Does “shooting for effect” have contradictory meanings in different areas? Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Planned maintenance scheduled April 23, 2019 at 23:30 UTC (7:30pm US/Eastern)Does “someone appeared to help me” have two meanings?Different meanings for phrase “off the regular price”Using any punctuation, how many meanings does this sign have?Does 'affect' imply negative effect?Why does “eastwardly” have two opposite meanings?Why there are two different meanings for “triweekly”?Two different meanings of Present Perfect TenseDifferent meanings of “supported” softwareHow come certain words have totally different meanings?Why have etymologists assigned multiple meanings to the word “wraith”?
How did Fremen produce and carry enough thumpers to use Sandworms as de facto Ubers?
What are the discoveries that have been possible with the rejection of positivism?
Lagrange four-squares theorem --- deterministic complexity
C's equality operator on converted pointers
Does the Mueller report show a conspiracy between Russia and the Trump Campaign?
macOS: Name for app shortcut screen found by pinching with thumb and three fingers
Is it possible for SQL statements to execute concurrently within a single session in SQL Server?
How to run automated tests after each commit?
What is the meaning of 'breadth' in breadth first search?
Central Vacuuming: Is it worth it, and how does it compare to normal vacuuming?
Intuitive explanation of the rank-nullity theorem
A term for a woman complaining about things/begging in a cute/childish way
Most bit efficient text communication method?
What is the chair depicted in Cesare Maccari's 1889 painting "Cicerone denuncia Catilina"?
How can I prevent/balance waiting and turtling as a response to cooldown mechanics
What to do with repeated rejections for phd position
Can the Flaming Sphere spell be rammed into multiple Tiny creatures that are in the same 5-foot square?
Why does it sometimes sound good to play a grace note as a lead in to a note in a melody?
Would it be easier to apply for a UK visa if there is a host family to sponsor for you in going there?
Flash light on something
Does "shooting for effect" have contradictory meanings in different areas?
preposition before coffee
One-one communication
How to identify unknown coordinate type and convert to lat/lon?
Does “shooting for effect” have contradictory meanings in different areas?
Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara
Planned maintenance scheduled April 23, 2019 at 23:30 UTC (7:30pm US/Eastern)Does “someone appeared to help me” have two meanings?Different meanings for phrase “off the regular price”Using any punctuation, how many meanings does this sign have?Does 'affect' imply negative effect?Why does “eastwardly” have two opposite meanings?Why there are two different meanings for “triweekly”?Two different meanings of Present Perfect TenseDifferent meanings of “supported” softwareHow come certain words have totally different meanings?Why have etymologists assigned multiple meanings to the word “wraith”?
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
I only know one meaning for "shooting for effect". It's the sort of thing a SWAT team commander might say to indicate that no one is terribly interested in interrogating the subjects. Basically, it means two in the chest and one in the head.
This is the first item returned by Google for the search "shooting for effect"
When shooting for effect in a combat situation, there needs to be a good balance of speed and accuracy. We need to aim small to miss small. Larger targets are easier to shoot fast because we have a smaller margin to miss, but the smaller the target gets, the harder it is to control our shots at faster speeds. We have to slow down to make sure we can make the smaller shots.
This is mostly evident when trying to transition from a body target to
a head target. In the Mozambique Drill we see this the most. After two
shots to the body, we transition to a smaller, harder-to-hit target
(the head) for one shot. This smaller target is much harder to hit
than the body shots we just took.
In competition, shooting headshots or shooting smaller steel plates is
the same thing. We need to slow down after the transition and
concentrate on the smaller, harder plates, especially at farther
distances.
However, there seems to be some confusion about this, and this really isn't something you want to get wrong. There appears to be an alternate interpretation that shooting for effect means an ineffectual show of smoke, noise, and commotion. Basically, it's an attempt to scare someone without actually hurting them.
I was a bit surprised to find this:
It's from Reports of Cases Determined in the Supreme Court of the State of Missouri, Volume 170, apparently from a 1902 decision.
I think we would be doing everyone a service by clearing this up.
What was the first use of the phrase as it pertains to firearms?
Did it have an established legal meaning as suggested by the above court index extract?
Does it retain an established legal meaning?
When was it first used to mean shoot with deadly intent?
expressions ambiguity legalese
add a comment |
I only know one meaning for "shooting for effect". It's the sort of thing a SWAT team commander might say to indicate that no one is terribly interested in interrogating the subjects. Basically, it means two in the chest and one in the head.
This is the first item returned by Google for the search "shooting for effect"
When shooting for effect in a combat situation, there needs to be a good balance of speed and accuracy. We need to aim small to miss small. Larger targets are easier to shoot fast because we have a smaller margin to miss, but the smaller the target gets, the harder it is to control our shots at faster speeds. We have to slow down to make sure we can make the smaller shots.
This is mostly evident when trying to transition from a body target to
a head target. In the Mozambique Drill we see this the most. After two
shots to the body, we transition to a smaller, harder-to-hit target
(the head) for one shot. This smaller target is much harder to hit
than the body shots we just took.
In competition, shooting headshots or shooting smaller steel plates is
the same thing. We need to slow down after the transition and
concentrate on the smaller, harder plates, especially at farther
distances.
However, there seems to be some confusion about this, and this really isn't something you want to get wrong. There appears to be an alternate interpretation that shooting for effect means an ineffectual show of smoke, noise, and commotion. Basically, it's an attempt to scare someone without actually hurting them.
I was a bit surprised to find this:
It's from Reports of Cases Determined in the Supreme Court of the State of Missouri, Volume 170, apparently from a 1902 decision.
I think we would be doing everyone a service by clearing this up.
What was the first use of the phrase as it pertains to firearms?
Did it have an established legal meaning as suggested by the above court index extract?
Does it retain an established legal meaning?
When was it first used to mean shoot with deadly intent?
expressions ambiguity legalese
1
oops, my bad. "Fire for effect". My fingers are quite svelte, thank you.
– Cascabel
6 hours ago
1
There's nothing prevent this phrase from being ambiguous. As to legal meaning, that would be something that only lawyers would be able to ascertain.
– Mitch
4 hours ago
1
To be clear, in my comment on the other question, I wasn’t talking specifically about shoot for effect as an expression. I didn’t know that it was an expression at all, actually. I was only talking about the phrase for effect in the sense of ‘for show’, applicable to any verb where it makes semantic sense: “He brandished his sword for effect”, “He opened his mouth in a wide gasp for effect”, etc. If shoot for effect exists as an expression and means ‘shoot for maximum effectiveness’, then I guess those three words put together can indeed be autantonymic.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
2 hours ago
@JanusBahsJacquet That may well be the entire issue here - a three word expression or just a two word phrase preceded by shooting.
– Phil Sweet
24 mins ago
@JanusBahsJacquet That may well be the entire issue here - a three word expression or just a two word phrase preceded by shooting.
– Phil Sweet
24 mins ago
add a comment |
I only know one meaning for "shooting for effect". It's the sort of thing a SWAT team commander might say to indicate that no one is terribly interested in interrogating the subjects. Basically, it means two in the chest and one in the head.
This is the first item returned by Google for the search "shooting for effect"
When shooting for effect in a combat situation, there needs to be a good balance of speed and accuracy. We need to aim small to miss small. Larger targets are easier to shoot fast because we have a smaller margin to miss, but the smaller the target gets, the harder it is to control our shots at faster speeds. We have to slow down to make sure we can make the smaller shots.
This is mostly evident when trying to transition from a body target to
a head target. In the Mozambique Drill we see this the most. After two
shots to the body, we transition to a smaller, harder-to-hit target
(the head) for one shot. This smaller target is much harder to hit
than the body shots we just took.
In competition, shooting headshots or shooting smaller steel plates is
the same thing. We need to slow down after the transition and
concentrate on the smaller, harder plates, especially at farther
distances.
However, there seems to be some confusion about this, and this really isn't something you want to get wrong. There appears to be an alternate interpretation that shooting for effect means an ineffectual show of smoke, noise, and commotion. Basically, it's an attempt to scare someone without actually hurting them.
I was a bit surprised to find this:
It's from Reports of Cases Determined in the Supreme Court of the State of Missouri, Volume 170, apparently from a 1902 decision.
I think we would be doing everyone a service by clearing this up.
What was the first use of the phrase as it pertains to firearms?
Did it have an established legal meaning as suggested by the above court index extract?
Does it retain an established legal meaning?
When was it first used to mean shoot with deadly intent?
expressions ambiguity legalese
I only know one meaning for "shooting for effect". It's the sort of thing a SWAT team commander might say to indicate that no one is terribly interested in interrogating the subjects. Basically, it means two in the chest and one in the head.
This is the first item returned by Google for the search "shooting for effect"
When shooting for effect in a combat situation, there needs to be a good balance of speed and accuracy. We need to aim small to miss small. Larger targets are easier to shoot fast because we have a smaller margin to miss, but the smaller the target gets, the harder it is to control our shots at faster speeds. We have to slow down to make sure we can make the smaller shots.
This is mostly evident when trying to transition from a body target to
a head target. In the Mozambique Drill we see this the most. After two
shots to the body, we transition to a smaller, harder-to-hit target
(the head) for one shot. This smaller target is much harder to hit
than the body shots we just took.
In competition, shooting headshots or shooting smaller steel plates is
the same thing. We need to slow down after the transition and
concentrate on the smaller, harder plates, especially at farther
distances.
However, there seems to be some confusion about this, and this really isn't something you want to get wrong. There appears to be an alternate interpretation that shooting for effect means an ineffectual show of smoke, noise, and commotion. Basically, it's an attempt to scare someone without actually hurting them.
I was a bit surprised to find this:
It's from Reports of Cases Determined in the Supreme Court of the State of Missouri, Volume 170, apparently from a 1902 decision.
I think we would be doing everyone a service by clearing this up.
What was the first use of the phrase as it pertains to firearms?
Did it have an established legal meaning as suggested by the above court index extract?
Does it retain an established legal meaning?
When was it first used to mean shoot with deadly intent?
expressions ambiguity legalese
expressions ambiguity legalese
edited 5 hours ago
user240918
26.9k1075160
26.9k1075160
asked 6 hours ago
Phil SweetPhil Sweet
11k22549
11k22549
1
oops, my bad. "Fire for effect". My fingers are quite svelte, thank you.
– Cascabel
6 hours ago
1
There's nothing prevent this phrase from being ambiguous. As to legal meaning, that would be something that only lawyers would be able to ascertain.
– Mitch
4 hours ago
1
To be clear, in my comment on the other question, I wasn’t talking specifically about shoot for effect as an expression. I didn’t know that it was an expression at all, actually. I was only talking about the phrase for effect in the sense of ‘for show’, applicable to any verb where it makes semantic sense: “He brandished his sword for effect”, “He opened his mouth in a wide gasp for effect”, etc. If shoot for effect exists as an expression and means ‘shoot for maximum effectiveness’, then I guess those three words put together can indeed be autantonymic.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
2 hours ago
@JanusBahsJacquet That may well be the entire issue here - a three word expression or just a two word phrase preceded by shooting.
– Phil Sweet
24 mins ago
@JanusBahsJacquet That may well be the entire issue here - a three word expression or just a two word phrase preceded by shooting.
– Phil Sweet
24 mins ago
add a comment |
1
oops, my bad. "Fire for effect". My fingers are quite svelte, thank you.
– Cascabel
6 hours ago
1
There's nothing prevent this phrase from being ambiguous. As to legal meaning, that would be something that only lawyers would be able to ascertain.
– Mitch
4 hours ago
1
To be clear, in my comment on the other question, I wasn’t talking specifically about shoot for effect as an expression. I didn’t know that it was an expression at all, actually. I was only talking about the phrase for effect in the sense of ‘for show’, applicable to any verb where it makes semantic sense: “He brandished his sword for effect”, “He opened his mouth in a wide gasp for effect”, etc. If shoot for effect exists as an expression and means ‘shoot for maximum effectiveness’, then I guess those three words put together can indeed be autantonymic.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
2 hours ago
@JanusBahsJacquet That may well be the entire issue here - a three word expression or just a two word phrase preceded by shooting.
– Phil Sweet
24 mins ago
@JanusBahsJacquet That may well be the entire issue here - a three word expression or just a two word phrase preceded by shooting.
– Phil Sweet
24 mins ago
1
1
oops, my bad. "Fire for effect". My fingers are quite svelte, thank you.
– Cascabel
6 hours ago
oops, my bad. "Fire for effect". My fingers are quite svelte, thank you.
– Cascabel
6 hours ago
1
1
There's nothing prevent this phrase from being ambiguous. As to legal meaning, that would be something that only lawyers would be able to ascertain.
– Mitch
4 hours ago
There's nothing prevent this phrase from being ambiguous. As to legal meaning, that would be something that only lawyers would be able to ascertain.
– Mitch
4 hours ago
1
1
To be clear, in my comment on the other question, I wasn’t talking specifically about shoot for effect as an expression. I didn’t know that it was an expression at all, actually. I was only talking about the phrase for effect in the sense of ‘for show’, applicable to any verb where it makes semantic sense: “He brandished his sword for effect”, “He opened his mouth in a wide gasp for effect”, etc. If shoot for effect exists as an expression and means ‘shoot for maximum effectiveness’, then I guess those three words put together can indeed be autantonymic.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
2 hours ago
To be clear, in my comment on the other question, I wasn’t talking specifically about shoot for effect as an expression. I didn’t know that it was an expression at all, actually. I was only talking about the phrase for effect in the sense of ‘for show’, applicable to any verb where it makes semantic sense: “He brandished his sword for effect”, “He opened his mouth in a wide gasp for effect”, etc. If shoot for effect exists as an expression and means ‘shoot for maximum effectiveness’, then I guess those three words put together can indeed be autantonymic.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
2 hours ago
@JanusBahsJacquet That may well be the entire issue here - a three word expression or just a two word phrase preceded by shooting.
– Phil Sweet
24 mins ago
@JanusBahsJacquet That may well be the entire issue here - a three word expression or just a two word phrase preceded by shooting.
– Phil Sweet
24 mins ago
@JanusBahsJacquet That may well be the entire issue here - a three word expression or just a two word phrase preceded by shooting.
– Phil Sweet
24 mins ago
@JanusBahsJacquet That may well be the entire issue here - a three word expression or just a two word phrase preceded by shooting.
– Phil Sweet
24 mins ago
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
One source of ambiguity in phrasing is the word effect. Literally, it would mean producing a result. The Oxford English Dictionary lists this under 2a for "effect, n.":
a. That which results from the action or properties of something or someone; results in general; the quality of producing a result, efficacy.
However, "effect" can also refer to leaving an impression of something, emphasizing the effect on someone else rather than the effectiveness of the action at wounding or killing. This is 9a of the same entry:
a. The impression produced on a beholder, hearer, or reader (formerly
esp. by a work of art or literature); the impression produced by a
picture, building, costume, etc., viewed as a whole; the look that a
collection of features has. for effect: for the sake of creating a
telling impression on the minds of spectators or hearers.
So, are you an efficacious shooter, or are you a shooter who wants to make an impression on someone else?
As for the phrase's earliest use, the first mention of similar phrasing I can find is from the Ypsilanti sentinel., June 04, 1845, Image 1 features a story using antequated terminology for indigenous people ("Indians"):
... the rapid firing of muskets made it evident that there the Indians had the better chance of shooting with effect.
"Effect" could mean either thing here (result or impression), but later on in the article "effect" is used to suggest wounding or killing an enemy, as an attacker who fires "without effect" rushes his enemy with another weapon:
Zick dropped his rifle which he had discharged without effect, and rushed on his rival with his tomahawk.
A similar usage in the Chicago Tribune, January 13, 1867, Image 3, suggests that "effect" would involve wounding someone, since the lack of effect means that Mr. Baugh finds another way to wound his opponent:
Mr. Baugh, finding the pistol shooting of no effect made an attack with a wheel spoke, and with one effectual blow, succeeded in felling the convict to the floor.
"Effect" seems often used in the sense of wounding or killing someone, whether or not it's associated with the word "shooting." Arizona Republican., April 02, 1911, Image 1 features a dire headline:
Accidental Shooting: Deadly Effect of New Rifle in Hands of California Boy
Most results in my newspaper search correspond to this meaning of "effect."
"Effect" in senses not meaning to wound or kill seems parallel to this usage. Relating to court cases, there is this mention of "effect" in the Ottumwa tri-weekly courier., December 27, 1906, Image 5. In this case, "to effect" is a verb meaning roughly "bring about," meaning bring about an arrest. In any case, the result is not immediately doing harm, and (like in the Missouri case in the question) shooting in this manner is frowned upon:
When he appealed the first time the supreme court affirmed the judgment against him, holding that a peace officer was not warranted in shooting to effect an arrest of a mere misdemeanant.
This usage and the one you cite do not suggest an established legal meaning, but rather a description of how the shooting was done for a purpose that goes beyond killing people. They are meant either to bring about a secondary goal (arresting) or to make an impression on the other person.
Furthermore, these uses postdate the use of "effect" to mean producing a wound or a killing blow. In most of the results I can find, "effect" in relation to shooting means doing harm. For that reason, I would assume the second meaning you've found is only used in contexts where it is clear the effect is not lethal from context; "and did not intend to do any harm" and "effect the arrest of a mere misdemeanant" are both clear at conveying an alternative meaning.
add a comment |
While not familiar with the phrase "shoot for effect", I am familiar with the practice.
A mercenary I knew here back during the war (the guy that took Barry Sadler to hospital after he shot himself, actually) said that the so-called Mozambique Drill (basically a double-tap + 1) originated with an old SAS practice and supposedly dated back to Stirling...but I cannot confirm that and it is tangential to the topic.
That conversation happened at the Europa Bar, if you know what that is.
I think that the usage in the self-defense sense (read legal murder) originated from the phrase...
Fire for effect
Fire which is delivered after the mean point of impact or burst is within the desired distance of the target or adjusting/ranging point.
That is from Wikipedia (sorry, but it is a place to start)
This refers to the tactic of "walking" spotting rounds from a mortar into the position marked by an FO (forward observer... usually sitting in a high position closer to the target) using what is sometimes called "ranging fire". When the FO reports that the rounds are falling into the designated area, the order is often called to "fire for effect". This means that the gun should deliver as many rounds necessary for the elimination of the objective.
An N-grams search for "shoot for effect, fire for effect" renders nothing for the first, and many for the second, going back to 1906.
From the Drill Regulations for Field Artillery...
"...fire for effect has for its sole objective the the destruction of the enemy..."
So...bottomline: I think that "shoot for effect" is borrowed from an earlier military usage, and that the quote about the Misery cowboys was a one-off.
1
+1 for the self defense sense. That is where I tend to hear it. If you shoot someone, make a proper job of it and there won't be anybody to argue with your version of events.
– Phil Sweet
21 mins ago
add a comment |
I looked for references. Here are two.
FBI REPORT as reported at https://www.roninjj.com/page/page/4336917.htm
SHOOTING STYLE.
Twenty-six of the offenders [about 60%], including all of the street
combat veterans, "claimed to be instinctive shooters, pointing and
firing the weapon without consciously aligning the sights," the study
says.
"They practice getting the gun out and using it," Davis explained.
"They shoot for effect." Or as one of the offenders put it: "[W]e're
not working with no marksmanship....We just putting it in your
direction, you know....It don't matter...as long as it's gonna hit
you...if it's up at your head or your chest, down at your legs,
whatever....Once I squeeze and you fall, then...if I want to execute you, then I could go > from there."
Then there is this article Shoot for effect by John Stembridge. It is about guns used in Hollywood movies.
So that is two usages.
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "97"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f494537%2fdoes-shooting-for-effect-have-contradictory-meanings-in-different-areas%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
One source of ambiguity in phrasing is the word effect. Literally, it would mean producing a result. The Oxford English Dictionary lists this under 2a for "effect, n.":
a. That which results from the action or properties of something or someone; results in general; the quality of producing a result, efficacy.
However, "effect" can also refer to leaving an impression of something, emphasizing the effect on someone else rather than the effectiveness of the action at wounding or killing. This is 9a of the same entry:
a. The impression produced on a beholder, hearer, or reader (formerly
esp. by a work of art or literature); the impression produced by a
picture, building, costume, etc., viewed as a whole; the look that a
collection of features has. for effect: for the sake of creating a
telling impression on the minds of spectators or hearers.
So, are you an efficacious shooter, or are you a shooter who wants to make an impression on someone else?
As for the phrase's earliest use, the first mention of similar phrasing I can find is from the Ypsilanti sentinel., June 04, 1845, Image 1 features a story using antequated terminology for indigenous people ("Indians"):
... the rapid firing of muskets made it evident that there the Indians had the better chance of shooting with effect.
"Effect" could mean either thing here (result or impression), but later on in the article "effect" is used to suggest wounding or killing an enemy, as an attacker who fires "without effect" rushes his enemy with another weapon:
Zick dropped his rifle which he had discharged without effect, and rushed on his rival with his tomahawk.
A similar usage in the Chicago Tribune, January 13, 1867, Image 3, suggests that "effect" would involve wounding someone, since the lack of effect means that Mr. Baugh finds another way to wound his opponent:
Mr. Baugh, finding the pistol shooting of no effect made an attack with a wheel spoke, and with one effectual blow, succeeded in felling the convict to the floor.
"Effect" seems often used in the sense of wounding or killing someone, whether or not it's associated with the word "shooting." Arizona Republican., April 02, 1911, Image 1 features a dire headline:
Accidental Shooting: Deadly Effect of New Rifle in Hands of California Boy
Most results in my newspaper search correspond to this meaning of "effect."
"Effect" in senses not meaning to wound or kill seems parallel to this usage. Relating to court cases, there is this mention of "effect" in the Ottumwa tri-weekly courier., December 27, 1906, Image 5. In this case, "to effect" is a verb meaning roughly "bring about," meaning bring about an arrest. In any case, the result is not immediately doing harm, and (like in the Missouri case in the question) shooting in this manner is frowned upon:
When he appealed the first time the supreme court affirmed the judgment against him, holding that a peace officer was not warranted in shooting to effect an arrest of a mere misdemeanant.
This usage and the one you cite do not suggest an established legal meaning, but rather a description of how the shooting was done for a purpose that goes beyond killing people. They are meant either to bring about a secondary goal (arresting) or to make an impression on the other person.
Furthermore, these uses postdate the use of "effect" to mean producing a wound or a killing blow. In most of the results I can find, "effect" in relation to shooting means doing harm. For that reason, I would assume the second meaning you've found is only used in contexts where it is clear the effect is not lethal from context; "and did not intend to do any harm" and "effect the arrest of a mere misdemeanant" are both clear at conveying an alternative meaning.
add a comment |
One source of ambiguity in phrasing is the word effect. Literally, it would mean producing a result. The Oxford English Dictionary lists this under 2a for "effect, n.":
a. That which results from the action or properties of something or someone; results in general; the quality of producing a result, efficacy.
However, "effect" can also refer to leaving an impression of something, emphasizing the effect on someone else rather than the effectiveness of the action at wounding or killing. This is 9a of the same entry:
a. The impression produced on a beholder, hearer, or reader (formerly
esp. by a work of art or literature); the impression produced by a
picture, building, costume, etc., viewed as a whole; the look that a
collection of features has. for effect: for the sake of creating a
telling impression on the minds of spectators or hearers.
So, are you an efficacious shooter, or are you a shooter who wants to make an impression on someone else?
As for the phrase's earliest use, the first mention of similar phrasing I can find is from the Ypsilanti sentinel., June 04, 1845, Image 1 features a story using antequated terminology for indigenous people ("Indians"):
... the rapid firing of muskets made it evident that there the Indians had the better chance of shooting with effect.
"Effect" could mean either thing here (result or impression), but later on in the article "effect" is used to suggest wounding or killing an enemy, as an attacker who fires "without effect" rushes his enemy with another weapon:
Zick dropped his rifle which he had discharged without effect, and rushed on his rival with his tomahawk.
A similar usage in the Chicago Tribune, January 13, 1867, Image 3, suggests that "effect" would involve wounding someone, since the lack of effect means that Mr. Baugh finds another way to wound his opponent:
Mr. Baugh, finding the pistol shooting of no effect made an attack with a wheel spoke, and with one effectual blow, succeeded in felling the convict to the floor.
"Effect" seems often used in the sense of wounding or killing someone, whether or not it's associated with the word "shooting." Arizona Republican., April 02, 1911, Image 1 features a dire headline:
Accidental Shooting: Deadly Effect of New Rifle in Hands of California Boy
Most results in my newspaper search correspond to this meaning of "effect."
"Effect" in senses not meaning to wound or kill seems parallel to this usage. Relating to court cases, there is this mention of "effect" in the Ottumwa tri-weekly courier., December 27, 1906, Image 5. In this case, "to effect" is a verb meaning roughly "bring about," meaning bring about an arrest. In any case, the result is not immediately doing harm, and (like in the Missouri case in the question) shooting in this manner is frowned upon:
When he appealed the first time the supreme court affirmed the judgment against him, holding that a peace officer was not warranted in shooting to effect an arrest of a mere misdemeanant.
This usage and the one you cite do not suggest an established legal meaning, but rather a description of how the shooting was done for a purpose that goes beyond killing people. They are meant either to bring about a secondary goal (arresting) or to make an impression on the other person.
Furthermore, these uses postdate the use of "effect" to mean producing a wound or a killing blow. In most of the results I can find, "effect" in relation to shooting means doing harm. For that reason, I would assume the second meaning you've found is only used in contexts where it is clear the effect is not lethal from context; "and did not intend to do any harm" and "effect the arrest of a mere misdemeanant" are both clear at conveying an alternative meaning.
add a comment |
One source of ambiguity in phrasing is the word effect. Literally, it would mean producing a result. The Oxford English Dictionary lists this under 2a for "effect, n.":
a. That which results from the action or properties of something or someone; results in general; the quality of producing a result, efficacy.
However, "effect" can also refer to leaving an impression of something, emphasizing the effect on someone else rather than the effectiveness of the action at wounding or killing. This is 9a of the same entry:
a. The impression produced on a beholder, hearer, or reader (formerly
esp. by a work of art or literature); the impression produced by a
picture, building, costume, etc., viewed as a whole; the look that a
collection of features has. for effect: for the sake of creating a
telling impression on the minds of spectators or hearers.
So, are you an efficacious shooter, or are you a shooter who wants to make an impression on someone else?
As for the phrase's earliest use, the first mention of similar phrasing I can find is from the Ypsilanti sentinel., June 04, 1845, Image 1 features a story using antequated terminology for indigenous people ("Indians"):
... the rapid firing of muskets made it evident that there the Indians had the better chance of shooting with effect.
"Effect" could mean either thing here (result or impression), but later on in the article "effect" is used to suggest wounding or killing an enemy, as an attacker who fires "without effect" rushes his enemy with another weapon:
Zick dropped his rifle which he had discharged without effect, and rushed on his rival with his tomahawk.
A similar usage in the Chicago Tribune, January 13, 1867, Image 3, suggests that "effect" would involve wounding someone, since the lack of effect means that Mr. Baugh finds another way to wound his opponent:
Mr. Baugh, finding the pistol shooting of no effect made an attack with a wheel spoke, and with one effectual blow, succeeded in felling the convict to the floor.
"Effect" seems often used in the sense of wounding or killing someone, whether or not it's associated with the word "shooting." Arizona Republican., April 02, 1911, Image 1 features a dire headline:
Accidental Shooting: Deadly Effect of New Rifle in Hands of California Boy
Most results in my newspaper search correspond to this meaning of "effect."
"Effect" in senses not meaning to wound or kill seems parallel to this usage. Relating to court cases, there is this mention of "effect" in the Ottumwa tri-weekly courier., December 27, 1906, Image 5. In this case, "to effect" is a verb meaning roughly "bring about," meaning bring about an arrest. In any case, the result is not immediately doing harm, and (like in the Missouri case in the question) shooting in this manner is frowned upon:
When he appealed the first time the supreme court affirmed the judgment against him, holding that a peace officer was not warranted in shooting to effect an arrest of a mere misdemeanant.
This usage and the one you cite do not suggest an established legal meaning, but rather a description of how the shooting was done for a purpose that goes beyond killing people. They are meant either to bring about a secondary goal (arresting) or to make an impression on the other person.
Furthermore, these uses postdate the use of "effect" to mean producing a wound or a killing blow. In most of the results I can find, "effect" in relation to shooting means doing harm. For that reason, I would assume the second meaning you've found is only used in contexts where it is clear the effect is not lethal from context; "and did not intend to do any harm" and "effect the arrest of a mere misdemeanant" are both clear at conveying an alternative meaning.
One source of ambiguity in phrasing is the word effect. Literally, it would mean producing a result. The Oxford English Dictionary lists this under 2a for "effect, n.":
a. That which results from the action or properties of something or someone; results in general; the quality of producing a result, efficacy.
However, "effect" can also refer to leaving an impression of something, emphasizing the effect on someone else rather than the effectiveness of the action at wounding or killing. This is 9a of the same entry:
a. The impression produced on a beholder, hearer, or reader (formerly
esp. by a work of art or literature); the impression produced by a
picture, building, costume, etc., viewed as a whole; the look that a
collection of features has. for effect: for the sake of creating a
telling impression on the minds of spectators or hearers.
So, are you an efficacious shooter, or are you a shooter who wants to make an impression on someone else?
As for the phrase's earliest use, the first mention of similar phrasing I can find is from the Ypsilanti sentinel., June 04, 1845, Image 1 features a story using antequated terminology for indigenous people ("Indians"):
... the rapid firing of muskets made it evident that there the Indians had the better chance of shooting with effect.
"Effect" could mean either thing here (result or impression), but later on in the article "effect" is used to suggest wounding or killing an enemy, as an attacker who fires "without effect" rushes his enemy with another weapon:
Zick dropped his rifle which he had discharged without effect, and rushed on his rival with his tomahawk.
A similar usage in the Chicago Tribune, January 13, 1867, Image 3, suggests that "effect" would involve wounding someone, since the lack of effect means that Mr. Baugh finds another way to wound his opponent:
Mr. Baugh, finding the pistol shooting of no effect made an attack with a wheel spoke, and with one effectual blow, succeeded in felling the convict to the floor.
"Effect" seems often used in the sense of wounding or killing someone, whether or not it's associated with the word "shooting." Arizona Republican., April 02, 1911, Image 1 features a dire headline:
Accidental Shooting: Deadly Effect of New Rifle in Hands of California Boy
Most results in my newspaper search correspond to this meaning of "effect."
"Effect" in senses not meaning to wound or kill seems parallel to this usage. Relating to court cases, there is this mention of "effect" in the Ottumwa tri-weekly courier., December 27, 1906, Image 5. In this case, "to effect" is a verb meaning roughly "bring about," meaning bring about an arrest. In any case, the result is not immediately doing harm, and (like in the Missouri case in the question) shooting in this manner is frowned upon:
When he appealed the first time the supreme court affirmed the judgment against him, holding that a peace officer was not warranted in shooting to effect an arrest of a mere misdemeanant.
This usage and the one you cite do not suggest an established legal meaning, but rather a description of how the shooting was done for a purpose that goes beyond killing people. They are meant either to bring about a secondary goal (arresting) or to make an impression on the other person.
Furthermore, these uses postdate the use of "effect" to mean producing a wound or a killing blow. In most of the results I can find, "effect" in relation to shooting means doing harm. For that reason, I would assume the second meaning you've found is only used in contexts where it is clear the effect is not lethal from context; "and did not intend to do any harm" and "effect the arrest of a mere misdemeanant" are both clear at conveying an alternative meaning.
edited 4 hours ago
answered 5 hours ago
TaliesinMerlinTaliesinMerlin
7,6581430
7,6581430
add a comment |
add a comment |
While not familiar with the phrase "shoot for effect", I am familiar with the practice.
A mercenary I knew here back during the war (the guy that took Barry Sadler to hospital after he shot himself, actually) said that the so-called Mozambique Drill (basically a double-tap + 1) originated with an old SAS practice and supposedly dated back to Stirling...but I cannot confirm that and it is tangential to the topic.
That conversation happened at the Europa Bar, if you know what that is.
I think that the usage in the self-defense sense (read legal murder) originated from the phrase...
Fire for effect
Fire which is delivered after the mean point of impact or burst is within the desired distance of the target or adjusting/ranging point.
That is from Wikipedia (sorry, but it is a place to start)
This refers to the tactic of "walking" spotting rounds from a mortar into the position marked by an FO (forward observer... usually sitting in a high position closer to the target) using what is sometimes called "ranging fire". When the FO reports that the rounds are falling into the designated area, the order is often called to "fire for effect". This means that the gun should deliver as many rounds necessary for the elimination of the objective.
An N-grams search for "shoot for effect, fire for effect" renders nothing for the first, and many for the second, going back to 1906.
From the Drill Regulations for Field Artillery...
"...fire for effect has for its sole objective the the destruction of the enemy..."
So...bottomline: I think that "shoot for effect" is borrowed from an earlier military usage, and that the quote about the Misery cowboys was a one-off.
1
+1 for the self defense sense. That is where I tend to hear it. If you shoot someone, make a proper job of it and there won't be anybody to argue with your version of events.
– Phil Sweet
21 mins ago
add a comment |
While not familiar with the phrase "shoot for effect", I am familiar with the practice.
A mercenary I knew here back during the war (the guy that took Barry Sadler to hospital after he shot himself, actually) said that the so-called Mozambique Drill (basically a double-tap + 1) originated with an old SAS practice and supposedly dated back to Stirling...but I cannot confirm that and it is tangential to the topic.
That conversation happened at the Europa Bar, if you know what that is.
I think that the usage in the self-defense sense (read legal murder) originated from the phrase...
Fire for effect
Fire which is delivered after the mean point of impact or burst is within the desired distance of the target or adjusting/ranging point.
That is from Wikipedia (sorry, but it is a place to start)
This refers to the tactic of "walking" spotting rounds from a mortar into the position marked by an FO (forward observer... usually sitting in a high position closer to the target) using what is sometimes called "ranging fire". When the FO reports that the rounds are falling into the designated area, the order is often called to "fire for effect". This means that the gun should deliver as many rounds necessary for the elimination of the objective.
An N-grams search for "shoot for effect, fire for effect" renders nothing for the first, and many for the second, going back to 1906.
From the Drill Regulations for Field Artillery...
"...fire for effect has for its sole objective the the destruction of the enemy..."
So...bottomline: I think that "shoot for effect" is borrowed from an earlier military usage, and that the quote about the Misery cowboys was a one-off.
1
+1 for the self defense sense. That is where I tend to hear it. If you shoot someone, make a proper job of it and there won't be anybody to argue with your version of events.
– Phil Sweet
21 mins ago
add a comment |
While not familiar with the phrase "shoot for effect", I am familiar with the practice.
A mercenary I knew here back during the war (the guy that took Barry Sadler to hospital after he shot himself, actually) said that the so-called Mozambique Drill (basically a double-tap + 1) originated with an old SAS practice and supposedly dated back to Stirling...but I cannot confirm that and it is tangential to the topic.
That conversation happened at the Europa Bar, if you know what that is.
I think that the usage in the self-defense sense (read legal murder) originated from the phrase...
Fire for effect
Fire which is delivered after the mean point of impact or burst is within the desired distance of the target or adjusting/ranging point.
That is from Wikipedia (sorry, but it is a place to start)
This refers to the tactic of "walking" spotting rounds from a mortar into the position marked by an FO (forward observer... usually sitting in a high position closer to the target) using what is sometimes called "ranging fire". When the FO reports that the rounds are falling into the designated area, the order is often called to "fire for effect". This means that the gun should deliver as many rounds necessary for the elimination of the objective.
An N-grams search for "shoot for effect, fire for effect" renders nothing for the first, and many for the second, going back to 1906.
From the Drill Regulations for Field Artillery...
"...fire for effect has for its sole objective the the destruction of the enemy..."
So...bottomline: I think that "shoot for effect" is borrowed from an earlier military usage, and that the quote about the Misery cowboys was a one-off.
While not familiar with the phrase "shoot for effect", I am familiar with the practice.
A mercenary I knew here back during the war (the guy that took Barry Sadler to hospital after he shot himself, actually) said that the so-called Mozambique Drill (basically a double-tap + 1) originated with an old SAS practice and supposedly dated back to Stirling...but I cannot confirm that and it is tangential to the topic.
That conversation happened at the Europa Bar, if you know what that is.
I think that the usage in the self-defense sense (read legal murder) originated from the phrase...
Fire for effect
Fire which is delivered after the mean point of impact or burst is within the desired distance of the target or adjusting/ranging point.
That is from Wikipedia (sorry, but it is a place to start)
This refers to the tactic of "walking" spotting rounds from a mortar into the position marked by an FO (forward observer... usually sitting in a high position closer to the target) using what is sometimes called "ranging fire". When the FO reports that the rounds are falling into the designated area, the order is often called to "fire for effect". This means that the gun should deliver as many rounds necessary for the elimination of the objective.
An N-grams search for "shoot for effect, fire for effect" renders nothing for the first, and many for the second, going back to 1906.
From the Drill Regulations for Field Artillery...
"...fire for effect has for its sole objective the the destruction of the enemy..."
So...bottomline: I think that "shoot for effect" is borrowed from an earlier military usage, and that the quote about the Misery cowboys was a one-off.
edited 1 hour ago
answered 3 hours ago
CascabelCascabel
8,16662856
8,16662856
1
+1 for the self defense sense. That is where I tend to hear it. If you shoot someone, make a proper job of it and there won't be anybody to argue with your version of events.
– Phil Sweet
21 mins ago
add a comment |
1
+1 for the self defense sense. That is where I tend to hear it. If you shoot someone, make a proper job of it and there won't be anybody to argue with your version of events.
– Phil Sweet
21 mins ago
1
1
+1 for the self defense sense. That is where I tend to hear it. If you shoot someone, make a proper job of it and there won't be anybody to argue with your version of events.
– Phil Sweet
21 mins ago
+1 for the self defense sense. That is where I tend to hear it. If you shoot someone, make a proper job of it and there won't be anybody to argue with your version of events.
– Phil Sweet
21 mins ago
add a comment |
I looked for references. Here are two.
FBI REPORT as reported at https://www.roninjj.com/page/page/4336917.htm
SHOOTING STYLE.
Twenty-six of the offenders [about 60%], including all of the street
combat veterans, "claimed to be instinctive shooters, pointing and
firing the weapon without consciously aligning the sights," the study
says.
"They practice getting the gun out and using it," Davis explained.
"They shoot for effect." Or as one of the offenders put it: "[W]e're
not working with no marksmanship....We just putting it in your
direction, you know....It don't matter...as long as it's gonna hit
you...if it's up at your head or your chest, down at your legs,
whatever....Once I squeeze and you fall, then...if I want to execute you, then I could go > from there."
Then there is this article Shoot for effect by John Stembridge. It is about guns used in Hollywood movies.
So that is two usages.
add a comment |
I looked for references. Here are two.
FBI REPORT as reported at https://www.roninjj.com/page/page/4336917.htm
SHOOTING STYLE.
Twenty-six of the offenders [about 60%], including all of the street
combat veterans, "claimed to be instinctive shooters, pointing and
firing the weapon without consciously aligning the sights," the study
says.
"They practice getting the gun out and using it," Davis explained.
"They shoot for effect." Or as one of the offenders put it: "[W]e're
not working with no marksmanship....We just putting it in your
direction, you know....It don't matter...as long as it's gonna hit
you...if it's up at your head or your chest, down at your legs,
whatever....Once I squeeze and you fall, then...if I want to execute you, then I could go > from there."
Then there is this article Shoot for effect by John Stembridge. It is about guns used in Hollywood movies.
So that is two usages.
add a comment |
I looked for references. Here are two.
FBI REPORT as reported at https://www.roninjj.com/page/page/4336917.htm
SHOOTING STYLE.
Twenty-six of the offenders [about 60%], including all of the street
combat veterans, "claimed to be instinctive shooters, pointing and
firing the weapon without consciously aligning the sights," the study
says.
"They practice getting the gun out and using it," Davis explained.
"They shoot for effect." Or as one of the offenders put it: "[W]e're
not working with no marksmanship....We just putting it in your
direction, you know....It don't matter...as long as it's gonna hit
you...if it's up at your head or your chest, down at your legs,
whatever....Once I squeeze and you fall, then...if I want to execute you, then I could go > from there."
Then there is this article Shoot for effect by John Stembridge. It is about guns used in Hollywood movies.
So that is two usages.
I looked for references. Here are two.
FBI REPORT as reported at https://www.roninjj.com/page/page/4336917.htm
SHOOTING STYLE.
Twenty-six of the offenders [about 60%], including all of the street
combat veterans, "claimed to be instinctive shooters, pointing and
firing the weapon without consciously aligning the sights," the study
says.
"They practice getting the gun out and using it," Davis explained.
"They shoot for effect." Or as one of the offenders put it: "[W]e're
not working with no marksmanship....We just putting it in your
direction, you know....It don't matter...as long as it's gonna hit
you...if it's up at your head or your chest, down at your legs,
whatever....Once I squeeze and you fall, then...if I want to execute you, then I could go > from there."
Then there is this article Shoot for effect by John Stembridge. It is about guns used in Hollywood movies.
So that is two usages.
answered 2 hours ago
MikeJRamsey56MikeJRamsey56
2,229314
2,229314
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to English Language & Usage Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f494537%2fdoes-shooting-for-effect-have-contradictory-meanings-in-different-areas%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
oops, my bad. "Fire for effect". My fingers are quite svelte, thank you.
– Cascabel
6 hours ago
1
There's nothing prevent this phrase from being ambiguous. As to legal meaning, that would be something that only lawyers would be able to ascertain.
– Mitch
4 hours ago
1
To be clear, in my comment on the other question, I wasn’t talking specifically about shoot for effect as an expression. I didn’t know that it was an expression at all, actually. I was only talking about the phrase for effect in the sense of ‘for show’, applicable to any verb where it makes semantic sense: “He brandished his sword for effect”, “He opened his mouth in a wide gasp for effect”, etc. If shoot for effect exists as an expression and means ‘shoot for maximum effectiveness’, then I guess those three words put together can indeed be autantonymic.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
2 hours ago
@JanusBahsJacquet That may well be the entire issue here - a three word expression or just a two word phrase preceded by shooting.
– Phil Sweet
24 mins ago
@JanusBahsJacquet That may well be the entire issue here - a three word expression or just a two word phrase preceded by shooting.
– Phil Sweet
24 mins ago