Florida warning shot bill passed. (The Wild West down here)

[Rhino]

I suppose a warning shot would be okay if it can be done safely, but too many people would be inclined to shoot up in the air like our super intelligent, "gun friendly" veep recommends, but where will that bullet land? The gun owner is responsible for that bullet, so he must insure that there is a safe place to fire it.....

A bullet shot straight up in the air is no more a danger than any other small falling object such as a marble. It isn't much of a threat, so up in the air is pretty much a safe place to fire it, unless you do so at a really low angle.

 

[Steon]

A bullet shot straight up in the air is no more a danger than any other small falling object such as a marble. It isn't much of a threat, so up in the air is pretty much a safe place to fire it, unless you do so at a really low angle.

Ummm. I was always taught what goes up must come down. I was also taught that even a penny dropped from the Sears (now Willis) Tower would kill someone if it hit them, so a wouldn't a bullet that managed to travel a mile up manage to gather enough velocity on it's downward fall to at least do some serious damage if not kill on impact should it hit someone?

Mind you, I'm terrible at math let alone know anything about physics etc... But I certainly wouldn't want to be standing there when it came down.

 

[Rhino]

No, it won't kill anybody. Neither will the penny. They quit accelerating when they reach terminal velocity. The same force that prevents a fired bullet from traveling forever also keeps it from continually accelerating if it falls from a great height. Drag. It might hurt a little bit if it falls on your head. It might even cause a nasty scratch in the right circumstances. But it won't really hurt you. If you're a Mythbusters fan like my younger son is, he tells me they tested the 'myth of the deadly falling bullet' theory on one of their episodes.

 

[NotTwoShure]

I would not. The buddies and family I have taught I do not suggest this as an option.

 

[wolf_fire]

Blues Stringer,

You truly are an A-s Hole. All I did was copy and paste a news article to put it out there for a discussion and once again you take a cheap shot. You truly need to grow the F--k up. I didn't research the bill or read it. I just copied a story off the Sun Sentinal a news paper in south Florida. Please re frame from attempting to make yourself, ONCE AGAIN, sound as if you are some expert in any of the topics. You are no law enforcement officer, a lawyer, a law student, or have any specialized military training at all, etc., you are just a poser and a wana be, and was probably passed up for a real law enforcement job, or your could not hack it in the military and this is your only avenue of trying to feel as you matter. You do not fool me for one second. You are just some guy who lives on this site, probably some fat as_ who cant even see his pecker anymore and than you get off on trying to sound as if you are some expert. Over 4,000 posts, Get a Life already!

From what I have read through this thread, he's the only one that thought it prudent to get the facts about a new law that people were opining about... and opining incorrectly based on misinformation. Blues, just gathered the correct information, and dismantled the hysterically induced misinformation.

That to me sounds like someone who is using logic, reason, and intelligence. The initial posters just fanned the flames of the hysteria that wasn't true in the first place.

So your retort to when he sets the record straight is to swear and call him names and make ridiculously vile accusations about his character. Who needs to get a life? Let me see... let me see... yeah, that would be you.

The forums are set up in order for people to know and learn more about firearms and all that has to do with them which includes the law. And there are several people on this site who do a very good job at researching and providing correct information. So yes, when someone comes on the forum with bad or wrong information, it is the duty of those on this forum to correct it as soon as possible.

Blues, thank you for your research.

 

[wolf_fire]

Ummm. I was always taught what goes up must come down. I was also taught that even a penny dropped from the Sears (now Willis) Tower would kill someone if it hit them, so a wouldn't a bullet that managed to travel a mile up manage to gather enough velocity on it's downward fall to at least do some serious damage if not kill on impact should it hit someone?

Mind you, I'm terrible at math let alone know anything about physics etc... But I certainly wouldn't want to be standing there when it came down.

If that penny (or bullet) were unfettered by air resistance you would be correct. However, this is but a myth. That penny would reach terminal velocity shortly after it was dropped. Terminal velocity is when the force of air resistance upward is equal to the force of gravity pulling the object downward. When this happens, the object no longer increases in speed.

The problem with a bullet (versus a penny) is that the bullet is aerodynamic. Therefore, it has a higher terminal velocity than the penny. The penny won't even break skin when dropped from the Sears Tower. However, a bullet can still have speeds of up to 300-700 ft/sec. This speed combined with the mass of the bullet can pierce skin.

From an LA county sheriff: County warns against New Year?s Eve celebratory gunfire

From a legal expert who's job it is to explain highly scientific aspects of a legal case in ways that can be understood by the court:
The falling bullet: myths, legends and terminal velocity | Forensic Outreach

 

[Rocketgeezer]

That's good, because the law says absolutely nothing about warning shots.
.
Some of you guys need to write propaganda for the antigunners, because you're doing a great job of it here. This is a bill about self defense, nothing more. It isn't about warning shots and it never mentions warning shots. It is specifically designed to remove minimum mandatory sentencing for acts committed in self defense because judges have been using that rule to send innocent people to prison. The media is calling it a warning shot law because it was inspired by the case of Marissa Alexander. She was given three 20 year sentences in prison when she lawfully defended herself against her estranged husband. She defended herself by firing three warning shots. Marissa wasn't allowed to use Florida law governing self defense where she can claim a threat to her life. The mandatory sentencing law the judge used classified her as a dangerous criminal and placed the burden on her to prove beyond any doubt that her life was in danger. That of course is incredibly difficult to do because it's almost impossible to prove a state of mind. But Marissa Alexander is far from the only person caught up in this unfair practice, and it involves much more than warning shots. Any use of a firearm, including simply showing it, can get you a minimum mandatory sentence under the current Florida guidelines if a judge decided to apply them to you like the judge did in Marissa Alexander's case. That's what this legislation is designed to stop. It does one simple thing. It changes the law so that minimum mandatory sentencing cannot be used in cases of self defense. So this bill doesn't say "warning shots" are okay. It says "self defense" is okay.
.
If some of you guys want to keep parroting the antigunner propaganda line, that's your right. But could you please do it somewhere else? It's a little hard to stomach here.

Sorry I was going on what I read in the post, and it appears so did a lot of other people, a question I have though is being in Ohio how do you personaly know so much about Florida law?...............just wondering?

 

[S&W645]

Sorry I was going on what I read in the post, and it appears so did a lot of other people, a question I have though is being in Ohio how do you personaly know so much about Florida law?...............just wondering?

Same way I know about Ohio laws from down here. We read the law.

 

[BC1]

A bullet shot straight up in the air is no more a danger than any other small falling object such as a marble. It isn't much of a threat, so up in the air is pretty much a safe place to fire it, unless you do so at a really low angle.

In some states it is a misdemeanor to fire center-fire rounds in the air. And contrary to popular belief it does present a danger.
.
On New Year’s Eve, in Highlands Park, CA (A suburb of Los Angeles), Sheriff Lee Baca warned about the dangers of shooting live ammunition into the air. A few hours later, past the stroke of midnight, a 30 year old man was struck in the head and hospitalized by bullet fragments from above. Fortunately, he survived. “A bullet fired into the air can return to earth at speeds between 300 and 700 feet per second, fast enough to pierce a person’s skull,” Baca claimed.

 

[mappow]

Warning shot my @ss. If I have to pull the trigger it'll be to remove the lethal threat that's in front of me. Plus ammo' s to expensive these days to waste.

 

[BluesStringer]

Blues Stringer,

You truly are an A-s Hole.

Tsk tsk. Touch a nerve did I? That would be a nerve touched off by exposure to the truth, something which, in this story anyway, you are unacquainted with.

All I did was copy and paste a news article to put it out there for a discussion and once again you take a cheap shot.

That's not all you did. You engaged in hysterical meanderings about....well....here, I'll show you your hysterical meanderings again since your memory is so short:

I agree with both of you. I am pro gun but this law scares me. I can close my eyes and see everyone who gets pissed off shooting warning shots.

I was shocked the first time I read it was going to be placed on a ballet but completely floored today when I read it passed.

So I asked myself this, When will it be ok to pull out a firearm and fire a warning shot, 1) When a car cuts me off, 2) When someone cuts me in line at Burger King, 3) When a pissed off elderly driver flips me the bird, etc. I know these are way out of the park but I am going to have to ask a lawyer on this new law, When can someone fire a warning shot?

I put in bold what I take as hysteria, mostly because it's so far unrelated from reality to begin with, but also because the law doesn't even mention "warning shots" at all in the first place, so obviously none of those "rationales" for firing a warning shot are legalized by the law that "scares" you so much.

I especially liked this part of your rant:

You truly need to grow the F--k up. I didn't research the bill or read it.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!! Man, I need to grow up because I research a law before going batcrap hysterical over it, but you have no obligation to base your hysteria on truth rather than the lies you spread in your OP? Comedy gold man, truly comedy gold.

I just copied a story off the Sun Sentinal a news paper in south Florida.

Right. That's the same paper that posted the Editorial from Marion Hammer, former N R A President, saying basically the same things about the piece you opened your OP with as I said. A former N R A President said what you "just" copied and pasted (and subsequently posted a bunch of histrionics over) was nothing but bunk.

Please re frame[sic] [the word is "refrain" genius] from attempting to make yourself, ONCE AGAIN, sound as if you are some expert in any of the topics.

In other words, if you know the truth, Blues, don't tell it. If you're smart enough to research and find the truth, Blues, don't tell it. It hurts my feelings when you expose me as an hysterical old woman shaking in my pumps over a law that doesn't even exist! And you have the gall to tell me to grow up? Pffft.

You are no law enforcement officer

Boy, you got that right. I scored too high on the Academy entrance exams. You do realize that academies don't want folks with high IQ's, right? Oh, that's right, you used to be a cop, so you obviously couldn't realize anything on your own because of the low IQ that allowed you to be a cop in the first place. Sorry for putting a strain on your brain by asking you if you "realized" something.

As to the rest of your angry and profane rant, there's a real easy way to avoid being exposed as lacking the intelligence to actually knowing what you're talking about before posting something, and here it is; know what the heck you're talking about before posting a bunch of lies and inaccuracies and old-woman-like hysteria about a law that doesn't even exist. Easy as pie. You have heard of Google, right?

Pffft.

Blues

 

[Rocketgeezer]

Same way I know about Ohio laws from down here. We read the law.

Well good for you, I can only guess your one that likes to spout off about knowing this or that law in a specific state, when in all probability it wont mean a rats ass to nobody cause they will never be there, if I go into a state that does not have reciprocity, I lock my gun in the trunk, I don't and would not ever fire a warning shot, if my gun is pulled and fired it will hit what I intended it to hit......................oh one other thing while your checking laws for specific states that you may travel through, be mindfull that the LEO that stops you for a minor traffic infraction may not know the law and you may go to jail anyhow

 

[BluesStringer]

Good grief.

 

[Rhino]

Sorry I was going on what I read in the post, and it appears so did a lot of other people, a question I have though is being in Ohio how do you personaly know so much about Florida law?...............just wondering?

I'm pretty good at research.

 

[Rhino]

In some states it is a misdemeanor to fire center-fire rounds in the air. And contrary to popular belief it does present a danger.
.
On New Year’s Eve, in Highlands Park, CA (A suburb of Los Angeles), Sheriff Lee Baca warned about the dangers of shooting live ammunition into the air. A few hours later, past the stroke of midnight, a 30 year old man was struck in the head and hospitalized by bullet fragments from above. Fortunately, he survived. “A bullet fired into the air can return to earth at speeds between 300 and 700 feet per second, fast enough to pierce a person’s skull,” Baca claimed.

He's correct if that bullet is fired at a low angle, just as I said in my post. The one in Highlands Park was. Bullet design also plays a part, because that will also affect drag, which in turn is a determinant in terminal velocity. Very large and heavy bullets, with very aerodynamic designs, such as large caliber, pointed rifle bullets, can cause more significant damage in the right circumstances. But light pistol rounds aren't going to cause anything beyond a minor injury. Again, that's fired straight up.

 

[telpinaro]

He's correct if that bullet is fired at a low angle, just as I said in my post. The one in Highlands Park was. Bullet design also plays a part, because that will also affect drag, which in turn is a determinant in terminal velocity. Very large and heavy bullets, with very aerodynamic designs, such as large caliber, pointed rifle bullets, can cause more significant damage in the right circumstances. But light pistol rounds aren't going to cause anything beyond a minor injury. Again, that's fired straight up.

Ever see the Mythbusters episode of that? Fun one. I do wish they'd done more calibers, though. My boy loves Mythbusters, so we watch old episodes of that quite a bit... then watch it again... and again...

 

[apvbguy]

the moral to all this is to not believe one word of what the media tells you

 

[wolf_fire]

Good grief.

What's the matter Blues? Has the derp gotten strong in these here parts? lol

 

[JustTheFacts]

If that penny (or bullet) were unfettered by air resistance you would be correct. However, this is but a myth. That penny would reach terminal velocity shortly after it was dropped. Terminal velocity is when the force of air resistance upward is equal to the force of gravity pulling the object downward. When this happens, the object no longer increases in speed.

The problem with a bullet (versus a penny) is that the bullet is aerodynamic. Therefore, it has a higher terminal velocity than the penny. The penny won't even break skin when dropped from the Sears Tower. However, a bullet can still have speeds of up to 300-700 ft/sec. This speed combined with the mass of the bullet can pierce skin.

But bullets tumble just like pennies. They are barely more aerodynamic than pennies when tumbling. They reach a higher terminal velocity because of their higher weight and density.

If fired straight up, they'll tumble as they fall but bullets will never reach anywhere near the 300-700 ft/s you mention. You realize that's 200+ mph right? I thought you taught this stuff??

 

[JustTheFacts]

He's correct if that bullet is fired at a low angle, just as I said in my post. The one in Highlands Park was. Bullet design also plays a part, because that will also affect drag, which in turn is a determinant in terminal velocity. Very large and heavy bullets, with very aerodynamic designs, such as large caliber, pointed rifle bullets, can cause more significant damage in the right circumstances. But light pistol rounds aren't going to cause anything beyond a minor injury. Again, that's fired straight up.

But the bullets tumble as they fall so the aerodynamic properties of the bullets in their normal trajectories don't apply here. Like you said, only straight up.