Valentine's day…

[ngghowParticipant 6]

johnconnor777 wrote:

I didn’t know about the Japanese Valentine’s day, I just learnt something new today. If guys want to watch a good action movie that nobody saw last year, watch “John Wick” starring Keanu. Non stop action, very well shot, like a solid good B movie. For Valentine’s day all men just need a juicy steak, with some good red wine, and a good blow job.

Speaking  of learning new things I had a female buddy put me on to steak and blowjob day not too long ago. A quick search just now gave me this – http://www.steakandbj.org/

 

 

[casqueteroParticipant 85]

When I was dating, I would use her to make money.

No, I was not a pimp…

For VD I would condition her to not expect anything… I would give her something better after Feb 14. Since I had my own business, I would set a trip to somewhere we had discussed weeks before – and set a short business meeting there with a prospective client.

I would get a new client and business expenses to deduct from taxes. She would be happy because she got to travel to a fancy hotel / location she would have NEVER gone on her own and something to brag about with her friends. During the trip (and weeks after), I  got my head / pussy / ass combo treatment  without complaints. A win-win situation…

The best part: When I cross paths with them on the supermarket, they don’t remember what their current husbands / BF gave them last VD… but they still remember the trip to Venezuela, Punta Cana, or Cancun they had with me years ago…

[Cap285Participant 6007]

Guns: Personal preference. I got hooked on the 9mm in the Marines, the Beretta 92FS. I can get 30 rounds in the kill zone at a high rate of speed. Then of course there is the 9mm vs. .45 argument but the 44. Special pretty much solves that. Lately, I have been perusing 1911’s and Mossberg shotguns at the local gun shops. I’d like a 1911 for winter carry and a Mossberg 590 for the house. I could buy both in another divorce bill for a scumbag lawyer hadn’t shown up. So, I might have to find a cheaper pistol. Maybe a Rossy .357 for the house. I currently carre a generation 4 Glock 19 with Federal hollow points.

National MGTOW day: Yes! Buy yourself a gun….and other stuff. Here is what I have bought myself so far:

Also got the 1984 G.I. Joe Sky Hawk and Rip Cord figure of eBay and are currently being shipped to yours truly.

As stated above, still deciding on a gun to buy.

This will be my purchase with my March work bonus:

http://parksabers.com/arcwave.html

National MGTOW day is better than Christmas!

Fuck this planet.

[Mister GeeParticipant 3]

I went to bed at 8:00 pm which was the extent of my celebrating VD Day. House is still kind of quiet.

[Governor Megachris%Participant 3584]

I had a get-together with my best guy friend, who invited over his potential “lady of interest.”  She invited a friend of hers over, and we played Cards Against Humanity, and various drinking games.  After that, it was the infamous “truth-or-dare” time.  It was…interesting, to say the least.

[Mister GeeParticipant 3]

On another note, my niece world in the flower department of a large grocery store. Yesterday (Sunday Feb 15) there were more than 5 guys returning their Valentine Day’s flowers with excuses ranging from “my wife complained they were not nice enough” to “she complained they were wilting too fast!”

[StargazerParticipant 12505]

All of which actually translate to “I bought these flowers for a girl I like but don’t have a relationship with yet who refused to accept them from me because she’s already f~~~ing someone else.”

Oh man, what kind of mangina returns flowers? You have flowers nobody will take, remove all the valentine crap from them, take them down to your local cemetery and put them on a veteran’s grave on the 16th. Who knows, you may find a bereaved widow there doing the same thing for her dead husband and hey!

“My father. Yeah, he was a tough guy but loved roses… kind of a sap for romance… runs in the family, I guess. Your husband, huh? That’s got to be hard. You know, I could use a drink… you look like you could too. Shall we?”

[BrainPilotParticipant 7640]

at casquetero,
that’s a very smooth battle plan right there. I’ve had some victories in the gender wars, but growing your business, beating hallmark, beating the IRS, and getting a woman to stop complaining and appreciate something you do, and remember it…all at the same time…

Well, that’s just showing off… 😛

At keymaster, I am aware of the no violence discussed here and agree with it so please assume the following to be a question of physics, not gun violence.

Maybe some of the guys above who are way better informed about firearms than I am could help me with something I’m not completely clear on. I hear people refer to ‘knockdown power’ of one bullet vs another one, but there’s something about the term that I don’t completely understand.

When I was in college, we did an experiment in a lab where we measured the mass and speed of a bullet coming out of a gun, along with the mass and speed of the gun’s recoil. The professor’s intent was to demonstrate the principal of equal and opposite reactions. His plan was to show that when powder explodes, it explodes with equal force (mass x acceleration) in all directions. Forces directed radially against the sides of the barrel cancel themselves out. Force directed left is equal to and cancels force directed right. Force directed up is equal to and cancels force directed down. But force directed forward into the bullet also equals force directed back into the recoil of the gun.

The result is that the mass of the gun times the speed of the gun in reverse, is equal to the mass of the bullet times the speed of the bullet leaving the barrel going forward. The reason that the speed of the bullet going forward is about 1000 times greater than the speed of the gun in recoil is that the mass of the gun is about 1000 times greater than the mass of the bullet. But the energy imparted on each of them is the same (equal and opposite).

So if I hold the rifle against my shoulder and fire it toward the shoulder of someone standing at the end of it, (and on their shoulder there is a rifle butt sized brick that stops the bullet), then all of the kinetic energy of the bullet is transferred to their shoulder with zero penetration, then the ‘kick’ they (the animal I’m hunting) feel is exactly the same as the ‘kick’ that I feel from recoil of the gun. We both get kicked with equal intensity. Since that kick is not enough to knock down the shooter or the receiver, then it’s the injury caused by the penetration that knocks down the target.

Assuming the bullet does not go all the way through the target, but stops inside it, then all the kinetic energy in the bullet is transferred into the target, and penetration is not sufficient to take it all the way through the target. But this is not the knock down ability of the bullet. The injury of penetration is. I’ve heard shooters say that they didn’t want the bullet to ‘over penetrate’ and go through the target. They want the bullet to stop inside the target so that it transfers all its energy into the target. I’ve heard them say that over-penetration is an undesirable thing because the bullet leaves the target through the other side with some of the energy it arrived with.

What I don’t understand is that, since we know that it’s not the absorption of the energy of the bullet by the target that knocks it down, but instead the injury from penetration that knocks it down, wouldn’t it be better to have the bullet penetrate as far as possible – all the way through – to maximize the knockdown power of the injury? The more penetration the better, right?

Can anyone explain this in a way that I understand it better than I do now?

Look, it's not my fault that tornado dropped a house on your sister. Now get back on your broom and get your ass out of here... and take your monkeys with you

[Mr. LameParticipant 13]

Id love to hear others weigh in on this, I’ve wondered alot of those same things.
When I hear over penetrate its usually in reference to hunting and the fact the bullet goes clean through the target and dosent expand as designed.
An example would be be a hollow point/soft point not breaking apart to cause maximum damage to vitals.

[StargazerParticipant 12505]

BrainPilot:

I’m not a ballistics expert by any means but it’s my understanding that the purpose of the firing chamber and bolt is to direct half of the explosive force of the powder charge to driving the projectile forward while the other half produces the recoil. Energy directed off the axis of the barrel isn’t canceled out, compression of the sides of the chamber direct it forward and back.

When it comes to penetration, the energy that the projectile imparts to the target is the cause of the damage the target incurs. It isn’t enough that the projectile just come to rest in the target either, you want the projectile to stop quickly. The faster a projectile dumps its energy into the target, the more force it produces (imagine being in a car wreck in a rigid steel vehicle that stops instantly vs. one with a crumple zone that takes several tenths of a second to come to a stop). You also have to consider the force dispersion capability of whatever armor the target is coated in. Kevlar, for example, doesn’t stop bullets just because it’s strong but because it also disperses kinetic energy very effectively.

So again, in the case of armored targets, you need a hard enough projectile (jacketed in copper, brass, tungsten or, if your target is hard enough, depleted uranium) to penetrate the armor with enough force that it can then dump its remaining energy quickly into the target (or blow up inside of it, even better!). If you’re shooting at softer targets, however, you want a softer projectile such as uncoated or soft metal jacketed lead that’s going to mushroom immediately on impact.

I think the idea of knocking the target down is a bit misleading. It’s not necessary to actually knock a person down to stop them… but if that’s what you were after, you’d want the projectile to strike higher than the target’s center of gravity and dump all its energy as quickly as possible.

Imagine you’re going to punch a guy… your fist isn’t going to penetrate at all. So how do you dump as much of your punch force into the guy as quickly as possible? Punch him someplace high and hard. If you punch him in the stomach, the force is going to squish and slosh around in all that soft tissue and be dispersed, plus you’re hitting him right at his center of mass which may drive him backward or even double him over but probably won’t knock him down.

Hit him equally hard in the sternum, though, and the force of your punch is dumped into his bone which will give a lot less and it’s above his center of gravity which has a better chance of knocking him down.

By comparison, a super high speed rifle bullet that strikes soft tissue and goes straight through without deforming, tumbling or stopping will do a very tiny amount of damage by comparison… just the entry wound and the internal wound channel and probably an equally sized exit wound… then go on to penetrate something else (a wall, another person, etc) until it eventually runs out of energy.

So your best bet for “knocking a person over” with a bullet is to hit them high and close to the center of mass so that they can’t twist the energy away (versus hitting them in the shoulder where spinal rotation could potentially prevent them from losing balance). But if you can hit them in the sternum, why risk armor and bone deflecting the bullet or knocking the target down just to have them get back up when you can just aim for the heart or the face which will take them out whether it knocks them down or not.

That’s my two bits.

[Author]

Posts