Here's why you don't shoot over water.

[Archaic]

Beentown and JPG19:

So you guys genuinely think its ok to hapahazardly spray tracers across 1/2 mile of distant hillside as long as you own it?

TennJed:

I have passed up on more than one skylined deer because I knew I was responsible for that Accubond after it passed through. Being a responsible shooter has not impeded me from killing critters all over north America.

 

[22-rimfire]

Not a good idea to shoot into water. But I suspect most of us have done it if you live out in the country. If you do shoot into water, make sure you are shooting at a steep angle to the water surface. At a low angle, most bullets will riccochet.

I pay attention to my backstop. The lack of a backstop is why I pretty much refuse to shoot squirrels high up in trees., especially with a 22 rifle. Even with shotguns, you are spraying shot all over the place. I have had shot rained on me archery hunting more than a couple times by squirrel hunters.

 

[Scooter22]

A neighbor at our camp lost a cousin back in the 40s from a water ricochet. They were shooting at debris getting blow in toward shore. Apparently one shot hit a incoming wave and came back hitting the cousin in the heart. When ever we went to the lake shore to shoot a shotgun he always came down and made sure no rifles were involved.

 

[Cee Zee]

Hey I'm not in favor of shooting at water where you can't see the backstop well and you don't have any idea what's beyond that. Because sometimes bullets do get over that big hilll of a backstop. But it is certainly possible to find places that are safe to shoot water. There was a pond behind my dad's house. Beyond that pond was a large hill where we could see anyone who might happen to be there. I don't remember ever seeing one single person on that hill in all the years we lived there. We shot down the hill at a fairly steep angle into that pond. Beyond the hill (which was about 400-500 foot tall) was nothing but open land for miles except for one house that was up against a hill toward where we lived and that was 2 miles away. So the bullet would have to ricochet up and over the 500 foot hill and come almost straight down to hit that house stuck up against a hill as protected as it could be. It was the same hill range so it was another 500 foot hill down to the house and that's after going up high enough to clear a 500 foot hill, travel 2 miles in a huge arc, and come straight down on the other side of the hill. The people who lived there were old and never got up on that hill. I'm talking very old. There were no deer at all in that area at the time. Well there was the ONE that I saw twice in my first 25 years of life. I suppose we could have hit him but I seriously doubt it. First it's impossible to get a .22 to go high enough on a ricochet to even clear that first hill but for it to then travel 2 miles and come straight down on the other side it would have had to go up about 5 or 6 miles in the air off a ricochet. And we never shot anything except a .22 or once in a great while a .25 which was actually weaker than the .22's.

And this stuff about saying a shotgun isn't safe either? Give me a break. A shotgun would never clear that lake in the video if you tried to shoot it to the other side. And to bounce it off the water first would be a miracle. A slug might clear the lake but any shot shell wouldn't. They make those round which means a lot less distance it will travel. I've had birdshot rain on me from a trap range. We never got hurt. It came back down after about 200 yards and that's after being shot at a clay flying which would be just about the right angle to make the shot travel as far as possible. And to think it would make it much farther than that on a ricochet is just off the wall. It wouldn't happen.

There are ways to shoot even centerfire rounds into water too. You need a LONG distance behind the water and you need to shoot right under the bank on the other side of the water no more than an inch from the end of the water. You need the bank to be high enough to catch any ricochets coming off that water.

I wonder how some of the people here think hunting works. I won't shoot a squirrel in a tree with a .22 either. I have to shoot where there's a backstop or I won't shoot. But we should remember that the woods aren't crawling with people. A single shot will have a very, very small chance of hitting a person even if you do shoot over the horizon. I wouldn't do that but we're talking a .3" bullet needing to hit a person a long way off. The odds have to be in the billions against such things. As many wacko deer hunters that have invaded our area over the years and shot people's houses I have never heard of a single person being hit by a high powered bullet fired by an idiot at a random direction where they don't know the area. Lots of houses have been hit. Zero people have been hit. And there have been many, many, many chances for a bullet to hit a person in a situation like that just in my area. We're talking odds in the billions to one range. I'm not talking about people shooting where houses and people are close. I'm talking ridge clearing shots that have to hit something on the other side of that ridge.

Not every shot taken is going to endanger someone. Some seem to think that shooting is ony safe when at a range. Well I've seen ranges that weren't safe by any means. I don't shoot there either. But I have hunted my entire life and I've never shot anyone yet. And that includes the occasional shot into a tree to knock a coon out (although most of those rounds never left the coon).

 

[DM~]

Do you hunt? If so do you lead the game in front of your backstop or do you have someone place a backstop behind it real quick before you shoot?

I was thinking the exact same thing!

DM

 

[ApacheCoTodd]

You can always HEAR ricochets I've never NOT been able to hear one, you can also tell by the sound of the impact it makes on the water.

Reminds me of this one:

You've never heard my dad either but I promise you he exists.

I think you may have been watching too many Sergio Leone movies.

For my part, I've seen far too many ricochet/deflections which I could not hear than I care to remember.

 

[Ignition Override]

A rifle round went over a really small hill in a rural area in Arkansas and killed a young boy during a picnic.

 

[grter]

Be sure of your backstop is that too hard to understand?

As far as shooting .22s into water that is a bad idea since those lightweight fast bullets are prone to richochets.

I was told of a girl that was hit in the head and killed by a .22 that skimmed across a lake and hit her from over a mile away.

 

[GBExpat]

A neighbor at our camp lost a cousin back in the 40s from a water ricochet. They were shooting at debris getting blow in toward shore. Apparently one shot hit a incoming wave and came back hitting the cousin in the heart.

Hit a wave and came back?

 

[45_auto]

So you guys genuinely think its ok to hapahazardly spray tracers across 1/2 mile of distant hillside as long as you own it?

You've obviously never been in the military or to a Knob Creek night shoot.

As RcModel stated back in post #65, if you've EVER been behind a range you'll find bullets all over the ground for literally miles around it. Tracers just let you see why they end up there. People who have never fired tracers seem to believe that all their bullets that hit the berm stay there. It doesn't work that way in real life. Even firing into a soft berm a good percentage of the bullets will ricochet over it. Any time you take a shot at an animal while hunting without verifying that the woods are clear for miles around you're risking hitting another hunter with your ricocheting bullet. Just like every time you go outside without your armor plated umbrella you're risking getting hit by a meteorite. Sometimes you just have to be realistic in assessing risk.

This is a typical M16 night shoot with tracers. That's with 1 tracer every 5 rounds, how many bullets that you can't see do you think are ricocheting around?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NCsnSr6lqKM

A minigun with tracers at Knob Creek also produces a few richochets:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNN-VyprfSw

 

[Beentown]

Beentown and JPG19:

So you guys genuinely think its ok to hapahazardly spray tracers across 1/2 mile of distant hillside as long as you own it?

What is the use of buying it if I can't use it? Due diligence has been done on my part. If I did everything on what someone else may do wrong....I wouldn't be able to do anything.

We also start shooting into our set berms (50, 100, 300 and 500 yards). If they still trespass after seeing the posted signs, having the landowners go by on quads, and hearing multiple gun shots...it is on them.

Some sue for having hot coffee...not my game.

 

[119er]

I don't think it is so much the bullet 'flinging' the trace element.
The mostly burnt out trace element doesn't weigh enough to fly that far that fast!

Makes sense RC. That's just me assuming what I was told back in the day as truth. Your analysis makes sense about the energy/velocity of the tracer elements alone. It just seems odd that THAT many tracers would ricochet off of an earthen berm! When the whole firing line is shooting it looks like a laser light show or something! I believe tracers are supposedly less stable than typical 55/62 bullets but then again tracers are the reason for 1:7 if I am informed correctly. Maybe this causes a higher occurance of ricochets with tracers?

 

[rcmodel]

No, like I said before, and 45_auto said in post #85.

Go downrange and wander around behind any military impact area, and you will find spent bullets and shells of all types & sizes all over the place, 100's of yards away from where they should have ended up if they continued in a straight line behind the berm or impact area.

I believe each bullet impacts, some hitting soft dirt head on, some hitting hard clay at an angle, some hitting gravel a glancing blow, and some hitting other bullets in the dirt..

And each ricochet takes on a new trajectory depending on the object in the dirt it hit, the angle it hit it, and how badly the bullet was deformed.

Heck some of them, or more like lots of them, shoot curve balls once they hit the ground the first time and go off in a different direction..

As an aside, I have seen 18 pound, 106mm Recoilless Rifle training rounds glance of a derelict M-60 target tank and take off almost 45 degrees or more from the direction it was going when it hit the tank.
They were slow enough in the air you could watch them all the way to the target, glance off, and a 1/4 mile later when they hit the ground again, and took off in yet another direction.

The .50 Cal WP spotting rounds often did the same thing if they didn't impact into a flat section of armor and explode in a white puff of marker smoke as intended..

rc

 

[22-rimfire]

So you're saying that there is no such thing as a good natural backstop?

 

[119er]

I thought I agreed with you, RC. Sometimes I can be unclear as I run with a thought and take it on a path its own.

As a general question, what reason do you have to be wandering around military impact areas? We had to police up brass but never projectiles!

 

[jim243]

That was an act of "Reckless Endangerment" with a firearm it becomes a felony.

Jim

Reckless endangerment is a charge that can be filed against people who engage in activity with dangerous consequences that could be foreseen, with a disregard for the danger involved. This charge may be a felony or a misdemeanor, depending on the specifics of the situation. It can also be combined with other charges.

In situations deemed reckless endangerment, people do something that they know is dangerous, and they do not exhibit any thought about the potential consequences of what they are doing. They willfully behave in a way that is wanton or reckless, putting other people at risk. No intent to injure or kill is required; it is enough that the person knew an activity could pose a threat and chose to do it anyway.

One example could be firing a weapon out the sunroof of a car. The person firing the weapon would be aware that there is a chance that someone could be hit with a bullet, potentially putting people in the area in danger. If someone is injured or killed, the person can be charged with a felony, because the use of a deadly weapon such as a gun in a reckless endangerment case upgrades the charge to a felony.

 

[rcmodel]

119er said:

I thought I agreed with you, RC. Maybe this causes a higher occurrence of ricochets with tracers?

And I said, no, I didn't think it did, as every bullet goes off to do it's thing when it hits the ground, regardless of the caliber or bullet type.

what reason do you have to be wandering around military impact areas?

Anti-tank squad leader, sergeant, & platoon sergeant longer, AMU gunsmith & shooter, and helped get a 5th. Army sniper school started at Ft. Carson CO in 1969-70.

As AMU guys laying out long range targets, we had free access to every range on post if small arms live fire, or high-explosives wasn't on the training schedule that day.

When it was on the schedule, we were the ones running the training ranges.

Other times we went out and marked unexploded ordinance for EOD to come deal with so we could clear our ranges for longer range use.

Another time, we were camped out for a week in a WWII anti-aircraft impact area at Ft. Riley KS..

I had one of my guys wake me up one night banging on a dud 90mm AA round with his entrenching tool.
Because the pointy end with the corroded fuse on it poked a hole in his air mattress!!!!

Plus, general interest and curiosity the whole while.
We even re-conned a 1940's deserted uranium mine on the south end of Ft. Carson once, against good common sense and general orders.

It did make a good sniper hide nobody had enough guts to come look in though!

And it was way cooler then it was outside in the sun hiding behind a Yuka Sucka plant, with a tarantula crawling up your shirt sleeve because it was cooler inside your shirt!

rc

 

[xxjumbojimboxx]

Vermont still has a 60 day 'Fish Shooting' season in the Spring...I have shot many fish, and have never 'hit' one...

The concussion briefly stuns the fish, and then you hopefully net or gaff them quickly before they 'wake up'...

The key is steep angle, and anything more than 2 feet down is a waste of ammo (including .45-70)...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BY6FnzroUBE

Whaddia know? Ya learn something new everyday I guess. I knew though that most bullets wont travel very far through water... Ive never seen it done with the 45/70 though.

 

[45_auto]

One example could be firing a weapon out the sunroof of a car. The person firing the weapon would be aware that there is a chance that someone could be hit with a bullet, potentially putting people in the area in danger. If someone is injured or killed, the person can be charged with a felony, because the use of a deadly weapon such as a gun in a reckless endangerment case upgrades the charge to a felony.

This guy is committing felonies at a rate of about 100 per second by your standards.

http://www.break.com/video/the-presidential-gatling-gun-651141

 

[we are not amused]

This is getting silly!

Bullets that hit a wave and are "bounced" back at you!

When ever somebody starts talking about ricochets, somebody always has to out do somebody else's story, and it spirals from there.:banghead:

If half these stories are true, it is a wonder anyone is still alive.

 

[RetiredUSNChief]

Anybody ever consider the fact that whatever prey you're shooting at is essentially nothing but a bag of water?

Ricochets happen ALL the time and from ALL mediums. Branches and tree trunks, ground, rocks, water, plants and shrubbery, and yes, even the prey we shoot.

As it's been said before, be sure of what lies beyond your target and, in general, use common sense and don't be stupid.

 

[22-rimfire]

As it's been said before, be sure of what lies beyond your target and, in general, use common sense and don't be stupid.

Words I live by when shooting. Riccochets do happen all the time. As I understand it though, a great deal of the energy is used up. The Garland TX shooting range was in deep do do for a while and I don't know if they are still in business today. There is a landfill behind the range and urban sprall has pretty much used up all the normal land that the owners would sell. I used to shoot there and always wondered how many rounds got sent up toward the houses that you could see above the range on the hillside regardless of the backstop. They used to have machine shoots there but that all stopped years ago.

 

[Scooter22]

Hit a wave and came back?

Yes they were shooting at debris being carried in by waves rolling toward them on the lakeshore. The cousin fired at whatever was being washed in to him and yelled and dropped the gun. Freak accident but it happened.

 

[Geronimo45]

Shooting tracers can be very... illuminating.

Also, anybody who can afford a FA M16 lower can surely afford to own ridiculous stretches of land, as well.

 

[JPG19]

Beentown and JPG19:

So you guys genuinely think its ok to hapahazardly spray tracers across 1/2 mile of distant hillside as long as you own it?

TennJed:

I have passed up on more than one skylined deer because I knew I was responsible for that Accubond after it passed through. Being a responsible shooter has not impeded me from killing critters all over north America.

It depends on the nature of your land, but essentially, yes. If your land is rarely trespassed on, you drive around prior to pulling a stunt like this, and begin with some more controlled fire as a last warning to anyone who is hanging around where they shouldn't, then I see no problem with it. If, on the other hand, you have close neighbors with kids who like to explore, then no, I wouldn't send rounds flying like this. I also wouldn't buy land where this were the situation either though. If you can't enjoy it and use it, why have it? The backstop during hunting post is a perfect example of my thinking.