Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Five-Year-Old Boy Dies After Being Struck By Stray Bullet (Which was fired by cops)
ktul ^ | 8-5-07

Posted on 08/05/2007 6:29:48 AM PDT by LouAvul

Noble, Oklahoma - A five-year-old boy is dead after a tragic mistake in which a stray bullet, meant to kill a snake, struck the boy.

It happened Friday night in Noble, about 100 miles southwest of Tulsa in Cleveland County. Officers had responded to a rural area after a family called about a snake.

Noble City Manager Bob Wade says the snake was apparently in the rafters of a home and that officers decided to shoot the snake. But, when they did so, they later heard the boy screaming.

The boy, who was apparently fishing at a nearby pond, had been struck by the gunfire. The boy was airlifted to a nearby hospital, but was pronounced dead. He was identified Saturday evening as Austin Haley.

Noble City Manager Bob Wade says he is 'devastated' by the tragedy. Meanwhile, the officer who fired the shots has been placed on routine administrative leave while the investigation continues.


TOPICS: Culture/Society
KEYWORDS: bang; banglist; donutwatch; leo
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-120 next last
To: Dave in Eugene of all places
It's not mass, but energy, I think you mean.

Kinetic energy is mass times speed squared. So the mass is relevant, especially as Lou specified, *at terminal velocity.* Plus, a projectile with a higher inertial mass has more oomph to overcome wind resistance, and will therefore have a higher terminal velocity.

Mythbusters tested the falling bullet myth with everything from a .22 to a 9mm to a 30-06 (M1, I think); I wouldn't like to be hit on the head with a falling .50 cal. It might not be lethal, but I bet it would leave a mark.

In simpler terms, if you're on the sidewalk and I'm gonna drop something on your head from five stories up, would you prefer a tennis ball or a bowling ball?

51 posted on 08/05/2007 9:04:44 AM PDT by ReignOfError (`)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: NittanyLion

Looking at how often I’ve seen stories get reported wrong by TV news in Oklahoma I’d lean towards the birdhouse version of the story. The Oklahoman gets stories wrong too, but they tend to spend more time trying to get the facts than the TV guys do.


52 posted on 08/05/2007 9:06:21 AM PDT by digitalbrownshirt (http://digitalbrownshirt.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: EndWelfareToday
With all due respect you are the one who doesn't know what you are talking about.

Terminal velocity is terminal. No way a grain of sand falling straight down cause ANY injury. YOU are disputing thousands of physics lectures going back hundreds of years. Mythbusters spent lots of time on both these myths and found no credible scientific EVIDENCE in either case They are just the latest with electronic transmission. They even revisited the bullet one because of mail pressure from people like you who have a basic understanding of physics.

From WIKI:

As an object accelerates downwards due to gravity, the drag produced by the passing through a fluid medium, (usually air), increases. At a particular speed, the drag force produced will be equal to the downward force, mostly the weight (mg), of the object. Eventually, it plummets at a constant speed called terminal velocity. Terminal velocity varies directly with the ratio of drag to mass. More drag means slower terminal velocity. Increased mass means higher terminal velocity. An object moving downwards at greater than terminal velocity (for example because it was affected by a force downward or it fell from a thinner part of the atmosphere or it changed shape) will slow until it reaches terminal velocity. For example, the terminal velocity of a skydiver in a normal free-fall position with a closed parachute is about 195 km/h (120 mph or 54 m/s). This velocity is the asymptotic limiting value of the acceleration process, since the effective forces on the body more and more closely balance each other as it is approached. In this example, a speed of 50% of terminal velocity is reached after only about 3 seconds, while it takes 8 seconds to reach 90%, 15 seconds to reach 99% and so on.

Now before you call me ignorant again. PROVE IT with scientific EVIDENCE. Where does your physics come from Wal-Mart?

53 posted on 08/05/2007 9:10:05 AM PDT by mad_as_he$$ (Beware of the seminar poster.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: All

The Daily Oklahoman version contains quotes from many of the people involved, including the grandfather that was with the boy when he was killed by the second shot. The first one hit the water in front of the boat dock they were fishing from. It sounds like the bird house was hanging from a rafter on the outside of the house. The policeman might have been on the porch shooting down or across at it. The pond was downhill from the house.


54 posted on 08/05/2007 9:15:52 AM PDT by digitalbrownshirt (http://digitalbrownshirt.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: mad_as_he$$
My assessment stands mad_as_he$$. There is no reason for me to have to prove squat to you. You are the one that claims bullets travel in arches, a bullet falling from the ski cannot kill or injure, etc. yet it is I that cited a law that is backed up by "scientific" evidence to support my position.
If anyone were to consider your brand of physics anything more than junk science they would have to admit (after first admitting that it exists) that global warming is Bush's fault.
55 posted on 08/05/2007 9:19:17 AM PDT by EndWelfareToday (Live free and keep what you earn. - Tancredo or Hunter '08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Burkean
The grandfather also said the bullet went into the back of the boy’s head and out his forehead. I don’t know as much about guns as others, but that doesn’t sound like it’s likely to be a ricochet. It sounds like a straight shot.
Doesn't sound like he'd be screaming after getting shot either. If he was doing any screaming like the article claims then it was probably after the first shot missed him and before the second shot killed him.
56 posted on 08/05/2007 9:19:40 AM PDT by digitalbrownshirt (http://digitalbrownshirt.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: EndWelfareToday
Here in Tucson, AZ it is illegal to fire your guns into the air precisely for the reason this little boy has tragically died. Over the years several people here in Tucson have died or been severely injured because of lead falling from the sky after morons found it fun and funny to shoot rounds into the air during their 4th of July, Cinco de Mayo and other celebrations.

Bullets "flying through the sky," not "falling from the sky."

The statement that a falling bullet lacks the energy to be lethal is like advice from Microsoft technical support -- technically accurate but more or less useless. [*] Technically correct because a falling slug simply does not have enough kinetic energy to be lethal. More or less useless because the kind of stupid drunken yahoos who treat firearms as party noisemakers are unlikely to hang a plumb bob and be careful to fire straight up.

A few degrees off plumb, and you're no longer talking about something going up and faling down -- you're talking about something following a ballistically-stable arc, and that's a whole 'nother animal. They can and do kill.

* - Semi-old joke: A helicopter pilot is surprised by a sudden fog bank and a sudden instrument failure. Flying slowly and looking for a safe spot to land, he sees a high-rise with people inside. Digging around in the back, the passenger grabs a piece of poster board and a marker (just go with it), and writes, WHERE ARE WE?

The people in the building signal that they have received the message, wheel over a white board, and write on it 'YOU ARE IN A HELICOPTER."

The pilot nods, flicks the controls, and has the copter safely on the ground five minutes later. The stunned passenger asks, "how did you do that?" The pilot answers, "The folks in the building gave us an answer that was completely correct and utterly useless. From that, I knew we had to be on the Microsoft campus, and the Redmond airport is a few miles due east of there."

(I don't even know if there's really a Redmond airport, so folks who know Washington State geography, please take it easy on me.)

57 posted on 08/05/2007 9:21:53 AM PDT by ReignOfError (`)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: LouAvul

“Shannon’s law refers to specific changes in Arizona statutes, enacted in 2000, making it a felony offense to discharge firearms randomly into the air, resulting in injury or death.”

Phoenix had a terrible problem with celebratory gunfire on holidays. The last year before this law was passed I was afraid to go outside on New Years Eve. You’d have thought Saddam and his army lived in Phoenix.


58 posted on 08/05/2007 9:28:48 AM PDT by donna (The United States Constitution and the Koran are mutually exclusive.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: B4Ranch
If you as a civilian had done the same thing, would you be at fault? Yes or no?

Civil liability? Probably, and definitely a strong enough case that a judge or jury should hear the case. Criminally liable? Iffy. Negligent manslaughter at most, and that would depend on whether the court decides the harm was directly foreseeable. I wouldn't have fired under those circumstances, but I don't base my judgment on the least the law requires.

It's a bit different for a law enforcement officer. They have limited immunity against such claims -- we ask them to make life-and-death decisions in a split-second, and cover their butts in return.

For this cop, the question is whether he acted within state or department standards. If not, he could be liable. If so, and if the courts decide the standards are to blame, then it's the folks who set the standards who are liable.

An example of this is the choke hold. It used to be a standard police technique, and it was the department, not the cop, liable if someone happened to croak. Now, most (if not all) departments have stopped using it, the academies don't teach it, and if a cop kills someone with a choke hold, it's his own personal ass on the line. Though the department will probably be sued anyway.

59 posted on 08/05/2007 9:36:40 AM PDT by ReignOfError (`)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: ReignOfError
you're talking about something following a ballistically-stable arc, and that's a whole 'nother animal. They can and do kill.

True but it really depends on your position on the arc. If you were close to the end of the arc you could, theoretically, catch the bullet in your hand since it's speed is approaching zero.

60 posted on 08/05/2007 9:43:24 AM PDT by org.whodat (What's the difference between a Democrat and a republican????)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: EndWelfareToday
Sorry mad_as_he$$ but you don’t know what you are talking about. A grain of sand can be “lethal” if it hits the right person in the right place.

But is that reasonably foreseeable?

"I shot an arrow into the air/It came to Earth I know not where."

It is irresponsible to needlessly launch a lethal projectile without knowing where it will stop. There was no imminent threat to life to justify shooting; even if the snake was venomous, if there was time for a cop to take potshots at it, there was time to pull everyone out of range and wait for someone to show up with a stick or a machete and the skill to use it. The rest is cowboy BS.

61 posted on 08/05/2007 9:46:16 AM PDT by ReignOfError (`)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: LouAvul

If any douchebag says “I feel sorry for the officers”, I’m going to puke.


62 posted on 08/05/2007 9:50:27 AM PDT by Pencil
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat
...you could, theoretically, catch the bullet in your hand since it's speed is approaching zero.

Not me, I've already had surgery on one hand.

63 posted on 08/05/2007 9:54:07 AM PDT by Max in Utah (O Great and Benevolent Rulers of America: WHERE'S OUR FENCE?!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat
True but it really depends on your position on the arc. If you were close to the end of the arc you could, theoretically, catch the bullet in your hand since it's speed is approaching zero.

Or in your teeth. You look much cooler that way.

Only under ideal circumstances; a bullet will almost always be pulled to the ground by gravity long before it slows down that much, assuming that it doesn't hit anything else along the way.

As I posted elsewhere on the thread, "one in a million" does not mean impossible. Fire millions of rounds into the air, and "one in a million," its statistical validity aside, isn't a measure of whether something will happen, but how often.

64 posted on 08/05/2007 9:56:23 AM PDT by ReignOfError (`)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: LouAvul
This is what my Grandma used to kill snakes.

No bullets required!

65 posted on 08/05/2007 9:56:42 AM PDT by Tamar1973 (Riding the Korean Wave, one BYJ movie at a time! (http://www.byj.co.kr))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: digitalbrownshirt

The boy wasn’t the one who was screaming, it was the grandfather.
The first shot didn’t hit anything, including the snake. The second shot hit and killed the snake and went on to pass through the boy’s head and immediately kill him.


66 posted on 08/05/2007 9:58:46 AM PDT by Burkean
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: EndWelfareToday
Ok there sparky - we will start running the world on your brand of Physics. IF YOU manage to actually READ and comprehend what I wrote I DID say that bullets traveling in arcs can injury someone - very clearly. I DID NOT agree with your position on bullets falling straight down.

FWIW I am not the only one who claims this. Guys with names Einstein and Bohr also believe as I do.

Nice try with the global warning stunt. Bring out the boogeyman when you can't make your case.

You were the one that made the crack about the not believing the physics teacher - not me.

67 posted on 08/05/2007 10:03:43 AM PDT by mad_as_he$$ (Beware of the seminar poster.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: Burkean
The first shot didn’t hit anything, including the snake. The second shot hit and killed the snake and went on to pass through the boy’s head and immediately kill him.

Oh, please. You're pretending there weren't seventeen shots from the grassy knoll.

68 posted on 08/05/2007 10:07:04 AM PDT by ReignOfError (`)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: LouAvul

A rake or a hoe would have done nicely. The advantage of the hoe is that you can cut the snake into two pieces with one down swing.


69 posted on 08/05/2007 10:07:17 AM PDT by em2vn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LouAvul
This is the caliber and type of load that should have been used. It's effective at close range against small pests but the very small #12 pellets lose velocity quickly at longer range. I doubt it would penetrate skin at 50 ft. distance.


70 posted on 08/05/2007 10:08:16 AM PDT by Max in Utah (O Great and Benevolent Rulers of America: WHERE'S OUR FENCE?!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ReignOfError

Naw, there were two shots, that’s all. The first shot that this Barney Fife like character shot went into the water that the old man and his grandson were standing by. At that point the old man says he started yelling that there were people down there and he grabbed his grandson and held him close. Unfortunately that did no good because the second shot hit not only its target, the snake, but also the boy.


71 posted on 08/05/2007 10:19:03 AM PDT by Burkean
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: ReignOfError

How low of a degee do you claim you can shoot a gun and catch a bullet in your hand without injury?


72 posted on 08/05/2007 10:39:41 AM PDT by Shooter 2.5 (NRA - Hunter '08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Pencil

I feel sorry for all kinds of sinners, that doesn’t mean they shouldn’t get punished by the law.


73 posted on 08/05/2007 10:59:08 AM PDT by donna (The United States Constitution and the Koran are mutually exclusive.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: ReignOfError

As a public employee authorized to carry a firearm, cops are taught all of the safety issuses. I am positive this officer was taught to be aware of the backstop when he prepares to fire a round. If the backstop is a group of people then the lowest IQ possible would be aware what the consequences are if he misses the target or if the bullet passes through the target.

To think that this man would fire his weapon into the air without a solid backstop behind the trajectory belittles the intellingence of every officer I know. There was no immediate danger and therefore no reason to fire the weapon in an unsafe manner.

I would sue him, the department, the city and any firearms intructors who gave the man a passing grade.

I have allowed deer to continue walking because I wasn’t 100% positive that there wasn’t another hunter beyond the bushes that I couldn’t see through. Not knowing the possible consequences was enough to stop me. But then I was thinking and this man wasn’t.


74 posted on 08/05/2007 11:01:48 AM PDT by B4Ranch ( "Freedom is not free, but don't worry the U.S. Marine Corps will pay most of your share.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: ReignOfError
It's a bit different for a law enforcement officer. They have limited immunity against such claims -- we ask them to make life-and-death decisions in a split-second, and cover their butts in return.

I have been through many law enforcement academy firearms certifications. I have repeatedly been instructed that once a bullet leaves the muzzle, you can not call it back. The person firing the round is responsible for its action until its' energy is spent.

Boiler plate Force Continuum training would have told these officers that this was far from a life or death situation that required a deadly force answer. Especially with the chance that it would put innocent bystanders at risk.

For this cop, the question is whether he acted within state or department standards. If not, he could be liable. If so, and if the courts decide the standards are to blame, then it's the folks who set the standards who are liable.

Tennessee vs. Garner showed that State Law and Department Policy is not always the final answer on the subject. Without being familiar with this state's law, I'd also guess that this scenario could be prosecuted criminally.

75 posted on 08/05/2007 11:10:16 AM PDT by Ghengis (Of course freedom is free. If it wasn't, it would be called expensivedom. ~Cindy Sheehan 11/11/06)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat

>If you were close to the end of the arc you could, theoretically, catch the bullet in your hand since it’s speed is approaching zero.<

We used to have some mortarmen whom you would love to play catch with.


76 posted on 08/05/2007 11:11:26 AM PDT by B4Ranch ( "Freedom is not free, but don't worry the U.S. Marine Corps will pay most of your share.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: B4Ranch
We used to have some mortarmen whom you would love to play catch with.

Since you don't seem to know the difference between a bullet and a mortar why bother. Same applies to the word theoretically, which has a meaning.

77 posted on 08/05/2007 11:52:17 AM PDT by org.whodat (What's the difference between a Democrat and a republican????)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: B4Ranch

“If you as a civilian had done the same thing, would you be at fault? Yes or no?”

Mother raised no fools. Your question is therefore not applicable to me. And, I have shot loads for my Redhawk.

If the snake was not an immediate threat to human health or life, the cop would seem to have, as they say in the poultry industry, ‘clucked up’ seriously.


78 posted on 08/05/2007 12:07:55 PM PDT by GladesGuru (In a society predicated upon freedom, it is essential to examine principle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Burkean

I know he wasn’t screaming, I was pointing out that the article itself says they heard the boy screaming. That’s a good indication that somebody isn’t telling the truth (either the reporter or the police).


79 posted on 08/05/2007 12:24:44 PM PDT by digitalbrownshirt (http://digitalbrownshirt.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: Burkean

I was kidding. Dig at conspiracy theorists. I don’t even know if this house had a grassy knoll.


80 posted on 08/05/2007 12:30:58 PM PDT by ReignOfError (`)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: 353FMG
I hope that you are not saying that the mass of the bullet changes at terminal velocity.

Of course not. Newton's second law says the Force is equal to the mass times the acceleration.

A bullet in freefall would be falling at terminal velocity, whatever that might be given the circumstances.

Therefore the deciding factor would be the mass of the bullet.

F=MA

81 posted on 08/05/2007 12:31:59 PM PDT by LouAvul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Shooter 2.5
How low of a degee do you claim you can shoot a gun and catch a bullet in your hand without injury?

Damned it I know. That's way too much math for this poli sci major. So I'll just skip the math and class it as "theoretically possible, but ain't gonna happen."

82 posted on 08/05/2007 12:33:12 PM PDT by ReignOfError (`)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: B4Ranch
We used to have some mortarmen whom you would love to play catch with.

A bullet is an inert mass. Mortar rounds tend to be filled with stuff what goes boom. Not the same thing at all.

Now, if you're using mortar tubes to fire tennis balls -- something you can do with PVC pipe and hair spray as propellant if you're bored next weekend -- give me an outfielder's glove, and that could be a game. Fly balls only -- no line drives.

83 posted on 08/05/2007 12:58:57 PM PDT by ReignOfError (`)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: Dick Vomer
Sad case. Shotguns are the best for snakes...little .410 with bird shot.... or just a stick and jam its head off.

Anything wrong with pistol-fired snakeshot, assuming one is extra careful of course to make sure that's actually what one is shooting?

84 posted on 08/05/2007 1:17:27 PM PDT by supercat (Sony delenda est.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat
True but it really depends on your position on the arc. If you were close to the end of the arc you could, theoretically, catch the bullet in your hand since it's speed is approaching zero.

That depends on the height of the arc. If a bullet is fired at 45 or even 60 degrees, I wouldn't want to be at the other end of the arc.

85 posted on 08/05/2007 1:25:06 PM PDT by supercat (Sony delenda est.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: Ghengis; B4Ranch
B4Ranch: To think that this man would fire his weapon into the air without a solid backstop behind the trajectory belittles the intellingence of every officer I know. There was no immediate danger and therefore no reason to fire the weapon in an unsafe manner.

I would sue him, the department, the city and any firearms intructors who gave the man a passing grade.

Agree. Unless there's something we haven't yet heard -- like a baby sleeping in a crib within striking distance of a rattler -- this doofus should lose his job, his pension and most of his lifetime earnings.

In terms of liability, LEO certification is kind of a double-edged sword -- the law demands greater judgment, but is more forgiving of minor lapses in judgment. Emphasis on minor, which this case wasn't. As we like to say in Georgia, this ol' boy was all eat up with the dumbass.

As an example of what I'm talking about, suppose a cop draws down on a suspect and the suspect reaches back and pulls a wallet or a call phone, and is then shot dead. A civilian would likely be let go pending an investigation and never charged. But if he were charged, he would likely face prison. A LEO would likely face an internal review and departmental sanction, but not prison time unless his actions were egregious.

Ghengis: Boiler plate Force Continuum training would have told these officers that this was far from a life or death situation that required a deadly force answer. Especially with the chance that it would put innocent bystanders at risk.

I completely agree. As I wrote above, unless there was a sleeping baby right next to the snake, there was no good reason to shoot at it. Even in far more dire circumstances, like perps shooting at them, cops often refrain from firing back if there is undue risk to bystanders.

Most cops are issued batons. More than enough, with even a little training, to deal with a snake that isn't an anaconda, a bushmaster or a king cobra. Maybe they ougt to be issued swords, too, at least out in the sticks; that has a pretty solid intimidation value. A samurai sword, a machete, a cavalry sabre, all good choices.

Tennessee vs. Garner showed that State Law and Department Policy is not always the final answer on the subject. Without being familiar with this state's law, I'd also guess that this scenario could be prosecuted criminally.

I wasn't familiar with that case, but having googled and skimmed it, you have a good point. But if this officer acted within official policy (which I rather strongly doubt), an is then punished for doing so, he could turn around and sue the department for training him wrong.

My meager credentials -- I have no LEO training or certifications. But my dad taught me how to shoot, and when, and he is trained and qualified. He still qualifies every year in his retirement. so he can keep his valid-in-all-50-states carry permit.

86 posted on 08/05/2007 1:34:47 PM PDT by ReignOfError (`)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: mad_as_he$$
Einstein and Bohr also believe as I do.

I'd love to see their data supporting your contention. Perhaps you have a link?

87 posted on 08/05/2007 1:37:28 PM PDT by EndWelfareToday (Live free and keep what you earn. - Tancredo or Hunter '08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: supercat

Unfortunately bird or snake shot in a pistol is influenced by the rifling. It tends to try and head out in a circle instead of staying in a group. If you have a 22 get some shot and try it on cardboard at varying distance. It will amaze you how fast it disburses.


88 posted on 08/05/2007 1:40:28 PM PDT by mad_as_he$$ (Beware of the seminar poster.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: Max in Utah
Not me, I've already had surgery on one hand.

How about skin grafts?

I would guess, emphasis on guess, that if you caught a bullet at the very end of its arc, something that left the barrel white-hot would still -- kinetic energy aside -- be hot enough to leave first- or second- degree burns on your palm, Third, if it's a tracer round.

89 posted on 08/05/2007 1:42:44 PM PDT by ReignOfError (`)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: mad_as_he$$
Unfortunately bird or snake shot in a pistol is influenced by the rifling. It tends to try and head out in a circle instead of staying in a group. If you have a 22 get some shot and try it on cardboard at varying distance. It will amaze you how fast it disburses.

That is a feature, not a bug. Light shot in a handgun or rifle is designed for soft targets at close range; It disperses and loses its punch at a distance. It's supposed to. That's what it's for.

If the cop in this story had used bird/snake/rat shot, the snake would likely still be dead and the kid almost certainly wouldn't. That is the central point.

90 posted on 08/05/2007 1:52:14 PM PDT by ReignOfError (`)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: ReignOfError

I was always impressed with the way our mortar teams could predetermine the almost exact path a mortar shell would travel while making allowances for the existing winds.

>PVC pipe and hair spray as propellant<

Those days are behind me. LOL


91 posted on 08/05/2007 2:00:23 PM PDT by B4Ranch ( "Freedom is not free, but don't worry the U.S. Marine Corps will pay most of your share.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: EndWelfareToday

http://recommendedreading.suite101.com/article.cfm/physics_for_dummies


92 posted on 08/05/2007 2:19:22 PM PDT by mad_as_he$$ (Beware of the seminar poster.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: ReignOfError
In general I agree but if you are trying to take out a snake at say 25 feet with bird shot it may take more than one shot - especially with a 22. A 9mm has more shot and hence a better chance of hitting the snake. Since most people don't want to get that close to a snake then it is problematic. I agree if the cop had used bird shot the kid would probably still be alive.

Oh and Mickeysoft did give me the correct answer - once!!!!

93 posted on 08/05/2007 2:24:02 PM PDT by mad_as_he$$ (Beware of the seminar poster.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: ReignOfError
That is a feature, not a bug. Light shot in a handgun or rifle is designed for soft targets at close range; It disperses and loses its punch at a distance. It's supposed to. That's what it's for.

I've sometimes wondered whether a derringer with snake shot might be usable as a self-defense weapon by a severely-visually-impaired person. Deadly against a person at contact range, but not terribly far beyond.

94 posted on 08/05/2007 2:25:13 PM PDT by supercat (Sony delenda est.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: LouAvul
Good grief. They attempted to shoot a snake out of the air? No one could possibly be that darn DUMB.

What's complicated about:

a - Get a hoe/rake
b - whack snake out of rafters/bird house
c - whack snake in to cutlets?

95 posted on 08/05/2007 2:29:04 PM PDT by Malacoda (A day without a pi$$ed-off muslim is like a day without sunshine.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee
The reality is that one of the article stories said that the snake was in the house rafters. If poisonous, that is a risk to health and/or life.

My post was made from that perspective. Living where all of America’s venomous snakes and the occasional King Cobra, and other escapees from the Miami pet trade wind up - I am aware of the risk such snakes pose.

96 posted on 08/05/2007 2:36:03 PM PDT by GladesGuru (In a society predicated upon freedom, it is essential to examine principle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: supercat
I've sometimes wondered whether a derringer with snake shot might be usable as a self-defense weapon by a severely-visually-impaired person. Deadly against a person at contact range, but not terribly far beyond.

SHot or slug, a gun is lethal at short range. Even blanks -- just ask Jon-Erik Hexum and Brandon Lee.

For someone severely visually impaired, aka "legally blind," i'd recommend a cattle prod built into the white cane. Call it a contact taser.

97 posted on 08/05/2007 2:45:59 PM PDT by ReignOfError (`)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: ReignOfError

When I was about 8 my mother had a bunch of church ladies over for a get together. One of the ladies screamed, momma grabbed a manual lawn edger, threw it like a spear, and whacked a moccasin in the yard, from 20 feet out.
They don’t make many ladies like her these days.


98 posted on 08/05/2007 2:46:22 PM PDT by SWAMPSNIPER (THE SECOND AMENDMENT, A MATTER OF FACT, NOT A MATTER OF OPINION)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Popman

Huh? What’s wrong with shooting snakes? Normally they are on the ground and you shoot down. The bullet goes into the ground. What’s the problem? I’m been shooting things like this my whole life. Heck, I shoot grasshoppers just for kicks if I feel like it.


99 posted on 08/05/2007 2:57:41 PM PDT by mamelukesabre
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: GladesGuru
The reality is that one of the article stories said that the snake was in the house rafters. If poisonous, that is a risk to health and/or life.

A risk is not an imminent threat. Get everyone out of and away from the house. Then deal with the risk in a sane and propionate manner.

My post was made from that perspective. Living where all of America’s venomous snakes and the occasional King Cobra, and other escapees from the Miami pet trade wind up - I am aware of the risk such snakes pose.

Where the dangers are greatest, funny thing, the expertise tends to be greatest. If this had been a Miami-Dade cop, he would likely have cleared the house, kept an eye on the beast, and waited for animal control to arrive. Hold aim and be ready to shoot if you must, but don't blaze away like a damn fool. South florida animal control officers know their snakes and gators as well as most suburban dog-catchers know a yapping terrier.

100 posted on 08/05/2007 3:05:48 PM PDT by ReignOfError (`)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-120 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson