Assaulted by a paint ball gun...

[cucamelsmd15]

Which figure is correct...the one that you quoted (60ft/lbs) or the one that wobbie quoted (100 ft/lbs)?

The 60ft/lbs is from 90 years ago steve, so based on developments since then, Ill take Robs. Anything else you wish to be wrong about steve?

 

[SkinnyRob]

Which figure is correct...the one that you quoted (60ft/lbs) or the one that wobbie quoted (100 ft/lbs)?

Its Rob, spell it right.

 

[stevebaby]

No more argument steve? Gonna argue how to fire a gun vertically now?

Your entire argument is based around that one thing...isn't it?

 

[SkinnyRob]

Your entire argument is based around that one thing...isn't it?

No, like I said, a falling bullet that doesnt have ballistic trajectory doesnt have the energy to kill. On the contrary, it would appear thats the basis if YOUR argument, now debunked

 

[stevebaby]

The 60ft/lbs is from 90 years ago steve, so based on developments since then, Ill take Robs. Anything else you wish to be wrong about steve?

So the figure that you originally quoted ...from the us army...was wrong?
Would that be correct?

 

[cucamelsmd15]

So the figure that you originally quoted ...from the us army...was wrong?
Would that be correct?

Flip flop, flip flop, flip flop steve Cant figure out if youre coming or going huh? All turned around and confused. Sad that it had to come to this Get back to the sauce steve, you dont know what youre doing here.

 

[SkinnyRob]

So the figure that you originally quoted ...from the us army...was wrong?
Would that be correct?

The one he quoted was from the 20's, without todays modern technology. The ones I quoted are the ones commonly held by ballistics experts today, as well as the Army and Navy.

 

[cucamelsmd15]

The one he quoted was from the 20's, without todays modern technology. The ones I quoted are the ones commonly held by ballistics experts today, as well as the Army and Navy.

Dang, steve is wrong again, imagine that

 

[stevebaby]

No, like I said, a falling bullet that doesnt have ballistic trajectory doesnt have the energy to kill. On the contrary, it would appear thats the basis if YOUR argument, now debunked

On the contrary.As I have stated right from the beginning of this argument (which started as a discussion about whether a bullet fired into the air...not exactly vertically...into the air..is potentially lethal),it is impossible to fire a bullet exactly vertical.It is absolutely impossible for someone to do so with a handheld weapon.
Any discussion based on a bullet fired exactly vertically is irrelevant.It has no bearing on the subject.It is a diversion.It is intellectually dishonest.
You know quite well that people have been killed by falling bullets.You have admitted that but only after overwhelming evidence was presented.Your first response to the thread was that it couldn't happen.
Ever since you were proven wrong on that point you have attempted to change the discussion to a theoretical argument which has nothing to do with the original question..."can a bullet fired into the air kill?".
You already know the answer...yes,it can.
If you're tired of arguing about it...nobody is forcing you to respond and nobody is forcing anyone else to read it.

 

[stevebaby]

Dang, steve is wrong again, imagine that

Umm...you were the one who quoted that figure.

 

[SkinnyRob]

On the contrary.As I have stated right from the beginning of this argument (which started as a discussion about whether a bullet fired into the air...not exactly vertically...into the air..is potentially lethal),it is impossible to fire a bullet exactly vertical.It is absolutely impossible for someone to do so with a handheld weapon.
Any discussion based on a bullet fired exactly vertically is irrelevant.It has no bearing on the subject.It is a diversion.It is intellectually dishonest.
You know quite well that people have been killed by falling bullets.You have admitted that but only after overwhelming evidence was presented.Your first response to the thread was that it couldn't happen.
Ever since you were proven wrong on that point you have attempted to change the discussion to a theoretical argument which has nothing to do with the original question..."can a bullet fired into the air kill?".
You already know the answer...yes,it can.
If you're tired of arguing about it...nobody is forcing you to respond and nobody is forcing anyone else to read it.

Wrong, I said bullets that maintained ballistic trajectory can kill. This post, which mitosis replied to, started it all. I replied to mitosis reply to this specific post, referencing bullets fired straight up:

Physics of shooting straight up: the speed lost as the bullet slows on its path upward is regained as it falls back down to earth (accelaration due to gravity). The bullet would actually hit the ground with the same force as if you had shot it directly into the ground, if that makes any sense. Not as dangerous as pointing a gun at someone, but I'd hate to be dodging my own warning shots... Wouldn't that be ironic?

So, its not about bullets fired straight up then? Did you read the post? Have you read the thread? Are you saying that someone cant extend their forearm fully, and point the barrel of a gun straight up? You have already said that Newton and physics were wrong, no?

People have been killed by bullets shot into the air, 1.5 miles away or more. Those bullets maintain their ballistic trajectory. Which part about that dont you understand? Are you really that confused as to what it takes for a bullet to maintain its trajectory? If youve ever shot a gun in your lifetime, then you should be able to answer that question.

Ive not changed the argument, that would lie at the feet of you. Youve tried to change the argument into firing a bullet vertically, how the first law of physics doesnt apply, how a degree stating Doctor does not confer the title of Doctor, how a military ballistics test went in the 20's and on and on.

Basically, all you have done is dodge the fact, or divert attention away from the fact that I proved you wrong, that a bullet fired straight up that does not maintain its ballistic trajectory does not possess the kinetic energy required for penetration, and I backed this statement with physics and facts from the US Navy and Army, not to mention commonly held facts from ballistics experts such as myself. If there is anyone who is intellectually dishonest here, it is you stevebaby. You post links that you dont read (and links that dont work, by the way), you change the subject to divert conversation away from the subject matter, and you twist other peoples words to say what you want them to say, or to something that you think will support your argument.

So, what will you change the argument to now, stevebaby? Will you reply to my post, and say that you havent changed your argument (which you have) or that you havent diverted the argument (which you have), or that you havent been proven wrong repeatedly (which you have). Im still waiting on a response to my challenge to you a few pages back, which you havent been man enough to step up to, and put forth any facts.

I think we can all agree here stevebaby, that its you who should drop the argument and stop reading the thread. You have accomplished nothing here but misinformation, diversion, and promoting your own ignorance.

 

[stevebaby]

If you do carry a gun for protection, you could pull it out and shot about three warning shots into the air. I bet they would be louder than the kids paintball gun, and would get his attention quickly. Now with this idea, you might get hit more times, but at least when the kid does stop, he wouldn't have anywhere to go, and the cops could come, and you could press charges. See, no one gets hurt.

But you might need an awfully load gun. Oh well.

--Is it illegal to fire warning shots into the air? I suppose it wouldn't be as dangerous as pointing a gun at someone, and telling them to stop, since there is always a chance of a freak discharge.


Anyways it definitley sucks, and I hope you catch them. Little F**king rats!

Nope.

 

[SkinnyRob]

Nope.

Yep. That post is about firing into the air as warning shots. Not a word said about killing.

Again, for your reading pleasure:

Physics of shooting straight up: the speed lost as the bullet slows on its path upward is regained as it falls back down to earth (accelaration due to gravity). The bullet would actually hit the ground with the same force as if you had shot it directly into the ground, if that makes any sense. Not as dangerous as pointing a gun at someone, but I'd hate to be dodging my own warning shots... Wouldn't that be ironic?

And the reply by mitosis:

Muzzle velocity would be greater than terminal velocity when the projectile falls back to earth.

So the impact on the ground would be less than if you fired the bullet into the ground.

Still enough to kill someone tho'.

There it is in writing stevebaby. Are you going to deny that too?

 

[stevebaby]

No,you cannot fire a hand-held weapon exactly straight.
If it was possible,the us army would not have had to set up a fixture on a raft to fire test shots,would they?
Nope,I didn't contradict Newton in any way.Neither did I say that physics was wrong either.
I very much doubt that caca has a degree of any sort.His lack of education shows in his writing style.
caca quoted the us army test.
I haven't twisted anybody's words at all.The fact is,I have repeatedly reposted your own words to prove how you and caca have both contradicted yourselves and each other.
Stating that you carried a gun "24hours a day,7days a week for almost 20 years" is a pretty good example of some of the nonsense that you have posted.
I've won one six-pack out of this thread...and I'm going to win another!

 

[cucamelsmd15]

No,you cannot fire a hand-held weapon exactly straight.
If it was possible,the us army would not have had to set up a fixture on a raft to fire test shots,would they?
Nope,I didn't contradict Newton in any way.Neither did I say that physics was wrong either.
I very much doubt that caca has a degree of any sort.His lack of education shows in his writing style.
caca quoted the us army test.
I haven't twisted anybody's words at all.The fact is,I have repeatedly reposted your own words to prove how you and caca have both contradicted yourselves and each other.
Stating that you carried a gun "24hours a day,7days a week for almost 20 years" is a pretty good example of some of the nonsense that you have posted.
I've won one six-pack out of this thread...and I'm going to win another!

Good steve, you need to get back on the sauce

Ive got two degrees, which is more than youll ever have, especially at a Doctor level Thanks for playing. You did a nice job of copping out, and roundaboutly admitting youre wrong.

SkinnyRob=1
stevebaby= 0, minus too many to count for your numerous errors.

 

[SkinnyRob]

No,you cannot fire a hand-held weapon exactly straight.
If it was possible,the us army would not have had to set up a fixture on a raft to fire test shots,would they?
Nope,I didn't contradict Newton in any way.Neither did I say that physics was wrong either.
I very much doubt that caca has a degree of any sort.His lack of education shows in his writing style.
caca quoted the us army test.
I haven't twisted anybody's words at all.The fact is,I have repeatedly reposted your own words to prove how you and caca have both contradicted yourselves and each other.
Stating that you carried a gun "24hours a day,7days a week for almost 20 years" is a pretty good example of some of the nonsense that you have posted.
I've won one six-pack out of this thread...and I'm going to win another!

You said that a bullet will still be spinning when it hits the ground, which is an obvious contradiction to Newton, and the laws of physics. They also set up an apparatus so they could be clear of the firearm when testing, and under the shelter. That should be fairly obvious.

We are not talking about wether cucamelsmd15 has a Doctor degree or not. Youre trying to divert attention away from the subject. You cant even put together a coherent argument. If you read the posts that have been between you, I, and cucamelsmd15, you will see that both cucamelsmd15 and I agree on the same points, which leaves you the lone man standing.

By the way, I can obviously tell you know nothing about guns, physics, or the US Marines, and that you obviously lack higher education, or all this would be apparent. I carried a gun for almost 20 years in the Marines, be it a sidearm, or an M-16, or in my later days making the transition to the M4. I also headed up ballistic studies on bullets fired into walls, doors, cement, water and other mediums to see what round would be most effective for our troops in close quarters combat.

You are obviously ignorant, or incapable of admitting the truth, which is you are wrong, and I called you and mitosis on your gross information, or lack thereof. You dont have to respond to this post, in fact, Id rather you not. Im tired of repeating myself, and the facts so you can look more like a fool. Go drink your beer. If all you accomplished was to make yourself look like a fool, the beer will certainly help your cause.

 

[stevebaby]

Good steve, you need to get back on the sauce

Ive got two degrees, which is more than youll ever have, especially at a Doctor level Thanks for playing. You did a nice job of copping out, and roundaboutly admitting youre wrong.

SkinnyRob=1
stevebaby= 0, minus too many to count for your numerous errors.

"roundaboutly"?
Is that a new word?
"youll"?
"youre"?
Do you know what this is " ' "?
It's called...an apostrophe.
You can't spell,you can't punctuate,you can't formulate an argument and when your mistakes are pointed out you respond like a screechy,pissy little girl.
2 degrees? Nah,********...just like all the ******** you posted about having sponsors (but you still buy all your own gear,don't you?)
doctor? ...Mmwahahahahaha!

 

[stevebaby]

You said that a bullet will still be spinning when it hits the ground, which is an obvious contradiction to Newton, and the laws of physics. They also set up an apparatus so they could be clear of the firearm when testing, and under the shelter. That should be fairly obvious.

We are not talking about wether cucamelsmd15 has a Doctor degree or not. Youre trying to divert attention away from the subject. You cant even put together a coherent argument. If you read the posts that have been between you, I, and cucamelsmd15, you will see that both cucamelsmd15 and I agree on the same points, which leaves you the lone man standing.

By the way, I can obviously tell you know nothing about guns, physics, or the US Marines, and that you obviously lack higher education, or all this would be apparent. I carried a gun for almost 20 years in the Marines, be it a sidearm, or an M-16, or in my later days making the transition to the M4. I also headed up ballistic studies on bullets fired into walls, doors, cement, water and other mediums to see what round would be most effective for our troops in close quarters combat.

You are obviously ignorant, or incapable of admitting the truth, which is you are wrong, and I called you and mitosis on your gross information, or lack thereof. You dont have to respond to this post, in fact, Id rather you not. Im tired of repeating myself, and the facts so you can look more like a fool. Go drink your beer. If all you accomplished was to make yourself look like a fool, the beer will certainly help your cause.

Ummm....why did they have an armoured roof on that shelter?
The falling bullets couldn't kill them...right?

 

[cucamelsmd15]

"roundaboutly"?
Is that a new word?
"youll"?
"youre"?
Do you know what this is " ' "?
It's called...an apostrophe.
You can't spell,you can't punctuate,you can't formulate an argument and when your mistakes are pointed out you respond like a screechy,pissy little girl.
2 degrees? Nah,********...just like all the ******** you posted about having sponsors (but you still buy all your own gear,don't you?)
doctor? ...Mmwahahahahaha!

Shut the hell up steve, seriously. Yes, I have two degrees. BS Pharmaceutical Sciences, Doctor of Pharmacy, and working on a PhD. Any other questions?

 

[cucamelsmd15]

Ummm....why did they have an armoured roof on that shelter?
The falling bullets couldn't kill them...right?

Flip flop, flip flop, flip flop, dodge the argument steve, dodge it. Cant accept youre wrong, huh? Really steve, get back on the sauce. Youre looking more like an idiot.