Incendiary Image(s) of the Day: We’ve Only Just Begun Edition

Having shot more than a few weddings, I know you get some unusual requests from couples from time to time. I had one, too, that wanted to be memorialized with their guns. My bride and groom, however, knew how to handle their heaters and at no time directed any muzzleage in an unsafe direction. And neither did any of the rest of the wedding party, all of whom posed for a heavily armed group portrait. But if you’re just starting out in married life, a mock duel seems like a rough way to go. If these two are already pointing guns at each other, I’d set the over/under on this particular union at no more than six years. More gun fun after the jump. . .



56 Responses to Incendiary Image(s) of the Day: We’ve Only Just Begun Edition

  1. avatarNot too Eloquent says:

    In before the Safety Patrol!!

    My take: If two consenting adults want to shoot each other, whether figuratively or literally, have at it. Just don’t take out any nearby non-consentors.

    • avatarMoonshine7102 says:

      I’d actually be okay with two guys shooting eachother or two girls. As long as they’re happy, who are we to judge?

  2. avatarSkyler says:

    I have often accused of not getting jokes or sarcasm. Dan, are you serious in objecting to this staged photo? Is there no room for levity or even art in the relentless nannyism that all gun owners must conform to this blog’s rules?

  3. avatarMr. Lion says:

    But.. but.. they could have been loaded! What if someone had been shot! Whataworldwhataworld!

  4. avatarRobert Farago says:

    An incendiary image is not necessarily didactic.

  5. avatarRalph says:

    They’re doing it for fun now, but there’s a 50-50 chance that they’ll be dueling for real in front of a judge within five years.

    Marriage (and the dissolution thereof) is the greatest gift the world could ever give to lawyers.

    • avatarSam Wright says:

      Ralph, you continue to amuse me with your humor. Where do you get it from?

      • avatarGreg Camp says:

        I understand Ralph’s point. In my case, I get my sarcasm about marriage from having taken the oath of poverty, chastity, and obedience from time to time. . .

        • avatarSam Wright says:

          Greg Camp,
          I have never had the need to take an oath of poverty, chastity, and obedience (not even from time to time). Ralph is funny because divorce makes lawyers rich.

        • avatarRalph says:

          As a lawyer who has been divorced twice, I can tell you without fear of contradiction that the law that giveth also taketh away.

        • avatarCarlosT says:

          Well, see, that was your first (and second) mistake.

        • avatarRalph says:

          Yes, but I learned.

          Marry a rich girl, my brothers.

        • avatarRopingdown says:

          It’s a sign of the times: “Son, just remember it’s as easy to cheat on a rich girl as on a poor one.”

        • avatarSam Wright says:

          “Ralph is funny because divorce makes lawyers rich.” oops Ralph is a lawyer that may not have gotten rich from divorce.
          How do I find a rich girl that would marry my sorry ass?

        • avatarAharon says:

          Why seek out trouble and danger? Boycott marriage and stay single. MGTOW– men going their own way.

        • avatarRobert Farago says:

          NOW you tell me.

        • avatarSam Wright says:

          LMFAO now you tell me.

      • avatarcameron says:

        Massachusetts gun owners need that kind of humor to prevent from offing ourselves.

    • avatarRopingdown says:

      The most pleasant money is the upfront fee for a properly drawn and executed marriage contract, one with an accurate schedule of assets attached. They seem to have the ‘executed’ idea, vaguely. Odds that they entered into a prenup?

      • avatarRalph says:

        At gunpoint! Why didn’t I think of that.

        • avatarRopingdown says:

          Figuratively, in my experience, a prenup is usually at gunpoint. Fortunately for him they’re both holding guns. Perhaps they have similar net worth.

  6. avatarCarlosT says:

    I give it six months.

    • avatarRalph says:

      I give them six months, too. Now they have a year.

      Does anyone else want to pitch in so these lovely people can be stuck with each other stay with each other for all eternity?

  7. avatarNeonCat says:

    Is that a Red Ryder BB gun? I hope those sunglasses she’s wearing are impact resistant.

    Is he really wearing a t-shirt and flip-flops for his marriage photos?

    • avatarRalph says:

      Is he really wearing a t-shirt and flip-flops for his marriage photos?

      With a litle luck, he’ll get to keep them in the settlement.

  8. avatar101abn says:

    $20,000 for marriage license, $1 for divorce, any monies/property/weapons/children/pets, must be forfeited to whatever government is in power at the time. Before having kids, rent a two year old for six months,(see: Rent A Brat R Us) minimum. Law provide that you may shoot your first spouse with impunity, $500 fine for shooting additional spouses thereafter.

  9. avatarSutton says:

    They’re not necessarily pointing them right at each other. Camera angles can be deceiving. For example, in movies, actors rarely point guns at each other for safety reasons (the gun that killed Brandon Lee wasn’t pointed at him, but because it was “loaded” with dummy brass, not a real bullet, it went flying off at a weird angle).

  10. avatarRKflorida says:

    You could put an eye out with those things.

  11. avatarTom says:

    War of the Roses needed more gun action.

  12. avatarNot too Eloquent says:

    See how fun this post is without the Safety Patrol??

    Though Sutton did try to put a damper on things with the Brandon Lee thing…

  13. avatarAharon says:

    Follow the money and power trial. Who gains from divorce the Very most? Even more than women? Women gain more than men who suffer the most along with the children. Women divorcing do gain far more money, wealth, property, and power especially when kids are involved since the Courts and the anti-male social worker system advising judges are biased against men. Something like one in six adult males suicides occurs during the divorce process with the way men are treated. Behind the scenes consider who really gains.

    Government, by writing laws that favor women in the Family/Divorce Courts and related issues of allegations of domestic violence in the Criminal Courts gain a voting ally and supporter of the growing big-government police-nanny state. More women working means more tax payers and more depending on government support. More workers are good for the businesses and Wall Street. Two homes to fill-up means far more furnishings and furniture that will be bought creating more jobs and purchases that can be yes, taxed yet again. More social/criminal problems from children and teens requires more government involvement. There are on any day 50,000 US men in jail/prison for not being able to pay alimony even if they are broke and unemployed. Thousands of other men are in hiding who don’t want to be incarcerated. So what that the US outlawed debtor prisons in the 1920s? (sarcasm off) Single parenthood: 85% of men in prison for a second violent offense where raised in a single parent household. In about 95%+ of the time that means a single mother household. Kids need both parents.

    An MRA Men’s Rights Advocate created a site that produces a series of great documentaries that covers the anti-male discrimination and bigotry in modern society explaining the politics that are going on behind the scenes. The mass media, government, and universities present a white-washed politically-correct version keeping Americans dumb and in the dark.

    • avatarJerk Jiggler says:

      Way to kill a thread Aharon…

    • avatar101abn says:

      I like my version better…………….

    • avatarRalph says:

      Who gains from divorce the Very most?

      Aharon, my brother, I thought we already covered that. It’s the lawyers.

      That’s the only thing about divorce that I like.

      • avatarAharon says:

        Those factions in America that seek to transform American society benefit the most. Ex-wives and divorce lawyers do make lots of money. Yet they are really only minor players in a far greater long-term game. It’s sad about the children who are often serious victims and messed-up by divorce and one-parent families.

        Many businesses now benefit from access to far more employees and increased consumer buying because of divorce. Various career fields also prey off the massive divorces in modern society.

        Back in the 1930s an Italian communist (in prison) wrote a strategy for undermining the capitalist West. His plan called for infiltrating a nation’s cultural institutions (such as the mass media, religious institutions, government, entertainment, educational, etc) with progressives. What would follow would be a gradual modifying over many years of a society’s value and moral system. Change a nation’s values and change the nation. Thus a revolution occurs without a shot fired on some civil war battlefield.

        Feminists who helped write the sex/gender-based laws on divorce and in the criminal courts have achieved their level of success in society because they have had the support of various factions in government. It was Winston Churchill back in the late 40s or 50s who identified feminism as the tip of the liberal spearhead that would open up the West to the corrupting forces of liberalism and tolerance or rather new new communism and the police-nanny state.

        Over the past forty-years America has turned into a soft, weak, obese, corrupt, debt-ridden, and dumbed down society. Step back from the trees and look down upon the American forest from 5,000′. It is no longer a beautiful site.

        Increasing numbers of men are now not only boycotting marriage they are avoiding dating, living with a woman, and having children. The young guys know the drill. They’ve seen older men screwed over. One divorce with kids can be alimony for life, or simply a pregnant girlfriend who has the child can keep those young men a financial serf to her for a long many years. The younger generations of young women are now paying the price wondering where all the men are at.

        Add it all up. Things are not good for the ongoing stability of society.

  14. Aharon may have already killed the thread, but let me have a whack at it too.

    Pointing a gun at someone is wrong, it’s in violation of at least one of the 4 Rules of Gun Safety.

    Furthermore all you guys yuckin’ it up on this thread, it looked like 100% of you to me, are hypocrites. In other discussions you talk about how serious a responsibility gun ownership is and how much safer you are than your average joe simply because you’re armed and you take that seriously.

    The truth is many of you don’t. And when you see idiots like these doing stupid things, you laugh it off.

    • avatarAharon says:


      Pointing a gun at someone is right if you are using the gun to stop the person from starting or continuing a crime. How does someone like you know to what degree the gun owners here practice safety? The picture and piece where from the start a light-hearted parody on marriage. FLAME DELETED

    • avatarRalph says:

      Wow, mikey. I thought that your blahg was a snorefest, but it’s highly entertaining compared to your comment.

  15. Found this thread a little late but wanted to contribute. I am the photographer who took these pictures so I wanted to give a little back story.

    This lovely couple was married in March 2010 on a cruise ship. Obviously, these are not their wedding pictures. They became good friends of mine so I went out to Arizona to visit them and do a “Trash the Dress” session (please note, in most TTD shoots the dress does not get trashed. I believe this bride later went on to resell the dress in perfect condition). The guns were her Grandmother’s and they, in fact, were not loaded nor had they been for many years. They also never did aim them at each other, in the above picture they were both aiming over the shoulder of the other. They were aimed at me, briefly, for that last image, but I was standing quite a ways back using a zoom.

    There was a whole story line to this shoot, starting with a “Natural Born Killers” sort of couple who turn on each other. In the end the groom was actually shot to death (not really, of course!). It was actually one of the funnest shoots (pun intended) that I’ve done to date.

    And I am proud to say these two are on their second year of marriage and have a beautiful baby boy! So far, so good.

Leave a Reply

Please use your real name instead of you company name or keyword spam.