... http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_BUGGY_SHOOTING_DEATH?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME...

--
Sincerely,

Hobie

A horrible loss for that family. Seems people will never learn.

into the air. South Phoenix sounds like a war zone on 4th of July, 5th of May and new years... We have a onerous law in AZ because of a young gal allegedly killed by this type of nonsense.

--
Of the Troops & For the Troops

..."Why not just shoot into the ground?" I appreciate a gal with common sense.

The myth that shooting up in the air is dangerous is just a myth. This myth has been debunked so many times that the only thing funny about it is how many people still believe it. Hatcher debunked the myth. Mythbusters debunked the myth. But it still persists.

Sure if you shoot "up in the air" like you were shooting a bird off of your neighbor's roof, that bullet will travel a long way and can damage whatever it hits. Whether a black powder bullet can go 1.5 miles is a good question though. But if you shoot up in the air as in straight up, then you won't hurt anything except possibly a bird or airplane if they are extremely unlucky.

I've been suspicious that some lawbreakers use occasions such as new year's to take care of business. Shoot one of their enemies during a time when people are known to "shoot up in the air" and then claim that he was killed by a falling bullet.

One of the rules of safe shooting says to know your backstop, and shooting up in the air clearly violates this rule. Shooting anywhere outside in a populated area or incorporated area is stupid because you're going to face legal consequences.

In the article it sounds like the shooting was an accident, and the tragic injury of someone 1.5 miles away means that the person was extremely unlucky.

Didn't Mythbusters do a segment on this topic? They determined that a 30-06 bullet fired straight up would have a low enough velocity coming back down that it would be unlikely to kill someone.

There is a difference to shooting straight up into the air and just shooting out and away into nowhere. Supposedly the fellow was "cleaning" his gun and as a first step discharged it into the "air" but obviously not straight up (if the other is at all true) as the bullet traveled 1.5 miles (give or take). And while I don't really believe in luck, this young woman was extremely unfortunate (or not, depending on how you look at it). But, let's face it, the shooter is at best a putz. He is directly responsible for needlessly killing a person. If he had any sense he would have fired into a safe place in the ground. He did not.

BTW, most people don't have a means of shooting plumb so most shots are angled. If you watch those films where people are shooting "into the air"...

--
Sincerely,

Hobie

pointed straight up.

--
Of the Troops & For the Troops

Uh..not so fast. A bullet falling straight down from several thousand feet will do serious damage or kill a human being if it hits them.

Years ago, the army developed a little missile code named "Lazy Dog". This little thing looked like a bomb about an inch long with stabilizing fins. Thousands could be dropped from air planes at one time. If a soldier on the ground was struck with one of these things in the head, it would go all the way through his body and a foot or two into the ground.

The army dropped the idea, because even though dropped in quantity, the dispersal was go great that it was not effective on troops. Truly a hit and miss more situation. High explosives was much more effective.

When Commandant of Frankfort Arsenal General Hatcher conducted experiments on firing a 30-06 round straight up. It landed a distance from the rifle when it came back down due to the rotation of the earth. Hatcher and crew barricaded themselves for protection from the falling bullet.

As to Myth Busters , that is a TV program and they can't shoot a cannon very well either.

In my part of the world, it is common practice for Mexican folks to fire guns in the air to celebrate New Years and 4th of July. Every year some of them things fall onto houses and go through the roofs. Over the years a few people have been hurt and one young girl killed by this stupid practice.

Uh..not so fast. A bullet falling straight down from several thousand feet will do serious damage or kill a human being if it hits them.

This was not what Gen. Hatcher discovered in his tests. He fired .30-06 straight up and the falling bullets could barely dent a wooden dock or a metal bucket. He concluded that they would not pose a danger to troops. He did further calculations and discovered of course that heavier projectiles would fall faster and do greater damage. Small arms projectiles would fall at just a few hundred feet per second but by the time you get to a 5" canon shell it will fall at supersonic velocity.

I think when personal injuries are attributed to something like this, then either the bullets were fired more horizontal than vertical, or there is more to the story than what is being told.

Found a 9mm FMJ stuck in my roof one time. Penetrated just about the length of the bullet, through two layers of asphalt shingles. Looked like it came almost straight down. I would say that if it had hit someone on the bare head it would have broken the skin and raised a heck of a welt, but probably not have been fatal.

Any object falling in air at sea level accelerates at almost exactly 32 feet per second squared up to terminal velocity. Terminal velocity is the maximum speed attained by an object falling in whatever medium it's falling through. Terminal velocity is a factor of the aerodynamic (hydrodynamic, if the medium is liquid) drag in ratio to the air density or a liquids viscosity through which the object is falling.
Example: It takes about 26 horsepower to propel an mid size unfaired motorcycle 100 MPH. The same bike requires about 200 horsepower to go 200 mph, a fully enclosed land speed record Bonneville salt flats bike requires almost 800 horsepower to touch 300 MPH.
It all has to do with resistance and available force Mike C