Go | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply |
Who else? |
A deeper penetrating round would have a better chance of hitting a vital organ, causing the necessary hemorrhaging to incapacitate the attacker - thus reducing the necessity to empty the gun into him. Using a lesser round for the isolated scenario where the round might over-penetrate and strike a co-worker is a recipe for failure.
Following that logic, perhaps carrying a firearm with one round would be best? Having additional rounds would have increased the likelihood the thug would never have gotten the firearm from the victim in the first place. Again, fail.
Barely. Without better equipment and training, they may not fare as well - or have as much luck - next time. Even you recommend other equipment. Agree with you there. | |||
|
half-genius, half-wit |
It's all down to shot placement in the end, as our Royal Marine Colour Sergeant rifle coach used to say - 'Shoot them in the eye, any eye will do'. tac | |||
|
Powered by Social Strata | Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 |
Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |