Well if a six foot man fell backwards and his feet remained planted wouldn't his torso technically be "back a few feet" from where it was before he was hit? Just wondering what exactly needs to happen to the body to satisfy the "knocked back a few feet" comment of Eric's.
On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 6:02 AM, Scott Stroz <boyz...@gmail.com> wrote: > > And yet, still nothing that states it will knock someone back several > feet when hit by a bullet from the weapon. > > Will it knock them down? Shit yea. Will it knock them back a few feet? > No way. Why? Because it is physically impossible to do so. > > On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 12:38 AM, Eric Roberts > <ow...@threeravensconsulting.com> wrote: > > > > I don't know if I will find a video of what it does to the human body > since > > that is a bit illegal ;-) > > > > Here's a site that has some vids on the effects of shooting various > > objects... > > > > http://stoppingpower.info/.45/ > > > > and the wiki which state the round hits the target with and avg of 252 > PSI > > with a penetration of up to 27 inches into ballistic gel, depending on > the > > ammo used. I don't know what brand the military used and didn't see > > anything stating it. > > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.45_ACP > > > > > > This is what it replaced: > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.45_Colt > > > > and this is what eventually replaced the m1911: > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9x19mm_Parabellum > > > > > > Eric > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Scott Stroz [mailto:boyz...@gmail.com] > > Sent: Sunday, July 11, 2010 10:34 PM > > To: cf-community > > Subject: Re: Daily Kos: Why liberals should love the Second Amendment > > > > > > Show me video. If this gun can do what you claim, there must be video > > of it on the Internet...somewhere. If you cannot, then I guess we can > > chalk it up to a flare up of your cranial rectitis. > > > > Your reply makes no attempt to disprove me. I guess your avoidance is > > as close to a 'you are right, I am wrong' as we will ever get out of > > you. > > > > On Sun, Jul 11, 2010 at 9:33 PM, Eric Roberts > > <ow...@threeravensconsulting.com> wrote: > >> > >> Go read up on the m1911 > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Scott Stroz [mailto:boyz...@gmail.com] > >> Sent: Sunday, July 11, 2010 8:09 PM > >> To: cf-community > >> Subject: Re: Daily Kos: Why liberals should love the Second Amendment > >> > >> > >> I think you need to understand physics. > >> > >> There is no gun that can be held by one person, that when fired at > >> another person, will knock that other person back a few feet. (Maybe a > >> rail gun could do it, but I do not think there are any hand held rail > >> guns...yet) If there is such a gun, I am sure you can find some video > >> somewhere that proves me wrong. My challenge to you is to find such > >> proof. > >> > >> On Sun, Jul 11, 2010 at 6:14 PM, Eric Roberts > >> <ow...@threeravensconsulting.com> wrote: > >>> > >>> I think you need to study how guns work. > >>> > >>> -----Original Message----- > >>> From: Scott Stroz [mailto:boyz...@gmail.com] > >>> Sent: Sunday, July 11, 2010 4:08 PM > >>> To: cf-community > >>> Subject: Re: Daily Kos: Why liberals should love the Second Amendment > >>> > >>> > >>> OK...you keep believing in magic guns and bullets, I stay firmly > >>> rooted in the real world. Sound fair? > >>> > >>> On Sun, Jul 11, 2010 at 2:49 PM, Eric Roberts > >>> <ow...@threeravensconsulting.com> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> If you fire a .50 cal rifle (they are used as sniper rifles) you dont > >>> move > >>>> a bit because you have more leverage. It's why you can fire a .50 cal > >>>> machine gun without ending up in the next county after a few rounds. > > Now > >>> if > >>>> you were to take a 50 cal and try and Rambo it...yeah...you are going > to > >>> get > >>>> thrown back as the recoil on it isn't designed to absorb the energy. > A > >>> .50 > >>>> cal rifle, on the other hand, has recoil spring to absorb some of that > >>>> energy directed back at you so the bullet will effectively have more > of > > a > >>>> punch than the rifle but will have on your shoulder...same goes with a > >>>> m1911...re recoil springs and venting cause it to have less of a > >> blowback, > >>>> energy wise, than the bullet has punching power if that makes sense. > >> Just > >>>> for sake of argument, the bullet may exert 500 lbs of pressure on the > >>> target > >>>> it hits, while you may only feel 50 lbs of pressure on your body from > >>> firing > >>>> it because of venting and the recoil mechanisms. The energy coming > back > >>> at > >>>> you is absorbed by springs or vented and thus deflected in a different > >>>> direction thus lessening it's effect on you. > >>>> > >>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>> From: Scott Stroz [mailto:boyz...@gmail.com] > >>>> Sent: Sunday, July 11, 2010 12:52 PM > >>>> To: cf-community > >>>> Subject: Re: Daily Kos: Why liberals should love the Second Amendment > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> IIRC, the biggest gun they tested was a .50 caliber rifle. > >>>> > >>>> I do not have to fire a gun to know that any bullets it shoots cannot > >>>> defy the laws of physics. > >>>> > >>>> On Sun, Jul 11, 2010 at 11:05 AM, Eric Roberts > >>>> <ow...@threeravensconsulting.com> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> Again...you obviously have never fired an m1911. The force the round > >>>> exudes > >>>>> when it hits a target is pretty intense. I dont know what weapons > > they > >>>>> tested on Mythbusters (I would certainly like to see the episode), > but > >>>> they > >>>>> obviously didn't test the m1911. When you fire it, it has a pretty > > hard > >>>>> kick that causes your hands to go back and the gun to go up. That is > >> one > >>>> of > >>>>> the several reasons why it is so accurate because you have to totally > >>>> re-aim > >>>>> for the next shot. Part of it is also because the round is so huge. > > It > >>>> is > >>>>> pretty useless at a distance, but close range, it packs a punch. Id > >>> dont > >>>>> know if any of the other vets here used it as I think they are all > much > >>>>> younger than me and probably would have used the 9mm handgun the > >> military > >>>>> adopted. > >>>>> > >>>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>>> From: Scott Stroz [mailto:boyz...@gmail.com] > >>>>> Sent: Sunday, July 11, 2010 9:19 AM > >>>>> To: cf-community > >>>>> Subject: Re: Daily Kos: Why liberals should love the Second Amendment > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Had to look it up, could not think of the reference at the time that > >>>>> proves this is physically imposible, its Newton's Third Law of Motion > >>>>> > >>>>> On Sun, Jul 11, 2010 at 10:11 AM, Scott Stroz <boyz...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > >>>>>> OK, earlier you said it it would 'knock him back a few feet'...that > is > >>>>>> physically impossible, without the shooter also getting knocked back > a > >>>>>> few feet. 'knock them on their ass' is quite a bit different than > >>>>>> 'knock him back a few feet'. :D > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Sun, Jul 11, 2010 at 9:45 AM, Eric Roberts > >>>>>> <ow...@threeravensconsulting.com> wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I guess you have never fired an m1911...it's doesn't knock you back > > at > >>>>> all. > >>>>>>> The army adopted the handgun during the Philippine Insurrection > when > >>> the > >>>>>>> Philippine Moros, who were hopped up on drugs, would keep on > charging > >>>>> when > >>>>>>> hit by the revolvers that were previously used. The .45 cal round > >> that > >>>>> the > >>>>>>> m1911 fired hit them and knocked them on their ass so they wouldn't > >> get > >>>>> back > >>>>>>> up. The handgun was used up until the late 80's/early 90's when it > >> was > >>>>>>> replaced by the much less powerful (and more accurate at greater > >>>>> distances) > >>>>>>> 9mm. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Eric > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>>>>> From: Scott Stroz [mailto:boyz...@gmail.com] > >>>>>>> Sent: Sunday, July 11, 2010 7:21 AM > >>>>>>> To: cf-community > >>>>>>> Subject: Re: Daily Kos: Why liberals should love the Second > Amendment > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Any weapon that will knock the bad guy back a few feet will also > > knock > >>>>>>> you back a few feet. I know this because I saw it in Mythbusters. > :D > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Sun, Jul 11, 2010 at 12:01 AM, Eric Roberts > >>>>>>> <ow...@threeravensconsulting.com> wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> If I were to have a firearm for self defense, I'll take the m1911 > > any > >>>>> day. > >>>>>>>> Screw the little 9mm handguns...I want something that would not > only > >>>>> kill > >>>>>>> my > >>>>>>>> opponent, but knock him back a few feet ;-) Which is one of the > >>>> reasons > >>>>> I > >>>>>>>> won't own one. I wasn't trained to injure. I was trained to shoot > > to > >>>>> kill > >>>>>>>> (one shot one kill as the saying went) and I really don't want to > be > >>>> put > >>>>>>> in > >>>>>>>> that situation. I'll give my opponent a fighting chance and stick > > to > >>>>>>> blades > >>>>>>>> ;-) > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>>>>>> From: Robert Munn [mailto:cfmuns...@gmail.com] > >>>>>>>> Sent: Saturday, July 10, 2010 1:49 AM > >>>>>>>> To: cf-community > >>>>>>>> Subject: Re: Daily Kos: Why liberals should love the Second > > Amendment > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> I could go for either of those, or maybe the M4 shotgun. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 8:49 PM, Zaphod Beeblebrox > >>>>>>>> <zaph0d.b33bl3b...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> I've got the Remington 870 Express. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 10:16 PM, Scott Stroz <boyz...@gmail.com> > >>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> We have a Benelli SuperNova tactical shotgun. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology-Michael-Dinowitz/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:322875 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
