A long while back, I forgot to change the default when uploading images of my children onto a “store your photos here” website. I puked when I saw the hit count on certain photos. Literally. Now I’m not saying that this image is child porn. The model appears to be happy, healthy (very) and past the point of no return (as we call 18 in these parts). But the whole scantily-clad school girl thing makes me distinctly uneasy. To say the least. Oleg Volk’s decision to add a deer-caught-in-the-headlights grin and a rifle with an extended mag to this mix does nothing to settle my queasiness and much to hurt our cause amongst fence-sitting non-firearms folk . . .

Don’t get me wrong: the First Amendment came first for a reason (so to speak). And good looking women with firearms are OK by me. Such as . . .

OK a LITTLE more skin might be better. Keeping in mind that I’m old enough to be just about anyone’s father, how about this?

But scantily clad school girls with deadly weapons is, I hope, incendiary.

Recommended For You

60 Responses to Incendiary Image of the Day: Shoot Me Baby One More Time Edition

  1. I don’t think you need firearms to make scantily clad sexy school girl imagery incendiary. There’s something not quite right about it for grown men (though for school age boys it’s a lot more understandable).

  2. The weird part about the first picture is that the school girl is holding one very unsexy 10/22. with that being said, i have always felt that these kinds of photos were lame to begin with, from what i know, models and firearms are 2 separate categories. I have seen WAY too may of these pictures with the model’s finger on the trigger. This shows me that these picture were not sponsored or endorsed by firearms advocates to begin with, just somebody trying to make a buck……

    With that being said, the female IDF soldier is an excellent representation of a “women with weapons” photo. This classy gal is serving her country and more than likely is highly competent with the weapons she is issued. The model with the shotgun , i doubt has extensive experience with weapons, at least she does not have her finger on the trigger.

  3. I must be getting old when the part of the photo(s) that immediately draws my attention is to see if there is a finger on the trigger.

  4. I agree with you, RF. The first model’s attire was just plain wrong. Nobody wears high heels with that outfit. It calls for low heels and little white ankle socks with a lacy fringe at the top. And maybe she could have put her hair in a pony tail that would kinda sway back and forth when she walks, and . . . uh, sorry, I’m kinda drifting here.

  5. It’s a picture. It’s nothing more than you allow it to be. I would bet you could have a middle-aged woman dressed in loose fitting jeans and a cotton oxford holding a Ruger 10/22 and that would be an incendiary image to tens of thousands.

  6. Meh. Never was into the school-whore thing. The lady on the machine gun however… no, she isn’t wearing anything sexy and she is just showing a pretty face but you know under all that she is fit and way sexier then the other two photos. My opinion of course.

  7. I don’t think that it would be a good idea to hook up with a woman who can outshoot me. Or outgun me. Or who drives a freakin’ tank.

  8. Yeah, the whole chick draped over the motorcycle/car/ATV calendar in the auto body shop genre doesn’t do much for me. Don’t get me wrong, I still appreciate the female form with the best of ’em. But chicks (even extremely attractive chicks) smelling of exhaust fumes and motor oil (or, in the above examples Rem Oil and Hoppe’s No. 9)…not so much.

  9. I actually made a pretty poor business decision once and got involved with a “chicks with guns” calendar under my website brand. I deeply regret that decision, and in the intervening years I’ve really realized that stuff like the first image really doesn’t do anything to help our cause. If we want to attract women to the shooting sports, there are plenty of professional, qualified women out there who would be much better role models than just putting some silly cheesecake model out there with a gun.

    Like I said, I screwed up once in this same area, and it was a hard lesson for me to learn. But learn I did; and stuff like that doesn’t help us at all.

      • I don’t disagree with that statement, the problem that I have (and that I experienced with my own poor decision) is that pandering to dudes like that will actually drive women shooters away from the shooting sports.

        We already have enough negative stereotypes of the shooting sports and gun owners out there, why would we want to reinforce them with mindless cheesecake? I’d much rather see pictures of Jessie Abbate or Julie Golob shooting or teaching others to shoot than more “hot chick with gun” nonsense.

        • I can agree with that, but is it pandering when it you have to seek this type of image out? Sure you’ll always find critics of the female form, but its not like viewing it is unavoidable.

        • “We already have enough negative stereotypes of the shooting sports and gun owners out there, why would we want to reinforce them with mindless cheesecake.”

          How is that any different than the argument that Fudd’s make against “assault weapons”? For example: “We already have enough negative stereotypes of the shooting sports and gun owners out there, why would we want to reinforce them with these evil, black terrorist rifles?”

          This picture really isn’t that bad. In fact, no worse than what you see at some of the booth’s at SHOT Show and some gun advertisements. The gun industry is no stranger to women in tight and/or revealing clothes.

          As for the concern of driving women away from shooting sports, will it really do that? Scantily clad women splayed across automobile hoods and parading around race tracks and car shows hasn’t driven women away from motor sports.

          Personally, I think we have bigger PR problems than scantily clad women with guns.

        • Also, who is to say that a woman in skimpy clothing is some kind of negative image or demeaning? The model clearly doesn’t see herself that way.

          Also, would these moral busybodies be just as upset if it were some beefcake shots of Jason Statham shirtless with a gun?

        • It’s not the scantily-cladness of the image that rankles. It’s the sexualization of children PLUS guns. YMMV.

        • …but you point to acceptable examples that are the same age, or portrayed as younger?

        • “If it was mature beefcake dressed like a school boy, then yes, I would.”

          If you’re referring to Angus Young from AC/DC, then yeah, that would be BAAAAAD.

  10. You know, those Israeli girls are probably a lot closer to the “point of no return” then that model, and Summer Glau’s roles have been teenagers in Firefly and Terminator…

  11. I think their all hot, but I would like to see the chick with the machine wearing a nice skimpy bikini.

  12. I must concur. I find the sexualization of school girl attire to be despicable and downright pedophilic. Britney went out of bounds with it and this picture is no less repugnant. Hollywood is unrepentant in their effort to sexualize our youth. This pic may not be a Hollywood production, but it certainly follows the immoral trend.

  13. As a professional photographer and father of four grown daughters, to me much of Oleg’s work looks like the old Ridgid Tool calendars using sex to sell plumbing gear.

    Now don’t get me wrong. Technically, his work is superb and he does a very nice job lighting both the models and the weapons. I do product photography for a living and his technique for bringing out the smallest details in each weapon is first rate.

    My issue is with his decision to use sex to attract attention to his firearm photography and the fact that I believe it sends the wrong message to young women about learning to protect themselves with a weapon. It also makes “us guys” (firearm enthusiasts, gun collector, etc.) look downright immature and sexist when we ogle the girl instead of the gun. You don’t need a half dressed young girl to make a firearm look “sexy”.

    This type of “gun porn” does nothing to further our cause as responsible (and mature) gun owners in the US. All it does is give the gun control lobby some wonderful ammunition to use against us in the court of public opinion.

  14. Reminds me of Gordon Liddy’s annual “Stacked and Packed” calendars. Lots of very well put together young women in skimpy bikinis holding firearms (trigger discipline always observed). But for me the sexiest vision of a babe packing heat was when MythBusters Kari Byron (AKA everyone’s geek goddess) – fully clothed in the prone position – fired one of Ronny Barrett’s .50 cal. toys.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *