*news

Adding video to channels (News) - requested by kulpims.

Head shot

How do we know it's a sniper? <-- Honest question.

Honestly, how could anyone know except the shooter? I got it from the description on YouTube. Seems like a pretty lucky shot if it was just someone with an assault rifle.

I saw this on Live Leak, the consensus there was that this was the work of a rubber bullet to the head. Which have been known to cause massive trauma.

If that was a .223 full metal jacket I'm surprised to see so much trauma. Given other pictures of similar trauma, on the internet, it would appear that a .223 would not cause the brain to flop out on the concrete like that. It seems like a rubber slug or something to that extent. Of course we don't have sufficient proof, but we can formulate a good hypothesis.

If it were a sniper, there would have been much, much more damage. I mean like his head would have popped in a red mist and his body would have slumped directly to the ground, not as if it were being knocked over. I get the feeling that if it were a lethal round then it wasn't a sniper but regular infantry; who is a good marksman. The circumstances just don't lead me to think it was.

Since when do snipers do head shots...?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Thai_Army#Equipment

The general Thailand bolt action sniper rifle is listed as the SIG-Sauer SSG 300; which shots the famous 7.62x51mm NATO.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SIG-Sauer_SSG_3000

They also have the SR-25 which also fires the 7.62x51mm NATO.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SR-25

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=f44_1271214688

From SOURCE: "I don't know anything about this video other than my wife's relatives sent it to us. The footage shows a red shirt having his head blown off in what looks like a completely unprovoked attack. Now I'm no forensic scientist, but what occurs doesn't look like the work of a rubber b More..ullet, more like a point blank shotgun round being ploughed through the guy's skull.

I'm not uploading this with any political motivation; I am actually having a hard time trying to understand where the truth lies in all that is going on, mostly due to the conflicting media reports. I am neither red nor yellow, I am simply interested in current events such as this.

Red shirt or yellow, I care not. All I do see though is a poor bastard get his head blown off and some very naughty police work. "

snuff

Fuck.

I don't think whether or not it was a sniper or not changes the tenor of the vid, but thanks for the in-depth information on Thai weaponry.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag.(show it anyway)

I've spent a couple months in Thailand- and have friends in Bangkok. It's really disheartening to see this kind of strife happening. It's a place where Buddhist monks in saffron robes are walking down almost very street- lots of smiles and laughter.

I know they're only human and capable of the worst like all of is- but nationally I never thought they had this in them.

wow, that image won't be leaving me anytime soon.

>> ^dag:

I've spent a couple months in Thailand- and have friends in Bangkok. It's really disheartening to see this kind of strife happening. It's a place where Buddhist monks in saffron robes are walking down almost very street- lots of smiles and laughter.
I know they're only human and capable of the worst like all of is- but nationally I never thought they had this in them.


I didn't think the Greeks where modernly capable of the row either.

This sort of thing is common in the US, only they call it a riot or a street gang. Of course I'm speaking of Rodney King, or all the other riots.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_riots

I don't know much about Australia, but I would assume that the Aborigine have seen their fair share too. (http://www.australian-news.net/Redfern_riots.htm)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Riots_in_Australia

Riots, revolts, from my arm chair they all look the same; however I have the cognitive power to know that is not true in many places. People have grievances, they should be aired or they end up like this video.

*snuff lame

Yea, I don't feel like there is enough warning on this video to get the viewer ready for what it contains.

This need more than an ambiguous NSFW tag, and a warning of graphic violence. Honestly.

I think it should stay. As a testament to what humanity is capable of and so everyone knows what is happening outside of their warm little bubbles.

I very well know its not appropriate but honestly the first thing that shot through my mind when I seen the red river was " HEADDDD SHOTTTTTT " as per the vocals of Unreal Tournament

how desensitized the world is now because of technology.

>> ^NordlichReiter:

I think it should stay. As a testament to what humanity is capable of and so everyone knows what is happening outside of their warm little bubbles.


*discuss

While I appreciate your sentiment, I complete disagree. It isn't a news report; it doesn't provide any sort of context about what the issues are in Thailand and why things have gotten this bad. We have a clear snuff rule on the Sift. People who want to see other people get their head exploded can easily find this video on other sites besides Video Sift.

If nock's point is to make people aware of what's going on, he can start a a Sift Talk about it and provide everyone so inclined to watch the link (warning everyone in advance about what they're about to see).

This video falls under VS's rules about snuff and should be discarded.

This video is being sent to Sift Talk for discussion - discuss requested by SDGundamX.

While were being cordial, spare me the civilities. Just get to the point. We all knew this was going to be discussed sooner or later. I would have hoped, with how the sift works, that if sifters had a problem they would have down-voted it at the beginning.

I think the sift has already spoken just by sifting it; 14 votes.

I did not feel that this video constituted a "snuff" film because it was not presented for entertainment purposes. While it is not part of a newscast or documentary, it well could be used in one of those media to spur debate about the conflict in that region.

I don't know if Wikipedia is generally accepted as a source, but here goes:

"A snuff film or snuff movie is a motion picture genre that depicts the actual death or murder of a person or people, without the aid of special effects, for the express purpose of distribution and entertainment or financial exploitation."

Since the cameraman presumably is a red shirt himself, he does not stand to gain financially by taking the film, nor would he find particular entertainment pleasure in the death of a comrade. Discuss.

>> ^NordlichReiter:

While were being cordial, spare me the civilities. Just get to the point. We all knew this was going to be discussed sooner or later. I would have hoped, with how the sift works, that if sifters had a problem they would have down-voted it at the beginning.
I think the sift has already spoken just by sifting it; 14 votes.


This argument (that we should vote on it) has already been made and discussed. It is a moot point because previous videos that have tried that argument have been discarded. For reference see the following Sift Talk discussions (warning: they are long... relevant posts come towards the end).

Budd Dwyer Suicide Video

Mentally Challenged Man Beaten to Death

To put it simply--the rules exist so people don't vote stuff like this up. They also exist so stuff like this gets booted even if it does gets voted up. entr0py said it best (regarding the second link I posted above):

>> ^entr0py:

So, you posted a snuff video? Why is most of the sift okay with this? It's insane that we have rules against members posting porn, but not lengthy graphic videos of people being murdered.
Of course I realize nearly all of the people who up-voted don't see it as entertainment, but are outraged by the event. And if this were presented as a news story that would be completely valid.
Still, I think anyone who would want to watch this, knowing it's contents, and knowing damn well that they will never personally do anything to bring about justice, is motivated by some morbid curiosity. And we shouldn't be encouraging that. Really it is disgraceful that it hasn't been removed yet.

>> ^nock:

I did not feel that this video constituted a "snuff" film because it was not presented for entertainment purposes. While it is not part of a newscast or documentary, it well could be used in one of those media to spur debate about the conflict in that region.
I don't know if Wikipedia is generally accepted as a source, but here goes:
"A snuff film or snuff movie is a motion picture genre that depicts the actual death or murder of a person or people, without the aid of special effects, for the express purpose of distribution and entertainment or financial exploitation."
Since the cameraman presumably is a red shirt himself, he does not stand to gain financially by taking the film, nor would he find particular entertainment pleasure in the death of a comrade. Discuss.


Please read the Video Sift definition of snuff here (#3 on the posting guidelines).

Point taken. *discard

Discarding this post - discard requested by original submitter nock.