Behold the power of The Hogg!

You are right. But the math does not tell the full story. What determines damage to the target of a bullet is how much of the kinetic energy of that bullet is transferred to the target. That is the point that you math egg heads keep ignoring. In the real world, a high energy bullet that penetrates all the way trough a body can do less damage than a low energy bullet that dissipates all of its energy within the body.

Actually you don’t.

You are quite wrong on my opinion of David Hogg…and left-wing protesters in general.

I’ve made my opinion quite clear several times on them.

No- you do what people are are hyper-partisan typically do…you see an argument made and you assume political affiliation based upon those arguments.

Already been addressed earlier in the thread.

I was just trying to get on the same page for the KE calculation. One item at a time.

Agreed on your point that energy absorption and dissipation playing a role. The physics of the problem are complex.

Go see it? Black Panther is already on Bluray in stores.

What source did you get this from?

“A 22 caliber bullet weighs 40 grams. A 45 caliber bullet weighs 230 grams … “

You can weasel all you want, but it is clear from that quote that you don’t know ■■■■ about this topic. You are just Google searching and not comprehending what you read because you are ignorant of the terminology. It’s time for you to stop pretending.

High velocity bullets may make for a “cleaner path” through the body but are also known to cause cavitation effects that can cause damage “far” from the site of the wound.

Stated this earlier in the thread as well.

Stated that kinetic energy wasn’t all there was to it.

You finally got one right.

Velocity does matter in damage done. You saying it is does NOT change that fact.

Allan

Yeah, Wildrose massively failed in his energy equation criticism centered around units. A bit surprising because I was under the impression that he worked in a lab or something like that.

Yeah, I’m researching this now and my sources seem to think the high velocity bullet does far more damage.

The statement you bolded is absolutely correct, but if you read it carefully, it does NOT say that that is the description of ball ammo. Yes, the ammo usually fired from AR style rifles is ball ammo, but ball ammo is also commonly fired by most small arms and has been for more that 100 years. Ball ammo has been standard issue for the military since the Spanish - American War. Ball ammo refers to a type of bullet … the projectile … not the caliber.

When this silliness first came up, I suggest that you Google “ball ammo” and become knowledgeable … but obviously, you are committed to remaining ignorant and making a fool of yourself.

I quoted your words exactly describing ball ammo as being “small fast moving” and “usually fired from AR style rifles”

You people are worthless if you can’t even admit what your own words were.

But then, I already knew that.

Wrong character. It’s normally expressed as foot-pounds abbreviated as ft-lbs.

Good to know. Thanks!

Only if we talk about the transfer of energy from the projectile to the target in terms of ergs per millisecond. :wink:

Welcome to the Hannity Forums part deux. :wink:

We’re both supposedly measuring energy.

Are you lost?

Nope…it’s you who’s lost.

You quoted my exact words, but you got the meaning completely wrong. My words do NOT say that ball ammo is defined as a small caliber high velocity bullet, they say that the usual ammo used in an AR is ball ammunition … which it is. It is also the usual ammo used in many other rifles and hand guns. Google “ball ammo” … quit making a fool of yourself.