Determination of Wounding Potential of Guns Known from Childhood - Blowpipe and Slingshot

Abstract

This paper deal with the comparison of relative wounding potential of guns, which we know from childhood, specifically blowpipe and slingshot. Many people played with these guns in childhood without knowing how dangerous these guns are. Because this area has not been examined enough, this paper focuses on it. The relative wounding potential is examined through an experimental method. This method is indirect and includes shooting to the replacement material, which was gelatine with a concentration of 20 %. Using a high-speed camera, the course of missiles in the target, from penetration to stopping, is recorded. The volume of the temporary cavity is determined by image analysis, and subsequently, the relative wounding potential is calculated. Other monitored parameters are the depth of penetration of the projectile and the impact velocity of the projectile. Then, it is possible to determine the transmitted kinetic energy of the projectile. The results should help to assess the dangers of these "children's" weapons and alert society to their risks. They can also serve to experts in the field of ballistics and forensic expertise.

Methods of Indirect Identification in the Hand of a Crisis Manager in the Context of Sociological Aspects

“…flash photography). The socalled blocks of semi-infinite thickness are preferred for this method [3], when the effort of ballistics is to capture the bullets behavior in the material on the entire trajectory on which the bullet will stop in the test block. Comparing the bullets effects through the injury profiles comparison is a simple orientation method.…”

“…The material block has to be shone through for recording. That is why; the relatively powerful reflectors are used, which light is scattered by a semipermeable barrier [3].…”

“…Figure 4. Construction of the dependence of the total length of radial ruptures on the bullet trajectory (Source: [3])…”

“…When comparing the results of different authors, it is necessary to keep this fact in mind. (Source: [3])…”