Lot of cops surrounding the place. (http://img.tapatalk.com/452cb702-c922-76cd.jpg)
More pics. (http://img.tapatalk.com/452cb702-cb0b-a6e0.jpg)(http://img.tapatalk.com/452cb702-cb16-ca46.jpg)
Anyone know if it's inside or out where it happened? Obviously I'm little concerned being married to a police officer, luckily mine is safe at home, but haven't been able to get ahold of anyone that would be there yet.
Quote from: tulsa_fan on March 07, 2012, 02:59:09 PM
Anyone know if it's inside or out where it happened? Obviously I'm little concerned being married to a police officer, luckily mine is safe at home, but haven't been able to get ahold of anyone that would be there yet.
Outside. My wife works in the courthouse and said it was outside.
KJRH is reporting 3 people injured. My wife says she thinks the gunman was shot in the head or chest but she thinks he was still alive when they carted him away.
That's terrible.
This will become fairly normal news as people who have bad tempers and/or mental issues pack side arms. They need to add another layer of metal detectors out to the perimeter of the property and put up fencing. Nothing is sacred anymore.
TW reports a deputy shot in the hand.
Sauer? You at the library today?
Channel 6 Has some pretty gnarley pics of the guy laying on the ground bleeding.
http://api.newson6.com/utils/slideshow/?id=0f746019-3d80-4674-9892-e450abe7f5e8 (http://api.newson6.com/utils/slideshow/?id=0f746019-3d80-4674-9892-e450abe7f5e8)
Quote from: jacobi on March 07, 2012, 06:03:26 PM
Channel 6 Has some pretty gnarley pics of the guy laying on the ground bleeding.
http://api.newson6.com/utils/slideshow/?id=0f746019-3d80-4674-9892-e450abe7f5e8 (http://api.newson6.com/utils/slideshow/?id=0f746019-3d80-4674-9892-e450abe7f5e8)
It's difficult to feel sorry for someone who starts shooting people. Was this a case of Police assisted suicide?
Geez!!!....
Evolution in action. Too bad others got hurt!
Quote from: jacobi on March 07, 2012, 06:03:26 PM
Channel 6 Has some pretty gnarley pics of the guy laying on the ground bleeding.
http://api.newson6.com/utils/slideshow/?id=0f746019-3d80-4674-9892-e450abe7f5e8 (http://api.newson6.com/utils/slideshow/?id=0f746019-3d80-4674-9892-e450abe7f5e8)
The guy that took those pics from the library is saying the gunman only shot in the air, and sat down. TCSO isnt saying where the rounds that injured the deputy's hand and the bystander came from.
Quote from: Teatownclown on March 07, 2012, 03:10:22 PM
That's terrible.
This will become fairly normal news as people who have bad tempers and/or mental issues pack side arms. They need to add another layer of metal detectors out to the perimeter of the property and put up fencing. Nothing is sacred anymore.
Idiot...!
Quote from: patric on March 07, 2012, 11:52:05 PM
The guy that took those pics from the library is saying the gunman only shot in the air, and sat down. TCSO isnt saying where the rounds that injured the deputy's hand and the bystander came from.
NPR local said the bystander was injured by a deputy.
QuoteIt's difficult to feel sorry for someone who starts shooting people. Was this a case of Police assisted suicide?
I find it's a good idea to be as empathetic as possible. If not for this guy, for his family or any friends that he might have. It's never a good thing when something like this happens.
It seems that he was either trying to commit suicide by cop or trying to go (back?) to jail.
Quote from: jacobi on March 08, 2012, 12:16:19 PM
I find it's a good idea to be as empathetic as possible. If not for this guy, for his family or any friends that he might have.
I would be likely to be empathetic to his friends and family, depending on several factors. If his family/friends were a bunch of violent criminals, then too bad. That's the life they chose. If the family/friends were just people, then yes, they get some sympathy.
Quote from: Red Arrow on March 08, 2012, 12:28:34 PM
I would be likely to be empathetic to his friends and family, depending on several factors. If his family/friends were a bunch of violent criminals, then too bad. That's the life they chose. If the family/friends were just people, then yes, they get some sympathy.
His brother was shot and killed in a police standoff after being charged with murder in 2003 I believe.
Sent from my Atrix4G with fat fingers
So now lets see if all those cameras installed in and around the courthouse were a good investment.
His brother was shot and killed by TPD Homicide Detectives in 2005, AFTER HE KILLED HIS GRANDFATHER IN OKC
Quote from: Townsend on March 08, 2012, 09:34:03 AM
NPR local said the bystander was injured by a deputy.
Possibly, given the angle.
(http://www.tulsaworld.com/articleimages/2012/308_p4sequence0308%5B1%5D.jpg)
(http://www.tulsaworld.com/articleimages/2012/308_p5sequence0308%5B1%5D.jpg)
Some of the rounds went through the library windows, apparently striking a library patron inside.
Is the shooter still in critical condition?
Quote from: AngieBrumley on March 09, 2012, 12:20:45 PM
Is the shooter still in critical condition?
One can only hope...
The slide "show" shows the shooter in the process of sitting down on the light pole curbing with his back to the deputy and then seen lying on the plaza deck. Why? Is there some scenes missing?
Quote from: shadows on March 09, 2012, 03:34:49 PM
The slide "show" shows the shooter in the process of sitting down on the light pole curbing with his back to the deputy and then seen lying on the plaza deck. Why? Is there some scenes missing?
Hmm...the cameraperson was actually in the building shooting this and not an employee of the World. Let's not let the black helicopters come into the scene now.
Quote from: Hoss on March 09, 2012, 04:04:59 PM
Hmm...the cameraperson was actually in the building shooting this and not an employee of the World. Let's not let the black helicopters come into the scene now.
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Do to the fact that a supposed free lance camera person took the slides it would not take a very intelligent attorney to question the pictures and he would not need a black chopper to arrive in. It is time to check the ballast and see who shot who.
Quote from: shadows on March 09, 2012, 05:14:27 PM
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Do to the fact that a supposed free lance camera person took the slides it would not take a very intelligent attorney to question the pictures and he would not need a black chopper to arrive in. It is time to check the ballast and see who shot who.
(http://www.gospeljohn.net/wp-content/uploads/facepalm.jpg)
Quote from: shadows on March 09, 2012, 03:34:49 PM
The slide "show" shows the shooter in the process of sitting down on the light pole curbing with his back to the deputy and then seen lying on the plaza deck. Why? Is there some scenes missing?
You would think that a photo of him actually pointing the revolver at someone would be a photo all the news agencies would use, but it doesn't seem to be out there. Im sure there are lots more frames than what we have seen, though.
I'd still like to see what the surveillance cameras got.
(http://media.cmgdigital.com/shared/img/photos/2012/03/07/39/3f/librayr2_t960.jpg?43ffad5983be9db4d9a3e3fb9464e611547fef58)
Patrick: thanks for posting the picture. With the way he is dressed it would be hard to conceal gun unless he was exercising open carry. So many times we jump at conclusions. It is reported that he had a gun that held five rounds and that was shooting in the air. Has it been released as if the gun contained any live ammunition at the time he was sitting down?
Was his brother charged for killing their grandfather in OC or was it alleged that he did by the OCPD?
Just curious because of how this could happen in such a busy place. Always there is the possibility of a planned suicide.
Quote from: patric on March 09, 2012, 07:48:54 PM
You would think that a photo of him actually pointing the revolver at someone would be a photo all the news agencies would use, but it doesn't seem to be out there. Im sure there are lots more frames than what we have seen, though.
I'd still like to see what the surveillance cameras got.
(http://media.cmgdigital.com/shared/img/photos/2012/03/07/39/3f/librayr2_t960.jpg?43ffad5983be9db4d9a3e3fb9464e611547fef58)
Talking with a friend of mine who knows officers involved in the shooting, the guy never really pointed it at anyone was my understanding. He had it raised in the air firing most of the time, but when he brought it to about a 45 degree angle, the deputies had seen enough at that point.
Quote from: patric on March 07, 2012, 11:52:05 PM
The guy that took those pics from the library is saying the gunman only shot in the air, and sat down. TCSO isnt saying where the rounds that injured the deputy's hand and the bystander came from.
A person firing a gun in any manner, espescially in a public place, should be shot. The threat should be taken out before other questions are asked. There's no telling what he may have done with the gun had he not been shot.
ZYX, that raises some interesting ironies. We pass legislation to make concealed carry and open carry to supposedly give us more protection from crazies and criminals. And, we are so afraid of gun rights being curtailed by unknown sinister elements that a mentally deranged man is able to obtain a gun and openly carry it into a public plaza. Then, with your rationale that anyone who discharges said gun in public needs to be immediately shot, we close the circle. Does this seem weird to anyone else?
Why even bother with non lethal weapons then? This crazy never even pointed the gun at anyone yet he must be shot. I don't for a minute criticize the officers involved. They responded with force in a critical situation with high tension and with current training and protocol. But, the guy was sitting down and obviously less of a threat by the time they shot him. The only injuries sustained were likely from the officers guns.
Those of you who think that drivers should be retested/recertified regularly, like aircraft pilots, to protect public safety, how do you feel about recertifying gun owners?
Quote from: AquaMan on March 10, 2012, 09:18:55 AM
Those of you who think that drivers should be retested/recertified regularly, like aircraft pilots, to protect public safety, how do you feel about recertifying gun owners?
That depends on a number of things. One of which is what do you mean by recertifying gun owners? You don't have to be certified to own a gun, only to conceal carry. Second, who is going to pay for it? If you place a tax on gun ownership then your restricting their rights. Third, are you speaking about the current level of certifying for CC? If so, then there is no point, that class, as far as I have seen, has no criteria to pass, you just pay and attend, and the information is so basic that there isn't a lot of point to it, primarily just to tell you that instructors take on the law.
Quote from: custosnox on March 10, 2012, 11:15:34 AM
That depends on a number of things. One of which is what do you mean by recertifying gun owners? You don't have to be certified to own a gun, only to conceal carry. Second, who is going to pay for it? If you place a tax on gun ownership then your restricting their rights. Third, are you speaking about the current level of certifying for CC? If so, then there is no point, that class, as far as I have seen, has no criteria to pass, you just pay and attend, and the information is so basic that there isn't a lot of point to it, primarily just to tell you that instructors take on the law.
Great answer. Yes, conceal, carry.
Second, who usually pays. The licensee.
Third, are we restricting drivers and pilots by requiring them to be capable and knowledgeable? Is the right to vote restricted by requiring registration and a form of identification?
Fourth, whatever the law allows. I have to occasionally attend mandatory recertification classes for my CDL but that is a requirement of my employer and only consists of reminders and updates of current law and safe practices. I also am subject to losing that license by exhibiting unlawful behavior like public drunk, dwi, excessive vehicle accidents, felonies etc. Would that be too much to ask of conceal/carry gun owners?
What makes gun owners feel that their rights exceed the publics right to safety from them? Seriously, this is just crazy how gun people use the constitution to give them rights at the expense of everyone else.
Quote from: AquaMan on March 10, 2012, 11:30:27 AM
Great answer. Yes, conceal, carry.
Second, who usually pays. The licensee.
Third, are we restricting drivers and pilots by requiring them to be capable and knowledgeable? Is the right to vote restricted by requiring registration and a form of identification?
Fourth, whatever the law allows. I have to occasionally attend mandatory recertification classes for my CDL but that is a requirement of my employer and only consists of reminders and updates of current law and safe practices. I also am subject to losing that license by exhibiting unlawful behavior like public drunk, dwi, excessive vehicle accidents, felonies etc. Would that be too much to ask of conceal/carry gun owners?
What makes gun owners feel that their rights exceed the publics right to safety from them? Seriously, this is just crazy how gun people use the constitution to give them rights at the expense of everyone else.
Conceal carry isn't a right (or hasn't been argued successfully as such), it's a privilege, like driving a car. However, I would expect the costs of such recertification to reflect the cost of issuance, not as an additional revenue to the state (I know, I'm dreaming). But unless there is really a benefit to such certification, is there a point to requiring it? Beyond telling the licensees what they can and can't get away with legally, there really isn't much to this class. If it was to teach proper handling and safe practices, then I could agree to it, but until then it's just adding another layer to a defective system. Still, this won't keep those who shouldn't be carrying from doing so, only the complete removal of firearms from our society would do that, and good luck with that.
Quote from: AquaMan on March 10, 2012, 11:30:27 AM
What makes gun owners feel that their rights exceed the publics right to safety from them? Seriously, this is just crazy how gun people use the constitution to give them rights at the expense of everyone else.
You are safe from me. I only have the license for another 9 years.
Constitution only says you cannot infringe on the right to own firearms. There are plenty of regulations concerning the exercise of that right. Like the hoops I would have to jump through to own a machine gun (that's why I don't) and the total loss of privacy entailed by that ownership. (Feds can come visit any time, day or night. Regardless of what is convenient for you.)
In much of the ME the civilians in their protesting have a tendency to fire guns into the air. In the humanitarian side which we flaunt it is noted that the law enforcement has the right if a citizen is protesting, by the firing of a gun in the air in protest, to act a judge, jury and executor and shoot the protester. In view of the out of state grand jury investigations doesn't this practice need to be looked into and clarified?
Quote from: shadows on March 11, 2012, 07:29:26 PM
In much of the ME the civilians in their protesting have a tendency to fire guns into the air. In the humanitarian side which we flaunt it is noted that the law enforcement has the right if a citizen is protesting, by the firing of a gun in the air in protest, to act a judge, jury and executor and shoot the protester. In view of the out of state grand jury investigations doesn't this practice need to be looked into and clarified?
I agree, firing guns in the air should be protected as free speech. :D
Quote from: BKDotCom on March 11, 2012, 07:59:57 PM
I agree, firing guns in the air should be protected as free speech. :D
Your right, because firing a live round into the air offers no public safety issues what-so-ever. Those rounds dissipate in the atmosphere or something. ::)
Quote from: custosnox on March 11, 2012, 08:06:49 PM
Your right, because firing a live round into the air offers no public safety issues what-so-ever. Those rounds dissipate in the atmosphere or something. ::)
I remember that Myth Busters did a show on that. They had a difficult time getting the round to come back on their target. I forget the final results as I have no plan to fire live rounds into the air.
Quote from: Red Arrow on March 11, 2012, 09:05:46 PM
I remember that Myth Busters did a show on that. They had a difficult time getting the round to come back on their target. I forget the final results as I have no plan to fire live rounds into the air.
They came back down.. just not on the person that fired the gun
http://mythbustersresults.com/episode50
Quote
busted / plausible / confirmed
In the case of a bullet fired at a precisely vertical angle (something extremely difficult for a human being to duplicate), the bullet would tumble, lose its spin, and fall at a much slower speed due to terminal velocity and is therefore rendered less than lethal on impact. However, if a bullet is fired upward at a non-vertical angle (a far more probable possibility), it will maintain its spin and will reach a high enough speed to be lethal on impact. Because of this potentiality, firing a gun into the air is illegal in most states, and even in the states that it is legal, it is not recommended by the police. Also the MythBusters were able to identify two people who had been injured by falling bullets, one of them fatally injured. To date, this is the only myth to receive all three ratings at the same time.
I would have to assume that the two people were as of the airing of the show and does not include the girl that died this last new years eve.
I don't know if its the case for all weapons or types of bullets, but I definitely remember the night firing range in the army and watching the tracer bullets. Every so often a tracer would change direction in mid air, more often than you would think actually. It was as if a bullet would hit some invisible object and shoot off in a completely different direction, sometimes even going backwards at a 45degree angle from the direction it was shot from and you would hear the guys go "Holy sh!t did you see that!" lol. Some bullets would have a corkscrew path through the air. I was just amazed watching things that seemed to defy physics. Though I know all it might take is the slightest nick or scratch on a bullet to help create those trajectories. Needless to say it added a bit extra adrenaline as we low crawled under the barbed wire underneath all that live fire. Aaaah memories, good times.
Anyway, shooting a bullet straigh up in the air in no way means it's going to go straight up in the air.
If fired vertically, they come down at the terminal velocity dictated by the weight, mass and drag coefficient of the object. Take an AK-47 for instance, once the bullet reaches the apex of it's climb, the energy from the 2329 ft/s muzzle velocity has been depleted. The fall of the projectile is totally dependent on simple laws of physics. Because there is no more energy being created, the fall is dependent on only the kinetic energy provided by gravity and altitude. Since you can't break the second law of thermodynamics, the bullet cannot reach anything near muzzle speed on the way down, but it can hurt.
d=distance fallen (enough to reach terminal velocity)
g=32.15/f^2
m=mass of bullet
Cd=drag coefficient
p=density of air
v=velocity while falling
A=frontal area (from which Cd is generated)
The bullet will gain energy +E=d*g*m, and lose energy -E=d*Cd*p*v^2*A/2.
Setting -E=+E, and solving for v, we find that v=((2*g*m)/(Cd*A*p))^1/2.
V=269.293
Bullet on the way up=2329 ft/s
Bullet on the way down=269 ft/s
It would hurt. Wear a helmet.
If the bullet was not fired straight up, gravity would not exercise as much force on depleting the energy of the projectile, and it could travel much faster.
Now, if you want to talk about what would happen if a swallow were to drop a coconut on your head, that's another matter.
Quote from: Gaspar on March 12, 2012, 11:01:57 AM
If fired vertically, they come down at the terminal velocity dictated by the weight, mass and drag coefficient of the object. Take an AK-47 for instance, once the bullet reaches the apex of it's climb, the energy from the 2329 ft/s muzzle velocity has been depleted. The fall of the projectile is totally dependent on simple laws of physics. Because there is no more energy being created, the fall is dependent on only the kinetic energy provided by gravity and altitude. Since you can't break the second law of thermodynamics, the bullet cannot reach anything near muzzle speed on the way down, but it can hurt.
d=distance fallen (enough to reach terminal velocity)
g=32.15/f^2
m=mass of bullet
Cd=drag coefficient
p=density of air
v=velocity while falling
A=frontal area (from which Cd is generated)
The bullet will gain energy +E=d*g*m, and lose energy -E=d*Cd*p*v^2*A/2.
Setting -E=+E, and solving for v, we find that v=((2*g*m)/(Cd*A*p))^1/2.
V=269.293
Bullet on the way up=2329 ft/s
Bullet on the way down=269 ft/s
It would hurt. Wear a helmet.
If the bullet was not fired straight up, gravity would not exercise as much force on depleting the energy of the projectile, and it could travel much faster.
Now, if you want to talk about what would happen if a swallow were to drop a coconut on your head, that's another matter.
An African or European swallow?
Quote from: swake on March 12, 2012, 11:06:02 AM
An African or European swallow?
A five ounce bird could not carry a one pound coconut.
It could be carried by an African Swallow. But then of course, African swallows are non-migratory.
Imagine what this could have been like if it wasn't some depressed person looking to be taken out.
If he had intended to do some real damage, he might have brought more than five bullets in a revolver.
Quote from: patric on March 12, 2012, 01:59:25 PM
Imagine what this could have been like if it wasn't some depressed person looking to be taken out.
If he had intended to do some real damage, he might have brought more than five bullets in a revolver.
I doubt it.
QuoteIf the bullet was not fired straight up, gravity would not exercise as much force on depleting the energy of the projectile, and it could travel much faster.
One of the things discussed on that mythbusters ep was that the cases where people have been hurt are usually from people firing up, but at an angle. With the distances traveled by bullets, it doesn't take much of a move of the hand when firing to make a huge difference in the skew of the vector at the hieght of the bullet's trajectory relative to the position of the shooter. I wonder what the min nec. angle of fire would be to get the bullet to arch over rather than just expend its force and return at terminal velocity only. TO THE LAB!
Quote from: Townsend on March 12, 2012, 11:27:00 AM
A five ounce bird could not carry a one pound coconut.
Use a bumblebee then...
Quote from: jacobi on March 14, 2012, 06:36:54 AM
One of the things discussed on that mythbusters ep was that the cases where people have been hurt are usually from people firing up, but at an angle. With the distances traveled by bullets, it doesn't take much of a move of the hand when firing to make a huge difference in the skew of the vector at the hieght of the bullet's trajectory relative to the position of the shooter. I wonder what the min nec. angle of fire would be to get the bullet to arch over rather than just expend its force and return at terminal velocity only. TO THE LAB!
There is a distance/velocity curve to every bullet, related to what Gaspar said about terminal velocity. 45 degrees is the angle for the intersection of distance traveled versus velocity. Below 45, the velocity is higher (but declining) while the distance is shorter, but increasing. Above 45, velocity is lower (and still declining) while distance is shorter and declining.
QuoteThere is a distance/velocity curve to every bullet, related to what Gaspar said about terminal velocity. 45 degrees is the angle for the intersection of distance traveled versus velocity. Below 45, the velocity is higher (but declining) while the distance is shorter, but increasing. Above 45, velocity is lower (and still declining) while distance is shorter and declining.
I guess i'm wondering at what point the bullet loses it's rifling spin, becomes less stable and thereby hemorages momentum. BTW, you guys inspired me, I'm watching mythbusters now.
Quote from: jacobi on March 14, 2012, 08:03:23 AM
I guess i'm wondering at what point the bullet loses it's rifling spin, becomes less stable and thereby hemorages momentum. BTW, you guys inspired me, I'm watching mythbusters now.
That's extremely dependent on the round, and the gun. The gun this shooter was using was a S&W Centennial. It holds 5 rounds either .38 or .357. It only has about a 3" barrel. This produces a very unstable rifle spin, and unpredictable ballistic path. Because it is a short barrel revolver, gas also escapes around the firing chamber, therefore the barrel does not serve as an expansion mechanism for gasses. This gun is designed for close encounters. A longer barrel will produce more friction, but also a more stable spin, and if the firing chamber and barrel are one (semi-auto pistols, rifles) the barrel offers a smooth expansion chamber for the round's gasses. This gives you more distance, more stable spin, and more accuracy.
Different manufactures and products also offer different twist ratios. An AK-47 may have a twist of 1:8, that means the bullet makes one complete rotation every 8 inches. Some may be as low as 1:12. Some graduate from almost no twist to a tight 1:8 by the end of the barrel. Each dictates a different muzzle velocity and stability characteristics.
Quote from: Gaspar on March 14, 2012, 09:22:07 AM
That's extremely dependent on the round, and the gun. The gun this shooter was using was a S&W Centennial. It holds 5 rounds either .38 or .357. It only has about a 3" barrel. This produces a very unstable rifle spin, and unpredictable ballistic path. Because it is a short barrel revolver, gas also escapes around the firing chamber, therefore the barrel does not serve as an expansion mechanism for gasses. This gun is designed for close encounters. A longer barrel will produce more friction, but also a more stable spin, and if the firing chamber and barrel are one (semi-auto pistols, rifles) the barrel offers a smooth expansion chamber for the round's gasses. This gives you more distance, more stable spin, and more accuracy.
Different manufactures and products also offer different twist ratios. An AK-47 may have a twist of 1:8, that means the bullet makes one complete rotation every 8 inches. Some may be as low as 1:12. Some graduate from almost no twist to a tight 1:8 by the end of the barrel. Each dictates a different muzzle velocity and stability characteristics.
Good for about 20 feet (3" barrel) if you are lucky. I have acquaintances who talk about their hunting prowess with a .357 revolver with 6" barrel (Colt, Smith, or Ruger, depending on the "liar") and how they are able to take down a running deer at 100 yards!
There is some expansion in the barrel, but most leaks out the cylinder end. All of the gas just can't get out at the end of the cylinder before pushing down the barrel, too.
Obviously have never shot a revolver at anything anywhere close to 100 yards. Or seen a running deer at 100 yards. Hitting anything smaller than about a one foot target at 100 yards is a crap shoot - fairly easy at a range, with no outside influences, like running deer, or trees, or the other distractions typically found in the field. Hunting that way would be exceptionally irresponsible.
Quote from: jacobi on March 14, 2012, 06:36:54 AM
One of the things discussed on that mythbusters ep was that the cases where people have been hurt are usually from people firing up, but at an angle. With the distances traveled by bullets, it doesn't take much of a move of the hand when firing to make a huge difference in the skew of the vector at the hieght of the bullet's trajectory relative to the position of the shooter. I wonder what the min nec. angle of fire would be to get the bullet to arch over rather than just expend its force and return at terminal velocity only. TO THE LAB!
So is someone trying to say the deputy who was shot in both hands/arms was hit by a bullet returning to earth?
Quote from: patric on March 14, 2012, 12:26:34 PM
So is someone trying to say the deputy who was shot in both hands/arms was hit by a bullet returning to earth?
No. Certainly no bullet that left the earths atmosphere.
We're just trying to determine how dangerous it is to fire a gun into the air. Which is apparently all the suspect did.
If I deciphered Shadow's post correctly, I believe he was trying to say it's a first amendment thing.... that's just how people celebrate.
The law, common sense, and mythbusters say "don't do it".
I believe the issue is illustrated quite clearly in this clip from Ronin:
If the forum doesn't pass through the time tag, go to 1:17.
Quote from: BKDotCom on March 14, 2012, 01:11:26 PM
No. Certainly no bullet that left the earths atmosphere.
We're just trying to determine how dangerous it is to fire a gun into the air. Which is apparently all the suspect did.
If I deciphered Shadow's post correctly, I believe he was trying to say it's a first amendment thing.... that's just how people celebrate.
The law, common sense, and mythbusters say "don't do it".
No commercial ammunition will achieve escape velocity. I don't believe the guy just shot up in the air. While it is possible, the odds are just too huge to believe. And the time interval would have been seconds before the deputy was shot rather than almost instantaneously. One of the sequences of pictures showed the guy with the gun in the general direction of the deputy, then the next frame showed the deputy down, with another one shooting at the guy. That was less than many seconds, it appeared.
Any recent physics students that can do the math in their head? .38 special from 2.5" barrel, about 1400 fps. Straight up, the first second, about 1400 feet. Second second ?? Speed reducing 32 fps/second. Stops in a few seconds (3 or 4?). Then must accelerate back down for a few more. It looks like the whole thing was over by the time the bullet could get back down.
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on March 14, 2012, 07:05:27 PM
One of the sequences of pictures showed the guy with the gun in the general direction of the deputy, then the next frame showed the deputy down, with another one shooting at the guy. That was less than many seconds, it appeared.
Unless all the sources are wrong, the deputy nearest the north courthouse doors (and surveillance camera) crouching in the published photos is not the same as the one that was wounded.
I thought the same thing at first glance myself, but the photographer captioned the photo as the deputy ducking for cover.
Quote from: patric on March 15, 2012, 11:05:26 AM
Unless all the sources are wrong, the deputy nearest the north courthouse doors (and surveillance camera) crouching in the published photos is not the same as the one that was wounded.
I thought the same thing at first glance myself, but the photographer captioned the photo as the deputy ducking for cover.
Simple crossfire incident. No need to over-analyze it. Dealing with large bollards and round cement planters there is multiple opportunities for ricochet, and no way for an officer to know where that shot will wind up. A solid round object can deflect a bullet or a fragment by as much as 45 degrees.
Quote from: Gaspar on March 15, 2012, 03:08:45 PM
Simple crossfire incident. No need to over-analyze it. Dealing with large bollards and round cement planters there is multiple opportunities for ricochet, and no way for an officer to know where that shot will wind up. A solid round object can deflect a bullet or a fragment by as much as 45 degrees.
No, it's a conspiracy.
Quote from: Gaspar on March 15, 2012, 03:08:45 PM
Simple crossfire incident. No need to over-analyze it. Dealing with large bollards and round cement planters there is multiple opportunities for ricochet, and no way for an officer to know where that shot will wind up. A solid round object can deflect a bullet or a fragment by as much as 45 degrees.
Or even put it right back in your face if unlucky enough.
The person who keeps loading those rounds like the ones furnished to Kennedy's assassin, that are radio controlled, moving in a shield of an absolute vacuum, not subject to the laws of astronomy with earth constant movement, defying the laws of physics, must be stopped or no one will be secure.
Quote from: shadows on March 16, 2012, 10:02:14 PM
The person who keeps loading those rounds like the ones furnished to Kennedy's assassin, that are radio controlled, moving in a shield of an absolute vacuum, not subject to the laws of astronomy with earth constant movement, defying the laws of physics, must be stopped or no one will be secure.
Holy cow. I can't believe I read that all the way through without going blind from a headache.
Quote from: Hoss on March 16, 2012, 10:38:06 PM
Holy cow. I can't believe I read that all the way through without going blind from a headache.
I thought that was a result of something else.
;D
Quote from: Red Arrow on March 16, 2012, 11:20:26 PM
I thought that was a result of something else.
;D
Nope, Santorum won't allow me that.
:o
Quote from: AquaMan on March 10, 2012, 09:18:55 AM
ZYX, that raises some interesting ironies. We pass legislation to make concealed carry and open carry to supposedly give us more protection from crazies and criminals. And, we are so afraid of gun rights being curtailed by unknown sinister elements that a mentally deranged man is able to obtain a gun and openly carry it into a public plaza. Then, with your rationale that anyone who discharges said gun in public needs to be immediately shot, we close the circle. Does this seem weird to anyone else?
Why even bother with non lethal weapons then? This crazy never even pointed the gun at anyone yet he must be shot. I don't for a minute criticize the officers involved. They responded with force in a critical situation with high tension and with current training and protocol. But, the guy was sitting down and obviously less of a threat by the time they shot him. The only injuries sustained were likely from the officers guns.
Those of you who think that drivers should be retested/recertified regularly, like aircraft pilots, to protect public safety, how do you feel about recertifying gun owners?
Sorry Aqua Man, I didn't see this. I'll respond when it's not one in the morning. :D
Quote from: ZYX on March 17, 2012, 01:10:43 AM
Sorry Aqua Man, I didn't see this. I'll respond when it's not one in the morning. :D
Be sure to note Custo's responses a little later on.
I mostly just feel that in our zest to protect our gun rights against imaginary political forces that are assumed to be fascist in nature, that we are putting ourselves at more risk by putting guns in the hands of an untrained, uneducated, unenlightened, unstable population.
Wow. Did I just say that about my fellow countrymen?! Okay, maybe just the Santorum states. ;D
Quote from: Hoss on March 16, 2012, 10:38:06 PM
Holy cow. I can't believe I read that all the way through without going blind from a headache.
...
That goes to show you that in Darwin study on evolution, among all physical creatures the brain is in constant development to where it adapts to all situations without pain.
No Pain? Are you sure? I have sure felt some severe headaches from trying to adapt.
Quote from: AquaMan on March 17, 2012, 09:14:08 AM
I mostly just feel that in our zest to protect our gun rights against imaginary political forces that are assumed to be fascist in nature, that we are putting ourselves at more risk by putting guns in the hands of an untrained, uneducated, unenlightened, unstable population.
I doubt that politicians (elected or otherwise) that oppose gun ownership are imaginary, as much as I doubt some depressed person couldn't sit on a bench in front of a police station brandishing a butter knife to hasten their demise.
Im a little more worried about the ratio of 2 unintended targets for 1 legitimate.
Quote from: patric on March 17, 2012, 11:36:22 AM
I doubt that politicians (elected or otherwise) that oppose gun ownership are imaginary, as much as I doubt some depressed person couldn't sit on a bench in front of a police station brandishing a butter knife to hasten their demise.
Im a little more worried about the ratio of 2 unintended targets for 1 legitimate.
Is there an organization as large and forceful as the NRA who opposes gun ownership? There may be some politicians who oppose unrestricted gun ownership but they are hardly the force that the Santorum states think they are.
Even well trained military end up shooting each other. If you don't like those 2:1 odds support some sort of ongoing training for gun owners. I support gun ownership yet I also believe anything that damaging to other people begs for rational treatment.
Simple question: How many of these gun zealots do you think has actually had a gun aimed at them or had shots fired at them? It gives you a different perspective. When you know the guy on the trigger end is stupid, untrained or mentally deranged you suddenly see the issues differently. It galvanizes your opinion for or against restrictions.
New story out on the shooting. Those surveillance cameras should be purged. That may have been a Thompson machine gun.
The shooter was a good shot to have shot the gun out of officer's hand.
Seriously, they are giving themselves medals for this clusterfu@k:
The Tulsa County Sheriff's Office will hold an awards ceremony recognizing employees for their heroic acts during the courthouse shooting that took place on March 7, 2012.
http://www.fox23.com/news/local/story/Tulsa-County-Sheriff-Deputies-honored-for/M1oOFXdpTUmlc9AnBNhjyA.cspx
The ceremony will be held at the Tulsa County Courthouse on Thursday and will recognize the following outstanding employees in the categories of:
Purple Heart
Deputy David Adam Fortenberry
Medal of Valor
Deputy David Adam Fortenberry
Corporal Dennis Miller
Deputy Stephen Culley
Meritorious Service
Captain Larry Merchant
Sergeant Judy Pounds
Deputy David Pool
Deputy Brandon Montgomery
CSO Tammy Johnson
CSO Marjorie Mears
CSO Betty Allen
OHP Trooper Shilo Hall
Letters of Commendation
Detention Officer Brandon Johnson
Sara Gadd
Patti O'Donnell
Kim Watson
Wow...
So you would have rather they had done nothing?
I could picture it now, lone nut kills five civilians and you'd then blame it on the cops and TCSD for not intercepting him sooner.
Quote from: Conan71 on June 06, 2012, 01:39:34 PM
So you would have rather they had done nothing?
That's not a very rational conclusion, don't you think?
Quote from: patric on June 06, 2012, 02:33:07 PM
That's not a very rational conclusion, don't you think?
So what's your beef with honoring some deputies who put themselves in harm's way then?
Quote from: Conan71 on June 06, 2012, 02:55:21 PM
So what's your beef with honoring some deputies who put themselves in harm's way then?
Are you kidding? Did you see who posted that crap? Sorry patric, but your one trick pony is beaten to death.
Even TPD went on record with a finding of friendly fire, yet you just had to get a personal attack in. >:(
Quote from: patric on June 06, 2012, 11:28:58 PM
Even TPD went on record with a finding of friendly fire, yet you just had to get a personal attack in. >:(
Smile happens. This nut bag could have killed a bunch of people. Several officers not typically involved in such action, reacted, and because of their training, were able to contain a situation that could have been far far worse. I understand that your purpose in life is to villainize public safety officials. I don't know what happened to you to make you so angry at those who devote their lives to protecting our rights, and I really don't care.
I know several cops, marshals, and a few federal agents. All of them went into the profession (service) because they believe in protecting the rights of the individual against illegal force. They want to stand against people who do bad things. No one is perfect and there are imperfect law enforcement officers, but the vast majority are wonderful hard working people that put themselves at great risk to enforce the laws that keep us safe. They are held accountable and scrutinized for every move they make. In many cases they risk incredible penalties for doing the right thing the wrong way.
My friend Mark puts him self in danger every day, his wife prays that he will come home to her and their two boys every night. He's been stabbed, cut, had bones broken and been beat to a pulp by bad people who do bad things. He's not paid much, but he still puts on the uniform and goes to work every day. He does it because he understands what his purpose is every time he looks at his kids, and my kids, and your kids.
Take just a moment to look around your office or home. Look at the simple locks on your doors and thin panes of glass. You don't have bars on your windows, or 10ft iron gates around your yard. This is because a few people are willing to strap on a gun and badge and march into danger, protecting an environment that you can appreciate. This is because they create an environment that offers significant risk to those who would do you harm or violate your rights. In some cases they are beat up, cut, burned, shot, stabbed, and killed. Most have loved ones that feel that pain in their hearts every time the phone rings, and say a little prayer before answering it.
I've been to countries where law enforcement is either powerless or criminal puppets.
Your children don't look out at the world from iron gates.
(http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRdV1zY1bebSBe7xvghXj96Cfeq6v2i82X-i0rWsZLaPSi8tMnRyA)
This will be the last time I ever react to one of your foolish, self-serving posts. I invite others to do the same.
This is too relevant to just slip through the cracks... On the very day the Sheriff's Department was giving itself medals for the courthouse shooting, this was happening:
Suicidal Gunman Surrenders Near Sand Springs Walmart
SAND SPRINGS, Oklahoma - An armed gunman threatening to take his own life held police at bay for nearly two hours Thursday near the Sand Springs Walmart.
Authorities responded near the old Gerdau Ameristeel and Walmart, located at 220 S. Oklahoma Highway 97, where a gunman was on the loose southwest of the department store, scanner traffic indicated.
The man dropped his weapon, was surrounded by police and taken into custody at 6:16 p.m.
The man had earlier fired his gun into the air twice, but police said they're not treating this as a criminal act, and the man didn't mean to target anyone else.
Sand Springs Assistant Police Chief Mike Carter said the Walmart was able to remain open during the standoff, although part of its parking lot was cleared for the safety of the public.
The 27-year-old man, whom Carter described as suicidal, was in an industrial area as negotiators talked with him, Carter said. At least 25 officers from Sand Springs, Sapulpa and Tulsa responded, he said.
Carter said the recently formed South West Area Tactical Team of Sand Springs and Sapulpa officers was among those responding.
"We intend in this moment to treat this as a mental health incident and taking the subject in for emergency detention," Carter said. The man's name was not released.
It seems almost a mirror image of the courthouse affair, except for the bloodless outcome.
If anyone deserves medals, it should be Sand Springs PD.
We should learn something from this,
and give credit where credit is due.
Why do I sense that you know who has a tub of astoglide in his living room and watches and rewatches this movie scene?