4 ms·

I'm pretty sure their calculations assume a perfect impossible arc. A bullet coming down is catching the wind and spinning wildly directing force in all direct

by donatj 4y ago

I'm pretty sure their calculations assume a perfect impossible arc. A bullet coming down is catching the wind and spinning wildly directing force in all directions and likely not getting anywhere near terminal velocity. It's like dropping a penny off of skyscraper. Mathematically it could kill somebody, but in all likelihood it's not going to. This has been shown experimentally time and time again.

autoexec 4y ago
> Mathematically it could kill somebody, but in all likelihood it's not going to. This has been shown experimentally time and time again. Yet somehow people keep dying tho don't they? Some quick examples: https://blogs.bcm.edu/2019/12/31/what-goes-up-must-come-down-the-dangers-of-celebratory-gunfire/ https://blogs.bcm.edu/2019/12/31/what-goes-up-must-come-down... https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/least-17-killed-celebratory-gunfire-kabul-reports-2021-09-04/ https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/least-17-killed-c... https://www.thetrace.org/2015/07/celebratory-gunfire-july-4-fireworks/ https://www.thetrace.org/2015/07/celebratory-gunfire-july-4-... Seems like the math says celebratory gunfire is a stupid practice that needlessly kills and injures people and endangers many others since serious accidents also occur in addition to the deaths and injury caused by falling bullets. Plenty of other things make loud noises without seriously hurting or killing people. I really don't see the point in defending this one.
- 1shooner 4y ago
  Math called something stupid? More stupid than flying in an airplane, or going to a hospital for surgery? Without a denominator, isn't the math basically silent on just how dangerous a given celebratory bullet is, relative to other behavior?
  - autoexec 4y ago
    It doesn't matter how dangerous it is vs flying in an airplane or having surgery since those activities serve a purpose and there aren't equivalent alternatives that don't involve risk. If everyone in the world suddenly stopped flying or getting surgery tomorrow deaths and suffering would increase. If everyone stopped recklessly and needlessly shooting firearms at the sky, deaths and suffering would decrease. It doesn't matter how many deaths celebratory bullets cause. Any number of deaths greater than zero is too many deaths because celebratory gunfire serves zero useful purpose beyond "I think it's fun and I care more about that than I do about human life and the suffering this activity causes" and alternative options exist for "fun" that don't cause deaths and injuries to innocent people. If people who were irresponsible with firearms only ever killed themselves I'd be much much less concerned, but the lives of others will always win out over someone who just wants to celebrate with their favorite way to make bang bang noises.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
- concordDance 4y ago
  > Seems like the math says celebratory gunfire is a stupid practice Math says no such thing. It can merely say how likely something is, human values are needed to conclude something is stupid.
EdwardDiego 4y ago
> A bullet coming down You know that every bullet follows a ballistic arc right? Cos you know, gravity being a thing. And there are specific tradeoffs that are made in gun and ammunition design to maximise stability and prevent tumbling (with the exception of rounds specifically intended to tumble, usually in close range anti-human weapons) So, the Federal 150gr .308 ammo I use, when zeroed for 200 yards, has two zero points, one at ~28 yards (I'm vaguely remembering this, so numbers may not be perfectly accurate), the other at 200 yards, if I've sighted it in right. At 100 yards, the pill will be about 1.5 inches above my imaginary horizontal firing line, at 300 yards, about 4" below. 400 yards, 11 inches, etc. It's not tumbling at those ranges, but it's very much descending, and very much lethal. I mean, that's why we use _rifles_, the rifling imparts aerodynamic stability, and that's also why I'm using 150gr, it's far more stable in windy conditions than a lighter pill. If you go higher in grain, you get more stability, but the arc is necessarily higher, which makes long range shot placement trickier. (Likewise, why people seeking flatter trajectories choose smaller pills with more powder behind them, my friend's .220 felt like a laser at 300 yards due to the flatness of it's trajectory) Hence why firing angle is very significant here.
- donatj 4y ago
  The air speed plus initial stability is what maintains stability. It's the entire reason guns are rifled, to give the bullet initial stability. If you fire straight up, there’s a point where it reaches an actual zero velocity before heading back down. It’s lost all its stability at this point. It's quite literally the same thing as dropping a bullet.
  - mrguyorama 4y ago
    Nearly no bullet fired during a celebration is fired directly "up" and even small deviations still end up with a ballistic trajectory that maintains stability.
  - EdwardDiego 4y ago
    > Hence why firing angle is very significant here

by donatj 4y ago

autoexec 4y ago

> Mathematically it could kill somebody, but in all likelihood it's not going to. This has been shown experimentally time and time again. Yet somehow people keep dying tho don't they? Some quick examples: https://blogs.bcm.edu/2019/12/31/what-goes-up-must-come-down-the-dangers-of-celebratory-gunfire/ https://blogs.bcm.edu/2019/12/31/what-goes-up-must-come-down... https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/least-17-killed-celebratory-gunfire-kabul-reports-2021-09-04/ https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/least-17-killed-c... https://www.thetrace.org/2015/07/celebratory-gunfire-july-4-fireworks/ https://www.thetrace.org/2015/07/celebratory-gunfire-july-4-... Seems like the math says celebratory gunfire is a stupid practice that needlessly kills and injures people and endangers many others since serious accidents also occur in addition to the deaths and injury caused by falling bullets. Plenty of other things make loud noises without seriously hurting or killing people. I really don't see the point in defending this one.

1shooner 4y ago
Math called something stupid? More stupid than flying in an airplane, or going to a hospital for surgery? Without a denominator, isn't the math basically silent on just how dangerous a given celebratory bullet is, relative to other behavior?
- autoexec 4y ago
  It doesn't matter how dangerous it is vs flying in an airplane or having surgery since those activities serve a purpose and there aren't equivalent alternatives that don't involve risk. If everyone in the world suddenly stopped flying or getting surgery tomorrow deaths and suffering would increase. If everyone stopped recklessly and needlessly shooting firearms at the sky, deaths and suffering would decrease. It doesn't matter how many deaths celebratory bullets cause. Any number of deaths greater than zero is too many deaths because celebratory gunfire serves zero useful purpose beyond "I think it's fun and I care more about that than I do about human life and the suffering this activity causes" and alternative options exist for "fun" that don't cause deaths and injuries to innocent people. If people who were irresponsible with firearms only ever killed themselves I'd be much much less concerned, but the lives of others will always win out over someone who just wants to celebrate with their favorite way to make bang bang noises.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
concordDance 4y ago
> Seems like the math says celebratory gunfire is a stupid practice Math says no such thing. It can merely say how likely something is, human values are needed to conclude something is stupid.

EdwardDiego 4y ago

> A bullet coming down You know that every bullet follows a ballistic arc right? Cos you know, gravity being a thing. And there are specific tradeoffs that are made in gun and ammunition design to maximise stability and prevent tumbling (with the exception of rounds specifically intended to tumble, usually in close range anti-human weapons) So, the Federal 150gr .308 ammo I use, when zeroed for 200 yards, has two zero points, one at ~28 yards (I'm vaguely remembering this, so numbers may not be perfectly accurate), the other at 200 yards, if I've sighted it in right. At 100 yards, the pill will be about 1.5 inches above my imaginary horizontal firing line, at 300 yards, about 4" below. 400 yards, 11 inches, etc. It's not tumbling at those ranges, but it's very much descending, and very much lethal. I mean, that's why we use _rifles_, the rifling imparts aerodynamic stability, and that's also why I'm using 150gr, it's far more stable in windy conditions than a lighter pill. If you go higher in grain, you get more stability, but the arc is necessarily higher, which makes long range shot placement trickier. (Likewise, why people seeking flatter trajectories choose smaller pills with more powder behind them, my friend's .220 felt like a laser at 300 yards due to the flatness of it's trajectory) Hence why firing angle is very significant here.

donatj 4y ago
The air speed plus initial stability is what maintains stability. It's the entire reason guns are rifled, to give the bullet initial stability. If you fire straight up, there’s a point where it reaches an actual zero velocity before heading back down. It’s lost all its stability at this point. It's quite literally the same thing as dropping a bullet.
- mrguyorama 4y ago
  Nearly no bullet fired during a celebration is fired directly "up" and even small deviations still end up with a ballistic trajectory that maintains stability.
- EdwardDiego 4y ago
  > Hence why firing angle is very significant here