Bullets....any firearms experts here? (People who shoot guns..?)

Hi all!

Hopefully someone here can tell me if this is plausible because Google is sending me down too many rabbit holes. I don't have time to become a firearms expert and I don't know enough to separate the Hollywood crap from reality.

I have a crime thriller in progress right now where are someone is shot in the chest BUT not harmed. I have a mechanism in mind for how that happens. I just don't know if it is plausible so I am hoping someone can answer my questions.

As I understand a 'bullet' is made up of the shell, the gunpowder that goes into the shell, a primer that causes the gunpowder to ignite, and then the round that flies out of the gun and hits the target, the bullet.

1. Is it possible for someone who makes his own bullets to manipulate the power the bullet has by adjusting the amount of gunpowder in the shell?

2. If so....what gets mixed in with the gunpowder so it is still a full load but does not have the same explosive power as a regular bullet....pepper? Dirt?

3. Again, if so, can such a bullet function in a handgun, both revolver pistols and automatic pistols?

4. The damage from such a round, I am assuming would be solely (mostly) from the impact of the bullet hitting the target and there would be no penetration of the target's body?

The idea is that the target will have dropped a pistol and taunted someone else, "YOU don't have the balls to shoot!" - who will then pick up the dropped gun with the non-verbal bullets in them and fire them at the target.

EDIT - should read 'non-LETHAL' above.

The target then spins around, pretending to be mortally wounded and fall off a ledge or through a window or......and it will look like he's dead and gone.

This seems entirely plausible to me, but I've never done anything with guns other than shoot a .22 rifle in the Boy Scouts when I was....11? 12?

So.....I'm hoping someone can weigh in and either tell me, "Yes, this works!"; or "No, this doesn't work, but it could work if you did _______."

Thanks all!

 

I'm far from an expert (though apparently I know more than Stephen King on the subject... ) but why not load it with blanks? Or do as you said, lower the amount of powder, but also use soft rubber bullets or something.

Plus:

Do you mean non-lethal? (though of course I've never heard a bullet talk come to think of it... )

 

I would do some basic research on reloading as it may help you in the future.

I'm not an expert, so take this with a grain of salt.

I think just using a blank as @Xoic said makes more sense UNLESS it needs to actually have a projectile (bullet) visible at some point (viewed in the chamber by the victim in this case).

Bullets can have extra gunpowder which translates to more velocity (I've seen these rounds called +1 but I don't know if the reverse is ever done relative to well known rounds).

That being said, I doubt it would be possible to get an exact amount to where the round is 'safe' but the gunshot sound and recoil are still unnoticeable. In the scenario you describe, the person firing the gun would know something is off if they have shot the gun often enough.

Some guns like a .357 can fire common rounds of different power (the .357 magnum and lighter powered 38 special) but I'm not sure anything would exactly fit your scenario.

Bulletproof vests can stop most handgun rounds but not many rifle rounds, that could be some scenario where say a 5.56 round is weakened but I wouldn't risk a headshot.

 

Ahh, stupid auto-correct!!!! I did not catch that before posting. Yes, "non-lethal" (this time I caught the auto-correct and fixed it.....

[To stupid auto-correct, what on earth does "non-lethal" have to do with "non-verbal"????? What is the logic at play there...????]

 

That's incorrect. The "bullet" is the actual projectile. The "cartridge" consists of a case (usually brass, but possible aluminum or even mild steel), a primer, a charge of gunpowder, and a bullet.

You actually mean someone who loads or reloads his own "cartridges," but many people who reload do make their own bullets (projectiles) by casting them from lead in molds.

Nothing gets mixed in. You use more or less powder. And there are a myriad of different powder formulations available, so you can also affect the muzzle velocity by choosing a faster or slower or "more energetic" powder.

Yes ... and no. A revolver doesn't in any way rely on the energy from the shot to cycle the machinery, so you can load pretty light for a revolver. Except! ... there's friction as the bullet (projectile) travels down the barrel of the gun. If the load is too light, the bullet never makes it out of the barrel. There's a word for that -- it's called a "squib" load.

In a semi-automatic, beyond the question of squibs there is also the problem of the firing process producing enough recoil energy to push the slide back, eject the empty case, and load the next cartridge. It's a balancing act -- semi-auto pistols have recoil springs. You can reduce the power of the recoil spring to allow the slide to retract with a lighter loaded cartridge, but at some point the spring gets too weak to push the slide forward and load the next cartridge.

Nope. Not possible.

Basically, any bullet that has enough velocity to make it out of the barrel of a gun is likely to do some damage if/when it hits a human body.

The rubber bullets suggested by Xoic are a possibility. Police use rubber bullets for riot and crowd control -- but not at close range. Even rubber bullets are not reliably non-lethal. There was a case a few years ago -- I think in Boston after the Red Sox won a World Series -- in which a young woman was shot by the police using rubber bullets and died. The solution is soft body armor. They make "bullet proof" vests out of Kevlar fibre that will stop handgun bullets without bulky, ceramic plates. Most police wear this armor under their uniforms every day when on duty. Those are only good for handgun rounds, and a hit would still leave a nasty bruise on whatever part of the body was hit.

To stop rifle rounds, you need ceramic armor plates. That's the armor you see in photos of SWAT teams in action.

 

Go over to taurusarmed.net and pose your question to them. There are lots of reload folks over there who could fill you in on all the ins and outs of reloading and the chemistry of the charge you’d need to create the effect you’re looking for.

 

I reload. I'm certified to teach other people how to reload. Cutting to the chase, the effect described in the opening post is not possible in the real world, using real firearms and real ammunition. I've seen people injured by ricochets (bullets bouncing off after striking an object). I have read of people being killed by ricochets from a distance of 100 yards. Guns are not toys, and the human body is 90 percent water -- it's not at all resistant to bullet penetration.

 

probably wouldn't cycle an autoloader.

I can't imagine how this would be possible; I don't think the amount of energy required for the bullet to exit the barrel would be compatible with the very tiny amount required to not harm the target. Wouldn't using a lightly loaded round with a kevlar vest work? Blanks too, although I understand they sound different from real ammo.

 

It wasn't 100 yards, but a civilian was killed by an accidental discharge by a cop doing a routine patrol by a ricochet in NYC (mistake he made was holding the gun and using his shoulder to open the door to access the apartment building). But the sad thing was, not only did he not see the person he killed, he wasn't even on the same floor. The cop got manslaughter but I don't think he served any jail time.

 

Hopefully people will see this update:

I guess I should have fleshed out the background a bit more and explained why I didn't want to use body armour or rubber bullets or blanks.

The victim of the shooting is being shot is in a state of undress and topless. It would not be possible for him to be wearing body armour, not the way I wrote the scene. The person being shot is committing a sexual assault when he is interrupted by an earlier victim who is seeking revenge/to help the other victim.

In terms of using a "fake" bullet, the gun is dropped by the shooting victim/rapist, it is picked up by someone who does not have any experience with weapons at all and she discharges it at him and he acts like he's hit by the bullet. The gun then ends up in evidence control at the local police precinct where it is investigated and it is found to be actual bullets - not rubber bullets or blanks.

The twist that the reader is not supposed to know is coming is that the person working in the forensics/ballistics lab has a vested interest in making people think the shooting victim is deceased.

As I see it, the bullet has to be real so that it passes the forensics smell test at first glance. A full investigation in a ballistics laboratory will discover that the load was manipulated to have less power but I am hoping I can cheat there and say that the basic tests check all the boxes so a full investigation is not necessary.

Hmm......maybe I need a ricochet instead but this relies on LUCK rather than the shooting victim manipulating things to his benefit and I didn't want to do that - it seems like a lazy solution.

Nuts. I really thought this would work.

THANKS ALL!!! Back to the drawing board.....

 

I'm confused, if the bullet isn't dislodged in his body isn't that proof he's probably alive? Or do you mean the shell?

 

I think a more plausible solution is something like "Ma'am, based on the blood loss observed on the grassy ridge alone, there's no way he survived. Scavengers probably ate his body, hopefully while he was still alive."

Of course if you push the point too much, the readers will know something is up.

 

Interesting. They had us shoot each other with many various blanks in simulated combat in Marine Combat Training. We all got bettered by the shit, or burnt if the shot was close, but I would never image it killing anyone.

Yes, but that's a great way to blow up your chamber straight into your face, or just not have the bullet make it out of the end of your chamber.

Rubber bullets mentioned above are a good idea.

Of course, you could always actually shoot the person in a thick area like a shoulder. Sure, they'll be quite fucked, but they probably won't die and the bullet is very doubtful to make it through.

You should also factor in that acting out dying by way of the person getting shot is near impossible. The amount of pain even a rubber bullet would induce would be excruciating. They'd be rolling around clearly alive and screaming for a while longer than someone would suppose they died from the shot.

 

Why would you even shoot blanks AT each other? What is the benefit that can't be gained by shooting at a target?

 

I'm going to have to go with the revolver I think. The shell will still be in the revolver's wheel chamber thingy. The bullet needs to go out the window with the rapist who got shot, so I guess it does have to penetrate the flesh somewhat so it can disappear with the rapist's body. Or it gets kicked around during the confusion and nobody can find it....I guess I can write whatever I want, it's my story.

I haven't really sorted this out. I was going to deal with it by having the victims being in a rural area where they don't know what's what and by the time the police show up to investigate, it's a couple of days later. I figured they wouldn't really care that much about the rapist, not if they're in the middle of the war on drugs and over-worked. How much time gets devoted to finding an injured rapist? Especially when cops are overworked and underpaid.

 

Didn't somebody die while shooting a movie because of a blank? The wadding or whatever came out under too much pressure. I'm not at all sure about this though. I keep mixing it up with Brandon Lee dying on The Crow, but I think somebody loaded real bullets in the gun, right?

 

Yeah, I get it. Any time outside of the combat exercising, where we literally fought with each to mock death in war-like engagements, it would have been inadmissible to point a rifle in anyone else's direction. You'd get your ass kicked on multiple levels for that. But in combat training, it was whole different animal.

 

Here:

"Make no mistake: blanks can kill. In 1984, actor Jon Erik-Hexum died while on the set of CBS’s Cover-Up as a result of a blank cartridge. Bored by incessant delays, the actor pointed a gun loaded with blanks to his head and reportedly said, “Can you believe this crap?” before pulling the trigger.

He had pressed the barrel directly to his temple, and the force of the explosion still did incredible damage, even without a bullet. It drove a small chunk of his own skull into his brain, which caused severe hemorrhaging and put him in a coma. He died as a result of his injuries.

“Blanks aren’t toys,” warns firearms dealer Bob Lesmeister. “You have to remember that the force of the exploding gas is great enough to fire a bullet.” In fact, some blank cartridges contain more gunpowder than regular ones in order to ensure an extra-loud sound."

Source​

 

It's an experience you never forget. I remember during our mock exercises, which mind you had been going on continuously for two days straight, reached night number two. We were posted in various combat positions, and I had was essentially front entrance duty with another Marine to our makeshift camp. Little did we know that there were people acting out civilian roles looking for water and food handouts. We were supposed to use our understanding of training in dealing with non-combatants to deal with them. They were, of course, were speaking another language, so it was difficult to communicate, but when I turned away and lowered my rifle to see what my partner in the fighting hole thought, I turned back to find two AKs in my face and felt the heat of both blast, the powder and ash out of those barrels scrape my neck. Learned some valuable lessons when I saw the gunshot that would end my life because of my own ignorance. I know it's fake, but it put things into perspective for me. The sound and the muzzle flashes are more than real enough for me.

 

I remember him as Phineas Bogg on the time travelling tv show 'Voyagers!', sort of like an American version of Dr. Who.

With live blanks, like in the case of Brandon Lee, anything in the barrel, intentional or not, will be the projectile when the powder ignites. In Jon Erik-Hexum's case, his own flesh and bone became the projectile.

 

He put the barrel to his head like a moron. Of course the pressure burst, muzzle flash, and and powder bits killed him. Its like lighting an m80 and then closing your hand around it. Pressure needs to go somewhere.

That's pretty circumstantial. Blanks are pretty much just fine.

The Brandon Lee incident, if I remember right, was a misload with sn actual bullet. I cant remember though.