Your source buys into the school of terminal ballistics which pays much attention to the temporary cavity, while another school of thought pays more attention to the permanent cavity. Evidence supports the latter much more.

"It's designed to bounce around inside the body once it makes contact with bone."

I argued against the "designed to bounce around", which frankly reminded me too much of the needle projectile stories from the 80's. Told them about the tumbling and fragmentation issues and bullet on bone in general instead.
I also opposed talk about "hollow point", which was simply the wrong term.


So I didn't claim that the little bullets doesn't do much damage. I pointed out that most damage is usually done at some depth, and that skinny or particularly young humans usually don't have this depth.


The point was more about telling them that normal hunting bullets (7.62) are even more mean and that some horror stories about 5.56 were either exaggerations or not specific to 5.56.
I've seen 5.56 carbines with normal 30 rds mags been talked up to the biggest, meanest weapons there are, and this is an irrational build-up of a bogeyman in my opinion.

The idiot could have pulled off the very same massacre with two pistols, one home-made wooden carbine stock and 8 rds mags with soft lead bullets. The shooting distance inside buildings is mostly less than 10 metres and nobody had body armour, after all.

The hope that a ban of "high capacity" (=normal capacity) magazines and 5.56mm automatic weapons could actually prevent massacres is just as unfounded as claims that armed teachers would be a good idea (one of them might possibly stop a massacre sometime, but a couple others would till then probably have used theirs on the pupils!).


I personally don't care what gun legislation you guys have - Pandora's Box has been wide open for too long anyway. I just made an experiment on how some facts might be received in such a heated discussion.