Per https://mythresults.com/episode50, Mythbusters found that if a bullet is fired upward at a non-vertical angle, 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 is not recommended by the police in the others. Also the MythBusters were able to identify two people who had been injured by falling bullets, one of them fatally injured.
The non-lethal was only if the bullet was fired perfectly straight up using precision alignment. It seems to be a common disinformation tactic to take this section out of context and claim that Mythbusters said shooting up was fine.
I don't see a contradiction between what I said and what Mythbusters have found [1].
> In the case of a bullet fired at sufficiently close to a vertical angle to result in a nonballistic trajectory, the bullet would tumble, lose its spin, and fall at a much slower speed due to terminal velocity, so is rendered less than lethal on impact (the Busted rating). However, if a bullet is fired at a lower angle allowing for a ballistic trajectory (a far more likely case), it will maintain its spin and will retain enough energy to be lethal on impact (the Plausible rating). Because of this potentiality, firing a gun into the air is illegal in most U.S. states, and even in the states where 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 (fired from about 1 mi (1.6 km) away, hence at a lower angle), one of them fatally (the Confirmed rating). This is the only myth to receive all three ratings at the same time.
You said "Terminal velocity of bullets fired above approximately 60 degrees is not high enough to be lethal." Mythbusters found that any angle more than a few degrees off of straight up (i.e., below 87 degrees) was enough to establish a ballistic trajectory and be lethal.
There is a huge difference in difficulty between 30 degrees, which is easy enough to eyeball, and 3 degrees which requires careful aiming with a specialized tool.
Let's take a common 9 mm round with muzzle velocity of 1,100 fps. When fired at 87 degrees, horizontal velocity component is 1,100 fps * cos 87 deg = 57 fps.
It will be much less than that on the way down due to air resistance throughout the flight, and negligible compared to terminal velocity (around 200 fps).
The reason perfectly vertical bullets are less dangerous is that they tumble and this tumbling reduces the terminal velocity below dangerous levels. Presumably tumbling could also happen at lower angles due to wind or other factors, it just is less likely.
It takes considerably more to kill someone than to break the skin. Maybe if you are laying on your back and the falling bullet hits the carotid artery, but this is a really contrived example.
Wow thank you for this. Literally almost believed him. The amount of authority people speak with is just insane. Literally the truth was the exact opposite.
Goes to show people believe the thing that's most convenient for them to believe.
See my other comment. Mythbusters found the same thing, that bullets fired at low elevation remain dangerous, while bullets fired at high elevation (close to vertical) come down at a much lower velocity, not sufficient to kill a person.
The non-lethal was only if the bullet was fired perfectly straight up using precision alignment. It seems to be a common disinformation tactic to take this section out of context and claim that Mythbusters said shooting up was fine.