World trade center movie question.


October 1, 2007, 07:02 AM
I watched the movie World Trade Center the other day and something struck me as odd. During the time the guys were trapped one of the officers guns starting firing and it went off maybe 5 or 6 times I cant remember. It cycled just fine and continued to fire with out being held, it was just sitting flat on the ground from what I recall. My question is why did it start firing and would it really be able to cycle and fire over and over again just laying there unrestained on a flat surface?

If you enjoyed reading about "World trade center movie question." here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!
October 1, 2007, 07:47 AM
I am aware of two occasions when a gun can fire unassisted.

A cook-off.

There is a rumor of a guy who hung a firearm on the hook of a stall with the safety off when using the bathroom. The hook engaged the trigger and recoil caused the gun to jump. When the gun recovered from recoil the hook engaged the trigger again.

I can't say for sure the second part is true but I can attest to the first.

October 1, 2007, 10:09 AM
The latter was written up in some gun rag years ago. The gun was a Smith semi, DA/SA. It wasn't decocked and hung on the hook. The hook nudged the trigger and it spun around, whacking the trigger till the mag emptied.

This was supposedly in a police station by some detective in an office. Much hilarity ensued when the station heard a string of fast shots.

If this is true, maybe someone remembers the reference.

October 1, 2007, 11:31 AM
Master's answer makes sense, but a cookoff from a fire would heat the entire magazine and probably blow the handle to pieces. The chamber wouldn't be the only area apt to a cookoff in a fire.
Answer: NO. I can't think of a legitimate way that it would happen either.

October 1, 2007, 12:18 PM
It is also unlikely that the gun in the WTC movie would have been able to fire more than once. Being unsupported would have been the ultimate 'limp wrist', and the gun would have likely had a failure to extract.

Just another example of Hollyweird just plain making schtick up about guns.

Finally.. video evidence of a gun that 'just went off'. :neener:

October 2, 2007, 02:08 AM
I was going to write it off as hollywierd gun magic but it is based on a true story and the guys that were trapped survived and I assume are the ones who told someone there story and it was made in to a movie.

Ragnar Danneskjold
October 2, 2007, 02:57 AM
The limp wrist effect is a real good reason why it's highly unlikely. But like MPanova said, a lot of WTC was taken from stories if survivors. Now I'm not saying that this part of the movie is true, but it may be, since the movie does have a lot of truth in it.

Prince Yamato
October 2, 2007, 10:57 AM
I didn't see the movie, but I recall the story of an officer's gun "going off" when he and his partner were trapped and the gun heated up. I think if he was unable to see the firearm, he may have assumed that it was firing, when in fact it was just bullets exploding in the magazine.

October 2, 2007, 11:28 AM
Yeah, I'd think that the bullets in the magazine would cook off A LOT faster than the one in the chamber. Once one or more of them go off, the gun would only have one shot from the chamber, if that.

October 2, 2007, 11:43 AM
You're questioning the firearms accuracy of an Oliver Stone film? :scrutiny:

If you enjoyed reading about "World trade center movie question." here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!