Jack House
Regular Member
Last edited:
-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
Texas Man Shot in Yard Sues nearby Gun Range
- Thread starter Jack House
- Start date
Doug Huffman
Banned
http://www.google.com/search?q=Michael+Domin+of+Rowlett
64 articles and a garage sale benefit? Something is fishy.
64 articles and a garage sale benefit? Something is fishy.
SFCRetired
Regular Member
I know a .22 can carry up to a mile, but, from what I read, this guy was 1.2 miles from the range, the police determined that (a) the bullet was on a downward trajectory and (b) it could not be ascertained that the bullet came from the range.
Some of you who are more up on ballistics than I am tell me something: Would a .22 at that distance, 1.2 miles, even be able to break the skin?
Something is just not right here. Reading between the lines, it sounds like someone is trying to pressure this range into closing while getting themselves a payday out of it.
Some of you who are more up on ballistics than I am tell me something: Would a .22 at that distance, 1.2 miles, even be able to break the skin?
Something is just not right here. Reading between the lines, it sounds like someone is trying to pressure this range into closing while getting themselves a payday out of it.
Jack House
Regular Member
How so? I don't disagree, I just don't know in what way you mean it is fishy.
Here is another article. Seems this neighborhood is fairly new, whereas the range was opened in '69. Really sucks for the range.
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcon...nrange_03met.ART0.State.Edition2.3581089.html
Last edited:
eye95
Well-known member
Sometime back, the Mythbusters busted the myth that bullets shot straight up could kill someone on the way down. The problem was that wind resistance eventually caused the bullet to reach a terminal velocity which, ironically, was not terminal to human beings.
Now, on the way down, these bullets had the full effect of gravity helping them fall faster, so that terminal velocity would be more than the terminal velocity of a bullet shot at a 45 degree angle (which, theoretically, yields the greatest range). For this reason, after 1.2 miles, I cannot imagine a .22 bullet having sufficient velocity to do much damage at all.
IANA Ballistic Expert.
A Remington 36 Grain golden hollow point has a muzzle velocity of 1280 feet per second. The maximum range of this round is 1892.6 yards, fired at an angle of 28 degrees from horizontal.
Maximum EFFECTIVE range is something else entirely, though.
Source:
Sierra Infinity ballistic calculator
Best estimate (see chart) is that a .22 cal round would be moving about 200 ft/sec at one mile - might sting but unlikely to penetrate unless it hit an eye. Think this incident doesn't fall in the range's area of responsibility.
http://yarchive.net/gun/maximum_range.html
simmonsjoe
Regular Member
NOWHERE does it specify this was a .22 rim-fire round.
It may have been a .22 cal bullet that is lethal at 1 mile, of which there are plenty.
If you read the article, the man was shot in the back, the bullet nicked his pancreas and lodged in his lung.
It also states he was shot at a downward angle. The lungs are above the pancreas I'm uncertain what position he was in to be shot at a downward angle, but have the bullet travel up his back. He was probably doing yard work or the like.
It may have been a .22 cal bullet that is lethal at 1 mile, of which there are plenty.
If you read the article, the man was shot in the back, the bullet nicked his pancreas and lodged in his lung.
It also states he was shot at a downward angle. The lungs are above the pancreas I'm uncertain what position he was in to be shot at a downward angle, but have the bullet travel up his back. He was probably doing yard work or the like.
merc460
Regular Member
This is just typical really. A gun range is close, so when a gun accident / incident happens, of course it's because of the range. There is NO WAY possible it could be someone in their back yard be irresponsible.
I say this just simply from experience... I'm sitting on the couch watching a show. I hear what I thought was firecrackers, so I decided to look outside. I almost fell to the floor when I saw what I did. The neighbors grandson in the front yard shooting a .22 rifle into the trees at the squirrels. By the time I got over there to jump in his dumbass, I have no idea how many rounds he had already shot, at least 8 - 10 I would guess, shot into the air at 30 degree angles or more. I lost my mind on this kid, he had no idea what damage he could do with his actions.
So, I would say this was the case in this particular situation.
I say this just simply from experience... I'm sitting on the couch watching a show. I hear what I thought was firecrackers, so I decided to look outside. I almost fell to the floor when I saw what I did. The neighbors grandson in the front yard shooting a .22 rifle into the trees at the squirrels. By the time I got over there to jump in his dumbass, I have no idea how many rounds he had already shot, at least 8 - 10 I would guess, shot into the air at 30 degree angles or more. I lost my mind on this kid, he had no idea what damage he could do with his actions.
So, I would say this was the case in this particular situation.
I agree that the media did not specify the specific caliber, though typically .22 refers to a rim fire. While .222, .223, .224 et cetera are all technically .22 projectiles they are correctly identified by their proper nomenclature - yah, I know it is the media, lacking as it is. Grain weight of the projectiles are different too, allowing for some better ID.
Did you read what was between his place and the range? Trees - lots of them. There is obviously more to this than what we have read.
http://www.myfoxdfw.com/dpp/news/090310-Man-Shot-in-Yard-Sues-nearby-Gun-Range#disqus_thread
Last edited:
eye95
Well-known member
Yeah, the odds of a .22 traveling 1.2 miles, and not hitting something else along the way are minuscule.
All else being equal, the simplest explanation is usually the correct explanation. The simplest explanation is that someone a lot closer than 1.2 miles fired the shot.
All else being equal, the simplest explanation is usually the correct explanation. The simplest explanation is that someone a lot closer than 1.2 miles fired the shot.
Nevada carrier
Regular Member
I was just thinking the same thing. many people thin k all ".22's" are the same, but while a .223 NATO round may be sometimes referred to as a .22 caliber round, it's far more powerful than someones .22 pea shooter that they take out and plink with.
At 1.2 miles, the .223 NATO may not be effective against an enemy at this distance in the sense that it can be reliably lethal, but my guess is it could still penetrate and cause injury.
eye95
Well-known member
The effective range of an AR-15 firing a .223 is 600 m, 0.6 km, or about 1/3 of a mile. Which rifle and cartridge would have an effective range of 1.2 mi (almost 2 km, almost 2000 m)?
Effective range does not equate to maximum dangerous range.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCJxQqkgGf0
http://www.longrangehunting.com/articles/shooting-223-mile-1.php
http://www.longrangehunting.com/forums/f73/jerry-teos-one-mile-223-shooting-video-32846/
SFCRetired
Regular Member
This article reinforces my thought that someone is trying to pressure the range to close and is also looking to get a payday out of it. I noticed that the power company emphatically stated they had no problems from the range.
Back to my original thought; something just does not compute.
eye95
Well-known member
Your links demonstrate the the .223 can put a hold in paper at 1 mile and at 1000 yards (0.57 miles) and will kick up a small cloud of dust at 1 mile.
Will it put a hole, such as the one described, at 1.2 miles, in a human being? I just don't buy that kind of penetration at 1.2 miles.
Effective range, besides hitting the target, includes the ability to do damage. Luck may cause the round to hit the guy 1.2 miles away, but I've yet to see anything that would convince me it could do the damage that was done.
Maybe you could hook up R. Lee Ermy, a watermelon, and an AR-15 on a 1.2 mile range.
Will it put a hole, such as the one described, at 1.2 miles, in a human being? I just don't buy that kind of penetration at 1.2 miles.
Effective range, besides hitting the target, includes the ability to do damage. Luck may cause the round to hit the guy 1.2 miles away, but I've yet to see anything that would convince me it could do the damage that was done.
Maybe you could hook up R. Lee Ermy, a watermelon, and an AR-15 on a 1.2 mile range.
Your links demonstrate the the .223 can put a hold in paper at 1 mile and at 1000 yards (0.57 miles) and will kick up a small cloud of dust at 1 mile.
Will it put a hole, such as the one described, at 1.2 miles, in a human being? I just don't buy that kind of penetration at 1.2 miles.
Effective range, besides hitting the target, includes the ability to do damage. Luck may cause the round to hit the guy 1.2 miles away, but I've yet to see anything that would convince me it could do the damage that was done.
Maybe you could hook up R. Lee Ermy, a watermelon, and an AR-15 on a 1.2 mile range.
About 108 ft-lb at 840fps - Care to stand in front?
eye95
Well-known member
Are you saying that is the speed at 1.2 miles? 570 mph? At that speed, I would have expected more than the bit of dust we saw kicked up at 1 mile.
I am not saying you're wrong. I really don't know. I'm just looking for something concrete.
The speed at which a projectile must travel to penetrate skin is 163 fps and to break bone is 213 fps, both of which are quite low, so other factors are more important in producing damage. (Belkin, 1978)
http://library.med.utah.edu/WebPath/TUTORIAL/GUNS/GUNBLST.html
To calculate foot-pounds of energy (fpe) for a given load when you know bullet weight and velocity, use the following formula:
FPE=(Velocity x Velocity) x Bullet Weight / 450400
Rough calculation: 1,000 ft / sec * 60 sec / min * 60 min / hr = 3,600,000 ft / hr3,600,000 ft / hr * 1 mile / 5280 ft = 681.81 mph
Note my initial estimate may not have been exact - too tired to recompute it, but I'll not volunteer to stand down range.
http://library.med.utah.edu/WebPath/TUTORIAL/GUNS/GUNBLST.html
To calculate foot-pounds of energy (fpe) for a given load when you know bullet weight and velocity, use the following formula:
FPE=(Velocity x Velocity) x Bullet Weight / 450400
Rough calculation: 1,000 ft / sec * 60 sec / min * 60 min / hr = 3,600,000 ft / hr3,600,000 ft / hr * 1 mile / 5280 ft = 681.81 mph
Note my initial estimate may not have been exact - too tired to recompute it, but I'll not volunteer to stand down range.
eye95
Well-known member
The speed at which a projectile must travel to penetrate skin is 163 fps and to break bone is 213 fps, both of which are quite low, so other factors are more important in producing damage. (Belkin, 1978)
http://library.med.utah.edu/WebPath/TUTORIAL/GUNS/GUNBLST.html
To calculate foot-pounds of energy (fpe) for a given load when you know bullet weight and velocity, use the following formula:
FPE=(Velocity x Velocity) x Bullet Weight / 450400
Rough calculation: 1,000 ft / sec * 60 sec / min * 60 min / hr = 3,600,000 ft / hr3,600,000 ft / hr * 1 mile / 5280 ft = 681.81 mph
Note my initial estimate may not have been exact - too tired to recompute it, but I'll not volunteer to stand down range.
Are you saying that one of those (570 mph or 680 mph) is the speed of a .223 round fired from an AR-15 after it has traveled 1.2 miles?
Considering the damage described, speeds in excess of those you said would break skin and bone would be necessary. BTW, the speeds of 163 fps and 213 fps (roughly 110 mph and 145 mph) are far less than the speed of falling bullets on Mythbusters, where the falling bullets were not considered lethal.
I am not the ballistic expert; rather relying on the input of others and then trying to decipher their numbers.
Don't know what credence I would give to Mythbusters or not - kind of like Hollywood or the $20,000 Question - what to believe on TV or at the movies.
The bottom line for me is that I'm not standing in front of any of them on purpose.