Heh, I actually do remember both those episodes, so my memory is not so good anymore. But I already knew that. 
Never understood why nobody in John Wick just used a shotgun with bird shot to counter Wicks bulletproof suit, as his hands are still exposed when he pulls it over him to cover himself from normal bullets.
I ever understood why in Watchmen Night Owl didn’t just shoot Ozymandias again, and again, as many times as it took. He can’t catch every bullet!
And speaking of John Steed, anyone remember the New Avengers episode with the highly trained assassin that could deflect machine gun bullets with his hands? Fun stuff.
It seems I was misinformed about Emma’s leather catsuit. She wore it again (albeit very briefly) in today’s episode “You Have Just Been Murdered.”
…it was Silk Spectre who shot the bullet he caught, and who didn’t realize that he’d caught said bullet until he could floor her with a drop-the-gun strike of the go-limp-now variety.
(For what it’s worth, Nite Owl similarly got off very little in the ‘foiled shot’ category before likewise winding up minus his weapon and off his feet after one hit from the guy — but, IIRC, without ever actually firing a bullet.)
On the one hand, I should have not trusted my memory, and looked it up to confirm
On the other, I knew the SD crowd would correct me if I was wrong, which is just as good as looking it up. 
I guess I just hate the ending so much out of proportion to the rest that it bugs me. The Bad Guy wins. I guess I didn’t want Watchmen to be that kind of book,
Given that the entirety of Watchmen is a deconstruction of the super hero genre, that was probably hoping for too much. I see the whole Watchmen story as “what would happen in a reality that simply doesn’t support the metaphysical concept of ‘superheroes’ if someone tried to make them real?”
I have to wonder: is getting the bullet sucked out akin to a snakebite wound promote healing? At least, as long as you don’t keep getting shot in the same place…
Asking for a friend, who happens to be a private detective in 1947.
Sucked out? I’ve never seen that, the bullets are always removed with forceps.
And dropped into a metal bowl with a loud clank.
Thank you, Waldo. Nice to know cultural literacy hasn’t entirely gone extinct.
Guns as Deus ex machina. In real life, a gun hardly ever solves a problem. Introducing a gun into almost any scenario only makes the problem infinitely worse. Sometimes permanently. But the movies/tv would have us believe that we can just shoot an intruder or even just a rude person on the train and we won’t then have to mortgage our homes and lose everything we’ve ever built trying to convince a jury that it was absolutely necessary to defend our lives.
Even if you win, even if you started out fairly wealthy, you’ll be starting again from zero once the legal establishment has had its way with you. The first thing they will do is find out how much money you have, and the trial will not come to fruition until your lawyer has every cent you and your family can come up with.
Using a gun for any reason just lands you in the laps of the best muggers in the country.
Well, it works for most Police officers.
And indeed- in many states if the intruder is actually in your house, you likely wont get charged.
But you make a point- getting a Not Guilty verdict or even the charges dropped is not “home free”. There’s bail, and legal costs and work lost (and maybe job lost) and reputation lost, etc. Even 'case Dismissed" will likely run you $20,000 at least.
That why there exists an insurance industry to protect oneself from the potential liability of actually using your gun. Have no idea if it’s cost-effective.
Can we drop the hijack about the real-life use of guns for defense, because it’s likely to sidetrack the thread?
Thumbs up on this.
“Okay Mr Chef, we are terrorists who have kidnapped your wife. We want you to take this Thanksgiving Turkey we have put a nuclear bomb in and deliver it to state of the union address, and if you do that we won’t kill her”.
Then the Chef obviously does it and then he and his wife are still killed by the terrorists to eliminate loose ends immediately afterwards.
I’m not saying bad guys using people’s family members for leverage doesn’t happen, but asking people to do such absurd things where even if they do get their loved ones back a ton of people will die and they’ll most likely be arrested as an accomplice for it. Also CLEARLY the bad guys are still going to kill your loved one they have literally no reason to give them back.
A slightly less extreme example of this plot point is how often parents will go to extreme lengths to protect their children from the consequences of their (the children’s) crimes. According to TV, parents will kill witnesses, frame the kid’s friends, destroy evidence, and even confess to the crime themselves.
I’m not a cruel or harsh person, but if my family member commits a crime, they need to answer for it. I will love them and support them in as many ways as I can, but it’s their responsibility.