Those peculiar snipers... (and not just them!)
Thanks for your kind message and your very interesting question (yeah, Iâve been waiting for such a question for ages, because that scene troubles me, too!), but, first of all, APOLOGIES for the delay in answering!!!
I know, Iâm horribly, shamefully behind in answering the questions in my askbox⊠Please, forgive me and have a little more patience, folks, Iâm working on them, I promise!
So, coming to the matter at hand: Iâm afraid that the whole scene at the pool, in tGG, when it comes to various kinds of guns and how people acts with them, borders on fantascientific, and requires a good old-fashioned leap of faith - not to mention willing suspension of disbelief - to be accepted as it is portrayedâŠ
Better, at the very beginning of the episode we have:
Almost a whole magazine discharged and no neighbour calling the police?!?
Why using a sniper for goodness sake?!? Didnât Moriarty know that they invented remote detonators AGES ago?
Well, of course he knew, and the bombs MUST have had one, too, as some of the hostages - particularly the second - were located in places where the sniperâs line of fire was constantly broken by vehicles and passerbys! So WHY a rifle too?
Well, my best guess is that it was mainly a canonical reference, as in both FINA and in EMPT Holmes mentions Moriarty employing hitmen and rifles.
However, later on we see:
Neither Sherlock, NOR JOHN, even TRY to reach the gun - which is on the floor at about 1m of distance - when the Golem RELEASES Sherlock and thus offers a perfectly clear, big target.
And donât tell me it would have been unfair to shot an unarmed man, because THIS guy was lethal with just his bare hands, and, besides, immediately after Sherlock doesnât have any scruple to shot at the retreating Golem, quite clearly aiming at his back and head.
And now the real fun begins!
Itâs immediately apparent that our sniper doesnât have a very steady hand, nor has he/she thought to bring along an easel, or just to place him/herself flat on a hard, level surface (or to prop the rifle on, say, a railing or the like), judging by how much the laser dot dances on Johnâs chestâŠ
Not a very sniper-y thing to doâŠ
So, your arch-enemy, a criminal mastermind who has just had a sweet old lady killed BASICALLY just to prove a point, and who has just strapped your best friend to a couple of kilos of Semtex and placed him right in front of you, tells you that he is aware that you arrived armed at this little rendez-vous of yours, and what do you do?
Of course, you DONâT drop your gun, to avoid endangering the hostage more and escalating the thorny situation, and instead you draw it and aim it at your enemy, who just happens to have a sniper you canât locate to cover his back.
I couldnât have said it betterâŠ
Another very clever, gun-wise move, this time from our beloved Jim: youâve just got into your sniperâs line of fire, Moriarty dear - well done!
John, your logic is faulty:
- you didnât need to jump on Moriartyâs back in order to threaten to have him blown up, too, in case the sniper pulled the trigger and detonated the Semtex: even at one - or several - meters of distance, EVERYONE in the pool would have been killed (as Sherlock, later on, demonstrates to understand well enough); Moriartyâs very presence in the room was a life insurance against explosions;
- on the other hand, your jumping on Moriartyâs back could not prevent the sniper from killing Sherlock with a clean shot, had he ârunâ as you told him to do, even if the sniper had been only one: he/she had no interest in blowing his/her boss up, but shooting Sherlock would not have damaged Moriarty in the least (as we see immediately after)âŠ
But, ok, letâs make allowances for the agitation and stress of the moment.
Now, to answer more specifically the initial question: could not the sniper kill John ANYWAY, leaving Moriarty safe and sound, just by shooting John in the head?
Well, of course, theoretically she/he could - even if this is just the less troubling trouble with the whole scene.
The fact is, heads are small, difficult targets, thus always dangerous to pick; even more so, when a jacket full of Semtex is involved; even more so, when the target doesnât stay still; even more so, when the sniper doesnât appear - as this is the case - to have a very steady hand.
Thus, under this respect, John betting on the sniper not daring to shoot was at least a decently reasonable gambleâŠ
But more troubles still lay ahead:
As stated above, snipers appear to be very movable properties - and we get confirmation that John has no way to detonate the bomb himself, thus lacking any effective way to threaten Moriarty and his sniper.
Of course, Sherlock, dear, letâs mess about a bomb jacket whitout any bomb disposal training: who has ever heard of anti-tampering devices which detonate bombs when untrained people try to remove them?
And, of course, with a whole pool filled with water, donât even try to submerge the bomb, once miraculously removed⊠good, clever boy!
Better still, linger in the same place where the bomb is, and DO NOT immediately call a bomb squad.
Then, of course, proceed to scratch your head with a loaded, unsecured gun: every gun safety instruction manual recommends it!
And then point it at your best friend with shaking hands.
And - at last! - suddenly an entire platoon of (invisible) snipers appears!
And - oh wonder! - all of them with a very bad aim (the awning, seriously?) and very shaky hands!
(Either this, or Moriarty had a disco psychedelic lamp installed in the poolâŠ)
So, you now know why I have always had problems with this episode, in relation to guns, snipers, bombs, and all the jolly good company.
In the end, I just guess that we have to accept it like an article of faith.
Cheers! Have a very good night!