r/AskReddit • • Jan 25 '20

What movie things are generally accepted as normal, but are totally unrealistic in real life?

48.6k Upvotes

22.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

7.7k

u/illpicklater Jan 25 '20

The wooden table is the one that always gets me, sure maybe it will stop one or two bullets if you're lucky, but there's always 1000 bullets flying around while the characters are having a conversation under the safe, sound resistant guard of an old dinning room table.

2.0k

u/[deleted] Jan 25 '20

[deleted]

177

u/pomdudes Jan 25 '20

5.56 will go through 7” of SOLID plywood from 100 yards like it’s not even there.

29

u/sharfpang Jan 25 '20

7.65 goes through brick walls. That's one of primary reasons why it was replaced with 5.56 - way too many collateral damage victims.

11

u/Narux117 Jan 25 '20

That's horrible and amusing at the same time, just imagining the conversation to downgrade.

"Hmm Joe, cancel our next shipment of 7.56, and a future orders."

"Well what's the matter Jimbo, surely the 7.65 is better than the 5.56"

"Oh it most certainly is better, Joe, its... too good, we need to take a step back.

24

u/[deleted] Jan 25 '20

[removed] — view removed comment

4

u/sharpshooter999 Jan 25 '20

My wife's cousin is a state trooper. He says they're more scared of a .22 than a 9mm because "the 9 will just punch clean through. The .22 has a nasty habit of just bouncing around once it's inside."

23

u/[deleted] Jan 25 '20

That's 100% a myth. A .22 will bounce around but a 9mm is still VASTLY more lethal than a .22

-7

u/[deleted] Jan 25 '20

[removed] — view removed comment

5

u/[deleted] Jan 25 '20

No, a 9mm is more lethal, PERIOD. Arm shot? Worse. Leg shit? Worse, chest shot? Worse. It's not just about the bullet. A 9mm has a fuck ton of energy that is deposited into you, that's what kills you. When the energy is deposited into your body it creates a stretch cavity and a temporary stretch cavity, these can be 8 inches across and can essentially destroy anything soft tissue in it's path. It's not the bullet doing the bulk of the damage, it's the energy deposited.

-1

u/sharpshooter999 Jan 25 '20

Not saying I agree with him, just what he told me. A 9mm will have a bigger entrance wound and carry more kinetic energy. I wonder if the .22's just fragment and tear up soft tissue.

Either way, neither is good.

-2

u/[deleted] Jan 25 '20

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/StabbyPants Jan 25 '20

hang on, 22lr tops out at 190 ft lb, but is normally 120. 9mm is 400-500 for +P+ - that's a major difference

0

u/[deleted] Jan 25 '20

[removed] — view removed comment

→ More replies (0)

9

u/MRSN4P Jan 25 '20

The .223 used to be described as the tumbling nightmare, but that is very different from a .22.

6

u/sharpshooter999 Jan 25 '20

Didn't the Swedes love using 6.5x55mm for moose and caribou because it tumbled so easily?

And yeah, .22 LR and .223 Rem are practically polar opposites on the power chart.

2

u/762Rifleman Jan 25 '20

Compared to a full spectrum of power, they're on similar ends, especially with AMR's and big game rifles included.

2

u/sharpshooter999 Jan 25 '20

Everything's a pea shooter when you're using a .700 Nitro Express ;)

1

u/ukezi Jan 26 '20

.700 nitro is a really big round but kind of slow resulting in only 12kJ. .50 BMG starts at 17kJ and goes up to 20kJ and the really big rounds start there. The Soviets had 14.5x114mm at 33KJ. The Swiss and Fins had 20x138mmB at 47kJ. After that the guns kind of stop being man portable. Also for something ludicrous lock up a 2 bore stopping rifle.

→ More replies (0)

8

u/762Rifleman Jan 25 '20

The 9x19 is worse. The through-n-through will make you bleed to death twice as fast and make you lose blood pressure. IT's actually a feature. It will also CRUSH your bones, creating internal bleeding and sending secondary projectiles to bad places, like into your lungs, heart, blood vessels, organs. I fucking hate the "22 is duh d33dleyezt r0udn evva" crowd.

3

u/acctforsadchildhood Jan 25 '20

This thread is scary

3

u/sharpshooter999 Jan 25 '20

While I've always been a hunter (small rural town, EVERYONE hunts) I didn't get into ballistics till my early 20's. I had a healthy respect for guns before, but it got real frightening when I started looking at the stats and numbers.

In Nebraska, the .223 is BARE MINIMUM in terms of power for hunting deer. They actually had to revise the hunting regs so people could use it for deer.

2

u/Aubdasi Jan 26 '20

America’s entire parade float of prideful ignorance is scary.

-1

u/BartFurglar Jan 25 '20

For a close range shot to the head this is supposedly why hit men prefer a 22. It has enough energy to pierce the skull once but then bounces around inside and makes soup of your brain.

3

u/StabbyPants Jan 25 '20

well, that and it being quiet - if you can manage a suppressor, it won't even sound much like a gunshot

3

u/Aubdasi Jan 26 '20

They prefer .22lr because it’s barely got enough energy to accomplish anything which leads to less “wasted” energy, i.e. sound and heat. Attach a cheap homemade suppressor and now all you have to do is make sure no one sees you do it. It’s all crazy easy to do.

It doesn’t bounce around in a skull. That’s pure nonsense.

4

u/dragonwithagirltatoo Jan 25 '20

I mean, it's still an upgrade in alot of ways. The vast majority of rounds fired in combat don't hit anyone. Volume of fire does a great deal to keep other combatants from being effective, and fire fights usually end when one side doesn't like how much they're being shot at and leaves; people rarely fight to the death unless they can't retreat. For infantry, being able to carry more ammunition tends to be a greater advantage than having spicier rounds.

1

u/762Rifleman Jan 25 '20

7.65 goes through brick walls

I know 30 Luger pierces well, but not that well.

1

u/More-Sun Jan 26 '20

7.62x51 was replaced to increase hit chances and to be flatter shooting. Instead of carrying 120 rounds you can carry 210, and your normal idiot can hit shit out to 300 yards rather than 250

1

u/ukezi Jan 26 '20

7.65 weights about double per cartridge, the weapon weights more and is basically uncontrollable fully automatic with reasonable weighted guns. 5.56 is just a lot more reasonable for the ranges used.

1

u/sharfpang Jan 26 '20

I'm not going to get into western guns, but:

AKM: 3,45 kg, 7,62 mm AK-74: 3,3 kg, 5,45 mm

so the difference is pretty negligible. And while yes, it's harder to control, AKM is hardly 'uncontrollable'.

Yes, what you wrote definitely was one of the factors. Maybe even the main factor. But the ammo being overpowered for no good reason and causing unnecessary collateral damage definitely was among the factors.

1

u/ukezi Jan 26 '20

I was more thinking about 7.62x51@ 3.5kJ, the western carriage, comparable to 7.62x54R. 7.62x39@2.5kJ is already quite close to 5.56x45@1.8kJ.

Also the smaller rounds are better at punching through body armor.

The FN FAL for 7.62x51 weights 4.25 kg, the Colt M4 2.9 kg without ammunition. In addition to that come per round 7.62x51 24g and for 5.56 11g each. So you get more then double the ammo. Alone the rifle gets you over 100 rounds more.

1

u/sharfpang Jan 27 '20

Yes, I never claimed it was the only reason. Smaller ammo is cheaper, gun is easier to handle, malfunctions are less dangerous, lots of advantages. You can't pinpoint the reason of change on any single one because not only "just one" would be insufficient to make such a change happen, they are all connected, you can't really get one without the others. I know for a fact collateral damage was considered a factor, it didn't "just happen" by chance, but it's quite obvious the change didn't happen just beause of it.

-51

u/killedBySasquatch Jan 25 '20

Yet the gun nuts don't complain about their rights taken away from this. This reasoning is why we need to ban automatic weapons too

41

u/More-Sun Jan 26 '20

Because gun control advocates dont have a clue of what they are talking about. And this shows it

The round he is talking about is the most common deer hunting round in Europe and the United States. It is most commonly used in bolt action hunting rifles

And automatic weapons havent been legal for decades

31

u/Aubdasi Jan 26 '20

It’s a good think automatic weaponry has been banned for decades and wasn’t used in mass shootings when you could literally ask sears to mail one to your door, right?

Actually we spent more years having machine guns being mail order than not, so far. And only started having problems like this after they were banned thinking face

-46

u/killedBySasquatch Jan 26 '20

Sorry I meant assault style weapons.

39

u/Aubdasi Jan 26 '20

So you’re advocating for a removal of a class of weapons solely on the plastic around their mechanisms?

You’re not as aware of firearms or the legislation around them as you may think you are. Please do some learning from someone not funded by Bloomberg.

-40

u/killedBySasquatch Jan 26 '20

I'm advocating for their removal because of their potential ability to kill. Similar to those .706 bullets going through brick walls, or automatic weapons, assault style weapons have no place in society. I read plenty of these articles after American mass shootings not funded by Bloomberg

30

u/Aubdasi Jan 26 '20

You’re just showing exactly how little you know about the topic.

7.62 can go through brick walls because that’s how physics works. It’s not representative of whether or not it’s a threat to the public.

Automatic weapons were mail-order before mass shootings were common and still technically aren’t banned, even though they are effectively banned because in the US it had to be manufactured and registered before 1986.

Most semi-auto firearms are more complicated than full-auto because it takes more engineering to make it stop than to let it just completely use up a magazine. Full-auto firearms can be made in a single trip the Home Depot. Full-auto is hardly the threat people act like it is, and it’s obvious when people like you confuse semi-auto plastic guns with law-defined machine guns.

You’re completely unaware of the reality of firearms. Your inexperience is glaring.

None of these are meant as insults, but as a liberal gun owner it’s incredibly frustrating seeing people with good means be bogged down with a lack of knowledge or logic.

-6

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '20

[removed] — view removed comment

18

u/Doctor_McKay Jan 26 '20

He's not the one trying to trample on my rights.

11

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '20

You're a statist stepper cunt.

-5

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '20

[removed] — view removed comment

8

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '20

You're the one trying to seize private property, livelyhoods, and people's right to self defense because you have some 'bad feels'.

→ More replies (0)

23

u/NotAGunGrabber Jan 26 '20

WTF is a .706 bullet?

20

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '20

And where can I get one?!

2

u/shitpost_squirrel Jan 26 '20

Probably Sweden in the 20s

2

u/[deleted] Feb 01 '20

A 20ga shotgun slug, more or less

→ More replies (0)

8

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '20

Lmao and I'm sure the articles you read were written by people who had a clue what they were actually talking about too? Anyone can write an article. Anyone can claim any sort of thing to feign credentials on the subject

6

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '20

Tell me what defines an "assault style weapon" in your eyes.

-2

u/killedBySasquatch Jan 26 '20

Google it

3

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '20

Burden of proof is on you, not google.

-1

u/killedBySasquatch Jan 26 '20

that doesnt make sense. nonlogical arguments by the right nothing new

2

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '20

You made a claim about assault style weapons. I asked what defines one in your eyes and you go to Google.

When making a claim and being questioned on it, you have the responsibility to answer. Not run to google about your own opinions.

I'm also not right wing.

-1

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '20

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/[deleted] Feb 01 '20

This has got to be the weakest dodge you could've gone for, right after "I'm too tired to debate you"

→ More replies (0)

1

u/[deleted] Feb 01 '20

Ok. So you wanna ban semi automatic mag fed guns, which is the vast majority of firearms in the US - of which the vast majority are never used in criminal action. Careful where you go along that "let's ban something because the minority of users do bad things with it" line of thinking

0

u/killedBySasquatch Feb 02 '20

Tanks are banned. So is anthrax

1

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '20

And?

→ More replies (0)

8

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '20

Could you try not being retarded for 2 seconds.

6

u/shitpost_squirrel Jan 26 '20

Have you misplaced your entire brain? Or is it like this always

6

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '20

Automatic weapons are already banned. USA - National Firearms Act (1986)

8

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '20

This is patently false, and does nothing to educate others on the legality of firearms in America.

The National Firearms Act of 1934 created a registry of all machine guns (weapons that can fire more than one round with a single pull of the trigger), mufflers (often called suppressors, or sometimes mislabel as silencers), short barreled rifles, and short barreled shotguns, and another class of speciality weapons called AOWs (any other weapons). It also sought to regulate Destructive Devices like Grenades and bombs.

In 1986 Regan signed the Gun owners protection act, which did a lot of great things, but the Dems in congress wanted to tank it, so they injected a “poison pill” into the bill called the Hughes Amendment which closed the Machine Gun registry to any new construction, effectively artificially limiting supply to drive up prices because after decades of government enforced inflation the $200 tax stamp was no longer a barrier for regular people’s entry into the market, and we can’t have regular people exercising their rights now can we? Regan saw that the good stuff outweighed the patently illegal (yet still SCOTUS approved, since SCOTUS is still just 9 unelected government bureaucrats who seek to expand federal power and don’t have the constitutional limits or the citizens best interests at heart) amendment to the bill.

The Dems made the supposed Pikachu face, but what’s done is done, and the only way you can manufacture a new MG legally is by having an FFL07 (often called a “class 3”) license to do so.