Of course. Anything a white man does without the approval of the liberal establishment is racist. We know the firearm is a surrogate for a penis. Not that it is necessarily true, or even if it was would have anything to do with the question, but you know that will be brought up and used against the white man anyway. The gunshot is somehow environmentally damaging, obviously intentional by the white man. We know he's trying to kill trees as a stand in for some other race - no we don't need any evidence of this, we already know it. The burning powder is also an obvious attempt to increase global warming and harm all the non-white races through climate change. The lead in the bullet is obviously intended to pollute the groundwater and impact the poor black man who can't afford the bottled water we all know the white man is drinking.
The only possible way the liberal/fascist establishment could begin to accept a white man firing a gun in the forest would be if he were doing it in celebration of something they approve of. Say gay-pride day or some such. Of course, they'd still fault him for doing it alone in the forest instead of going public with his support of whatever...
“We know the firearm is a surrogate for a penis”
Does that mean a man with a vasectomy shoots blanks?