Talk:Drive-by shooting

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Drive-by shooting article.
Article policies
It is requested that a photograph or photographs be included in this article to improve its quality.
The Free Image Search Tool (FIST) may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

[edit] Comparison

How does the number of drive by shootings in the US compare to the killing in Lebanon? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.66.229.203 (talk • contribs) .

That's a strange question to ask. Care to explain better what you want to know? --Dhartung | Talk 04:23, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps the above question is meant to point out how the USA is sometimes demonized in the international media for its so-called "gun culture", while other parts of the world with comparatively greater carnage and warfare escape such labeling. Kepiblanc 18:09, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Or perhaps there's a universal and unsurprising correlation between "lots of guns" and "lots of gun deaths". But this is off-topic; see Gun violence in the United States. --Dhartung | Talk 01:04, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Photo request?

Someone just added a photo request tag to this article. That's a terrible idea. Anyone with a camera in the vicinity of an actual drive-by will be more concerned with diving for cover than with taking pictures (and most criminals who engage in such criminal acts are smart enough to not create such incriminating evidence). And anyone with the skills and resources to actually stage one convincingly for dramatic purposes (e.g., motion pictures and television shows) will not be posting their work on Wikipedia for free. --Coolcaesar 06:05, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Drive-by shooting images could be sourced from a large selection of fictional works. Indeed, they are fairly common in film, television, and computer games, and this could/would aid in the contextualisation of the tactical manuveur and (removing any emotivity of course), its seemingly cult status (in fiction at very least). One could easily be sourced under a fair use licence.
This aside, I'm sure there are illustrators/graphic designers who would be able to render a diagram or illustration. Or even screenshots from CCTV footage.
There is a Wikipedia style guide that strongly recommends either an infobox or image be pegged to the top right corner of articles; I believe an image/screenshot/diagram would be a more suitable approach than a infobox. Jhamez84 13:48, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
Fair use would be difficult. It's easier to argue for fair use in an article about the work itself from which the image is taken (e.g., illustrating the article on Bullitt with an image of the movie poster). But when it comes to borrowing an image for a collateral purpose, U.S. copyright law is much, much more messy and unpredictable (and Americans will sue over anything). This is why the scope of permissible content under Wikipedia:Non-free content has narrowed over time. It's also the reason why the image of the Elvis Presley stamp was pulled from the United States article after several months. The image may be appropriate for illustrating the article on Elvis Presley, but inappropriate for illustrating the United States article to show Elvis as the King of Rock and Roll.
I know copyright law can be really annoying, but it serves the legitimate purpose of rewarding artists for their creative endeavors. Accurately staging a drive-by shooting for dramatic purposes is difficult, expensive, and dangerous. One has to hire a cast and crew, and obtain prop weapons, blanks, squibs, sugar glass (which is safer than real glass), and permits (so that if anyone calls the cops, which does happen, they know it's only a movie).
As for CCTV footage, they may be fair use depending upon the circumstances but the quality is usually very poor.
Finally, I agree that there are graphic designers/illustrators who could render an illustration and license it under the GFDL, but good luck finding one! --Coolcaesar 17:29, 2 May 2007 (UTC)