Let's say a beautiful woman appears at your door intending to seduce you into sex. But since you already have a harem of beautiful women at your beck and call you're just not interested.
My question is what do you do to discourage the woman?
Let's say a beautiful woman appears at your door intending to seduce you into sex. But since you already have a harem of beautiful women at your beck and call you're just not interested.
My question is what do you do to discourage the woman?
Blackjack if it were my story and certainly my thoughts at the moment:: I'd send her to the dogs:: :)
O.o
While i admit that's a valid response, I'm honestly not interested enough to turn it into a bestiality scene.
I'd send her to the dogs
As in telling her to get out, or actually feeding her to the dogs?
As in telling her to get out, or actually feeding her to the dogs?
I read it as literal, but I think the implication was that she would be "entertaining" the dogs, not ending up as dog food.
My question is what do you do to discourage the woman?
Okay, and bearing in mind the location you've posed this, I'd ask the woman to prove her worth by satisfying all my harem first.
AJ
Okay, and bearing in mind the location you've posed this, I'd ask the woman to prove her worth by satisfying all my harem first.
That might not actually count as discouraging her.
That might not actually count as discouraging her.
It's a sex story site. If the harem owner is reluctant to knock boots with her, who else does it leave? ;-)
AJ
It's a sex story site. If the harem owner is reluctant to knock boots with her, who else does it leave? ;-)
The dogs?
The dogs?
The OP has already admitted not being a fan of bestiality.
Of course, there's always the crazed twin brother of the protagonist, who's kept permanently locked in a soundproofed underground basement wearing an iron mask.
AJ
An idea i'd like to hear everyone else's (constructive) thoughts on
If you really want constructive thoughts we need more information.
For instance;
Does the harem owner have his harem with him?
How does he view his harem? Lovers or possessions? Would he 'trade up' the lowest harem member for the new woman?
How careful is he about outsiders knowing of his harem? Could the woman be a 'plant'?
Is the woman aware of his harem, is she looking for a one night stand or a successful guy with a fat wallet?
Already having a harem isn't necessarily a reason to not be interested. Is there a reason to limit harem numbers?
How does he know the woman's motive? If your
POV is omniscient how much do you want to detail her backstory, motives, etc.
you already have a harem of beautiful women at your beck and call
I assume by that, the harem is with the guy. So an unknown woman shows up on this guy's doorstep, who has a harem of women inside the place. Simply invite the harem out to meet the unknown women (uw) and the problem resolves itself. UW is told and or forced to leave via a violent reaction by the harem. The harem didn't likely get to be a harem by mixing strangers. Assuming the harem likes their status, uw sticking their nose in would be unwelcomed by them.
My question is what do you do to discourage the woman?
Calling the cops would probably work.
My question is what do you do to discourage the woman?
If existence of the harem isn't secret, explaining the situation may help. If not, introducing her to harem members may. If not, explaining harem inner workings might. If not... why the fuck turn her down at this point? Now if there's still valid answers, those may do the work. If not, we're dealing with toxic stalker at this point so might proceed with some humiliation. If that doesn't work... well, eventually there's dogs. Or, why dogs, implying on an invite for a bbq where she's the meat might help, even if you're not committed to follow through. If she does show up ready for that, well... it might become a problem. Especially if recurring.
Now, if the harem situation is to be kept under wraps and simply explaining how ugly she is doesn't work it gets interesting.
Or maybe, just make her a living statue decor for your foyer. You can always extend her supposed test period for whatever reason. Bored of that, why not sell the artwork at auction?
I'm not sure if i can use that....
But you have my respect just because i like how your mind works :)
My question is what do you do to discourage the woman?
This is a true story from when I was young. Maybe 10 or 11 or 12. I have no idea. What I remember was being on my bicycle. A girl (who I can't remember how I hooked up with because she wasn't from my immediate neighborhood where all my friends were) was sitting on the seat and I was sitting on her lap. My guess is I was peddling and she had her legs out to the sides.
The girl said, "You're sitting on my pussy."
Back then, at that young age, that must have freaked me out. I don't remember how we got from being on the bike to off it, but I remember grabbing her hair and pulling her until her head smashed into a tree. I never saw her again, so smashing the woman's head into a tree will get rid of her. LOL
Now, 60 years later, I regret my action. Not for smashing her head into a tree, but who knows where that could have led. I should have said, "Wanna change places so you can sit on my cock?" If she did, I could have told her how good it felt and who knows what would have happened. But I was a scared little kid.
Now i think i should explain the intention of the original post. Lately i've been working on a harem story (ain't it obvious?) Then i got into a sub plot involving a woman showing up on the MC's door step intending to seduce him to try to get him to come back to her boss's company to salvage a deal (doesn't matter much to the point of this story)
On a basic level this is one of those scenes where the woman shows up on the MC's door step wearing nothing but slinky underwear and heels under her trench coat.
But the MC has a harem of beautiful demi humans under his roof and he was even sleeping with two of the girls who can pass as human.
The thing you have to realize is outside of trust issues, the MC just isn't that interested in looking for women outside the coterie. Also he's not inclined to add women indiscriminately either which seems to happen in a lot of harem stories from what i've seen.
Then the inspiration came to me with the question "okay how would the MC make the woman (that arrived on his doorstep) leave?
The one complication is that he isn't much of an asshole so he's inclined to take a more polite approach at first.
After thinking about it, i realized that would be an interesting scenario.
After i thought about it the first time, my answer was a lot like awnlee jawking's.
Also, for the sake of comedy, when the UW (unknown woman) wakes up naked on the couch in the morning, she has an experience like ashton kutcher did in no strings attached
You can see it here.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ak8huhsVKc
With all this being said, the only thing i could see you'd have to consider is the sexual experience of the unknown woman.
Then the inspiration came to me with the question "okay how would the MC make the woman (that arrived on his doorstep) leave?
The one complication is that he isn't much of an asshole so he's inclined to take a more polite approach at first.
Politely decline and close the door in her face. If she fails to get the hint and go away, call the cops.
Hmmm.
How do we know this woman? What's her relationship to the guy prior to her showing up at his door? What's her role in the tale being told?
If I had a harem of beautiful women already, I'd simply tell her that I'm flattered but don't have any openings on the roster at the moment and she should try back in a few months.
It's kind of hard to come up with something without knowing more about the universe this is set in.
Right now, I'd be worried that I'm being set up, that there's a guy with a camera in the bushes recording the whole thing or she's wearing a wire. How did she find out about my harem? Are harems legal? Did I use nefarious mind-control technology to enslave the women? Did one of the harem girls rat me out?
Or is it something like I have no idea why all these women are dying to be in my harem? Maybe pheromones or addictive cum or a dick so perfect that once dick pic automatically enslaves a chick? Do I know the cause or am I still trying to figure it out at the moment the woman knocks on my door?
My gut reaction is to be polite but firm in the rejection. Whether I know her or not, I don't want to be rude and hateful towards her because rejection is never fun. Best to be gentlemanly about the whole thing and offer her the chance to re-apply in a little while. That gives you time to investigate the matter, but doesn't give her a reason to be hateful and looking for revenge.
Best to be gentlemanly about the whole thing and offer her the chance to re-apply in a little while.
Perhaps there's a marriage to a fat, ugly village elder arranged for her in the next couple of days, and her only out (apart from death or a a convent) is to lose her virginity so she's no longer considered pure. She chose the first half-decent looking guy she could find who seems to be reasonably competent (ie keeping a harem satisfied).
AJ
Maybe he abducted and raped her sister to add to his harem. She wants revenge and having just tested positive for COVID-19 is intent on seeing him suffer and die painfully.
She wants revenge and having just tested positive for COVID-19 is intent on seeing him suffer and die painfully.
You know that, presuming you're healthy, Covid-19 has a 1% mortality rate. It's only among those of us who are fat, diabetic, and old that it has more than a 10% mortality rate. Otherwise, it's something that can get you sick, but from the actual numbers, is basically a statistical blip on the actual number of people that do get sick and die every year from everything else.
Actually spent a bit of time discussing that with my cardiologist last week while I was laying in the hospital that the regular docs were concerned I'd had a mild heart attack due a severe UTI. (I had three different incidents lasting more than 20 minutes, where my temp spiked from normal to 104 in about 3 minutes, causing massive muscle spasms throughout my whole body as it was trying to shiver but instead was simply spasmodically jerking randomly - looked a lot like a three year old throwing a tantrum.)
Anyway, he said he's a twenty percent increase in cardiac related deaths from people that put things off due to the Covid shutdown, and a ten percent increase in strokes because people couldn't get tested. We're already one of the more unhealthy states in the country anyway. This was just the cherry on top, not letting people that he could have saved get treatment.
Anyway, he said he's a twenty percent increase in cardiac related deaths from people that put things off due to the Covid shutdown
People say the UK's NHS has been working flat-out during Covid, but the truth is that many consultants in other fields (cancer, heart attacks, strokes, dementia etc) are twiddling their thumbs because the usual volume of patients just isn't getting through to them.
AJ
You know that, presuming you're healthy, Covid-19 has a 1% mortality rate.
Not in a fictional story,
:)
COVID-22R
Is that Covid-22LR, or Covid-22 shorts?
I've heard it said that a .22 subsonic is the preferred round of up close and personal assassins. Pop in the back of the head, it's enough to get in and scramble things, but not enough to make more than the small entry hole.
Subsonic -- not because it makes a small hole, but because all you hear is a "click" as the hammer falls if your cleaner uses a suppressor like most do. If you've never shot a suppressed .22, you aren't living right. Great fun when you can hear the firing pin strike the cartridge... and then the bullet hitting the paper.
They don't have the power to cycle the slide and eject the spent casing, but they are still fun to shoot suppressed!
They don't have the power to cycle the slide and eject the spent casing, but they are still fun to shoot suppressed!
Which is why I always laugh at movies, which show somebody using a silenced pistol, and all you hear is "thwp, thwp, thwp". Like what, the action of the slide is suddenly completely silent also?
I have fired silenced MP5 and other weapons. And while quiet, they are nowhere near as quiet as movies and TV make them out to be. they still make a lot of racket from the actions, just nothing like with the sound of the explosive gunpowder going off.
Or hearing high power military rounds like 5.56 or 7.62 buzzing, wooshing, or once "quietly passing" over head. Obviously they had never experienced the real thing, it really sounds like bullwhips cracking as the supersonic round passes by.
The newer suppressors are doing really great things, but, yea, so long as the ammo is super-sonic..... it's going to be loud!
The only way around that is to use a bolt-action weapon and make sure your suppressor has a "wiper" installed.
Something like 300BLK, subsonic, out of a bolt gun ---> really fun and plenty of long-range capability!
The newer suppressors are doing really great things, but, yea, so long as the ammo is super-sonic..... it's going to be loud!
The only way around that is to use a bolt-action weapon and make sure your suppressor has a "wiper" installed.
Something like 300BLK, subsonic, out of a bolt gun ---> really fun and plenty of long-range capability!
I laugh even more at the really stupid movies and books that use revolvers.
Like one I saw recently set in the 1970's, with a silencer on a revolver (appeared to be a standard S&W .38). The gap between the cylinder and barrel would have made that absolutely pointless.
Or the occasional reference I see to people using the "safety switch" on a revolver. Yes, they do exist but are very VERY rare. Only a handful ever used such a feature.
I will be honest, I almost never read or watch "gun porn" or "military porn" kinds of movies or stories. Most are really really bad, and completely blow it. Chuck Norris or Sly may be entertaining mowing down huge numbers of Communists, but I honestly stopped watching the Sly series the moment he shot down an enemy helicopter with a LAW missile, HE FIRED INSIDE OF ANOTHER HELICOPTER!
Never mind that all those POWs he just rescued would have been killed in the backblast. One of two movies I remember in that era inspired by Ross Perot.
killed in the backblast
We got to fire one in training. Kneeling position, tube on our shoulder. If your back foot wasn't on an angle, you could feel the back blast when it hit your heel.
Or the occasional reference I see to people using the "safety switch" on a revolver. Yes, they do exist but are very VERY rare. Only a handful ever used such a feature.
While it's very rare to see a pre-1900 design revolver with a safety switch it's very rare to see any post-1900 design revolvers without a safety switch, except for those by Colt or an imitation of a pre-1900 revolver. The safety is a small catch worked by the thumb as it's right where the thumb rests when the gun is held in the right hand. There are photos of most revolvers in the list below and those showing the left side of the gun clearly show the safety catch.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_revolvers
The lack of a safety switch mechanism is why the majority of revolver owners in the 1800s kept the chamber under the hammer empty as a hard knock on the back of the hammer could cause the gun to fire.
That's 100% untrue.
"post-1900 design revolvers without a safety switch"???
That "switch" on the side of the revolver is a release for the cylinder so it can be swung out to the side for reloading. Older models that don't have that "switch" are either break-action or the whole cylinder is removed from the frame. That "switch" in no way functions as a safety mechanism and your thumb should never be on it when you're holding it in your right hand -- you might actually bump it during recoil and cause a malfunction.
As for the myth of dropping a gun and causing the hammer to fly forward.... that's a myth. I'm not saying people way back in the day didn't do it, but just because they believed in a myth doesn't mean it was anything more than a myth. To suggest the "majority of revolver owners" did something is pretty silly unless you can show your survey.
A "hard knock" isn't going to push the hammer forward with enough power to ignite a primer. Dropping the pistol isn't problematic at all because you'd be talking about a one-in-a-billion incident where someone dropped a pistol from high enough (over 10') and said pistol happened to hit on the hammer. The odds of that ever happening are so amazingly slim.... and I'm pretty sure it's already been tested to see if it could actually happen.
A "hard knock" isn't going to push the hammer forward with enough power to ignite a primer.
Not now it won't as they have safeties in them, but it used to be a problem which was resolved somewhere in the late 1800s.
Nope. Total myth. Not saying that some companies didn't play up to the myth, but it's still a myth. I'll have to find the study that was done to see just what it would take to cause the hammer to shear through the sear or otherwise impact the firing pin like you're suggesting.
Due to the weight distribution of a revolver (its shape), the odds of the hammer being hit in a fall, and with enough force to do anything, was so astronomical as to be funny. Like a lot of urban legends, the lie was repeated often enough that folks believe it no matter what.
Nope. Total myth.
So, when Wyatt Earp said it happened to HIM, he was lying?
https://www.tactical-life.com/firearms/dropped-gun-inertia-discharge/
Apparently the CDC just makes stuff up, too:
When the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention analyzed data from 27 states in 2015, it found that 193 people were killed "due to unintentional firearm-related injuries"; a "dropped gun" was to blame for 12 of those deaths.
Older weapons (potentially, anything made prior to 1968 - when the Gun Control Act made drop-safety tests mandatory) may not (probably don't) have firing pin blocks. A MODERN revolver SHOULDN'T fire when dropped. A model 1876 Colt, if there's a live round under the hammer, possibly to probably, WILL fire if dropped.
Here's a story from a holster manufacturer (that mentions the Sig P-320 early models being notorious for firing when dropped).
As for the myth of dropping a gun and causing the hammer to fly forward.... that's a myth. I'm not saying people way back in the day didn't do it,
Back in the days of single action revolvers - where you had to pull the hammer back to cock it - there were no internal safeties on revolvers. So, yeah, you could drop the damn thing on the floor and have it fire accidently. (Or potentially on purpose.) That was something that got resolved with internal safeties where the hammer could NOT go forward at all unless the trigger was pulled during the late 1800's, but not all manufacturers did that until the early 1900's.
I'm well aware of how revolvers work. It's because of that familiarity with them, even the very old designs, that I can say with certainty that you actually couldn't drop it on the floor and have it fire accidentally. As I pointed out earlier, the physics don't work like that and it has actually been tested. If you just stop to think about it, how the revolvers are shaped and where their center of mass is, you'd see that the chances of you hitting the hammer accidentally and with enough force to move the firing pin which is being held in place by a coil spring.... you'd see that it's not a great stretch to imagine the whole thing is an old wive's tale.
those by Colt or an imitation of a pre-1900 revolver. The safety is a small catch worked by the thumb as it's right where the thumb rests when the gun is held in the right hand. There are photos of most revolvers in the list below and those showing the left side of the gun clearly show the safety catch.
That's the cylinder release, so you can swing it out for reloading. Other than a very few pretty much specialty revolvers made around the 1900's, no modern revolver has a safety switch on it like a semi-automatic pistol does.
They DO have internal safeties, so the hammer can't go forward without a trigger pull, but that's it.
They DO have internal safeties, so the hammer can't go forward without a trigger pull, but that's it.
I thought some revolvers had/have a half-cock safety.
I thought some revolvers had/have a half-cock safety.
It's still internal - not an actual slide switch like my Sig or Colt have. (And most people don't realize that Glocks have a 'safety', but it's built into the trigger, not anything external. If your finger is on the trigger, the safety is disengaged and the weapon is ready to fire.)
It's still internal
I have to disagree with that. The half-cock has an external, visible component. The position of the hammer.
With the half-cock, the exposed hammer has two different positions it will "lock" into, half cock and full cock.
With the hammer at half-cock, the trigger will not engage and release the hammer. You have to manually pull the hammer all the way back to full-cock in order to fire the weapon.
ETA: Any firearm with an exposed hammer could have a half-cock.
I have a Marlin lever action rifle with both a half-cock and a separate mechanical safety.
The mechanical safety on that one is interesting. Rather than locking the trigger, it engages a physical block that will prevent the hammer from falling. The hammer has to be in full cock to engage that safety.
Y'all are both right and wrong depending on the firearm manufacturer. Some designs are all internal, while others are not.
Y'all are both right and wrong depending on the firearm manufacturer. Some designs are all internal, while others are not.
No, I'm talking about firearms with a half cock.
You can not have a half cock on a firearm with a fully internal hammer.
It has to have an exposed hammer to have a half cock.
ETA: We were talking primarily about revolvers. Name one revolver model with a fully internal hammer. I've certainly never heard of one.
half cock
I wrote a story about one of those, titled 'And a Half'.
Absolutely no gun porn involved ;-)
AJ
We were talking primarily about revolvers. Name one revolver model with a fully internal hammer. I've certainly never heard of one.
Bossu revolver, Velo-dog revolver (based on the same basic design as the Bossu), S&W Centennial (all 8 models), S&W Ladysmith, S&W Safety Hammerless (I think it's the base design for the other 2).
I'm not sure if the Lanstad revolver counts as it's a cross between a revolver and a pistol.I can't see if there is or isn't a hammer on the S&W Bodyguard .38 special revolver. The Udar revolver has an internal 'shrouded' hammer.
Is that enough for you to look at?
You're about to step on your crank publically if you seriously argue this.
There are multiple hammerless revolver models. I strongly advise you spend a bit of time researching before going Fwd in this.
You're about to step on your crank publically if you seriously argue this.
I'm not arguing that at all. Anything with a fully internal hammer is irrelevant to my comments about a half-cock as a safety. You can't do half-cock without an exposed hammer.
Name one revolver model with a fully internal hammer. I've certainly never heard of one.
Here are five of them
And here's some gun porn on the Kimber. (That so qualifies as a stripper name!
Cool! I presume those are all double action. The article you linked to doesn't say, but I can't see how you could cock them manually.
You are 100% correct. The post is about revolvers, not semi-auto pistols.
The only way to have a "half-cock" feature on a revolver is if the hammer is exposed and there's a thumb spur to grip. That means the revolver has to be either a Single-Action or a Double-Action, and definitely not a Double-Action-Only. Three different types of action, and only two of them allow for the half-cock notch in the hammer body that is engaged by the sear.
Lots of pocket-sized snub-nose revolvers have fully-enclosed hammers, but they are all Double-Action-Only by default since you can't access the hammer and put the revolver on half-cock.
The term half-cock relates to a sear position.
The half-cock position is where a extra notch is in the hammer that the sear rest on blocking the mainspring tension from pushing the hammer forward to impact either a transfer bar or the firing pin.
The only thing preventing a half-cocked concealed hammer is a means to relieve the mainspring tension thus allowing a full-cocked position.
There are several designs out there for this. Ruger comes to mind along with colt. All of which require DAO action.
a full-cocked position.
I am sure there are half cock and full cock puns involving penis problems. Fortunately SOL does not object to either puns or penis discussion. That is why pungent puns are so popular. Although some gents think they stink.
A gent who puns is a pungent.
Yep. Got one here that was made back in 67, in "West Germany" and it's a beaut. Being single-action-only, you have to pull the hammer back to the half-cock position so you can rotate the cylinder when you want to eject spent casings and load in new rounds. Great .357Magnum!
It's not a safety, though. Maybe technically you could call it that, but nothing in the company literature refers to it as such.
That's the cylinder release, so you can swing it out for reloading. Other than a very few pretty much specialty revolvers made around the 1900's, no modern revolver has a safety switch on it like a semi-automatic pistol does.
I am glad somebody else understood that, because I was trying to figure out what that meant.
And yes, I am well aware of the various type of safety features that are used to help ensure that dropping or otherwise causing a blow to a weapon will not fire a round.
But that is not an active setting that is used to ensure it is not fired, as on a semi-automatic. And certainly not something a user sets, like I see in so many badly written stories. I am not really anal about details, but a writer should at least make the attempt to do a little research if they are delving into things they know nothing about.
he shot down an enemy helicopter with a LAW missile, HE FIRED INSIDE OF ANOTHER HELICOPTER!
There's a great scene in one of the Dirty Harry films where Eastwood drags a young female cop away from being caught in the back-blast of a demonstration firing of a LAW that amply demonstrates the problem.
I almost never read or watch "gun porn" or "military porn" kinds of movies or stories. Most are really really bad, and completely blow it
Or when a guy is beaten to the point he can barely stand and then all of sudden beats the crap out of the other guy. Or a guy gets hit on the head with a baseball bat and ends up with no more than a bump rather than his skull cracked open. Or what about romantic comedies where they fall in love at first sight?
It's fiction and meant to be enjoyed.
Or what about romantic comedies where they fall in love at first sight?
Actually, in most RomComs, it is the exact opposite. It is pretty much the norm that one, the other (or both) deny it for as long as possible. In fact, one of the most well known ones never actually has the two love interests meet until literally in the last minute or two of the movie.
The Wedding Singer, When Harry Met Sally, even His Girl Friday and Twelfth Night largely follows that style.
Actually, in most RomComs, it is the exact opposite
Sleepless in Seatle
Les Miserables
West Side Story
Titanic
Meet Joe Black
Okay, not necessarily comedies.
Sleepless in Seatle
Les Miserables
West Side Story
Titanic
Meet Joe Black
Sleepless is exactly what I am talking about. They never meet until the very last minute of the movie.
The rest are not really "romances", but tragedies. With almost the exact opposite intent in mind. To get a couple to fall in love, then kill one or both of them in the end. Completely different dynamic. Like another of my favorite dark movies, "The War of the Roses".
Grease is another classic "RomCom" movie. Met at the start, had a romance, then through most of the rest of the play and movie are alternating pushing each other away, and only when Sandra accepts her "Inner Slut" are they finally compatible.
The entire series of "Moonlighting" was based on that dynamic. As was the later Bruce Willis vehicle "Look Who's Talking". Even "50 First Dates" somewhat turned it on it's head, as the girl reset every night, and had to fall in love all over again every day.
"Fools Rush In" is another of that genre, as they meet at the start, she gets knocked up and they get married. But find out they are not compatible and for most of the movie are fighting or apart. Only to get back together at the end.
Even "50 First Dates" somewhat turned it on it's head, as the girl reset every night, and had to fall in love all over again every day.
That movie engendered some discussion in our household, which were things completely glossed over and ignored in the movie. Specifically, when Lucy is pregnant, and wakes up at night to pee, then her reactions. Or she wakes up, thinking, wow, my back hurts. I'm EIGHT MONTHS PREGNANT!!! WHAT THE HELL???
That movie engendered some discussion in our household, which were things completely glossed over and ignored in the movie. Specifically, when Lucy is pregnant, and wakes up at night to pee, then her reactions. Or she wakes up, thinking, wow, my back hurts. I'm EIGHT MONTHS PREGNANT!!! WHAT THE HELL???
Oh I know, I thought the same thing.
Or the time of post-partum depression.
"Why in the hell am I feeling fat, my belly is floppy, and my boobs are two sizes to big? And why in the hell is there a baby screaming in the next room and because of that my nipples leaking?!?"
I admit I actually love the movie, and at the same time find it more than a bit disturbing. I actually am not a real fan of Adam Sandler. But that is one of his 3 movies that I own, and will watch many times.
But sadly, the other one is not a Drew Barrymore movie. Blended is alright, but I kind of had the same reaction to it as I ultimately had with "Bell, Book, and Candle". Just as Jimmy Stewart was to old to play the lead in a romantic comedy, Drew and Adam were by that time to old to do it either.
The rest are not really "romances", but tragedies.
The love at first sight in Les Miserables was the daughter and the rich revolutionary boy. That wasn't a tragedy.
In Meet Joe Black, it was the daughter and the guy who she met in the coffee shop (whose body Death borrowed). Again, not a tragedy.
In Sleepless, as soon as Tom Hanks saw Meg Ryan from a distance he fell in love with her.
Pop in the back of the head, it's enough to get in and scramble things, but not enough to make more than the small entry hole.
Use a .22rimfire. A shot in the anus uses the existing hole, cavity deadens sound, correct choice of bullet hastens death.
:)