Re: Here's one for Bob (hope it makes your head spin) - VMS

This is a discussion on Re: Here's one for Bob (hope it makes your head spin) - VMS ; Hello, JF Mezei wrotes: >>> However, is there anything wrong with continuing a practice which, although no longer needed, is still part of a very old tradition and doesn't cause illness to people ? JF your are right. There is ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: Re: Here's one for Bob (hope it makes your head spin)

  1. Re: Here's one for Bob (hope it makes your head spin)

    Hello,

    JF Mezei wrotes:

    >>>

    However, is there anything wrong with continuing a practice which,
    although no longer needed, is still part of a very old tradition and
    doesn't cause illness to people ?
    <<<

    JF your are right. There is nothing wrong to practice tradition. But is
    wrong to demonise one side (the traditionals or the other one). The Bibel is
    not a cookbook. It is written to show God plan with mankind and his mention
    about the best way to live. It is also not a book without contradiction. It
    is written within the historical context and the writer where not puppets on
    the string (e.g. Chronik versus Kings: David did be tempted by God or by the
    devil to count the soldiers?).
    Chinese people do eat pork. Are Chinese Christians are bad, if they eat too?
    My personal opinion is: no. Also Jesus did say, the Sabbath is made for
    mankind and not mankind for Sabbath.

    Best regards Rudolf Wingert


  2. Re: Here's one for Bob (hope it makes your head spin)

    On 09/10/07 04:12, Rudolf Wingert wrote:
    > Hello,
    >
    > JF Mezei wrotes:
    >
    > However, is there anything wrong with continuing a practice which,
    > although no longer needed, is still part of a very old tradition and
    > doesn't cause illness to people ?
    > <<<
    >
    > JF your are right. There is nothing wrong to practice tradition. But is


    There are *lots* of very old traditions which are very very very bad.

    --
    Ron Johnson, Jr.
    Jefferson LA USA

    Give a man a fish, and he eats for a day.
    Hit him with a fish, and he goes away for good!

  3. Re: Here's one for Bob (hope it makes your head spin)

    On 09/10/07 08:12, Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
    > Ron Johnson wrote:
    >> On 09/10/07 04:12, Rudolf Wingert wrote:
    >>
    >>> Hello,
    >>>
    >>> JF Mezei wrotes:
    >>>
    >>> However, is there anything wrong with continuing a practice which,
    >>> although no longer needed, is still part of a very old tradition and
    >>> doesn't cause illness to people ?
    >>> <<<
    >>>
    >>> JF your are right. There is nothing wrong to practice tradition. But is

    >>
    >>
    >> There are *lots* of very old traditions which are very very very bad.
    >>

    >
    > e.g. celebrating by firing guns into the air. It doesn't seem to occur
    > to the celebrants that the bullets come down somewhere and that terminal
    > velocity is something like 120 MPH!
    >
    > Every once in a while, this practice makes the news when some
    > unfortunate soul happens to be standing where the bullet came down.


    I was thinking of older, *much* older traditions.

    --
    Ron Johnson, Jr.
    Jefferson LA USA

    Give a man a fish, and he eats for a day.
    Hit him with a fish, and he goes away for good!

  4. Re: Here's one for Bob (hope it makes your head spin)

    Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
    > Ron Johnson wrote:
    >> On 09/10/07 04:12, Rudolf Wingert wrote:
    >>
    >>> Hello,
    >>>
    >>> JF Mezei wrotes:
    >>>
    >>> However, is there anything wrong with continuing a practice which,
    >>> although no longer needed, is still part of a very old tradition and
    >>> doesn't cause illness to people ?
    >>> <<<
    >>>
    >>> JF your are right. There is nothing wrong to practice tradition.
    >>> But is

    >>
    >>
    >> There are *lots* of very old traditions which are very very very bad.
    >>

    >
    > e.g. celebrating by firing guns into the air. It doesn't seem to
    > occur to the celebrants that the bullets come down somewhere and that
    > terminal velocity is something like 120 MPH!
    >
    > Every once in a while, this practice makes the news when some
    > unfortunate soul happens to be standing where the bullet came down.


    I read once that one person gets "shot" this way every New Year in LA. I
    forget where, sorry. Maybe an urban legend, but 120mph bit of lead to the
    head would probably be fatal.

    Dweeb



  5. Re: Here's one for Bob (hope it makes your head spin)

    On Sep 10, 4:11 pm, "Dr. Dweeb" wrote:
    > Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
    > > Ron Johnson wrote:
    > >> On 09/10/07 04:12, Rudolf Wingert wrote:

    >
    > >>> Hello,

    >
    > >>> JF Mezei wrotes:

    >
    > >>> However, is there anything wrong with continuing a practice which,
    > >>> although no longer needed, is still part of a very old tradition and
    > >>> doesn't cause illness to people ?
    > >>> <<<

    >
    > >>> JF your are right. There is nothing wrong to practice tradition.
    > >>> But is

    >
    > >> There are *lots* of very old traditions which are very very very bad.

    >
    > > e.g. celebrating by firing guns into the air. It doesn't seem to
    > > occur to the celebrants that the bullets come down somewhere and that
    > > terminal velocity is something like 120 MPH!

    >
    > > Every once in a while, this practice makes the news when some
    > > unfortunate soul happens to be standing where the bullet came down.

    >
    > I read once that one person gets "shot" this way every New Year in LA.


    And that one person is getting *real* tired of that happening;-)))

    > I
    > forget where, sorry. Maybe an urban legend, but 120mph bit of lead to the
    > head would probably be fatal.
    >


    The aforementioned TV show /Mythbusters/ (also one of my favorites,
    Ron) took on the "falling bullet" myth and concluded that the bullet
    can probably exceed 120mph downward if it's trajectory is such that it
    doesn't "flutter" on descent, but if fired close to straight-up it
    will flutter back down. Even 120mph put some pretty impressive holes
    in the ground.


  6. Re: Here's one for Bob (hope it makes your head spin)

    On Sep 10, 5:42 pm, Doug Phillips wrote:
    > On Sep 10, 4:11 pm, "Dr. Dweeb" wrote:
    >
    > > Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
    > > > Ron Johnson wrote:
    > > >> On 09/10/07 04:12, Rudolf Wingert wrote:

    >
    > > >>> Hello,

    >
    > > >>> JF Mezei wrotes:

    >
    > > >>> However, is there anything wrong with continuing a practice which,
    > > >>> although no longer needed, is still part of a very old tradition and
    > > >>> doesn't cause illness to people ?
    > > >>> <<<

    >
    > > >>> JF your are right. There is nothing wrong to practice tradition.
    > > >>> But is

    >
    > > >> There are *lots* of very old traditions which are very very very bad.

    >
    > > > e.g. celebrating by firing guns into the air. It doesn't seem to
    > > > occur to the celebrants that the bullets come down somewhere and that
    > > > terminal velocity is something like 120 MPH!

    >
    > > > Every once in a while, this practice makes the news when some
    > > > unfortunate soul happens to be standing where the bullet came down.

    >
    > > I read once that one person gets "shot" this way every New Year in LA.

    >
    > And that one person is getting *real* tired of that happening;-)))


    Chuckling OL!

    > > I
    > > forget where, sorry. Maybe an urban legend, but 120mph bit of lead to the
    > > head would probably be fatal.

    >
    > The aforementioned TV show /Mythbusters/ (also one of my favorites,
    > Ron) took on the "falling bullet" myth and concluded that the bullet
    > can probably exceed 120mph downward if it's trajectory is such that it
    > doesn't "flutter" on descent, but if fired close to straight-up it
    > will flutter back down. Even 120mph put some pretty impressive holes
    > in the ground.


    Imagine being hit in the head by a tennis ball served by Roger
    Federer. Now change that to a bullet.

    AEF


  7. Re: Here's one for Bob (hope it makes your head spin)

    In article <46e5b266$0$21929$157c6196@dreader1.cybercity.dk>, "Dr. Dweeb" writes:
    >
    > I read once that one person gets "shot" this way every New Year in LA. I
    > forget where, sorry. Maybe an urban legend, but 120mph bit of lead to the
    > head would probably be fatal.


    Mythbusters did an episode where they showed such projectiles fall
    at a non-lethal velocity. Who came up with 120 mph as the terminal
    velocity, and which projectile did they use?


  8. Re: Here's one for Bob (hope it makes your head spin)

    Bob Koehler wrote:
    > In article <46e5b266$0$21929$157c6196@dreader1.cybercity.dk>, "Dr. Dweeb" writes:
    >
    >>I read once that one person gets "shot" this way every New Year in LA. I
    >>forget where, sorry. Maybe an urban legend, but 120mph bit of lead to the
    >>head would probably be fatal.

    >
    >
    > Mythbusters did an episode where they showed such projectiles fall
    > at a non-lethal velocity. Who came up with 120 mph as the terminal
    > velocity, and which projectile did they use?
    >


    I believe it was something I read in "The American Rifleman" but this
    was many long years ago and I can't swear to it.

    ISTR a story in the Philadelphia Inquirer about an incident in which
    someone was hit by such a bullet and injured or killed. Whether or not
    someone has actually been killed this way, firing your rifle into the
    air is NOT a very good idea. The bullet WILL come down somewhere and
    hit something unless it lodged in a passing aircraft on the way up. The
    place where that bullet will strike is not easily predictable. ISTR
    that the 30-06 military round fired from a Garrand M1 has a maximum
    range of something like three miles when fired at a 45 degree elevation
    although the effective range (at which you can expect to hit and damage
    your target) is far less than that.


  9. Re: Here's one for Bob (hope it makes your head spin)

    On 09/11/07 08:39, Bob Koehler wrote:
    > In article <46e5b266$0$21929$157c6196@dreader1.cybercity.dk>, "Dr. Dweeb" writes:
    >> I read once that one person gets "shot" this way every New Year in LA. I
    >> forget where, sorry. Maybe an urban legend, but 120mph bit of lead to the
    >> head would probably be fatal.

    >
    > Mythbusters did an episode where they showed such projectiles fall
    > at a non-lethal velocity.


    I also remember that episode.

    IIRC, only when the round was fired exactly vertically was the
    velocity non-lethal.. Any angle would cause a ballistic trajectory
    and lethal velocity.

    > Who came up with 120 mph as the terminal
    > velocity, and which projectile did they use?


    --
    Ron Johnson, Jr.
    Jefferson LA USA

    Give a man a fish, and he eats for a day.
    Hit him with a fish, and he goes away for good!

  10. Re: Here's one for Bob (hope it makes your head spin)

    In article <46E6A889.7070806@comcast.net>, "Richard B. Gilbert" writes:
    >
    > ISTR a story in the Philadelphia Inquirer about an incident in which
    > someone was hit by such a bullet and injured or killed. Whether or not
    > someone has actually been killed this way, firing your rifle into the
    > air is NOT a very good idea.


    I fully agree. I'm one of many who think that most of the damage
    and injuries sustained in Bhagdad early in the US attacks in both
    Gulf wars were primarily due to falling munition shot randomly into
    the might sky after US stealth aircraft had left the area.

    I don't want an anti-aircraft projectile falling on me at any speed,
    nor a flood of bullet from small arms.


  11. Re: Here's one for Bob (hope it makes your head spin)

    On Sep 11, 8:39 am, koeh...@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob
    Koehler) wrote:
    > In article <46e5b266$0$21929$157c6...@dreader1.cybercity.dk>, "Dr. Dweeb" writes:
    >
    > > I read once that one person gets "shot" this way every New Year in LA. I
    > > forget where, sorry. Maybe an urban legend, but 120mph bit of lead to the
    > > head would probably be fatal.

    >
    > Mythbusters did an episode where they showed such projectiles fall
    > at a non-lethal velocity. Who came up with 120 mph as the terminal
    > velocity, and which projectile did they use?


    Just looked it up on a few sites, and they all agree that the actual
    terminal velocity of a .30 cal bullet will be between 300 - 400 fps
    which converts to approx 204 - 272 mph (depending on weight and
    shape.)

    A .22 cal's terminal velocity will be lower and a large cal higher,
    and a 1000 lb 12" shell would return at 1300 - 1400 fps -- around 900
    mph!

    The MythBuster's concluded the "would a bullet fired up kill someone"
    myth as confirmed, probable and busted, depending on the angle from
    which it is fired -- this is one of the few myths (maybe the only) to
    which they've ever given all three ratings.

    The 120 mph was just repeated from someones post and is too low. 120
    mph is close to what a sky-diver will achieve with limbs extended, but
    I wouldn't want one of those falling on my head, either.


+ Reply to Thread