Quote:
Originally Posted by swatsurgeon
Tuukka,
What you have stated is what the average person is given as truthful information by 'authorities'. It is up to the individual to believe or investigate what they hear to verify that information and with Google and other search functions at your fingertips, 'expert opinion' is becoming 'opinion' because we now have the tools to challenge those opinions and clarify/verify validity.
ss
|
Yes, I am complete amateur on this matter and have to rely on the professionals to present the facts, but doing a proper investigation behind the facts is some what hard being an amateur
ie. a case of who's opinion to trust.
Here is a quote from the referenced thread;
Quote:
From a terminal performance perspective gelatin is AN ENGINEERING EVALUATION TOOL to examine a bullet's behavior (penetration, deformation, fragmentation, and yaw) when it strikes and penetrates soft tissues.
From a wound ballistics perspective gelatin provides A REASONABLE INDICATION of a bullet's wounding characteristics in soft tissues.
|
If ballistic gelatin is not the best possible testing medium, is testing on animals or cadavers a better alternative?
Related to this matter, here is a doctoral dissertation by a person I have been involved with due to my work;
Jorma Jussila
Wound ballistic simulation : Assessment of the legitimacy of law enforcement firearms ammunition by means of wound ballistic simulation
https://oa.doria.fi/handle/10024/2120