Myth Busted: Sniper Scope Shot Not Lethal

  • Thread starter wolram
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Scope
In summary, the show Mythbusters tested the idea that a bullet from one gun could lodge in an empty chamber of another. They used an armor piercing round and it didn't work.
  • #1
wolram
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
4,446
558
A sniper kills an opposition sniper by hiting his scope the bullet traveled through the scope and killed him.
No way according to myth busters, even at point blank range the bullet does not make it all the way through the scope.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
They made it work, if I remember right. I don't see why they get a bad rap on this forum (I've seen it a few times), they stick to the scientific method and do things well, plus its entertainment and not meant to be absolute.
 
  • #3
They don't always think things through. Sometimes they miss obvious pitfall in their theories when they decide to test something out, and other times they decide something is plausible, without getting positive results, simply because they can't figure out why it wouldn't work.

I'd still take that show over 90% of other "sciency" shows. Definitely take it over anything on the History channel. I can't believe how much it's fallen.
 
  • #4
They seem to take great pains to get things right, on the same show they proved it plausable for a bullet from one gun to lodge in an empty chamber of another.
I guess most people would think the lenses in a scope to fragile to stop a bullet but they sure did on this show.
 
  • #5
Yeah, it's been a while since there was a really good episode. Have you seen the new show "Smash Lab" its far, far worse, IMO.
 
  • #6
I only watch TV at my folks place so i am not up to date with shows.
 
  • #7
That's probably for the best.
 
  • #8
Yes. If I recall correctly, they had to use an armor piercing round to get through it (that was on the revisit because they used the wrong materials on the first try).

I enjoy watching mythbusters even though they are sometimes inaccurate.
 
  • #9
The show jumped the shark after they hired the "cool kids". They are even worse about this than the 2 guys.
 
  • #10
It is an excellent show if for no other reason than that it strongly promotes and popularizes the disciplines of critical thinking, experimentation and the principles of the Scientific Method. What other show does this?

Criticisms such as 'they got this wrong or that wrong' don't reflect poorly on the show at all, they encourage debate, re-evaluation, retesting and modification. To cast aspersions upon the show based on getting things wrong is like casting aspersions upon Newton for getting his theory of gravity wrong.

How could any of us on PF consider anything less than throwing our full support behind - and giving a rousing "hear hear!" for - this show?
 
  • #11
They could replace it with a more modern version where Simon Cowel + sharon Osbourne laugh at the ideas and then the viewers phone in on a premium rate number to vote on if the idea works or not.
 
  • #12
At my work, we had an incident that resulted in changing the safety policy - we had to wear steel-toed boots. Several guys on the floor really resisted, because they believed that if you were wearing them and you dropped a heavy object on your foot, the steel cap would collapse and cut off all your toes.

We tried to explain that if you drop happened to drop an object on your foot that would collapse a steel toe, you would probably loose your toes anyway - but they just wouldn't change their minds.

Mythbusters did a show on it, showing that it is highly unlikely that toes would be amputated in that manner. That sealed the deal for them!
 
  • #13
I love that show, and not just because they blow stuff up. It's extremely entertaining and educational. The best aspect, though, is the extent to which they emphasize taking all possible safety precautions when mucking about with stuff. I'd still be alive today if someone had pointed that out before I started experimenting with bombs. :rolleyes:
 
  • #14
Some of the shows are a bit insulting to our intelligence, however. I still am in disbelief that Mythbusters had to do a show on the airplane on a treadmill situation.
 
  • #15
jhicks said:
Some of the shows are a bit insulting to our intelligence, however. I still am in disbelief that Mythbusters had to do a show on the airplane on a treadmill situation.

You wouldn't believe the fierce debates that have been held about that situation, though. There are lots of people who do need their intelligence insulted apparently. I'm glad they put that issue to bed so I don't have to keep seeing people argue it. You could tell they both knew the plane would still take off.
 
  • #16
Meatbot said:
they put that issue to bed so I don't have to keep seeing people argue it

You're an optimistic little bugger, aren't you? That argument will never stop no matter what happens. Stupid people will continue to argue their point, and intelligent people are too proud to let it go unchallenged.
As for the 'insulting our intelligence' bit, I disagree. If the show were intended for the likes of us, then it would indeed seem condescending. Then again, if everyone was like us there'd be no market for the show in the first place. I'm probably the least-educated member of PF, and have no trouble not only following what they're doing but frequently anticipating the outcome. Keep in mind, though, that there are a couple of hundred million people not in PF who have access to the show. If a junior high student who can't read or write develops an appreciation for physics and engineering from watching them, and then strives to become educated because of it, then the show is worth its bandwidth in gold.
 
  • #17
Meatbot said:
You wouldn't believe the fierce debates that have been held about that situation, though. There are lots of people who do need their intelligence insulted apparently. I'm glad they put that issue to bed so I don't have to keep seeing people argue it. You could tell they both knew the plane would still take off.

http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtopic=2417" . 604 pages and still going. I tried to put some logic in there for a couple of pages, then gave up.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #18
As the saying goes, "I used to be disgusted; now I'm just amused."
 
  • #19
DaveC426913 said:
How could any of us on PF consider anything less than throwing our full support behind - and giving a rousing "hear hear!" for - this show?

Hear, hear! And a hip, hip!

I agree, I think that many of the things that look like carelessness are more from budget and time and film production constraints. They have to arrive at some sort of firm conclusion on each Myth (pretend that they at least covered their bases) and pretend like they've done something interesting, even if they simply wasted a ton of money and time. Once they've done all of their experiments they can't just throw all of the footage out.

The guys on Top Gear waste considerably more money and do significantly stupider things and they're still interesting to watch.
 
  • #20
I'm sometimes astonished at the durations of some of their experiments. Some appear to require weeks of prep and construction, and some of the experiments last for several months.
 
  • #21
I love the show. It's a great combination of entertainment and education. They're not careless with their experiments, and, as stated before, when the do miss something, they take notice and re-think the experiment and do it again. ... obviously they don't go into deep discussions of the science involved, but they do touch on the basics of what's going on, which is usually more than the non-scientist would know.

Besides... how can anyone not like a show that conducts THIS experiment:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=eTQh7D-nDNM"

:bugeye: that's ridonculous!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #22
NeoDevin said:
http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtopic=2417" . 604 pages and still going. I tried to put some logic in there for a couple of pages, then gave up.

The plane WOULDN'T take off! Are you guys THAT stupid??

...

Only joking...;D Hehe. Funny link btw
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #23
moe darklight said:
Besides... how can anyone not like a show that conducts THIS experiment:
Yeah that one was awesome! I couldn't believe what it did to the paneling on those vehicles. Peeled em like bananas!


But my fave is the cement mixer. They closed the highway a mile away for that one.
 
  • #24
Last edited by a moderator:

Related to Myth Busted: Sniper Scope Shot Not Lethal

1. What is the myth about the sniper scope shot not being lethal?

The myth is that a bullet fired through a sniper scope is not lethal, as the bullet would be deflected or lose its trajectory when passing through the scope's lens.

2. Is this myth true?

No, this myth has been thoroughly debunked through multiple experiments and real-life scenarios.

3. How have scientists proven this myth to be false?

Scientists have conducted experiments using high-speed cameras and ballistic gel to show that the bullet maintains its trajectory and remains lethal even when passing through a scope's lens.

4. Are there any documented cases of a sniper scope shot not being lethal?

No, there are no documented cases of a sniper scope shot not being lethal. In fact, there have been numerous documented cases of successful sniper shots using a scope.

5. What is the importance of debunking this myth?

Debunking this myth is important as it dispels false information and misconceptions about the use of sniper scopes and their effectiveness. It also highlights the rigorous testing and precision involved in the development of these scopes for military and law enforcement use.

Similar threads

  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
17
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
9K
  • Sci-Fi Writing and World Building
4
Replies
118
Views
6K
  • General Discussion
Replies
4
Views
855
  • Sci-Fi Writing and World Building
Replies
23
Views
3K
  • Sci-Fi Writing and World Building
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • General Discussion
Replies
6
Views
1K
Replies
13
Views
1K
Back
Top