
Originally Posted by
foxtrot
Have read it before. Multiple... problems with the facts in the article, when discussed prior (I forgot where) and some actual forensics experts weighed in it made me doubt the factuality of the entire article, as if I didn't already. IE: Is the guy who he says he is or is he a biased keyboard commando. If he even works at a morgue at all, there is some definite exaggeration and bias supplied through the entire article at minimum, as well as extreme "stretching" the truth.
In my opinion: He's one of the guys that hangs out in the towns most popular gun stores that when a customer asks for anything in 9mm, he goes on an "expert" rant about how 9mm can't hurt anything, he's seen people get shot in the face with a clip while in nam' with a 9mm and hardly did so little damage he could patch it with cigarette paper and spit, but his favorite handgun in his collection of three pistols just happens to be the best combination of a self defense weapon for anybody, their grandmother, and their dog that you could possibly ever have, why, it's his 357 magnum, its superior to every other caliber for one reason or another. You all know the type.
Science and facts directly contradict a majority of the elements in this writeup. If you ask me, don't give it any more weight than you would the "expert" ranting of the guy at the gun shop counter. I prefer to trust my life to true science. Now, before everyone jumps on me - there is some logic in it, but an article written on 87% bias and 13% logic is still just some guys B.S. opinion.