Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

SCIENTIFIC Ballistics Analysis from Canada suggests 30 FEET distance

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
berni_mccoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-16-06 01:37 AM
Original message
SCIENTIFIC Ballistics Analysis from Canada suggests 30 FEET distance
Edited on Thu Feb-16-06 01:39 AM by berni_mccoy
Check out this report on the penetration of various shot sizes (0 buck, #4 and #7.5) from the Canadian RCMP: http://www.cprc.org/tr/tr-1998-03.pdf

The study is relating penetration depths based on distance and notes that the relationship is linear unless the shot is traveling at a critical velocity at the time of impact.

Note, they are using a 12 gauge shotgun with full choke and lead pellets. However, the main factor in the shot in relation to penetration is not gauge, but velocity and distance.

Another important part of this study is that it quotes penetration velocities required for SKIN and CLOTHING:

550 ft/sec for clothing and 360 ft/sec for skin.

The results of their study show the following:

Penetration Depth at 30 METERS (about 32 YARDS) is 1.9 INCHES IN BALLISTICS GEL after traveling through clothing. Is that enough distance to reach the HEART and the LIVER? I don't think so. The same test at 15 METERS is 3 inches in ballistics gel after traveling through clothing. They tested Ribs of various diameters ranging from 0.28 inches to 0.68 inches and the #7.5 shot did NOT PENETRATE PAST THE RIBS at 30 METERS.

To get past clothing, skin and ribs, the pellets would have be traveling faster than their critical velocity, which for #7.5 shot would be 940 ft / sec. For the pellets to be going that fast AND penetrate deep enough to reach the heart and other organs, it would have to be a distance less than 15 meters (16 yards). At 7 yards, the velocity of #7.5 shot is 1058 ft/sec. So somewhere between 7 and 15 yards would be the critical velocity of 940 ft/sec, near TEN YARDS.

That's 30 FEET, NOT 30 yards.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Julius Civitatus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-16-06 02:00 AM
Response to Original message
1. It makes more sense than the "Magic BB Theory" they are selling
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
berni_mccoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-16-06 02:38 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. Actually, #7.5 birdshot keeps it's grouping tighter than most other types
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
berni_mccoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-16-06 09:45 AM
Response to Original message
3. Kick for AM Crowd
Edited on Thu Feb-16-06 09:45 AM by berni_mccoy
And to those who are tired of this subject, my apologies, but this is too important to let go of.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
janx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-16-06 09:47 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. Who told the police it was 30 yards, anyway--Ms. Armstrong?
?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
berni_mccoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-16-06 09:50 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. Dunno, but it's in the report for the Parks and Wildlife...
My guess is that if this was not deception, someone who was NOT an eye witness provided the information to the investigator and misspoke yards for feet.

However, NO INVESTIGATION was DONE, NO EYEWITNESSES interviewed to my knowledge, so all we have is to do an investigation based on known facts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-16-06 02:08 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. And she had a GREAT view, from a car, on the road
...and was able to see the SS running toward the VeePee...which suggests that perhaps the SS cadre was BETWEEN her and the events??? At or near sunset??? Yeah, she had a "bird's eye" view, all right!!!

But hey...move along, nothing to see here...the cops have cleared him, no investigation, don't bother yer pretty little heads about it...if the guy isn't mad about being shot in the face by Big DUCK!!!!! Cheney, who are we peons to argue about it??

And who are we to wonder why a guy who just shot his "friend" goes back to the ranch for "dinner" instead of rushing to the hospital to wait for word? It's not like he couldn't catch a ride, or didn't have someone to drive him!!! Surely a man of his stature would have been afforded a private space in the facility to await the results of the doctors' examinations? And still, when Hapless Harry was airlifted to yet ANOTHER hospital, Old Deadeye Dick remained ranch-bound?

Could dinner have consisted of a menu that included "time to sober up?"

Enquiring minds may want to know, but unless someone starts chirping like an upland game bird, we never will...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
berni_mccoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-16-06 02:17 PM
Response to Reply #4
9. Appranetly, CHENEY HIMSELF
Based on the newly made up, er, released Police Report: http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/0216061cheney2.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wtmusic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-16-06 01:56 PM
Response to Original message
6. Do we know what choke Cheney's gun was
or whether he was packing steel or lead? Just curious.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
berni_mccoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-16-06 02:16 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. Steel would penetrate less than lead.
Don't know if Cheney was using a choke or not. Probably not because a 28 gauge doesn't require one to keep a tight grouping... the 12 gauge they used in the tests required it because they were shooting at 50 meters.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProfessorGAC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-16-06 02:18 PM
Response to Original message
10. Somebody Here At DU Said That Yesterday
Someone who seemed to know a lot about shotguns (i know nothing about them), came up with that exact distance based upon shot weight and depth of penetration. Sorry, but i don't remember who it was.
The Professor
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TahitiNut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-16-06 02:26 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. But, Professore! It's an ITALIAN shotgun!
Edited on Thu Feb-16-06 02:28 PM by TahitiNut
:evilgrin: :evilgrin: :evilgrin: (I couldn't help myself.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProfessorGAC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-16-06 02:34 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. But, A REALLY Expensive Italian Shotgun!
:*

The Professor
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Javaman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-16-06 02:55 PM
Response to Original message
13. Why does Canada hate America?
:sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Roland99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-16-06 02:57 PM
Response to Original message
14. The pellets didn't penetrate into the heart or the liver.
I believe the one traveled thru the chest somehow and lodged against the heart.

The one in the liver maybe thru the blood? There have been sparse details on this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
berni_mccoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-17-06 12:41 PM
Response to Reply #14
16. Docs said the one in heart was NOT due to travel
To get to the heart, it would have to enter a vein and travel THROUGH the lungs... not remotely likely.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slaveplanet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-17-06 12:36 PM
Response to Original message
15. Another scientific Ballistics test -15 feet w/28 gauge
Edited on Fri Feb-17-06 12:45 PM by slaveplanet
http://infowars.com/articles/us/cheney_shooting_scientific_proof.htm

On February 14, 2006 when I made my original comments about the Cheney shooting incident on The Alex Jones Show, the subsequent article and ballistic data that I complied were based on a basic knowledge of firearms and my own personal and shared hunting experiences. I assumed that they were probably using #4 or #5 birdshot, accordingly I went to the http://www.tacticalshotgun.ca/ website and gathered that specific data. We now know the shot being used was an even smaller grain #7.5 birdshot, packing even less lethal ballistics than previously thought. Included is data for #8 birdshot, the closest we could find, any differences between #7.5 and #8 would be negligible.

As many of you already know Alex is a Pit Bull, he sinks his teeth in and won’t let go. So yesterday I accompanied Alex to the local gun store where he purchased a 28 gauge side-by-side double barreled shotgun with one barrel modified and the other full-chocked. Which means the first barrel has a slightly wider spread than the second, this allows for a quick reaction shot when the bird is flushed, and if missed, the second shot will allow for a better aimed tighter spread shot.

Alex also purchased the same 2 ¾ inch #7.5 shotgun shells used by Cheney. So this morning February 16, the crew was off to the local range to conduct a controlled, scientific ballistic test to prove that the official story coming from the Cheney camp, describing the circumstances of the Whittington shooting to be bold-faced lies. Again, we can’t speculate at this time as to whether there was any malice or intent involved, or whether it was a simple hunting accident, such as a dropped gun or a snagged trigger. Although, as I speculated the other day about the delay in allowing the Sheriff to interview "Quick-Draw Cheney," it has now been confirmed that Cheney had indeed had at least one beer during lunch. If you accept the notion that he stopped at one, that’s like eating one potato chip, you must also consider the fact that he could be on a number of medications for his heart condition that would cause adverse effects if mixed with alcohol. The incident may have been an accident, an unlucky fluke, a simple twist of fate, but what happened in the aftermath of the shooting is without a doubt a crime, cover-up, and a conspiracy. Here’s how we proved it:

We used three cameras to film the test, two were fixed at different angles to the targets, the other was used to film Alex shooting the shotgun. In our group we had Raymond, a former NASA contract engineer from the Apollo program with prior service in the Air Force to make sure the measurements were correct. Another in our team was Karl, a former Airborne Infantrymen, M.P., weapons and self-defense instructor, and former law enforcement, to explain the nature of shot trajectory and wound ballistics. And finally there was Ryan and I on the cameras.
The first thing we did was to measure out 90 feet or 30 yards from where we were to set-up the various targets. We erected man sized torso targets for the shots from 90 feet, 30 feet, 15 feet, and 10 feet. We also made shots from both barrels. The first shot was from 90 feet into the paper target on a cardboard backing, this gave a spread of approximately 7 ½ feet. Rule of thumb, you get 1 inch of spread for every 1 foot of distance away from the barrel.
more...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 07:19 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC