Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Hunting
Long Range Hunting & Shooting
Hydrostatic shock, what's your opinion?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="mzimmers" data-source="post: 368595" data-attributes="member: 23748"><p>OK, I'll venture an opinion. Hydrostatic shock is (mostly) bunk.</p><p></p><p>First, there doesn't seem to be a generally accepted definition of the term. Second, there are widely varying claims as to what exactly it does to a living organism.</p><p></p><p>Does a firearm projectile create a temporary wound cavity? Absolutely, although the effects of this are pretty nebulous. The arguments that it somehow causes an enormous surge in blood pressure (enough to reach the brain and disrupt functioning) are borderline ridiculous, in my opinion. The studies of this have found nothing more than very minor capillary damage in the brain.</p><p></p><p>Some people insist on trying to make the effects of getting shot more complicated than necessary. A living creature dies when its brain functioning is stopped. And, unless you accomplish this with a direct hit to the brain or CNS, it happens because of bleeding.</p><p></p><p>You kill an animal by causing it to lose blood, amply enough and fast enough to cause death. This is done with tissue damage. A hit to vital organs will make this happen faster, because they have more and bigger blood vessels, but it's not necessary. You simply need to create enough tissue damage to cause blood loss to the extent that blood pressure drops to the point where the brain doesn't get any more oxygen. End of story.</p><p></p><p>There are exceptional cases in which hydrostatic shock has caused death. I believe that an FBI shootout a number of years ago resulted in an agent hit in the neck. Though the bullet missed his vertebrae, the temporary wound channel created enough pressure to snap his neck, killing him instantly. But these are rare, and certainly not to be tried for (again, in my opinion).</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="mzimmers, post: 368595, member: 23748"] OK, I'll venture an opinion. Hydrostatic shock is (mostly) bunk. First, there doesn't seem to be a generally accepted definition of the term. Second, there are widely varying claims as to what exactly it does to a living organism. Does a firearm projectile create a temporary wound cavity? Absolutely, although the effects of this are pretty nebulous. The arguments that it somehow causes an enormous surge in blood pressure (enough to reach the brain and disrupt functioning) are borderline ridiculous, in my opinion. The studies of this have found nothing more than very minor capillary damage in the brain. Some people insist on trying to make the effects of getting shot more complicated than necessary. A living creature dies when its brain functioning is stopped. And, unless you accomplish this with a direct hit to the brain or CNS, it happens because of bleeding. You kill an animal by causing it to lose blood, amply enough and fast enough to cause death. This is done with tissue damage. A hit to vital organs will make this happen faster, because they have more and bigger blood vessels, but it's not necessary. You simply need to create enough tissue damage to cause blood loss to the extent that blood pressure drops to the point where the brain doesn't get any more oxygen. End of story. There are exceptional cases in which hydrostatic shock has caused death. I believe that an FBI shootout a number of years ago resulted in an agent hit in the neck. Though the bullet missed his vertebrae, the temporary wound channel created enough pressure to snap his neck, killing him instantly. But these are rare, and certainly not to be tried for (again, in my opinion). [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Hunting
Long Range Hunting & Shooting
Hydrostatic shock, what's your opinion?
Top