this post was submitted on 13 Jul 2024
240 points (91.4% liked)

politics

19090 readers
3853 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 23 points 3 months ago (2 children)

NYT photographer got the photo of the bullet, it seems that TMZ's reporting that it was glass from the teleprompter is not correct:

https://x.com/spectatorindex/status/1812293722832318726

[–] [email protected] 19 points 3 months ago

Well that certainly blows up any argument it was staged. You don't fake shoot a real bullet past your fake targets head.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 3 months ago (1 children)

That isolated tweet with the pic doesn’t claim to be from NYT or a NYT photographer. I’ve never heard of this “spectator index”. Here is the AP collection of photos from the event.

If I do assume that’s a bullet, let’s test if the size of the streak makes sense. A bullet travels at about 750m/s. That streak (using Trump’s head for scale) is about 50cm long, or 1/2 meter. A 750 m/s bullet travels 1/2 meter in 1/1500 seconds. When you consider projection effects (we might not be looking with a line-of-sight perpendicular to the bullet’s trajectory), we expect the length and time used in my above calculations to be lower bounds, with the true answer probably being within about a factor of 3 of that bound. This means that this image only makes sense as a bullet if the shutter speed is between 1/1500 and 1/500 seconds. That lines up with this website’s recommendation of 1/1000 second exposure time for bright outdoor shots.

Either a very good fake that considered the kinematics, or this is a real image of the bullet.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 3 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 8 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Thanks! With the information in the article you just linked, I am now very suspicious that this is a picture of the bullet, where I previously thought it was plausible from my low-precision estimate. From the article:

“If the gunman was firing an AR-15-style rifle, the .223-caliber or 5.56-millimeter bullets they use travel at roughly 3,200 feet per second when they leave the weapon’s muzzle,’’ Mr. Harrigan said. “And with a 1/8,000th of a second shutter speed, this would allow the bullet to travel approximately four-tenths of a foot while the shutter is open.”

Same procedure, but an AR-15 shoots a bullet faster than the speed for a generic bullet that I used, and the shutter speed was faster because it was a fancy NYT camera. 3200ft/s is almost exactly 1000m/s. The 1/8000s shutter speed is the fact that seems the most reliable, assuming that the photographer knew what setting their camera was on.

What I disagree with is that that streak is only 0.4 feet long. The average size of a human male head (brow to back of head) is about 20cm, or 8in per this image from Wikipedia. The streak from the bullet in the image is about twice the size of Trump’s head, or 40cm/16in. Due to projection effects, this is a lower bound on the path of the bullet during the 1/8000s exposure. This puts a lower bound on the speed of 3200m/s. This is over three times the velocity of an AR-15, at minimum. Either this was some super-high-powered rifle to fire the bullet that fast, the shutter speed is misquoted (or a misleading representation of the exposure time), or this isn’t picture of the bullet.

Thanks for providing the data to make me suspicious that this is an image of the bullet.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 3 months ago

assuming that the photographer knew what setting their camera was on

The photographer would definitely know even if the camera was in a mode that selects the shutter speed automatically because it's embedded in the image file's metadata, which is shown in software used for image processing.

Note publishing and social media platforms usually strip metadata from images.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 months ago (2 children)

3200ft/s is muzzle velocity, that's going to drop over the distance.

Plus the velocity depends on how hot the load is. An AR-15 can be as high as 3,200, but it can alao be lower.

https://www.spartanarmorsystems.com/understanding-bullet-speed-how-distance-affects-armor

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Right, all more reasons the streak in the image is too fast to be an AR bullet.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

What also doesn’t make sense is, if you roughly line up his arm position in the three NYT stills vs going frame by frame in the video/audio playback captured by the various news outlets, he raises his hand to his ear nearly 2/3rds a second after the audio recorded first shot, which, given bullet velocity and distance traveled was probably nearly a full second after the first shot (so a super slow reaction time, which normal nervous system reaction time is .150-.300/sec), since you’ll hear (and audio record) the shot roughly 5 frames after it’s passed by. He starts to lift his hand off the podium at nearly the same time the second shot estimates to be fired, and maybe 3-4 frames before the first posted NYT pic catches the bullet supposedly whizzing by.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 months ago

drop over the distance

Very true, but it was only 300".