Hey wait....did you just kill this thread?...officially?
10mm.
Man, just by the picture I was going to guess Sledge Hammer.
I loved that show when I was a kid and I am sure I had no idea what was happening
Don't ya just love when idiots twirl double action revolvers? They just want people to see it and kill themselves.
"trust me, I know what I'm doing"...... Bwa-ha-ha
I say lets all remove the warning labels and let nature take its course.
I'm the only one in this room professional enough to carry a glock 40.
Obviously not a golfer.
About 20% of rounds fired by LEOs strike their intended target, about 20% of those shot by LEOs die of their wounds. While not something I would bet my life on, there is a 96% chance of survival if an LEO fires one shot at you. Those numbers are of course math, which is only an approximation. Having forensically studied several shootings where 10 or more rounds have been fired from a ballistics perspective, a few things are interesting. If the target is not hit in the first 3 rounds, the round count drifts to the spray and pray area with very low hit ratios. If the target is struck in the first three rounds, the caliber is typically not of great significance. LEOs fired well over 200 rounds at Columbine and did not hit the targets. If you look at the round counts from the perpetrators of Columbine, Sandy Hook, Virginia Tech, Ft. Hood and Aurora, you will find that they have a higher hit factor than LEOs. However, when we get to civilians involved in lethal force encounters and their hit rate, it is phenomenally high in comparison.
In order to get a true perspective, one must evaluate the training of the shooter, the mental state of the shooter, the conditions, and the forensic evidence. When that is done, the conclusion that can logically be reached is that those getting a paycheck to shoot a weapon have the lowest hit rates, those who do not fear losing their life are in the middle and those with training and the will to survive an attack on their own life have the highest hit rates. That should raise an eyebrow or two. The "attacked" civilian will have the least amount of warning and or preparation of the lethal force encounter, however they have the highest hit rates. That "may" tend to give some credence to delayed physiological effects of the adrenaline dump more than anything else.
Many years ago, we ran a test with 10 shooters. They fired 5 rounds from 4 different handguns (.38 spl revolver, 9mm Glock, .45 1911, .380 PPK) at a 7 yard target. We recorded total time, splits, accuracy and recall of some visual items near the target. This was done static several times to get a baseline. Then we had the shooters bungee jump and do the same test immediately, then at 5, 10 15 and 30 minutes. We also dropped them in a 45 degree dunk tank and last, after 2 shots of whiskey. While most shooters appeared calm by about 15 minute mark, the 5, 10, 15 and 30 minute delays after bungee jumping resulted in progressively worse times and accuracy while the immediate test was the best for 7 of the 10 shooters. The people who commissioned the test did not like the results and so the next phase was not completed. Adrenaline is an odd and powerful drug and its role in shooting performance should not be ignored.
We know that many race car drivers, pro golfers and some extreme sports participants use Beta-Blockers in an effort to increase performance and reduce the negative effects of adrenaline. While it has been discussed, I am not aware of any real world test involving responding LEOs using Beta-Blockers en route to a call, but I am not sure it is not something that should not be considered.
In the FWIW, the article in the OP is in concert with the forensic work I have performed on actual shooting incident reconstruction which often includes virtual autopsy evaluation of the terminal ballistics.
I'm not fat, I'm tactically padded.
Tactical Commander - Fast Action Response Team (F.A.R.T.)
For my feedback Click Here.
Click: For anyone with a dog or pets, please read