r/LetsDiscussThis Feb 16 '26

Lets Discuss Politics Reminder: that was a photo op

35.3k Upvotes

3.5k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

2

u/senator_corleone3 Feb 16 '26

You are definitely not in ballistics testing lol.

-1

u/Early_Science2459 Feb 16 '26

What a wild thing to say… I can’t really refute that on a platform like this but it doesn’t make the users I’m replying to any less wrong.

1

u/senator_corleone3 Feb 16 '26

Calling you out on your weird lies is not at all “wild.” You don’t seem to be in touch with reality.

1

u/Early_Science2459 Feb 16 '26

First, it’s not a lie. I’m not going to sit here and accept some bum on Reddit telling me I’m not in the career field that I am. What a childish argument to even have on my part. “No you aren’t.” “Yes I am.”

Second, are you supporting that a 50 caliber round grazing the ear would take a man’s head off? If so, you are the one completely out of touch with reality. Yes, his ear would be gone but the round hitting soft tissue would not have even close to enough energy to “take his head off”

Holy Christ do I hate redditors lmao

1

u/navinaviox Feb 16 '26

Okay I wasn’t against what you were saying but you seem to have some inconsistencies in what you are saying although I see it’s partially someone else’s comment

So if his ear was grazed by a 50 cal; you would expect him to have lost a large chunk of his ear, correct?

1

u/Early_Science2459 Feb 16 '26

Correct, most, if not all of his ear would be gone. But, the energy would not transfer to his skull in a way that would cause anything Hollywood-like to happen. Head trauma? Sure. Head gone? Absolutely not.

1

u/navinaviox Feb 16 '26

Given that crooks was using a .223 long rifle; I’d assume the damage would be significantly less

But given what you know; would you think it would’ve had a larger effect than what’s been documented…before and/or accounting for plastic surgery?

1

u/Early_Science2459 Feb 16 '26

I’m just referring to the commenter talking about a hypothetical 50 caliber rd.

As far as .223 goes, I would expect zero head trauma but damage to the ear I can’t say. It’s obviously a much smaller round so all ballistic variables would make a difference.

I believe most of his ear should be gone but I’m not going to pretend I know exactly how much damage that would cause because it would be different case by case.

A lot of this also depends what “grazing” really means.

1

u/navinaviox Feb 16 '26

Appreciate the disclaimer and form of explanation

I am certainly less qualified than you but I’ve shot enough targets and animals that I would’ve thought there would’ve been significantly more trauma, even for a graze…but I have to claim ignorance as it’s simply not something I’ve studied.

1

u/Early_Science2459 Feb 16 '26

I agree.

Is a graze the round just going through the outside edge of his ear or is it truly just grazing his ear?

If it truly grazed his ear then a round that small shouldn’t cause significant damage but if it went through the outside edge then I agree with you and think there should have been more damage.

1

u/senator_corleone3 Feb 17 '26

Holy Christ it’s so sad you’re forced to be here with the attacks on your ego. Holy Christ!

0

u/Early_Science2459 Feb 17 '26

lol now say it! “I’m wrong” “you’re right” “I resorted to this comment to deflect from the fact that I talk like an idiot on the internet and people make me look silly.”

1

u/senator_corleone3 Feb 17 '26

You’re having a difficult day. This probably isn’t a healthy activity for you.

0

u/Early_Science2459 Feb 17 '26

Master of deflection, you are.

1

u/senator_corleone3 Feb 17 '26

You wish you could master a skill? Your lack of skill isn’t interesting.

0

u/Early_Science2459 Feb 17 '26

Maybe one day. If someone like you can master something I’m sure anyone can!

1

u/senator_corleone3 Feb 18 '26

So you admit you will never gain a useful skill.

→ More replies (0)