06-25-2020, 01:09 AM
(06-24-2020, 09:42 PM)Dill Wrote: LOL all smoke and I'm pretty sure anyone following this debate can tell.
Your claim that leg shots are only "slightly" less lethal arose in discussion of police violence/killings in the US--police who typically use hand guns.
So the "limited" study of handgun wounds addresses YOUR claim directly. Nothing to do with the IDF.
Is 1 still "slightly less" than 84"?
Dear god you and your buddies are wearingly obtuse. You’re combining two arguments and then cherry picking from them. Bottom line, hitting the leg with a handgun is a losing proposition. You’re going to miss most of the time. You brought up your IDF friend, who aims at thighs with his rifle. I pointed out that a thigh shot is less lethal than a torso shot, but not by nearly as much as you seem to think. You then posted a handgun study in response.
Bottom line if you want police to aim at the thigh like your IDF buddy using a rifle then realize they’re going to miss a lot. While a thigh shot is not as lethal with a handgun as a rifle it’s still very dangerous. Also most criminals use FMJ rounds because to them a bullet is a bullet. A FMJ is far less lethal than a JHP or SJHP.
Your study does not address my claim as it makes zero distinction for point of aim, which is your key argument. Bottom line, you clearly know jackshit about firearms and their use and no amount of posts from your little buddies attempting to back your inane argument will change that.
