# The reason paper targets were invented.. Duh!..



## Soren (Dec 27, 2007)

Many do it and IMO its downright stupid, eventhough the odds are immensly against it ever happening, if it DOES happen the result is often fatal. 

This guy was incredibly lucky, had his head been just a few inches more to the left he could've kissed his head goodbye:

_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ABGIJwiGBc_

So children, what's the lesson of today ??


----------



## Njaco (Dec 28, 2007)

I like how the cameraman goes looking for the bullet first before checking his buddy.


----------



## evangilder (Dec 28, 2007)

Some fools never learn. With .50 cals, you could be seriously killed! And you're right, an inch or 2 over, and he would have been likely made a mush-head.


----------



## wilbur1 (Dec 28, 2007)

That boy needs to go out and buy a lotto ticket right now


----------



## Matt308 (Dec 28, 2007)

Know your backstop. I think the last thing they say is something about "no more shootin' at iron". Yeah. Probably a good idea. One of the most dangerous guns is a .22LR when shooting at metal targets. Many a people have been killed or seriously hurt from richochets. This guy was probably hit by a part of the metal jacket, a rock or a piece of his target.


----------



## Thorlifter (Dec 28, 2007)

wilbur1 said:


> That boy needs to go out and buy a lotto ticket right now



My thought exactly.


----------



## lesofprimus (Dec 28, 2007)

Ive seen some close calls in my time, but that dude is just plain ol lucky....


----------



## Matt308 (Dec 28, 2007)

You got that right. And the "team" reaction was spot on... "time to wrap it up boys, lets get the F outta here".


----------



## Soren (Dec 28, 2007)

Like NJaco pointed out I find it strange that the cameraman went looking for the bullet before checking if the guy was o.k. first.

Stupid stupid stupid..


----------



## DOUGRD (Dec 28, 2007)

Soren said:


> Like NJaco pointed out I find it strange that the cameraman went looking for the bullet before checking if the guy was o.k. first.
> 
> Stupid stupid stupid..



Well as they say, birds of a feather flock together.


----------



## Soren (Dec 28, 2007)

Indeed


----------



## wilbur1 (Dec 29, 2007)

The fact that the bullet didnt do damage alone is luck. A 50 cal should put a hole through an iron plate at that range alone(what is he 250 yards) but these idiots do not know how to load the rounds. seen this before,have 50 small load will work, MORONS BROWNING MADE THIS ROUND TO DO ONE THING........DESTROY EVERYTHING IN ITS PATH!!!!!!sorry guys i own a b 50 i know what it does. btw shoot at dirt


----------



## comiso90 (Dec 29, 2007)

Certainly an argument against "plinking". The red neck in me likes to take computer hard drives, old cell phones, in op DVD players ect.. and watch them explode into bits of plastic and metal... 

I strongly doubt that it bounced back directly from the iron. It looks like it may have burned through the iron, hit a rock in the back ground and ricocheted 3 times. .. anyway you look at it, how much is your life worth?

WEAR EYE AND EAR PROTECTION!

.


----------



## Soren (Dec 29, 2007)

That depends entirely on how thick the iron plate they were shooting at is. If its 25mm thick the projectile is going to bounce. Any way you look at it what they did was stupid. You don't shoot in the direction of large rocks either.


----------



## Konigstiger205 (Dec 29, 2007)

You know maybe they should vote a law that forces people to take an IQ test before allowing them to own weapons...


----------



## comiso90 (Dec 29, 2007)

Soren said:


> That depends entirely on how thick the iron plate they were shooting at is. If its 25mm thick the projectile is going to bounce. A



Yes but given the velocity of a .50 cal, the delay and ricochet echo suggests that the iron plate was a close range recreational experiment. 

"Hey Bubba, do ya think a .50 round will punch through this shielding I found?

.


----------



## Soren (Dec 30, 2007)

To me its sounds like the target is something like 250 - 300 m away.

But how can you make an accurate assessment from just watching the video ? You know what I mean ?


----------



## lesofprimus (Dec 30, 2007)

I agree with Soren..


----------



## Matt308 (Dec 30, 2007)

Assume worst case equal speed in both directions. Time it. Divide in half. Multiply by about 2800ft/sec.

Oh sorry. I have The Knack.


----------



## Matt308 (Dec 30, 2007)

.


----------



## wilbur1 (Dec 30, 2007)

I knew there was something wrong with me. Now that doc proved it


----------

