I think that settles it
Remember the lady cop in Marble Falls who had her AR-15 magazine in backward? Then we argued about whether that was the case or not due to the pic? Well, looks like it was, in fact, backwards. The picture is fairly clear and the video shows how easy it is to do.
Via Joe.
July 19th, 2007 at 10:03 pm
Yup. Call me a convert.
July 20th, 2007 at 1:56 am
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v665/hautlipz/marblefallspdzoom.jpg
And there it is again. While I do not disagree that she might have it in backwards, I don’t think the evidence is water tight either way. The photo, when looked at close up, seems to show two distinct magazines. Enough for reasonable doubt.
PLEASE NOTE: I Never did claim that the pic was photo shopped, nor that it is not possible to put the mag in backwards. Only that in that pick, when you zoom in, there appears to be a HORIZONTAL BREAK in the magazine about an inch below the magwell that should NOT be there if there is only one mag present.
It is possible that that break is there due to some artifact thing or other from compression of the low-res picture. We may never know. Someone will have to get their grubby mitts on the original picture if they ever want to settle the issue, it’s the only way!
July 20th, 2007 at 2:00 am
And if that doesn’t do it, then this one, from someone on THR should be definitive:
http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=48069&d=1163872980
So it WAS in backwards after all!
July 20th, 2007 at 2:08 am
OK, so a member of THR called the Marble Falls PD and talked to a higher up there. Apparently, the higher up confirmed that that mag was in backwards.
Still, that’s not entirely water tight, but I’ll buy it now. Besides, she doesn’t really look like the type to go with double mags anyway :p