Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Andor" data-source="post: 2789040" data-attributes="member: 1879">As had been pointed out already on this thread, no. No it isn't. The reason it isn't is because any competently designed firearm is designed to absorb, redirect, and use that energy, rather than transfer it to the shooter. That it what recoil springs, recoil pads, recoil compensators and automatic actions do. That's what they're for. The only firearm design without any compensation is a sealed breech rifle with no butt pad. A Winchester 1874 model lever action say. And they kick pretty good and will indeed knock an unbraced individual flat on his butt. It doesn't actually take much energy to knock a human off balance if he isn't expecting the blow. But efficient design makes all the difference in the world. I have a Kel-tec P3at .380 pistol. This is a tiny thing made out of composites and weighs 23 ounces unloaded. A friend of mine had a .380 made by a fly-by-night manufacturer in California. It is a heavy steel thing that probably weighs 3 times what my pistol does, and it kicks twice as hard. Because my pistol is efficiently designed to absorb (in recoil springs) and use (by working the action) the firing energy, and his was not well designed and transfers too much energy to the shooters hand. Heck even a revolver will redirect some of the recoil into an upwards motion rather than a straight backwards push, by simple virtue of it's geometry. At anyrate the important part is that the shooters knows what is happening and can brace for it, whereas the shootee is probably not braced for impact and is therefore vulnerable to being knocked over, if not up and back ala hollywood.Err.. Sorry to drift off topic.</blockquote>

Verification