LOTS of new gun owners out there.

Started by NM_Shooter, January 01, 2009, 05:58:42 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

NM_Shooter

(I'm grumpy.  Apologies in advance)

Even went to bed early last night.  But at midnight, all hell broke loose in my neighborhood.  Woke us all up.  We have some distance between our neighbors... we are all on an acre or more here, and yet it still sounded like a battlezone.  We've lived here 11 years and have never heard that sort of shooting before at midnight.  I'm guessing that a lot of the gun-rush folks decided that New Year's was a good time to try out their new guns.

I was more than a little worried about where all that lead was coming down.   

It started at 12, and the shooting still was going on at 12:20.  Literally thousands of shots.  I hate idiots with guns.  Actually, I just hate idiots. 

Grrrrrr.  Okay, I'm a little better now.

-f-
"Officium Vacuus Auctorita"

MountainDon

There are some idiots living near us too.  >:(
Just because something has been done and has not failed, doesn't mean it is good design.


Whitlock

No idiots around here only geniuses that can't spell heh
Not one shot herd must be saving ammo for something more important ;D
Make Peace With Your Past So It Won't Screw Up The Present

MountainDon

NM has a dubious tradition of New Years Eve gun firing. More bullets than brains...  :o
Just because something has been done and has not failed, doesn't mean it is good design.

bayview

   The Texas custom of firing your gun in the air at Midnight New Years Eve, will now get you a fine of $4,000 and at least a year in jail.

   There was a couple of incidents last year where a person was killed and a few people were hurt from the bullet returning back to earth.
    . . . said the focus was safety, not filling town coffers with permit money . . .


peternap

Quote from: bayviewps on January 01, 2009, 08:01:32 PM
   The Texas custom of firing your gun in the air at Midnight New Years Eve, will now get you a fine of $4,000 and at least a year in jail.

   There was a couple of incidents last year where a person was killed and a few people were hurt from the bullet returning back to earth.

While I don't condone shooting in the air, unless I plan to rain on someone..... ;D

I have fought this battle over half the internet and the facts always prove to be the facts. I don't know the specifics of the Texas woundings, but they were NOT the result of a bullet free falling back to earth at terminal velocity. Or at least not MY idea of being hurt. Stung, yes, maimed, no, killed, impossible unless they were hit in the eye or ear....or just died of fright  ;D ;D

IF THE SHOT WERE FIRED AT GREATER THAN A 50 DEGREE ANGLE, THE BULLET WOULD STRIKE THE EARTH AT TERMINAL VELOCITY.



In 1920 the U.S. Army Ordnance conducted a series of experiments to try and determine the velocity of falling bullets. The tests were performed from a platform in the middle of a lake near Miami, Florida. The platform was ten feet square and a thin sheet of armor plate was placed over the men firing the gun. The gun was held in a fixture that would allow the gun to be adjusted to bring the shots close to the platform. It was surmised that the sound of the falling bullets could be heard when they hit the water or the platform. They fired .30 caliber, 150 gr., Spitzer point bullets, at a velocity of 2,700 f.p.s. Using the bullet ballistic coefficient and elapsed time from firing until the bullet struck the water, they calculated that the bullet traveled 9,000 feet in 18 seconds and fell to earth in 31 seconds for a total time of 49 seconds.

As a comparison, the .30 caliber bullet fired in a vacuum at 2,700 f.p.s. would rise nearly 21.5 miles and require 84 seconds to make the ascent and another 84 seconds to make its descent. It would return with the same velocity that it left the gun. This gives you some idea of what air resistance or drag does to a bullet in flight.

Wind can have a dramatic effect on where a vertically fired bullet lands. A 5 mile per hour wind will displace the 150 gr. bullet about 365 ft based on the time it takes the bullet to make the round trip to earth. In addition the wind at ground level may be blowing in an entirely different direction than it is at 9,000 feet. It is no wonder that it is so difficult to determine where a falling bullet will land.

Out of the more than 500 shots fired from the test platform only 4 falling bullets struck the platform and one fell in the boat near the platform. One of the bullets striking the platform left a 1/16 inch deep mark in the soft pine board. The bullet struck base first.

Based on the results of these tests it was concluded that the bullet return velocity was about 300 f.p.s. For the 150 gr. bullet this corresponds to an energy of 30 foot pounds. Earlier the Army had determined that, on the average, it required 60 foot pounds of energy to produce a disabling wound. Based on this information, a falling 150 gr. service bullet would not be lethal, although it could produce a serious wound.

The exception would be for very heavy bullets, say 100 to 1000 pounds  c*
Major Julian Hatcher in his book Hatcher's Notebook estimates that a 12 inch shell weighing 1000 pounds and fired straight up would return with a speed of 1,300 to 1,400 feet per second and over 28 million foot pounds of striking energy.
These here is God's finest scupturings! And there ain't no laws for the brave ones! And there ain't no asylums for the crazy ones! And there ain't no churches, except for this right here!

bayview

#6
Quote from: peternap on January 01, 2009, 08:23:47 PM
IF THE SHOT WERE FIRED AT GREATER THAN A 50 DEGREE ANGLE, THE BULLET WOULD STRIKE THE EARTH AT TERMINAL VELOCITY.

   These bullets may have been fired less than a 50 degree angle,  I don't know.  Never the less, injuries and deaths have occured.

   A lady at Texas Motor Speedway that got hit by a bullet returning to earth.  Came right through the motorhomes roof.



   Yes, it was a 50 cal.

   The follow up:  The man shooting the rifle came forward . . . Was over two miles away.


   Heres another . . .  She ends up with a glass eye and a bullet that is not removable in her head.


Quote from Wikipedia, Falling-bullet injuries:

   People are injured, sometimes fatally, when bullets discharged into the air fall back down. The mortality rate among those struck by falling bullets is about 32%, compared with about 2 – 6% normally associated with gunshot wounds.[5] The higher mortality is related to the higher incidence of head wounds from falling bullets.  


Thats a 32 percent mortality rate !!!

   An older link from 1996:

   In the past few years, falling bullets from New Year's celebrations have killed at least a dozen people across the country, including a 50-year-old woman in Atlanta, an 11-year-old boy in Phoenix and a man in Fairfield, Calif., who was killed by a friend as they were taking turns firing a semiautomatic pistol into the air a year ago.

   In New Orleans two years ago, a woman visiting from Massachusetts was killed by a falling bullet that could have come from as far away as two miles, the police said. The bullet entered the top of the woman's skull, passed through her brain and lodged in her neck.




    . . . said the focus was safety, not filling town coffers with permit money . . .

peternap

Quote from: bayviewps on January 01, 2009, 09:25:11 PM
Quote from: peternap on January 01, 2009, 08:23:47 PM
IF THE SHOT WERE FIRED AT GREATER THAN A 50 DEGREE ANGLE, THE BULLET WOULD STRIKE THE EARTH AT TERMINAL VELOCITY.

   These bullets may have been fired less than a 50 degree angle,  I don't know.  Never the less, injuries and deaths have occured.

   A lady at Texas Motor Speedway that got hit by a bullet returning to earth.  Came right through the motorhomes roof.



   Yes, it was a 50 cal.

   The follow up:  The man shooting the rifle came forward . . . Was over two miles away.


   Heres another . . .  She ends up with a glass eye and a bullet that is not removable in her head.


Quote from Wikipedia, Falling-bullet injuries:

   People are injured, sometimes fatally, when bullets discharged into the air fall back down. The mortality rate among those struck by falling bullets is about 32%, compared with about 2 – 6% normally associated with gunshot wounds.[5] The higher mortality is related to the higher incidence of head wounds from falling bullets.  


Thats a 32 percent mortality rate !!!

   An older link from 1996:

   In the past few years, falling bullets from New Year's celebrations have killed at least a dozen people across the country, including a 50-year-old woman in Atlanta, an 11-year-old boy in Phoenix and a man in Fairfield, Calif., who was killed by a friend as they were taking turns firing a semiautomatic pistol into the air a year ago.

   In New Orleans two years ago, a woman visiting from Massachusetts was killed by a falling bullet that could have come from as far away as two miles, the police said. The bullet entered the top of the woman's skull, passed through her brain and lodged in her neck.






I really don't want to start an argument here....Usually when I argue this, it's with people I don't like :)

The press plays a big part in these things, the police don't help because they aren't ballistics experts (even though some think they are).
The motor home lady is a good example. At two miles, the bullet would be in free fall, even from a 50 BMG.

Here is a quote from her:
"I thought I was hit by lightning, the explosion was so loud," Jill King said from her hospital bed. "I still can feel it all. I still can hear that explosion."



A fifty BMG bullet may go through a motor home roof in free fall. Mine's pretty flimsy.......But anyone that has been in the target area of a sniper knows the sound of a bullet. Hard to describe, but is a hissing sound followed by the thud of impact. It's something you never really forget. If the man shooting is close enough, up to a mile, you hear the rifle report a few seconds later but is very light.

To hear an explosion, the bullet would have to be traveling faster than the speed of sound and that ain't happening at 2 miles. Period!

Somebody fired that shot nearby and it wasn't in the air either.

The police said:
The bullet is believed to be a rifle round and appears to have been fired from a long distance because it penetrated the roof at a slight angle, Henderson said.

Bullets fired in the air (Greater than a 50 degree angle) don't come home at a slight angle.

Every one of those stories can be dissected and dismissed as to shots being fired in the air.

Wikipedia's stats are so skewed they are laughable.

compared with about 2 – 6% normally associated with gunshot wounds.[5] The higher mortality is related to the higher incidence of head wounds from falling bullets.   
These here is God's finest scupturings! And there ain't no laws for the brave ones! And there ain't no asylums for the crazy ones! And there ain't no churches, except for this right here!

Ernest T. Bass

I would imagine the "explosion" she heard was the bullet hitting her roof?

Our family's homestead adventure blog; sharing the goodness and fun!


peternap

Quote from: Ernest T. Bass on January 01, 2009, 10:38:34 PM
I would imagine the "explosion" she heard was the bullet hitting her roof?

Could be Earnest, but it would be no louder than a rock hitting your windshield on the highway.
Sounds like her husband is an anti...and a crusader and the media just hyped it.

Still doesn't change the angle of entry.
These here is God's finest scupturings! And there ain't no laws for the brave ones! And there ain't no asylums for the crazy ones! And there ain't no churches, except for this right here!

bayview

   I'm not looking for an argument either. 

  One of the first rules I was taught when I got my first gun was to know what and where
I was shooting.  

  Gun ownership is for responsible people.  Hunting, target practice, home security, etc.  

  Do we need drunks on New Years Eve firing weapons in the air?

  Regardless of how these people where killed or injured, can we both agree that firing a
weapon recklessly is irresponsible?
    . . . said the focus was safety, not filling town coffers with permit money . . .

peternap

Quote from: bayviewps on January 01, 2009, 10:48:30 PM
  I'm not looking for an argument either.  

  One of the first rules I was taught when I got my first gun was to know what and where
I was shooting.  

  Gun ownership is for responsible people.  Hunting, target practice, home security, etc.  

  Do we need drunks on New Years Eve firing weapons in the air?

  Regardless of how these people where killed or injured, can we both agree that firing a
weapon recklessly is irresponsible?


You beat me to it. I was just about to post that I had gotten OT. (I do that once in a while) :)

NM and you are right, lots of irresponsible (I'm not so sure they're all new) gun owners out there.
The type of shooting I've heard all week, used to be confined to the cities. I hear the bababababap, more often in the burbs now. Thankfully, I do not hear it in the country......YET
These here is God's finest scupturings! And there ain't no laws for the brave ones! And there ain't no asylums for the crazy ones! And there ain't no churches, except for this right here!

desdawg

That is some pretty interesting info Peter. It is illegal to fire a round into the air here in AZ. I ran into a guy who got to to to jail for doing that. I don't know all of the details but someone must take it pretty seriously. I am with bayviewps if you are going to pull the trigger you ought to know where you are shooting. It just makes sense to me.
I have done so much with so little for so long that today I can do almost anything with absolutely nothing.

peternap

I am with bayviewps if you are going to pull the trigger you ought to know where you are shooting. It just makes sense to me.

We're all in agreement with that Des.

Unfortunately, laws are normally made by people who just want headlines. Let's assume we have a law that says, you can't shoot a rifle in the air. Does that eliminate shooting squirrels in trees, or bears in trees or worse yet, high angle shots at Sheep.

I just like to make sure that when someone looks at an incident, which may cause legislation to be introduced, that they look at the real world, not what the media says.
These here is God's finest scupturings! And there ain't no laws for the brave ones! And there ain't no asylums for the crazy ones! And there ain't no churches, except for this right here!


Redoverfarm

Most overlooked law is "firing within 500 feet of a dwelling".  I say overlooked until you have trouble with a neighbor and it becomes all too real. 

bayview

Quote from: peternap on January 01, 2009, 11:07:07 PM

Unfortunately, laws are normally made by people who just want headlines. Let's assume we have a law that says, you can't shoot a rifle in the air. Does that eliminate shooting squirrels in trees, or bears in trees or worse yet, high angle shots at Sheep.

I just like to make sure that when someone looks at an incident, which may cause legislation to be introduced, that they look at the real world, not what the media says.


  Missing a shot at squirrels, bears in trees would be accidental.  And you probably wouldn't be hunting in town.  The chance of injury would be minimal.

  I also, do not want any more laws controlling gun ownership.  ( . . . from my cold dead hand . . . )  

  Yep, media hype . . .  

  Was just watching Dallas news.  Lady with a bullet hole in the windshield.  The windshield took the entry energy but hit her friend in the passenger seat on the right shoulder.  Did not break the skin.  But left a bruise.

  They also showed a guy with a rifle emptying a 30 round clip off his apartment balcony.

  The gun-control advocates must be having a field day.

    . . . said the focus was safety, not filling town coffers with permit money . . .

NM_Shooter

Quote from: peternap on January 01, 2009, 11:07:07 PM


Unfortunately, laws are normally made by people who just want headlines. Let's assume we have a law that says, you can't shoot a rifle in the air. Does that eliminate shooting squirrels in trees, or bears in trees or worse yet, high angle shots at Sheep.



And even more unfortunately, too many laws are made out of fear and ignorance.  For example, we have some of the best dove hunting out to the West of Rio Rancho.  You get out there and there are not any houses for miles.  However, a new law says that no hunting is allowed on the west mesa until you get out to the Rio Puerco.  7.5 shot has a terminal range of about 300 yards, and a relatively few home owners made the county legislators nervous enough to ban hunting. 

I don't want the anti-gun folks to have any additional real or perceived issues that will further their cause.  Drunks firing guns into the air at midnight in a residential area are not exactly poster children for responsible gun ownership.  Plus, it wakes me up  :-\

-f-

"Officium Vacuus Auctorita"

MountainDon

First I want to say that I doubt that any of these idiots on New Years Eve or the Fourth of July ever really fire their guns pointing straight up. More than likely they fire them off at an angle; a steep angle to be sure, but an angle nonetheless. Why do I think that? I think that because they have just enough brainpower to believe if they fired straight up the bullet might come straight back down and hit them, that's why.

I also believe a bullet fired as straight up in the air will react different in its descent than a bullet fired at an angle.  I believe the bullet fired straight up will more than likely not descend with its pointy end first; it'll either tumble or fall on its side. That will cause it to have more air friction and that will slow the bullet down.

The bullet fired at an angle will continue to spin throughout its trajectory. It reaches a point of maximum altitude but retains forward momentum and spin. Unlike the vertically fired bullet it never stops moving, it only stops moving up. This bullet would most likely have a greater velocity and be traveling pointy end first when it returns to earth striking whatever is in its path. Those are the bullets that I believe retain sufficient energy; enough to injure or kill at great range.

We here in NM also have several laws that a person would fall afoul of if they fire a gun off like Frank and I have heard. We also have laws against driving drunk, and people still drive drunk, so what's to stop the criminally stupid from loosing off a few rounds? Hell, on New Years they probably fire their guns and then later drive home drunk through my neighborhood.

Just because something has been done and has not failed, doesn't mean it is good design.

Sonoran

Quote from: bayviewps on January 01, 2009, 09:25:11 PM

Thats a 32 percent mortality rate !!!



Statistics can be deceiving.  This could mean that out of the 9 people hit by bullets falling back to the earth, 3 were killed.  I'm sure it's more than 9...but still. And what about the victims...it would be important to examine them to see if they have anything in common. 

Also, 300 f.p.s. is not very fast.  Paintballers shoot between 270-300 fps.

Back to the statistics...the say crap like: Men are more likely to get into a an automobile accident then women.  A simple equation for this would be to take the number of women in accidents and divide that by the total population of women and the same for men.  If men come out to .01% more than women they will say, officially, men are more likely to get into an accident then women.
Individuality: You are all unique, just like everybody else.

Homegrown Tomatoes

I'm sure that the anti-gun guys are having a field day.  A few days after Christmas here, a kid was showing the new revolver his folks got him for Christmas to his best friend and the gun discharged and killed him.  (The owner, not the friend... I guess the other kid was checking it out and didn't realize it was loaded.)  Combined with the idiots shooting in the air for New Year's, it creates a ripe situation for the anti-gun crowd.