You must log in or # to comment.
Damn not the pisstol!
We, uh…we all just going to ignore the fact that he already has a supply of this guys urine?
No but he is storing volumes of that fellow’s urine properly, and labeling and dating all containers, which get promptly frozen
I mean I’m not going to question him. He has a pee bullet.
He’s the guy’s urologist.
That really is taking the piss!
He’s actually the tech at the urinalysis lab, and this guy made an ill-advised gross joke when handing his sample over last time.
It just goes to show, you know?
On the next Mythbusters
That actually did this one lol.
Not urine, but ice, as depicted in… Some spy movie I think?
IIRC they busted it because the heat and pressure from the gunpowder just blew the ice bullet apart upon firing and I do not recall them doing the thing where they just made it work. I think it could have worked if they used compressed air instead of the normal way a bullet is fired. It at least wouldn’t have the heat so maybe.
They tried a meat bullet don’t think they got it working either. In the movie it was never supposed to work the person firing the ice bullet was being setup his target set the whole thing up to arrange for someone else to be killed and the sniper with the ice bullet would take the blame.
Using a co gun should work. I have an umarex and that thing hits hard, and it’s possible an ice bullet may penetrate, but it depends where it’s shot at.
Are co guns really that much more gentle on a projectile? I would have thought the force of the expanding gasses would be similar. It’s basically just a pressure explosion vs a chemical one, no?
This is why we need mythbusters…
Maybe some YouTuber that was inspired by them can help.
Hell, I’m actually a videographer I shouldn’t really need help with that. I’m just not motivated to make big projects for my own sake most of the time. So, If you make an ice bullet and fly me out to you we can be mythbusters lol.
I mean the biggest difference is is there’s no heat generated during the process. There’s actually a YouTuber I just watched two days ago with a t-shirt gun that is significantly more powerful than the 50 cal or 68 Cal guns that I use. And he was able to fire a frozen t-shirt multiple times to the point where it actually took the head off of a ballistics dummy literally ripped it off with the amount of force that it was firing at 150 psi. And at no point in time did the T-shirt thaw. There’s a couple of YouTubers out there that do quite a bit of air gun reviews and testing. I’m betting that one of them would be willing to test a frozen projectile out of one of them. So long as the projectile itself didn’t start to melt significantly during the waiting process so essentially load and then fire. I think something more like a byrna would be much better than the umerex due to the way it loads into the gun itself.
JOHNNY DOLLAR IN…URINE FOR A SURPRISE!
Loved him in the toilet westerns. A Fist Full of Piss; For a Few Pees More; The Good, the Bad, and the Pissed.
I want this kind of a villain. Not because it’s smart, but because it is petty.
Do we know who the artist is?
RobertHack it seems, but idk for sure I barely looked into it: https://www.instagram.com/p/DXQRH5njgA7/
Ok these are awesome. I’m probably gonna buy this dude’s book.
Thanks!
Should have used that man’s frozen cum.
Passional crimes are back!
Self mastur-headshot-bated to death was the official cause on the death certificate, but our furry detectives suspect the pearl necklace isn’t what it seems …
All I see when looking at the gunman is Danny DeVito.
Aaaand now I’m re-reading it in his voice
“So, anyway, I started pissin’”
The Penguin?
Im seeing Kevin from the office
That’s exactly how I wanna die.
The ol’ pee gun move. Nice.
I remember some old movie where the murder weapon was a bullet made of ice. First of all, that shit would melt in seconds. You’d have to load it right next to the freezer and then shoot them right there. Was the casing also made of ice? And like what exactly was this trying to hide? Some bullets won’t create an exit wound so what the difference whether they find the bullet or not? Obviously there’s an entry wound.
MythBusters did it (twice!). The bullet melts before even leaving the barrel.
They never tried an ice crossbow bolt though. I have a feeling that would work. Or at least hurt.
Hmm we have to try with something else, like a pudding bullet
Maybe rethink the gun. They have these things that use rapidly (but, crucially, not instantly) expanding liquid nitrogen to propel sensitive payloads real fast. I saw a study about using them to throw bombs on mountains for avalanche prevention. That solves the temperature problem and maybe the brittleness problem.
Also, there is an ice-adjacent material that could make the bullet named pykrete which is more durable than pure ice (Mythbusters made a boat made out of it one time). That defeats the purpose of an ice bullet somewhat, but who knows, the added sawdust might just confuse the forensics.
Though if you really wanna kill someone with an ice projectile, a big hunk of ice thrown from a sling is more than enough. Bonus points if you give it two sharp edges like the romans did.
I spent way too long thinking about this.
I spent way too long thinking about this.
Well I appreciate it.
Would cooling the barrel buy you anything, I wonder?
An ooblek bullet.
Perfect. The faster it goes, the harder it gets. That’s just science.
Ballistic investigators can use the scratches on bullets to match them to a gun barrel. No bullet, no ballistic evidence.
Just tie a string to the bullet and pull it back out after shooting someone with it, duh
Gun barrels are mass produced and are all the same… That “science” is a lot like lie detectors, mostly bunk.
“But bullets and cartridge cases that are fired from different guns might have similar markings, especially if the guns were consecutively manufactured. This raises the possibility of a false positive match, which can have serious consequences for the accused.”
That’s double speak for “we manufacture the evidence to fit.”
Do they ever fire from a control group? Show me the “striations” on a dozen guns of the same age and use.
I wonder if it’s something that used to work when guns were less consistently mass-produced
Or maybe it’s always been nonsense, never knew that though thanks
I feel like the article you linked doesn’t support your conclusion, at least for the technique described in the article as an improvement over what people were doing before 2013. Those NIST researchers seemed to conclude that their 3D scan techniques can reduce the false positive rate to very low numbers, even when comparing 9mm rounds fired from consecutively manufactured handguns of the same model. At least if they recover an undamaged bullet that didn’t get mangled by the actual shooting.
But yeah, the previous method sounds about as reliable as the My Cousin Vinny expert testimony: maybe getting things down to a range of possible models, but not specifically identifying a specific gun.
Now I kinda wish I had a mythbusters budget for comparing bullet and casing markings to both replicate the NIST study and to just compare whether different manufacturers have very different markings for the same caliber.
Technically you could get much colder ice if needed but it would be serious effort and I’m not sure what the gain is. It would bewilder the investigators if there’s no exit wound AND no bullet I guess.
Checkmate criminologists
deleted by creator
