[QUOTE=Jawalt;16448680]That video is one in a million.[/QUOTE]
Yes, one in a million multiple times in a row.
It's only one in a million that someone drops instantly when shot. A taser will put someone on the ground faster.
[QUOTE=DrMortician;16448733]It's only one in a million that someone drops instantly when shot. A taser will put someone on the ground faster.[/QUOTE]
No. It is more common that a tazer doesn't stop somebody then a bullet to the chest. I've seen videos of people getting away from tazers using nothing but their bodies adrenaline. The video you posted probably has some kind of story behind it of the filipinos getting pumped up full of drugs and going crazy running at the attackers. The difference is that filipinos are trained to do this, and they still fall after 3 shots.
[editline]12:02AM[/editline]
Apparently I was wrong about the m3, it was produced cheap, acted reliably, and was lighter then the thompson.
[QUOTE=Oecleus;16448788]No. It is more common that a tazer doesn't stop somebody then a bullet to the chest. I've seen videos of people getting away from tazers using nothing but their bodies adrenaline. The video you posted probably has some kind of story behind it of the filipinos getting pumped up full of drugs and going crazy running at the attackers. The difference is that filipinos are trained to do this, and they still fall after 3 shots.
[editline]12:02AM[/editline]
Apparently I was wrong about the m3, it was produced cheap, acted reliably, and was lighter then the thompson.[/QUOTE]
Cool, think what you want.
Filipinos are obviously a super race bred for warfare.
[QUOTE=DrMortician;16448883]Cool, think what you want.
Filipinos are obviously a super race bred for warfare.[/QUOTE]
You misjudge what the mind and a body full of drugs can do.
[QUOTE=Jawalt;16445727]Lol, the round is useless. That made me giggle. Bullets kill people, size, shape, they don't matter when you're shot in some major artery and bleeding rediculously fast, or in the chest, or head. A bullet is a bullet man.
Against a man that is, shooting at a vehicle etc is an entirely different ballgame, but if you're hit by a bullet, I don't care the size you're 99% on the floor, unless you're lucky, or some shit. Bullets hurt.[/QUOTE]
I guess you know better than the guys that relied on it while in the shit, and then ditched the idea of using it again, because it was shit.
You're our new hero.
If terminal performance was guaranteed in all rounds, the military wouldn't bother spending assloads of money on research for new cartridges. Yes, you can kill someone with 4.6x30mm. You can kill someone with a .22 short, the problem is however, how effectively and quickly you can put someone out of the fight, i.e combat ineffective.
I'm telling you right now, I don't care how tuff you think you are, a bullet hurts. Professional it's not used because there's another bullet out there that does the job better. A bullet is enough to kill a man, big or small. And if it doesn't kill him he's most like on the floor. Muskets killed people, or atleast put them down. So I'm pretty sure an MP7 would have the same effect. During the civil war, all those men who were shot they didn't have huge adrenaline rushes, no. They lie in the mud, groaning is awful pain as the maggots eat away their decomposing infected flesh. Bullets put men down.
[QUOTE=Jawalt;16449746]I'm telling you right now, I don't care how tuff you think you are, a bullet hurts. Professional it's not used because there's another bullet out there that does the job better. A bullet is enough to kill a man, big or small. And if it doesn't kill him he's most like on the floor. Muskets killed people, or atleast put them down. So I'm pretty sure an MP7 would have the same effect. During the civil war, all those men who were shot they didn't have huge adrenaline rushes, no. They lie in the mud, groaning is awful pain as the maggots eat away their decomposing infected flesh. Bullets put men down.[/QUOTE]
Technically, the maggots would be helping by consuming the dead flesh.
[QUOTE=lintz;16449876]Technically, the maggots would be helping by consuming the dead flesh.[/QUOTE]
Well, yes. But I'm pretty sure it wasn't pleasant, plus it was good effect?
[QUOTE=Jawalt;16449746]I'm telling you right now, I don't care how tuff you think you are, a bullet hurts. Professional it's not used because there's another bullet out there that does the job better. A bullet is enough to kill a man, big or small. And if it doesn't kill him he's most like on the floor. Muskets killed people, or atleast put them down. So I'm pretty sure an MP7 would have the same effect. During the civil war, all those men who were shot they didn't have huge adrenaline rushes, no. They lie in the mud, groaning is awful pain as the maggots eat away their decomposing infected flesh. Bullets put men down.[/QUOTE]
The critical element you're missing there is that during the civil war everyone used guns that fired bullets so wide you could drop a rhino.
Ultimately this whole big vs. small bullet thing does work both ways to a degree. To one degree, sure, any bullet can do substantial damage. On the other hand if you're going to bet your life on a caliber you want one that will stop the threat as fast as possible. If it can do it in one hit (which it sometimes just can't) that would be ideal. Sometimes a gun such as a 9x19mm or 5.56mm is just more practical in spite of not having that kind of stopping power.
[QUOTE=Bean-O;16450466]The critical element you're missing there is that during the civil war everyone used guns that fired bullets so wide you could drop a rhino.[/QUOTE]
But now we've got bullets that are no where near that wide, but you can put out up to thirty of them in the course of a couple seconds. Well, not if you want to hit anything.
But ya, you're also forgetting the face that it takes like a tenth of a second for three bullets to leave the barrel and dig themself into some guy.
[QUOTE=Jawalt;16450485]But now we've got bullets that are no where near that wide, but you can put out up to thirty of them in the course of a couple seconds. Well, not if you want to hit anything.
But ya, you're also forgetting the face that it takes like a tenth of a second for three bullets to leave the barrel and dig themself into some guy.[/QUOTE]
Like I said it's a trade-off.
There are bullets which have a lot of punch but are heavy, kick a lot and just a handful but they can bring down anything in one hit (such as a honking Magnum caliber) and you have bullets that are very light and with little to no recoil but you simply can't count on it to stop an attacker with one hit (such as a .22LR). The most practical solution simply doesn't lie on the fringe. Intermediates between the two such as 9mm or .40 or .45ACP work best.
That's what is wrong with the 4.5mm, it's on the far light end of that spectrum. And you shouldn't have to count on hitting the target multiple times.
[QUOTE=Bean-O;16450587]Like I said it's a trade-off.
There are bullets which have a lot of punch but are heavy, kick a lot and just a handful but they can bring down anything in one hit (such as a honking Magnum caliber) and you have bullets that are very light and with little to no recoil but you simply can't count on it to stop an attacker with one hit (such as a .22LR). The most practical solution simply doesn't lie on the fringe. Intermediates between the two such as 9mm or .40 or .45ACP work best.
That's what is wrong with the 4.5mm, it's on the far light end of that spectrum. And you shouldn't have to count on hitting the target multiple times.[/QUOTE]
I'm pretty sure if someone shot at me with an MP7, I'd be on the floor, and so would most people.
Not only that, but chances are that you ARE hit more than once. Since it can fire nearly 16 bullets in a second, by the time you pull that trigger once I'm pretty sure you've got a burst of bullets. If I was shot I'd be on the floor whimpering for my mother. I was stabbed by a spring once, in the leg. It was a light gash, I was dizzied in pain. I can't even begin to imagine a bullet.
I'd wager quite a bit that you wouldn't even notice being hit by a MP7 in a firefight for the first few seconds.
[QUOTE=DualReaver;16450770]I'd wager quite a bit that you wouldn't even notice being hit by a MP7 in a firefight for the first few seconds.[/QUOTE]
Try it. Get a couple guns of similar ammunition size and have you get someone else and shoot at each other, see if you notice getting shot.
GETTING shot is one thing, yeah any bullet would hurt like a bitch. But you have to be able to count on that bullet stopping someone else. You don't know how tough the other person is. They very well could shrug off a hit. It happens. They go down later, but you don't need them to go down in a few minutes once they get off their adrenaline high, you need them to go down immediately.
[QUOTE=Jawalt;16450741]I'm pretty sure if someone shot at me with an MP7, I'd be on the floor, and so would most people.
Not only that, but chances are that you ARE hit more than once. Since it can fire nearly 16 bullets in a second, by the time you pull that trigger once I'm pretty sure you've got a burst of bullets. If I was shot I'd be on the floor whimpering for my mother. I was stabbed by a spring once, in the leg. It was a light gash, I was dizzied in pain. I can't even begin to imagine a bullet.[/QUOTE]
Pain tolerance is an individual and variable thing. Also, your analogy of you having a light gash is irrelevant. Don't take our words for it, go look at reports from almost any recent conflict of cases where individuals are getting shot 6-10 times (sometimes more in rarer cases) and are STILL combat effective (able to utilize their weapons) or still able to move and communicate.
If you want to use a lame ass analogy of you being in pain after getting stabbed in the leg, I'll use the analogy of a animal that broke it's leg and still managed to sprint away (as if it didn't even have a broken leg) when it saw a pack of wolves headed in it's direction. Walking on that broken leg would've been sheer agony, but when it saw the threat, a combination of fear and adrenaline rendered the pain a secondary thought to it's primary concern: survival.
There's a list as long as my fucking arm of notable events where soldiers/police/people have survived AND continued fighting after numerous hits from rounds much larger and carrying much more energy than the 4.6x30mm.
Please stop, you're trying desperately hard to win an argument you lost quite a few posts ago.
[QUOTE=Jawalt;16450803]Try it. Get a couple guns of similar ammunition size and have you get someone else and shoot at each other, see if you notice getting shot.[/QUOTE]
You're seriously underestimating adrenaline.
Bullet calibres do make a difference.
Best evidence: If they didn't, everyone would use tiny small bullets because they're cheaper to produce, create less recoil and don't require as sturdy a gun.
If someone is shot, yes, it hurts. Whether they die is totally up to chance. Head shot: Death. Far enough.
Torso shot: Did it hit a major organ or artery? How major? If you shoot someone through the liver, they'll probably die, but not straight away.
How is this relevant? you're in a gun fight. Even if you shoot someone through the lung and they can't breathe, they still have about 10 seconds to live. In 10 seconds they can shoot back.
Adrenaline is also an amazing thing. You could shoot someone without them even knowing they have been shot until after the gun fight is long over. If they die then, who cares: they probably killed you too.
Where were the 4000 men who've died in the United State's military's adrenaline rush that kept them going? Or the 9000 others that had to be lifted to be treated at a hospital. From makeshift explosives and small arms fire, from all sorts of guns. What happened to their adrenaline rush?
That doesn't even make sense.
[QUOTE=Bean-O;16450587]Like I said it's a trade-off.
There are bullets which have a lot of punch but are heavy, kick a lot and just a handful but they can bring down anything in one hit (such as a honking Magnum caliber) and you have bullets that are very light and with little to no recoil but you simply can't count on it to stop an attacker with one hit (such as a .22LR). The most practical solution simply doesn't lie on the fringe. Intermediates between the two such as 9mm or .40 or .45ACP work best.
That's what is wrong with the 4.5mm, it's on the far light end of that spectrum. And you shouldn't have to count on hitting the target multiple times.[/QUOTE]
4.6mm. Sorry, ammo knowledge nazi, stupid, I know.
[QUOTE=Exalion;16450994]Bullet calibres do make a difference.
Best evidence: If they didn't, everyone would use tiny small bullets because they're cheaper to produce, create less recoil and don't require as sturdy a gun.
If someone is shot, yes, it hurts. Whether they die is totally up to chance. Head shot: Death. Far enough.
Torso shot: Did it hit a major organ or artery? How major? If you shoot someone through the liver, they'll probably die, but not straight away.
How is this relevant? you're in a gun fight. Even if you shoot someone through the lung and they can't breathe, they still have about 10 seconds to live. In 10 seconds they can shoot back.
Adrenaline is also an amazing thing. You could shoot someone without them even knowing they have been shot until after the gun fight is long over. If they die then, who cares: they probably killed you too.[/QUOTE]
If you got shot in the lungs you'd be almost immediately incapacitated, adrenaline or not. You just had a long collapse, you're on the floor.
[editline]02:52AM[/editline]
[QUOTE=DualReaver;16451012]That doesn't even make sense.[/QUOTE]
It did. You make it sound like everyone can take a bullet and keep going. They can't.
[QUOTE=Jawalt;16451005]Where were the 4000 men who've died in the United State's military's adrenaline rush that kept them going? Or the 9000 others that had to be lifted to be treated at a hospital. From makeshift explosives and small arms fire, from all sorts of guns. What happened to their adrenaline rush?[/QUOTE]
Shock. It's a marvelous thing. Too bad it only lasts a few minutes.
[QUOTE=Jawalt;16451025]It did. You make it sound like everyone can take a bullet and keep going. They can't.[/QUOTE]
It wasn't relevant to the argument at all. All I'm saying is that in a firefight I imagine quite a few people don't notice being hit by smaller caliber guns for the FIRST FEW SECONDS, because of adrenaline, and are able to continue fighting back. That's why bigger calibers are needed, and a bullet is not a bullet. You want a weapon that will put a man down and incapacitate them regardless of their adrenaline or pain tolerance.
[editline]04:29AM[/editline]
The US Army even adopted the .45 because the .38 they were using wasn't putting the Moro Guerrillas down in the Philippine–American War.
[QUOTE=DualReaver;16451065]It wasn't relevant to the argument at all. All I'm saying is that in a firefight I imagine quite a few people don't notice being hit by smaller caliber guns for the FIRST FEW SECONDS, because of adrenaline, and are able to continue fighting back. That's why bigger calibers are needed, and a bullet is not a bullet. You want a weapon that will put a man down and incapacitate them regardless of their adrenaline or pain tolerance.
[editline]04:29AM[/editline]
The US Army even adopted the .45 because the .38 they were using wasn't putting the Moro Guerrillas down in the Philippine–American War.[/QUOTE]
The Moro's where high on drugs
I know that. It was to prove his bullet is a bullet thingy wrong.
Don't bother arguing with Jawalt. One, he doesn't know what he's talking about, and two, he won't give up even when he is wrong.
A .22LR will never drop someone as quick as a .45ACP or even a 7.62. The bullet does make a major difference. There is so little behind a .22LR, while your hopped up on Adrenaline, it'll be like nothing for the first few minutes. The body naturally takes over to push you for survival when threated. You are not in control, and instead rely on instincts and the most primal part of your brain. Biology can tell you this much.
"4.6 and 5.7 are dum, dey dun kill people in 1 shot!"
"No ur dum bullets r bullets"
Hey kids, lets look at option three:
These tiny calibers are accurate for SMG rounds and weigh in at a fraction of the weight of even most other standard combat pistol calibers. Now couple that with virtually no recoil.
GASP. COULD IT BE THAT THEY WEREN'T DESIGNED TO CAUSE ONE HIT KILLS? No don't be silly gunfox, they gave the P90 a 50 round magazine for entertainment value. The MP7 just has a 40 round mag for shits and giggles. It isn't that they wanted you to put a BURST into someone. That would be outside the realm of normal thinking! The fact that you can carry ungodly large amounts of ammunition should be ignored entirely! /sarcasm
Kids, the guns are designed to be used on burst or full auto. Yes, one bullet does little damage, but 3 put into the chest followed by probably another 6 in two more bursts will rape you miserably. Because DERP DERP tiny rounds have little recoil! Now add in the fact that they go through standard body armor and you have a pretty damn functional round.
The pistols chambered in the rounds are COMPANION guns. They are there to be used WITH the smg versions as backup guns.
[QUOTE=GunFox;16453248]"4.6 and 5.7 are dum, dey dun kill people in 1 shot!"
"No ur dum bullets r bullets"
Hey kids, lets look at option three:
These tiny calibers are accurate for SMG rounds and weigh in at a fraction of the weight of even most other standard combat pistol calibers. Now couple that with virtually no recoil.
GASP. COULD IT BE THAT THEY WEREN'T DESIGNED TO CAUSE ONE HIT KILLS? No don't be silly gunfox, they gave the P90 a 50 round magazine for entertainment value. The MP7 just has a 40 round mag for shits and giggles. It isn't that they wanted you to put a BURST into someone. That would be outside the realm of normal thinking! The fact that you can carry ungodly large amounts of ammunition should be ignored entirely! /sarcasm
Kids, the guns are designed to be used on burst or full auto. Yes, one bullet does little damage, but 3 put into the chest followed by probably another 6 in two more bursts will rape you miserably. Because DERP DERP tiny rounds have little recoil! Now add in the fact that they go through standard body armor and you have a pretty damn functional round.
The pistols chambered in the rounds are COMPANION guns. They are there to be used WITH the smg versions as backup guns.[/QUOTE]
That's not the argument here. For some reason he's got it stuck in his head that any bullet, no matter how small the diameter or how much energy it's pulling, will drop a man on his ass and put him out of the fight in one shot.
I think he misunderstood when one poster said the 4.6 "was pretty useless". He took it literally. The only reason I say the 4.6 is a crap round, is because PMCs and the like who have used it in the middle east, weren't pleased with the performance in comparison to other typical weapons that made up the units: typically 9mm para subguns and 5.56/7.62 SBRs. Some might argue that getting german soldiers opinions on the MP7 might hold more sway, but that would be biased to a degree and word is they don't/didn't see much action over there, least not in any capacity where they would've been using MP7s.
I doubt these damning opinions on the performance of the 4.6 were from cases where they fired a single shot either, most PMCs are well trained, I'm sure they know how to handle their PDWs.
Personally, I don't think there's anything wrong with these smaller high velocity rounds in the role of pesonal weapons for crew members and the like, but to hope they can perform in comparison to more traditional subgun chamberings like 9x19mm, is pushing it.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
