> moderator,   i've gotten carried away by all of this discussion on the
> ballistics, design, etc. of weapons and ammo designed to wound.
 
Ohhhhhh let's say you're not the only one.. ;)
 
 
> apologize. however, would like to point out that i am not alone. indeed,
> there seems to be at least as much heat generated by a discussion of
> whether or not a bullet tumbles than rtkba issues, which are the reasons
> that we gather here.
 
Yup... and let's just say that it's the second oldest discussion that I've 
seen in the Firearms echo.. and it's never an issue that gets resolved.. ;)
 
 
 
> keep that in mind for it reminds us of the work before us. THERE IS A LOT
> OF MISINFORMATION OUT THERE.
 
Yup... Always will be.
 
 
> we need to spend more time correcting the
> absolutely foolish notions that we are daily confronted with and less
> time arguing over some of the more technical aspects of gun ownership.  
Well let me clarify the "mods" position on this issue..
 
1) If you're going to use a weapon against a human or animal.. you should do 
so with the intent to kill. *IF* the person places his shot.. the intended 
target should die. Therefore.. the Kill/wound disucssion is somewhat tired.
 
2) Much like the 9mm VS .45acp discussion.. it goes round and round.. and 
never stops.. although it is known to go dormant from time to time.. 
 
3) It really has little to do with RTKBA.. I've yet to hear of a decent RTKBA 
discussion that revolves around a kill vs wound thread..  
 
 
Therefore unless someone can really elighten me as to why this should be 
considered a part of an RTKBA echo.. it's a dead thread. 
 
 
> thank you
> and the other contributors to this echo for allowing me the opportunity
> of venting my spleen. jackson
 
 
No problemo.
 
 
                                 BK
--- DB B2300sl/001347
---------------