.45 acp vs. .357 magnum oil tank ventilation.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Nanuk said:
You post the information, you're responsible for providing the resources. If you can't provide the resource, why would we believe it?
Click to expand...
Wrong. The truth is self evident if you are educated in the topic. I am not going to link a citation for everything I say.
Click to expand...
"Self-evident" means that the evidence of accuracy or correctness is present in the statement as offered, without need for recourse to outside sources. A self-evident statement is the type of statement that generates responses such as "Thank you, Captain Obvious."

Your statement was NOT self-evident. You were saved by someone else who supplied a link to documentation for your assertion, but in reality it was your responsibility to have done so. Your statement manages to commit two logical fallacies in one try: the Proof by Assertion fallacy, and the Onus Propandi fallacy.
 
A PMC 357 magnum , 125 grain jacketed hollow point that penetrates 1/2 inch thick steel plate...
I reserve the right to be skeptical ... Momma told me not to believe everything I read on the internet !
Gary
 
Was at range when a guy brings a new silhouette cut from what looked like mild steel.
He put it out at 400 yds. Ask him why so far, said it would be harder to hit.

LOL, I quickly said I can hit. He said go ahead and try.
I said "Your target - You should go first". He said Nah go ahead and try.
OK. Figured my 270 was 20" low at 400 with my 200 zero.
Aim 3 shots at the top of the head. Put 3 through lower chest area.
He could believe a 270 would go through it - So we walked out to check target.
The 3 shots were perfect bullet dia size holes.
Each hole looked like the steel had "splashed" both going in and out.
Just 150 gr cup/core bullets.
 
When I was a wee lad, and my grandfather told me something, had I asked for "proof", the proof I would have gotten was the back of his hand...:D

We may be in a more enlightened age now, but I still hold to the idea that its not up to me to prove I'm right, its up to you to prove I'm not. I'm from an age where doing research meant more than a few mouse clicks. It meant finding books and articles, and usually spending your own money to buy them, in order to read them.

If you think I'm wrong, fine, prove it. Get off your butt and do your own research. Spend YOUR OWN MONEY doing it. As far as I'm concerned, if you aren't willing to do that, then your challenge is of no significance.


What we learn from the OP's shooting an oil tank is that smaller diameter bullets at higher speed penetrate hard objects better than larger ones a slower speed. That's it. And while that may be news to some of us, it has been widely known for a few centuries or so.
 
44 AMP said:
When I was a wee lad, and my grandfather told me something, had I asked for "proof", the proof I would have gotten was the back of his hand...:D

We may be in a more enlightened age now, but I still hold to the idea that its not up to me to prove I'm right, its up to you to prove I'm not. I'm from an age where doing research meant more than a few mouse clicks. It meant finding books and articles, and usually spending your own money to buy them, in order to read them.

If you think I'm wrong, fine, prove it. Get off your butt and do your own research. Spend YOUR OWN MONEY doing it. As far as I'm concerned, if you aren't willing to do that, then your challenge is of no significance.


What we learn from the OP's shooting an oil tank is that smaller diameter bullets at higher speed penetrate hard objects better than larger ones a slower speed. That's it. And while that may be news to some of us, it has been widely known for a few centuries or so.
Click to expand...

You're giving yourself a free license to say any BS you want without repercussions.

In the professional world, you are responsible for what you say and have the burden of proof.

This still stands without exception: "What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitchens's_razor
 
We have gone from confirming that .357 Magnum is better at punching holes in metal than .45 ACP (which was a "known" fact when I was a youngster and Dick Tracy used to stop cars by shooting the engine block from a helicopter), to discussing how thick the walls of an oil tank are, to questioning whose responsibility it is to provide documentation of an unproven assertion.

I think this discussion has about run its course.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top