http://www.brokawarms.com/library/ba...iarization.pps
Interesting.
Couple of points.
I would remove the adolescent accidental deaths from the firearm stats, or at least show the ages involved. A sixteen year old, who can operate a motor vehicle is not really an adolescent IMHO, for the purposes of this discussion.
The bullet types abbreviations list also included a list of trade names. I hope that you explained that none of them actually explode, have additional power, are extremely terminal, etc.
Second, revolvers and autoloading pistols are both handguns, but a revolver is not a pistol, in American technical usage. The word "pistol" refers to autoloading handguns. The term "Revolver Pistol Diagram" and "Pistol Pistol Diagram" are technically (and redundantly) incorrect.
What the heck is a "Shotgun Pistol Diagram"?
Differentiating between tactical and hunting versions of firearms is semantics, as the functional differences are nonexistent. The same shotgun, like the Rem 870 becomes tactical by the use of parkerizing, black furniture, a different stock and a mag extension. This leads back to the "assault weapons" debate, where people think that can ban an entire class of firearms based on the appearance and characteristics. The same with the Rem 700. I would avoid the entire labeling process, or explain the point that it is merely cosmetics.
Your wounding ballistics statements are only valid for a solid projectile. Heavier bullets may, or may not penetrate deeper, depending on the construction. A Barnes solid may be lighter and less dense than a hollow-point in the same caliber, for example.
At least three of the pistol bullets you listed are supersonic in MV in the normal factory loadings in violation of your definition. A .22LR is supersonic for a short while, but I consider it to be a low velocity round. At the same time, it is small and lightweight. What about the common street crime .22s, .25s, .32s, etc. with small, lightweight bullets?
Some handgun rounds are very poor penetrators, and most rifle rounds are better penetrators due to multiple factors. On average, a rifle round that fragments creates a much larger permanent cavity than a pistol round.
Temporary cavitation does not "explode" anything. IIRC, it compresses or stretches non-elastic tissue, like certain organs, and damages them.
When a rifle bullet fragments, the secondary projectiles have destruction and wound tracks of their own than add to the permanent wound cavities. Some bullets cannot withstand the forces when they begin to yaw, and at that point, the jacket ruptures and they fragment. That helps explain some of the greater wounds.
Your Temporary Cavitation slide generalizing about the 5.56 is wrong. Dead wrong. It appears to be based on rumors and anecdotal stories. If you are hit by a military 5.56 round traveling above the frag velocity (2500-2700 fps), and it remains in tissue till the first yaw, you are going to have a lot of permanent tissue destruction wherever it hits.
Again, a .heavy 45 ACP round may be a poor penetrator, if the construction and impact velocity allow it to expand. A faster 9x19 bullet may be a better penetrator, if it is a non-expanding round. This generalization is great for a military audience limited to issue FMJ rounds. If non-standard ammo, like hollow points are used, the point could be completly incorrect.
Affect is what something does. Effect is what is done to something.
Good presentation overall, but needs tightening up on some of the details.
Thanks for putting it together.
TR