http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rAPNDjQ3Q28&feature=youtu.be

In the last sequence, a “pranked” pedestrian shoots back at the faux drive-by. Who saw that one coming? [h/t JLO]

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

57 COMMENTS

  3. This has to be filmed in CA or NY. Given the snow, I would have to opt for NY. I don’t see where else they could pull this off.

    • If it’s NOT against the law, something is very, very wrong.

      Considering the number of things that ARE against the law, but shouldn’t be.

      NOT. FUNNY.

      • You are obviously not a lawyer or you’d know that it varies from state to state vehicle code. In NY, for example, flashing blue lights are used legally in the personal vehicles of some ‘volunteers’. (I put it in half quotes because some people ‘volunteer’ just to drive around with flashing blue lights)

    • The prank certainly records an assault in tort law, and is actionable for damages. Which leads me to conclude the guys on the street were cooperating web exploiters. Whether it is a crime requires knowing the jurisdiction.

    • 1. Disturbing the peace

      2. Assault (which does not require real intent to harm, but merely to incite fear of harm)

      3. Most jurisdictions have laws about blring stereos.

      4. Several driving violations

      5. In some jurisdictions that blue light is a nono. Reserved for police

      6. I am sure there may be others, e.g. inciting a publc panic can be a separate offense

      IF real, they should be arrested and publicly flogged in my opinion. Imature douchebags

  7. I don’t know if this was staged or not, but they are pretty lucky to escape with their lives if it wasn’t. I certainly would have shot back if I was under the impression that they were trying to kill me, and it would not have been at the ground behind them. Whoever is behind these “pranks” is a Darwin Award waiting to happen.

  8. Looks like some bored white kids trying to pretend they’re ghetto. I hope these a-holes get shot.

  9. Interesting that the pedestrians seemed to have a very tight immediate action drill down pat.

    The guys who filmed this are ‘tarded. Yup.

  10. This reminds me of some teenagers in a neighborhood I used to live in who decided one night to point a laser pointer attached to a toy pistol at passing cars from a parked car. They managed to terrify numerous people in a matter of minutes but before the police could respond they lased the wrong vehicle and received 13 rounds of 9mm to their vehicle for their troubles. No one was hurt, the shooter wasn’t charged and the kids were arrested for aggravated assault. Seriously dumb. It makes one wonder if such ideas aren’t hatched by someone asking what sort of stunt they could pull that might get them killed without definitely getting them killed. Golden Darwin Award candidates indeed.

  11. These asshats will produce another Shannon Watts or equivalent after one of them takes a round to the melon.

    • won’t happen. urban youth. Shannon Watts is a racist and not disposed to favor my tribe. . . . won’t even get a blurb on her MAIG wholly owned subsidiary website

  13. Anyone want to take a guess at the caliber of the real gun? sounded pretty light.. maybe a 25 or 380?

    • given the given the ghetto urban scenery, I would say anything 9mm and below are valid guesses. Given the sparks thrown, dare I guess at TulAmmo, considering they can have a bi metal jacket.

  16. Did I see sparks coming off the pavement? I also saw the SUV start driving really fast after the crew inside probably heard the inbound rounds.

    So fucking stupid, man.

  19. The “people” – more accurately described by a term that is usually prefaced with the word “blithering” – in the SUV are intentionally inflicting emotional distress on the pedestrians. That is a tort in civil law. Whether they are committing criminal acts depends upon the laws of the jurisdiction the pranks took place in. Too bad they didn’t try this “humor” against the late Bob Munden.

    • Yeah, um, it’s an even split between “would figure out that it was a prank quick” and “tag them at up to 200 yards with his .45”

    • I agree. However, each jurisdiction has its own definition of “assault” and judges certainly have differing interpretations of those definitions. This situation is similar to one where someone intentionally shouts “fire” in a crowded theater where there is no fire and gets justly trampled to death in the resulting stampede. If this is a criminal act, a conspiracy also took place since more than one person was involved in the planning, commission, filming, and marketing of the fake shooting videos.

      • Nice take on possible conspiracy, I never saw it that way, but I am occupied with enough stuff to miss it at this moment!

        If this is real, hopefully a local judge would follow those basic definitions…

  22. I’m thinking it was staged. Most of the other sequences seemed to be filmed from outside the suv, and sparks from blacktop due to a handgun round ? Stranger things have happened, but it seems so hollywood…

  23. It would have been more entertaining if a police car just happened to turn onto the block as they started one of these runs. Morons.

  24. Like someone else, said did all the return fire hit the ground??
    I’m no comp guy but I could put a entire high capacity assault style magazine clip into the back of that SUV pretty easily.

  25. I think this is the video definition of
    “Stupid people, doing stupid things in stupid places”.
    Though, I gotta admit.
    i laughed.

  26. No doubt this was staged. Several things I noticed (and noted by a few above comments as well)

    Camera guy outside waiting for the kids to walk into the best lit intersections in town.
    What are the chances or timing on a cold night for the camera men, the guys walking and the SUV to all get into the amazing light all at the same time?

    In several scenes (ex scene #1) the guys running away from full-auto fire run right up the middle of the street. Even if you’re not too bright, instinctively you know to get behind a car or run between the houses. Not run in a straight line up the street.

    In scene #2, the gun shots start firing and the guys run, not away from the approaching SUV, but toward it for about 30 ft all so they can find protection from a chain link fence. Oh, and once again they run toward the better lighting conditions instead of the darker, harder to aim area.

    One of the two biggest giveaways are the return gun shots off the ground. I’m no ballistic expert nor have I shot at a wet road but the sparks on the road burst in an upward and outward direction ( around 1:08 on the video) not in a direction consistent with the angle being fired from. Both windage and elevation angles are very wrong. I’m not even so sure a wet road would cause sparks like that in the first place.

    This one is the biggest give away. Replay the video and listen to the volume, and tone of the gun fire. In each scene it’s exactly the same. How could the volume be identical from inside the SUV, outside the SUV and the same volume with the SUV down the road and right in front of the cameramen? Listen at :24 sec and then at :36 with your eyes closed. Sounds EXACTLY the same. Also, no echo what so ever even though there are plenty of structures to produce an echo. Clearly the sound was dubbed in on the video.

    Look, I don’t care how cool you think you are, you’re not going to venture into the hood and play a prank like this as you know there’s a good chance (very good chance) you’re going to get return fire from a real gun.

    • I didn’t do the thorough breakdown you did, but the last shot… The flash and those sparks look incredibly fake in that last scene. Not saying it couldn’t be real, but… I’m calling BS right along with you.

  29. I can’t throw stones here. As I kid, friends & I tossed a pack of firecrackers over a bridge railing & it landed right next to a cop car. We were lucky they didn’t play hey jude on our skulls with nightsticks. Now, we would have been charged with attacking cops with WMD’s, Randy

Comments are closed.