If the US police isn't allowed to do reckless things, where are all those car chases I can see on TV filmed?
I would think those would endanger bystanders much more than shots fired into the air (which might only kill you if you are really, really, unlucky, as in 'having a weak skull and watching up, getting the bullet in an eye socket' or so.
Bullets fired into the air can and do kill people because most of the time they do not loose their spin and hit with a higher speed than terminal velocity.
Bullets fired into the air maintain their lethal capability when they eventually fall back down.
busted / plausible / confirmed
In the case of a bullet fired at a precisely vertical angle (something extremely difficult for a human being to duplicate), the bullet would tumble, lose its spin, and fall at a much slower speed due to terminal velocity and is therefore rendered less than lethal on impact. However, if a bullet is fired upward at a non-vertical angle (a far more probable possibility), 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 even in the states that 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, one of them fatally injured. To date, this is the only myth to receive all three ratings at the same time.
Still - what are the odds that bullet fired in the air (let's say at 60 degree) will actually hit someone?
Most people during the day are under the roof, and with average population in New York being 10 000 persons/km2, sth like 99% of that under the roof at any time, so the figure goes down to 100 people per km2, assuming people are 0.5 m2 target for the bullet it's 50 m2 / 1000000 m2 , or 1 chance in 20 000. And I probably still overestimated that.
Certainly odds that bullet aimed at someone will hit are much higher (yeah, I know, it's most probably criminal you are shooting at, and falling bullet will most probably hit bystander).
EDIT: and warning shot can be shoot to the ground near the criminal, or into a wall.
I should add that bullets can go through the roof, and this has been documented to happen in some of the incidents of upward-aimed fire causing injury.
But I agree with the idea of aiming towards locations where the bullet is likely to penetrate but not go through. The ground might be dangerous because of the potential for ricochet - but many other surfaces could be adequate.
2 people... I don't know exactly what the stats for that is, but I'm pretty sure it would be safer to fire warning shots and maybe kill someone, than fire at someone with the expressed intention of killing them. Also, why do warning shots have to go in the air all the time?
Most US police agencies these days do not engage in high speed pursuits for non-felony suspects. Chasing a murder suspect may be dangerous but so is letting one escape.
Warnings shots fired in public are virtually always reckless.
And no where did I claim or imply that US police never engage in reckless behavior.
I would think those would endanger bystanders much more than shots fired into the air (which might only kill you if you are really, really, unlucky, as in 'having a weak skull and watching up, getting the bullet in an eye socket' or so.