Branca:

Quote:

---

Now re: Grosskreutz,

Chirafisi: Accept first and second attempted intentional homicide--can you merely ATTEMPT a reckless act? Either are reckless or not.

---

sicandtiredTXN said:

---

WTF

At point blank range a 40 SW will do more damage the a 223 FMJ

The larger projectile does more actual damage

It's been determined that the defendant had 223 FMJ 55 gr

and say GG has a 40 SW which in most cases are around 180 gr

The the kinetic energy at point blank is greater with the 40 S&W

---

Don't think that's true. I think the 223 is about 3x the 40 at the muzzle

Waffledynamics said:

---

Why are we even talking about damage? This is a self defense trial. Ffs, do something Defense attorneys.

---

Scary black rifle is why

Attempting to be reckless would be reckless, would it not?

There is no way you can "attempt to be reckless."

SpreadsheetAg said:

---

pacecar02 said:

---

I feel like this after the fact lesser included is BS

DA's should not over charge

---

Agree, especially after the testimony is concluded. Defense should be able to defend against new charges with new witness testimony.

---

Exactly. The trial should be about the charges brought, and not what you think you can get after it's clear you're going to lose.

aggiehawg said:

---

Branca:

Quote:

---

Now re: Grosskreutz,

Chirafisi: Accept first and second attempted intentional homicide--can you merely ATTEMPT a reckless act? Either are reckless or not.

---

---

Attempting to be reckless sounds like you are introducing a negligence standard.

Branca:

Quote:

---

Kraus: On Count 6 (?) not requesting reckless, so can skip that.

Count 6 is the gun charge.

Judge: You just offered the standard gun possession instruction.

---

Pookers said:

---

sicandtiredTXN said:

---

WTF

At point blank range a 40 SW will do more damage the a 223 FMJ

The larger projectile does more actual damage

It's been determined that the defendant had 223 FMJ 55 gr

and say GG has a 40 SW which in most cases are around 180 gr

The the kinetic energy at point blank is greater with the 40 S&W

---

I don't think this is true. Rifle rounds carry a lot more energy than pistol rounds.

---

Do your calculation and prove me wrong

The huge difference in weight of the bullet vs velocity is what determines kinetic energy and what damage is done, and that number drops over distance when facturing in powder charge. We are talking point blank and in several shots inches away.

KE = 0.5 m v2

where m = mass of object
v = speed of object

So to to keep it stupid simple, the amount of translational kinetic energy that an object has depends on two variables: the mass (m) of the object and the speed (v) of the object.I showed the equation is used to represent the kinetic energy (KE) of an object.

Waffledynamics said:

---

SpreadsheetAg said:

---

State: Kyle said he didn't know what his bullets would do. Kyle said he didn't know his weapon was more powerful or dangerous than other weapons....

He didn't say ANY of those things.

---

Why is the defense sitting on this stuff? What is the deal? This is making me anxious. Same goes for your post immediately before the quoted post.

---

Jury is out of the room; they're just talking about what instructions to give the jury. Judge is going back and forward between prosecution and defense.

AggiePetro07 said:

---

sicandtiredTXN said:

---

WTF

At point blank range a 40 SW will do more damage the a 223 FMJ

The larger projectile does more actual damage

It's been determined that the defendant had 223 FMJ 55 gr

and say GG has a 40 SW which in most cases are around 180 gr

The the kinetic energy at point blank is greater with the 40 S&W

---

Don't think that's true. I think the 223 is about 3x the 40 at the muzzle

---

Your energy equation is correct but give me a 223 in the arm vs a 40 all day long. The 40 is going to do much more damage.

I'm trying to watch but really need someone to explain the trajectory of this debate happening right now.

State: "The defense should have raised the issue of barrel length (with respect to youth gun laws)..."

Judge: You have the burden of proof!

Trying to say he illegally used a SBR?!

But prosecution never brought this up.

Denied for sure.

Branca:

Quote:

---

Kraus: The defendant should have measured the barrel in front of the jury.

Judge: YOU (Kraus) have the burden of proof.

---

sicandtiredTXN said:

---

Pookers said:

---

sicandtiredTXN said:

---

WTF

At point blank range a 40 SW will do more damage the a 223 FMJ

The larger projectile does more actual damage

It's been determined that the defendant had 223 FMJ 55 gr

and say GG has a 40 SW which in most cases are around 180 gr

The the kinetic energy at point blank is greater with the 40 S&W

---

I don't think this is true. Rifle rounds carry a lot more energy than pistol rounds.

---

Do your calculation and prove me wrong

The huge difference in weight of the bullet vs velocity is what determines kinetic energy and what damage is done, and that number drops over distance when facturing in powder charge. We are talking point blank and in several shots inches away.

KE = 0.5 m v2

where m = mass of object
v = speed of object

So to to keep it stupid simple, the amount of translational kinetic energy that an object has depends on two variables: the mass (m) of the object and the speed (v) of the object.I showed the equation is used to represent the kinetic energy (KE) of an object.

---

also, just to clarify, the energy of the projectile is not the same as damage done. the typical simplification is that damage can be equated to energy lost by the projectile while inside the target. so if the 223 has 3x the energy but only leaves 10% of that in the target, while the 40 sw leaves it all, then the 40 likely did more damage

AggiePetro07 said:

---

sicandtiredTXN said:

---

WTF

At point blank range a 40 SW will do more damage the a 223 FMJ

The larger projectile does more actual damage

It's been determined that the defendant had 223 FMJ 55 gr

and say GG has a 40 SW which in most cases are around 180 gr

The the kinetic energy at point blank is greater with the 40 S&W

---

Don't think that's true. I think the 223 is about 3x the 40 at the muzzle

---

Both muzzle velocity and kinetic energy at the muzzle for the 55 grain .223 are over 3x that of a 155 grain .40 caliber.

Trying to say he didn't have hunting certification from the state too?

There's other uses beyond hunting, such as simply shooting targets as he did say that he had done.

Does this dialogue have to do with the charge of illegally possessing a particular firearm?

Because in my mind, it has nothing whatsoever to do with self defense.

TAMUallen said:

---

Trying to say he didn't have hunting certification from the state too?

There's other uses beyond hunting, such as simply shooting targets as he did say that he had done.

---

Lol. Is there a hunting license for lawless rioters? Are they issued as toe tags?

TAMUallen said:

---

Trying to say he didn't have hunting certification from the state too?

There's other uses beyond hunting, such as simply shooting targets as he did say that he had done.

---

was that a fact that was found in the evidence presented during the trial? because if not its irrelevant and inadmissible

State is saying the defense didn't prove he was within the law with his gun barrel length.

Defense doesn't have to prove it.

Good Poster said:

---

I'm trying to watch but really need someone to explain the trajectory of this debate happening right now.

---

The more lesser charges get in, the better for the prosecution. Judge has been pretty fair imho

milner79 said:

---

Does this dialogue have to do with the charge of illegally possessing a particular firearm?

Because in my mind, it has nothing whatsoever to do with self defense.

---

i'm trying to keep up while also in a meeting but i think they are arguing about the gun possession charge right now

milner79 said:

---

Does this dialogue have to do with the charge of illegally possessing a particular firearm?

Because in my mind, it has nothing whatsoever to do with self defense.

---

It doesn't.

milner79 said:

---

Does this dialogue have to do with the charge of illegally possessing a particular firearm?

Because in my mind, it has nothing whatsoever to do with self defense.

---

They're trying to say that he possessed a short barrel rifle, that hasn't been measured.

The other part of that law is for under 16 which he wasn't

This DOES NOT MATTER. HE DID NOT HAVE A SBR (SHORT BARREL RIFLE)

The gun laws are contradictory and that was the subject of a lot of argument before trial.

AggiePetro07 said:

---

sicandtiredTXN said:

---

WTF

At point blank range a 40 SW will do more damage the a 223 FMJ

The larger projectile does more actual damage

It's been determined that the defendant had 223 FMJ 55 gr

and say GG has a 40 SW which in most cases are around 180 gr

The the kinetic energy at point blank is greater with the 40 S&W

---

Don't think that's true. I think the 223 is about 3x the 40 at the muzzle

---

Okay I dug out my phone and using the calculator a 223 55-grain fired from an AR, a 55-grain bullet will leave the muzzle somewhere around 2,600 feet per second depending on exact barrel length. That yields kinetic energy of 825.7 foot-pounds and momentum of 20.43 pounds-feet per second.

Same calculation for a 180 gr 40 S&W has a muzzle energy of 684.2 ft-lbs

So I am wrong about the greater kinetic, however the larger bullet at point blank into GG bicep would have like blown it completely off and he'd be wearing a hook instead of have just some numbness as he claims.

I don't watch too many trials - but I am finding this discussion pretty interesting - usually don't see this kind of thing.

AggiePetro07 said:

---

sicandtiredTXN said:

---

WTF

At point blank range a 40 SW will do more damage the a 223 FMJ

The larger projectile does more actual damage

It's been determined that the defendant had 223 FMJ 55 gr

and say GG has a 40 SW which in most cases are around 180 gr

The the kinetic energy at point blank is greater with the 40 S&W

---

Don't think that's true. I think the 223 is about 3x the 40 at the muzzle

---

Not to derail the thread, but the fmj took a lot of energy with it when it exited the bicep. It's not a matter of muzzle energy but how much energy is transmitted to the target.

Judge, law is 16 not 18

The defense is openly laughing now

Judge: "If the law makes no sense, then you're out of luck" (to State)

$h!tti1ly written gun laws should not apply, lol

so throw this case out and give him a fine for carrying a firearm illegally?

seems to have nothing to do with the murder charges and self-defense case.

This is not hunting.

The law is for hunting.