_naire

Without Shame
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 28, 2010
Messages
288
Reaction score
16
Location
If you're going to stalk me, make it interesting a
Ruger is my gun of choice, love them for many reasons, but for the most part, I don't know why.

I've got a Ruger P90 - 9MM
Ruger Blackhawk - .45 Long Colt (my favorite, and it's older than I am)
HighPoint - .45 ACP (honestly the only bad thing I have to say about it is the grips and the disassembly)
Ruger Mark 2 - .22
Remington rifle - .22 butt fed
Mossberg 500 - 12 gauge (modified)
Ruger Redhawk - .357 (possibly this'll be mine soon, but I consider it mine since I care for it)

The guns I want is a Ruger Mini-14 (what I consider the redneck assault rifle) and a Ruger 1911 - .45 ACP.

My dream gun however, the Colt 1911 they used in Vietnam. Don't know why, that's just my favorite gun of all time. It was the first gun I held as a kid while visiting my Dad's uncle. Come to think of it, maybe I should try and buy it from him . . . then again, I'd almost think it'd be an insult to try and by a Vietnam vets sidearm.

On a side not, my brother is the SIG man, he owns like 4 or 5 of them, but for some reason, I just stick to the Rugers.
 

Chase

It Takes All of Us to End Racism
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 13, 2008
Messages
9,239
Reaction score
2,316
Location
Oregon, USA
Ruger is my gun of choice. . . . My dream gun however, the Colt 1911 they used in Vietnam.

Opinions always make for good gun discussion. I've had phenomenal experience with Rugers, from the first little Luger look-alike my uncle bought in the '50s to my own .357 Blackhawk when I was 16 (times were different then).

I couldn't wear out a stainless steel Security Six after 20,000 rounds of action steel shooting, but finally traded it off for a GP100 for more competition. My concealed carry gun is an SP101 .357, and I practice every day with an SP101 .22.

Yep, you can't beat the 1911's century of service on this anniversary year. There are many, including Vietnam vets, who believe with some good reason the M1911A1 is the finest pistol ever.
 

gan_naire

Without Shame
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 28, 2010
Messages
288
Reaction score
16
Location
If you're going to stalk me, make it interesting a
The good thing is that Ruger is introducing a 1911, it might already be out for all I know. I haven't been able to buy a gun since I was 22. There are high reviews of it already and it looks pretty great, but the only thing I don't like is the extra safety feature built into the back of the handle. I haven't liked any gun that has that. It just reminds me of a pellet gun feel, granted once it's shot that pellet gun feel would go away, I simply don't like them.
 

Chase

It Takes All of Us to End Racism
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 13, 2008
Messages
9,239
Reaction score
2,316
Location
Oregon, USA
Hey, gunnies!

It’s Chase in Oregun (not how it’s spelled, but how it’s said).

I’m still weeping tears of joy over my birthday presents:

My girlfriend had The Godfather, my favorite book, reprinted so that Michael Corleone keeps the .22 used to hit McCluskey and Sollozzo. He hangs it on the wall, as any gun buff would.

Tired of my complaining every time we see it, she had the subtitles changed on the movie. Instead of Clemenza saying "Leave the gun. Take the cannoli," he now says the far more credible, "Leave the cannoli. Take the gun."

Truly a happy birthday, ha ha ha.

After getting back from the range tonight, we’re celebrating with the best wine. As said elsewhere, no cheap corked stuff for my big seven-oh, but the finest jug with the expensive metal screw cap.

You have a good day, too.
 

Orianna2000

Freelance Writer
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jun 15, 2011
Messages
3,434
Reaction score
234
Location
USA
I know nothing about guns, so please be gentle with me!

In Paris, 1882, a count swims across a lake with his pistol in hand. I'm certain it would get wet no matter how he tried to keep it above water. Once on dry land, he tries to use said pistol to shoot someone. Ideally for my purposes, the pistol won't work the first few times he tries to shoot, but it does need to fire eventually, because he has to shoot the guy.

How can I write this so it's within the realm of reason and practicality? I don't want anyone laughing their heads off or snorting when they read this scene.

The pistol can be any type, but it's probably expensive and well-made, since the owner is a count. But if it would help, it could be an heirloom passed down from his father.

As I said, I know nothing about guns, except a vague impression that the old fashioned kind don't like to work when they get wet. But that could be an urban legend for all I know! If you can help me make this scene accurate, I'll be indebted.
 

Chase

It Takes All of Us to End Racism
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 13, 2008
Messages
9,239
Reaction score
2,316
Location
Oregon, USA
In Paris, 1882, a count swims across a lake with his pistol in hand. I'm certain it would get wet no matter how he tried to keep it above water. Once on dry land, he tries to use said pistol to shoot someone. Ideally for my purposes, the pistol won't work the first few times he tries to shoot, but it does need to fire eventually, because he has to shoot the guy.

How can I write this so it's within the realm of reason and practicality? I don't want anyone laughing their heads off or snorting when they read this scene.

You're correct that any gunpowder will not work if wet or even a tiny bit damp, but I can imagine a number of scenarios which could work for you:

1. Cartridge revolvers and single-shot pistols were available at the time. The seating of primers and bullets into the brass casings wasn't nearly as watertight as are modern cartridges, so trying to fire and failing before reloading more cartridges which were kept dry in a water-proofed pouch is realistic.

2. Less realistic would be arming your count with an older percussion-cap muzzle-loaded pistol. Since he tried to swim keeping it dry, he might try to fire it in self defense after going ashore. When it didn't work, he would need to pull out the unfired lead (a process requiring time and a special attachment on his ramrod), swab out the barrel and dry it with patches, then reload with (hopefully) dry powder and percussion caps. As you can see, all of this may take a lot of cool action under duress.

Is any of this some help to you?
 

Orianna2000

Freelance Writer
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jun 15, 2011
Messages
3,434
Reaction score
234
Location
USA
1. Cartridge revolvers and single-shot pistols were available at the time. The seating of primers and bullets into the brass casings wasn't nearly as watertight as are modern cartridges, so trying to fire and failing before reloading more cartridges which were kept dry in a water-proofed pouch is realistic.

Is any of this some help to you?
This is definitely what I needed to know, thank you! So he could fire once, have it fail, and then quickly reload the pistol, so long as his spare bullets were kept in a water-proof container? Which would be more likely for him to use, a revolver or a pistol? Bearing in mind that he's wealthy and probably a collector of fancy weapons.
 

Cwm

Gator Bait
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 26, 2011
Messages
502
Reaction score
84
Location
Southern United States
Hoping you firearm experts will take a moment to eyeball this description of my MC getting nailed by a rifle bullet and let me know if it is accurate. The shooter is roughly four yards away.

Thanks much!

The bullet hit him center-chest. The ballistic vest redistributed the impact in a gripping pressure that rippled around his torso. Noise from the blast punched out his hearing. It came back in stinging waves.
 

Chase

It Takes All of Us to End Racism
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 13, 2008
Messages
9,239
Reaction score
2,316
Location
Oregon, USA
So he could fire once, have it fail, and then quickly reload the pistol, so long as his spare bullets were kept in a water-proof container?

Yes, he could cock the handgun, attempt to fire, perhaps even repeat cocking and squeezing the trigger to no avail. Then he could reload from his dry ammo supply.

Which would be more likely for him to use, a revolver or a pistol? Bearing in mind that he's wealthy and probably a collector of fancy weapons.

Your choice. There were many fine single-shot cartridge pistols made in Europe and the U.S. during your story's time frame. Many shooters preferred pistols to the newer revolvers. However, many loved the new repeaters.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.