Peter H. Proctor writes:

E.g., the original issue was whether Pistols are
much less deadly than long guns because pistol fatalities are mostly
proportional to the size of the permanent wound channel.

Doubly wrong. First, the issue addressed by my cites is your claim
that handgun and knife wounds are equally deadly. You have yet to
offer the slightest scrap of evidence for this claim. Second, you
continue to go on with theories explaining why your claim is true.
Unfortunately, your theories do not agree with actual observations of
the real world. Should we modify the theories or the observations?

Thus, they kill
by roughly the same mechanism as edged weapons such as knives.

So? Are you seriously trying to argue that this means that the
mortality rate is the same???? How do you explain the fact that it is

This is in contrast to rifle rounds which can actually
shatter tissue.

Sometimes. How important is this factor compared to all the other
factors that determine mortality? You’d have to actually look at case
fatality rates to figure this.

You quoted a JAMA article out of context re the unimportance of high linear
energy transfer in gunshot wounds, implying this meant long gun wounds.
In fact, If memory serves, this paper primarily concerned pistol wounds,
making the very point I was trying to make in the first place.

You really are full of it today, aren’t you? Anyone who is under the
misapprehension that Dr Proctor has the slightest shred of credibility
can check JAMA v259 p2733. In the section on the misconception
‘”Kinetic Energy Transfer” as a Wounding Mechanism’ Fackler talks
about the “temporary cavity generated by the AK-74 rifle bullet” and
the “temporary cavity produced by the M16”. Apparently Dr P believes
that the AK-74 and the M16 are pistols.

While I don’t do many autopsies these days, I trained at a hospital
that has one of the largest transplant services in this part of the
US. This goes hand in glove with the path department doing a lot of
autopsies on people dying from all sorts of trauma— from gunshot
wounds thru automobile accidents.

I see. The survival rate from the knife wounds and pistol wounds that
you autopsied was the same, so you infer that the survival rate for
knife wounds and pistol wounds in general is the same.

Frankly, I’d be more inclined to trust the opinion of a physician who
had treated some live patients. I talked to a friend who saw quite a
few knife and gun-shot wounds when he worked at an inner-city
hospital. He told me that that knife wounds were much less serious
since knives tend to push vital organs out of the way while bullets
tend to plough straight in.

I know bullshit when I see it….

Me too. It usually follows the phrase “If memory serves”.