[demolition]

(06-29-2017 11:03 PM)Luther Wrote:  

I think that they set the book up freestanding for the test shot. When they shot it the book was knocked back, absorbing a large part of the force so the bullet didn't penetrate. 200 lbs of man behind the second shot didn't work out quite the same. These people are dumb, but you'd have two be two complete retards to do it without testing first. I mean too retarded to know how to have a YouTube channel.

There are any number of ways this could have played out. Did they use the same book that they tested on (with prior damage reducing its structural integrity)? Did they use a different book with similar profile but differing paper quality? Was the bullet fired from the same position and angle? etc.

Stunt had nearly the intended effect as far as I can tell.

[Mage]

dupe

[Mage]

[quote] (07-02-2017 03:41 AM)Mage Wrote:  

[quote='Zelcorpion' pid='1602535' dateline='1498775644']

I don't think that she needs prison time. The rest of her life will be punishment enough.

It was an accident and that is why the bail is set so low.

But since it was predominantly her boyfriend's idea, then the guy already got his punishment.[/quote]

Would you say the same if the shooter was the guy and victim was a girl?

I think stupid people do deserve jail time for stupidity. Because stupid people are no less dangerous than evil people. And sometimes the difference between stupidity and evil is blurry. Like in this case - she did it for subscribers. Is it naivety or vanity?
The problem is women have this magical ability blur things up and make up excuses by making their motives and reasoning seem blurry, while with a man many would not even care about his reasons and motives and just punish him according to what he did.


Her children defiantly need to be separated from her. She can endanger them in many ways with her poor understanding of physics. Also I doubt children will ever truly forgive her.

[quote] (06-29-2017 06:44 PM)Kona Wrote:  

She gets probation, and I bet that's it.

Even more so since she's pregnant. Fun fact: If a woman is pregnant and has to go to court to face criminal charges, a doctor will automatically classify her pregnancy as "high risk."

This is because the stress causedmby the very court proceedings fucks with the pregnancy. And guess what, you can't incarcerate a high risk pregnant woman. Not a joke.[/quote]

You can always incarcerate her after she has given birth.


[quote] (06-29-2017 06:52 PM)king bast Wrote:  

If I've learned anything from video games, it's that the desert eagle is one powerful handgun. I find it hard to believe a couple of layabouts like these two didn't get exposed to the same "education".[/quote]

Just what I thought. These blokes were too lazy to even get themselves the smallest lady purse handgun available and just went with what was probably the single gun they had at home. Not that it wouldn't be stupid still with a smaller gun. But basically these people were not gun-smart, knew they were not gun smart and went on with this anyway.

[Simeon_Strangelight]

(07-02-2017 03:41 AM)Mage Wrote:  

(06-29-2017 05:34 PM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  

I don't think that she needs prison time. The rest of her life will be punishment enough.

It was an accident and that is why the bail is set so low.

But since it was predominantly her boyfriend's idea, then the guy already got his punishment.

Would you say the same if the shooter was the guy and victim was a girl?

I think stupid people do deserve jail time for stupidity. Because stupid people are no less dangerous than evil people. And sometimes the difference between stupidity and evil is blurry. Like in this case - she did it for subscribers. Is it naivety or vanity?
The problem is women have this magical ability blur things up and make up excuses by making their motives and reasoning seem blurry, while with a man many would not even care about his reasons and motives and just punish him according to what he did.


Her children defiantly need to be separated from her. She can endanger them in many ways with her poor understanding of physics. Also I doubt children will ever truly forgive her.

(06-29-2017 06:44 PM)Kona Wrote:  

This is because the stress causedmby the very court proceedings fucks with the pregnancy. And guess what, you can't incarcerate a high risk pregnant woman. Not a joke.

Aloha!

You can always incarcerate her after she has given birth.

First of all - we will always treat women differently to men. That is why men should have more rights in certain things than women knowing that women have it easier on some fronts.

Second - this cannot be compared because any man shooting at a pregnant wife in a stunt does deserve greater punishment.

I also don't think that she is that dumb that she will kill her child. Forced adoption is unlikely to produce a better outcome for the child.

I personally know plenty of young men who did dumb thing - sometimes destroying their own lives that way (jumping head first into a beach, getting paralyzed for life the neck downwards). I have had buddies who killed themselves and others while driving drunk.

Stupid comes in many ways or forms.

In a sane judicial system one should also always assess the likelihood of future similar transgressions and pure intent.

A rapist imbued with a negative mindset (let's say Islam and thinking that all infidel women are sluts that deserve to be raped) - he will certainly rape again. If that guy gets 6 months behind bars in Sweden, then he is a dire danger to any woman in the future. I would give that bloke life behind bars, but jus keep an eye on that woman - years and years on probation.

Also we should really get our asses out of the idealistic perception that men and women will ever be treated equally before the law. We are not equal in the sexual market and we will never be truly equal before the law. The MRA are wrong in that point similar to the feminists. Men should be given more rights in divorce and other legal issues because of such differences.

[Mage]

(07-02-2017 04:08 AM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  

(07-02-2017 03:41 AM)Mage Wrote:  

(06-29-2017 05:34 PM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  

I don't think that she needs prison time. The rest of her life will be punishment enough.

It was an accident and that is why the bail is set so low.

But since it was predominantly her boyfriend's idea, then the guy already got his punishment.

Would you say the same if the shooter was the guy and victim was a girl?

I think stupid people do deserve jail time for stupidity. Because stupid people are no less dangerous than evil people. And sometimes the difference between stupidity and evil is blurry. Like in this case - she did it for subscribers. Is it naivety or vanity?
The problem is women have this magical ability blur things up and make up excuses by making their motives and reasoning seem blurry, while with a man many would not even care about his reasons and motives and just punish him according to what he did.


Her children defiantly need to be separated from her. She can endanger them in many ways with her poor understanding of physics. Also I doubt children will ever truly forgive her.

First of all - we will always treat women differently to men. That is why men should have more rights in certain things than women knowing that women have it easier on some fronts.

Second - this cannot be compared because any man shooting at a pregnant wife in a stunt does deserve greater punishment.

I also don't think that she is that dumb that she will kill her child. Forced adoption is unlikely to produce a better outcome for the child.

I personally know plenty of young men who did dumb thing - sometimes destroying their own lives that way (jumping head first into a beach, getting paralyzed for life the neck downwards). I have had buddies who killed themselves and others while driving drunk.

Stupid comes in many ways or forms.

In a sane judicial system one should also always assess the likelihood of future similar transgressions and pure intent.

A rapist imbued with a negative mindset (let's say Islam and thinking that all infidel women are sluts that deserve to be raped) - he will certainly rape again. If that guy gets 6 months behind bars in Sweden, then he is a dire danger to any woman in the future. I would give that bloke life behind bars, but jus keep an eye on that woman - years and years on probation.

Also we should really get our asses out of the idealistic perception that men and women will ever be treated equally before the law. We are not equal in the sexual market and we will never be truly equal before the law. The MRA are wrongs on that similarly to the feminists. Men should be given more rights in divorce and other legal issues because of such differences.

I agree that women should get excused of some things easier if men had other rights women do not have, particularity to have a greater authority over women who are recognized to be less accountable for their actions. Each sex should have their own rights and duties according to their nature.

But since society doesn't give men their unique rights, I always advocate a woman getting punished as hard as possible. If they want equality they should get it.

I also dislike children being taken from home for small reasons, but this is no small reason - I predict the child will grow up rebellious and self-destructive and disrespect this mother any time she remembers what she did. The mother has lost her authority. She can no longer tell the children that doing drugs or sleeping around or getting tatoos is stupid - because - hey where was her prudence when she shot dad for social network likes?

[Simeon_Strangelight]

You don't know whether she will react badly (by turning to drugs and anger) or whether she will react in a way to make up for it (by being totally committed to her child and humbled). That is why she needs to be watched for years. If she takes a bad turn, then the child should be taken from her.

But taking away her child right away may cause other problems - she can get pregnant with another man. You wold need to lock her away, but she would only get a few years and could still get another kid.

A child also always wants to meet the real parents, because she did not do anything evil - just stupid.

[Mage]

(07-02-2017 04:25 AM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  

You don't know whether she will react badly (by turning to drugs and anger) or whether she will react in a way to make up for it (by being totally committed to her child and humbled). That is why she needs to be watched for years. If she takes a bad turn, then the child should be taken from her.

But taking away her child right away may cause other problems - she can get pregnant with another man. You wold need to lock her away, but she would only get a few years and could still get another kid.

A child also always wants to meet the real parents, because she did not do anything evil - just stupid.

I think the child will despise her mother even if she is humble and committed. She will see it is all about her trying to compensate. Children don't like doormat parents just like women dislike doormat men, game works here as well. I don't think there is anything the mother can do to make this right.

Your argument about leaving her with her current children so she would be less likely to get other children is probably the best argument for leaving children with her. But it is not a sure thing she will never hook up with another man anyway. After all she is "popular" now in the social networks and with the rampant male thirst all around...

[Leonard D Neubache]

Take these kids to any middle class Christian family and tell them that they need a good home to be raised in because their mother killed their father and she's going to jail.

I guarantee that they will come out better than if they live with this shit-show of a human being who I would bet good money is going to end up with a serious drug addiction after this (reality escapists and get-rich-quick fools will always walk downhill unless they have no other options).

Mage is right. Men and women in an ideal society would be judged differently but while men are given all of the penalties and none of the passes then women should be held to the same standard, which is frankly utterly necessary to get their fucking heads straight on feminism.

If you puss out on throwing a dumb bitch like this in the slammer when a man would go away for years then what does that teach women?

No consequences for anything, so why would they ever vote to change that arrangement?

Toss the book at this dangerous fuckwit and give her kids to a family that will raise them right.

[Chetthebaker]

(07-02-2017 08:22 PM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  

Take these kids to any middle class Christian family and tell them that they need a good home to be raised in because their mother killed their father and she's going to jail.

I guarantee that they will come out better than if they live with this shit-show of a human being who I would bet good money is going to end up with a serious drug addiction after this (reality escapists and get-rich-quick fools will always walk downhill unless they have no other options).

Mage is right. Men and women in an ideal society would be judged differently but while men are given all of the penalties and none of the passes then women should be held to the same standard, which is frankly utterly necessary to get their fucking heads straight on feminism.

If you puss out on throwing a dumb bitch like this in the slammer when a man would go away for years then what does that teach women?

No consequences for anything, so why would they ever vote to change that arrangement?

Toss the book at this dangerous fuckwit and give her kids to a family that will raise them right.

Agreed.

This is next level stupidity and negligence. She should be in jail, and not raising children.

[Mikan]

(07-01-2017 11:17 PM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  

^This.

It's incredible the leaps of 'logic' we have to spin to make something like this even vaguely understandable.

I'm guessing that slug was probably closer to 60 or 70 cal by the time it hit his chest. Ironically he might have had a better chance to survive it without the book.

Absent the book a slug that big at such a short distances might have failed to expand properly and given them a few precious minutes to get him to a hospital.

There is a chance that even if the round had failed to penetrate, he still could have been badly injured or killed by the blunt trama. I work with a guy who was shot while serving in Iraq; he took a 7.62×54 to the lower back. His body armor stopped it from penetrating, but he's still crippled for life.

[PapayaTapper]

(07-03-2017 07:06 PM)Mikan Wrote:  

(07-01-2017 11:17 PM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  

^This.

It's incredible the leaps of 'logic' we have to spin to make something like this even vaguely understandable.

I'm guessing that slug was probably closer to 60 or 70 cal by the time it hit his chest. Ironically he might have had a better chance to survive it without the book.

Absent the book a slug that big at such a short distances might have failed to expand properly and given them a few precious minutes to get him to a hospital.

There is a chance that even if the round had failed to penetrate, he still could have been badly injured or killed by the blunt trama. I work with a guy who was shot while serving in Iraq; he took a 7.62×54 to the lower back. His body armor stopped it from penetrating, but he's still crippled for life.

Thats what strikes me as implausible about this whole thing.

1. That they "tested" this at all
2. That it was a 50 cal gun

If youve shot a 50 cal or even been next to one when it was...how could you still knowingly stand in front it ?

I have a hard time believing these are the pertinent facts

[MMX2010]

The clip of the guy setting the shotgun against the post, that slowly but certainly falls down, gets me every single time.

[BortimusPrime]

Guess the link to start it mid video doesn't work, so the joke is at 1:18.

[Leonard D Neubache]

What's not commonly know to a lot of people is that the Desert Eagle handgun is made in .357 and .44 magnum. It was one of the first semi-automatic pistols to be built chambered in these rounds which were there-to-fore considered unsuitable for anything other than revolvers due to their overall length and protruding rim design.

The .50 chambered DE coupled with the matrix movies was what popularised the gun but most people don't know it's also produced to fire less (but still very powerful) rounds.

Having said that, the muzzle report from a .357 is still nothing to shrug about. If these idiots really did this then I'm guessing alcohol had to be involved.

Possible it could have been the "baby eagle" which is the shrunken 9mm version. I have a hard time believing that these morons would pay what 50ae ammo costs, unless the guy that sold them the flashy gun tossed in a box to seal the deal.

[weambulance]

The 357 Magnum Desert Eagle was the pistol to use in Rogue Spear, as I recall.

Some guy on youtube tested shooting reams of paper with the 50 AE Desert Eagle after this happened. With two reams standing up, but not bound together, the bullet passed through the first ream and stopped against the face of the second ream. Figure if they'd been duct-taped together it would've gone at least partway into the second ream.

A 500 page ream in its wrapper is tougher than any book you're likely to find except maybe a very-unabridged dictionary.

If I wasn't in magical guns-are-bad-mmkay NY right now I'd test shooting a couple books with a 9mm. I suspect a 124 grain 9mm JHP would zip right through a typical textbook.

Also relevant:

https://www.theboxotruth.com/the-box-o-t...s-o-truth/

[PapayaTapper]

(07-03-2017 07:30 PM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  

What's not commonly know to a lot of people is that the Desert Eagle handgun is made in .357 and .44 magnum. It was one of the first semi-automatic pistols to be built chambered in these rounds which were there-to-fore considered unsuitable for anything other than revolvers due to their overall length and protruding rim design.

The .50 chambered DE coupled with the matrix movies was what popularised the gun but most people don't know it's also produced to fire less (but still very powerful) rounds.

Having said that, the muzzle report from a .357 is still nothing to shrug about. If these idiots really did this then I'm guessing alcohol had to be involved.

Possible it could have been the "baby eagle" which is the shrunken 9mm version. I have a hard time believing that these morons would pay what 50ae ammo costs, unless the guy that sold them the flashy gun tossed in a box to seal the deal.

The 357 and then the 44 mag actually came out several years before the 50 cal (I actually owned a 44 version briefly before I sold it to my brother. He's got a 50 as well...thats how I came to shoot one and why I struggle to believe the facts as presented in this story)

The 50 cal runs around $1400-$1700 depending on features, where purchased, etc and the ammo costs about $3-$4 per round. This is not a gun a novice would buy to "plink" with, nor does it seem the type of gun a couple of minimum wage ignoramuses would invest in for a one off stunt.

Im not suggesting any type of conspiracy but rather I think its probably shoddy reporting ie...someone extracted some "facts" from their anus

[Leonard D Neubache]

Conspiracy theory of implausible plausibility (and it would require almost God/devil like intervention).

The gun had been bought by some dude obsessed with the wank factor who much later decided it was too expensive to shoot and sold it on. The one box of ammo he had was improperly stored for a year or more and some of the rounds were damp as such (alternate theory, the original buyer is a novice who jumped straight into reloading because the ammo was so expensive and fucked up a particular batch).

The test shot was a dud and the book stopped it, but the idiots didn't realise it was a dud because they've never shot a full powered round before.

The second and fatal round was factory fresh.

Just one of a thousand possibilities when you have to take a mental stroll into retard land.

It makes me wonder if a squib load in a 50ae will actually push the bullet out of the barrel.

[PapayaTapper]

(07-03-2017 09:45 PM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  

Conspiracy theory of implausible plausibility (and it would require almost God/devil like intervention).

The gun had been bought by some dude obsessed with the wank factor who much later decided it was too expensive to shoot and sold it on. The one box of ammo he had was improperly stored for a year or more and some of the rounds were damp as such (alternate theory, the original buyer is a novice who jumped straight into reloading because the ammo was so expensive and fucked up a particular batch).

The test shot was a dud and the book stopped it, but the idiots didn't realise it was a dud because they've never shot a full powered round before.

The second and fatal round was factory fresh.

Just one of a thousand possibilities when you have to take a mental stroll into retard land.

It makes me wonder if a squib load in a 50ae will actually push the bullet out of the barrel.

Youre likely right...cascading failures...I just cant get my head around the degree of common sense dismissal required to do this

[Handsome Creepy Eel]

(07-03-2017 07:30 PM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  

The Desert Eagle handgun is made in .357 and .44 magnum.

Not many know this.

Fixed it for you

[Number one bummer]

Woman who shot boyfriend for YouTube prank pleads guilty to second degree manslaughter

Quote:

20-year-old woman who hoped to skyrocket to YouTube stardom with a daring stunt has instead pleaded guilty to second-degree manslaughter after fatally shooting her boyfriend while cameras rolled.

Monalisa Perez of Halstad, Minnesota, shot her boyfriend through a book he was holding to his chest for a stunt the couple intended to upload to YouTube. Ms Perez said they did not believe the bullet would make it through the 1.5-inch tome.

It did. The bullet tore through the hardcover encyclopaedia and entered her 22-year-old boyfriend’ chest, injuring him fatally. Ms Perez was pregnant at the time, and the couple’s 3-year-old daughter was standing nearby, authorities said.

Ms Perez’s plea deal requires her to serve 180 days in jail and 10 years on probation, according to the Minneapolis Star Tribune.

If she had proceeded to trial, a second-degree manslaughter conviction could have earned Ms Perez 10 years in jail and a $20,000 fine. Now, she will likely serve her 180 days in 30-day sentences over the next three years, with the possibility of spending the last six months on house arrest.

She will also be barred from making any money off of the video, and from owning a firearm for the rest of her life.

Ms Perez and her boyfriend, 22-year-old Pedro Ruiz III, were “vloggers” who regularly uploaded videos about their life in small-town Minnesota to YouTube. In the 18 videos still live on the couple’s channel, Mr Ruiz attempts low-stakes stunts, and the pair discusses their desire to reach YouTube stardom.

The shooting stunt appears to have been an attempt to raise the stakes of their videos. Ms Perez told investigators she initially resisted firing the gun, and that her boyfriend had to persuade her. She claimed he showed her a book that he had shot himself, in which the bullet did not go all the way through.

I hope there was recording of him actually saying that he shot the other book and that the round didn't go through. If not she might have got away with a real murder.

Also for note it was confirmed that the deagle was a 50 cal.

Since this thread first came out I have tested my own 50 cal Desert Eagle, against some books and a safe backstop(ie not human). The bullet traveled through an entire 4-4.5 inch thick book and went approx 2 inches into a second book before stopping. By then the round had expanded into an 1.5inx1in oval shape. That is why I don't buy the fact that this guy got an 1.5 inch book to stop it. Unless he was using old, wet ammo for the first shot

[RoastBeefCurtains4Me]

I think with a desert eagle round, even if the book stopped it, you'd feel like somebody smacked you in the chest with a sledge hammer, possibly still enough to stop your heart.

[Cr33pin]

Puss pass yet again.......

[Germanicus]

(07-03-2017 07:06 PM)Mikan Wrote:  

There is a chance that even if the round had failed to penetrate, he still could have been badly injured or killed by the blunt trama. I work with a guy who was shot while serving in Iraq; he took a 7.62×54 to the lower back. His body armor stopped it from penetrating, but he's still crippled for life.

This is very true. Not very many people realize that most armors and helmets aren't worn to protect against bullets. It's expected that the armor will reduce injury from bullets, not prevent it except in the off chance that due to variables like angle of impact, firer's distance, weaker calibre, etc. that the armor will stop it or the shape of the helmet will redirect the bullet away. In fact, plenty of soldiers have died in battle from being shot in the head, but the bullet not penetrating the helmet. The projectile hit in such a way that it didn't go through, but its force carried on forward and broke the neck or smashed the skull.

God bless your colleague. I hope he is doing well.

(07-03-2017 07:14 PM)PapayaTapper Wrote:  

(07-01-2017 11:17 PM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  

^This.

It's incredible the leaps of 'logic' we have to spin to make something like this even vaguely understandable.

I'm guessing that slug was probably closer to 60 or 70 cal by the time it hit his chest. Ironically he might have had a better chance to survive it without the book.

Absent the book a slug that big at such a short distances might have failed to expand properly and given them a few precious minutes to get him to a hospital.

Thats what strikes me as implausible about this whole thing.

1. That they "tested" this at all
2. That it was a 50 cal gun

If youve shot a 50 cal or even been next to one when it was...how could you still knowingly stand in front it ?

I have a hard time believing these are the pertinent facts

Those two mongoloids most certainly did not test out their plan or even think about it or attempt to learn something about ballistics and penetration. These are people whose prime intellectual interest is which Kardashian whore said what today. They don't have the attention span or the even capacity for sitting down and learning the science required. The only thing they know about guns and ballistics is whatever Hollywood movie with wrong physics was the most badass. The idiot willfully stood in front of a handgun because he was an ignoramus and seriously thought he was gonna be ok. Those thick nerd books will do the trick just fine. No way a bullet goes through that.

The idiot female has a part in this too. No pussy pass deserved; of course she gets one.

[PapayaTapper]

(12-21-2017 10:34 AM)Number one bummer Wrote:  

It did. The bullet tore through the hardcover encyclopaedia and entered her 22-year-old boyfriend’ chest, injuring him fatally. Ms Perez was pregnant at the time, and the couple’s 3-year-old daughter was standing nearby, authorities said.

She claimed he showed her a book that he had shot himself, in which the bullet did not go all the way through.

She should have never judged a book by it's cover

[Simeon_Strangelight]

(12-21-2017 12:56 PM)Germanicus Wrote:  

The idiot female has a part in this too. No pussy pass deserved; of course she gets one.

We will never be able to get the pussy pass out of the legal system unless we are judged by advanced ethical robots. Society will always treat women more leniently. That is why men need greater rights in terms of voting (man gets 2 votes with one female vote), men need stronger rights given automatic custody of the children if a woman blows up the marriage frivolously, men need to be believed equally when any kind of abuse is mentioned - not just thrown out to the curb by the cops.

If you remedy that, then they can have their pussy passes before court.