This week we saw the leak of the Nashville Manifesto, a document that devestated the M5M media narrative. Today, we see this story rising on X and being pushed by the M5M. Be very careful with this story! I sense a psy-op in the making to reignite old narratives. This seems way too convenient!
(media.greatawakening.win)
🤢 MSM SCUMBAGS 🤢
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (84)
sorted by:
The slide will be back into position, but there would still be visible smoke at the barrel...the "shooter's" position wouldn't be this relaxed, or even in the current postion he's in if he did fire a shoot...you wouldn't be able to clearly see the brass as you do in this image, in the location it's in/timing wise from the "shot"...not to mention, the cameraman being in the perfect position/down range to capture such image.
100% fake and staged.
I'm not seeing the relaxation everyone is mentioning; but it's moot because the COMPLETE lack of smoke and the gun's position showing no hint of being in recoil, even with a one-handed grip and the casing still right there, are sus AF.
The nonchalant face, no tension in his forearm, and arm position...none match anything I'd ever seen while shooting a gun, unless you were in Hollywood.
Visible smoke not a possibility. First, it is called smokeless powder for a reason. Second, it is being ejected from the barrel at the speed of the bullet (~1000 feet per second), or even faster from rapid expansion. The case is moving much slower than the bullet. When shooting, it is common to be aware of the case motion (sometimes it hits you in the forehead). I have seldom been aware of smoke from an immediate shot.
You have an imaginary conception of what the proper shooting stance should be, and there is nothing about his stance that is contrary to proper shooting posture. Relaxed is a good way to be. Being tensed up leads to a poor shot.
The cameraman was lucky to get the shot, but being lucky does not mean impossible.
DRD chimes in, verifying that its a psyop
This fits very well in here: https://rumble.com/v3uri4d-stone-temple-pilots-big-bang-baby.html
Oh, I have an acronym. I hadn't known. But you guys all respond to reality through your own paranoia. So, in an ironic way, it is a "psyop"...for you.
Have you ever noticed that the only people who ever talk about “reality” are those people who are so delusional that they actually assume that their own unique life experience is somehow more valid than everyone elses?
10000000000% and that many doots too. WTAF on this one! Has DRD ever seen a gun fired in his fucking life?
More like the question should be directed at you. I've done lots of shooting over decades.
Good point about the brass isn't blurred. (Duh, I should add - no need to inspect THAT for 'shop!)
Moreover the pistol is in full battery, no trace of movement on the slide. It still should be moving given the location of the casing. Also there is no sign of recoil induced hand movement or barrel rise.
The pistol has completed its ejection cycle and is BACK in battery. The shell casing didn't get in mid air all by itself; it was ejected. There can never be a "trace of movement on the slide" when being in battery, which is stationary. The flight of the casing is SLOW compared to slide movement in action. With good technique, there should be no sign of "recoil induced hand movement." There is only barrel rise with muzzle flip, but that would be visible in this photo only if the shooter "limp-wristed" the shot, which is easy to prevent. The usual way of absorbing such motions is for the forearm as a whole to rise, and there is no way of telling whether it did or not.
Given the previous comment was that the casing was not blurred from movement, the casing would have been moving slower than the slide and muzxel flip as the casing approached apogee. So if The casing should be blurred then so would the slide and muzzle.
But if, as the previous anon was implying, the casing was photoshopped in, there would be no motion blur of the casing, slide or muzzle.
Lots of photos of ejected shells in the gun magazines. I've never seen a blurred one. The camera is fast enough to capture that.
Its almost like you are an expert on everything!
I have a brain and I use it. I am also trained in system analysis. Human psychology is a very complex system, but it does have cause and effect.
LOL. Now you have. This is the very first image when I did Google (Lukol actually, but should be the same) search for "semi automatic pistol being fired."
https://c8.alamy.com/comp/B5H4TW/close-up-of-a-colt-45-semi-auto-pistol-being-fired-with-the-empty-B5H4TW.jpg
What's your point? The slide is returning. The shell is only about half as distant as the one in the original post, which means that would have been enough time in the OP for the slide to close.
You clearly don't know what you are talking about, because (1) there wouldn't be visible smoke (the discharge departed the muzzle at the rate of 1000 feet/second), (2) you can't tell the difference between relaxed or unrelaxed, but good technique requires being relaxed, (3) the shooter was point-shooting (not using sights) which is typical at close range if one is practiced with the weapon used, (4) brass is seen clearly in photography as a commonplace (read gun magazines to see examples), (5) with respect to timing, the slide has completed its cycle and is ready for the next shot (yes, it is damn near instantaneous), and (6) you don't know how many shots the cameraman took that were crummy, if he had a motorized shutter (there was a famous World War II photographer who explained that his technique was to simply take copious amounts of photos and sort them out afterward to find the choice shots); it also happens that people are in the right place at the right time. Being in the right place at the right time is NOT an impossibility. (The flip side, of course, was that the victim was in the wrong place at the wrong time.)
Really a joke for you to say anything was fake, when you are unfamiliar with the subject.
You are so full of shit! "there wouldn't be visible smoke (the discharge departed the muzzle at the rate of 1000 feet/second"
And you've fired SOOOOO many guns!
GTELGSFO!!
And you are so full of name-calling, but not one iota of refutation. The bullet is propelled from the pistol at a typical speed (for 9mm) of 1000 fps. It can't do that unless the gas behind it is also moving at the same speed, at high pressure. Once the bullet leaves the muzzle, the high-pressure gas actually expands and increases its velocity, but dissipates after traveling several feet.. I've read articles in the shooting press on the use of Schlieren photography to visualize the density field around the bullet, to draw conclusions about whether a boat-tailed bullet or a flat-based bullet will be affected by this expansion cloud behind it. (In my opinion, interpreting the photos, I didn't think their experimental setup was exact enough to draw any conclusions. Understanding Schlieren photographs is part of my training as an aerodynamicist.)
I've already mentioned I have fired at least 8 major pistol calibers, repeatedly, or at least enough to have preferences. I've fired semi-automatic pistols and revolvers, double-action and single-action triggers. You don't mention if you have even fired a .22. (Of course, if that's all you've fired, I would be embarrassed to say so.)
I don't know what that acronym means, but if you try to pronounce it, don't trip on your way down the stairs.
I do see what looks to be faint smoke just above the gun, although that would be VERY easy to Photoshop into the picture. If the picture was actually taken the moment the round is ejecting, you would expect there to be more smoke in front of the barrel of the gun. I can't say there is no smoke in the picture, but it sure doesn't look very realistic.
Just above the gun is totally clear. The background is blurry, but that is because it is out of focus.