Guns and knockdown, What most of us didn't know Options

[AllTheNothing]

CAN there be? Sure. Does there need to be? Absolutely no. You can also, with the same person, just shrug and walk on as if nothing at all happened period. Why would it be a learned response one time and not the other?

The more likely explanation is a physiological one. Maybe you were nearing an electrolyte deficit as it was, before the accident. There are so many contributing factors to human physiology and how it operates in this situation THIS TIME and why it operates completely differently another time that simply because nothing obvious was happening doesn't mean that the explanation wasn't almost entirely physiological.

I know that I've sometimes felt faint after donating blood and that after I was shot (and lost more than twice as much blood as I would have from a donation) I jumped (literally) right back up and scrambled on. Adrenaline pumping through you can produce some drastic effects. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)


Isshia

Ok I know I probably should mind my own buisness but.... about you being shot... Who (pulled the trigger)? Wher? When? Why?

P.S.
I can conferm adrenalin works wonders; my problem is that usualy when its effect endes my blood pressure tend to drop below my feet.

[Method]

Okay, medically speaking, almost everyone who has posted so far is right to some degree.

The problem here is that there are so many variables (balance, force, anatomy, weapon caliber, wound channel, etc) that just about every gun shot wound is different. If you were to only look at static physics then the majority of gunshots would not knock anyone down. But there is a lot more at work.

Physiologically, there is definitely psychosomatic component (look up vasovagal response, for example). This is not shock, but can cause serious issues. "Shock", BTW is a very vague term. It includes, hemodynamic (i.e.- blood loss), cardiogenic, neurogenic and septic varieties. Neurogenic shock could cause someone to instantly fall down when shot, but that generally requires CNS damage. Hemodynamic shock can also be very fast, because it has more to do with how your body distributes blood than how much blood you actually loose (thus the big tough guy that dies from a "minor" injury).

Also there are numerous negative feedback reflex arcs that cause your muscles to go limp in response to pain or damage. The deep tendon reflexes your doctor checks give a little glimpse of how this works, but a better example would be people with knee injuries that have the sensation of their knee "giving out". Anatomically, the straightened knee is VERY stable, but when your pain receptors fire all the stabilizing muscles relax and you fall. And then of coarse you have autonomic responses like the "adrenalin" response. And endogenous opiates like enkephalins. And so on and so on.

Anyway, my point is that any and all of the physiological responses people have mentioned can and do play a role in "knock down" but its probably a little over generalized to say that any one mechanism is responsible all the time. It depends a lot on physics (balance, momentum, biomechanics, etc), where you get hit, how much damage is done AND your perceptions of what is happening. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

EDIT: Interesting read here. page 45 says that according to EEG studies "trauma almost instantly induced global cerebral dysfunction". Good times.

[AngelisStorm]

I think everyone has good points (and especially the folks who said there are two many variables involved).

I think the "Voodoo Factor" needs to be taken into account. People really can will themselves to death. Because they think they should die, they will waste away. The reverse is true with "Sugar Pills." The headaches of a majority of patients (in a study who recieved sugar pills instead of pain killer) went away, either partially or totally.

On the other hand, look at the famous shoot out between the bank robbers and the police, when the robbers where in full kelvar. Those guys just wouldn't go do.

On a similar note, the problem the police had with the .38 was that it didn't consistantly stop the target on the first shot. Similar problem with the M16. Soldiers officially complain that the caliber is to small, but "officials" (military brass tied in with the weapon, and scientists) tell them that it simply isn't true.

And there is the suprise factor. I think everyone here has been blind sided before, even when they were expecting something similar. I know on a couple of occasions when boffering, someone I didn't see landed an accidental headshot and I dropped. I was fine after a second of figuring out what happened, but when your suprised by damage one of the instincts is to roll into a ball. Even if you are expecting the type of attack. So mental state on that one.

K, think that's enough (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif) 's for me.

[TheOOB]

The truth is, whether or not a wound is fatal, most people will be out of a fight after a single good wound of any caliber. Most non combatants will play dead or run away once they start taking wound penalties, and even experienced fighters are going to lose a bit of their composure for a moment after taking a nasty blow.

Regardless of how realistic it is though, I'm not giving up leveling my shotgun at my opponent and shooting them through the window, it's just too darn awesome and fun, and really that's what it all boils down to.

[kzt]

On a similar note, the problem the police had with the .38 was that it didn't consistantly stop the target on the first shot. Similar problem with the M16. Soldiers officially complain that the caliber is to small, but "officials" (military brass tied in with the weapon, and scientists) tell them that it simply isn't true.

Pistols suck for stopping people intending to do you harm. Unlike SR, they are not a "tiny bit" inferior to shotguns and rifles, they are hugely inferior. I know a guy who shot a thug (who had just shot his partner) 11 times because the thug didn't stop trying to shoot him until he'd been hit 11 times. And it really doesn't matter what caliber they are, they all suck. .45s suck less then .22s, but .45s still suck compared to a 12 gauge. Not that a .25 or a .45 can't kill you dead, but they tend to not be very effective in stopping people right now.

I'm told that the dirty secret about the deployment of the .45 to replace the .38 was that the .45 was about as ineffective in stopping a worked up Moro as the .38, but it made troops feel better.

[AngelisStorm]

(And the .45 has a clip, which probably helped to.)

I think saying they "suck" is a bit much though. Pistols will kill you dead quite throughly, just like any gun will. (A .22 might richochet off your skull... but if it goes inside, it's likely to bounce around in your skull.)

Was the guy who needed to be shot 11 times on drugs? (I've heard of similar instances, but all the ones I recall off the top of my head involved someone out of their mind on drugs.)

[kzt]

They DO suck. Pistols are the gun you have when you didn't think you needed a gun, not the gun you take when you expect to need a gun. There was an 11 year old kid (in 1988) who shot two guys who broke into his house. He fired 3 shots from .22lr rifle at them. Both of them died, one in the backyard, the other behind the wheel of his car. I still wouldn't suggest a .22lr as good round for personal defense. They certainly had enough time to have messed him up if they hadn't bolted.

I didn't ask the details, as the point of his story was that he got charged for the shooting, as the ADA couldn't believe that it was needed. I mean, it never happens that way on TV. Luckily the replacement ADA decided that this case wasn't likely to produce the great white defendant, being the guy who got shot (I can't remember if he died, or if was stated) had just shot a cop and had a long record of violent crimes.

But aggressive motivated people, on drugs or not, can take a huge amount of damage and keep coming, particularly from pistols, but nothing short of a HMG or autocannon can reliably produce one-shot stops. The guy above said the only actual one-shot stop he ever got was from a .50 BMG round in vietnam. .38, 9mm, .45 pistols, 9mm SMGs, M16s, M60s, shotguns all required multiple hits to put down motivated people.

I've seen autopsy pictures of a guy who looked like he had a bad case of measles due to 30 some 9mm holes in him. The 12 gauge slug that dropped him broke his pelvis, at which point he dropped the gun and said "I give up, stop shooting me". Then expired.

Another cop talked about the escaped prisoner they chased for a mile across the desert after he got shot in the buttocks with a slug. It skidded along the femur and lodged behind his knee. The guy stopped when the leg cramped up so he couldn't run any further. He recovered fully.

[Critias]

(And the .45 has a clip, which probably helped to.)

Magazine, please.

[Fortune]

I think the distinction is kind of silly. Everyone knows what item the term 'clip' is referencing in this context. The word 'clip' is in common use for that item around the world, and has been for a very, very long time. The English language adapts and adopts quickly when it comes to new words for old meanings, and new meanings for old words. As an example, the words 'google', 'bling', and 'muggle' have not been in common use for anywhere near as long as 'clip' (in this particular context and meaning), and they have all been officially accepted (by whomever decides these things) into the English language.

[Zen Shooter01]

The idea proffered earlier that falling down after being shot is a "learned response" is just nonsense. I've seen a lot of kung fu on TV, that doesn't mean I'm going to automatically deploy it if someone unexpectedly tries to punch my face.

In the American Revolution, a lot of people on the battlefield who got shot fell down. They didn't learn to do that from watching TV.

[Starmage21]

Magazine, please.

Both technically correct. Magazines feed the rounds into the chamber, clips hold the bullets. The "things" we're used to seeing nowadays are actually both

[Zen Shooter01]

kzt: I have to take exception to your statement that a pistol is the gun you take when you didn't think you would need a gun. A pistol is the gun I take almost every time, for practical reasons. I've got a Florida state concealed permit. A 12-gauge autoloader on a single point sling is a little awkward down at the mall, practically and socially. And I can expect that any deadly force confrontation I get into will happen at 15 feet or less, where my 1911 will serve very well when it comes out from under my shirt.

[Ed_209a]

Both KZT and Zen have points here.

KZT is right in that if you _know_ you will be walking into trouble later, you will want more than a handgun, any handgun.

However, Zen is right in that in the event of surprise situations, a handgun that is handy (and practical) enough to carry all the time will be more helpful than the 12-ga auto that is back in the truck.

[Blade]

I don't know about you guys, but if I know I will be walking into the kind of trouble which would require me to use a gun later, I'd rather try to find a way not to walk into this instead of getting a gun...

[masterofm]

At that point why not carry a panther cannon, with a drone that has a rocket launcher, and a mortar with White Phosphorous rounds.

[Ed_209a]

I don't know about you guys, but if I know I will be walking into the kind of trouble which would require me to use a gun later, I'd rather try to find a way not to walk into this instead of getting a gun...

Gotta agree with you there. Maybe I should have said "..if you know you have to walk into trouble later..."

[hobgoblin]

At that point why not carry a panther cannon, with a drone that has a rocket launcher, and a mortar with White Phosphorous rounds.

you know your in for a bad day when packing for a trip to the corner involves gear meant for mechanized infantry (IMG:style_emoticons/default/silly.gif)

[Critias]

I think the distinction is kind of silly. Everyone knows what item the term 'clip' is referencing in this context. The word 'clip' is in common use for that item around the world, and has been for a very, very long time. The English language adapts and adopts quickly when it comes to new words for old meanings, and new meanings for old words. As an example, the words 'google', 'bling', and 'muggle' have not been in common use for anywhere near as long as 'clip' (in this particular context and meaning), and they have all been officially accepted (by whomever decides these things) into the English language.

*sigh*

Nevermind.

[TheOneRonin]

I think the distinction is kind of silly. Everyone knows what item the term 'clip' is referencing in this context. The word 'clip' is in common use for that item around the world, and has been for a very, very long time. The English language adapts and adopts quickly when it comes to new words for old meanings, and new meanings for old words. As an example, the words 'google', 'bling', and 'muggle' have not been in common use for anywhere near as long as 'clip' (in this particular context and meaning), and they have all been officially accepted (by whomever decides these things) into the English language.

I don't think Critias was trying to say that "clip" is incorrect because no one knows what the poster is talking about. However, I'm with him on encouraging people to use the correct term for the item they are trying to describe. Just because "clip" is commonly used when talking about a "magazine" doesn't mean that we should encourage people to use the wrong term, regardless of the context.

I work in IT, and this sort of thing happens all the time when dealing with non-technical users. I'd rather teach them the correct term for something and encourage them to use it rather then let them keep calling their PC a "modem", even when I know exactly what they are talking about in the context of the conversation.

[Method]

The idea proffered earlier that falling down after being shot is a "learned response" is just nonsense.

Calling it a "learned response" may be giving a little too much credit to the forebrain, but there is undoubtably a psychological component to how people experience (and thus respond) to pain and trauma. I see this every day. People who come into surgery anxious or afraid have more pain than others from the same proceedure. Its why anesthesiologist routinely use benzo's to induce anesthesia. You can take just about any medication and substitute the same pharmacological compound in a pill that is smaller, more expensive or red and the patient will report improvement in their symptoms. They have done RCTs that show that pain medications are more effective when the doctor says the words "this will help with your pain" than when the drug is just given without explaination.

There is a torture technique where you show the vitcim hot irons and describe in detail the trauma that is about to happen. Then they blindfold the person and press ice against their skin. The victims feel burning. The power of subtle suggestion on the human mind should not be underestimated.

I'm about a year away from officially being a doctor. I also happen to be an avid shooter and I routiunely carry a 1911 (and I have carefully chosen this caliber for reasons that would be better suited to another post). In any event I do not expect an attacker to just fall down, but there IS good evidence that part of what we call "knock down" IS psychological.

[masterofm]

@ Hobogoblin - Oh you silly silly man. If you are taking on mechanized infantry you must call in your favor from a great dragon and deploy seven tac-nukes. If your going to the store you always pack ten times more then you will probably need. I mean if I was going to the store I would take a panther cannon because no one will be able to see it. That is why every shadowrunner wears a trench because you can hide a six foot cannon in three to four feet of black coat. Geeze do the math man... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/ohplease.gif)

[TheOneRonin]

kzt: I have to take exception to your statement that a pistol is the gun you take when you didn't think you would need a gun. A pistol is the gun I take almost every time, for practical reasons. I've got a Florida state concealed permit. A 12-gauge autoloader on a single point sling is a little awkward down at the mall, practically and socially. And I can expect that any deadly force confrontation I get into will happen at 15 feet or less, where my 1911 will serve very well when it comes out from under my shirt.

A pistol/handgun is a compromise. It's obviously better to carry one than to be unarmed, but when it comes to killing bad guys, it's really at the bottom of the firearms effectiveness ladder. Obviously, your .1911 sits higher on the effectiveness hierarchy than your fists or a pocket knife. And while that makes it a more effective "defense measure" than many others, it doesn't make it a better "firearm". Like KZT said, a pistol is the MOST BOTTOM END firearm you can use. Pretty much every thing else is better AT KILLING BADGUYS. You can't necessarily conceal-carry other weapon systems, but other firearms are UNEQUIVOCALLY better at killing people than pistols.

[child of insanit...]

At that point why not carry a panther cannon, with a drone that has a rocket launcher, and a mortar with White Phosphorous rounds.

i see you've been talking to my players...(IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

[Whipstitch]

Yeah, see, and unless you're crazy, I bet you don't really see using your pistol at the mall as some kind of inevitability. On the other hand, show me a soldier using a pistol in an active warzone and I'll show you a guy trying to get to a rifle.

[TheOneRonin]

Yeah, see, and unless you're crazy, I bet you don't really see using your pistol at the mall as some kind of inevitability. On the other hand, show me a soldier using a pistol in a warzone and I'll show you a guy trying to get to a rifle.

Amen ma brotha!

Now if only the SR devs understood/embraced that truth...