• javasux@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    1 year ago

    if it takes you 20 shots to neutralize a threat at point-blank, I don’t think you should be allowed to own a gun

    • slazer2au@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      Fun thing in Australia, you don’t need to be able to hit a target to get a gun licence. Licences tests are more focused on firearm safety.

      • Zikeji@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        I mean, that’s how it should be. Just like getting drivers license requires you to demonstrate you can drive safely, so should a firearms license.

      • rainynight65@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’d say being able to hit an intended target and not just praying and spraying is part of firearm safety. Errant bullets can cause a lot of damage. It’s been over a decade since I’ve owned a firearm but it wasn’t for nothing that one of the four fundamental rules of firearm safety I was taught is “be sure of your target and what’s behind it”.

        • superkret@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          in the firearm safety course, you learn not to shoot if there’s anything behind the target you do not intend to destroy. Even if you hit the target, the bullet can pass through it. So it really makes no difference for gun safety whether you hit.

    • Shard@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      5.7 is known to be pretty terrible for its “stopping power” for lack of a better term. Its a handgun round design to penetrate body armor. In doing so it had to make sacrifices in bullet dimensions and weight. It performs similarly to a .22 magnum round which is a frankly wimpy cartridge meant for small game like rabbits.

      So 20 rounds to stop a human isn’t stretching the truth too much.

      • JackbyDev@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        But 20? Like if you get shot once, hell, more than once, wouldn’t you just more or less drop from the pain?

        • Fosheze@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          In high stress situations people frequently don’t even realize they got shot until after the adrenaline wears off. In my EMR course they trained us that we need to physically check for bullet wounds ourselves if a shooting was suspected because you can’t rely on the victim knowing that they’ve been shot.

          That’s why mag dumping is more or less standard practice in survival situations. Sure, 1 bullet may kill the person, but it probably won’t do so for several minutes and until then you’ve only pissed them off. So you shoot and keep shooting until they actually drop. Which, when you’re talking about a particularly wimpy round like the one above, can take far more bullets that most people expect.