A question of self-defence - Fire extinguishers & self defence

[Petro]

At 9:21 PM -0500 7/23/01, Jim Choate wrote:
>While it's true the hole would have reduced the cushion impact of breaking
>the glass it would not have eliminated it.
>
>NATO says it takes a transfer of approx. 85 Joules to kill.

	That's ridiculous. There are far too many variables involved 
in delivering a fatal wound for anyone to be able to reduce it to a 
single number. 

	85 Joules delivered where and how? 

	That seems to come to about 62-63 foot pounds, about the 
muzzle energy of a .22 long rifle out of a 2 inch barrel (65 pounds)
and more than the energy of a .32 short-colt (54 pounds). 

	I would say that neither is adequate to reliably do the job, nor 
is either "sub-lethal". 


>
>Figure out the velocity that takes for 15 lbs.. Compare to the velocity
>possible in this incidence.

	Assuming that the protestor can achieve 20 FPS with a 15 pound 
weight, he's generating 93+ foot pounds at terminus. 

	That's 13 miles per hour. I'd bet he could get closer to 25-30
miles an hour which would be over 300 foot pounds, which puts it around 
the energy delivered by a 9mm Parabellum. 

	Check my math, I'm not good at it. 

	Now, as I indicated above, just because there is adequate energy
to do the job if well placed, doesn't mean there's enough to do the 
job if it falls on your foot. 

	As well, it may be nominally inadequate, but still be lethal if
delivered *just* right. The .22LR has killed a lot of people, and I'd bet
the .32 short has done one or two. 


>In addition the fact that a previous protestor had put a board through the
>window only goes to demonstrate the high level of emotional disruption
>these officers were exposed to. Panicking is not justification for making
>a wrong decision.

	Huh? 

	When one is in a panic state, one by definition is not thinking 
clearly, otherwise one would not be panicking. 

>
>Deadly force was not in any way justified.

	It most certainly was.