Go Back   Alberta Outdoorsmen Forum > Main Category > Guns & Ammo Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 02-20-2018, 01:10 PM
propliner propliner is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 1,309
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bat119 View Post
That's what I thought the only plausible explanation was a hangfire as the trigger can't be pulled when a cartridge is out of battery, the bulged case is proof that the cartridge was not completely in the chamber.
And this is why the jury could not convict him of murder or any intent to do harm.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 03-03-2018, 10:07 PM
Traveller11 Traveller11 is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 31
Default Movidos

Quote:
Originally Posted by KGB View Post
I had a hangfire on my sks rifle a few years ago. Loaded up 5 rounds, 3 went boom and then silence....I turned the gun on its side still holding it up on a shoulder and then -bum! It fired. That happened a few months after I got my PAL and I remembered what the guy was teaching us. So I was just holding th3 gun as usual.
"3 went boom and then silence"

Mr. Stanley used his Tokarev TT-33 semi-auto extensively at his cow/calf operation to frighten coyotes away, and testified to experiencing many hangfires with the 1953 Czech milsurp ammo he was using.

The Tokarev is a powerful, high velocity handgun that produces a noticeable recoil and a VERY loud muzzle blast.

Does anyone here find it possibly just a little bit strange that Mr. Stanley did not notice the 3rd shot he fired into the air did not go off, indicating he still had a live round in the chamber that had hangfired?

Even an inexperienced sporadic shooter can easily distinguish between a shot being fired and a hangfire.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 03-03-2018, 10:18 PM
CaberTosser's Avatar
CaberTosser CaberTosser is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Calgary
Posts: 19,416
Default

You seem to have overlooked that duds in very old soviet surplus ammo are fairly common due to any number of factors including, but not limited to: moisture contaminating the powder, contact with oil neutralizing the primers, etc.
__________________
"The trouble with people idiot-proofing things, is the resulting evolution of the idiot." Me
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 03-03-2018, 10:52 PM
Traveller11 Traveller11 is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 31
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaberTosser View Post
You seem to have overlooked that duds in very old soviet surplus ammo are fairly common due to any number of factors including, but not limited to: moisture contaminating the powder, contact with oil neutralizing the primers, etc.
No one is arguing whether or not old ammo has the potential to be defective.

I'm merely pointing out how odd it is that an experienced shooter, such as Mr. Stanley, did not notice his Tokarev failed to produce a very loud muzzle blast and kick the third time he pulled the trigger and, failing to hear a muzzle blast, how he could possibly think the 3rd round had left the barrel.

If he had only loaded the clip with two rounds, he would not have been able to pull the trigger the third time, as the action would have locked itself in the rearward position after ejecting the spent casing from the 2nd round.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 03-03-2018, 11:18 PM
Traveller11 Traveller11 is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 31
Default Bridge calle

"Originally Posted by bat119 View Post
That's what I thought the only plausible explanation was a hangfire as the trigger can't be pulled when a cartridge is out of battery, the bulged case is proof that the cartridge was not completely in the chamber."

Yes, you're correct. The trigger on a Tokarev cannot release the hammer until the action is completely forward and the locking lugs engaged. If this occurred, the cartridge would be fully chambered.

So, you believe it was a hangfire, meaning something had to detonate the primer of the cartridge.

How do you suppose that happened?
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 03-04-2018, 01:41 AM
hogie hogie is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Millet
Posts: 854
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Traveller11 View Post
"Originally Posted by bat119 View Post
That's what I thought the only plausible explanation was a hangfire as the trigger can't be pulled when a cartridge is out of battery, the bulged case is proof that the cartridge was not completely in the chamber."

Yes, you're correct. The trigger on a Tokarev cannot release the hammer until the action is completely forward and the locking lugs engaged. If this occurred, the cartridge would be fully chambered.

So, you believe it was a hangfire, meaning something had to detonate the primer of the cartridge.

How do you suppose that happened?
Explaine what you think happened. How did the shell discharge out of battery? It was clearly not chambered correctly. If you have the answers then please tell us. Please duplicate what happened on video.

Could you replicate the blown out case that jambed the gun the firearms expert testified to with 3 rounds? The dud? How many to make rounds to make it happen?

A correct functioning firearm would need correct functioning ammo? They kinda go hand in hand. One doesn't work well then the other won't. The ammo was proven defective.


If you have the evidence that the crown needs to appeal this then why waste time here? Please in detail explaine what happened. Please.please please. Explain the bulge case.

If you don't like the decision then start asking the crown on the charges that they decided to lay. Maybe If the decided to lay manslaughter charge, MAYBE, there would have been a different outcome on the trail.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 03-04-2018, 06:15 AM
bat119's Avatar
bat119 bat119 is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: On the border in Lloydminster
Posts: 8,342
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Traveller11 View Post
"
So, you believe it was a hangfire, meaning something had to detonate the primer of the cartridge.

How do you suppose that happened?
Stanley said he fired two warning shots when he attempted the 3rd round it didn't ignite. The primer was crushed by the misfire, when Stanley removed the magazine he must have pulled the slide back out of battery leaving the misfired cartridge part way into the chamber a few seconds later it detonated.

I would like a better look at the primer on that cartridge and compare it with others fired by the Tok.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 03-04-2018, 08:02 AM
gunluvr's Avatar
gunluvr gunluvr is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,594
Default

The fact of the matter is if the jury saw evidence that would lead them to believe that Stanley did not maliciously intend to shoot Boushie or even brandished his firearm with undue negligence, WITH REASONABLE DOUBT, then they could not deliver a verdict of "guilty of manslaughter". The obvious evidence that the Tokerev malfunctioned at that critical moment, is enough to raise reasonable doubt, even without consideration of Stanley's explanation of what transpired.
Proponents of Colten Boushie don't want to consider what happened in the jury deliberations because they were all "non-impartial white men". It's unfortunate that there wasn't a FN representative on the jury. The verdict would have been the same.
__________________
Some days you're a bullet; some days you're a gopher.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 03-04-2018, 08:48 AM
Traveller11 Traveller11 is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 31
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gunluvr View Post
The fact of the matter is if the jury saw evidence that would lead them to believe that Stanley did not maliciously intend to shoot Boushie or even brandished his firearm with undue negligence, WITH REASONABLE DOUBT, then they could not deliver a verdict of "guilty of manslaughter". The obvious evidence that the Tokerev malfunctioned at that critical moment, is enough to raise reasonable doubt, even without consideration of Stanley's explanation of what transpired.
Proponents of Colten Boushie don't want to consider what happened in the jury deliberations because they were all "non-impartial white men". It's unfortunate that there wasn't a FN representative on the jury. The verdict would have been the same.
You have just hit the nail on the head.

Mr. Stanley was NOT charged with criminal negligence through reckless endangerment. He was charged with 2nd degree murder which, as per the judge's instructions, the jury could have reduced to a charge of manslaughter. Nothing in his charges stated anything about negligence or the brandishing and discharging of a restricted weapon, which I find extremely puzzling. Under the Criminal Code of Canada, criminal negligence carries a maximum life sentence if a life is taken.

As you stated, intent would be almost impossible to prove in this case.

As all of you have likely noticed by this point, I do not believe the misshapen spent cartridge found on the dashboard of the SUV was the result of a "hangfire" or an "out of battery" discharge. If you will be patient with me, I will explain a scenario in which the 3rd round was chambered just the same as the first two, and disharged the same way as the first two (ie. by pulling the trigger).

Unfortunately, though, what I am going to say is going to shed a very bad light on Mr. Stanley's testimony. That being said, it is still quite possible the weapon was discharged accidentally when Colten Boushie was killed, and that Mr. Stanley felt great remorse at taking a life. I refuse to condemn him for what he did, as I do not know if I would have acted much differently under similar circumstances.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 03-04-2018, 09:07 AM
Dick284's Avatar
Dick284 Dick284 is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Dreadful Valley
Posts: 14,585
Default

For some 11 days this thread laid dorment. Then our new member T11 drags it back up with his own supicisions on the events.

Interesting that T11 chooses only to speak on this single subject. He has chosen no introduction, but has only chosen this single thread.

Most interesting.
__________________


There are no absolutes
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old 03-04-2018, 09:09 AM
Smokinyotes Smokinyotes is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: onoway, Ab
Posts: 6,956
Default

No kidding eh Dick. Wonder who he was in his past life
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 03-04-2018, 09:23 AM
AndrewM AndrewM is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: NW Calgary
Posts: 2,785
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Traveller11 View Post
You have just hit the nail on the head.

Mr. Stanley was NOT charged with criminal negligence through reckless endangerment. He was charged with 2nd degree murder which, as per the judge's instructions, the jury could have reduced to a charge of manslaughter. Nothing in his charges stated anything about negligence or the brandishing and discharging of a restricted weapon, which I find extremely puzzling. Under the Criminal Code of Canada, criminal negligence carries a maximum life sentence if a life is taken.

As you stated, intent would be almost impossible to prove in this case.

As all of you have likely noticed by this point, I do not believe the misshapen spent cartridge found on the dashboard of the SUV was the result of a "hangfire" or an "out of battery" discharge. If you will be patient with me, I will explain a scenario in which the 3rd round was chambered just the same as the first two, and disharged the same way as the first two (ie. by pulling the trigger).

Unfortunately, though, what I am going to say is going to shed a very bad light on Mr. Stanley's testimony. That being said, it is still quite possible the weapon was discharged accidentally when Colten Boushie was killed, and that Mr. Stanley felt great remorse at taking a life. I refuse to condemn him for what he did, as I do not know if I would have acted much differently under similar circumstances.
Stop beating around the bush. Let’s here how a case bulged inside the chamber!
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 03-04-2018, 09:28 AM
CaberTosser's Avatar
CaberTosser CaberTosser is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Calgary
Posts: 19,416
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick284 View Post
For some 11 days this thread laid dorment. Then our new member T11 drags it back up with his own supicisions on the events.

Interesting that T11 chooses only to speak on this single subject. He has chosen no introduction, but has only chosen this single thread.

Most interesting.
My exact thoughts upon reading his very first post. Waiting to hear how he proposes how a cartridge that was fully seated in a chamber could possibly look like that, at least in a firearm where the chamber didn’t also have the same irregularity
__________________
"The trouble with people idiot-proofing things, is the resulting evolution of the idiot." Me
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 03-04-2018, 09:38 AM
hogie hogie is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Millet
Posts: 854
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AndrewM View Post
Stop beating around the bush. Let’s here how a case bulged inside the chamber!
Yep I agree, tell us how a bottle necked case becomes a straight walled case with a bulge. The case looks nothing like a normal bottle necked fired case.
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 03-04-2018, 09:42 AM
Cement Bench's Avatar
Cement Bench Cement Bench is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: alberta
Posts: 1,927
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick284 View Post
For some 11 days this thread laid dorment. Then our new member T11 drags it back up with his own supicisions on the events.

Interesting that T11 chooses only to speak on this single subject. He has chosen no introduction, but has only chosen this single thread.

Most interesting.
he has an agenda he is a plant or a cop hired by feds to see how the gun community reacts for future legislation or interpretation of rules relating to self defense

he needs to be punted and revealed who he is

mods

Cement Bench
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 03-04-2018, 11:10 AM
raised by wolves raised by wolves is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,277
Default

The aspect of this casing that I find interesting is its final resting place, considering the manner in which this model of pistol ejects. Makes me wonder which direction the firearm itself was pointed when it was discharged.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 03-04-2018, 11:23 AM
gunluvr's Avatar
gunluvr gunluvr is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,594
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by raised by wolves View Post
The aspect of this casing that I find interesting is its final resting place, considering the manner in which this model of pistol ejects. Makes me wonder which direction the firearm itself was pointed when it was discharged.
Well, I think it was pointed at Colten Boushie's head, whether intentionally, or not. Who knows what the spent casing could have bounced off inside the car before it came to rest in the defroster vent?
__________________
Some days you're a bullet; some days you're a gopher.
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 03-04-2018, 11:29 AM
Newview01 Newview01 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 5,326
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by raised by wolves View Post
The aspect of this casing that I find interesting is its final resting place, considering the manner in which this model of pistol ejects. Makes me wonder which direction the firearm itself was pointed when it was discharged.
The results of the incident would give a clear direction in which the firearm was pointed. However, it is interesting to note that Stanley gave a concise picture as to how he placed his hands while he was trying to remove the keys from the vehicle (I believe the pistol was in his right hand, which he placed on the window sill of the drivers door while reaching over the steering column, this would reasonably place the direction of travel of the spent casing up and forward towards the windshield which likely then would have deflected it downwards into the vent). The jury has concluded that his statements were factual.
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 03-04-2018, 11:33 AM
CaberTosser's Avatar
CaberTosser CaberTosser is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Calgary
Posts: 19,416
Default

Lots of surfaces for an empty cartridge to bounce off inside a vehicle. Having never shot a Tokarev I don't know what usual direction and with what kind of force they eject their spent casings, and with the weird manner in which this one discharged that would have been a different manner than normal anyways. I do know however that I have had to urgently remove hot pistol casings after they bounced into my chest and down my shirt at the range, frequently from adjacent shooters rather than the pistol I was shooting, but both apply. Reading up on the pistol it seem to be a rather hot round with some substantial velocity in the 1400fps range (of course when its functioning properly, that is).

As for Cement Bench, the new poster so far has been polite and well written, I think your request for them to be banned is more than a little premature. Take note they even mentioned they might have taken the same course of action as Stanley if faced with such a rapidly developing situation. To date, they've only displayed reasonable behaviour, contrasting your most recent rude post. Also note that their description of a firearms mechanics mean they could not possibly be anti-gunners, because those people never get their mechanics and terminology correct!

About the only possibility for someone knowing both the mechanics and being an anti would be someone with the RCMP firearms lab, but the case having been through the courts would not give such a person a reason to bother with further investigation, unless it was solely to satisfy their personal curiosity.
__________________
"The trouble with people idiot-proofing things, is the resulting evolution of the idiot." Me

Last edited by CaberTosser; 03-04-2018 at 11:41 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 03-04-2018, 12:48 PM
AndrewM AndrewM is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: NW Calgary
Posts: 2,785
Default

I am curious to hear his theory as that was why the thread was created to begin with. Let’s try to keep it about the round so it doesn’t get closed.
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 03-04-2018, 12:52 PM
Traveller11 Traveller11 is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 31
Default

The handgun owned by Mr. Stanley was a WWII era Soviet Tokarev T-33 semi-auto pistol that fired a 7.62x25mm cartridge. Using Soviet milsurp ammo, the average muzzle velocity expected would be just over 1300 fps. The milsurp ammo used by Mr. Stanley was actually made in Czechoslovakia in 1953 for the CZ 52 semi-auto pistol; the Czech version of the TT-33.

The Czechs changed several features when they designed the CZ 52, including replacing the simple locking system that kept the action in place, preventing the rearward travel of the action until the bullet had safely exited the barrel. Because of these changes the Czechs must have felt their CZ 52 was capable of withstanding higher pressure chambers than the TT-33, and the loading of their ammo reflects this.

The article linked to below was written by a Mr. Claude Harrington, an expert on the Czech CZ 52.

https://harringtonproducts.com/7.62x25mm/

Take note of the second paragraph, in which Mr. Harrington states that Czech ammo is loaded up to 25% hotter than other Tokarev ammo. While he does not come right out and warn against using Czech ammo in anything but the CZ 52, he does caution against using it in guns not designed for it. I believe this warning would also apply to 75 year old TT-33 pistols that were dirty, stored outdoors and likely corroded, worn and possibly defective.

Also interesting in this article is the ballistics table near the bottom, showing the Czech ammo clocked at 1640 fps, while another 85 gr. JHP was only clocked at 1230 fps. Energy at 1640 fps was 512 ft/lbs., while energy at 1230 fps was a mere 290 ft/lbs.; almost doubling the energy.

As ammo ages, the primers and gunpowder that make up its propulsion system will deteriorate, and are typically the cause of hangfires and misfires. This was especially true of a lot of older European milsurp ammo, as it was common to use corrosive compounds such as sodium or potassium chlorate as oxidizers in their primers. However, it is not always true that deteriorated gunpowder automatically loses its potency. In fact, it has been found, in many cases, that aged gunpowder, through chemical transformation, will burn hotter than when it was new.

Now, back to the question; how did the casing end up bulged out at the base, and its bottleneck swollen out to the diameter of the rest of the slightly tapered casing?

To understand my explanation, I must first insure you are cognizant of exactly how a short recoil blowback semi-auto works, and just how delicately balanced the operation is.

The whole point of designing a short recoil blowback (SRB) system is to time the departure of the bullet from the barrel with the rearward travel of the action (and extraction of the casing) so precisely, two events are avoided:

1. The casing is not started moving rearward out of the chamber before the bullet leaves the barrel. Such an event would allow contained high pressure gases in the barrel to blow back into the shooter's face.
2. The casing is not started moving out of the chamber so late, the expanding gases necessary to move casing and action rearward have all escaped out the muzzle with the muzzle flash.

In other words, what appears to be a very simple reloading system is actually a complex balance of mass, spring tension and rate of powder burn that must be timed to within a mere fraction of a second just to get it to work at all. Change ANY of the factors involved, and the results are immediate and obvious.

We already know Mr. Stanley had a TT-33 that was possibly up to 80 years old (first mf'd in 1934) and that he was shooting Czech ammo that was loaded up to 25% hotter than the pistol was designed to shoot. We also know he stored this ammo outdoors in a shed in a climate that varied from -30° to +30° C. We also now, from testimony, that Mr. Stanley did not actually shoot coyotes with his TT-33 but, rather, employed it more as a noise maker, due to its exceptionally loud muzzle blast. Therefore, it is doubtful Mr. Stanley ever cleaned the barrel or action on his TT-33 or paid much attention at all to its maintenance. We also know the TT-33 was kept outdoors in the same shed as the ammo, and there is a very good chance its action and barrel were rusted and possibly corroded.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped..._operation.png

Above is a link to a diagram showing the five stages of a typical short recoil operation cycle. Below is the text describing each stage.

Cycle diagram explanation

Block diagram of short recoil operation cycle.

1. Ready to fire position. Bolt is locked to barrel, both are fully forward.

2. Upon firing, bolt and barrel recoil backwards a short distance while locked together. Near the end of the barrel travel, the bolt and barrel unlock.

3. The barrel stops, but the unlocked bolt continues to move to the rear, ejecting the empty shell and compressing the recoil spring.

4. The bolt returns forward under spring force, loading a new round into the barrel.

5. Bolt locks into barrel, and forces barrel to return to battery.

As you may have guessed by now, rate of powder burn and peak chamber pressures are critical factors in getting the bolt to unlock from the barrel at PRECISELY the right moment.

I believe the 3rd round in Mr. Stanley's TT-33 was not only a hot Czech load, its powder had also experienced chemical changes over the last 60+ years that caused it to burn at a higher than normal rate. The resulting elevated chamber pressures first caused the casing to expand, fire-forming it to the precise bottleneck shape of the chamber. At this point, though, due to extreme chamber pressures, the barrel and bolt began moving rearward together faster and with more force than usual. At this point, the worn/rusted/unoiled/corroded locking lugs disengaged the bolt from the barrel prematurely and, just before the bullet exited the barrel, began moving the bolt and casing rearward, just out of the chamber. As chamber pressures were still elevated, the already fire-formed casing now re-expanded to the shape seen in the photo. This re-expansion of the casing only stopped when a) the bullet left the barrel, relieving gas pressure or b) the slightly tapered 7.62x25mm casing moved far enough back in the chamber to release gas pressure rearward.

Last edited by Traveller11; 03-04-2018 at 01:02 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 03-04-2018, 12:59 PM
Traveller11 Traveller11 is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 31
Default

I have also been curious as to how the bulged casing ended up where it did on the dashboard.

However, if you consider Colten Boushie's wound, it actually makes some sense.

The bullet entered Boushie's skull behind his left ear, and exited the right side of his neck. Using my wife, in a kitchen chair, as a test victim (sans gun, of course), it appears the only position Boushie could have been in to accidentally sustain such a wound would be with him leaned far forward, almost, it would appear, with his head tucked downward.
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 03-04-2018, 01:16 PM
CaberTosser's Avatar
CaberTosser CaberTosser is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Calgary
Posts: 19,416
Default

Well that sounds rather accurate, though I might make exception for the wound angle theory, based on the fact that during a physical altercation Stanley's hand and the pistol might have been in any number of unnatural positions & angles. I won't say the position theory is without merit, merely the "only possible" wording as many weird physical positions occur during a fight.
__________________
"The trouble with people idiot-proofing things, is the resulting evolution of the idiot." Me
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 03-04-2018, 01:22 PM
Traveller11 Traveller11 is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 31
Default

I apologize if I have stirred up any controversy here on this forum. I found this forum quite by accident the other day, and joined this forum simply because your group seems to be the only group in Canada having a real intelligent discussion about what actually happened on that fateful day.

I especially appreciate the lack of drama in the discussion here. While it can be a very passionate topic I, like many members here, am more interested in the pure science of this matter.

BTW, my name is Bob and I live on Haida Gwaii (formerly Queen Charlotte Islands) here in BC.
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 03-04-2018, 01:26 PM
Traveller11 Traveller11 is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 31
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaberTosser View Post
Well that sounds rather accurate, though I might make exception for the wound angle theory, based on the fact that during a physical altercation Stanley's hand and the pistol might have been in any number of unnatural positions & angles. I won't say the position theory is without merit, merely the "only possible" wording as many weird physical positions occur during a fight.
Absolutely. The position of Boushie and Stanley at the time of the shooting is one of those things we may never know. I am basing this theory (emphasis on the word theory) on the assumption Boushie was sitting somewhat upright in the driver's seat and Stanley, from his testimony, had the pistol in his right hand and was resting his right hand on the lower part of the open window frame.
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 03-04-2018, 01:26 PM
bat119's Avatar
bat119 bat119 is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: On the border in Lloydminster
Posts: 8,342
Default

The case on the dashboard could be explained, I've seen Tokarev's at the range throw the case forward sometimes a long ways. As for the hot powder theory the RCMP expert fired 36 rounds he was unable to replicate the bulged case and was unable to explain how it happened.
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 03-04-2018, 01:36 PM
Traveller11 Traveller11 is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 31
Default

Yes, a person might have to shoot a lot of ammo to replicate this freak incident, and hangfires are about that common as well. In my entire life, I have experienced one hangfire.

I know the explanation I gave involving hot powder and premature disengagement of the locking lugs may seem difficult to believe but, in the final analysis, it is the only possible explanation. Despite what two experts said at the trial, the evidence cannot be explained away as a "hangfire" or "out of battery" discharge.

Would you be interested in knowing why the hangfire and out of battery discharge will not work here?
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 03-04-2018, 02:05 PM
CaberTosser's Avatar
CaberTosser CaberTosser is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Calgary
Posts: 19,416
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Traveller11 View Post
Absolutely. The position of Boushie and Stanley at the time of the shooting is one of those things we may never know. I am basing this theory (emphasis on the word theory) on the assumption Boushie was sitting somewhat upright in the driver's seat and Stanley, from his testimony, had the pistol in his right hand and was resting his right hand on the lower part of the open window frame.
A reasonable postulation. From my imagining of the incident I thought of a time where I had intervened with a drunk driver who stopped for traffic after having torn off my drivers side mirror, so my thoughts revolved around the drivers door being opened by Stanley just as I had done and him trying to grab the vehicle keys just as I also did in an instinctual act to stop the vehicle. Go with what you can relate to as a plausible action.
__________________
"The trouble with people idiot-proofing things, is the resulting evolution of the idiot." Me
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 03-04-2018, 02:10 PM
AndrewM AndrewM is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: NW Calgary
Posts: 2,785
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Traveller11 View Post
Yes, a person might have to shoot a lot of ammo to replicate this freak incident, and hangfires are about that common as well. In my entire life, I have experienced one hangfire.

I know the explanation I gave involving hot powder and premature disengagement of the locking lugs may seem difficult to believe but, in the final analysis, it is the only possible explanation. Despite what two experts said at the trial, the evidence cannot be explained away as a "hangfire" or "out of battery" discharge.

Would you be interested in knowing why the hangfire and out of battery discharge will not work here?
Forgive my ignorance but with this semi, would any hot load cause a case to look like that one? If it’s perfectly timed wouldn’t it be risky to use war time ammo?
Absolutely would love to see why it couldn’t be a hang fire.
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 03-04-2018, 02:27 PM
Traveller11 Traveller11 is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 31
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AndrewM View Post
Forgive my ignorance but with this semi, would any hot load cause a case to look like that one? If it’s perfectly timed wouldn’t it be risky to use war time ammo?
Absolutely would love to see why it couldn’t be a hang fire.
Something I should have pointed out is that a semi-auto, like any other propulsion system, is subject to Newton's Third Law, which tells us: For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.

In other words, if a hot load was fired from a semi-auto in perfect working order, the only thing we would see is a bullet leaving the barrel quicker than normal, and the action cycling rearward quicker than normal. They would still be perfectly timed to each other. Of course, though, this is not an excuse to start cranking handloads upward for old pistols, as there are other things that tend to let go and make for a bad hair day.

Something else I should have explained better is deteriorated gunpowder. When I said it had the potential to become "hotter" as it deteriorated, I made a poor selection of adjective. By hotter I did not mean the temperature of the gunpowder would be elevated. What actually occurs is the rate of burn increases, causing peak chamber pressures to be realized sooner and in a more confined space (ie. when the bullet is closer to the chamber). There is a vast difference between volumes of gunpowder in a cartridge and rate of burn between different powders.

As one gunsmith pointed out to me, a semi-auto pistol is like a fine Swiss watch, and must be totally dismantled to find the one errant part that has gone awry. In the case of Stanley's pistol, I would suspect the locking lugs or the bolt return spring. I am far from being a gunsmith, though.

I have to go out but will sit down tonight to discuss hangfires and out of battery discharges.

Last edited by Traveller11; 03-04-2018 at 02:41 PM.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:30 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.