Political Crossfire Forums

britboy · Joined: 02 Jun 2006 Posts: 3559 Location: London

About 2/3 the way down -- guy training sniper on civvies

To find the bit of the page do a search for the word 'CANADA'.

Er .. have I got something wrong here, or is this a photo of a guy with a sniper rifle -- second photo we see he has it trained on what looks to me like civilian cars driving up and down a road!!

:? Bit dodgy isn't it? :? Didn't think you were allowed to point your rifles at civilians driving down a road? (Or are you?).

Also check out the very bottom picture on the page. The guy on the left looks like he's pointing his pistol into the guy on the right's leg! Is that OK? Seems like a lack of 'muzzle discipline' going on or am I mistaken?

Winchester · Joined: 23 Aug 2005 Posts: 7557 Location: Montana

britboy wrote: About 2/3 the way down -- guy training sniper on civvies

To find the bit of the page do a search for the word 'CANADA'.

Er .. have I got something wrong here, or is this a photo of a guy with a sniper rifle -- second photo we see he has it trained on what looks to me like civilian cars driving up and down a road!!

:? Bit dodgy isn't it? :? Didn't think you were allowed to point your rifles at civilians driving down a road? (Or are you?).

Also check out the very bottom picture on the page. The guy on the left looks like he's pointing his pistol into the guy on the right's leg! Is that OK? Seems like a lack of 'muzzle discipline' going on or am I mistaken?

Kind of lost me after I saw this photo:

As to the first set of pictures your referring to I would guess the second one is fake to give you the impression that he is pointing his gun at civilians driving down the road. If he really is doing that he's an idiot and I'm assuming breaking a law of some kind.

As to the last picture on the page, yeah he's breaking a couple of basic gun safety rules.

Aqualung · Joined: 03 Jun 2006 Posts: 2260 Location: Washington

I was too busy drooling over all those guns that I would love to just be able to shoot...

As to that picture, yeah, that would be kind of stupid if he's actually pointing a gun, but maybe he's just demonstrating the power of a scope or something.

jimmyz

Winchester wrote: britboy wrote: About 2/3 the way down -- guy training sniper on civvies

To find the bit of the page do a search for the word 'CANADA'.

Er .. have I got something wrong here, or is this a photo of a guy with a sniper rifle -- second photo we see he has it trained on what looks to me like civilian cars driving up and down a road!!

:? Bit dodgy isn't it? :? Didn't think you were allowed to point your rifles at civilians driving down a road? (Or are you?).

Also check out the very bottom picture on the page. The guy on the left looks like he's pointing his pistol into the guy on the right's leg! Is that OK? Seems like a lack of 'muzzle discipline' going on or am I mistaken?

Kind of lost me after I saw this photo:

As to the first set of pictures your referring to I would guess the second one is fake to give you the impression that he is pointing his gun at civilians driving down the road. If he really is doing that he's an idiot and I'm assuming breaking a law of some kind.

As to the last picture on the page, yeah he's breaking a couple of basic gun safety rules.

..."this is my rifle...this is my gun......this is for killing, this is for fun!"

Standing erect and at attention, SIR!!!!!!
:shock: WOW

Dear Santa,
I would like one of those rifle cleaning,markswoman,belly-warmer thingamajigs.
Thanks in advance,
Jimmy

Rankor and Pissing · Joined: 04 Mar 2006 Posts: 10208

You'd convince me more would there be an actual picture on a highrise or something with traffice down below.

The pistol issue, yes, he's breaking some basic rules, but at least the safety's on!

TNBiologist · Joined: 31 Jan 2006 Posts: 962 Location: Tennessee

Yeah in the last picture the need a little more muzzle control, whats your point? Even police whom everybody thinks are expert gun handlers make a mistake every now and then. Granted his buddy should have called him on it and may have, we don't know sense we weren't there. As for the pointing a gun at people, the picture looks photoshopped. IF this guy was actually doing that then he needs to be beaten over the head until he learns not to do that.

OneZero · Joined: 23 Sep 2005 Posts: 3413

britboy wrote: About 2/3 the way down -- guy training sniper on civvies

To find the bit of the page do a search for the word 'CANADA'.

Er .. have I got something wrong here, or is this a photo of a guy with a sniper rifle -- second photo we see he has it trained on what looks to me like civilian cars driving up and down a road!!

:? Bit dodgy isn't it? :? Didn't think you were allowed to point your rifles at civilians driving down a road? (Or are you?).

Also check out the very bottom picture on the page. The guy on the left looks like he's pointing his pistol into the guy on the right's leg! Is that OK? Seems like a lack of 'muzzle discipline' going on or am I mistaken?

:? what law could he be breaking? He's not military, he's not (or doesn't appear to be) police, and who says the target IS a civilian? Who says the picture is real?

As for the other pic, yeah, some bad gun handling there, but most likely just careless.

britboy · Joined: 02 Jun 2006 Posts: 3559 Location: London

TNBiologist wrote: Yeah in the last picture the need a little more muzzle control, whats your point?

Er .. my point was 'I think I've found 2 examples of bad muzzle control but I'm not sure, what do you think?'.

:lol: You probably thought I was moving towards 'One guy exercises bad muzzle control lets ban all guns' :lol:

Quote: what law could he be breaking? He's not military, he's not (or doesn't appear to be) police, and who says the target IS a civilian? Who says the picture is real?

Well the picture would never stand up in court. However different scenario -- let us presume (maybe incorrectly) that the picture is real and they are civilians etc.. does this not break any law? Is it legal to point a sniper rifle at civvies?

I would guess that the picture is real -- I reckon it's some guy getting over excited at the fact he can spy on people from 1600 metres away .. and not thinking through the consequences of what he is doing. Why would he fake such a picture? But, naturally, none of us will ever have any evidence either way.

OneZero · Joined: 23 Sep 2005 Posts: 3413

britboy wrote:
Quote: what law could he be breaking? He's not military, he's not (or doesn't appear to be) police, and who says the target IS a civilian? Who says the picture is real?

Well the picture would never stand up in court. However different scenario -- let us presume (maybe incorrectly) that the picture is real and they are civilians etc.. does this not break any law? Is it legal to point a sniper rifle at civvies?

I would guess that the picture is real -- I reckon it's some guy getting over excited at the fact he can spy on people from 1600 metres away .. and not thinking through the consequences of what he is doing. Why would he fake such a picture? But, naturally, none of us will ever have any evidence either way.

First you have to define "sniper" rifle. What is it? Is it a gun that has a scope and a bipod? well that's no help, I can put those on a .22 rifle, certainly no sniper.

I assume you're talking about rifles used by the military and police specifically.
Does pointing them at civilians break any law? No, none that I'm aware of. A sniper could point his rifle at civilians for any number of reasons, including identification, threat assesment, providing cover, etc.

perdidochas · Joined: 06 Mar 2006 Posts: 15424 Location: Florida

britboy wrote: TNBiologist wrote: Yeah in the last picture the need a little more muzzle control, whats your point?

Er .. my point was 'I think I've found 2 examples of bad muzzle control but I'm not sure, what do you think?'.

:lol: You probably thought I was moving towards 'One guy exercises bad muzzle control lets ban all guns' :lol:

Quote: what law could he be breaking? He's not military, he's not (or doesn't appear to be) police, and who says the target IS a civilian? Who says the picture is real?

Well the picture would never stand up in court. However different scenario -- let us presume (maybe incorrectly) that the picture is real and they are civilians etc.. does this not break any law? Is it legal to point a sniper rifle at civvies?

I would guess that the picture is real -- I reckon it's some guy getting over excited at the fact he can spy on people from 1600 metres away .. and not thinking through the consequences of what he is doing. Why would he fake such a picture? But, naturally, none of us will ever have any evidence either way.

If it's real, and the scope is mounted on a rifle, the guy should be arrested for brandishing a firearm. It's wrong. All rules of hunting safety (and gun safety) are that you don't use a telescopic sight until you have already identified a target and are ready to shoot. Binoculars or spotting scopes are to be used for simply looking for the target.

Hard to tell if it was a photoshop, or if the blurriness was due to it being a shot from a camera through a lens. Most automatic cameras would have troubles focusing that correctly.

OneZero · Joined: 23 Sep 2005 Posts: 3413

perdidochas wrote:
If it's real, and the scope is mounted on a rifle, the guy should be arrested for brandishing a firearm. It's wrong. All rules of hunting safety (and gun safety) are that you don't use a telescopic sight until you have already identified a target and are ready to shoot. Binoculars or spotting scopes are to be used for simply looking for the target.

Rules, yes. Ethics, yes. But law, no. If it is really on a gun then he was incredibly thoughtless, stupid, and careless, but I don't think he broke any laws. If all it takes to brandish a gun is to point it at someone then I've probably brandished everytime I go out hunting.

MassMark · Joined: 22 Nov 2004 Posts: 1555 Location: Massachusetts

jimmyz wrote: Winchester wrote: britboy wrote: About 2/3 the way down -- guy training sniper on civvies

To find the bit of the page do a search for the word 'CANADA'.

Er .. have I got something wrong here, or is this a photo of a guy with a sniper rifle -- second photo we see he has it trained on what looks to me like civilian cars driving up and down a road!!

:? Bit dodgy isn't it? :? Didn't think you were allowed to point your rifles at civilians driving down a road? (Or are you?).

Also check out the very bottom picture on the page. The guy on the left looks like he's pointing his pistol into the guy on the right's leg! Is that OK? Seems like a lack of 'muzzle discipline' going on or am I mistaken?

Kind of lost me after I saw this photo:

As to the first set of pictures your referring to I would guess the second one is fake to give you the impression that he is pointing his gun at civilians driving down the road. If he really is doing that he's an idiot and I'm assuming breaking a law of some kind.

As to the last picture on the page, yeah he's breaking a couple of basic gun safety rules.

..."this is my rifle...this is my gun......this is for killing, this is for fun!"

Standing erect and at attention, SIR!!!!!!
:shock: WOW

Dear Santa,
I would like one of those rifle cleaning,markswoman,belly-warmer thingamajigs.
Thanks in advance,
Jimmy

Yummy....The rest is just plain lost at this point...I'm in love.... :flwr:

Wolverine · Joined: 15 Jul 2005 Posts: 10983 Location: Podunk, Colorado

A bit dodgy, if it is real. I certainly don't do the same, if I do point the weapon at a window, I aim for the sky. Or when ever I need to dry fire a gun, like the CETME, 995, SKS, or the Cruiser, I point at the floor, not at the window or anything.

ZakThePhilosopher · Joined: 22 Apr 2005 Posts: 41 Location: Washington, D.C.

Maybe this guy just took the scope off his gun. I think that all guns should require fingerprint ID to fire and keep a log of discharges, so that if that guy had shot anybody, it wouldn't have been hard to prove it in court.

Wolverine · Joined: 15 Jul 2005 Posts: 10983 Location: Podunk, Colorado

ZakThePhilosopher wrote: Maybe this guy just took the scope off his gun. I think that all guns should require fingerprint ID to fire and keep a log of discharges, so that if that guy had shot anybody, it wouldn't have been hard to prove it in court.
Ok.... so I get the gun "finger printed", after doing so I just barely rub the inside of the bore with a file, and the fingerprint changes. So what did the multi-million dollar progrma accoplish? Not to mention that bullets deform when striking, or passing through objects.

BALLISTIC “FINGERPRINTING”
Myth: Every firearm leaves a unique "fingerprint" that
can pinpoint the firearm used
Fact: "Firearms that generate markings on cartridge casings can change with use and
can also be readily altered by the users. They are not permanently defined like
fingerprints or DNA."46
Fact: "Automated computer matching systems do not provide conclusive results.”47
Fact: “Because bullets are severely damaged on impact, they can only be examined
manually”.48
Fact: “Not all firearms generate markings on cartridge casings that can be identified
back to the firearm.”49
Fact: The same gun will produce different markings on bullets and casings, and
different guns can produce similar markings.50
Fact: The rifle used in the Martin Luther King assassination was test fired 18 times
under court supervision, and the results showed that no two bullets were marked alike.51
“Every test bullet was different because it was going over plating created by the
previous bullet.”
Myth: A database of ballistic profiles will allow police to
trace gun crimes
Fact: More than 70% of armed career criminals get their guns from "off-the-street
sales" and "criminal acts" such as burglaries52, and 71% of these firearms are stolen.53
Tracing these firearms will not lead to the criminals as the trail stops at the last legal
owner.
Fact: Computer image matching of cartridges fails between 38-62% of the time,
depending on whether the cartridges are from the same or different manufacturers.54

Fact: “Automated computer matching systems do not provide conclusive results"
requiring that "potential candidates be manually reviewed".55
Fact: Criminals currently remove serial numbers from stolen guns to hide their origin.
The same simple shop tools can change a ballistic profile within minutes. “The minor
alteration required less than 5 minutes of labor”.56 Criminals will make changing ballistic
profiles part of their standard procedures.
Myth: Ballistic imaging is used in Maryland and New York
and solves many crimes
Fact: Not so far. Neither New York nor Maryland has reported a single prosecution
based on matched casings or bullets.57 58 59 The cost for this lack of success in
Maryland exceeds $2,500,000 a year and New York budgets $4,000,000.
Fact: In Syracuse, the police have not submitted over 400 handguns for ballistic testing
over a three-year span because the system is inefficient.60
Myth: a ballistic database is inexpensive to
create/maintain
Fact: “ . . . a huge inventory [of possible matches] will be generated for manual
review.”, “[The] number of candidate cases will be so large as to be impractical and will
likely create logistic complications so great that they cannot be effectively addressed".61
Myth: Police want a ballistic database
Fact: “The National Fraternal Order of Police does not support any Federal
requirement to register privately owned firearms with the Federal government,” the
group said. “And, even if such a database is limited to firearms manufactured in the
future, the cost to create and maintain such a system, with such small chances that it
would be used to solve a firearm crime, suggests to the F.O.P. that these are law
enforcement dollars best spent elsewhere.”62
Fact: “We in law enforcement know it will not, does not, cannot work. Then, no one
has considered the hundreds of millions of guns in the US that have never been
registered or tested or printed.”63

Fact: “One, the barrel is one of the most easily changed parts of many guns and two,
the barrel, and the signature it leaves on a bullet, is constantly changing."64
http://www.gunfacts.info/pdfs/gun-facts/4.0/GunFacts4-0-Screen.pdf

OneZero · Joined: 23 Sep 2005 Posts: 3413

ZakThePhilosopher wrote: Maybe this guy just took the scope off his gun. I think that all guns should require fingerprint ID to fire and keep a log of discharges, so that if that guy had shot anybody, it wouldn't have been hard to prove it in court.

Oh yeah, and jack the prices up even more for a system that has been proven to fail.

Thrilla · Joined: 23 May 2005 Posts: 22263 Location: Sin City

Winchester wrote: britboy wrote: About 2/3 the way down -- guy training sniper on civvies

To find the bit of the page do a search for the word 'CANADA'.

Er .. have I got something wrong here, or is this a photo of a guy with a sniper rifle -- second photo we see he has it trained on what looks to me like civilian cars driving up and down a road!!

:? Bit dodgy isn't it? :? Didn't think you were allowed to point your rifles at civilians driving down a road? (Or are you?).

Also check out the very bottom picture on the page. The guy on the left looks like he's pointing his pistol into the guy on the right's leg! Is that OK? Seems like a lack of 'muzzle discipline' going on or am I mistaken?

Kind of lost me after I saw this photo:

As to the first set of pictures your referring to I would guess the second one is fake to give you the impression that he is pointing his gun at civilians driving down the road. If he really is doing that he's an idiot and I'm assuming breaking a law of some kind.

As to the last picture on the page, yeah he's breaking a couple of basic gun safety rules. Outstanding eye Mr Winchester!.... I fully approve of your taste... although i must warn you that you are gawking at my future ex-wife.. :wink:

as for the picture...i cant say if any basic rules were violated... the weapon may have very well been verified to be safe.. cant tell.

Winchester · Joined: 23 Aug 2005 Posts: 7557 Location: Montana

Thrilla wrote: Winchester wrote: britboy wrote: About 2/3 the way down -- guy training sniper on civvies

To find the bit of the page do a search for the word 'CANADA'.

Er .. have I got something wrong here, or is this a photo of a guy with a sniper rifle -- second photo we see he has it trained on what looks to me like civilian cars driving up and down a road!!

:? Bit dodgy isn't it? :? Didn't think you were allowed to point your rifles at civilians driving down a road? (Or are you?).

Also check out the very bottom picture on the page. The guy on the left looks like he's pointing his pistol into the guy on the right's leg! Is that OK? Seems like a lack of 'muzzle discipline' going on or am I mistaken?

Kind of lost me after I saw this photo:

As to the first set of pictures your referring to I would guess the second one is fake to give you the impression that he is pointing his gun at civilians driving down the road. If he really is doing that he's an idiot and I'm assuming breaking a law of some kind.

As to the last picture on the page, yeah he's breaking a couple of basic gun safety rules. Outstanding eye Mr Winchester!.... I fully approve of your taste... although i must warn you that you are gawking at my future ex-wife.. :wink:

as for the picture...i cant say if any basic rules were violated... the weapon may have very well been verified to be safe.. cant tell.

I always err on the side of caution. These are the 4 basic firearm rules we teach the kids (and adults now) during hunters safety. If the students can't grasp or choose to disregard these rules when handling firearms (or replicas) in class, it's an instant flunk and they get to retake the class in 6 months.

1. Always point the muzzle of your firearm in a safe direction.

Never point the firearm at yourself or others, even if you are certain it isn't loaded. Determine the safest available muzzle direction and keep your firearm pointed in that direction.

2. Always treat every firearm as if it were loaded.

Even if you are certain a firearm is unloaded, act as if it were loaded. Consider any firearm that you have not unloaded yourself to be loaded and treat it accordingly. Even double-check yourself.

3. Always be sure of your target and beyond.

Never point your firearm at something you do not intend to shoot. You must positively identify what you are shooting at and know what lies in front of and beyond it.

4. Always keep your finger off the trigger until ready to fire.

The natural instint when picking up a firearm is to put your finger in the trigger guard. Don't! This could cause an accidental discharge if the firearm is loaded.

ZakThePhilosopher · Joined: 22 Apr 2005 Posts: 41 Location: Washington, D.C.

Wolverine wrote:
Ok.... so I get the gun "finger printed", after doing so I just barely rub the inside of the bore with a file, and the fingerprint changes. So what did the multi-million dollar progrma accoplish? Not to mention that bullets deform when striking, or passing through objects.

Ok ok. But that's not what I'm talking about:

ZakThePhilosopher wrote: ...all guns should require fingerprint ID to fire and keep a log of discharges, so that if that guy had shot anybody, it wouldn't have been hard to prove it in court.

I'm talking about biometric fingerprint readers on the stock of the gun. So that you can't be shot with your own gun.

Boneman · Joined: 24 Feb 2006 Posts: 511

That would be rather expensive, but if it turns out to be efective and cheap, i think that would be rather a good idea. May have to wait a while before the technology develops though. And make sure they dont have the info on a great big database, just on the gun itself.