So, I was watching Fox news last night and they interview a woman who is supposed to be a nurse or something from the east coast.
She made the statement that Getting shot with a round fired on full automatic is more devastating to the body than a semi auto round shot.
She said it cause more trauma when it entered the body cavity????

I am no doctor but my son in law and his father are and his father has treated a lot of gunshot wounds. I will have to ask him about it.

But to me, it sounds like b.s.
I thought I would throw this out there for other opinions.

was she the same one that said rifle rounds are more devastating than pistol rounds because rifle rounds 'explode' inside the body (I think she meant fragment, but c'mon).

On ABC the crawler said the gunman used 'Armor Piercing Artillery'. wtf.

Better get used to it, 'cause in the coming days and weeks we are going to hear and read tons of bullshit from the "gun experts Media" concerning guns and ammo.

Unfortunately, the great unwashed sheep will believe that Media BS.

Most definitely spotted a DD DD5 in the hotel room pics.

I like how several articles have pointed out he had an arsenal, and some even had scopes..

Oh no! A scope!

Yeah, after hearing the cache they found and reported about, I found out how bad I really am.

I saw the pics of the DDs, the .308 had a scope and the other had a slide fire or bump fire. I guess that must be the "conversion" they are talking about?

Hope they never find out where he bought that stock, the poor GS will be persecuted.

Read somewhere on the web today that sales of automatic weapons to the general public were banned in 1986.

quote:

Originally posted by Aquabird:
But to me, it sounds like b.s.
I thought I would throw this out there for other opinions.

It's BS.

Don't assume the media is any more informed or any less biased on any thing else they report.

A man that doesn't watch the news is uninformed. A man that watches the news is misinformed.

It’s true. Moving the lever to full auto quadruples the power of a round and also guides the bullet to a target like a laser.

When I read the thread title, I thought the OP wanted examples of oxymorons!

There was a lady on the radio this morning who repeatedly said "each rifle had a cartridge capable of holding 60 bullets!" Ugh.

WE know better, but the general public will believe whatever they see/hear. Well, most of them will.

quote:

Originally posted by ScorpionBoy:
was she the same one that said rifle rounds are more devastating than pistol rounds because rifle rounds 'explode' inside the body (I think she meant fragment, but c'mon)...

Hit a deer at 120 yards with a lightly constructed 140gr from a 7mm Rem Mag, I could identify the lungs, and there was no exit wound. The deer dropped right there. Hit another deer in the same location at 40 yards with a 325gr Hornady LEVEReloution and it put a nice clean hole through both sides and through the lungs in the middle. The deer ran 90 yards into the woods.

There maybe some truth to that particular statement.

We can all alternate our laughs about the mistakes, and groan about the exaggeration, but this is our root problem folks. The media confuses everyone who doesn't shoot or know firearms or nomenclature.

We cannot expect to win over very many converts to reason, if the public has already been misinformed and scared. Privately with our responsible and knowledgeable tribe I laugh. Overall I both lament the misinformed and truly despise the media who form opinions on topics they know nothing about.

quote:

Originally posted by Aquabird:
She made the statement that Getting shot with a round fired on full automatic is more devastating to the body than a semi auto round shot.

Complete and utter bullshit.

all other things being equal, it's about energy transference.

That is, a 55 grain FMJ 5.56 fired out of a 20" 1:9 semi-auto is going to hit with the exact same energy as a 55 grain FMJ 5.56 fired out of a 20" 1:9 automatic.

It does do more damage if you get hit by a burst v. a single round, but that's not what she's saying.

Same bullet + same muzzle velocity + same range = statistically the same result. Yes, you could have a bullet that does something weird like fragment early, or tumble funny, but that variable is attached to the projectile, not the rifle that fires it.

I would even think you could make a case for the opposite if comparing a bolt action to a semi or full auto. The bolt action round should have a little more energy coming out of the barrel, since no energy was used moving the action to chamber another round..

? Just a thought. I have no data to back it up.

quote:

Originally posted by ScorpionBoy:
was she the same one that said rifle rounds are more devastating than pistol rounds because rifle rounds 'explode' inside the body (I think she meant fragment, but c'mon).

Well that misses a lot, and exaggerates, but it is true-ish.

That a full auto bullet is more deadly than a semi-auto bullet isn't even wrong, as the expression goes.

quote:

Originally posted by SBrooks:
I would even think you could make a case for the opposite if comparing a bolt action to a semi or full auto. The bolt action round should have a little more energy coming out of the barrel, since no energy was used moving the action to chamber another round..

? Just a thought. I have no data to back it up.

Nope, the physics doesn't work that way. Any given bullet going at the same speed and hitting a target at the same distance has the same energy and terminal characteristics regardless of the gun it came from.

And more to your point, the action type has little to no affect on the velocity of the bullet. Factors like barrel length are important, but as you know, those aren't dependent on action type.