Kevlar Now Required For Shooting Celebrity Weddings... [Archive]

JWright

6th of April 2009 (Mon), 16:10

It's Fox... What more do you expect? Notice how there were two pictures of the SUV and six of Gisele Bundchen?

Don't give Costa Rica a bad rap on this one. I've been down there and it's a whole bunch safer than Mexico or other parts of Latin America...

Karl Johnston

6th of April 2009 (Mon), 16:31

I'll say, I have friends that live in costa rica. They say it's more safe than most of the north american continent and the people are a lot friendlier. Blaming costa rica for a closed off private wedding fiasco is like giving the Virgina Tech a bad reputation just because of the shooting that happened there a couple year ago

It'd suck if this were true, but knowing FOX - 90% of the news and opinions discussed on that channel are crap anyway. I wouldn't doubt they bought this story from the national enquirer for all of its validity.

FlyingPhotog

6th of April 2009 (Mon), 16:39

I happened to pull the story from FOX Sports as it's part of the MSN Homepage but if you'd like other sources:

Take Your Pick (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=brady+wedding+shooting&aq=f&oq=)

DennisW1

6th of April 2009 (Mon), 16:58

Holy Cow .. LINK (http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/9421126/Report:-Gunfire-erupts-at-2nd-Brady-Gisele-wedding?MSNHPHCP&GT1=39002)

Assuming how accurate Fox's reporting of the story is:

They're paparazzi, hard to feel very sympathetic for them. Those guys give everyone who owns a camera a bad name.

I can't quite condone them being shot at but they had no business being where they were and doing what they were doing.

At the same time, the guards obviously went way too far, hopefully they'll be prosecuted for their actions.

In the meanwhile, those two are definitely going to need some new boxers.

FlyingPhotog

6th of April 2009 (Mon), 17:04

The article says they had permission to shoot from adjoining property.

It's quite possible the security folks overstepped here (discounting the firing of shots)

jcpoulin

6th of April 2009 (Mon), 17:22

Agree with above...they had permission to shoot from neighbors yard....but stashed their car in the bushes?!! Sounds to me like they had a problem recognizing the boundries of the neighbors yard!!

FlyingPhotog

6th of April 2009 (Mon), 17:23

Agree with above...they had permission to shoot from neighbors yard....but stashed their car in the bushes?!! Sounds to me like they had a problem recognizing the boundries of the neighbors yard!!

Now that's entirely possible...

Gentleman Villain

6th of April 2009 (Mon), 17:55

Best Title I've seen in awhile :D

OH and this thread is useless without Giselle pics

semi-fly

6th of April 2009 (Mon), 18:33

Oddly I find the story very funny. Especially this part "I could have lost my life for the sale of some pictures that Gisele didn't want published. Are they insane?", if they wanted their special day photographed they would have invited press. It kind of serves as a warning to photographers that some things need not be photographed.

Karl Johnston

6th of April 2009 (Mon), 19:21

I personally think paparazzi are disgusting, the entire industry they work for is an embarrassing genre of photography (imo).

I don't know how one can call themselves photographers when 90% of the shots you see of these crappy captures are so horribly executed, lit, composed, framed. They seem to spray-and-pray and see if they pick up a boob or nipple shot to throw at the market.

I could never take myself seriously again if I were to put "Photographer of ****ty supermarket tabloid" in my portfolio.

Picture North Carolina

7th of April 2009 (Tue), 05:34

Good gosh. Wait until the Hollywood folks find out about this. They'll be deploying a whole new methodology of deterrence in the states.

mikekelley

7th of April 2009 (Tue), 09:35

NickSimcheck

7th of April 2009 (Tue), 21:16

Seconds later, a bullet shattered the back of Cortez's SUV, struck a front windshield wiper and then bounced back into the cabin, landing in between the terrified shutterbugs, he said.

The fotogs said they found a .38-caliber slug in their SUV's front cabin.

Good thing they had bulletproof windshield wipers! And to think, the bullet was still intact enough for them to put their micrometer to double check that it was indeed a .38 caliber, yeah - ok.

outbri

8th of April 2009 (Wed), 01:06

Good thing they had bulletproof windshield wipers! And to think, the bullet was still intact enough for them to put their micrometer to double check that it was indeed a .38 caliber, yeah - ok.

Often times the front part will mushroom while the bottom part will stay intact. So it's entirely plausible that they (or at least the police investigating) could tell that it was a .38.

See this image.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v135/Bell406_206B/PLRRemJSPand45GD.jpg

Karl Johnston

8th of April 2009 (Wed), 03:07

Good thing they had bulletproof windshield wipers! And to think, the bullet was still intact enough for them to put their micrometer to double check that it was indeed a .38 caliber, yeah - ok.
I didn't read that part LOL!

"It must've bounced off the windshield wiper!!!"

Uh...okay? So where can I get these bulletproof titanium/obsidian wiper blades? Last ones I put on my car were 14 bucks of chinese plastic.

sspellman

8th of April 2009 (Wed), 09:27

Something does not really seem accurate in this story. Isn't it wierd that the photogs say they were on a neighbors property just 300 feet from the ceremony-I can't imagine that Gisele's property is so small to be that close. Plus they had to go 500 feet back to their car? If they really were on a neighbors property with full permission, why didnt they just stay there? Neighbors generally stick together and would be unlikely to give permission to strangers to trespass.

Nobody deserves to be shot at, but I think it is likely to come out that the Paps were tresspassing on Gisele's property and that is the real cause of the shooting.

-Scott

outbri

8th of April 2009 (Wed), 22:44

I didn't read that part LOL!

"It must've bounced off the windshield wiper!!!"

Uh...okay? So where can I get these bulletproof titanium/obsidian wiper blades? Last ones I put on my car were 14 bucks of chinese plastic.

My second reply to his post. My first point above is about how they knew it was a .38 caliber bullet.

A bullet can bounce off of anything. In this case the bullet had already used its force breaking through the rear window, front window and it seems either a seat or seatrest also before it got to the windshield wiper blades. It isn't traveling at a very high speed right now. It is not unlikely that it will either bounce or get stuck right there in the metal part of the blades.

Here's an article about how a bullet bounced off a piece of wire, causing it to not kill the person it hit. That is a rare occurrence, what we see in this thread's article is not entirely unlikely.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/london/4319966.stm

NickSimcheck

8th of April 2009 (Wed), 22:50

My second reply to his post. My first point above is about how they knew it was a .38 caliber bullet.

A bullet can bounce off of anything. In this case the bullet had already used its force breaking through the rear window, front window and it seems either a seat or seatrest also before it got to the windshield wiper blades. It isn't traveling at a very high speed right now. It is not unlikely that it will either bounce or get stuck right there in the metal part of the blades.

Here's an article about how a bullet bounced off a piece of wire, causing it to not kill the person it hit. That is a rare occurrence, what we see in this thread's article is not entirely unlikely.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/london/4319966.stm

I think you're missing the point, they way the story is embellished with such complete idiocy the story itself becomes moot.

outbri

9th of April 2009 (Thu), 16:42

I think you're missing the point, they way the story is embellished with such complete idiocy the story itself becomes moot.

But you're point out the idiocy as being the fact that they could tell the caliber of the bullet and the fact that it bounced off a windsheild wiper.

I agree with everyone here stating the photographers were probably in the wrong, and that they seemed to be covering up for something. But you didn't pick the right points to show that. Those points are the only believable part of the story.

NickSimcheck

9th of April 2009 (Thu), 19:01

But you're point out the idiocy as being the fact that they could tell the caliber of the bullet and the fact that it bounced off a windsheild wiper.

I agree with everyone here stating the photographers were probably in the wrong, and that they seemed to be covering up for something. But you didn't pick the right points to show that. Those points are the only believable part of the story.

:confused:

I find the story believable until they get to the part about bouncing bullets and their ability to judge caliber size.

I fully know it's possible, just not believable.

BrantG

10th of April 2009 (Fri), 20:20

:confused:

I find the story believable until they get to the part about bouncing bullets and their ability to judge caliber size.

I fully know it's possible, just not believable.

Most journalists have 0 clue about guns or firearm ballistics. Therefore it's worth taking anything like this with a grain of salt. Heck there was the story about a month ago where the COP said that a woman's hair weave stopped a bullet from hitting her. :rolleyes:

NickSimcheck

10th of April 2009 (Fri), 20:37

Most journalists have 0 clue about guns or firearm ballistics. Therefore it's worth taking anything like this with a grain of salt. Heck there was the story about a month ago where the COP said that a woman's hair weave stopped a bullet from hitting her. :rolleyes:

Exactly my point, the way they tell the story is like they just picked up a mushroomed bullet and said "Hmm, no it's not 9mm .357, .40, it's gotta be a .38!"

Not that it makes any difference :lol: