I always love hot takes on gun subjects from big, fancy publications whose contributors really don’t know shit about guns, but they take a hard stance on the issue nonetheless because “By God, we are the [ New York Times / Washington Post / USA Today etc. ] and we couldn’t possibly be wrong.” [Inserts picture of an AR-15 with a chainsaw bayonet]

So imagine my unbridled delight when I saw this bad boy from 2008 pop up in my phone’s suggested news stories:

Oh, Google, you know me…too well?

Surprisingly, the proclamation in the title is probably an accurate one. And – I guess – as far as this being a gun piece from a large publisher, it’s really not that bad, albeit too brief. It’s a very technical issue, and they could have done better than a couple of anecdotes from survivors (including a guy who got shot 20 times…with a .22LR) and some catchy bites from medical professionals.  But at least facially, this article supports the conclusion that this New York Times author doesn’t know that he’s making: Shot placement matters over stopping power. Unquote.

It’s funny to me, because innocent, naive, unaware NYT contributor John Eligon was just trying to put together a fun, if macabre, little Thursday feature for the Times. Oh, but sweet John unknowingly dipped his toes into a boiling hot bloodbath of a debate in the gun community. He had no idea that the very issue touched on in this article has been at the center of tactical dynamic internet commando CQB for decades. And he couldn’t have known that 11 years later, The Firearm Blog would resurrect this homage to 9mm, this genuflection to 115 grain, where an oblivious Brooklyn author literally pisses in John Moses Browning’s face for 983 words.

If a gunshot victim’s heart is still beating upon arrival at a hospital, there is a 95 percent chance of survival, Dr. DiMaio said. (People shot in vital organs usually do not make it that far, he added.)