Dangerous Dems at backyard shooting range. The longer you look at the photos, the worse it gets.

X ^ | Sean Davis

[hardspunned]

1) They are shooting steel at 5-7 yards with rifles, which could’ve killed somebody given the force with which the bullets will ricochet off the steel targets at the at distance. You would instantly get permanently banned at my range if you did that. Zero questions asked.

2) Kinzinger holds his rifle like a complete ninny, and that will never not be funny to me. And pro-tip for @AdamKinzinger: the eye protection works better when it’s on your eyes, not your head. You stupid idiot. Try using your brain for once. You’re lucky you still have one after today.

[PIF]

Entire post:

Sean Davis@seanmdav
I’m sorry, but this tweet is INSANE. It contains multitudes. The longer you look at the photos, the worse it gets.

1) They are shooting steel at 5-7 yards with rifles, which could’ve killed somebody given the force with which the bullets will ricochet off the steel targets at the at distance. You would instantly get permanently banned at my range if you did that. Zero questions asked.

2) Kinzinger holds his rifle like a complete ninny, and that will never not be funny to me. And pro-tip for @AdamKinzinger: the eye protection works better when it’s on your eyes, not your head. You stupid idiot. Try using your brain for once. You’re lucky you still have one after today.

3) Kinzinger is for some reason using a high-powered scope (at least a 3-9x by the looks of it) to shoot a target 5 yards away.

4) There is a bolt action rifle on the table, so presumably someone was also using that to shoot steel at 5 yards. Insane.

5) There are at least two canisters of explosive Tannerite powder on the table, down range from where guns are being fired. That could’ve potentially killed or seriously injured someone if someone shot it or if someone was stupid enough to be shooting close enough to steel for a ricochet to hit it.

6) At one point the cameraman is down range from all the guns, which - given the violations we’ve found so far - we can assume are not safe and unloaded. Way to think that one through, dummy.

7) And these morons are so stupid that EVEN AFTER SHOOTING SOMEONE (whose injury was due entirely to negligence), they thought it would be an awesome idea to post the evidence of their idiocy for all the world to see. Lawyer up, dummies, because that reporter you could’ve killed has you dead to rights.

Absolutely mind-blowing insanity from a candidate for a political party that wants to take away your guns because it claims you can’t safely own them.





Lucas Kunce@LucasKunceMO
Great day at the range today with my friend @AdamKinzinger. We got to hang out with some union workers while exercising our freedom. Always have your first aid kit handy. Shrapnel can always fly when you hit a target like today, and you’ve got to be ready to go. We had four first aid kits, so we were able to take care of the situation, and I’m glad Ryan is okay and was able to continue reporting.

[Skwor]

He does not have a full grip, notice how his thumb is raised and not wrapped around the grip.

Also his butt is to high on his shoulder, looks like he is collarbone-ing it.

[circlecity]

Yeah, I too saw he didn’t have it shouldered correctly and wasn’t using a forward posture. I have a hard time believing this guy has ever shot a rifle in his life.

[CodeToad]

Do not interrupt but by all means point it out!

[eyeamok]

Sure looks and sounds likje:
Reckless Endangerment using a Firearm causing Injury or Death
and it carries a 20 year sentence.

[joe fonebone]

“Shall not be infringed”

[suasponte137]

This whole thing reminds me of Chuck Schumer having raw hamburgers with cheese already on them, on his gril....that wasn’t turned on.

People who understand firearms, ranges, etc...will see the absolute idiocy of this photo op.

Those that don’t...might be impressed.

[Flag_This]

"They are shooting steel at 5-7 yards with rifles, which could’ve killed somebody given the force with which the bullets will ricochet off the steel targets at the at distance."

Way back in the day, when I was in the Army, I was at a live fire range and had been detailed to watch for any aircraft that might accidentally overfly our range (at least, I think that's what I was supposed to be doing). We were shooting M-16s that day and the targets were out at least 100 meters.

I was positioned well behind the firing line and to the extreme left of the range. I distinctly heard a ricochet fly past me at one point. I don't think it was particularly close to me, but the point is, that bullet had to have traveled at least 100 meters out and ricocheted 100 meters back for me to hear it. And we were shooting at plastic/vinyl (whatever) silhouettes backed by earthen berms, not steel targets 25' away.

[suasponte137]

Ridicule is an important way for us to capitalize on their stupidity though.

[Kudsman]

Nah, it’s not those wonderful Democrat marksmen that are responsible. They will no doubt cast all blame on the poor SOB that had to load their magazines. He put the bullet in sideways you see.

[Dead Corpse]

Shooting even a .22LR at that short of a distance is going to spall like crazy.

Eye protection. It is not a suggestion. It’s a rule.

Height over bore is a thing with scopes.

[NorthMountain]

They are shooting steel at 5-7 yards with rifles, which could’ve killed somebody given the force with which the bullets will ricochet off the steel targets at the at distance

BS. The bullets won't "riccochet" off the steel plate. They splatter. The lead gets turned to dust and the jacket to small sharp pieces that can inflict a very minor cut. And it tears up the steel ...

[Kudsman]

Are we sure the AR15 shot the reporter? Could Alec Baldwin have been hiding in the hedgerow? Guns don’t shoot people, Alec Baldwin does.

[Organic Panic]

This sounds like a set up. The description from the original poster sounds soooo much like a setup a gun hating democrat would make up trying to write as a gun enthusiast.

The reply is spot on. The more you look at it, the more ridiculous it looks.

[NorthMountain]

See #32.

That object you heard flying past you wasn’t a complete bullet; it was a piece of jacket. They’re noisy because they’re irregularly shaped and spinning rapidly.

[NorthMountain]

Hahah.

But nobody got “shot”. The reporter got hit by a fragment of jacket. It happens. I’ve been hit by them. Whatever. Only a pansy would act like it’s a big deal ... unless you get hit in the eye.

And that’s why we wear eye protection, buoys and gulls ...

[CodeJockey]

I wonder if they were aware of rule number 4?

Be sure of your target and what is behind it (and in front of it). - Never shoot at sounds or a target you cannot positively identify.

Know what is in line with the target and what is behind it (bullets are designed to go through things). Be aware of your surroundings whether on a range, in the woods, or in a potentially lethal conflict.

https://www.frfrogspad.com/safety.htm

[Flag_This]

"That object you heard flying past you wasn’t a complete bullet; it was a piece of jacket."

I still wouldn't want to get hit by it. Thank you for the clarification.

[Flag_This]

"That object you heard flying past you wasn’t a complete bullet; it was a piece of jacket. They’re noisy because they’re irregularly shaped and spinning rapidly."

Wait. Wait. Wait! The example you posted was of a guy blasting directly into a steel plate. In such a case, I could understand your explanation; however, as I mentioned, we were shooting plastic targets. I assume whatever flew past me hit a rock, and probably not directly. It would still be noisy, because I'm sure it was spinning and tumbling at that point.

[NorthMountain]

I wasn’t there, so I can’t say for sure ... but physics can’t be denied. FMJ rounds tend to break up pretty dramatically on hitting something hard.