Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

Cutting bullets.

2

Comments

  • ZikielZikiel Cincinnati, OHPosts: 1,138Member

    Yeah, I've read an old article like that, they tested it, a grown man can cover a distance like that in about 2 or 3 seconds. The article was about using a small knife, concealed in your palm. I would not bet on a gun in close quarters. Anyways, seems as though the common consensus for this thread: Swords, pretty cool, but not as practical as a knife. (except against ninjas)

  • Rikimaru_XRikimaru_X Myrtle Beach, SCPosts: 11,939Member

    Originally posted by WantsumBier


    Even this guy Riki?
     
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N5WJUD-7FFc&mode=related&search=

    Yeah he would be easy to take down. Just becuase he can shoot that many times does not mean he can aim. He has to be standing still like a turrent in order to shoot that fast Soooo. Dash at him, low dash as he shoots, 360 slash spin at the legs then a dragon uppercut and then any finishing move to a flawless victory.

    -In memory of Laura "Taera" Genender. Passed away on Aug/13/08-
    |
    RISING DRAGOON ~AION US ONLINE LEGION for Elyos

  • DraenorDraenor Roseville, CAPosts: 7,918Member

    Originally posted by Malachi1975


     
    Originally posted by Draenor


    Swords take a great deal of training to use effectively...guns do not.  And no matter how good you are with a sword, a guy with a gun will still be able to shoot you from 500x the distance that you could hit him with that sword.  You want to talk about close quarters?  Ever been pistol whipped?  You don't have to shoot someone with a gun in order to kill him with it.  My dad is a retired police officer and once went to a murder scene in which someone pistol whipped a person so hard that bits of their teeth and skull were jammed into the slide of the gun and it would not fire..the guy managed to survive somehow. (the person murdered had actually been shot with the gun before it got jammed from bits of bone)
    While I will give you the fact that swords take a much greater discipline to master I will refute two things:

     

    1- An untrained shooter will NOT hit me at 500x the range I can strike with a katana (and don't make me pull out my Nodachi at 72"). Give I am deadly within 4 feet range past my arm reach (not including blade length) without moving, that would mean your shooter would be roughly 2000ft from me. Good luck hitting me at that range. I know what you were going for, but your multiplier was a bit overzealous.

    2- Since I am trained, I can garaunty you that whomever was the poor bastard who tried to pistol whip me at close range, coming around a corner would have at least 12" of steel shoved neatly into the chest cavity. Problem one in blade v. gun in melee. I can grab and hold your gun without damage to my hand, you cannot say the same about my blade. Also, a single hit to the face from a pistol is generally nowhere near as devistating as a single hit to the face with a true-steel blade. You may knock my jaw out of place or crush my cheekbone in the first strike, but one draw of a blade across your face and you're down. EIther with an eye hanging out, throat gushing blood, or mouth split from ear to ear. That's only taking in to account that I swipe the blade and not drive it into your face.

    reseponse to refutation number 1:  It doesn't matter of the multiplier was over zealous, the point remains.

    response to refutation number 2:  I wasn't referring to fighting someone with a pistol in close range with a sword, that would be absolutely insane, as pistols are obviously not DESIGNED for close quarters combat.  The point was that a pistol does not have to be fired in order to be effective on close quarters.  Even with that point made though, I'll take a foot long piece of solid wood over your average hunting knife in a melee fight any day.

    Your argument is like a two legged dog with an eating disorder...weak and unbalanced.

  • BigdavoBigdavo BrisbanePosts: 2,065Member

    While I agree with some of the points you raised and your insight into the matter is plausible, you've based the greater part of your argument on singular situations. The subject has to be looked at broadly, and like you said no situation is the same. Your viewpoints are based off experience and personal situations as an accomplished martial artist. I'm talking about the average Joe here, unskilled swordsman against a unskilled pistol wielder in a close quarters situation, neither have the element of surprise. Rule of thumb by any untrained person is that the pistolier will win. An untrained swordsman simply lacks the skill to be as effective as a trained one, AND like you said it doesn't take much to wield a pistol, whereas a sword does.

    I'd also like to refute your point on the effectiveness of stabbing someone in the stomach and getting shot at the same time, unless you have a freakish pain threshold your not going to twist your blade out for maximum damage with the pefection of a trained man with a gun shot wound. I might also add the high probability of the gunman popping off a few extra rounds, something you seem to have missed, ammo running out seems kind of unimportant in a close quaters situatuation no?

    O_o o_O

  • Malachi1975Malachi1975 Las Vegas, NVPosts: 1,079Member

    Originally posted by Bigdavo


    While I agree with some of the points you raised and your insight into the matter is plausible, you've based the greater part of your argument on singular situations. The subject has to be looked at broadly, and like you said no situation is the same. Your viewpoints are based off experience and personal situations as an accomplished martial artist. I'm talking about the average Joe here, unskilled swordsman against a unskilled pistol wielder in a close quarters situation, neither have the element of surprise. Rule of thumb by any untrained person is that the pistolier will win. An untrained swordsman simply lacks the skill to be as effective as a trained one, AND like you said it doesn't take much to wield a pistol, whereas a sword does.
    I'd also like to refute your point on the effectiveness of stabbing someone in the stomach and getting shot at the same time, unless you have a freakish pain threshold your not going to twist your blade out for maximum damage with the pefection of a trained man with a gun shot wound. I might also add the high probability of the gunman popping off a few extra rounds, something you seem to have missed, ammo running out seems kind of unimportant in a close quaters situatuation no?
    Okay, I will work with the highleted sentence and break it down by points.

    1- "Stomach damage: Pistol v. Blade"- You'll note here I say blade as I am not limiting this to a sword. Knife, Wakazashi, Tanto, you choose. It does not take "freakish" pain thresholds to twist the knife. We're talking simple reaction. If I have just stabbed you in the gut with a 10" blade and you shot me our immediate reactions are to recoil and cover the wound. You cannot pull the bullet you just imbedded in my stomach back out and cause it to cause more damage. However, your own movement away from my blade, coupled with my movement from being shot, is going to cause the blade to inflict more damage. In fact, it's nigh impossible to bring a blade back out on the same exact path from which in entered. Here we will look at muscle tissue damage. Let us say that both of our combatants are roughly the same size and are now running on adrenaline. You're bullet(s), I will give you three, cause less muscle tissue damage as a gaping knife would in which the blade has been retracted. The bullet entry would is going to be a small, usually less than 1/4" inch hole in my abdominal muscles. Even with three 1/4" entry wounds you cannot match the single blade slice (let's assume we're using a common household kitchen knife which measures about 1 3/4 wide). Said knife will not retract without slicing even more muscle tissue. We will not even take into account the common reflex of "push and twiist" away which would cause the blade to drag through several more inches of flesh. In fact, in many given situations you almost have to torque a blade to neatly retract it from a human chest or stomach cavity, they tend to get stuck in the pressure of the wound..

    So for the sake of the arguement we're both running on adrenaline, me with 3 1/'4, smooth wounds (thanks to heat and velocity) in my stomach, you with 2-3" of abdominal tissue ripped open. You have now lost upper body functionallity to a higher degree than I have. Pain aside, you're muscles in certain areas are no longer attached and can therefore no longer do their job. While mine on the other hand have holes, but still remain partially attached.

    2- "Running out of ammo, irrelevent?"- No, it's not. Hence why our modern military STILL carry melee weapons as backup. I had, in one of my earlier posts, taken into account multiple shots. You've assumed all hit. When meeting face to face around a corner (no surprise needed, you hear me, I hear you. You want in my house to get my goods YOU have to proceed, not I. I have an advantage here) it's awfully hard to get off more than 2, perhaps 3, clean shots before either we have collided or we're struggling for the gun. If we're both taken wounds to the stomach (I will keep using stomach wounds because they are wounds from which you can still fight but at the same time can be more fatal than an arm or leg...barring femoral arterial shots) and you now run out of ammo, 6 or 10 rounds, I still have my blade which is functional. Yes, you can use your pistol as a blunt instrument, but please...pick a pistol up and try so. You will feel that it is awkward as it was not intended for such. Again, I can also point out that I can happily grab and squeeze your gun to control you without major hand injury (assuming I am smart enough NOT to grab a semi-automatic from the top, in which case that action would break my fingers). You cannot grab my blade, or even my wrist as I hold the blade backhanded, and squeeze with the same control unless you enjoy cutting your own sinew and tendons in your hand. Running out of ammo is VERY relevant as to the fact that if you DO NOT kill me before you run out you are suffering from weapon lethality for more than I am with my Ginsu knife.

    An "untrained" gun wielder is very likely to miss with more than 50% of their rounds in a close quarters combat situation. And this is being liberal as to the situation in which both combatants come face to face.

    3- "Rule of thumb in close quarters gives the win to the pistol wielder". False. That's a horrific generalisation. Pistols are meant for range, period. Assuming that you have a pistol, ergo you will win the fight,  pretty much sets you up to fail. There are so many variables to take into account to factor whether or not you are garaunteed a victory. Environment, calliber of the weapon, size of your opponent, the list goes on. Yes, I will give you that I base my foundation of singular variables (e.g.- how I would handle the siutation). I am 6'4" 250lbs. I can toss most men smalled than me back down the stairs with the gun still in hand in need be. By your own rules, because you have a gun, you win. Let us take my house for example. Average american home, stairs lead up and around a turn to head to the bedrooms. You have to meet me at that turn (going by your own rule that neither of us have the element of surprise). Even if you are a trained shot, accurate 99% of the time at 300ft, you are going to find yourself hard pressed to come around the corner, bring your firing line to bear on me, and get off a couple shots before I have a hand on you. You could fire blindly around the corner I suppose, but then we're back to ammo contraints. If you swing around the corner to bring your pistole to bear on me you have just offered your weapon ahead of your body. THIS IS THE MAIN REAsON WHY PISTOLS SUCK IN CLOSE QUARTERS. If you swing round the corner with pistol down, you're mine before you get a chance to raise it. You may shoot me in the foot or leg but I've grabbed your arm and neck by the time. Adrenaline will not make your bullets do any more damage, but it will allow me to squeeze your larynx with a good deal more force. A blade can be drawn back with the attacking arm behind the body as I round the corner, If you do grab my arm and throat (now I have offered you my unarmed hand) I can still swing my blade up. Yes, you could offer me you unarmed arm with your pistol in tow I suppose, but you still have to bring to bear a straight firing line (which is a small killzone) to be effective. A blade can be swung up in an arc, allowing me a first strike. In both situations again, you may swing your pistol up, at which point I can grab your handle point and push upwards (it's much easier for me to push up than it is for you to pull your arm down due simply to the fact that you ONLY have your triceps and partial bicep effort working to bring your weapon arm back down whilst I can use my arm muscles, torso muscles, leg muscles, and mass to keep your arm driven upwards.) If you were to do the same to me, my blade held backhand as it would be, I can simply twist my wrist to drag the blade on your offending hand. Again, this assumes the easiest grab which is holding by the wrist. Fist grabs are a bitch to maintain due to the shape. I will give to you that a blade held forehand is much like a gun in that grab. You cannot bring it's lethality to bear. So an untrained blade wielder at this point would be at the same disadvantage as the gun wielder. However, with both weapons brought out of combat for the moment (and assuming you're not emptying your magazie into my ceiling while we struggle) the fight is now based upon the individual, not the weapons. Therefore, having the gun does not afford you the "I win" button. To assume guns beat rock, paper, and scissors all the time is a horrific assumption when you leave out all the variables.

    Trained on trained, I will put my money on the blade wielder (this is assuming ONLY training in their given weapon is factored in, not assuming both assailants are Chuck Norris). Untrained on untrained, it's a 50/50 roll. Depending on the variables of weapon, size of assailants, environment, and such. I am speaking from the perspectus of a home entry. From square one I have the first advantage in that you are breaking into my house. Something I know well and will defend with vigor. If we are talking about a man with a gun and a man with a blade meeting on the street for a duel? Sure, I will conceed to the pistoleer at that point. It would be just like a stupid WOP to bring a knife to a gunfight at that point - to paraphrase Sean Connery. Nonetheless, my debate is that from a home invasion scenario, in which a blade will have a bevy of advantages from which to choose. I even find it easier to teach someone to use a blade with some degree of training to defend themselves at point-blank range than it is to teach them to use a pistol.

    In short, to quote you while I "look at the subject broadly" I realise that a gun does not mean victory as a rule of thumb. To say that I must take the situation at a broad glance in one breath, then say that a gun will win as a rule of thumb in the next is contradictory. Yes, there are variables for both. I'd imagine a deep head wound from either weapon produces a "Game Over, man" effect, but headshots are a bitch with either weapon. Center of mass is the desired target and a blade purely does more damage than a single round. Certianly I will conceed to you that multiple rounds have have fired, at the same time you will have to conceed that the blade will be "torn" out of the targets chest due sheerly to the reactions of both combatants, no training needed there, it's relfex.

    "What is it I have against Microsoft, you ask? Well, you know how you feel when you wait for an MMO to come out and when it does you feel like you've paid to play it's beta test for another 6-9 months before anything even thinks of working the way it should? Being a network engineer you feel that way about anything Microsoft puts out."

  • Malachi1975Malachi1975 Las Vegas, NVPosts: 1,079Member
    Originally posted by Draenor


     
     
    Originally posted by Malachi1975


     
    Originally posted by Draenor


    Swords take a great deal of training to use effectively...guns do not.  And no matter how good you are with a sword, a guy with a gun will still be able to shoot you from 500x the distance that you could hit him with that sword.  You want to talk about close quarters?  Ever been pistol whipped?  You don't have to shoot someone with a gun in order to kill him with it.  My dad is a retired police officer and once went to a murder scene in which someone pistol whipped a person so hard that bits of their teeth and skull were jammed into the slide of the gun and it would not fire..the guy managed to survive somehow. (the person murdered had actually been shot with the gun before it got jammed from bits of bone)
    While I will give you the fact that swords take a much greater discipline to master I will refute two things:

     

    1- An untrained shooter will NOT hit me at 500x the range I can strike with a katana (and don't make me pull out my Nodachi at 72"). Give I am deadly within 4 feet range past my arm reach (not including blade length) without moving, that would mean your shooter would be roughly 2000ft from me. Good luck hitting me at that range. I know what you were going for, but your multiplier was a bit overzealous.

     

    2- Since I am trained, I can garaunty you that whomever was the poor bastard who tried to pistol whip me at close range, coming around a corner would have at least 12" of steel shoved neatly into the chest cavity. Problem one in blade v. gun in melee. I can grab and hold your gun without damage to my hand, you cannot say the same about my blade. Also, a single hit to the face from a pistol is generally nowhere near as devistating as a single hit to the face with a true-steel blade. You may knock my jaw out of place or crush my cheekbone in the first strike, but one draw of a blade across your face and you're down. EIther with an eye hanging out, throat gushing blood, or mouth split from ear to ear. That's only taking in to account that I swipe the blade and not drive it into your face.

    reseponse to refutation number 1:  It doesn't matter of the multiplier was over zealous, the point remains.

    The ONLY reason I refuted the range comment is that this debate was in regards to close combat only. It goes without saying if I pull out a 30o6, .223,  or .308 rifle you can kill someone with a blade at range. However, range IS always a factor when using a gun. SInce my angle has always been abount close combat and home invasion scenarios you have to come to me. Therefore, you've negated your range advantage. Unless you broke into my house just to exchange insults and have a mexican stand-off.

    response to refutation number 2:  I wasn't referring to fighting someone with a pistol in

    close range with a sword, that would be absolutely insane, as pistols are obviously not DESIGNED for close quarters combat.  The point was that a pistol does not have to be fired in order to be effective on close quarters.  Even with that point made though, I'll take a foot long piece of solid wood over your average hunting knife in a melee fight any day.

     

    True, a pistol can be an effective blunt object. But I can garauntee you that if you smash my nose with a perfectly angled strike from the butt of your pistol at the same time I drive my blade into the very same location on your face, you're in worse trouble than I am. I've never refuted the lethality of a projectile weapon ever. I've only compared their usefullness at point-blank ranges.

     

    "What is it I have against Microsoft, you ask? Well, you know how you feel when you wait for an MMO to come out and when it does you feel like you've paid to play it's beta test for another 6-9 months before anything even thinks of working the way it should? Being a network engineer you feel that way about anything Microsoft puts out."

  • JayBirdzJayBirdz Clarksville, TNPosts: 1,017Member

    Not sure why you all are really into this.     There way to many variables to a confrontation to say anythings an I win button.   Dependant on the the people of the confrontation, their situational awareness, their knowledge of the enviroment around them. .  I honestly don't get this thread what so ever.  Other than its a I can win with my sword / gun thread.    You guys are seriously going into some really deep posts making up situations.

    The thing is it doesn't work like that in real life. I do get what some of you are saying your coming up with example situations and saying this is what you would / could do.  But that and reality are very different.  And thats the reason I say a persons situational awareness is the most prudent factor of determing the outcome.

    I am not saying some of you are not talented  with your swords or guns.    All it takes is one mistake.  Or the other person to outsmart you and your advantage in skill has just diminished. :)

     

  • Malachi1975Malachi1975 Las Vegas, NVPosts: 1,079Member

    Originally posted by JayBirdz


    Not sure why you all are really into this.     There way to many variables to a confrontation to say anythings an I win button.   Dependant on the the people of the confrontation, their situational awareness, their knowledge of the enviroment around them. .  I honestly don't get this thread what so ever.  Other than its a I can win with my sword / gun thread.    You guys are seriously going into some really deep posts making up situations.
    The thing is it doesn't work like that in real life. I do get what some of you are saying your coming up with example situations and saying this is what you would / could do.  But that and reality are very different.  And thats the reason I say a persons situational awareness is the most prudent factor of determing the outcome.
    I am not saying some of you are not talented  with your swords or guns.    All it takes is one mistake.  Or the other person to outsmart you and your advantage in skill has just diminished. :)
     

    That's pretty much what the end of my last long post stated. Variables and the individual make the fight. Not the weapon. However, I just don't like it when people say "Guns win everytime." Hence why I bothered showing just a few situations in which a gun does not. Yes, I could easily do so vice versa for the pistoleer, but I was pointing out the commentary on YouTube where people were spouting "I could shoot you so easy and win because I am super cool with my gun and your sword is pointless" comments.

    "What is it I have against Microsoft, you ask? Well, you know how you feel when you wait for an MMO to come out and when it does you feel like you've paid to play it's beta test for another 6-9 months before anything even thinks of working the way it should? Being a network engineer you feel that way about anything Microsoft puts out."

  • As a man involved in several knife fights in my troubled youth, I can offer some real world insight.



    The pain threshold argument is not always relevant. I've heard of people getting shot and not realizing it. I've personally been stabbed in the chest and not realized I was wounded until after the fight. I've also stabbed someone with a very minor strike and watched them freak out so badly they nearly feinted. It really is up to the individuals in question. There are people out there who can take painful bullet wounds and just go faster, and unlike the movies if you shoot someone their forward momentum does not stop, they keep moving just as fast as they were.



    ...in case anyone's worried, I've never been in a knife fight with anything but scum of the earth, and I've never killed or permantantly disabled anyone. You do crazy things right out of high school sometimes.

  • WantsumBierWantsumBier Around, AZPosts: 1,079Member

    OK Riki fair enough... How about this guy?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pN-Tm9HSKdg

    I shoot for the curve... anything above that is gravy.

  • UrdigUrdig ., DEPosts: 1,260Member

    I could have swore that the .45 pistol was made specifically for close quarter combat.  Something to do with Philipinoes and machetes.

    At 6 feet a large caliber pistol doesn't have to be aimed.  It only needs to be pointed.  

     

     

    Wish Darkfall would release.

  • UrdigUrdig ., DEPosts: 1,260Member

    Originally posted by WantsumBier


    OK Riki fair enough... How about this guy?
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pN-Tm9HSKdg
    lol.

    That was sick!

    Wish Darkfall would release.

  • WantsumBierWantsumBier Around, AZPosts: 1,079Member

    You are pretty much right about the .45.  it was desinged as a man stopper.  The philipios you were taking about were so doped up that the .38 cal the U.S. was using at the time would not phase them.

    Aiming always helps, but even a round to the leg would be enough to stop someone.

    I shoot for the curve... anything above that is gravy.

  • Rikimaru_XRikimaru_X Myrtle Beach, SCPosts: 11,939Member

    Originally posted by WantsumBier


    OK Riki fair enough... How about this guy?
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pN-Tm9HSKdg

    I think someone deleted my reply to this. Basically I can get though that guy too. He has to stand still to shoot that much and put all his focus into his hands. So once I dodge the first 6 I will move on in and cut him up.

    -In memory of Laura "Taera" Genender. Passed away on Aug/13/08-
    |
    RISING DRAGOON ~AION US ONLINE LEGION for Elyos

  • WantsumBierWantsumBier Around, AZPosts: 1,079Member

    Originally posted by Rikimaru_X


     
    Originally posted by WantsumBier


    OK Riki fair enough... How about this guy?
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pN-Tm9HSKdg

     

    I think someone deleted my reply to this. Basically I can get though that guy too. He has to stand still to shoot that much and put all his focus into his hands. So once I dodge the first 6 I will move on in and cut him up.

    Actually It looks like his focus was on the red ballons (each smaller than a juman head).  I'm not saying it would not be possible for a ninja, but it would pose a challenge.

    A pirate would not stand a chance.

    I shoot for the curve... anything above that is gravy.

  • //\//\oo//\//\oo MalboroughPosts: 2,767Member

    What is wrong with you people? Are you all so insecure that you need massive arsenals just to feel safe in your little studio apartments? You nerds are just Taxi Driver wannabes, but I'm sure that Robert De Niro could kick all of your asses his butt cheeks.

     

     

     

    ........On that note, I've got a couple of 357's, dozens of knives, a few swords and a sawed off shotgun in my studio apartment.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    Yeah, I've got a big collection too i

    This is a sequence of characters intended to produce some profound mental effect, but it has failed.

  • OlujiwanOlujiwan EindhovenPosts: 18Member

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0iK2ndUyKE8&mode=related&search=

    This speed is just freaking not from planet earth o_O

     

    unbeleiveable.....*Astounded*

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    *Finds out his mouth is still open, and closes it...*

    Equilibrium's Community Leader.
    A dedicated Guildwars 2 PvP Guild.

  • XeximaXexima Keller/ Denton, TXPosts: 2,695Member

    Personally, I own a ruger .22/10.  If some guy was standing VERY still 50ft away, I could shoot him in the pupil, but that is not very effective at such a close range... may be the 10 shots I could get off in about 2 seconds might help.

    I say knifes FTW

  • Malachi1975Malachi1975 Las Vegas, NVPosts: 1,079Member
    Originally posted by //\//\oo


    What is wrong with you people? Are you all so insecure that you need massive arsenals just to feel safe in your little studio apartments? You nerds are just Taxi Driver wannabes, but I'm sure that Robert De Niro could kick all of your asses his butt cheeks.
     
     
     
    ........On that note, I've got a couple of 357's, dozens of knives, a few swords and a sawed off shotgun in my studio apartment.
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
    Yeah, I've got a big collection too i



    Dude, 1- I live in a 1400 sq ft home that I own with my gal and 2- Get Bobby D over here. I'd LET him kick my ass. He's too cool. Hell, I would run around for weeks saying "Man! Bobby D came over to my house and kicked my ass!!!"

    "What is it I have against Microsoft, you ask? Well, you know how you feel when you wait for an MMO to come out and when it does you feel like you've paid to play it's beta test for another 6-9 months before anything even thinks of working the way it should? Being a network engineer you feel that way about anything Microsoft puts out."

  • ZikielZikiel Cincinnati, OHPosts: 1,138Member

    Hehe, got me a Ruger 10/22 also, I like it.  I could make a kill with it, but damn- I can not hit small targets worth shit with it. In other news.. I need to go see Taxi Driver.. never did that.

  • WantsumBierWantsumBier Around, AZPosts: 1,079Member

    I also have a small collection Ruger 10/22, Mossburg 12 ga Turkey gun, MAC 90 assault rifle, Ruger 44 mag (single action), H&K USP compact .40, Sig 9mm. , Walther P-22 with bridge mounted red dot (very fun), and a Kimber .45 (My off duty CCW).

    I did not buy these for home defense, I bought them because I like shooting! I put a couple hundred rounds down range every week.

    I shoot for the curve... anything above that is gravy.

  • WantsumBierWantsumBier Around, AZPosts: 1,079Member

    Originally posted by Zikiel


    Hehe, got me a Ruger 10/22 also, I like it.  I could make a kill with it, but damn- I can not hit small targets worth shit with it. In other news.. I need to go see Taxi Driver.. never did that.
    Invest in an inexpensive optics system for it. Like this one.

    http://www.opticsplanet.net/tasco-1x30-22-reddot.html

     

    I shoot for the curve... anything above that is gravy.

  • ZikielZikiel Cincinnati, OHPosts: 1,138Member

    Just remembered something.. I think this thread would appreciate it. Actually, I think my shooting problem has more to do with holding steady, I can see the target, but I think I'm just a bit unsteady.

     

  • WantsumBierWantsumBier Around, AZPosts: 1,079Member

    sorry cant see the pic

    I shoot for the curve... anything above that is gravy.

  • Malachi1975Malachi1975 Las Vegas, NVPosts: 1,079Member

    Originally posted by Urdig


    I could have swore that the .45 pistol was made specifically for close quarter combat.  Something to do with Philipinoes and machetes.
    At 6 feet a large caliber pistol doesn't have to be aimed.  It only needs to be pointed.  
     
     
    As was said below, you are correct in that the .45 Cal was designed to have a greater impact on the Philipos, but it was NOT designed for "close combat". The change was the "stopping" power of the round, but it's accuracy at any given range. Sadly, too many people think Hollywood is real and that people get knocked backward when shot with a round, but anyone know knows anything about simple physics knows that for a round to knock you back 5' the shooter would also have to be knocked back (or have something to help resist said force) the same 5'. Equal and opposite reactions and all.

    As for caliber having ANYTHING to do with whether or not it still needs to be aimed or pointed, that has to be one of the silliest ideas in firearms I have ever heard. Changing from 9mm to .45 caliber is still going from roughly 1/4" to 1/2" (slightly under as .50 cal aka. 12.5mm is 1/2" in diameter). You STILL need to aim at your target. Adding 1/4" of an inch in your projectiles size doesn't suddenly allow it to sweep a 3 foot area with a single round. Had you sad a shotgun with double o. buck not needing to be aimed I would have agreed a bit more. But all slugs need to be aimed.

    Also, if you read my encounters I am talking true point-blank encounters. Coming into my house you wouldn't have 6' between you an I. You'd be lucky to have 2'. I take my home defense lessons from the Japanese and their castles. Make your invaders run upwards and change directions at all times. There's a prime reason why Japanese Castles were a bitch to sack.

    .45 Caliber still standing, it does not cause as much tissue damage as a kitchen knife. The speed alone of the bullet causes cleaner nerve ending cuts which produce a higher level of tollerance when in shock. A blade tears nerve endings, which causes more pain. A great example of this would be that for many people you actually feel more pain when you skin your knee as opposed to when you stab your thumb with a sewing needle.

    But that's just circling the debate. I only wanted to correct you in that the .45 was adopted because it had more "stopping" power, it wasn't designed for "close combat" per se. That would be a product of the pistole firing the round, not the round itself (and yes, Colt .45s were notorious for being crap at accuracy at anything more than 20ft most of the time, but that was due to a poor trigger design and hefty recoil.)

    "What is it I have against Microsoft, you ask? Well, you know how you feel when you wait for an MMO to come out and when it does you feel like you've paid to play it's beta test for another 6-9 months before anything even thinks of working the way it should? Being a network engineer you feel that way about anything Microsoft puts out."

2
Sign In or Register to comment.