Oh, yes, it is. It's very much different. The golfer misses an easy putt, and the carpenter hits his thumb. Both failures, frustrating instances that should not have happened. But the sniper had successfully defeated his enemy, his deadly enemy, and by making a difficult shot with a handgun,...
For sure, my analogous examples lack the requisite success elements for this comparison. However, the main question is, did the author use the protagonist’s aggression towards the revolver to blame the gun for his actions? Or, was it a device use to convey rage?
There wasn’t much else to use for depicting rage: his rifle was gone, so was his hat. Perhaps he could use his boot. Let’s see how that works.
The regret and crescendo of pain induced shock took its toll on the warrior; in a rage, he removed his boot and pounded it on the roof with many curses and oaths. After he calmed himself, he decided to change his name to Nikita Khrushchev, and establish a communist party in Éire, so there!
Humm... It doesn’t really have much punch, but it does make for good satire. (The author of this story, Liam O'Flaherty, was a founding member of the Communist Party of Ireland.) What else could we try?
Let’s try foot-stomping.
The regret and crescendo of pain induced shock took its toll on the warrior; in a rage, he stomped his right foot so hard into the roof that he fell in up to his waist. Then with both hands, he took hold of his left foot and ripped himself up the middle in two.
Humm... This one is funny too, and Rumpelstiltskin gets a reprieve. However, our protagonist is now dead, which means he cannot brave machinegun fire and conveniently discover that he killed his brother. This kinda wrecks the end of the story. 
So, only the smoking gun remains. The author has to risk an unintended double-action for the revolver: the readers interpreting it as a scapegoat, instead of the whipping-boy that it is.
Oh well, no one ever said it’s easy being a writer.
GA
