One wounded after 9mm bullet ricochets off Armadillo

Status
Not open for further replies.
well armadillo shells are also one of the best substance for making brainscan-proof helmets so maybe there is something to it. :rolleyes:

I'm calling BS. even if it was from a rifle, and +P+ heavy projectiles, the odds of it richocetting twice then going through a door and still having enough energy to injure someone on the opposite side of said door is pretty much ballistically impossible. I've been hit by ricochets that were traveling much faster than a 9mm and after richocheting off a single surface it still only had enough energy to tear my hand up good and bounce off my jaw(luckily my hand was up and deflected it downward away from my eyes). that 9mm pretty much would have had to have been pointed directly at the door and I think the armadillo happened to be a convenient "excuse" I'm guessing that the fact that it died in the process is enough proof that the shell didn't deflect the shot.
 
Last edited:
I believe Art's explanation of the bullet passing through the animal and then richocheting off something else.

After reading the story it seems the bullet then passed through a mobile home door and a recliner chair before entering the mother in law.

IMHO this bullet must have been manufactured by the same company which made the bullet Oswald fired that passed through Kennedy took several turns and ended up in Tx Gov's wrist! :eek:

I call BS on both reports.
 
It is very believable. You can ricochet a 168 match bullet shot from a .300 Win mag off of water if you hit it at the proper angle. In SWAT training we used to play with shooting car windshields with 9mm ad .40 Smith handguns and sub guns. We could actually shoot the front windshield at a certain angle and bounce 7 or 8 rounds off of it before we broke them.
Our "ricochets" were in actuality deflections and not true ricochets. I am guessing that the "ricochet" off the armadillo is in actuality a deflection.

Cowboy Mo, you must have missed the latest re-creations of the Kennedy shooting. The "magic" bullet was not magic at all. They have repeated that shot hundreds of times with the same results.
 
Reynolds, believe what you want and I will believe what I want.

I have seen all the recreations. For every one that substantiates the Warren report there are others that discredit. Just glad it is still a free country where we can agree to disagree:) and still own our guns:D
 
I've seen some bullets do some really unbelievable things. I have no reason to doubt it didn't happen.

I once observed an AD where a 45 ACP went straight up into a bedroom ceiling. I went to the roof to checked for an exit hole and to patch the roof and found nothing.

About a month later I noticed a small "pimple" in the sheet rock in the ceiling on the opposite end of the house. When I went into the attic I retrieved the bullet laying on top of the sheet rock and under the insulation. By back tracking I found that the bullet grazed a ceiling joist and deflected the first time, then struck 2 different rafters deflecting twice more and traveled the length of the house before striking a 3rd rafter sending it straight down into the ceiling. The bullet was playing pinball all through the attic.
 
While bullets can glance off of things such as water, no doubt, this isn't the type of issue we are talking about with the armadillo in the story. Note that the article says that the bullet "bounced back." That just isn't going to happen.

When a bullet bounces back, it usually involved a significant velocity loss. Then for the bullet to go through multiple barriers and then into the MIL, but yet did not have sufficient energy to penetrate the shell of the armadillo (where the bone is approximately 1/16" thick) is just plain silly
 
It happened not too far from where I live. It has been all in the local news and local talk radio. There are about 50 different accounts of how it happened. None of them seem to involve direct ricochet. You know the news media is very ignorant when reporting anything involving firearms.:rolleyes:
 
I agree with Art's theory, especially since the Armadillo died. But based on the article the bullet ended up in the shooter's mother-in-law. So who knows what really happened.
 
I'm with JMR on this. I've seen bullets do some weird things on rare occasions. I once was using a downed tree as a target holder for some .357 mag target shooting. I could see tufts of dirt kicking up under the log and sure enough some of the shots came out of the log at 90 degrees to where they entered. I'm thinking they followed the grain until they came to a week spot then came out...

I also think it was a deflection rather than a ricochet but not many non shooters would know the difference...

Tony
 
Bounce back at the shooter, I've hit myself with a 9mm that bounced back...

It stung a little and the pain left quickly
Same for 00 buck

Any other angle I don't know the effect or affect? Effect or affect. Grammar police help
 
rickyrick said:
Any other angle I don't know the effect or affect? Effect or affect. Grammar police help
Click to expand...

Effect is the correct word choice. Affect is only used as a noun when it's used to describe a human/animal's emotional disposition.
 
Armadillo deflecting a 9mm bullet...BS BS BS BS!!! It in all likelihood ricocheted after it exited the armadillo.

I shoot armadillos all the time with subsonic .22 bullets. They all die whether I shoot them in the head or in the side and I've yet to have a round bounce of the shell...a co-worker of mine shot an armadillo last month with his 9mm he used a Hornady 115gr Zombie-Max factory load he blew a huge hole in it on the opposite side no ricochet there.
 
Hmmm. Maybe it was a mother-in-law homing 9mm bullet? Nothing deterred it from it's intended target. (Kidding)

Actually, it's crazy that the guy was shooting within 90* of the house trailer in the first place.

Murphy had it right: "If anything can go wrong, it will, and at the most in-opportune time."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top