MovieChat Forums > Rules of Engagement (2000) Discussion > I'm no ballistics expert, but...

I'm no ballistics expert, but...

posted 13 years ago by mlspaur
6 replies | jump to latest

this story seems to have one big,gaping hole in it.

OK, so the storyline revolves around who was shooting at the US Marines - the snipers from several hundred yards away or the snipers and the nearby crowd of protesters. The snipers were obviously using rifles and, as the tape showed, the protesters were firing hand guns.

All they had to do is retrieve some of the bullets to see that the majority of the shots were made by small arms.

And that would have been the evd of the movie.

[–] libertarian45 13 years ago

The crowd also had AKs. By the way, handguns and rifles are all classified as "small arms".

[–] mlspaur 13 years ago

Like I said, I don't know much about guns, but a lot of the crowd was firing pistols at the marines. Why didn't the investigators check what type of gun was being fired at the embassy?

[–] fp_ff_fp 13 years ago

Yes, I wrote this point in my review on this board as well.

All they need to do is look at the bullet holes in the walls and also see the trajectory of the bullets.

When fired from below, several bullets would be facing upwards inside the wall.

Several bullets would be hitting near lower portion of wall (especially when held by the kids) or towards middle of wall.

Why would sniper bullets at same level end up there?

Also, several bullets would be in areas not directly accessible by the snipers on other side of street. They could've only come if you fired from directly below.

All this science and ballistics expertise in the military and none of it was even explored. What a shame.

[–] camel-wides 12 years ago

pretty sure they could have also checked the bullet holes in the marines...
from the distances the snipers were at, they would leave a distintly different hole and round than anything that was on the ground (ak's, and handguns)

[–] Foster (878) a year ago

I thought they abandoned the embassy???

EVEN if for only a short time forensics as you mention would be impossible

[–] GreenGoblinsOck8 (7994) a month ago

I might be wrong but it seems like multiple government agencies would have investigated it and that there would be more than one tape of the security footage made. Then again there are other things in it that wouldn't happen in real life. Like the prosecutor putting the defendent on the stand, asking him if he remembers what he said, then yells at him when he says he doesn't remember. Then suddenly submitting evidence without said defendent's or defense attorney's knowledge. Then yelling at him and insists there were no weapons in the crowd despite having no evidence causing the defendent to get angry and yell things. None of that would be okay in court room in real life.