The underrated guntuber Paul Harrell

>>34704740
>Does /k/ like him.
Does that matter?

I think hes pretty good, he has the credentials to talk on this and he isn't a washed up wannabe oper8r like some others. Like, hes out of the service but he is still in great physical shape. He's been in the situation of having to use his past and training to defend himself.

Hes almost an ideal.

File: 1499991437382.jpg (38KB, 685x652px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 685x652px

>>34704740
yes

File: IMG_0173.jpg (88KB, 746x746px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 746x746px

>Brags about killing people
>Brags about being mediocre at shooting
>substitutes ballistics gel tests with fucking oranges to try to say 40 is better than 9 and even then It's only marginal
>doesn't know how springs work
>everything he says is either allegory or already been said

Save everyone else's time and delete this thread

File: gone.jpg (123KB, 499x482px) Image search: [Google]

123KB, 499x482px

>>34704740
I like him

>>34704803
>brags

No he doesn't you fucking liar.

File: (You).png (362KB, 523x592px) Image search: [Google]

362KB, 523x592px

>>34704803
(You)

File: 1453860071511.jpg (105KB, 600x399px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 600x399px

>>34704803
Are you sure we're talking about the same guy?

File: IMG_0177.jpg (120KB, 999x587px) Image search: [Google]

120KB, 999x587px

>>34704875
"I was involved in multiple self defense situations and I DONT like talking about them"
>proceeds to talk about them anyway and dangles it over the heads of other instructors saying it like he special for shooting someone

I didn't even mention how he blatantly talks down to people who want to use semi auto rifles for defense but I leave you to base your opinions on emotion and his retro vibe he displays rather than the actual contex of what he's saying.

The gun community is too easily swayed by delivery of a message rather than it's content.

But fuck me for being objective I guess

>>34704792
Of course it doesn't matter, but I'd like to know what people here think of him and maybe even get his name out to those who haven't heard of him.

>>34704908
I don't watch gun people for their opinions, I watch for their information.

>>34704908
>people are too easily swayed by the delivery rather than the content
No duh, that's part of human psychology.

File: 1439186758119.png (80KB, 500x501px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 500x501px

>>34704908

>>34704875
>>34704881

literally who defense force get ye gone

>>34704803
Don't use Kanbaru for your shitposting.

>>34704803
>not realizing that paul harrell is some sort of god-tier neo-fudd troll

>Once you figure out his sense of humor when he's trying to be funny it becomes apparent that his "tests" are aimed at trolling the kind of idiots that "aint never seen a man wear 4 layers of denim..." while still imparting either harmlessly wrong information or helpful information that requires some theatrics to ingrain in morons.

Seriously, i hated this guy after watching one of his videos do to how obviously he was trying to mislead people(shotguns dont suck for HD if you're wondering). But after watching a couple more videos he slowly becomes hilarious and occasionally has good points in a been there, done that folksy wisdom sort of way. Slowly but surely you come to love him.

8/10, most entertaining currently active guntuber

>>34704908
>saying it like he's special for shooting someone

But that's the thing. Unlike other oper8rs on youtube he actually has experience with worst case scenarios. You can talk all day about what situations could be like, but Paul has gone through them and lived to tell the tale.

It's like telling a retired surgeon he's nothing special even though he saved 2 people's lives with nothing but a penknife and the shirt on his back in the wilderness.

File: IMG_0176.jpg (138KB, 766x960px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 766x960px

>>34704919
And the information Harrell has to give is minimal at best. Most of what he has to say is again either shit that has been said a million times before or allegories that have no hard print other than the self defense stories he uses as a crutch.

You're talking about a guy that uses oranges as a measure to grade 9mm vs 40 but then defends 25acp

It's not as contrarian as it is just non sensical

>>34704926
So you're just going to appeal to the fact you're easy to fool?

>>34704966
Hes a good watch.
The old saying goes, Beware of an old man in a profession where men usually die young.

File: tred.png (778KB, 1069x533px) Image search: [Google]

778KB, 1069x533px

He steppy.

File: bait.webm (184KB, 960x540px) Image search: [Google]

184KB, 960x540px

>>34704992
>So you're just going to appeal to the fact you're easy to fool?

>>34704962
I don't deny he's funny I wouldn't have these criticisms of him if I didn't watch him, but someone has to be more than entertaining for me to trust their advice

I watch clowns because they're stupid and funny not because they have something real to say

>>34704966
>worst case scenarios
>lived to tell the tale
Out of the two situations he was in one involved someone who was completely intoxicated and not able to fight back.

If you're a surgeon and only ever saved two peoples lives over your whole career you're a shit surgeon period

>>34704908
DESU you're probably wasting your time.

paul threads have been a pretty popular recent fad on /k/ and the kind of idiots that post here really like the dude.

I've tried to explain before about how some of his tests are slanted, misleading, or so poorly constructed as to be meaningless but the kind of people posting in these threads are by nature of wanting to post in here the kinds of idiots who can't understand your points.

They'll just accuse you of nitpicking and talk down to you like your some kind of over educated and under experience college boy, or act like his egregious errors and obvious lack of understanding of the underlying principles involved in matters of ballistics simply don't mean anything.

Frankly, watching paul harrell design a test that is clearly invalid due to it's nature, but just so inherently believable for the morons who proliferate this community by it's appeal to classic fudd logic is one of the few reasons i get out of bed in the morning.

>>34705037
people just like to defend old people because they think it gives them grizzled gun owner street cred.

>>34705037
So this is how we weed out the idiots now?

If that's the case Paul Harrell may have been the best invention to point out tards in the gun community since Taurus

>>34704740
There are two sorts of people on /k/
>Those who haven't seen Paul Harrell videos
>Paul Harrell's biggest fans

But hey, you be the judge.

>>34704908
>>34705037
Buttblasted tactifags detected.

>>34704908
>The gun community is too easily swayed by delivery of a message rather than it's content
This is literally everyone in humanity.
If you have good idea, but protect it like an asshole, no one will want it

>>34705060
Exactly! pPaul is doing god's work by giving us his own performances and the performances of his fanbois to laugh at

>>34705107
>Paul harrell astroturfer detected.

also, not an argument.

Maybe try proving something i said wrong, Anon-kun? that or constructing some sort of valid counterpoint is usually a good starting point

File: IMG_0746.png (315KB, 640x489px) Image search: [Google]

315KB, 640x489px

I enjoyed his video on the Beretta, his tip on DA/SA shooting helped me get more accurate with mine.

>>34704803
>he wouldn't brag about killing people
Literally first thing I'd do after killing someone. I'd probably brag at the guy I just killed

File: Gleeful Frog.jpg (74KB, 400x387px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 400x387px

>>34705089
He is criminally underviewed. He gives good equipment reviews because he doesn't have a sponsor buying shit for him and his presentation and listenability is fantastic. I love the guy.

>>34705223
>Paul harrell astroturfer detected.
Paul doesn't even know how to use the internet, he has a local company do all his video editing for him. The notion that he's astroturfing on /k/ is absurd.

Great content. I have no idea why so many people want to be angry about his videos when they're so intentionally low-key. Liking his dad's old guns makes him a "fudd" despite the fact that he carries a rare Steyr and a FN 5.7

>>34704792
>still in great physical shape
he was the fitness trainer so that's his thing, I don't think I'd tune in to his step aerobics videos though.

>>34705301
he was put on trial for one or both, that has to take some of the fun out of remembering that a guy tried to murder your wife.

>>34704962
But shotguns DONT suck for home defense, everything in that video is accurate you retard.

>>34706006
Ill just go ahead and refer you back to

>>34705037

now rewatch the video and look for what im talking about

>>34704803
Pretty much, he's James Yeager with a more annoying accent.

Thats not an argument, and there isnt an argument in the other post, that video is accurate, your just shitposting.

>>34704908
the semi-auto rifle thing rustles me bad

>self-defense expert
>doesn't advise to use the one weapon every military on earth currently issues

>>34704740

>approves of .40 S&W

In the trash he goes.

>>34706105
He doesn't say that semi-automatic rifles suck or that they're somehow not the best option, which makes sense when you consider that he actually used a semi-automatic rifle in the incident where he killed in self-defense.

The only point he made in his video about shotguns was that people like Cuck Yeager who insist that they are completely obsolete and unusable in a home defense scenario are fucking stupid.

>>34706086
Buck Angel never killed anyone tho

>>34706088
Im assuming you meant to reply to>>34706061

and somehow managed to fail at that much as you have at reading my explanation and applying it to paul's arguments


>Frankly, watching paul harrell design a test that is clearly invalid due to it's nature, but just so inherently believable for the morons who proliferate this community by it's appeal to classic fudd logic is one of the few reasons i get out of bed in the morning

>tests multiple kinds of shot and only one unspecified kind of 5.56 ammo

>based upon the fact that paul tends to use military style ammo(m855/m193) and despises so called "hyper ammo" it's probable that these were used in this test

>laughable because the reason 5.56 rifles have a reputation for low over penetration is entirely based on using quality commercial fragmenting rounds that will actually upset and break apart in common building materials

>praises the ability of #4buck to penetrate less than ?!?!? ammo that shows performance you'd expect of m193 or m855

>literally no professionals recommend using #4 buck, plated #1 buck is considered the minimum shot size that penetrates adequately reliably irl

>paul puts this concerns to rest by showing how well #4 buck can blow up a soda bottle

Case closed, ARs BTFO

>>34706261
Of course shotguns are fine choices for HD and all that jazz but his demonstrations and mentality throughout the whole video misleads people as to the real world capabilities of both platforms when loaded with proper ammunition.

Bunch of armchair commandos trying to pick apart a guy that actually lived what they dream about.

He knows more than you, admit it.

>>34706261
>>34706282
The point of the vid wasent to demonstrate an ARs qualities for home defense it was to prove shotguns dont suck for home defense, and if you dont want overpenetration the ammo type is more important than the caliber. Hence the title. The whole video was a response video to some other guntuber who said shotguns suck for home defense, and then he went point by point on what the other guy said.

You are literally just looking for things to be pissed off about.

>>34704740
Yes

>>34706658
>blah blah blah the overarching point of the video wasn't wrong

Doesnt matter. the manner in which he proves this point and the specific examples he makes are almost entirely wrong or misleading.

your claim that:

>everything in that video is accurate you retard

Is demonstrably false.

>>34704740
Agreed

>>34706658
Exactly right. Paul's main thesis of his channel is that a wide variety of firearms are more than suitable for defense purposes and that people shouldn't be so judgemental because what's TACTICALLY SUPERIOR for a fit man with an expendable income isn't necessarily what's best for everybody. Sometimes women or weaklings need defense. Sometimes poorfags who like to hunt defense. There are guns that, although very arguably inferior on paper, are still adequate for defense.

See for instance his video on 22lr for home defense. He demonstrates that 22lr is better than nothing by using a 22lr to shoot at some bottles, then attacking the bottles with nothing. Spoilers: using the 22lr worked better.

Paul Harrell's channel isn't about autism min-maxing. It's about "good enough". He doesn't care if you think something that's good enough isn't the absolute best. If you think "isn't the best" means "sucks", then you're a min-maxing autist. His channel is for people who don't like listening to such autists.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_w4Z5azEPWk

>>34706808
The title of the vid is what he demonstrates, That shotguns dont suck for home defense. If you're gonna be a whiny bitch about how he didnt equally demonstrate every 5.56, .223, loading, bullet type, barrel length, powder weight making it a several hour length video, as opposed to just using one common ammo in one common configuration to use as a reference point, you are just shitposting.

Get the fuck over yourself.

>>34706867
See also his 30-30 video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8-L3PMtID0

Is 30-30 the most tactically superior rifle cartridge? No, of course not. Does that mean it sucks? No. Not by Paul's non-autism standard.

File: 0176ba_6178736.jpg (117KB, 1200x800px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 1200x800px

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mzHs2G2jhYw

Paul the absolute madman.

>>34706885
> If you're gonna be a whiny bitch about how he didnt equally demonstrate every 5.56, .223, loading...

Literally not even what i said or the point of my posts, then again your inability to grasp even the most basic facets of what's important when comparing the efficacy of different firearms IS why were here in the first place...

All of the points I complain about are central to paul's claims he makes throughout the video. While shotguns not sucking for HD is his main claim the smaller claims and points he chooses to support it are all wrong or misleading in the most convenient of ways in respect to his freely disclosed personal opinion.

If you can't see why his video is misleading and his tests are laughable that's because you're a retarded fanboy

>recommends lightweight snubnosed revolvers as a viable carry option

He makes good videos, but I strongly disagree with this

>>34707120
They're not the optimal, but they're undoubtedly better than nothing. Paul's isn't about this "if it's not optimal it's shit" brand of autism.

File: oops.png (1MB, 1020x568px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1020x568px

Good sense of humor

>>34706889
He wasn't even talking "tactical" here, he was addressing hunters and the fuddy-06 crowd.

>>34704740
Is shilling him the latest meme?
I think this is the fifth thread I've seen about him this week.

>>34707138
b-but if I don't have the perfect piece of kit that means it's shit!

>>34707140
Which video was that?

>>34707322
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FO343bBwmTs

>>34707322
https://youtu.be/FO343bBwmTs?t=3m49s

>>34707140
>oh no, Marvin!

>>34704803
>Brags about killing people
He references it to give himself credibility
>Substitutes ballistics gel tests with fucking oranges
I agree with this, however I like how he used meat to simulate different parts of the body. The .40 vs 9 test was kind of a hack job.
>Doesn't know how springs work
Yeah, his fuddlore about springs failing in guns that are kept cocked triggered my autism.
Overall he's a pretty okay dude, I really liked his 1986 Miami Dade shootout analysis

>literally never heard of small time youtuber
>weekly threads start appearing about how great he is and how you should totes check out his channel
>people seem to like what he has to say and how he says it but their #1 complaint in threads is video quality, seems like the dudes been using the same shitty camera for years
>suddenly gets a new camera
>really shilly sounding posts are happening every other day now
>he has recently started having an outside company handle his video production and online presence

Hmmmmm

File: what the fuck is an adoption curve?.png (99KB, 864x415px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 864x415px

>>34707382
>people don't know something
>a few people learn something and tell others about it
>now more people know something
Whoa, it must be a conspiracy!

>>34707138
No, it's not recommending revolvers for carry that bothers me; I carry a revolver myself

What I disagree with is recommend lightweight snubs in particular

Those things may be easy to carry, but they are hard to shoot

And I disagree with the "gun you carry often but shoot little", a carry gun needs to be something that can be comfortable practiced with

>>34707471
Most people who carry almost never practice. That's not ideal, but it's the truth.

>>34705892
Fug. I thought he killed people in service. Never seen this fag before.

>>34707720
Paul probably did, he did 2 tours overseas, but the only time he ever talked about it was in his FAQ video and all he said was that its not worth talking about.

>>34707412
I've never heard of that. I feel like my college degree failed me.

>>34707741
>two tours
>too young for Vietnam
>too older for anything but the first gulf war
Gay

>>34707750
Basically me.
>too young for Iraq, Afghanistan, literally anything
My best hope is a happening in NK or Europe. I'm betting on Europe. Pls isis, blow up some shit. I want to go to France or Germany for free.

The first video of his I saw was the one covering the Miami Dade shootout, and I thought it was fairly decent.
Then I got to the videos where he "tests" shit, and decided I didn't want to watch anymore. His "tests" are poorly conceived and conducted at best, though "deceptive and biased" is likely more correct.

Anyone who shoots a soda bottle or milk jug as a "serious" test should be entirely ignored.

All that being said, I do think he's a fair bit more pragmatic than a lot of the "it must be x rifle with y ammo to ever be effective for self defense" types. His videos covering obsolete guns like the 1897 for self defense are interesting and worth watching, with a grain of salt.

As always, if you take everything any gun video maker says to be gospel, you're an idiot. You also should watch people you disagree with, because echo chambers lead to poorly thought out opinions.

>>34707750
Gulf War, maybe? He's probably close to that age.

>>34707865
>His "tests" are poorly conceived and conducted at best, though "deceptive and biased" is likely more correct.
Prove it.

>Anyone who shoots a soda bottle or milk jug as a "serious" test should be entirely ignored.
Explain why.

>All that being said,
All what being said? Are you under the impression that you just said a lot?

>>34707865
>Gulf War, maybe? He's probably close to that age.
That was my thought but him getting two tour out of that is unlikely. MAYBE he was very early on in OIF but he'd still be like 40 or so in 2003.

>>34708013
Not him but you're literally retarded if you can't comprehend why oranges and soda bottles aren't particularly comparable to the human body.

Literally, what the fuck do they even have in common?

>inb4 both have lots of water in them

>>34708138
>his "meat target" is just oranges and soda bottles, nothing else
Cool strawman.

If you've ever shot soda bottles with a gun (you haven't), you'd know that they don't all explode the same with every caliber equally. It's just a quick and dirty demonstration of ballistic power, one of many tests that he does.

>>34708015
Gulf war was in 90-91

>>34708200
Nice reading comprehension you fucking mongoloid.

>>34707750
He's 63. He could have easily been in Vietnam

>>34708222
Yeah, I read it too quick. I'll own it.

>>34708176
first that isn't what i said retard. Second his meat target is 1 thin layer of meat. some ribs from a long dead animal of different anatomy, structure, and weight that your average human, then a bunch of oranges with a beef heart in it.

By volume the target is MOSTLY oranges. I say again, if you think that oranges are a good substitute for all of the tissue inside of a human chest cavity other than the heart then you may literally be retarded.

>blah blah blah shooting soda bottles is informative and relevant to discussing a rounds relative effectiveness against a person

jesus christ how fucking stupid can you be.

How well a round explodes a soda bottle isnt a good indication of anything other than how well a round explodes soda bottles.

It literally shows you nothing other than which round probably has more energy. Otherwise everybody would load their shotguns up with high velocity bird shot and trade out their 147gr JHPs for some sweet, sweet prefragmented 90gr +p+ boutique rounds.

>inb4 buh-buh BG isnt anything like a person either! shooting oranges and soda is just as valid as that is!

You're a fucking moron. do the world a favor and don't procreate. BG tests only have merit because they've been shown to correlate strongly with real world autopsy results.

>>34708013
They're entirely unscientific and full of uncontrolled variables. Taping together meat and shooting it does not constitute a scientific test, as it is not repeatable. Milk jugs and soda bottles look impressive, particularly when shot with large calibers, but other than "it popped this many bottles," they offer no data that can be analyzed. Particularly if you aren't even filming them with a high speed camera to witness how the bullet performs inside them.
This is why things like ballistics gel were developed, because testing needs to be more rigorous than "this looked bigger and cooler" to be scientifically valid.
He has no control, and he stops shooting after he gets the desired result, for example, the birdshot makes the meat look nasty, ignoring the fact that it didn't demonstrate the level of penetration considered necessary for an effective round (The 12" minimum developed by actual FBI scientific research).

Also
>All what being said? Are you under the impression that you just said a lot?
Sweet attempt at redirection, m8. Choosing a common prepositional colloquialism to have an autism moment out of makes you look mega-smart.

I'm not entirely sure why you're so assblasted. I criticized his methodology, and even complimented his channel, I didn't insult him or his fanboys.

>>34708244
Jesus, really? He's aged impressively well.

>>34708015
True, if he saw combat, it may have been Gulf War and then one of the "police" missions like Kosovo to get two tours.

>>34708244
No fucking way, he looks like he might be in his early 50's at best. 63 is too young for Vietnam though.

>>34708344
Vietnam ended in 75.
He would have been 18 in 1972
That's 3 years in The Nam

I'm part of Pauls' crew. I'm in the big guy in the video about M193 vs M855. I served with Paul for 10 years and have been his friend for about 20 years.

He makes the videos for infotainment. The meat target is just a niche way of showing results that are visible for the audience.

I'm seeing a lot of shit talking and even one conspiracy nut spouting off.

He's had two encounters that required the use of and or threat of lethal force and the one that you find online at Troy black powder shoot was using an M4 style AR to defend his wife. They were set back 10's of thousands of dollars in lawyer fees because he found the best lawyer that a major city in Oregon uses for cop shootings to handle his case. His father was and brother is law enforcement.

Some of you seem to think you know what "any trainer" would do. Well, it's a big world and you really should avoid using words that show off your narrow world view. It makes you look petty.

He did 20 years and I served with him in Iraq, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia in 2003 during a deployment that was less than stellar and just plain unremarkable.

File: Lady Gaga no makeup.jpg (96KB, 485x316px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 485x316px

>>34708391
MFW the conspiracy nut >>34707382

was right

>>34708391
What is your point?

>>34708302
>first that isn't what i said retard. Second his meat target is 1 thin layer of meat. some ribs from a long dead animal of different anatomy, structure, and weight that your average human, then a bunch of oranges with a beef heart in it.
>By volume the target is MOSTLY oranges.
By volume, people are mostly water. What's the difference between soft human organs and soft plant organs? I've been to graduate school and I have a background in science, and to me, his meat target is a highly valid scientific construct.

The soda bottle shooting is just one test of many in illustrating the power ***difference*** between any two given calibers. The entire test isn't all about proving their effectiveness against people. Look at the title. It's a comparison, not a definitive claim about either cartridge.

>other than which round probably has more energy.
What's wrong with that? Not every one of his viewers is intimately familiar with the ballistic specifications of every caliber. And even for the ones who have the numbers memorized, that's not to say that "124 grains at 1050 fps" has any real world meaning to people. It's nice to connect numbers with real world events.

>Otherwise everybody would load their shotguns up with high velocity bird shot and trade out their 147gr JHPs for some sweet, sweet prefragmented 90gr +p+ boutique rounds.
You're strawmanning. Demonstration of projectile energy isn't the only component of his comparison videos.

>>34708382
Yeah, the tail end though. By 1971 they were withdrawing troops and the scale of combat operation reduced as well with the ceasing of all offensive combat operation according to the Paris Peace Accords. Not to say that there wasn't quite a lot of fighting in this period of the war but the scale and nature of US involvement makes Paul Harrell's combat involvement less than likely.

>>34708308
Sure, it's scientific. There is a little variation from target to target, but there is also variation from bad guy to bad guy. The meat target has a lot more scientific validity (that's terminology and I STRONGLY recommend you look it up) than using "calibrated" ballistics gel. The meat target may not control as many variables, but there is only so much variation within the materials he uses.

>ignoring the fact that it didn't demonstrate the level of penetration considered necessary for an effective round
He does show penetration, though. Sometimes the bullets go through the target. Sometimes they don't. Sometimes they get stuck in the rear layer of meat, etc.

> (The 12" minimum developed by actual FBI scientific research).
What relevance does the 12 inch standard in gelatin have to real world defensive shooting? The answer is it has no direct relevance. It's an indirect correlation by way of an abstract construct. The meat target is a direct correlation with a real world construct.

Just trying to clear up some fallacious commentary.

>>34708391
If your actually part of Pauls production crew keep up the good work, im surprised your on /k/, but from what ive seen theres less than 5 individual faggots who like to hate on your vids, the rest of the people I see talking about the YouTube channel are positive, but you always get a couple fuckwads who like to shitpost about how they could do it better.

Keep making good videos.

>>34708522
I use this same handle on Youtube and post under it at times on his comment section.

This is my first time on /k/.

File: FN 57(Five Seven) Review.mp4_snapshot_00.29_[2017.06.16_21.55.28].jpg (518KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

518KB, 1280x720px

>>34708391
What's he like off camera?

>>34708542
Howd you find the thread? Does Paul lurk on /k/?

>>34707471
I am a newguns. I have have a total of ~500 rounds through my 642 over 5 or 6 range sessions. At 10 yards, I am able to get all of my shots inside the 9 ring of a standard qualification silhouette firing at a normal pace. At 25 yards, I can get the majority of shots inside the 8 ring of the same target firing at a normal pace.

Considering your average self-defense scenario takes place at 21 feet and the most common scenarios are at a distance of something like 3 feet away, I'm note sure where this notion that Airweight snubnoses are hard to shoot comes from.

>But you would have an easier time with a Glock bro

Maybe if I was better. My groups are about the same with a Glock 26 as they are with the 642 at both 10 yards and 25 yards.

>>34708542
>This is my first time on /k/.
Then let me tell you that trying to "clear up misconceptions" on an anonymous image board that is 99.99% shiposts is a fucking waste of time.
People will forget about this thread as soon as it's deleted.

>>34708467

>By volume, people are mostly water.

inigomontoya.jpg

>what's the difference between soft human organs and soft plant organs

As somebody who has had years of collegiate experience on the subject of anatomy/physiology and has fiddled around inside of both dead oranges and dead animals on several occasions i feel qualified in saying that there's a whole fucking lot of differences and they in fact have very little in common.

If you want me to go into depth i can but honestly the fact that you'd even make such an assertion kinda implies that you know too little of the subject to understand such a conversation in any meaningful way

>I've been to graduate school and I have a background in science, and to me, his meat target is a highly valid scientific construct.

Then you're likely either lying or a good example of how they don't teach common fucking sense in college. It isn't similar to a human body and it certainly isn't scientifically valid as it lacks the ability to replicate test results easily due to it's non homogeneous or controllable nature.

What the fuck exactly is this "science" background you speak of?

>what's wrong with that!
energy doesn't correlate directly to a rounds effectiveness, idiot. as my "strawman" points out just because a round can deposit more energy into a soda bottle DOESN'T mean that it's more effective for self defense.

You'd have a hard time being more wrong if you tried.

>>34708546
Much like you see on camera. He's a health nut and eats like a horse. He likes to talk, which is good for me because I'm kind of a quiet fellow. He's friendly, but doesn't tolerate fools, which can irk some folks. Especially if they arer drunk. He doesn't drink.Ever.

>>34708553
Paul is not computer literate so much.

I chose to lurk today and found this. Just checking out what folks are saying.

>>34708564
Roger that. I've been schooled. :)

>>34708562
>But you would have an easier time with a Glock bro

Actually, you'd have an easier time with an all-steel wheelgun with at least a 3" barrel

The difference in accuracy between an LCR and an SP101 is night and day

File: Paul-san noticed me!.png (79KB, 788x560px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 788x560px

>>34708580
Then you make a youtube channel and show him up dweeb, otherwise you're just being an asshole and shitposting to get the last word.

>>34708599
That makes sense, well tell him that he does good work and you guys should get around to making the best guns for camping or distance hiking vid he replied to me on youtube about, but even if you dont ever make that vid you guys are doing great work, dont mind the dickheads on an anonymous image board.

>>34708599
Get him to talk about his self defense shootings. It's rare that a public figure (ish) has had a verified shoot.

What's his (and your) day job?

>>34708642
He probably dosent want to talk about them on youtube because of legal implications, also thats private information, about him, and the (possibly but probably) deceased.

>>34708580
Seriously, though. Please google "scientific validity" before continuing to type out this insultingly ignorant stream of bullshit.

>>34708642
I'm a manager in the tech sector and a retired National Guardsman with 8 years active duty in the regular army.

Paul is a dental assistant and his wife is a dentist as well a a LtCol. in the army reserve.

Hickock is more comfy, Eric is more fun, and Mae is cuter, but I've learned more actual useful information about shooting from Harrell than every other gun YouTuber put together.

>>34708477
>it's scientific
Only if you don't know what that word means

>there's a little variation
different oranges, different meat, different bones arranged in differing orders and hit from differing angles between tests. Oh yea, and you don't ever take calibration shots like they do with gel so it's impossible to know what effect these and other factors are having.

>there's also variation from bad guy to bad guy

false equivalency. just because no two bad guys are the exact same doesn't mean that no two ballistics tests should use the same target. That's fucking troll level logic right there.

What you want to do is remove as many variables as possible so that you can isolate the differences in performance between rounds from the difference in the performance between rounds and substrates.

The former is an indication of a rounds performance whereas the second is an indication of two things interactions when all we wanted was the one thing.

>more valid then gel tests
no it isnt. It really isnt.

Where the fuck are the professionally performed studies showing that oranges make a viable testing medium by comparing it to autopsy results? claims like this are idiotic and potentially dangerous to uninformed observers.

>what relevance does the 12" standard have? the meat target is really real instead of a standard some egg-head made up! clearly it's better.

Just when you think it can't get any dumber. Do you really want me to explain where that number comes from? because i can and it IS highly relevant to defensive shooting.

>>34708642
Yeah, he won't do that... but he's surprised me before.

>>34708701
Mae was cute at first but chubby Mae is gross

>>34708714
What are your's and Paul's daily carry and ammo?

>>34708713
Then you make a youtube channel and prove your points dweeb, otherwise you're just being an asshole and shitposting to get the last word.

>>34708713
I'm not asserting anything baselessly. I explained my reasoning and gave you some ways you might educate yourself to better understand as well. Just because you ignored my evidence and reasoning doesn't mean you're able to dismiss valid arguments.

>>34708731
Me .40 S&W Shield.

Him? It fucking depends on his mood. The M9 is always with him when we hunt jack rabbits or deer and elk.

>>34708676
not gonna lie this level of what appears to be honest to goodness stupidity as opposed to your usual tongue in cheek trolling is honestly starting to rustle my jimmies.

>Validity is the extent to which a concept, conclusion or measurement is well-founded and corresponds accurately to the real world.

Gel tests exhibit scientific validity because the 12" minimum and 18" maximum is well-founded and based in reality as it is in fact based on the depth required to penetrate through the forearms and chest of an individual from a poor angle and still reach the deeper thoracic vessels. the high end number also takes into account the holding in effect of skin. gel has been shown to correspond to the real world by publicly published and properly conducted scientific studies comparing it to real world autopsies.

Wham bam thank you mam.

>>34708734
grats on making the most ass mad not an argument post in this thread

>>34708763
You ain't proved shit, nor have you provided ways for me to better educate myself. you've also offered no evidence other than your own personal opinions. These do not constitute a valid argument.

>>34708467
What graduate school did you go to that taught a single trial and a qualitative inspection is a valid method of data inspection?
My scientific training was vastly different than yours, apparently. I'm a chemist, what are you? Social sciences?

>>34708477
You have to control variables to have valid scientifically valid data. Maybe you should google your own phrase.
And regarding your second point, that is, again, not quantified data. The round could be capable of penetrating an inch past the meat, or 10 inches further. You have no way to know that information, other than extrapolation.

The 12 inches of penetration is important because it's the only quantifiable, repeatable way that has been developed to examine the effectiveness of various types of ammunition. Your "real world construct" is can't be analyzed scientifically.

You seriously need to learn more about how science works before you start whining about "scientific validity."

>>34708799
>Gel tests exhibit scientific validity because the 12" minimum and 18" maximum is well-founded and based in reality as it is in fact based on the depth required to penetrate through the forearms and chest of an individual from a poor angle and still reach the deeper thoracic vessels. the high end number also takes into account the holding in effect of skin. gel has been shown to correspond to the real world by publicly published and properly conducted scientific studies comparing it to real world autopsies.
>
>Wham bam thank you mam.

People aren't made of gelatin.

>>34708599
Tell Paul that he's doing a good job. As someone who has a great distaste for the direction that youtube gun channels have taken in recent years--reviews that are compromised by outside sponsorship, an obsession with "tactical" mindset and lifestyle that masquerades under the umbrella of practicality despite being anything but, self-appointed "experts" and "instructors" who are heavy on opinions, profanity, posturing, and e-begging, but light on actual facts or demonstration, etc--I was glad to find his videos.

This one in particular: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=27wDLjY5JSs has been linked around here a number of times, and it has had a noticeable impact when it comes to dispeling the myth that is addressed in it.

>>34708832
Will do. Deer season draws closer.

>>34708713
>>34708801
>>34708799
You have autism.

>>34708717
She's just THICC, anon.

>>34708799
>>34708801
A question for you. I assume you know what the Strasbourg tests are. Do you think those tests had no scientific value?

>>34708900
>>34708871
Stop giving him (You)'s. This is not a rational person.

>>34705892
>he was put on trial for one or both
What happened?

>>34709048
No trial. The DA couldn't build a case and prove it wasn't self defense.

>>34708813
>people aren't made of gelatin
Totes what i was trying to say there, good job on the reading comprehension.

http://www.ar15.com/ammo/project/Fackler_Articles/winchester_9mm.pdf


>>34708871
Sometimes even i have wondered. Oh yea, and the second post wasnt mine.

>>34708900
Good question honestly. On the one hand i would consider it to have scientific value if it actually happened and in the way their abstract said, on the other im not entirely sure that they did. To be clear i dont think that animal analogue testing in general has no relevancy to humans, they clearly do provide some information and they have been done before with somewhat informative results. On the other hand there have been some questions as to if this particular study actually did occur, i believe dr. roberts wrote an opinion on it once and was of the opinion that they likely had been a hoax of some sort.

Personally i dont think theres enough evidence to prove one way or the other for sure on that but some things about it are a little sketchy and i have a hard time finding anything but an abstract so i find it hard to trust their results.

Personally I'd recommend that you look at both views and decide for yourself based on the evidence.

That all being said I don't use them to base any decisions on. For that I look at a combination of real life incidents with medium-large animals and whatever happens to be the most scientifically supported analogue at the time.

>>34709104
They charged the everloving fuck out of him just from reading some news articles tho

>>34709048
http://www.wallowa.com/20061130/i-will-be-exonerated-troy-shooting-defendant-vows
http://www.wallowacountychieftain.com/20070619/harrell-freed-of-manslaughter-charges-in-troy-shooting

Also see>>34708391
>He's had two encounters that required the use of and or threat of lethal force and the one that you find online at Troy black powder shoot was using an M4 style AR to defend his wife. They were set back 10's of thousands of dollars in lawyer fees because he found the best lawyer that a major city in Oregon uses for cop shootings to handle his case. His father was and brother is law enforcement.

>>34709104
I should've been more specific, what happened that required a trial
>>34709125
Thanks for the info.

>>34709123
Yes. A hearing happened, but no trial. He got a good lawyer.

>>34709182
>what happened that required a trial
Some jackasses tried to run over him and his wife in a truck at a campground.
Shot and killed the guy through the windshield with an AR.

>>34709193
>>34709206
Just read the article. Holy shit. The guy went from inviting them for beers to driving through a campfire. Goddam, glad nothing happened to Paul aside from the monetary damage. I recently discovered his YT and enjoy his videos.

> elite army marksman
> decades of experience teaching the theory and practice of gunfighting
> killed two in self-defense situations, can actually practice what he preaches
> soft-spoken, never embellishes his credentials
> solid production value
> no obvious shilling

He's 10/10 in my book

>>34709225
>>>>>>>>>>>> solid production value

>>34709225
>solid production value
Nah, still looks like a high school production

>no obvious shilling
>as said in a dedicated shilling thread full of "random" and "anonymous" praise
lol ok

>>34709225
He uses a kahr in some of his vids but always goes out of his way to say in his experience they are mostly junk, he just has one that seems to work

File: droolpepe.png (70KB, 217x180px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 217x180px

>>34709248

>>34709248
>41 posters
>3-4 recurring negative shitposters the rest are positive
Sure bud.

>>34709220
You can understand his lack of tolerance for belligerent drunks.

The perp had a criminal history and was well known to the Sheriff for starting trouble.

>>34709292
not gonna lie im one of them and im pretty sure theres at least 4, maybe more. Frankly i really like the guys channel too, just don't agree with everything that's said

>>34708900
As the other Anon has said, it's debatable. As per the abstract, it appears to be valid (The fact that they make it difficult to access the paper itself makes it questionable, in my eyes. Last I heard, they were trying to keep it "industry only, which is a red flag.). However, you'll also notice they didn't just shoot one goat, one time and call it good to go. They also took pains to ensure the shots occurred in as close to the same manner as possible, ie tranquilizing the goats in order to ensure shots were as close to the same as possible. They also were able to examine the results after the fact, and produce data.

What the guys here seem to be incapable of understanding is repeatability and quantifiablility are the benchmarks of what constitutes an actual scientifically valid test.

>>34708871
I'm a government employed scientist. It comes with the territory. Also, you're replying to two different people.

>>34708934
>I can't actual argue, so I'll ad hominem. That'll prove I'm right!


>>34709123
That's common, they fling a bunch of shit and try to make something stick. Prosecutors are in the business of putting people in jail, not doing justice.
I think the extraordinary circumstances are what drove them to go after him. Shooting a vehicle driving away from you, even one driven by a known shitbag, looks bad. I'm glad he didn't wind up in jail over a legitimate self defense shoot.

>>34709432
Shooting a truck bearing down on his wife you mean you idiot.

>>34709509
This, a funny detail that tends to get omitted.

>>34709432
>The fact that they make it difficult to access the paper itself makes it questionable, in my eyes.

I think this says all that needs to be said about the level of education this person has.

>>34706133
>He's not recommending shit that's best for fifteen attacker scenarios whilst trying to disarm a bomb and carrying a wounded waifu pillow.

Generally I'd like to see him do a review of a club just to know you're out there with your pussy in a bunch over how he didn't buy tungstun nails to make it since they're better.

>>34709553
What i think is more impressive is that from the news articles there was a passenger in the truck that was bearing down on his wife, and the passenger was unharmed.

I dont know the juxtaposition of how it happened but legally shooting the driver of a truck speeding towards a loved one and away from you, and not harming the passenger is some real shit.

Stone cold man.

>>34708391
Neat.

>>34709628
Lethally shooting, not legally shooting that sounds fucked up, my bad im phoneposting

>>34708580
Please start using a tripcode so that I can filter your inane comments.

>>34708888
c-checked

She probably eats too many meals with Othais. Sorry buddy, but you've got to admit you're not exactly an image of athleticism.

File: terminator2eddiearnie-xlarge.jpg (70KB, 1280x721px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 1280x721px

Seriously, the complaint that Harrell isn't "scientific" is retarded. What do you want, guys in white lab coats reading off statistics? He's a YouTuber. Also, what he does is in line with his entire philosophy, which, as somebody else pointed out, is the philosophy of "good enough". His tests aren't scientific, but they're good enough to illustrate broadly valid points.

Again, the autism in this thread is amazing. Harrell made the broadly valid point that for home defense, a full-power rifle or handgun round > 12 gauge > 20 gauge > .410 bore > .380 or .25 > .22lr > nothing. This triggers mall ninjas who have magnumitis and paranoid delusions that their house is someday going to be robbed by the Terminator, and the only way to stop it is to have enough firepower to equip a regiment of the Bolivian army sitting in your closet.

People who actually have training and experience, however, know that good enough really is good enough.

>>34709432
>I'm a government employed scientist. It comes with the territory.
And you think that DISCOUNTS the possibility of you having autism? I guess you're both autistic AND an idiot.

>>34709432
>>34709576

Yes, it is an ad hominem, and I realized that an ad hominem is not an argument. I don't intend it to be an argument. I made my arguments earlier in the thread. The ad hominem is an explanation for why I'm not willing to waste my time and effort "debating" you.

>>34709706
The person making the complaint about how "unscientific" the meat target is has apparently never seen an academic journal article before - to the point where he thinks subscription based journals lack credibility - so take that for what it's worth.

>>34709713
I can assure you that person is not a scientist. He's just trying to one-up me when I said I went to graduate school. I would estimate his education at about high school level or below.

>>34707272
No, the latest meme is shitting on him, as a direct reaction to these threads.

File: mega cringe.jpg (27KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 480x360px

Notice how our little "government employed scientist" has stopped posting. He has school tomorrow!

>>34704803
He uses meat targets.

>>34709811
Which is a much more valid construct than gelatin. But you already knew that, didn't you?

File: 15578365_10211679337921860_5254973135660505406_o.jpg (44KB, 1080x682px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 1080x682px

>>34708717
>thick
>gross
Get out

>>34706133
If you watch the video you'll see that he dosn't approve of it, he just compares the calibers in different bulket weights and loadings and presents the info and asks you to be the judge...in the end he feels the difference in negligible at worst as you or only gaining 200 or so more feet less or more round etc.

>>34709244
>>34709248
His production value is great. Very aesthetic, it gives me warm fuzzy 90s vibes. Much like Steve1989's in that regard. I love the intro music of both.

>>34706247
Well, he got his passengers killed...

>>34706282
That's the kay he actually talks about the variety of ammunition and the appearence of the gun. Initially the jury was convinced he was a bad guy because he had a scary-15, now he prefers his blued and wood furnitured shiygun because it makes him look like a harmless old man with his deer gun.

>>34709750
>>34709576
He says difficult to access but a better way to put it would "has never really been published in any kind of journal or made publicly available but was supposedly presented at this one meeting one time" Oh yea it it was written anonymously.

that's kinda different from simply having an article behind a paywall.

>>34706219

$400 Mossington or $400 chrome-lined AR-15

I used to be a shotgun whore, but no fucking reason to pick on over an AR-15 for defensive use unless in brown bear country.

>>34709970
Where do you live that a Mossberg costs $400? I can buy a Maverick 88 for less than $200 when they are on sale and a 500 for less than $300 normally. Likewise, where are you finding an AR with a chrome-lined barrel for $400? All of the ones I see at that price point are either nitrided or stainless steel.

>>34709970
Narrow minded. You want a guntuber to re-enforce your biases. There is no one gun solution to an individuals gun choices.

>>34708015
There are plenty of old guys who are instructors in the navy and marines.

>>34707138

There is a difference between Gucci Gear Queers and common sense. If all you have is a .30-30 lever action then roll with it.

If you have a choice between an AR, a snub revolver, or a 10/22.... only a fudd or retard wouldn't pick the AR, especially when they are cheap as fuck.

>>34707380

Here is a point about the 1986 shootout and Paul.

- Paul kills a guy with an AR-15.
- FBI gets BTFO by a single guy with Mini-14
- LAPD gets BTFO by carbines because lol no patrol rifles

>You don't really need a carbine

Yeah Paul, but why not use the best?

>>34710119
Literally nobody disagrees.

>>34708477

>Oranges and soda bottles are totally more scientific than the FBI's Firearms Training Unit who has developed the best measure of testing how a bullet performs.

It's complete horseshit, and no swinging Youtuber knows more on terminal ballistics than the fucking FBI.

>>34710183
Bwahaha!

Except maybe hunters and combat soldiers.

>>34710034

Mossberg 590s are about $400 and Remington 870 Defense models are about $400

There are always sales of complete chrome-lined uppers. Just gotta keep an eye out. Fuck you could build a nitride or stainless AR for about $300.

This isn't even ultra jew mode where you spend $250 or less putting together a mutt out of quality used parts.

>>34710234

Hunters and Soldiers are literally cancer-tier for any information.

"I only use 7mm Rem Mag for whitetail" or "We used the Soviet ammo in our M60s" are perfect examples of retards whose credentials don't mean shit.

The FBI does this thing called compiling all their information from being shot at or shooting someone. They also use scientific conditions, not something built on the backyard after a 6 pack.

>>34710183
>being so autistic that you get upset at a man for making youtube videos instead of conducting scientific tests for the FBI
Just listen to yourself man. You're ridiculous. Even with autism you should be able to perceive how ridiculous you're being.

>>34709970
>>34710034
Seriously - I bought my Mav last November from Dick's for $179 on sale. It's not unusual to find them at that price.

>>34710265
>>34710183
What "FBI result" do you think Paul denied that has you so assblasted?

>>34710265
I'm talking about experience. Not FBI tables and charts. Appealing to authority as you seem so keen to do is just about jerking yourself off to your undeserved self actualized intellectual superiority.

>>34709970
>but no fucking reason to pick on over an AR-15 for defensive use
Many people own shotguns because they're poorfags who want a gun for more than just defense. Shotguns are more versitile than AR-15s in a "jack of all trades, master of none" sort of way Therefore, many people buy shotguns and not a rifle.

Furthermore many people own a shotgun but DIDN'T buy it, because they inherited it or were gifted it. Many people own a shotgun like that and no other firearm.

Furthermore many people own a shotgun which they purchased many years ago when ARs were significantly more expensive.

...
....

Do you understand all of that so far? Take a moment and make sure your blood pressure returns to normal before reading further.

Paul made a video showing that shotguns, which people may own for any of the above reasons, are adequate for home defense. He didn't say that your AR sucks and you should throw it away and buy a shotgun. Is your bloodpressure high again? Instead of responding, step away from the computer and take some deep breaths. Such autismal stress is bad for your health.

>>34710348
Well said.

>>34710348
Spergy AR fanboys get booty blasted any time anybody suggests that any other kind of gun in the world might have any real use or utility whatsoever. This is why Mini-14 threads always turn into a shitshow of AR fanboys having autistic meltdowns because a viable alternative to their one and only true raifu exists in the universe. At some point you just have to ignore it.

>>34710452

Mini-14s are great. NOT being an AR-15 is their #1 attribute, in fact.

>>34710458
Okay Bill. :^)

>>34707360
>spends 2 minutes listening and im already subbed

im actually sad

>>34710523
sad?

>>34704740
no

>>34710183
>more scientific than
What do you think that means? Show your work.

File: smggg.jpg (64KB, 904x720px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 904x720px

>>34704803
nigger

>>34704866
>YOU WANT THAT CHEESEBURGER TO GO

>>34709244
does babby wan muh fps russia