This discussion centers on the mechanics and design of bullets, specifically addressing why they do not contain poisons or reactive materials like potassium. Participants clarify that bullets are designed for maximum kinetic energy and effectiveness, with rifling inducing rotation for accuracy. The conversation also touches on the legality and practicality of using poison-filled bullets, noting that military regulations prohibit such designs due to ethical considerations and the desire for immediate lethality. Additionally, the discussion highlights that while some bullets can be designed to fragment or expand, the introduction of poisons would compromise their primary function.
PREREQUISITESMilitary personnel, firearms enthusiasts, weapon designers, and anyone interested in the ethical implications of ammunition design.
A bullet isn't likely to have a viable pathogen coating by the time it reaches the target - a more likely effect is that you will jam your own weapon. And if you are fighting a sophisticated enemy with medics and antibiotics there is nothing that is likely to cause them any real problems.People dip their bullets in things like horse, human, and cow feces so that when they hit the enemy they have a higher chance of causing infection.
BobG said:Decreasing the mass would lower the ballistic parameter of the bullet, meaning air drag would have a greater impact on the bullet's trajectory. The kinetic energy remaining in the bullet at time of impact probably would be less.
It's the wrong argument, anyway. It's not the kinetic energy of the bullet, per se, that kills a person - it's having that kinetic energy rip out internal organs that kills a person. It's that anybody parts hit along the way are ripped loose and add to the size of the object traveling through your body. The exit wound is always much larger than the entry wound. A bullet that would break apart would create several chunks of mass moving through a person's body. If it broke up enough to be truly efficient, you'd break up the kinetic energy into enough pieces that none of the chunks off mass actually left the body, since whatever energy remains in the parts coming out the other side is wasted.
Well, the point I was trying to make was that those who use guns are concerned with stopping someone in their tracks at that moment for whatever reason. Usually, if more needs to be done, there are more effective things after-the-fact one can do to render a threat moot (such as cuffing them, stabbing them, shooting them again, or simply running away from them).franznietzsche said:I would think this is the big reason that a poisoned bullet would be pointless. In most cases someone will bleed to death faster than a poison could kill them.