I agree that I would not want to have explain to a judge or jury or whatever why I chose to use incendiary rounds. Plus, the way I understand it, scientifically the way to neutralize a living adversary is through as quickly as possible lowering the blood pressure through rapid loss of blood. I would not want to risk that an incendiary round might cauterize any blood vessels or wounds. That's my two cents.
I agree with what you and Yankee said but I just think that burning you inside would be devastating, so I guess that I don't know and I'm wishy washy on this
Good point, maybe they'd be useful against demonic scarecrows or whatever, but they wouldn't be a good choice against flesh and blood targets. So, save them for Halloween season.
Why would you be explaining anything to a judge or jury? JHP rounds are for creating a larger cavity and wound channel. Made to kill and drain that 'blood balloon'.
I carry pepper spray and a Taurus judge with dragons breath. If they don't stop after the pepper spray, the dragons breath will light them up. Pepper spray is flammable 😂
If I were carrying my Dillon Aerospace M134D Mini-Gun, maybe a mix of armor piercing incendiary bullets, tracers, and ball would be fine for when the Predator arrives in the hot seasons. Praise Phil.🐙
Add to the potential negative side is the very real possibility of missing the perp and the incendiary round hitting something downrange that becomes burning collateral damage.
Incendiary rounds are for seeing where your fire is going, and possibly igniting a fuel source such as a gas tank. Hitting flesh would just cauterise any wound caused, most likely reducing damage. I'd stick to JHP's for self defense.
Anyone who doesnt want to use Dragons breath clearly has never seen John Carpenters 1982 documentary "The Thing". Or "they" have seen it and still dont want dragonsbreath rounds to be common and thats prettt suspect.
Explosive rifle ammunition was used in limited quantity against troops in WW2. It had variable effects and was not considered a good option. It was mainly a psycological weapon because of the perceived agony it could cause. InRangeTV did some testing a while back with some old surplus ammo they got ahold of somehow. The bullets mostly passed through their analog target before detonating, so the effect was very limited. The triggering mechanism and burn rate of the explosive was not quick enough to function on a man sized target. I guess maybe with modern technology we could make something better, but...
From my limited experience in medical technology seeing cauterization tools in use, I wouldn't think a bullet would be able to contain enough energy to cauterize anything major that would effect the results of shooting an attacker. An explosive round would be a quick flash of fire that might char tissue in small quantities, but that would be randomly distributed and probably not effective for stopping blood loss. A tracer round's phosphor chemical might have the capability on smaller vessels if it were to have the burn time inside the target (a shot at very close range), but it would need to be close enough and focused right at the vessel. This might work for liver damage though, if the round stopped in just the right spot. Livers tend to be notorious for finding ways to bleed after damage though too, so good luck. Lungs might be the same as livers, but i don't have any experience with that organ.
I guess my first comment was deleted. Watch inrangetv video on German 8mm B Patrone and Russian 7.62x54R PZ ammunition. At first they were using, I believe, 4 inch thick ballistics gel and it didn't do much, but when they used 8 inch thick ballistic gel, I think, it was putting softball too basketball sized holes in the gel. There was some charring in the hole, but I think that would be the least of your worries. The huge hole in your chest would be the main cause of death. During the 90's and early 2000's. This stuff was being imported and I bought alot of the B Patrone. They have a cross section of the B Patrone and it has a firing pin and a small amount of explosives in it. Devastating stuff.
I'm right there with you Yankee, pretty much nothing but disadvantages.. other than "cool factor" (which won't be as cool if the BG takes you out be ause he didnt go down when you shot him)
Only way I could see this is, if you spend a lot of time on the road & need it for road rage incidents where some is trying to run you off the road with their vehicle or shooting at you from their car. Incendiaries would set the upholstery of the car on fire & possibly blow the gas tank of a threat
If nothing else, I'd think it would be cost prohibitive. Self-defense ammo is expensive enough as it is; I don't even want to think about what incendiary ammo costs.
Law enforcement uses them. They are called tracers and they can cause fires in dry grass and brush etc. The LE community is pretty much immune to prosecution. They enjoy nearly total immunity from prosecution. If they are fired, they just pack up and move to Idaho. Pro Tip: Don't relocate to Idaho.
I posed this question because I just got a few boxes of .22lr tracer rounds just for fun but got to thinking that many drawbacks of .22lr for self defense (penetration depth, small hole) could be mitigated by the round being on fire while it was buried inside an assailant. Still seems better than standard .22lr out of a revolver.
Just curious, what's the bullet weight on one of these .22 tracers? I'd think it might be lighter than normal, but I'm really not sure. I've never seen them.
Short answer: No. Longer answer: For the love of any god you care to name, WTF are you thinking? Hell no. Answer that will hit home: Do you have any medical conditions that the Department of Corrections will need to know about after your trial?
It would be interesting to hear from some war veterans about their observations when it comes to the effectiveness of using "Willy Pete" to stop attacking enemy troops, whether through physical or psychological trauma. Being set ablaze by white phosphorus sounds like it would take the starch out a bad guy pretty quickly. Dr. B.
For my part, if it's the last ammo you have left, it's better than none, but I would never intentionally choose it for that purpose. The potential drawbacks far outweigh any possible benefit.
After giving some mugger or home invader a case of fatal heartburn with incendiary bullets, an anti gun judge is far more likely to nix a self defense argument. A standard hollow point is not considered exotic so would be effective without possible extra legal hassles.
I don't understand how you could say exploding rounds for self defense are a bad idea!?! What if you're fighting someone with metal plated bones like Wolverine? Sure you could say that he's not real and you'd have to be delusional to worry about that, but beyond that......
Tracers which light up if fired in dark when might not be able to see sights but can make out silhouette of opposing force or perpetrators so you can correct line of fire to be on target. However could start home on fire if fired indoors so, I'd say no not a good idea weighing benefits v consequences. If used outdoors person is probably already fleeing so is it really self defense at that point? I think probably not. If in combat situation ie if USA invaded by foreign entity or we're being oppressed under a defined tyrannical dictatorship maybe could be justified in that fight scenario.
If the incendiary round would cauterize the wound it could be argued 'in court' that the round was effective at stopping the threat without killing the attacker. But it's ridiculous to worry about arguing over which bullet shot the attacker. JHP are made to destroy without over penetrating. They are made to kill with greater damage. No one argues why a person used a JHP over a FMJ that I've ever heard whined about on the internet.
![Is 5.7x28mm Just Overpriced .22 Magnum? [Part 1]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/I9sBMgau4ew/mqdefault.jpg)
"There's no doctors watching this."
*three days later*
DOCTOR RUclipsR REACTS TO YANKEE MARSHAL! THE RESULTS WILL BLOW YOUR MIND
I agree that I would not want to have explain to a judge or jury or whatever why I chose to use incendiary rounds.
Plus, the way I understand it, scientifically the way to neutralize a living adversary is through as quickly as possible lowering the blood pressure through rapid loss of blood. I would not want to risk that an incendiary round might cauterize any blood vessels or wounds. That's my two cents.
I agree with what you and Yankee said but I just think that burning you inside would be devastating, so I guess that I don't know and I'm wishy washy on this
Good point, maybe they'd be useful against demonic scarecrows or whatever, but they wouldn't be a good choice against flesh and blood targets.
So, save them for Halloween season.
Why would you be explaining anything to a judge or jury? JHP rounds are for creating a larger cavity and wound channel. Made to kill and drain that 'blood balloon'.
Speaking as someone who used to shoot matches out of a BB gun, if you miss you will have burning stuff in the house, with you.
I carry pepper spray and a Taurus judge with dragons breath. If they don't stop after the pepper spray, the dragons breath will light them up. Pepper spray is flammable 😂
nothing as distracting as being on fire an guess
"Oh, and it burns." Lol.
If I were carrying my Dillon Aerospace M134D Mini-Gun, maybe a mix of armor piercing incendiary bullets, tracers, and ball would be fine for when the Predator arrives in the hot seasons.
Praise Phil.🐙
Add to the potential negative side is the very real possibility of missing the perp and the incendiary round hitting something downrange that becomes burning collateral damage.
That's why I always carry 3 Molotov cocktails as part of my EDC.
Gives you Heartburn !
Incendiary rounds are for seeing where your fire is going, and possibly igniting a fuel source such as a gas tank. Hitting flesh would just cauterise any wound caused, most likely reducing damage. I'd stick to JHP's for self defense.
Anyone who doesnt want to use Dragons breath clearly has never seen John Carpenters 1982 documentary "The Thing". Or "they" have seen it and still dont want dragonsbreath rounds to be common and thats prettt suspect.
Explosive rifle ammunition was used in limited quantity against troops in WW2. It had variable effects and was not considered a good option. It was mainly a psycological weapon because of the perceived agony it could cause.
InRangeTV did some testing a while back with some old surplus ammo they got ahold of somehow. The bullets mostly passed through their analog target before detonating, so the effect was very limited. The triggering mechanism and burn rate of the explosive was not quick enough to function on a man sized target. I guess maybe with modern technology we could make something better, but...
From my limited experience in medical technology seeing cauterization tools in use, I wouldn't think a bullet would be able to contain enough energy to cauterize anything major that would effect the results of shooting an attacker.
An explosive round would be a quick flash of fire that might char tissue in small quantities, but that would be randomly distributed and probably not effective for stopping blood loss.
A tracer round's phosphor chemical might have the capability on smaller vessels if it were to have the burn time inside the target (a shot at very close range), but it would need to be close enough and focused right at the vessel. This might work for liver damage though, if the round stopped in just the right spot. Livers tend to be notorious for finding ways to bleed after damage though too, so good luck. Lungs might be the same as livers, but i don't have any experience with that organ.
Sounds like a dream for prosecutors and a nightmare for defense attorneys.
You could also say the bullet is carter-rise the wound that would make it “safer “
Yes, there is a doctor watching! Me. Long time fan!
I have a nerd BBQ P365 with white laser etched Stormtrooper grips and a Stormtrooper OWB holster I load it with the Streak HP so it’s a blaster
I guess my first comment was deleted. Watch inrangetv video on German 8mm B Patrone and Russian 7.62x54R PZ ammunition. At first they were using, I believe, 4 inch thick ballistics gel and it didn't do much, but when they used 8 inch thick ballistic gel, I think, it was putting softball too basketball sized holes in the gel. There was some charring in the hole, but I think that would be the least of your worries. The huge hole in your chest would be the main cause of death. During the 90's and early 2000's. This stuff was being imported and I bought alot of the B Patrone. They have a cross section of the B Patrone and it has a firing pin and a small amount of explosives in it. Devastating stuff.
In some states it is probably illegal to shoot people with incindiaries. Incindiaries could fail to ignite some are impact incendiary.
No officer, this isn't incendiary ammo.
It's mostly peaceful spicy Bluetooth hole punchers.
By the way, your videos recently are fantastic! Love it!
Incendiary rounds basically explode when they impact and enter a target
I'm right there with you Yankee, pretty much nothing but disadvantages.. other than "cool factor" (which won't be as cool if the BG takes you out be ause he didnt go down when you shot him)
Only way I could see this is, if you spend a lot of time on the road & need it for road rage incidents where some is trying to run you off the road with their vehicle or shooting at you from their car. Incendiaries would set the upholstery of the car on fire & possibly blow the gas tank of a threat
You mean tracers for the first kind mentioned? I would think they are similar to FMJs. Look into the military trials of M856 for example.
If nothing else, I'd think it would be cost prohibitive. Self-defense ammo is expensive enough as it is; I don't even want to think about what incendiary ammo costs.
' incendiary ammunition was used against non-rigid observation balloons.'
The incendiaries ignited the hydrogen. Bye-bye balloon.
Sweet, want some. Midway??
Incendiary rounds just for 4th of July threats.
There not legal in CA where I live but I think they would be devastating
Fuck the rules (also from so cal)
The rules do suck here though. The weather is nice at least
Law enforcement uses them. They are called tracers and they can cause fires in dry grass and brush etc. The LE community is pretty much immune to prosecution. They enjoy nearly total immunity from prosecution. If they are fired, they just pack up and move to Idaho. Pro Tip: Don't relocate to Idaho.
We can’t get them in NY either.
@@lynnkramer1211wait why do a bunch of them specifically move to Idaho?
I posed this question because I just got a few boxes of .22lr tracer rounds just for fun but got to thinking that many drawbacks of .22lr for self defense (penetration depth, small hole) could be mitigated by the round being on fire while it was buried inside an assailant. Still seems better than standard .22lr out of a revolver.
Just curious, what's the bullet weight on one of these .22 tracers? I'd think it might be lighter than normal, but I'm really not sure. I've never seen them.
@@whelper4231 they’re 40 gr lead round nose. Manufactured by piney mountain. Available on gunbroker for around 20 bucks for a box of 50.
@@whelper4231 40gr lead round nose.
@@WheelgunsOnWheels Oh, ok. So they are standard weight. Interesting. Those probably would burn someone if fired from close range. 🤔😬
If u use a incendary round for self deffence it will cauterize the wound & stop the bleeding
Can we have marshmallows?
Instead of being asked why I chose incendiary rounds, I am waiting to be asked at trial, " Why a spoon?"
So dragon breath I thought was the answer to body armor
Short answer: No.
Longer answer: For the love of any god you care to name, WTF are you thinking? Hell no.
Answer that will hit home: Do you have any medical conditions that the Department of Corrections will need to know about after your trial?
Ha Ha ! I wouldn't trust most of this lot with matches !
It would be interesting to hear from some war veterans about their observations when it comes to the effectiveness of using "Willy Pete" to stop attacking enemy troops, whether through physical or psychological trauma. Being set ablaze by white phosphorus sounds like it would take the starch out a bad guy pretty quickly. Dr. B.
Curious about if it hit a flak jacket what the effect would be?
Would they be effective against vampires?
What about the werewolves or vampires?
Wonder why there's all those unsolved fires in West Virginia back in the day 😂
For my part, if it's the last ammo you have left, it's better than none, but I would never intentionally choose it for that purpose. The potential drawbacks far outweigh any possible benefit.
That's the very definition of sadism.😈
It's all hot, and it hurts and stuff.
Ballistics might not be possible. The (wasn't me!) Defense.
After giving some mugger or home invader a case of fatal heartburn with incendiary bullets, an anti gun judge is far more likely to nix a self defense argument. A standard hollow point is not considered exotic so would be effective without possible extra legal hassles.
And it burns… lmao
Maybe for clowns… Exclusively.
I don't understand how you could say exploding rounds for self defense are a bad idea!?! What if you're fighting someone with metal plated bones like Wolverine? Sure you could say that he's not real and you'd have to be delusional to worry about that, but beyond that......
Tracers which light up if fired in dark when might not be able to see sights but can make out silhouette of opposing force or perpetrators so you can correct line of fire to be on target. However could start home on fire if fired indoors so, I'd say no not a good idea weighing benefits v consequences. If used outdoors person is probably already fleeing so is it really self defense at that point? I think probably not. If in combat situation ie if USA invaded by foreign entity or we're being oppressed under a defined tyrannical dictatorship maybe could be justified in that fight scenario.
Here comes the burning blood red bullet on fire. It deos'ent need a body cuz it flys through the air!!!!!
My degree is in f¥{kery and don’t know either!!
F-it send it..
If the incendiary round would cauterize the wound it could be argued 'in court' that the round was effective at stopping the threat without killing the attacker. But it's ridiculous to worry about arguing over which bullet shot the attacker. JHP are made to destroy without over penetrating. They are made to kill with greater damage. No one argues why a person used a JHP over a FMJ that I've ever heard whined about on the internet.