I just watched KILLER BUTTS. My question is if the blast from the gun alone would be enough to kill without the butts?

I didn't see any mention of the toxic effects of cigarettes. Could it be that the friend died later?
Cigarette butts have 5-7mg of nicotine each.
Toxic dose (ingested) is 40-60mg.
The rate of absorption is likely different between ingested and subcutaneous routes (shot under the skin). I haven't found a source to tell the difference in absorption rates, but differences of 2 times certainly wouldn't be uncommon with other toxins (or medicines).

Could the friend have had 21 mg of nicotine injected subcutaneously and died from the toxic effects?

Just a theory.

The only thing I didn't see them try is taping the butts together that would keep the load packed and the hit may be fatal from the 7 ft. they could try it using 3 different types of type such as Scotch, Electrical, and Duct Tape.

My viewing of the "fatal" shot suggests that the heated gases from the powder is what caused the damage to the torso; there is a very distinct, narrow yellow cone from the rifle mouth into the dummy, with the point of the cone penetrating well in.

I agree with what several others have said: this one deserves a revisit, with a powder-only shot for comparison.

quote:

Originally posted by saiyanveg:
I dont believe it was the cigarette butts, as much as it was the charge itself. I had hear a story of an actor killed accidentally when a gun loaded with blanks was fired point blank range at his head. Since there was obviously no projectile in the gun (blanks) it was found that it was the power of the air itself. Shouldnt this account for the damage caused the dummy by firing the rifle point blank? Adam, Jamie...GET ON IT!!!

I think the actor you talking about is Brandon Lee, he died in filming Crow.

I agree many people here, that cigarette butts does not kill you, it's shot it self. I bet that if they shoot butts with just air pressure at same speed, it do nothing.

Okay as being an ex-smoker i noticed that when i put a cigarette out the part that was once lit would become much harder and me and my friends were playing around it that idea once and by stepping on the butts just before they went out it even made them sharp. So isn't it possible that the guys in the myth shot the butts by putting them into the barrel filter first thus causing the hard ash side to cut into the victim

quote:

I didn't see any mention of the toxic effects of cigarettes. Could it be that the friend died later?
Cigarette butts have 5-7mg of nicotine each.
Toxic dose (ingested) is 40-60mg.
The rate of absorption is likely different between ingested and subcutaneous routes (shot under the skin). I haven't found a source to tell the difference in absorption rates, but differences of 2 times certainly wouldn't be uncommon with other toxins (or medicines).

Could the friend have had 21 mg of nicotine injected subcutaneously and died from the toxic effects?

Just a theory.

________________________________________________

This is just silly. A full UNSMOKED cigarette can contain the amount of nicotine listed for that brand type, but an already smoked cigarette would have very little remaining nicotine in it. Death by nicotine overdose would be impossible unless shot by butts from an entire army of men! This post was simply another way to talk down to smokers everywhere. The question is whether the blast itself, or the "projectiles" from the show would kill a man at point blank. Death by overdose is simply stupid.

yeah, i vote the mythbusters read this article
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1997/11/971114070111.htm
even with padding, people stll die from the blunt trauma. if the butt hit directly on the heart (maybe even between the ribs), the person probably would have died.
heck, even punching someone in the heart could kill them.

Hi mythbusters., my first post, ok i just watched the cig butts deal. Well for sure i agree there is plastic type butts, i sean em before. and for those of you saying they shoulda put a shirt on the gell, That would just slow it down, and seeing they had problems penatrating with no shirt, what would the point be putting a shirt on it??? Helloo!!!!! lmao Now if the butts went clear threw the gell i could see trying with a shirt, but come on people it barley gave the gell a burn, lol.

I just watched that one 5 minutes ago!!!! And I could tell from the begining, the following three:

1. Busted!!

2. Busted!!

3. Busted!!

So if you say you can do it, go back to third grade!!

Since watching the show on Killer Butts I am wondering if they recieved the right facts. For example....
1. The powder charge, I'm a hunter and I use about 1 and a half the amount mentioned.
2. The wauding, was it a clothe or nylon.

what if there was leftover gunpowder in the gun, and a lit cigarette was put into the barrel when the gun was cocked.. would the gun explode?

My thoughts;

The gun had already been loaded when they had this 'wonderful' idea. Being drunk they forgot this, and loaded the gun a second time on top of the first charge.That or the last charge had not gone off for some reason and they forgot to clear the gun before reloading.

Being drunk when the gun was reloaded the bullet was put into the gun by accident before the butts. That or the butts were used in place of wadding to keep the bullet in place and they forgot about that.

It wasn't an accident. The firer deliberatly loaded the gun with a bullet and shot his friend. Since he was the only witness he could stagger into town a few hours later reeking of alcohol with this story of having shot his friend it cigg butts.

The victuim was either killed by the discharge at that distance, or suffered a heart attack when his 'Friend' really fired the gun at him.

It never happened.

I got done watching the viewer's choise and "Killer Butts" was among them (not sure if it was repeat, however, I think it is. IN anycase. The way I understand it, is that with clothing and a ribcage, the chances are very unlikely that the actual butts would make it through the skin ... and at 7' distance, the pressure would more than likely just knock the man down (presuming he was caught off guard). If a person is hunting, think about it, *MOST* hunting is done during the Fall and early winter months, when temps are cooler. So figure longjohns (thermal underwear), a t-shirt, some sort of flannel shirt over that, then a hunting jacket/coat, and quite possibly an orange vest that some hunters wear so as to prevent getting shot by other hunters. All these layers of clothing would seem to be very difficult for a blunt object to pierce, then to puncture the skin, and then the rib cage...? Come on, more thought should have been put into this myth, I would love to see a revisit with some of these variables put into it.

I am curious. They make cigs with plastic filters on them. I believe the brand is Parliment or something like that. Also, they mentioned only using 80 grain and most hunters around where I live use 200 grain and I know a couple that sometimes use as much as 300 grain. With the plastic filtered cigs and a higher (more commonly used among hunters) grain the results might be different even if a shirt or something were added to the equation.

the proplem with the killer butts myth is the dummy had no ribs. the butts hay have got to the heart but what if there was a rib cage in the way as bone makes a big diference. what u guys think?

I saw a Darwin Award in that the guy died of three cigarette butts to the heart.

quote:

Originally posted by mkitslaar:
I just watched KILLER BUTTS. My question is if the blast from the gun alone would be enough to kill without the butts?

I'm with you on this, I would think the blast alone from 2-3 feet would be sufficient enough to kill.

When they did the test the forgot one thing...The guy that was shot was wearing clothes so they probably wouldn't even bleed or have a skin breech!!!!!

i have somthing to add u have to rember there druck mabye they put to much black podwer in the gun idk if if that helps or not but is it a good idea?