When ever you have a discussion about bullet effectiveness some one ALWAYS, without exception, points out that "shot placement" is what counts.
As if to invalidate the discussion regarding bullet technology and performance.
Get's kind of old.
We all know that bullet placement is extremely important.
It SHOULD be just as evident that, if shooting is justified, perforating Bubba the feral man's upper torso with the best in bullet techology/performance is much preferal to the ad nauseum "it doesn't matter what bullet you use" philosophy.
Who are these guy's? Seems to be some developing evidence that a large percentage are those who have convinced themselves (and are now trying to convince others) that their lives are just as well protected with WWB or some other "budget" ammo as with DPX, Gold Dot, HST or Golden Saber.
Just my thoughts on the matter.
As if to invalidate the discussion regarding bullet technology and performance.
Get's kind of old.
We all know that bullet placement is extremely important.
It SHOULD be just as evident that, if shooting is justified, perforating Bubba the feral man's upper torso with the best in bullet techology/performance is much preferal to the ad nauseum "it doesn't matter what bullet you use" philosophy.
Who are these guy's? Seems to be some developing evidence that a large percentage are those who have convinced themselves (and are now trying to convince others) that their lives are just as well protected with WWB or some other "budget" ammo as with DPX, Gold Dot, HST or Golden Saber.
Just my thoughts on the matter.
Last edited: