[switchsl]

After reading for the last long while, not wikipedia... but references cited for all the different articles I could find from fbi study, blast pressure injury, to wwii trauma surgens, Its pretty clear that hydrostatic shock and remote injury is a very real thing. Now, I cant shoot a pig in the leg while I watch an eeg to prove this myself, but I will take the lab rats word for it. The specific type of injury was vague, only stating reduced eeg, neural damage in certain regions of the brain and spinal cord in general. It also listed the major organs as a target but again with no specific detail as to the exact effects. There were related formulas generalizing drag coefficients with depth of penetration and overall energy opposed to transfer to tissues. To coincide with this, the different shape and dispersal of energy based on projectile design, mass, and velocity. Evidence of the routes taken from various impact points to remote wound locations referenced aswell. I wont bother listing the 30 or so web pages and probably 50 articles I skimmed through, If it interests a person thats their perogative to find it on their own. Interesting read, I have made up my own mind and can say I learned something new about how a bullet works, beyond punching a hole and hitting like a frieght train. Many people here with right and wrong ideas... some in the same breath. Im not saying Im better, or smarter, just that overall I appreciate all of it because you cant prove one without the other, thats what discusion and debate is about. It made me think for myself, and education is a great thing.