LMAO!!! Im on FAKE ignore by the nutter lefties.

domer76 said:
LOL

Your ignorance is just fucking PRICELESS!

Twist rates aren’t measured on unknown projectiles, dumbfuck. You have your test snd nomenclature wrong.

Powder residues don’t identify a bullet and rarely, if ever, does it fucking matter who manufactured a round.

Yeah, great. You clean your gun and a crook doesn’t. Good for you, dumbfuck. I can still pick your gun out of any other, cleaned or not.

Keep struggling, motherfucker. I’ll point out your ignorance every fucking time.

Now, go change the oil in your car snd call yourself a master mechanic.
Click to expand...

Powder residue makes matching a bullet (including fragmented bullets) to a particular firearm much easier, you fucking idiot!
 
TOP said:
Oh, my...;) Good Morning ;)
Click to expand...

He fell out of bed on the angry side again...

Happens every day...

5fab1f1ebe360cef22d0517346e7d569.jpg
 
I think it's in that handbook... at least a report every two weeks... in addition to 3 daily personal attacks...
Maybe we can get someone to check... There's a couple dozen copies out there....
 
RB 60 said:
Powder residue makes matching a bullet (including fragmented bullets) to a particular firearm much easier, you fucking idiot!
Click to expand...

No, you stupid fuck. No firearms examiner goes about performing powder residues to match a projectile to a weapon. They match test fires to the questioned round, you fucking idiot.

Really, cumsack, you need to stop. Even I am starting to feel sorry for you.
 
domer76 said:
No, you stupid fuck. No firearms examiner goes about performing powder residues to match a projectile to a weapon. They match test fires to the questioned round, you fucking idiot.

Really, cumsack, you need to stop. Even I am starting to feel sorry for you.
Click to expand...

You can't do it with a hollow point, stupid fuck. They practically disintegrate, especially if they hit a bone.

No need to feel sorry for me,you incompetent twit, you spend enough time feeling sorry for yourself.
 
RB 60 said:
You can't do it with a hollow point, stupid fuck. They practically disintegrate, especially if they hit a bone.

No need to feel sorry for me,you incompetent twit, you spend enough time feeling sorry for yourself.
Click to expand...

Really, fucktard, you need to stop. I’m serious. You’re publicly shitting yourself and don’t even know it.
 
domer76 said:
RB 60 said:
Powder residue makes matching a bullet (including fragmented bullets) to a particular firearm much easier, you fucking idiot!
Click to expand...
No, you stupid fuck. No firearms examiner goes about performing powder residues to match a projectile to a weapon. They match test fires to the questioned round, you fucking idiot.

Really, cumsack, you need to stop. Even I am starting to feel sorry for you.
Click to expand...
While both of you seem to be arguing out in the weeds at times, RB is correct that matching powder residue on a gun and a fired bullet (including fragments) are additional evidence. Matching the manufacturer to each is additional evidence for trial.
 
Doc Dutch said:
While both of you seem to be arguing out in the weeds at times, RB is correct that matching powder residue on a gun and a fired bullet (including fragments) are additional evidence. Matching the manufacturer to each is additional evidence for trial.
Click to expand...

No, it’s not “additional evidence”, whatever that means. Do you really believe that bullet fragments pulled from a victim has sufficient powder residues to determine whether it came from a Federal, Hornady or Remington round? Especially since any one weapon could have been used to fire a variety of rounds, including home loads.

What fictional crime dramas are you guys watching? And what relevance is the manufacturer, anyway?
 
domer76 said:
No, it’s not “additional evidence”, whatever that means.

Do you really believe that bullet fragments pulled from a victim has sufficient powder residues to determine whether it came from a Federal, Hornady or Remington round? Especially since any one weapon could have been used to fire a variety of rounds, including home loads.

What fictional crime dramas are you guys watching? And what relevance is the manufacturer, anyway?
Click to expand...
The more you post statements like that, the more I’m learning about your critical thinking skills, Domer. :)

Yes, it can, but only those who understand what “additional evidence” means would understand it. Obviously the evidence found would have to be corroborated with evidence proving the shooter possessed such rounds.

The fact you don’t understand why matching the manufacturer of the weapon, the ammunition, the bullets themselves are important to the prosecution of a case, then I can’t help you, Domer.
 
Doc Dutch said:
The more you post statements like that, the more I’m learning about your critical thinking skills, Domer. :)

Yes, it can, but only those who understand what “additional evidence” means would understand it. Obviously the evidence found would have to be corroborated with evidence proving the shooter possessed such rounds.

The fact you don’t understand why matching the manufacturer of the weapon, the ammunition, the bullets themselves are important to the prosecution of a case, then I can’t help you, Domer.
Click to expand...

And exactly what test, do you suppose, one that would stand scientific scrutiny, would be used to state “beyond a reasonable scientific doubt” that a projectile fragment that could not be connected to a weapon was the same brand of ammunition as possessed by the suspect based on powder analysis?

I’ll wait.
 
domer76 said:
And exactly what test, do you suppose, one that would stand scientific scrutiny, would be used to state “beyond a reasonable scientific doubt” that a projectile fragment that could not be connected to a weapon was the same brand of ammunition as possessed by the suspect based on powder analysis?

I’ll wait.
Click to expand...
Scientfic tests that could not connect bullet fragments or powder to a weapon? Off hand, the taste test, the opinion test, the touch test and the insert-in-the-rectum test.
 
Doc Dutch said:
Scientfic tests that could not connect bullet fragments or powder to a weapon? Off hand, the taste test, the opinion test, the touch test and the insert-in-the-rectum test.
Click to expand...

Just as I thought. Neither you or RB have a clue. Merely tossing out guesses and not very good ones.
 
domer76 said:
Just as I thought. Neither you or RB have a clue. Merely tossing out guesses and not very good ones.
Click to expand...
I answered your question, Domer.

At this time I’m listing you as suspected of mental issues and/or simply young, angry and stupid.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top