I believe that this is how William Buroughs lost his esposa en Mexico, no?
If you have to ask, the answer is "stupidity".
Stupidity.
Gee, that was easy.
I'd call it serious stupidity.
Stupidity. Or trick.
Some trickery, yes. The target stood on the top of a pole which held it in place against the tree. The target was tall, making for a lot of vertical play. The double-action revolver was cocked first, then fired single action in an aimed shot. Any competent shooter could have done this right.
But stupid, yes -- the idiot downrange. Anyone standing ahead of the muzzle of a centerfire risks lasting damage to his hearing. He should have been wearing Sonic Ear Valves inside his ears and mickeys covering his ears. Also, he should have been wearing shooting glasses -- polycarbonate lenses -- to protect his eyes from burnt powder granules.
It looks fake to me. There is no mark on the tree where the bullet should have hit. None of the fragments of glass fell in front of him or on him. The bottle is off center on his head, and doesn't move when he does. It looks like it is resting on something stationary behind him. Perhaps that board which does happen to be directly in line with the bottle.
Where does that "smoke" come from when the bottle shatters? Perhaps from the explosive charge that shattered the bottle? Glass doesn't fragment into "smoke" when it shatters.
My guess, fake
That's how William S. Burroughs ("The Naked Lunch") accidentally killed his wife in 1951 -- he tried to shoot a glass off her head at a party, but aimed about three inches low.
Stupidity. Or a Darwin Award wannabe.
- JS
Stupidity.
With a rifle, maybe. With a pistol, hell no.
I believe that this is how William Buroughs lost his esposa en Mexico, no?
If you have to ask, the answer is "stupidity".
Stupidity.
Gee, that was easy.
I'd call it serious stupidity.
Stupidity. Or trick.
Some trickery, yes. The target stood on the top of a pole which held it in place against the tree. The target was tall, making for a lot of vertical play. The double-action revolver was cocked first, then fired single action in an aimed shot. Any competent shooter could have done this right.
But stupid, yes -- the idiot downrange. Anyone standing ahead of the muzzle of a centerfire risks lasting damage to his hearing. He should have been wearing Sonic Ear Valves inside his ears and mickeys covering his ears. Also, he should have been wearing shooting glasses -- polycarbonate lenses -- to protect his eyes from burnt powder granules.
It looks fake to me. There is no mark on the tree where the bullet should have hit. None of the fragments of glass fell in front of him or on him. The bottle is off center on his head, and doesn't move when he does. It looks like it is resting on something stationary behind him. Perhaps that board which does happen to be directly in line with the bottle.
Where does that "smoke" come from when the bottle shatters? Perhaps from the explosive charge that shattered the bottle? Glass doesn't fragment into "smoke" when it shatters.
My guess, fake
That's how William S. Burroughs ("The Naked Lunch") accidentally killed his wife in 1951 -- he tried to shoot a glass off her head at a party, but aimed about three inches low.
Guts or Stupidity?
Come now, can't it be both?