Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Flubflow
I'll bet a 0.2g plastic BB travelling at 328fps into someones eyball could still probably ruin ones chance of becoming an airline pilot.
|
Quote:
|
The Home Office and the Forensic Science Service considers that the lowest level of muzzle energy capable of inflicting a penetrating wound is one foot pound (or about 1.35 joules): below these power levels, weapons are "incapable of penetrating even vulnerable parts of the body, such as the eye".[54] However, more recent analysis by the Forensic Science Agency for Northern Ireland has indicated that a more reasonable assessment of the minimum muzzle energy required to inflict a penetrating wound lies between 2.2 and 3.0 ft/lb
|
It'd sting like hell, cause the target to drop to the ground screaming (stop them attacking you too!) but wouldn't do any permanent damage.
Certainly wouldn't kill them!
As I said, airsoft guns are the only ones I'd have because of being an airsofter (used while skirmishing against others with eye/face protection).
I don't see why I'd need a firearm.
If I lived in an area where I felt so scared for my life that I needed protection, I'd carry something like a tazer or mace (assuming I wasn't able to move out of the area), I certainly wouldn't carry something designed to kill when used.
Anyway, back to the case at hand, according to paul's post this woman broke the law and her child paid the price.
Had she followed the gun laws then her child would not have been able to get hold of the gun.
Ban guns and again, you will have eventually another breach of the law where the same thing happens but with an illegally owned gun (maybe some "home boy" left his desert eagle lying around)
Having laws to protect people, no matter how strict, only work up to the point where they are not broken.