[DonGlock26]

A Dr's View of Gunshot Wounds


http://youtu.be/tku8YI68-JA

You can fast forward to 7:30

Warning! Graphic photos and videos.
_

[uz2bUSMC]

Good insight on a few things. Limeted view on terminal performance.

[smokin762]

Very interesting. Thank you for posting this.

[cowboy1964]

Good video.

.40 cal example at 17:00. Insufficient penetration. Unfortunately he didn't specify the weight but I suspect it was a light one. Perfect example of why penetration matters and the 12" thing isn't just some made up crap.

[DonGlock26]

Originally Posted by smokin762

Very interesting. Thank you for posting this.

You are quite welcome.

[DonGlock26]

Originally Posted by cowboy1964

Good video.

.40 cal example at 17:00. Insufficient penetration. Unfortunately he didn't specify the weight but I suspect it was a light one. Perfect example of why penetration matters and the 12" thing isn't just some made up crap.

Excellent point. I was scratching my head over that one. Perhaps, it was a 135gr .40.

[RustyShackelford]

The image of the leg-wound (self afflicted by accident?) at about 8:30 sure was horrible. Tumble, indeed.

[maestrogustav]

Originally Posted by DonGlock26

Excellent point. I was scratching my head over that one. Perhaps, it was a 135gr .40.

Seems very unlikely that nothing else interfered.

I would not be surprised if the round first struck the guy's arm or something..

[Glk30]

Originally Posted by maestrogustav

Seems very unlikely that nothing else interfered.

I would not be surprised if the round first struck the guy's arm or something..

Yeah, what is NOT being said is always more important than what is being said. We don't know if the bullet went through glass windshield, a wall, car door, etc before striking the individual. I can't image a .40 hitting someone cleanly in the chest and it not penetrating enough.

[cowboy1964]

It's unlikely the .40 passed through an external barrier. Typically that results in proper expansion not occurring and more penetration, not less. The bullets in this case were expanded, apparently.

I still say it was just a light .40. But the point is, underpenetration is bad, regardless of the reason.

[Brucev]

Good post. Good video. Shot a lot of deer, etc. When you dress out the carcass, you quickly learn just what happens when a bullet goes through flesh... and when it hits bone. Dr. is right... even a low-velocity rifle is far more powerful than a handgun. His statement that most handgun rounds do not exit is odd. Would like to see any post-shooting data as to whether or not a round fired penetrated completely. Recent incident in NYC would seem to indicate that common pistol rounds will easily penetrate completely.

[uz2bUSMC]

Originally Posted by Brucev

Good post. Good video. Shot a lot of deer, etc. When you dress out the carcass, you quickly learn just what happens when a bullet goes through flesh... and when it hits bone. Dr. is right... even a low-velocity rifle is far more powerful than a handgun. His statement that most handgun rounds do not exit is odd. Would like to see any post-shooting data as to whether or not a round fired penetrated completely. Recent incident in NYC would seem to indicate that common pistol rounds will easily penetrate completely.

They missed...a lot. Google the video.

[uz2bUSMC]

Originally Posted by Glk30

Yeah, what is NOT being said is always more important than what is being said. We don't know if the bullet went through glass windshield, a wall, car door, etc before striking the individual. I can't image a .40 hitting someone cleanly in the chest and it not penetrating enough.

Exactly right. Doctors see the end result of the gun fight. That bullet most likely hit something first. Penetration does not always increase because it strikes something first. Drywall, sure, an arm which may have already caused some expansion...not so much. The velocity will be lower and the sectional density would be lower making it more difficult to penetrate the sternum. Since the bullet was already expanded it wo have been moving along fast enough to be within it's velocity window or contacted a hard barrier causing deformation prior to impacting the sternum.

[Tiro Fijo]

Originally Posted by Brucev

...Recent incident in NYC would seem to indicate that common pistol rounds will easily penetrate completely.

I would guess that far more bystanders were hit with missed shots than with "through & throughs" with the 124 gr. +p GD. However, since I don't know the details I am speculating. It is however safe to assume that every single bullet fired did not hit its intended target.

[M 7]

DonGlock26,

Thanks for the video.

Besides the educated and very thorough perspective on gunshot wounds, it was incredible to see the "magic" those surgeons perform on their patients in the OR.

Copied for future reference.

[Berto]

Very interesting, a local guy too.

[DonGlock26]

Originally Posted by RustyShackelford

The image of the leg-wound (self afflicted by accident?) at about 8:30 sure was horrible. Tumble, indeed.

I've seen it happen. It's horrible.

[seanmac45]

Great video Don.

Thanks for sharing.

[Eric2340]

Very interesting, VERY informative. Here's what I got from it handgun caliber wise, and something I have been looking at more and more as of late -


1. BIG holes that go DEEP work best, expansion and penetration appear to be the answer. (Love the video of the guy shot twice in the CHEST w/ the 9mm who runs away............. :( ).

2. Big bullets make BIG holes, the bigger the better, the more likely they are to make contact w/ something inside the need to hit to do damage. If a small bullet barely misses something it needs to hit, a bigger bullet in the SAME place is more likely to hit it just due to the fact it has more area to contact said place with.

3. I am DAMN glad I have long guns for HD I go to before my handguns. Long guns are king in the world of fight stoppers (NOT that was a news flash).


As I said in another recent thread I started, REALLY makes me rethink that whole, "just carrying a .380 ONLY" thing. :(

Handguns are comforting to carry, not COMFORTABLE. Make whatever means and adjustments to carry the biggest thing possible that you can shoot WELL.

Glad I'm carrying my G21 now, and that G20 is looking better and better every day...........


Thanks OP, GREAT video.

[English]

It was interesting and informative but very limited.

He took the Wound Ballistic Workshop's opinion as gospel without considering contrary evidence.

He showed significant slow speed video of the temporary cavities produced by 5.56mm, 7.62mm and .50 Cal Browning rifle rounds, but did not show comparissons between .38Sp, 9mm, .40S&W, 10mm, .357Mag or .44Mag. Just because they produce smaller temporary cavities than rifle rounds, it cannot be assumed that the differences have no significance or that all handgun rounds are equally feeble.

In essence he is a very competent surgeon who is used to dealing with the more normal range of handgun bullet wounds without going further into their differences. This was a practical lecture for trauma surgeons and not a significant examination of different hangun cartridge and bullet wounding effectiveness.

As an example, big buillets make bigger holes but faster bullets also make bigger holes. The effective diameter of tissue incapacitation and the average rate of blood loss is created by a combination of these two primary characteristics and is not a simple matter of expanded bullet diameter and depth of penetration. He pointed to the differences of the energy levels of different loads but failed to draw significant conclusions beyon the fact that rifles often have bigger cartridges with higher energy levels. Is there anyone here who did not know that?

Anyone who relies on his bigger bullet being able to miss a vital organ by an extra millimeter and still achieve a major effect is a fool. It is an old idea and is as stupid coming from him as it ever was. Even the heart is some 100mm wide. How much extra chance does a .45 give you over a 9mm? Nothing worth considering!

As Eric says above, the G20 looks better and better, but it is not its extra 1mm over the 9mm that does it and you would not conclude this from the video.

English

[unit1069]

Originally Posted by RustyShackelford

The image of the leg-wound (self afflicted by accident?) at about 8:30 sure was horrible. Tumble, indeed.

It certainly was a brutal wound and the doctor pointed out it was a self-inflicted negligent discharge. He then identified the victim as a SWAT officer and why the wound entered at the knee and traveled through the calf area.

These incidents reinforce my current decision to carry C3. If these NDs happen with highly-trained SWAT members they can certainly happen to me.

[WiskyT]

Originally Posted by unit1069

It certainly was a brutal wound and the doctor pointed out it was a self-inflicted negligent discharge. He then identified the victim as a SWAT officer and why the wound entered at the knee and traveled through the calf area.

These incidents reinforce my current decision to carry C3. If these NDs happen with highly-trained SWAT members they can certainly happen to me.

I can tell you with absolute certainty that not all SWAT Officers are highly trained, or even capable of responding to training.

[unit1069]

Originally Posted by WiskyT

I can tell you with absolute certainty that not all SWAT Officers are highly trained, or even capable of responding to training.

I would assume you're correct just because of the many large law enforcement agencies there are. But I'm also certain that if someone is designated SWAT and he is issued a fully automatic assault rifle he should know what he's doing. In fact, anyone authorized a weapon for official law enforcement use should know what he/she is doing.

The ND shown in the video didn't specify if the wound was incurred during an operation or from carelessly handling the weapon. If it was during the heat of an operation I would be far less inclined to fault the officer. At any rate the fellow sure paid dearly for his mistake.

[uz2bUSMC]

Originally Posted by unit1069

I would assume you're correct just because of the many large law enforcement agencies there are. But I'm also certain that if someone is designated SWAT and he is issued a fully automatic assault rifle he should know what he's doing. In fact, anyone authorized a weapon for official law enforcement use should know what he/she is doing.

The ND shown in the video didn't specify if the wound was incurred during an operation or from carelessly handling the weapon. If it was during the heat of an operation I would be far less inclined to fault the officer. At any rate the fellow sure paid dearly for his mistake.

Some SWAT teams are part time. There alotted time for serious team training and weapons handling can be as little as one or two days in a month.

[cowboy1964]

Originally Posted by Tiro Fijo

I would guess that far more bystanders were hit with missed shots than with "through & throughs" with the 124 gr. +p GD. However, since I don't know the details I am speculating. It is however safe to assume that every single bullet fired did not hit its intended target.

AFAIK, all bystanders were hit with shrapnel, not direct hits from the bullets.