I mean, let’s not use charged language like ‘almost point blank’ when it clearly isn’t… to attempt to make it more provocative than it already is.
This is already a blatantly obvious unwarranted attack on a reporter and the 1A. An attack on someone who isn’t even participating in the protests, just reporting. Who the officer clearly saw. This is assault (edit: or battery, depending on your legal definitions and the jurisdiction).
But, ‘almost point blank’…? That’s like 20-30 yards there.
Point Blank:The distance between a gun and a target such that it requires minimal effort in aiming it. In particular no allowance needs to be made for effects of gravity, target movement or wind in aiming the projectile.
You are correct, it wasn’t “almost point blank”, because it is absolutely point blank.
“20-30 yards”!? I’m assuming you’re in the US as well, so you should know yards better than that. But I’m not going to quibble over exact distance. He shot a reporter! Not in the midst of defending himself. He was standing, then raised his rifle, aimed, and deliberately fired on an uninvolved member of the media obviously covering the situation with a microphone. THAT’S the issue.
Re-read the center ‘paragraph’ of my earlier statement.
Also, I still believe a good argument can be made for it being close to 20 yards and that there’s still room to quibble on the left and right of ‘point blank’.
I’ll admit that before reading this comment thread I probably would have said that point blank is so close you could basically reach out and touch, or nearly touch, the target.
I do hope, however, that I would look it up before contesting how it was used.
The technical term comes from archery. In archery, the arrow rises when fired, so when shooting at very close targets, you actualy aim lower than the point you want to hit. At distant targets, of course, you aim higher, because the arrow will start to fall.
“Point Blank” is the distance at which you aim directly at the target. Last time I did any shooting, it was about 22 feet, with my bow and my arrows.
It actually comes from artillery, but it’s the same idea.
Cannons were tapered, so the bore would point slightly upwards compared to the line of sight on top of the cannon. So the projectiles trajectory would rise above and then fall below the line of sight.
Point blank range was the distance at which the projectile drops below that line when the cannon was aimed at zero elevation.
It actually comes from artillery, but it’s the same idea.
I question the accuracy of this statement. Archers existed long before black-powder artillery. At the same time, though, I don’t know if anyone would have been concerned with that measurement, way back when.
EDIT: Wikipedia suggests that the term did, in fact, originate with muzzle-loaded artillery. Good on you for correcting me.
Judging by their relative sizes in the screengrab and with some quick back-of-the-envelope math, the cop shot her from about 5 meters away. That’s pretty fucking close to point blank, no?
Honestly I assumed that it was a lot closer than that too, by that definition since I have a 50-200yd zero on my rifle, that’d mean anything out to 200yd is technically “point blank” which kinda seems like not how the phrase is usually used.
I’ve rethought actually, and technically, since gravity starts to affect it the second it leaves the muzzle (trajectory is parabolic because your muzzle is aimed slightly up, not because bullets defy gravity), there is no point blank past the muzzle.
I mean, let’s not use charged language like ‘almost point blank’ when it clearly isn’t… to attempt to make it more provocative than it already is.
This is already a blatantly obvious unwarranted attack on a reporter and the 1A. An attack on someone who isn’t even participating in the protests, just reporting. Who the officer clearly saw. This is assault (edit: or battery, depending on your legal definitions and the jurisdiction).
But, ‘almost point blank’…? That’s like 20-30 yards there.
Point Blank: The distance between a gun and a target such that it requires minimal effort in aiming it. In particular no allowance needs to be made for effects of gravity, target movement or wind in aiming the projectile.
You are correct, it wasn’t “almost point blank”, because it is absolutely point blank.
“20-30 yards”!? I’m assuming you’re in the US as well, so you should know yards better than that. But I’m not going to quibble over exact distance. He shot a reporter! Not in the midst of defending himself. He was standing, then raised his rifle, aimed, and deliberately fired on an uninvolved member of the media obviously covering the situation with a microphone. THAT’S the issue.
Re-read the center ‘paragraph’ of my earlier statement.
Also, I still believe a good argument can be made for it being close to 20 yards and that there’s still room to quibble on the left and right of ‘point blank’.
Edit: not that any of that matters
I’m curious to know what you think “point blank” means.
RAW for Point Blank Shot in 5e has it within 5 feet
I’m sure that applies for some combination of bow, arrow, and archer. I’ll add it to the list of things 5e has done to irritate me.
I’ll admit that before reading this comment thread I probably would have said that point blank is so close you could basically reach out and touch, or nearly touch, the target.
I do hope, however, that I would look it up before contesting how it was used.
The technical term comes from archery. In archery, the arrow rises when fired, so when shooting at very close targets, you actualy aim lower than the point you want to hit. At distant targets, of course, you aim higher, because the arrow will start to fall.
“Point Blank” is the distance at which you aim directly at the target. Last time I did any shooting, it was about 22 feet, with my bow and my arrows.
It actually comes from artillery, but it’s the same idea.
Cannons were tapered, so the bore would point slightly upwards compared to the line of sight on top of the cannon. So the projectiles trajectory would rise above and then fall below the line of sight.
Point blank range was the distance at which the projectile drops below that line when the cannon was aimed at zero elevation.
I question the accuracy of this statement. Archers existed long before black-powder artillery. At the same time, though, I don’t know if anyone would have been concerned with that measurement, way back when.
EDIT: Wikipedia suggests that the term did, in fact, originate with muzzle-loaded artillery. Good on you for correcting me.
Neat! That makes sense. Appreciate the learning moment!
Judging by their relative sizes in the screengrab and with some quick back-of-the-envelope math, the cop shot her from about 5 meters away. That’s pretty fucking close to point blank, no?
Not close, it is point blank.
IIRC ‘point blank’ means no need to adjust for bullet drop due to gravity. This is well within that.
Honestly I assumed that it was a lot closer than that too, by that definition since I have a 50-200yd zero on my rifle, that’d mean anything out to 200yd is technically “point blank” which kinda seems like not how the phrase is usually used.
No, for you it would be anything within 50 that’s essentially an easy shot. No leading or anything like that.
At 200 yards the bullet has curved above the point of aim and fallen back down to your impact point.
I’ve rethought actually, and technically, since gravity starts to affect it the second it leaves the muzzle (trajectory is parabolic because your muzzle is aimed slightly up, not because bullets defy gravity), there is no point blank past the muzzle.
I think you’re confusing feet with yards. That’s like 10 yards max
10 yards max