What gun and ammo?

[crich70]

Originally Posted by gmw

So the attacker comes from behind, the victim has no reason to be suspicious and does not look around. Bang! A hard enough whack to the head with a blunt instrument and then the attacker do pretty much whatever they like. Do it hard enough and they won't have to do anything more, do it not quite hard enough and the advantage has still swayed in the attackers favour with the victim now in pain and badly disoriented.

And the victim may not even know they are injured that badly if they do get away. Liam Neeson's wife is a case in point. She suffered an injury to the temple (if I recall correctly) and seemed fine at first so she didn't seek prompt medical attention. The result was that she died of her injury. So a person could be struck, be in a daze as a result and not know they are in serious trouble til it's too late.

It has been interesting reading this thread, especially some of the suggestions regarding impromptu suppressors for a firearm. Here are some of my thoughts on the scenario that seems to be under consideration. That is a unanticipated opportunity for the woman to kill a dangerous individual in a men's room in a restaurant.

Here are some of my thoughts.

A .22 caliber handgun would be the way to go. Such a gun is easy to conceal and so would be likely to be something the woman would have on here at all times. Larger calibers would be more effective, but also produce more noise. To have assurance of being effective a head shot would be required, ideally to the base of the rear of the skull assuming that she can thus approach him from behind.

While the various suggestions regarding homemade silencers are interesting, and many of them may work, none seem to be the sort of thing that the woman would just happen to have on her and be able to quickly attach to the gun If one is assume that a silencer is needed it would make more sense that she would always carry a manufactured suppressor and a handgun with a threaded barrel to attach it.

Regarding the choice of a revolver versus a semiautomatic pistol, one thing to consider is that if the gun is to be held close to the individual to be shot it is probable that blow-back of blood and tissue from the first shot will jam the operation of a semiautomatic, this is far less a potential problem with a revolver. While a single shot head shot at close range with a .22 in the proper location is likely to fatal, but better still would be multiple shots.

In the scenario described the advantage of being isolated with just the woman and the man in the restroom is that she can shoot the individual without anyone noticing immediately. In my opinion though her immediate actions after that should be to quickly ditch the gun, say in the waste container, clean any blood off herself, and quickly and quietly exit the restaurant. One disadvantage of the men's room location is that someone else could unexpectedly enter at any time. This of course assumes that the gun can not be traced to her.

[Penforhire]

Put me in with the guys that figure size helps in hand-to-hand but training and the match-up in different fighting styles matters more. An ex-GF of mine trains LEO's and special forces in bare hand and knife techniques. She happens to have above average female upper body strength but still significantly less than mine. In a serious fight she'd beat me senseless or dead every time (and twice on Sunday).

In terms of equalizers there are a couple more possibilities but, for example, pepper spray in a toilet booth is probably almost as effective on the user as the target. A flash-bang device would probably be heard outside the bathroom. Flash-only is a possibility. Ever looked into a decent camera strobe when it popped? I like the electric stun gun idea as well (Taser is a brand name and normally refers to the projectiles-with-wires type). If the bathroom includes any steaming-hot water dispensers (or perhaps coffee just outside) there is always the cliché hot fluid to the face.

[Matth79]

How about that 3D printed gun... could you silence it reasonably effectively - AND it would be disposable, or maybe burned in a fire, but not toatally destroyed, if you want some evidence left

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by VydorScope

Hitch,

I hold a Black Belt in American Freestyle Karate, I am second yellow in Aikidho, and I have also trained in Sho do khan, and just recently started Kali. I am undefeated in my class in tournament fighting.

I am 180pounds, 5'11" My wife, also black belt and trained in more styles then I have is 5'1" 100 pounds.My 9 year old son is also a black belt, and is training in Aikidho and Kali now with us.

So I have a wide range of sizes to compare. And yes, we fight for fun around my house.

I agree with GMW you are over simplifying it. There are blows that my wife can deliver that will kill an adult man, or disable him. She has a lot less room for error then I do, but I promise you, she can win the fight against a superior sized attacker. Put a weapon in her hand and it just gets better.

The key is that in a real life/death fight - you have seconds at best to win. These Hollywood fights that go on for 16 million hours are total BS. If it comes down to a head on, straight up boxing match, no she does not stand a chance. But if it gets there, she has already lost. A contest of strength she can never win, a contest of timing, speed and skill, she has a chance.

As for this attacker, slashing both jugulars makes a big mess but if you know how to move you can keep the blood off you, and its fast easy and silent. Strength of the attacker/victim will not come in to play, however you will have a problem with reaching, so you may want to consider the femoral instead of the jugular.

A 22 with a silencer would also work well and less chance for error. If I was writing the story, I would go with the 22 and sub sonics + suppressor. Its fast, easy, believable, and realistic. Unless there was some special significance in the way she killed, there is no reason to get fancy, IMO.

Hi, VydorScope:

After leaving my term of service, I'd trained (yes, long ago, for those who recollect that I am no spring chicken) in both Shorei-ryu and Shotokan, as well as TKB (Thai Kickboxing), the latter of which suited me more, as I have extremely long legs with a lot more power than my naturally-spindly arms, no matter how much iron I threw around nor how much heavy-bag or speed-bag time I'd invest. I would agree with you 100% that all fights in the real world are over in seconds; even drunken brawls between two utterly untrained "air-fighters" in a bar are over in a minute or so. Even most matches don't go on very long, and that's a controlled situation, generally without full-contact.

If your wife is that talented, good for her. (I'd also agree that there is some advantage, in somewhat gymnastic sports, to being smaller, vis-a-vis center of gravity and spin-up and delivery time on kicks and punches.) I didn't say that NO woman could EVER win a fight against a man; I said it is generally the case. And, could a woman your wife's size deliver a lethal blow to a man? Can I, as I'm far, far taller than your wife? Yes, as I said in my 2nd post. What I said was, "she'd better deliver it" immediately, because if it gets into a slugfest, well... From your post, I think you agree with that?

The OP's scenario is two deadly assassins, in a public bathroom. One male, one female. Frankly, my answer would have been the same had she described two men, one teeny and one large, as I also said previously. Just like, slashing the jugular is great, IF you are tall enough to get the angle around the neck. If your opponent (even assuming a dolt) is a foot or more taller than you, then, unless he's going to stand there and let you hop up on the toilet behind him, good luck with that. Just an observation. I concur that the femoral is an excellent target. It has the advantage of not really requiring reach, although you do have to get inside a strike zone, generally speaking. OTOH, it's (as we phrased it when training in the service, as it's a highly-favored contact target) "one and done."

With regard to room for error, etc., as I said, the OP's post seemed to indicate that she had two roughly-equivalently-skilled opponents, one bathroom, and she was asking about a gun. I still maintain that the suppressed .22 is her best bet. And I'll still maintain that on average, Tom Cruise or his female equivalent is going to get smashed by Chris (Chris? Liam? Sorry, not enough of a pop culture junkie to be sure which one was Thor, or whatever?) Hemsworth or Alexander Skaarsgard (or, I suppose, their female equivalent, as some women are that large; my sports physician, a competitive national athlete for decades, is). Just sayin'.

Also: great on training your son. Good on you, I mean it. More kids need to be trained in some type of competitive sport, and I'm a huge proponent of anything that requires that level of fitness. I've had a series of injuries that have sidelined me now for nearly three years (my latest being a torn rotator cuff which morphed into bloody frozen shoulder), and I know how much I miss being fit; it's a lifestyle and it's fabulous that you're getting him into that mindset young.

Hitch

[VydorScope]

Originally Posted by Hitch

I still maintain that the suppressed .22 is her best bet.

Hitch

So I think everyone agrees on that, but she threw out a question among highly creative people and we got talking.

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by VydorScope

So I think everyone agrees on that, but she threw out a question among highly creative people and we got talking.

Troo dat!

Hitch

[Greg Anos]

I think the main point is the use of "the element of surprise". What's not clear is how the lady hid in the men's room. Depending on how that occurred, and much of that is dependent on the layout of the men's room (a stall behind the urinal? Not common, but possible. A side by side layout would make it virtually impossible. Exit the stall and you'll be seen out of the corner of the eye, totally killing the element of surprise. Like, a guy is going to not notice a woman exiting at stall out of the corner of his eye? So different it would trigger a automatic glance. No surprise.)

[Stitchawl]

Originally Posted by Ralph Sir Edward

I think the main point is the use of "the element of surprise". What's not clear is how the lady hid in the men's room. ........SNIP......... Like, a guy is going to not notice a woman exiting at stall out of the corner of his eye? So different it would trigger a automatic glance. No surprise.)

Haven't been in many late-night clubs in N.Y., L.A., or Miami lately, have you?


Stitchawl

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by Kumabjorn

@Hitch

Woaw, that was a lot more silent than I expected. Forgive my ignorance, I don't live in a country where firearms are prevalent, is a .25 like 10% bigger than a .22 bullet? Will that transfer to 10% more sound (or more, if I remember my physics class isn't sound something that grows exponentially)?

Yes, you're absolutely right. My protagonist never ever fights (unless someone of similar build) she always kills with a gun, it's her only chance. That is also why she needs to be a real expert on anything firearms related (Something I fear I'm not). Hence the suggestion about a magic bullet is something that has me intrigued. I see a sewing kit with a hidden compartment for some very specialized ammo. What are some things you can creatively do with something like that? For example, can you make the bullet out of something so hard it won't deform if hitting cast iron or bronze?

Hi, there:

Okey-dokey. We all got distracted because I sort of hijacked the thread (sorry!) about the physics of people fighting. Ballistics is an enormously complex science, with many, many variables. (n.b.: most of the biggest computing advances have been to calculate ballistics, like Eniac, IIRC, for trivia fans.) Back onto the ballistics of the weapon:

Generally speaking, a "caliber" of bullet means the diameter of the round in inches. So, a .22 is ~2/10ths of an inch in diameter. A .25 is not hugely larger, but it's larger. Now, that means that yes, it's a larger bullet. The bullet will (but not necessarily must) weigh more. Any competent shooter or certainly assassin won't be buying their bullets down at Bob's Bullet Emporium, so s/he will likely be either making her own rounds (n.b.: probably not for a .22, as previously discussed by someone else who is patently knowledgeable about ballistics, as well) or having them custom-made. This means that the bullet could actually be lighter than the aforementioned .22. Are you married to the idea of a .25 for some reason? Have you already used that weapon elsewhere in the book? A la early James Bond with the Walther? So the answer to the "sound" question is: that depends. (Sorry.)

As far as a sewing kit with magic bullets...how realistic do you want this? (Don't misread that sentence, I'm seriously asking, not snarking). What your professional assassin would likely do is carry a throw-away gun. Make it a small-caliber derringer, suppressed. She'll have sanded down the interior of the barrel, so it's not grooved. What this means is that the bullet will tumble (grooves basically make a bullet fly straight, without getting too complex), so it cannot be used for anything more than a few feet; 10 at most, to be on the safe side. It's a one-shot weapon. The derringer will not leave brass; you have double-safety because the barrel isn't grooved; it's a single-use, specialized weapon (implies expertise) and it will be sub-sonic and quiet as the grave. If you go with this gun, due to the lightness of the round, tumbling, etc., I'd endeavor to make the killshot directly to the head, with as little space as possible between the end of the barrel and the skin.

It's almost overkill, no pun intended, but to not tie the weapon to the brass or the lead, make it smooth-bore. I don't know if she can throw the gun away, but this way, if you have a scenario where she can't, you can keep the gun, as it can't legally be tied to the round in the dead guy. (Although, any gun guy or woman will instantly know what was done, but still...no evidence is no evidence.) OTOH, it's really not very versatile, so your assassin probably then needs to have a backup weapon. Nobody carries a derringer to a gunfight, in other words.

So, a little less sexy is the basic .22 with suppressor. You can reuse it. It will be traceable to the bullet, unless your assassin gets really lucky. Still, excellent weapon for your purposes.

Hope that helped. Ah, ballistics. Brain-teasers for the whole family!

Hitch

[cromag]

Originally Posted by Ralph Sir Edward

I think the main point is the use of "the element of surprise". What's not clear is how the lady hid in the men's room. Depending on how that occurred, and much of that is dependent on the layout of the men's room (a stall behind the urinal? Not common, but possible. A side by side layout would make it virtually impossible. Exit the stall and you'll be seen out of the corner of the eye, totally killing the element of surprise. Like, a guy is going to not notice a woman exiting at stall out of the corner of his eye? So different it would trigger a automatic glance. No surprise.)

I'm guessing the "stall behind the urinal" configuration may be more common up here. I see it a lot. It's space efficient -- in my informal observation, more men in a men's room need a urinal than a toilet, and this arrangement allows more urinals in the same linear space.

Even side-by-side I don't think it's impossible. In a men's room guys tend to avoid seeing each other.

[Stitchawl]

Brass can usually be tied to the specific gun that fired it, and always to the make of the gun that fired it. Even with almost not space between the muzzle and the skull, there is going to be a LOT of back spatter of blood, brain, and bone. Heads do not go lightly unto this good night... You'll need some sort of 'shield' to keep the shooter from getting spattered upon. Should your victim be wearing a sports jacket, quickly raising the tail up to the base of the head and firing through it would work. Just don't leave epithelials from her hand on the fabric.

A .25 caliber round carries a LOT more powder than a .22, and thus usually much louder. However, if she had pulled the slug, dumped most of the powder, and re-seated the slug (not a very difficult task) that would eliminate much of the noise and still provide enough penetration.


Stitchawl

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by Stitchawl

Brass can usually be tied to the specific gun that fired it, and always to the make of the gun that fired it. Even with almost not space between the muzzle and the skull, there is going to be a LOT of back spatter of blood, brain, and bone. Heads do not go lightly unto this good night... You'll need some sort of 'shield' to keep the shooter from getting spattered upon. Should your victim be wearing a sports jacket, quickly raising the tail up to the base of the head and firing through it would work. Just don't leave epithelials from her hand on the fabric.

A .25 caliber round carries a LOT more powder than a .22, and thus usually much louder. However, if she had pulled the slug, dumped most of the powder, and re-seated the slug (not a very difficult task) that would eliminate much of the noise and still provide enough penetration.


Stitchawl

Yes, as long as she found some nearly turn-of-the-century .25. ;-) And vis-a-vis the brass, that's why I said "derringer," so she wouldn't have to clean up after herself, rather than the .22 automatic. And, yes, of course, on the backsplatter; I think that's a given, no matter what she uses, as she cannot garrote him from behind, given their relative sizes, etc.

I do think that the positioning in the bathroom has now become really interesting. ;-) We'll have to wait for the next installment. (Maybe this is all just a really sneaky plot to get us intrigued in the book!)

Hitch

[crich70]

Originally Posted by Ralph Sir Edward

I think the main point is the use of "the element of surprise". What's not clear is how the lady hid in the men's room. Depending on how that occurred, and much of that is dependent on the layout of the men's room (a stall behind the urinal? Not common, but possible. A side by side layout would make it virtually impossible. Exit the stall and you'll be seen out of the corner of the eye, totally killing the element of surprise. Like, a guy is going to not notice a woman exiting at stall out of the corner of his eye? So different it would trigger a automatic glance. No surprise.)

Unless the woman were able to pass for a man. Some women do look more masculine in their appearance (or like a young boy perhaps with hair cut short). And naturally if she were dressed properly (in men's clothes) on top of that he might not notice until it's too late.

[Stitchawl]

Actually, a garrote made with a 'Prussic Knot' would work for her...
This type of knot is self-jamming slip knot. Walk up behind him, drop the loop over his head and pull. She doesn't even have to stand around and wait. The cord will not loosen around his neck unless he can both reach as well as know how to work the knot. And he only has a few seconds to do so. He's dead... She doesn't have any blood spatter, and not even in the room when he actually dies 25 seconds later. Again, epithelials on the rope if she is bare handed, but that's easily rectified.


Stitchawl