Charlie Kirk Shooting

[deirdre]

If you were in a crowd and a shooter was at a distance in an unidentified direction, you would not know where to hide anyway, would you? You'd probably think "not near the victim", but that's about it.

most of the crowd didnt -and wouldnt -know who "the victim" was.

and not knowing where to hide does not equal ''just stand at the balcony" (like dozens did) and watch everyone else duck. It is a bit stupid, and they were just lucky the shooter didnt keep shooting at easy targets.

 

[Giddierone]

If you were in a crowd and a shooter was at a distance in an unidentified direction, you would not know where to hide anyway, would you? You'd probably think "not near the victim", but that's about it.

It seems most of the crowd had at least the core survival elements down: staying alert, looking for cover (even a behind flimsy gazebo) or getting down. I guess "active shooter" drills that are part of University life in the US are effective.

 

[MapperGuy]

Isn't not having someone filming in the face of danger stranger these days?

If you wanted to make something look real these days you probably have to have someone stood somewhere filming it on their mobile phone.

How do we define EXACTLY how people should act? It's hardly surprising that it's pretty much impossible and therefore any action can be deemed "strange". Not strange enough is strange. Strange is strange. Too strange is strange.

There is no porridge that's JUST right. Unless it's perfectly crafted. Which would make it obviously strange. It's not just right, it's TOO right.

Expecting everyone in a group to react in a specific way ignores the widely different life experiences of the individuals, it ignores exactly what they saw and heard (which will vary from person to person), and what their instant response is. Flight, fight, keep filming.... Firefighters ran toward the World Trade Center, everybody else runs away...

 

[FatPhil]

most of the crowd didnt -and wouldnt -know who "the victim" was.

What level of situational awareness are you ascribing to these people? I would have defaulted to the crowd being aware that the main speaker, who is in front of them at the time, had been shot. What else were they at the rally for if not to see the main speaker?

 

[deirdre]

What else were they at the rally for if not to see the main speaker?

to hear the main speaker and the guy asking the questions?

basically 90% or more of the people ive seen interviewed who said they actually saw kirk shot (they all mention blood) were directly in front of him and 20 feet was the furthest distance i heard. certainly i imagine some further back also were looking directly at kirk the moment he was shot. Many said they turned toward the sound when they heard the shot and then everyone around them was dropping to the ground.

the awning didnt seem to blocking the view of kirk from those further back. one man about 80 feet back said the crowd dropped in a wave from near the stage and back vs the crowd all dropping at the same time. Maybe if you arent close enough to focus on the small area the blood was coming from your brain cant register anything really in the half second before everyone around you starts to drop? i'm guessing if charlie was mid word or mid sentence maybe that stop in action would have been more noticeable?

 

[Gary C]

What level of situational awareness are you ascribing to these people? I would have defaulted to the crowd being aware that the main speaker, who is in front of them at the time, had been shot. What else were they at the rally for if not to see the main speaker?

In current era of social media addiction, many are 'there' just to be at "an event". Many of you are probably aware of the phenomenon of attendees making a video of an entire popular music event but afterwards being unable to discuss what was played and in what order. IMO this subset of attendees can be expected to possess almost no situational awareness and to react in some pretty random ways to any unexpected event.

 

[Giddierone]

Not sure what to think about this at the moment. It seems there's a lot of well reasoned skepticism from various gun enthusiasts/experts that the alleged gun/ammunition type used would have created a significantly different impact, and definitely an exit wound, which the footage from behind Kirk shows did not happen.

 

[John J.]

It seems there's a lot of well reasoned skepticism from various gun enthusiasts/experts that the alleged gun/ammunition type used would have created a significantly different impact, and definitely an exit wound, which the footage from behind Kirk shows did not happen.

I haven't watched the video of Kirk being hit, but some accounts suggest he was hit on the left side of his neck, causing an immediate catastrophic haemorrhage.
I don't know what direction Kirk was facing relative to the shooter.

We do not know the findings of any medical investigations other than there was a gunshot wound to the neck. We do not conclusively know that there wasn't an exit wound. As far as I know, we know the type of cartridge (allegedly) used, .30-06 Springfield, but not the type of bullet.

There are indications that on autopsy a bullet fragment was found but not the whole bullet:

A bullet fragment found lodged in Charlie Kirk's body showed signs of it could have been fired from suspect Tyler Robinson's rifle, newly unsealed court documents showed.
It's the latest blow to conspiracy theories that have dogged the conservative activist's killing.
That fragment was found to be a .30-caliber "deformed/damaged bullet jacket fragment" according to a report from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) submitted to a Utah court in January and unsealed Wednesday.

New York Times 16 April 2026, "Newly unsealed ATF report on bullet that killed Charlie Kirk reveals what the feds really found — and the link to Tyler Robinson's gun", Priscilla DeGregory, Alex Oliveira, https://nypost.com/2026/04/16/us-ne...atf-ballistics-report-unsealed-by-utah-judge/

Also, New York Times 31 March 2026, "Prosecutors reveal what analysis of Charlie Kirk bullet and Tyler Robinson's gun really found", Priscilla DeGregory

Claims emerged this week that the "bullet jacket fragment" recovered from Kirk's body didn't match the .30-06 hunting rifle Robinson allegedly used in the September 2025 assassination — fanning online conspiracy theories about the conservative icon's death.

My emphasis, note, not "fragments", https://nypost.com/2026/03/31/us-ne...-bullet-and-tyler-robinsons-gun-really-found/

We know the ATF couldn't conclusively match the evidence to the alleged shooter's rifle, so it was either partial (not a complete bullet) or the whole bullet was present but substantially fragmented or deformed. The apparent references to a fragment (singular) in the NYT (including a quote from the ATF) suggest the former.
If the latter -the whole bullet, or a large percentage of it, was retrieved- it must have been significantly deformed or fragmented, as it could not be forensically linked to Tyler's rifle.*
This might indicate an expanding or fragmenting bullet which is more likely to remain within the target. not a military-style bullet with "full metal jacket".

Commercially manufactured rifles chambered in .30-06 are popular for hunting. [Tyler's rifle was in that category].
... Many hunting loads... ...use expanding bullets that can deliver rapid energy transfer to targets.

Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.30-06_Springfield
Expanding bullets lack the hard full metal jacket, and are more prone to fragmentation on impact.

Deforming/ expanding bullets (e.g. hollow points, soft points) are designed to increase energy transferred to the target ideally without passing through.

Expanding bullets are less likely to pass through the target, and if they do, they will exit at a lower velocity. This reduces the risk of accidental injury to bystanders.

Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expanding_bullet
Full-metal jacket ammunition may be doctored to create an improvised deforming/ fragmenting bullet, e.g. by making cruciform cuts through the tip. Such "home-made" expediencies have unreliable performance and can fragment in flight.

The references to a (single?) bullet fragment found on autopsy suggests (to me) that most of that bullet did not come to rest in Mr Kirk's body.
If so, either a significant portion of it did indeed exit his body, or (I suspect, much less likely) Mr Kirk was struck by fragments from an already fragmented bullet.

A (hypothetical) expanding or fragmenting bullet, if it were arrested by striking bone, might not cause an exit wound, but had this happened we might expect most of the bullet to be retrieved on autopsy, probably with/ as a number of fragments, which doesn't appear to be the case.

-Full metal jacketed bullets produce less tissue damage and tend to travel through the body undeformed
- Semijacketed ammunition creates the classic lead snowstorm appearance on Xray due to the peeling back of the jacket as it travels through the body, releasing numerous, small lead fragments

"Autopsy & forensics, Types of injuries, Gunshot wounds", section Rifle wounds, Lorenzo Gitto, Robert Stoppacher, Pathology Outlines website https://www.pathologyoutlines.com/topic/forensicsgunshotwounds.html

If a 30-06 Springfield-type round was used, and the bullet hypothetically travelled through the side of the neck (that is, not on a trajectory through/ near the centre of the neck encountering bone) it would cause significant tearing at the proposed distance of approx. 130 metres (as would any full-power rifle cartridge). This is regardless of it being FMJ or expanding, or if it fragmented or not.

On each side of the neck, the carotid artery is a little under 25mm/ 1 inch or so beneath the skin's surface (Science Insights website says "roughly 1.5 to 2 centimeters (about half an inch to three-quarters of an inch) beneath the skin in most adults", https://scienceinsights.org/how-deep-is-the-carotid-artery/). It shares the carotid sheath with the internal jugular vein and vagus nerve.
A puncture or severing of the carotid fits very well with witness descriptions of a "fountain" of blood. Due to tearing effects, a full-power rifle bullet wouldn't even need to reach that depth to damage the carotid. The entry wound might be contiguous with the exit wound, if those terms still had meaning in this scenario, essentially a continuous wound across the side of the neck.

Again, from what we currently know it might be unlikely that a whole bullet/ fragments constituting most of a bullet were found during autopsy.
Until we know more, I think it's possible that Mr Kirk was struck on one side of the neck, damaging structures necessary for life.
The bullet must have at least partially fragmented, probably on impact, as one fragment was found on autopsy. Other fragments do not appear to be accounted for.
A second possibility is that the shooter used an expanding or fragmenting bullet, there was no major exit wound and the bullet/ most of it was recovered during autopsy but press coverage has been misleading, and the ATF, court professionals have failed to clarify what they know.

A third is a conspiracy, and the available information is unreliable or deliberately manipulated. Many tragic/ violent events and other dramatic happenings in public life attract such theories, most have little supporting evidence and fewer are ever borne out.

Fourth, a miracle, or supposed amazing strength on the part of Mr Kirk, possibly both, stopped the bullet to save others.
This has been suggested by Turning Point USA spokesman Andrew Kolvet (Turning Point USA was co-founded by Kirk).

The surgeon who operated on Charlie Kirk said the bullet that killed him miraculously did not exit his neck, likely saving others from getting hit.
Turning Point USA spokesman Andrew Kolvet revealed on Saturday night that he had spoken with the surgeon who made the comments directly to him.
In a post on X, Kolvet mentioned... "...the absence of an exit wound could be seen as a miracle, and I want people to understand that."

...The fact that Kirk's neck could stop such a powerful bullet, which is designed to kill animals many times larger than humans, was described as a "true miracle" by the surgeon who talked with Kolvet.

The surgeon further stated, "His bone density and health were so remarkable that he seemed like the man of steel. The bullet should have passed right through him, potentially injuring anyone behind him as well."
The surgeon reportedly said this was a miracle, as it likely saved the people standing behind him.
...'Even in death, Charlie managed to save the lives of those around him,' Kolvet wrote. 'Remarkable. Miraculous.'

From "Surgeon Discloses Details of Charlie Kirk's Wound Recovery Miracle" (a questionable title), Internewscast website (lots of pop-ups), 21 September 2025 https://internewscast.com/news/surgeon-discloses-details-of-charlie-kirks-wound-recovery-miracle/

I'm not sure Mr Kolvet's comments (or the surgeon's, if accurately reported by Kolvet) are helpful; perhaps they were intended to provide some form of solace to Mr Kirk's loved ones. I hope they aren't seriously regarded as evidence of a miracle.


*The rifling striations used to match bullets to firearms can still be present on the lower ends of expanding bullets, e.g. the photo of a .458 bullet in the Wikipedia article Expanding bullet, link above. It seems that no substantial fragment like this was found during the autopsy- if it were, forensically matching it to the rifle would have been possible.

 

[Giddierone]

I haven't watched the video of Kirk being hit,

This seems necessary for the discussion. But it's totally understandable to no want to watch it. When I first saw it (it auto-played on X on my phone) I thought he'd been shot from short range and from his right side with maybe a fairly weak homemade gun.

I don't know what direction Kirk was facing relative to the shooter.

The alleged shooter was directly in front of Kirk at around 130m.

I'm no gun expert but from some basic research the supposed rifle used to kill Kirk compared to say that used to kill JFK, is significantly more powerful and fired a heavier round. I think we've all seen the Zapruder film and the horrific damage it caused. Yet, what we see with Kirk is different with many ballistics commentators saying a shot from the front would have made a definite/significant exit wound and it being impossible for the round to not pass through.

Maybe they're all wrong.

EDIT: there have been some experts on TV claiming (without demonstrating) that a round could be stopped, implying that it might even be a likely outcome, but they're contradicted by other gun owners who demonstrate what the same rounds in the same gun at the same distance do.

The camera view from behind is here (it has no blood or gore so is safe to watch).
Source: https://www.youtube.com/live/5-HUyv9LyMg?si=WV21Jq1g2fKUvn-b&t=2074
[34:34]

 

[John J.]

Yet, what we see with Kirk is different with many ballistics commentators saying a shot from the front would have made a definite/significant exit wound and it being impossible for the round to not pass through.

A round passing through the neck across a fairly short chord could easily be fatal without having visibly discrete entry and exit wounds, leaving a continuous wound through the surface and underlying tissues. The carotid is less than an inch from the surface, the internal jugular and vagus nerve contained in the same carotid sheath.
This is absolutely not the same as saying the bullet didn't pass through.

Not all wounds inflicted by rifles cause exit wounds, sometimes the bullet is deflected within the body. And not all rounds perform as planned.

Soft- and hollow-point bullets are designed partly with the intent of not passing through the target, they are popular with hunters using .30-06; the rifle linked to Robertson was a hunting rifle. (We don't know what type of round the shooter used at present AFAIK). They are also more likely to fragment than full metal jacket projectiles.
Anecdotally, a long time back I knew a guy involved in conservation, in his locality part of that involved culling red deer. A mushrooming .303 British round was used, broadly equivalent to soft-point .30-06; it was selected partly because it was less likely to leave the target (as well as terminal effects). The shots were generally taken over some tens of metres.

The references to a bullet fragment being found on autopsy, and the ATF's inability to conclusively match it (or any other hypothetical fragments) to the rifle linked to Robinson, indicates either that the whole bullet was not found (perhaps striking the neck and partially fragmenting) or if it was, it was so fragmented or deformed that its rifling-imposed marks couldn't be determined. A projectile with these characteristics would rapidly dump kinetic energy causing greater localized injury accompanied by a rapid loss in momentum.

 

[Mick West]

The alleged shooter was directly in front of Kirk at around 130m.

Nor perfectly in front
https://www.metabunk.org/sitrec/?custom=1/Kirk Shooting Losee/20260712_233641.js

 

[Giddierone]

It's interesting that what seems like a neutral question of physics has become (like everything) deeply polarised.

Some push back to the "there must be an exit wound" here: https://www.dailywire.com/news/how-...s-fueling-the-worst-charlie-kirk-conspiracies

At an elevated angle from a Mauser, as in this case, the physics line up perfectly for exactly this outcome.(no exit wound)

While other commentators (claiming political neutrality and support for Kirk) maintain the improbability of there being no exit wound.

Again, I have no knowledge about guns, just pointing out the differing positions.

 

[Mick West]

I had my AI team spend about 30 minutes on this topic, and it gave this reasonable overview of the evidence, with this conclusion:

Executive conclusion
The publicly available evidence establishes that some fragmented .30-caliber projectile material remained in Charlie
Kirk's body and was recovered at autopsy. It does not establish how much of the original projectile remained, whether
any fragment exited, the projectile's construction, or the internal wound track.
Brian Harpole, Kirk's security chief, gave meaningful firsthand evidence supporting no exit wound: he said he treated the
visible left-neck wound, checked the other side during transport and saw no second wound. That is an eyewitness account,
not a published medical-examiner conclusion. Harpole's description of vertebral impacts and fragmentation was
secondhand from a doctor.
The complete medical-examiner report exists but is not public. At the July 6, 2026 preliminary hearing, the only findings read
aloud were manner homicide and immediate cause gunshot wound of the neck. Nothing public from the report identifies
an entry wound, an exit wound, the internal path or injured vertebrae.
Scientifically, "a .30-06 must exit a neck" is false as a universal claim. Retention depends on projectile construction, impact
conditions, yaw, deformation, fragmentation, bone impact, path length and the resistance of far-side tissue. But it is equally
unwarranted to use the recovered fragments alone as proof that there was no exit wound.

So basically not enough information to draw conclusions.

I lean towards the null hypothesis here - that he was shot as described. The objections are just not convincing enough to overrule Occam's razor.

 

[NorCal Dave]

I'm no gun expert but from some basic research the supposed rifle used to kill Kirk compared to say that used to kill JFK, is significantly more powerful and fired a heavier round. I think we've all seen the Zapruder film and the horrific damage it caused. Yet, what we see with Kirk is different with many ballistics commentators saying a shot from the front would have made a definite/significant exit wound and it being impossible for the round to not pass through.

@John J. noted above the big difference between fragmenting hunting rounds and military FMJ rounds. My experience is limited to hunting rounds.

Oswald used a Carcano 38 chambered in 6.5mm:

On November 22, 1963, John F. Kennedy, the 35th President of the United States, was assassinated using a 6.5×52mm Carcano Model 38 rifle.

The Carcanos were Italian surplus rifles from WW2 that often used surplus military rounds (my bold):

A 6.5×52mm Carcano 160 gr (10 g) round-nosed fully copper-jacketed bullet, of a type normally used in 6.5 mm military rifles (such as the Carcano) was found on Governor Connally's gurney in Parkland Hospital. This bullet (CE 399, see single bullet theory), and two bullet fragments found in the presidential limousine, were ballistically matched to the rifle found in the book depository building.[45]​ A partial palm print of Oswald was also found on the barrel of the gun.[46]​[47]​[48]​

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_F._Kennedy_assassination_rifle

So, it seems Oswald used a surplus military rifle with surplus full metal jacket ammunition. The Carcanos were also sometimes sold as surplus Mausers because they used a similar bot action:

The Carcano is a family of six-round bolt-action rifles and carbines using a modified Mauser-type action

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carcano

It appears Robbinson used some sort of vintage Mauser surplus rifle as well. While it may have been chambered in 8mm originally, it had likely been converted to the much more popular 30.06:

Prosecutors identified the recovered gun as a Mauser model 98, which had belonged to Robinson's grandfather.

The original Mausers were built to fire 8 millimeter cartridges. The recovered gun was a .30-06 caliber rifle, which indicates that at some point its barrel was replaced with a more modern one in order to fire rounds that are slightly smaller than 8 millimeters but are considered more powerful.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-new...un-was-powerful-vintage-hard-trace-rcna231334

While more powerful, unlike Oswald's 6.5mm Carcano which was somewhat limited to surplus FMJ military ammunition, Robbinson's 30.06 chambered rifle could have taken advantage of all kinds of options, with fragmenting hunting loads being the most available and easy to source.

Kennedy was struck by a FMJ military rounds, with one of them passing though his neck and sticking Connely, and others striking and then leaving horrific exit wounds. It seems likely that Kirk was struck by a fragmenting hunting load, possibly a glancing strike, that caused the bullet to fragment as designed.

 

[Ann K]

The camera view from behind is here (it has no blood or gore so is safe to watch).

OK for the video ...but exercise caution on the rest of it, because Candace Owens has never met a conspiracy theory she didn't like.

 

[Giddierone]

OK for the video ...but exercise caution on the rest of it, because Candace Owens has never met a conspiracy theory she didn't like.

I didn't comment on or endorse the rest of the video but provided the time stamp to the relevant part showing the footage from behind Kirk (which I'm assuming is genuine). I think people are smart enough to understand that.

 

[Giddierone]

The objections are just not convincing enough to overrule Occam's razor.

The problem here is that from the ballistic tests I've seen using a variety of rounds used, 100% of them pass through the target (ballistic gel, ballistic dummies, even cuts of meat). Which implies that more assumptions, (degraded or exotic "accelerator" ammo etc) rather than fewer, are required to match the outcome.

Typically trusting the experts is where i'd go, but with this one there's complete disagreement amongst them about what is physically possible or likely. Hopefully more information will be made public from the pre/trial.

 

[John J.]

The problem here is that from the ballistic tests I've seen using a variety of rounds used, 100% of them pass through the target (ballistic gel, ballistic dummies, even cuts of meat).

But were the people involved trying to demonstrate a viewpoint, or methodically testing a hypothesis? We know rifle rounds passing through substantial body masses can cause major exit wounds, and often do. That doesn't need demonstrating.
Those claiming that what (little) we know about Charlie Kirk's death is inconsistent with the official investigator's suspicions, because of the claimed lack of a visible exit wound, have to demonstrate that a rifle bullet wound always results in a visible exit wound (or is overwhelmingly likely to do so).

Contrary to popular belief the exit wound is not necessarily larger than the entry wound; if the bullet loses enough kinetic energy, it may not exit the body at all.

Real First Aid website, "ballistic injuries", 12 July 2023 https://www.realfirstaid.co.uk/ballisticinjuries.

.30-06 rounds designed to stay in the target are popular with hunters, though we don't know what type of round struck Mr Kirk. Such rounds are designed to maximise the dumping of kinetic energy on impact. A fragmenting FMJ bullet (e.g. from chance failure or deliberate doctoring) would also dump energy and rapidly lose momentum.
Whatever some commentators demonstrate using gel or meat, it is clear that .30-06 rounds exist that are capable of killing large prey without (always) exiting. Demonstrating that some other rounds do otherwise doesn't support conspiracy theorists in the absence of knowing what type of round was used, or any details of that individual round's performance or the bullet's trajectory.

Ballistic gelatine models soft tissues, by itself it cannot model bone or deflections/ fragmentation caused by a bullet striking bone.

Ballistic gel approximates the density of human muscle, but not tensile strength; it is often used to assess the penetration of a round in soft tissue but isn't used (AFAIK) to model wound characteristics (possibly with the important exception of cavitation).

While ballistic gelatin does not model the tensile strength of muscles or the structures of the body such as skin and bones, it works fairly well as an approximation of tissue...

Wikipedia, "Ballistic geltin", https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ballistic_gelatin

It seems that the one visible injury to Mr Kirk (that was seen by bystanders) was to one side of his neck. From what very little we know in the public domain, it is likely the bullet fragmented.

Doubts about the "official" narrative seem to depend on the neck wound being an entrance wound from a bullet which would have traversed much/ all of Mr Kirk's neck and exited on the opposite side. But if Mr Kirk was approximately facing his assassin (which I'm not sure has been demonstrated) this seems an unlikely trajectory.
A glancing (the word seems insufficient here) hit to the side of the neck, damaging "just" one or two cubic inches of tissue, could inflict rapidly fatal injury without leaving separate entrance and exit wounds.

Equally, if Mr Kirk wasn't facing his assassin we can't rule out a more oblique entry of a bullet arrested/ deflected by bone, maybe be more likely for a deforming/ fragmenting round but might also apply to a FMJ. I guess we can't rule out a bullet striking the upper torso through clothing, fragmenting on hitting bone and a neck injury resulting from a small internally deflected fragment without (in the heat of the moment) bystanders noticing the point of entry.

As Mick posted (@ 253) we don't have enough information to know what befell Mr Kirk in any detail.
But we probably have enough information to accept that injuries inflicted with .30-06 or other rifle cartridges don't always result in exit wounds, and a relatively shallow injury to the neck could be fatal without the bullet passing through the bulk of the neck to generate a separate exit wound.
People demonstrating that .30-06 rounds can cause grievous exit wounds, which is well understood, are not testing their hypothesis that those rounds always cause exit wounds, and they are not considering factors that sometimes result in the absence of exit wounds.

 

[Giddierone]

But were the people involved trying to demonstrate a viewpoint, or methodically testing a hypothesis?

As mentioned there's a variety of viewpoints from those simulating the shot. The viewpoints aren't part of this discussion. Some are more methodical in their testing than others.

This video (too long to excerpt but the section at 5:05 is relevant) offers some explanations for why a round might not exit, and makes use of the Martin Luther King example (also mentioned in Mick's AI report) where an apparently similar rifle round did not exit.

Source: https://youtu.be/-xV8xzNOhrA?si=Ld1nqs3rAz3BcMFv

it is likely the bullet fragmented

Yes, that seems to be broadly agreed upon, but the unlikely physics of how that occured are what people disagree about. For example what caused the fragmentation.

People demonstrating that .30-06 rounds can cause grievous exit wounds, which is well understood, are not testing their hypothesis that those rounds always cause exit wounds, and they are not considering factors that sometimes result in the absence of exit wounds.

Not sure someone could ever prove that something always occurs. Several of the test I've seen try to consider several factors that could lead to no exit. None have successfully demonstrated a round failing to exit.

 

[boguesuser]

.30-06 rounds designed to stay in the target are popular with hunters,

Whatever some commentators demonstrate using gel or meat, it is clear that .30-06 rounds exist that are capable of killing large prey without (always) exiting

The ability for a round to stop within a target is determined by the structure of the projectile and the thickness of the animal.

A round design to stop short of leaving a white tail deer with sail clean through a nutria.

Yes, that seems to be broadly agreed upon, but the unlikely physics of how that occured are what people disagree about. For example what caused the fragmentation.

From the videos I saw, the shooter would have had a clear shot so unless he was using the worlds worst ammunition, I'm not sure there was a good way for the projectile to break up.

I still don't think it was a 30-06 however, or at least a halfway standard loading of one. I've witnessed 556 nato just about split an 6-8ish lbs nutria in half and nominally put palm sized holes in the rest. 556 has about 1/3 the energy of 30-06. If there was no pass through, that mean all the energy would have been dumped and I'd expect significantly more damage from that.

Tha said, I could be inclined to believe that this was a down-loaded 110 grain 30-06. That would explain why investigators didn't find the whole projectile. They could have but were expecting more mass. It would also explain why there was no passthrough.

 

[John J.]

Several of the test I've seen try to consider several factors that could lead to no exit. None have successfully demonstrated a round failing to exit.

We know rifle bullets do not always cause exit wounds. Repeated demonstrations that they can does not alter this real-world fact.
We do not even know if the bullet that killed Mr Kirk passed through a substantial depth of his body, or "just" a shallow path through his neck.
Some .30-06 rounds (and other calibers) are designed to have a much lower chance of exiting, and these are used by hunters.

Equivalent deforming rounds (I'm not sure about .30-06 specifically) are sometimes used by police marksmen for similar (not identical) reasons; to maximise terminal effects and to reduce risk to innocent bystanders (e.g. hostages). They have not been deterred by experts on the internet.

Bullets sometimes fragment on impact. Bullets striking bone often fragment. But a FMJ bullet is unlikely to fragment in ballistic gelatine.

 

[boguesuser]

Some .30-06 rounds (and other calibers) are designed to have a much lower chance of exiting, and these are used by hunters.

Those are typically for large game such as deer and elk. A neck has significantly less bones and meat than your typical deer.

 

[Giddierone]

We know rifle bullets do not always cause exit wounds. Repeated demonstrations that they can does not alter this real-world fact.
We do not even know if the bullet that killed Mr Kirk passed through a substantial depth of his body, or "just" a shallow path through his neck.
Some .30-06 rounds (and other calibers) are designed to have a much lower chance of exiting, and these are used by hunters.

Equivalent deforming rounds (I'm not sure about .30-06 specifically) are sometimes used by police marksmen for similar (not identical) reasons; to maximise terminal effects and to reduce risk to innocent bystanders (e.g. hostages). They have not been deterred by experts on the internet.

Bullets sometimes fragment on impact. Bullets striking bone often fragment. But a FMJ bullet is unlikely to fragment in ballistic gelatine.

Yet, the gun owners of various stripes are considering it a ballistic anomaly. As far as i'm aware no one has been able to demonstrate the "real world" possibility of the claimed round size being stopped by a similarly composed target at the alleged distance/angle (there are dozens of videos on YouTube of people unsuccessfully trying to recreate the shot). Of course this doesn't mean it didn't happen.

 

[Ann K]

There's another possibility. Kirk was speaking to a large audience of his fans, and it's not impossible that in the confusion, one of them picked up a fragment of a bullet and pocketed it as a souvenir.