Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Posted: 7/4/2002 1:20:52 AM EDT
Here is a sad story. I got this off an Email list I am a member of. Let's learn from this guys mistake. This occurred on June 29th at the Easton Fish & Game (Park? Range?) in Easton Pennsylvania. The guys name is Glenn DeRuiter, and he was shooting an old rifle, some sort of Lee. I'm trying to find out the exact model and caliber. --- I'm cross-posting this to all the email lists that have mentioned this incident (that I'[m subbed to). Some have had accurate pieces of info, some have not. Since I was there, I want to let everyone know what happened, as I saw it. There are some lessons in this and in the hope that Glenn's death not be in vain, I will present them so others will not make the same mistakes that Glenn fatally made. I was at the Easton Fish & Game on Saturday, taking a Defensive Shooting class. During a break in our class, someone came down from the 100yd range and said, "Does anyone have a cellphone? Someone call 911. A guy shot himself. I think he's dead." I looked down and saw a cellphone on the table. I dialed 911 and handed the phone to someone standing next to me and took off around the corner to see what happened. I was one of the first to arrive at the scene. Glenn was lying on his back, bleeding from a single wound to the center of his forehead. A quick survey of the scene showed his rifle in two pieces, looking like it separated at the receiver ring. I knelt down to Glenn and check for a pulse. I easily found the pulse in the carotid. A couple quick shouts to see if he were conscious were futile and he wasn't breathing so I pulled the jaw down and pushed the tongue down to open the airway. He took in a deep raspy breath. I then moved to the forehead. I gingerly felt the open wound for protruding metal. Finding none, I began to apply pressure to the wound. About this time, Pete showed up and immediately began to assist. For the next 12 minutes, Pete maintained his airway and I kept pressure on his forehead to stop the bleeding. He was unconscious the entire time, most likely from the initial explosion. Pupils were dilated and fixed for the entire period as well. When Pete & I handed him off to EMS, Glenn was still breathing on his own and had a good heartbeat. After EMS took Glenn away, I began to examine the scene. Mixed in with the blood was brain fluid. This meant the skull was breached. Since there was no exit wound, this meant that either there was piece of metal inside the brain area or he had been dealt a glancing, ricochet type blow that had cracked the front of the skull. It looked like he lost about 1.5 to 2 pints of mixed fluids.
Link Posted: 7/4/2002 1:22:38 AM EDT
I looked at the pieces of the rifle. The barrel metal was completely intact, with the expended cartridge still in the chamber (more on that later), and the wood was badly splintered. It didn't take long to see that the receiver had failed. The upper half of the receiver ring was missing as were tops of the rails for about 1-2". Upon closer examination, the metal showed an obvious crystalline fracture, with the outer edge areas of the ring and maybe 1/2" back showing stretching/tearing, rather than crystalline breakage. The missing metal was nowhere to be found, although some wood splinters were recovered. The bolt would not return to battery. I couldn't tell if the bolt had been completely in battery when the round was fired but I am unfamiliar with the Lee so I don't know if it is possible to fire a round when the bolt is out of battery. I then turned my attention to the barrel. The brass was stuck in the chamber. There was a hole in the brass, in the extractor area. The primer was missing, the base of the cartridge was blackened and slightly bowed out into a convex shape. Surrounding the hole in the brass was obvious flow into the unsupported area of the extractor. The semi-rimmed brass was now obviously rimmed. Obvious, major headspace problem. Obvious, major overpressure situation. Looking through the barrel, I saw that it was plugged. Obtaining a rod, I slid in down the muzzle until it stopped. Marking the length with my thumb, the obstruction was at or near the end of the chamber. A shake of the barrel was silent. Driving the rod into the barrel to drive out the brass took a few sharp strokes, the first couple feeling like something was wedging in the barrel. After popping out the brass, I inspected the barrel. It was free of bulges and the barrel actually looked quite nice - dark but with strong rifling. The chamber was in good shape as well, with no obvious deformities. Examining the brass, I immediately noticed that the bullet had never left the barrel because I had driven it back into the powder area of the brass when driving it out and that it was what I had felt for the first couple blows. I did not notice any rifling marks on the bullet but could not see it that clearly inside the brass. I next turned to the shooting table, where Glenn had his box of ammunition. Glenn was apparently testing handloads because he had a few pieces of paper with different loads written on it. I recall them being 30gr or so of IMR powders but don't remember the numbers (I'm not a big reloader) with 100gr and 150gr bullets (Hornady and Speer). I do recall that one of the loads was 11gr Unique. Looking at the ammo in the box, I realized that the fatal shot was his second as there was only one previously expended round. Picking it up, it was obviously deformed as previously described: obvious brass flow into the extractor area, blackened & rimmed base, missing primer, except no hole in the brass. Looking at this first round, I have to wonder how hard it was to extract. It looked like a hammer-beater to me. And that's as far as I got before the police started to impound everything.
Link Posted: 7/4/2002 1:26:31 AM EDT
It wasn't until later that I found out that when Glenn was taken to the hospital, x-rays revealed that a piece of metal 40mm on its long side had penetrated the brain, ending its straight though travel at the rear of the skull; destroying his sinus cavity in the process. Lessons: It doesn't matter how much experience you have, if the brass is obviously deformed, stop shooting. If something looks wrong, it's most likely because it is. Resist the temptation to take "just one more shot". Figure out what's wrong FIRST. Always have a first-aid kit with you. Always have latex gloves with you. When you go shooting, make sure that EMS knows how to get to you, wherever you are. A cellphone is no longer a luxury. If it works, it can shave valuable minutes off the emergency response time. Glenn didn't need to die. From what I've read about him over the past couple days, I wish I would have met him in better circumstances, he sounded like a helluva guy. He was smart enough to notice that there was a problem. He either wasn't paying attention and missed it or he choose to ignore it; and continued shooting. Learn from his mistake. No fancy closing words here, just a reminder that this is a dangerous sport and to be careful out there. -Richard Beels --- Lets pray for his family. I believe he had a wife and a kid too.
Link Posted: 7/4/2002 4:03:32 AM EDT
Kind of hard to believe there could be that much pressure and the bullet never moved, no matter what kind powder he was using. Actually, there is quite a bit about this story that seems a bit hard to believe. This guy is some kind medic or something, that he can ID brain fluid without barfing? Or an off-duty professional accident reconstructor? He just barges in there and starts meddling with evidence before police or insurance companies get a peek at it? I think if I just got done doing mouth-to-mouth with a dead guy with a big hole in his forehead, I'd not be thinking about hobby gunsmithing for a couple hours afterward.
Link Posted: 7/4/2002 5:04:13 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/4/2002 5:24:18 AM EDT by Waldo]
Link Posted: 7/4/2002 5:15:31 AM EDT
While far from an expert, I am going to go out on a limb and say that the Unique is the culprit when combined with the old rifle. Unique is a pistol powder and much faster than rifle powder. BTW, my .45 load is 5.0 grains. 11 grains would easily destroy a firearm in my not so experienced opinion.
Link Posted: 7/4/2002 5:28:20 AM EDT
heysuss kay rist.........!!!!!!! 11 gr. of Unique is a deadly load in a large capacity case, what happened is that he had a DETONATION..!! this is quite common wyth reduced loads of fast burning powder, any one who uses fast burning powder as a reduced load in large capacity cases is just asking for trouble !!!!! any reloading shud be done in such a manner that the case is nearly full of the proper burn rate powder...... i sympathize wyth his family...........
Link Posted: 7/4/2002 5:30:24 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/4/2002 5:36:59 AM EDT by FirearmTom1]
Here is a related topic from a couple of days ago. [url]www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?id=128924[/url] This is from the SARCO web site: We must say a painful goodbye to our dear friend, GLENN deRUITER [img]www.ar15.com/members/albums/FirearmTom1%2Fglenn2%2D7102%2Ejpg[/img] Glenn was involved in a tragic accident this past Saturday, the 29th. He was taken to St. Luke's Hospital in Bethlehem, PA, but was not able to recover. He was 54. Glenn was a devoted employee of Sarco for 28 years, and specialized in military firearms. He had a tremendous love for guns and was passionate about his work. He was among the most well respected and knowledgeable people in the industry. He was a member of the Forks of the Delaware Weapon Association, the New Jersey Arms Collectors Club, a life-time member of the National Rifle Association, and a committee member of Boy Scout Troop 191, Bethlehem. Glenn was a good friend and was very much loved by everyone. He had frequent visitors here at Sarco who looked forward to intelligent conversations with the gun connoisseur. Our thoughts and prayers go out to Glenn's family and friends. He will be painfully missed. There will be a funeral service on Wednesday, July 3rd, 2002 at 10 a.m. at MARTIN FUNERAL HOME 1761 Route 31, Clinton, NJ (908) 735-7180 Visitation will be Tuesday, July 2nd from 2-4 and 7-9 pm at Martin Funeral Home. Directions for Martin Funeral Home In lieu of flowers, donations in memory of Glenn deRuiter may be made to Boy Scout Troop 191, c/o Scoutmaster Joe Smith, 201 Asbury-West Portal Rd., Asbury, NJ. 08802
Link Posted: 7/4/2002 5:36:16 AM EDT
[url]http://www.nj.com/news/expresstimes/nj/index.ssf?/base/news-0/1025601003187044.xml[/url]
Link Posted: 7/4/2002 10:10:23 AM EDT
Link Posted: 7/4/2002 10:34:23 AM EDT
I don't know who that guy is, in the original e-mail, but he's a jackass. Exploring a head wound for metal?? Why?? And if there was some metal what would he have done?? Applying pressure to a penetrating head wound? Be real careful, there's a very fine line between stopping bleeding, and making the wound worse. Oh, and the best yet, let's start tampering with potential evidence. Let's tamper with stuff that if they examine later they will wonder "how did that happen?" Like knocking the bullet out of the bore. Best "Lou" voice from the Simpsons: "Gee Chief this seems kinda weird to me...... and we found a lot of fingerprints on the remnants of the rifle." Best "Chief Wiggum" voice: "Lock'em up boys........." And you guys wonder sometimes when there is a big story and the evidence doesn't seem "just right". Gee you wonder if someone come through and touches stuff then leaves, or doesn't tell the police they "looked through the scene, with their hands". LEAVE STUFF ALONE
Link Posted: 7/4/2002 10:51:50 AM EDT
Originally Posted By OLY-M4gery: I don't know who that guy is, in the original e-mail, but he's a jackass. Exploring a head wound for metal?? Why?? And if there was some metal what would he have done?? Applying pressure to a penetrating head wound? Be real careful, there's a very fine line between stopping bleeding, and making the wound worse. Oh, and the best yet, let's start tampering with potential evidence. Let's tamper with stuff that if they examine later they will wonder "how did that happen?" Like knocking the bullet out of the bore. Best "Lou" voice from the Simpsons: "Gee Chief this seems kinda weird to me...... and we found a lot of fingerprints on the remnants of the rifle." Best "Chief Wiggum" voice: "Lock'em up boys........." And you guys wonder sometimes when there is a big story and the evidence doesn't seem "just right". Gee you wonder if someone come through and touches stuff then leaves, or doesn't tell the police they "looked through the scene, with their hands". LEAVE STUFF ALONE
View Quote
You covered my concerns pretty good.... Scott
Link Posted: 7/4/2002 11:32:55 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Waldo: 11 grains of Unique in a rifle case?? That's not much more than what goes in a 9mm case (6.5-7) oops, corrected. My 230gr 45 jhp is 6.0 Small charge of fast(for a rifle)powder in a large volume rifle case is not a good thing.
View Quote
Small charges of SLOW burning powders are thought to be dangerous in large capacity cases. The main danger with fast burning powders in large capacity cases is that there is so much extra space to accidently put 2 or 3 charges into one case. My Lyman Cast Bullet Handbook recommends charges from 9.5 grains Unique up to 17.5 grains Unique for .45-70, depending on the bullet weight and rifle type. I've used light charges of Unique in my 11mm Mauser before with no problem. It's a bit hard to figure what rifle is being referred to here. The main Lee models one might likely find are the Remington-Lee .45-70, and the Winchester-Lee 6mm. The powder type and charge sounds right for a .45-70; nobody would use Unique in a 6mm. But he specifically mentions a semi-rimmed case, and the 6mm Lee Navy round was semi-rimmed, IIRC. It's just useless to speculate on a cause, based on the sketchy and probably inaccurate info given. It's too bad a guy was killed. But I must say, the behavior of the witness puts the Kennedy assassination in a whole new light.
Link Posted: 7/4/2002 11:43:05 AM EDT
Looking through the barrel, I saw that it was plugged. Obtaining a rod, I slid in down the muzzle until it stopped. Marking the length with my thumb, the obstruction was at or near the end of the chamber. A shake of the barrel was silent. Driving the rod into the barrel to drive out the brass took a few sharp strokes, the first couple feeling like something was wedging in the barrel. After popping out the brass, I inspected the barrel. It was free of bulges and the barrel actually looked quite nice - dark but with strong rifling. The chamber was in good shape as well, with no obvious deformities. Examining the brass, I immediately noticed that the bullet had never left the barrel because I had driven it back into the powder area of the brass when driving it out and that it was what I had felt for the first couple blows. I did not notice any rifling marks on the bullet but could not see it that clearly inside the brass.
View Quote
Is this person an accident scene investigator? I really hope they are, because PLAYING with the item(s) involved in the incident is REALLY STUPID! HEY! There's an accident caused by a Corvette...I'm a Corvette enthusiast, so I will drag this car over to the side of the road and take it apart and try to figure-out why it caused the accident before the police get here! Same STUPID idea.
Link Posted: 7/4/2002 11:56:45 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Fuzzbean:
Originally Posted By Waldo: 11 grains of Unique in a rifle case?? That's not much more than what goes in a 9mm case (6.5-7) oops, corrected. My 230gr 45 jhp is 6.0 Small charge of fast(for a rifle)powder in a large volume rifle case is not a good thing.
View Quote
Small charges of SLOW burning powders are thought to be dangerous in large capacity cases. The main danger with fast burning powders in large capacity cases is that there is so much extra space to accidently put 2 or 3 charges into one case. My Lyman Cast Bullet Handbook recommends charges from 9.5 grains Unique up to 17.5 grains Unique for .45-70, depending on the bullet weight and rifle type. I've used light charges of Unique in my 11mm Mauser before with no problem. It's a bit hard to figure what rifle is being referred to here. The main Lee models one might likely find are the Remington-Lee .45-70, and the Winchester-Lee 6mm. The powder type and charge sounds right for a .45-70; nobody would use Unique in a 6mm. But he specifically mentions a semi-rimmed case, and the 6mm Lee Navy round was semi-rimmed, IIRC. It's just useless to speculate on a cause, based on the sketchy and probably inaccurate info given. It's too bad a guy was killed. But I must say, the behavior of the witness puts the Kennedy assassination in a whole new light.
View Quote
Multiple reports claim it was a Lee Navy 6MM... Scott
Link Posted: 7/4/2002 12:47:25 PM EDT
Originally Posted By DScottHewitt: Multiple reports claim it was a Lee Navy 6MM...
View Quote
Well, if Unique was actually used in one of them, that explains a lot. Not that Unique could not be used with light cast bullets, but cripes, you can't see into the case worth a darn to check powder levels. When I use it in my 11mm, I always charge all the cases first and then compare the height of the powder charges visually before seating bullets to make sure they are uniform. A double charge or more of fast burning powder trying to get down that skinny 6mm tube would mean real trouble.
Link Posted: 7/4/2002 12:48:07 PM EDT
11 gr. of Unique is a deadly load in a large capacity case
View Quote
Really? I've got loading manuals that disagree with that. The only reloads, so far, that I've shot have been between 8 and 12 grain charges of Bullseye (even faster than Unique) in a rifle. Two friends of my parents, that reload and would be in their late 90's if they were still alive, always reloaded all rifle cartridges with 13 grains of Unique. As I understand it, this load was very commonly used. There's no telling how many rounds of 30-06 they fired with that charge. You can't say as a general rule that it isn't safe. It's safe, I've know guys that did it for years, and it's even in reloading manuals. In the Lyman manual, they list a charge of up to 19 grains of Unique with light bullets for 30-06. 11 grains sounds like a very safe load.
this is quite common wyth reduced loads of fast burning powder, any one who uses fast burning powder as a reduced load in large capacity cases is just asking for trouble !!!!!
View Quote
No. You have it absolutely [i]backwards[/i]. From Lee's reloading manual, "never greatly reduce powder charges of very slow burning powders in large cases." The text was bold and underlined. It later went on to explain that charges in the lower 1/6th of the burning rate chart should not be greatly reduced. Elsewhere in the manual it states, "too little powder of a very slow burning variety, can sometimes cause too much pressure." Notice the [i]very slow[/i] phrase.z
Link Posted: 7/4/2002 3:12:24 PM EDT
I would like to learn the "true" story of what happened. I think the media is making a big deal out this to get people to hate and fear guns :-(.
Link Posted: 7/4/2002 3:17:56 PM EDT
Link Posted: 7/4/2002 3:38:06 PM EDT
Told to me by an ex Arty officer: With a small powder charge in a large case; if the primer ignites the powder in the front of the case first it will cause excessive pressure. I think it was called reverse aversion something or other. [b]I think[/b] the first shot of an over pressure cartridge as evidenced by the first cartridge case having no primer, black soot on the case head, and gross brass flow into the ejector, cracked or weakened the action. The subsequent firing of another cartridge, whether of the same load or not caused the action parts to explode, because the bullet was still in the barrel after the failure. My $.02 Anyway you slice it.....it's a tragedy.
Link Posted: 7/4/2002 4:32:22 PM EDT
I've learned that the rifle was a Lee Navy in 6mm. As for taken the rifle and messing with it: Was it really that big of a deal? Some people on the list said that the cops didn't even say much to the guy, and that the cops just tossed the rifle and parts into the back of the cop car. It seems to be a pretty open and shut case: exploded rifle-metal in head-death-accident. Would the cops actually investigate this further? Would the insurance company want more info? I'll agree it probably wasn't a great idea to mess with the rifle, but was it really that big of a deal?
Link Posted: 7/4/2002 5:05:03 PM EDT
Originally Posted By libertyof76: I'll agree it probably wasn't a great idea to mess with the rifle, but was it really that big of a deal?
View Quote
Well, if the police check it they will find your fingerprints all over it. Now, personally I can do without the hazzle of being questioned about why I tampered with evidence. I mean, it looks like an open and shut case, but how do you know? Let's say the gun had been tampered with and then you're screwing around with it trying to figure out what happened. You're not going to help, you're just making it harder for the professionals to figure out what happened. It's one thing to help the victim, where you can actually do some good. Though I must agree with the concern that others have about the guy poking around in the head wound. I was always told that if there's something sticking out of an injured person's head [b]YOU DO NOT F*CKING TOUCH IT![/b] Also, if there's nothing sticking out of it, but you have reason to suspect that something is dislodged on the inside of the cranial cavity [b]YOU DO NOT F*CKING TOUCH IT![/b] Granted, I'm not a medical profesional, and I can see how some people are taught different techniques, but if you have someone who's got any type of penetrating wound to the skull, are you really supposed to put pressure on it? As I recall the bleeding from the wound is less dangerous to the victim than the creation of pressure between the brain and the skull from attempts to stop the bleeding. When dealing with a gunshot wound to the rest of body you are reasonably safe in applying pressure to the wound, but when you have bleeding inside the head your main concern is to limit the pressure on the brain. Am I right? Just imagine the medical examiner or surgeon coming back saying, "Yeah, the injury was severe and the victim would have lost his sight. But the excessive preassure on the brain was what caused the terminal damage..."
Link Posted: 7/4/2002 5:23:25 PM EDT
Apparently two rounds were fired – the second one resulting in the destruction of the firearm and the death of the shooter. The bullet from the second round was still in the barrel, despite the signs of high pressure!! As Nakid80 suggests, maybe the first round started a fracture in the receiver - firing the second round then caused the receiver to come apart before the bullet exited the barrel. I assume such a failure could cause the appearance of high pressure on the second case, even if it didn’t actually exist. While less likely, I’m wondering if the bullet from the first round had lodged in the barrel and was struck by the second one – causing pressures to skyrocket. Possibly the second bullet knocked the first one out of the barrel; alternatively, possibly our industrious investigator drove both bullets back into the case. Granted, the barrel should be ringed internally if this happened. I can’t find much on the 6MM Lee Navy. However, I did come across the following Unique powder loads in a 1951 Ideal Reloading manual. Obviously these are for general reference only - I’m not suggesting they would necessarily be suitable in a 6MM Lee Navy. Charge:-------Round:-------------------------Bullet: 07.0 grains -- 25-35 Winchester------------111 grains cast 11.0 grains -- .257 Roberts -----------------100 grains cast 10.0 grains -- 6.5MM Japanese-------------100 grains cast 11.0 grains -- 6.5MM Mann.-Schoenauer-100 grains cast While I don’t know the bullet weight or type that the shooter was using, I agree with Zoom that the powder weight by itself doesn’t seem totally out of whack.
Link Posted: 7/4/2002 5:49:21 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/4/2002 8:31:51 PM EDT by lazyengineer]
I'm with a lot of other people, the details from the story sound just weird to me. I hate to second guess the someone who needed to make a decision and a response to the situation, as well as have the courtesy to post his experience (assuming it's true), but I think I'd rather this guy not be around when I get seriously hurt. And Jesus, messing around with the evidence at the scene of a fatality?? Holy cow.
Link Posted: 7/4/2002 5:54:45 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/4/2002 5:55:48 PM EDT by LE6920]
Originally Posted By libertyof76: As for taken the rifle and messing with it: Was it really that big of a deal?
View Quote
Yes, actually it is. It is hard enough to figure out what may have happened wothout people tampering, destroying, removing, altering evidence. The police may have "just put the rifle in the car trunk", because they are likely not specialists and will turn it over to a firearms examiner, etc. How are they going to know what this Columbo did on site to alter the evidence. It would be nice to know the real reason behind the explosion. If it is a failed reciever, it would be important to others. A good rule is to make sure the scene is safe and render care to any victims. But please try and refrain from causing more trouble. Do you really want your fingerprints all over everthing? My thoughts and prayers go out to the victim's loved ones. We don't need to lose any other friends!
Link Posted: 7/4/2002 11:28:28 PM EDT
Originally Posted By libertyof76: I'll agree it probably wasn't a great idea to mess with the rifle, but was it really that big of a deal?
View Quote
Well if you can see into the future and know that the police aren't that concerned........Wait since you can't see into the future, don't guess. 1) What if the first few officers on scene look at the scene, and just don't think it is an "accident"? Tough questions may be getting asked. How suspicious doe it look to have messed around in a gun that just caused a death? 2) Suppose the PD involved takes this VERY seriously. Even if they don't think it's a suspicious death. When they start asking questions Dr. Hands on stuff is going to have a serious problem. Like obstructing an officer, or tampering with evidence. Now if that same PD, or the insurance co., decides to have the weapon examined by an "expert", how do you think the expert will explain the bullet that genuis pushed out of the barrel? All of a sudden since the bullet is moved around an accident may look very suspicious. 3) What if this wasn't an accident, and was staged to look like one. Now who has tampered with that evidence? Yes the officer might have "just tossed it into the back of a car". Then again if that is the description from the tampering guy, it doesn't sound that bad. The police, real police, not ninjii, don't try to do a forensic ballistic exams in the field. There's something called the [red] 4 P's [/red] Protect, Perserve, Photograph, and Package. It is the "rule of thumb" for evidence handling. You'll notice that list doesn't have Tamper, Manipulate, Mess With, or Alter. Which is what someone did do in this case.
Link Posted: 7/5/2002 7:29:28 AM EDT
Originally Posted By OLY-M4gery:
Originally Posted By libertyof76: I'll agree it probably wasn't a great idea to mess with the rifle, but was it really that big of a deal?
View Quote
Well if you can see into the future and know that the police aren't that concerned........Wait since you can't see into the future, don't guess. 1) What if the first few officers on scene look at the scene, and just don't think it is an "accident"? Tough questions may be getting asked. How suspicious doe it look to have messed around in a gun that just caused a death? 2) Suppose the PD involved takes this VERY seriously. Even if they don't think it's a suspicious death. When they start asking questions Dr. Hands on stuff is going to have a serious problem. Like obstructing an officer, or tampering with evidence. Now if that same PD, or the insurance co., decides to have the weapon examined by an "expert", how do you think the expert will explain the bullet that genuis pushed out of the barrel? All of a sudden since the bullet is moved around an accident may look very suspicious. 3) What if this wasn't an accident, and was staged to look like one. Now who has tampered with that evidence? Yes the officer might have "just tossed it into the back of a car". Then again if that is the description from the tampering guy, it doesn't sound that bad. The police, real police, not ninjii, don't try to do a forensic ballistic exams in the field. There's something called the [red] 4 P's [/red] Protect, Perserve, Photograph, and Package. It is the "rule of thumb" for evidence handling. You'll notice that list doesn't have Tamper, Manipulate, Mess With, or Alter. Which is what someone did do in this case.
View Quote
Maybe the guy watched to many episodes of CSI.
Link Posted: 7/5/2002 4:14:38 PM EDT
Interesting, but possibly irrelevant, passage in Hatcher’s Notebook, page 444, regarding the failure of a couple of low number Springfield service rifle receivers using a fast burning powder. [image]www.ar15.com/members/albums/199%2Fhatcher01%2520jpg%2Ejpg[/image]
Link Posted: 7/5/2002 10:26:39 PM EDT
Originally Posted By 199: Apparently two rounds were fired – the second one resulting in the destruction of the firearm and the death of the shooter. The bullet from the second round was still in the barrel, despite the signs of high pressure!! Charge:-------Round:-------------------------Bullet: 07.0 grains -- 25-35 Winchester------------111 grains cast 11.0 grains -- .257 Roberts -----------------100 grains cast 10.0 grains -- 6.5MM Japanese-------------100 grains cast 11.0 grains -- 6.5MM Mann.-Schoenauer-100 grains cast
View Quote
It mentions that he was using 2 different weights of jacketed bullets. It could have been that he may have mistakenly used the 150gr bullets with the 11gr Unique load.
Link Posted: 7/5/2002 11:10:13 PM EDT
Stuff like this makes me leary of reloading.
Link Posted: 7/5/2002 11:23:55 PM EDT
BTW (IN CASE IT HASN'T BEEN SAID): [b]DO NOT REMOVE AN IMBEDDED OBJECT UNLESS IT IS COMPROMISING THE AIRWAY!!!!![/b] Scott
Link Posted: 7/6/2002 12:21:25 AM EDT
Originally Posted By SNorman: Stuff like this makes me leary of reloading.
View Quote
Its not really a problem. Only keep what you plan to use readily accessable, all else should be put away. If you have [b]ONE[/b] load that you use all of the time, then it shouldn't be a problem as you will always be using the same powder, primer and bullet. I only use one load for my 1911 and USP (both 45's) and several loads for my AR's. I have a place for everything and everything in its place! The key word: [b]Organization[/b] And remember this rhyme when reloading, [b]"If in doubt, dump it out!"[/b]
Link Posted: 7/6/2002 12:26:56 AM EDT
You guys bring up some very good points I hadn't considered, which makes me change my mind about messing with the rifle. I was wrong.
Link Posted: 7/6/2002 5:18:56 AM EDT
if you care to read page 105 of P.O.Ackleys book, start reading at "Finally...." that paragraph is an almost exact description of what happened........
Link Posted: 7/6/2002 7:52:43 AM EDT
Originally Posted By CactusJack: if you care to read page 105 of P.O.Ackleys book, start reading at "Finally...." that paragraph is an almost exact description of what happened........
View Quote
Page 105 of Ackley's handbook is entirely devoted to a discussion of the dangers of reduced charges of SLOW BURNING powders, not fast burning powders like Unique. Give it up, CactusJack. You remind me of that Bellesiles guy who wrote that discredited anti-gun book and never seemed to consider that other people could go to the sources he cited and see that he was distorting what was said there.
Link Posted: 7/6/2002 8:04:39 AM EDT
Originally Posted By 199: Interesting, but possibly irrelevant, passage in Hatcher’s Notebook, page 444, regarding the failure of a couple of low number Springfield service rifle receivers using a fast burning powder. [image]www.ar15.com/members/albums/199%2Fhatcher01%2520jpg%2Ejpg[/image]
View Quote
This is interesting, and better than anything CJ has come up with yet. But, if you can believe the report of that Columbo guy who was at the scene, there were obvious signs of overpressure in the case of the recent accident. Stretching/tearing of the receiver steel, brass flow of the cartridge case, the splintered stock, the great force of the flying pieces. Quite different from the "falling apart" that Hatcher describes.
Link Posted: 7/6/2002 8:19:02 AM EDT
I ordered a Swede target rifle from Sarco the other day and made an inquiry about a K11 and K31 and TJ made the comment be careful with the old military stuff. I thought that that was kinda strange. Now I know why he made that comment. Wonder if it was a squib load followed by a good one? Reloading is no different than shooting. Respect and safety should come first. RIP Glenn
Link Posted: 7/6/2002 2:23:34 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Fuzzbean: ... there were obvious signs of overpressure in the case of the recent accident.... Quite different from the "falling apart" that Hatcher describes.
View Quote
Agreed. I included Hatcher’s entire paragraph so everyone could draw their own conclusions. The fact that the shooter was killed in the recent incident also compellingly confirms a big difference in the events. Further, it appears the shooter was using a much warmer load than the round cited by Hatcher. However, what got my attention was Hatcher’s suggestion that the fast burning Bullseye may have stressed the receiver too quickly, causing its failure despite the absence of high pressure. A parallel point, of course, is that these low number Springfields mentioned by Hatcher apparently failed due to faulty (or outdated) heat treatment methods. The Lee Navy is even older than these Springfields and might have been treated with the same methods. Since many fewer Lee Navy's were produced, perhaps such problems with them are less known – it’s not like these problems were widespread even with Springfields (in a recent thread, some board members even contested the existence of the problem!). Also, I suspect the Lee-Navy’s were in service a much shorter time than the low number Springfields, though I don’t actually know this. Cactus Jack is proving to be the obstinate, pig-headed old cuss that I generally think of myself as being. However, I can’t dismiss out of hand his statement that he read what he is saying in a gun rag. A lot of gun magazine writers don’t have a clue what they are talking about. I will criticize CJ for believing anything he read in a gun magazine – he’s clearly old enough to know better!
Link Posted: 7/6/2002 4:16:14 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Imbroglio: It mentions that he was using 2 different weights of jacketed bullets. It could have been that he may have mistakenly used the 150gr bullets with the 11gr Unique load.
View Quote
I can’t believe the 150 grain round was a 6MM – I don’t know of anyone who makes such a thing. Even Lyman’s heaviest cast 6MM (that I can find) is 115 grains. Per Barnes, the factory load used a 112 grain bullet. My understanding is that jacketed bullets cause higher pressures than cast bullets of the same weight since they are much harder. If he used a jacketed bullet behind 11 grains of Unique, that might explain why the rifle came apart. On re-reading the original post of the guy who was there, I notice the bullet from the fatal round was stuck in or near the chamber. That would be consistent with a jacketed bullet being delayed as it engages the rifling while the pressure from the burning Unique skyrockets. Still, this is all just wild conjecture at this point. I’m not sure how much I trust the observations of the guy who was there. Plus this could have been a plain old double charge of powder, or such. Or the shooter may have done everything right and was simply the victim of a structural failure. Sadly, he is not here to explain his actions. Maybe I’m doing too much second-guessing!
Link Posted: 7/6/2002 10:30:34 PM EDT
Out of fairness to CactusJack, I probably should mention that I have this book, [i]Metallic Cartridge Reloading[/i] by M.L. McPherson, that tells of some tests done by Ken Oehler. Using "a charge of Unique powder that filled about 70 percent of the available powder space" in .38 Special cases, and 110 grain JHP bullets, he averaged 15,000 psi when the powder was sitting against the bullet and 26,100 psi when the powder sat against the primer. I actually find it hard to believe, since 70% is a fairly full case, that there could be that big of a difference. Also, I don't know offhand how many grains of powder 70% full translates to. So I don't know if this means that light plinking loads will blow your gun apart if fired upwards, or that overloaded proof rounds are perfectly safe to shoot if fired downwards. 70% sounds like a considerable amount to me, but they just aren't giving enough info to draw any real conclusion. I do note the back section of this same book lists loads for both standard and +P .38 Special that use Unique powder with 110 grain bullets.
Link Posted: 7/7/2002 8:59:00 PM EDT
Concerning "Maximum Handloads" Now your first round jams your rifle,and it was because of the OGIVE FACTOR: The bullet had a shorter ogive and engaged the rifling sooner. This is a great way of running up pressures expecially if you add a 150 grain bullet where a 115 grain bullet should have been used with the same +load and different anbient air temps. Could spell disaster! Nobody will ever know! Bob
Top Top