SteelyNirvana
Member
I would like to know some about ricochets, as I got a lecture from a deputy this afternoon. Heres the situation: I was on my buddys front porch which is about 4' off the ground firing a 30-30 and .357 at targets placed on soft/almost muddy farm land. I had been firing for about an hour when a deputy pulls up. He said that he had heard a ricochet when he was parked up the road (The closest road he could have been parked on is atleast 3/4 to a mile away which is surrouned by thick woods and way off to the left, almsot behind me of where I'm firing at). Then he asked what I had, when I told him a .357 and 30-30 he said the ricochet he heard was from the 30-30 ( I was firing mild reloads using a 150gr if that makes any diffirence) He then asked why I was shooting like I was and I explained that our theory is that we shoot down towards the ground and the rounds will embed into the earth. He then says that what I am doing is perfectly legal, there is no problem with me target practacing but is concerened about a liability because of a ricochet strkinga rock and hitting a car or going into a subdivision that is about 1 1/4 way off to the right of where I'm shooting.. There are thick woods both to the left and the right of where the targets are set up. The main road is about 200' to the right of where I'm shooting and he was concerned about a ricochet there also.
My buddy dosen't beleive it could happen/did happen. I have a difficult time because I beleive that if a round were to strick a rock, it would begin to tumble and would not travel very far, let alone someone sitting in a car to hear not to mention it would hit a tree or some-other obstruction before it could do any harm. The deputy's suggestion was to fire standing from the ground with our backs towards the road, because then nobody could say a round hit there car as bullets don't travel backwards, which i think is ludicris because a round would have more of a possibility of hitting something as it would be on a more straighter plane of flight. This would also mean we would be firing in a direction where a round would have more of a possibility of striking a home/car/person.
My buddy seems to think some busy body just called the law and the deputy wanted to see what was going on, which I think is the case. I would like to hear some input though on whether the deputy had a point or was just doing some friendly checking.
Thanks
My buddy dosen't beleive it could happen/did happen. I have a difficult time because I beleive that if a round were to strick a rock, it would begin to tumble and would not travel very far, let alone someone sitting in a car to hear not to mention it would hit a tree or some-other obstruction before it could do any harm. The deputy's suggestion was to fire standing from the ground with our backs towards the road, because then nobody could say a round hit there car as bullets don't travel backwards, which i think is ludicris because a round would have more of a possibility of hitting something as it would be on a more straighter plane of flight. This would also mean we would be firing in a direction where a round would have more of a possibility of striking a home/car/person.
My buddy seems to think some busy body just called the law and the deputy wanted to see what was going on, which I think is the case. I would like to hear some input though on whether the deputy had a point or was just doing some friendly checking.
Thanks