'Hundreds of young black people beating white people'...

[Zero Sum 305]

They don't even come close to answering my question. You claimed a bullet fired up in the air that wasn't perpendicular to the ground (or "straight up") would retain some of it's "forward" velocity and therefore "fall" at a faster rate than it would at it's terminal velocity. I asked at which angle a bullet fired would lose it's "forward" flight and simply fall. You still haven't provided me that angle.

It does. What to the projectiles in the graphs do, slim?

Any angle not 90% (perpendicular) from ground would retain some of the force from the gun. Please read more carefully.

I'm implying that you can fire a bullet at less than 90 degrees and it won't be fatal. Yes. Care to prove me wrong?

We've stated qualitative remarks on the matter. You can't prove something qualitatively. We could research things quantitatively, but you'd first have to understand what it was you're arguing.

[Zero Sum 305]

Your scientific research and double-blind study of the effects of smoking bans on the bar industry pales in comparison to the 967,000+ pieces of evidence that can be googled.

And since you brought up economic stimulus, I'm wondering, what's better for the economy? A few street vendor carts popping up, or several thousand bars and restaurants? Be careful, you may need Obamanomics to answer this one!

No slim, I was quite clear in stating it was personal experience. As I also stated, from personal experience, the comparison pre- and post- smoking ban gave me clear results. You may have to read the aforementioned posts before.

[The_Dude 1,142]

Misread? Literal interpretation isn't the same thing as misreading.

And yes, the way I read it there is an amendment that guarantees my right to have a gun tucked in my waistband at the library (the double down and fries, not so much) because it's unconstitutional to infringe upon my right to bear arms. The fact that laws have been passed prohibiting that from taking place shows how much interpretation has been unconstitutionally applied to "the supreme law of the land."

Slim, your inability to grasp any context, whatsoever is what should disqualify you from this conversation, and owning a gun.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

I actually do think Why_Me has a point on this. Why can't smokers have places they can chill and smoke with each other? As long as it's well advertised that it's a smoking zone I don't see the problem.

Probably the same reason men can't have a place all to themselves either, and there are a lot more men than smokers.

[elmcitymaven 9,712]

Liberty does not mean you make everyone do what you want them to do so you can be happy.

So is it liberty when a smoker makes everyone have to endure the stench and unpleasantness of their smoke so he or she can be happy?

[slim 1,533]

It does. What to the projectiles in the graphs do, slim?

The angles in your graph are all very, very small. Try some larger ones. Maybe even look into indirect fire like mortars, artillery, etc. (Ballistic trajectory if you're still not sure where I'm going with this.)

Any angle not 90% (perpendicular) from ground would retain some of the force from the gun. Please read more carefully.

I'm guessing when you pawned your job off on those dumb inner-city kids back in the day it wasn't math you were supposed to be teaching.

We've stated qualitative remarks on the matter. You can't prove something qualitatively. We could research things quantitatively, but you'd first have to understand what it was you're arguing.

Look up some more graphs and then come back. I'll wait.

No slim, I was quite clear in stating it was personal experience. As I also stated, from personal experience, the comparison pre- and post- smoking ban gave me clear results. You may have to read the aforementioned posts before.

You may have to expand your horizons a little bit to understand that your personal experience does not equal the overall situation in the entire country. It's quite possible what you experience on a local level is in direct contrast with what happens elsewhere.

Slim, your inability to grasp any context, whatsoever is what should disqualify you from this conversation, and owning a gun.

Have you ever thought that grasping wasn't the problem?

I've long told you it's not an inability to grasp... it's a disagreement! The fact that you can't allow people to disagree with you means EVERYONE should own a gun because you're the type of person that would (pay someone to) ship people off to a penal colony for disagreeing with you. That's frightening!

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Think about human anatomy for a moment. In order for the trajectory to go 100% perpendicular to the force of gravity (literally, 'straight up'), your arm would have to be pointed in this direction. In reality, human anatomy almost guarantees the gun will not be pointed directly straight up. Hence, it fires not in this direction.

Thanks for the vocabulary clarification.

There is a friction component vector and a gravity component vector. One is linear, and the other is a square. Gravity can be plotted as a parabola, so you get partial credit.

[slim 1,533]

So is it liberty when a smoker makes everyone have to endure the stench and unpleasantness of their smoke so he or she can be happy?

Where has that ever happened?

I don't remember reading about cases where someone kidnapped a citizen, tied them to a chair, and blew smoke in their face.

[Zero Sum 305]

There is a friction component vector and a gravity component vector. One is linear, and the other is a square. Gravity can be plotted as a parabola, so you get partial credit.

I think you and I know and understand the physics of the trajectories we speak of. Don't forget the inertia vector too. The trajectory itself is parabolic, due to the resultant vectors plotted out during its flight. Unless your gravitational parabolic is its effect on the ballistic as it flies- and we know its constant in its constant effect, making the bullet come down eventually.

[Zero Sum 305]

The angles in your graph are all very, very small. Try some larger ones. Maybe even look into indirect fire like mortars, artillery, etc. (Ballistic trajectory if you're still not sure where I'm going with this.)

Or you could read information that's already been posted.

I'm guessing when you pawned your job off on those dumb inner-city kids back in the day it wasn't math you were supposed to be teaching.

Read again champ. If you need help with the words perpendicular and the 90% angle, feel free to ask.

Look up some more graphs and then come back. I'll wait.

You seem to be OK with using google. Try an image search. You might add some anatomy to that as well.

You may have to expand your horizons a little bit to understand that your personal experience does not equal the overall situation in the entire country. It's quite possible what you experience on a local level is in direct contrast with what happens elsewhere.

I know you have a selective reading problem, since I did not make a claim to the broader national context. My only claim was personal from the first moment I added my input into this silly tangent.

[slim 1,533]

Or you could read information that's already been posted.

You've yet to post anything other than your opinion on the subject.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

I think you and I know and understand the physics of the trajectories we speak of. Don't forget the inertia vector too. The trajectory itself is parabolic, due to the resultant vectors plotted out during its flight. Unless your gravitational parabolic is its effect on the ballistic as it flies- and we know its constant in its constant effect, making the bullet come down eventually.

A parabola is symmetric about an axis. The flight path of a bullet would tend be more linear as it departs the muzzle when it has the highest kinetic energy, and becomes more parabolic as it loses kinetic energy. A bullet travelling at 1200 fps does a lot more damage than one travelling at 300 fps.

Edited August 8, 2011 by Crusty Old Perv

[Zero Sum 305]

You've yet to post anything other than your opinion on the subject.

Welcome to an internet opinion forum.

[Zero Sum 305]

A parabola is symmetric about an axis. The flight path of a bullet would tend be more linear as it departs the muzzle when if has the highest kinetic energy, and becomes more parabolic as it loses kinetic energy. A bullet travelling at 1200 fps does a lot more damage than one travelling at 300 fps.

Totally agree. I think you got hung up of my use of the word parabola, as in a perfect symmetrical parabola. When factoring in the interaction between the shot bullet and gravity, you get the trajectory you get. The steeper the angle towards the perpendicular, the more kinetic energy is lost in the bullet. Would it still be sufficient to penetrate tissue if fired at the perpendicular? I do not know this answer. Would caliber matter at the perpendicular? Mathematically, no. Would target area matter? Perhaps.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Totally agree. I think you got hung up of my use of the word parabola, as in a perfect symmetrical parabola. When factoring in the interaction between the shot bullet and gravity, you get the trajectory you get. The steeper the angle towards the perpendicular, the more kinetic energy is lost in the bullet. Would it still be sufficient to penetrate tissue if fired at the perpendicular? I do not know this answer. Would caliber matter at the perpendicular? Mathematically, no. Would target area matter? Perhaps.

Here is somebody that actually thought it through.

http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/1199/can-a-bullet-fired-into-the-air-kill-someone-when-it-comes-down