I Didn’t Even Notice Until Muir Pointed It Out . . .

(courtesy daybydaycartoon.com)

All seven of those “no hesitation” targets are white people.

avatar

About Bruce W. Krafft

I am a bit of a Johnny-come-lately to the civil rights (firearms flavor) movement, having not really gotten involved until after I hit 40. I am not really a "gun guy"; I can generally hit what I aim at, but I'm not a competitive shooter. I enjoy the craftsmanship of a fine pistol or rifle, but I am not particularly knowledgeable about firearms in general nor am I a Glock guy, or 1911 guy, I'm just a guy. What I am is passionate about civil rights, especially those of the firearm flavor.

66 Responses to I Didn’t Even Notice Until Muir Pointed It Out . . .

  1. avatarmllopilato says:

    Thaaaaat would be because police already have no hesitation when it comes to shooting black people.

  2. avatarإبليس says:

    Told you, Lon Horiuchi developed the targets :/

    • avatarTheSleeperHasAwakened says:

      “Let’s remember the principle of “Occam’s Razor”. That’s the idea that in the absence of other corroborating information, the simplest hypothesis is usually the correct one.

      Ask yourself what is more likely, a vast secret inter-agency government conspiracy to murder women and children or some federal firearms instructors trying to teach better threat discrimination?”

      Nice try, but you seemed to over look all of this corroborating information:

      - the DHS has recently purchased approximately 2 billion rounds of ammo (enough for a 20-something year long war)

      - the Dmoestic Drone program putting 30,000 drones over American skies

      - the passing of NDAA declaring the entire globe a battle field legalizing the arrest and indefinite detention of American citizens based on suspicion alone

      - the MIAC Report labeling veterans, Libertarians, and End the Feders as terrorists

      - the complete demonization of Gun Owners and the current effort to repeal the 2nd Amendment

      Get your head out of your ass and look around…there’s plenty of corroborating information if you’d just WAKE UP!

  3. avatarAccur81 says:

    Yep, I noticed that also. I’m wondering how the powers that be will try to polish that turd.

  4. avatarMichael B. says:

    Not that I really care, but most of the targets with dudes on them are white and I imagine that’s simply done to avoid having race baiters screaming in people’s ears.

    I prefer the targets with organs, myself. Or giant monstrous mosquitoes.

    • avatarOld Ben turning in grave says:

      This. If you want to illustrate a “bad guy” it’s always safest to use a white guy. This is a product of the political correctness and race-baiting witch hunts, which sucks ass. However, I wouldn’t read into it more deeply than that.

    • avatarSpoons Make You Fat says:

      Then maybe it’s time for whites to get pissed. It’s an equal opportunity world.

      The problem is finding someone accountable. Governments and corporations have become so big that anonymity provides safety. Add in a does of “too big to fail” and you’ve got some serious inertia.

      Personalize.

      Find the right person behind No Hesitation Targets and out them. Relentlessly. Picket their house. Picket their business. Picket their church. Put up a web page. Start a blog. Show some outrage.

      Or not. Turn the other cheek and all that.

      • avatarOld Ben turning in grave says:

        This man knows his Alinsky. This is a good thing, mostly. Turn it around on them, as long as you don’t go completely dark side. Hearty ridicule works wonders, and leftists generally have had no good answer for it. You don’t have to go to where they live and intimidate them (though if they deserve it, like people who publish lists of CC permit holders, let it rip). Don’t need to tell boldface lies, either. Truth is on our side.

  5. avatarmountocean says:

    Ah, daybyday. I had forgotten about that gem. Good comic comentary.

  6. avatarKevin says:

    I vote for pregnant zombie children regardless of what color they were before their skin fell off.

  7. avatarDaniel says:

    If pregnant women targets are okay, then I’m sure targets of men wearing government agency jackets are okay too.
    …unless you’re the government; in which case, that’s terrorism.
    Not so amusing when the tables are turned, now is it?

  8. avatarD says:

    You didn’t notice because us regular Americans don’t fixate on color. Liberals have that covered.

  9. avatarSGC says:

    Because making black people tagets would be racist! Really, they should make them multi-cultural. I understand the shock and awe that this topic causes, but I can’t get bent out of shape about it, becuase I’ve lived in that world. People are dangerous, and that does not preclude race, age, sex, physical condition, or anything else you want to believe. Don’t believe me, ask a combat vet.

    Pregnant women, old people, and “kids” can kill you just as fast and as dead as a 21 year old gangbanger or a 42 year old soverign citizen…or a pair of teenage nutjobs, or just one 18 year old kid off his meds. Failure to realize that just shows ignorance of the real world.

    And for 16V in the other thread, I’ve taken guns and knives off pregnant women, kids as young as 12-14 year old, and 70 year old men. Google Deputy Kyle Dinkheller in GA, killed by a Vietnam vet. Maybe you don’t get out of the house much, or you just believe what the media tells you.

    I think photorealistic targets are a great training tool, whether it be kids, dogs, old people, pregnant women, zombies, nazis, or anything else that can kill you.

    Despite them being called “No Hesitation” targets, the whole purpose of those targets is to make you hesitate and identify the weapon…real or not, shoot/don’t shoot. Just like the laser simulators and use of deadly force video training aids cops use.

    It may not be politically correct, it may not be “nice”, but it’s true to life. You fight how you train, and if you don’t train for any possiblity, that quarter second of heistation could cost you your life or someone elses.

    • avatarRalph says:

      that quarter second of heistation could cost you your life or someone elses

      Or it could mean the difference between shooting Chris Dorner or wildly firing over a hundred rounds at the newspaper delivery women.

      Cops, it’s not your job to kill us. It’s your job to keep us safe. If you’re so damn afraid of getting shot by a pregnant woman or a 12 year old girl, quit and get a real job instead. I’m tired of the excuses and bullsh!t.

      • avatarTheSleeperHasAwakened says:

        +1,000,000

      • avatarJoey says:

        Who needs training to shoot someone that poses a threat to your life? I’m pretty sure I’ve read stories of women and kids shooting intruders and I doubt they trained with targets like this. My point, shouldn’t cops focus their training on restraint?

        My second point, if the whole purpose of these kind of targets is to teach you to not hesitate, how would cops feel if I shot at “no hesitation” targets dressed as cops? Before you accuse me of hating cops (and before I accuse cops of hating pregnant white women), the reason I would do that is because I actually would hesitate to shoot a cop if he was a danger to myself or my kids. Put yourselves in the shoes of the 2 women who were shot up by the cops in CA. What would you do if out of nowhere, some cops started shooting at you without any commands, without any warning?
        I don’t idolize cops any more than I do the military. Why? Because my dad was a cop and because I’m in the military, and I know that having the title doesn’t mean crap, actions do.

        • avatarmountocean says:

          Your second point is in conflict with your first point.
          1. People would not hesitate
          2. You (and others) would hesitate.

        • avatarJoey says:

          My first point was that cops should focus on restraint, since the drive to protect your own life is innate. Your body doesn’t need training to kick into survival mode, but restraint mode? That’s a little different
          My second point was to show how it would be unacceptable for me to actually use a “no hesitation” target with a target that I might actually hesitate with, but cops shooting at pregnant white women is no problem.
          Now do you have any thoughts on the subject? Do I need to break it down more?

        • avatarmountocean says:

          Joey,
          I’ve already shared a number of my thoughts, but I’ll make one last attempt, trying to be complete and concise.
          Cop, soldier or armed citizen, a human has to recognize a threat and react to it.
          We recoil from targets with kids on them and .gov would disapprove of targets with gov agents on them. This illustrates our imbedded aversions to engaging certain groups of people regardless of the threat they pose.
          Targets like these (including don’t shoot examples I linked to below) train responsible armed humans to quickly gather and reason through as much information as possible to decide on an action based on the totality of circumstances.
          The website’s presentation and naming of this series of targets misrepresents the training strategy as a whole (concepts we could also benefit from), and has been blown out of proportion.

        • avatar16V says:

          If you really need a photorealistic target to hone your IFF skills, you have zero business as a copper on the street.

          Threat matrix identification is Academy stuff and the finer points of the subtle clues of impending violence are what your FTI/FTO should have been showing you.

          Once again, all things are possible, just not probable. You may win the Powerball, but I’ll bet a house you won’t. Show me the number of officers killed (or even bitten) by dogs. Show the number of knife attacks by those 12-14 year olds you’re so scared of. How many coppers have been executed by a 12 year old with a gun? It’s all propaganda and scaredy-cat nonsense.

          You wanna know how you’re most likely to die on the job? Flattened by a passing motorist during a traffic stop.

    • avatarmountocean says:

      That’s a good point about the hesitation. I didn’t look for them on this website in particular, but it wouldn’t be hard to have a paper-doll type overlay or seperate target to obscure the gun with a hankie or wallet for shoot-don’t shoot training. I’ve done dry-fire training with VHS tapes that have the exact same video sequence where a personwhips out a gun, or with an inhaler or coffee mug. I think the main reason this got blown up so big is the name “no hesitation” instead of “judicial use of force”, or “threat identification” and the poor placement of only SHOOT targets on that webgrab without correlation DON’T SHOOT targets.

    • avatarMichael B. says:

      Despite them being called “No Hesitation” targets, the whole purpose of those targets is to make you hesitate

      Holy crap. Black is white, up is down, freedom is slavery.

    • avatarBobtrumpet says:

      “Despite them being called “No Hesitation” targets, the whole purpose of those targets is to make you hesitate and identify the weapon…real or not, shoot/don’t shoot. Just like the laser simulators and use of deadly force video training aids cops use.”

      If that’s the case, why were all the targets holding *real guns*, and not airsoft or toy guns (e.g., orange tip on the end of the barrel)? All the images I saw of the company’s web site screen capture were of people holding real guns.

      Do they really make “don’t shoot” target images holding guns if they’re not LEO?

    • avatarSmaj says:

      I’m sure you’ll be telling yourself this crap as you and your fellow “operators” are kicking in the first law-abiding citizens door if and when confiscation happens. Just following orders and all that.

    • avatar16V says:

      “And for 16V in the other thread, I’ve taken guns and knives off pregnant women, kids as young as 12-14 year old, and 70 year old men. Google Deputy Kyle Dinkheller in GA, killed by a Vietnam vet. Maybe you don’t get out of the house much, or you just believe what the media tells you.

      Thanks f0r bringing it up again. Because you have proven every point I made in the last thread.

      Taking guns/knives off a pregnant woman isn’t an armed confrontation with one. Neither is taking guns off 12-14 year olds or 70 year olds. None of what you just describe even vaguely approaches a shoot/no shoot on any level. Carrying is not a confrontation.

      Oh and Dinkheller? What was that 15 years ago? One copper v. one whack-job Viet Vet. As I believe I noted last time, if *they* want to kill you, they just will. Meanwhile, how many innocents have just LAPD and NYPD shot and killed in that time frame?

      I do leave the house and know coppers in a couple of the most dangerous cities in this country. Like most of the new-wave paramilitaries, you want us to buy your propaganda so that we let you slide when you kill without any valid reason. Sorry, too many cops in the family and friends circle to buy that nonsense. I know very well how dangerous your job isn’t.

      • avatarSGC says:

        This “new wave paramilitary” was on the street from 1989 until about 2008…wrong again 9v…

        You’re right though, carrying is not an armed confrontation involving the exchange of gunfire…disarming a mental/doped/drunk subject, or just a kid wanna be gang banger prevents those armed confrontations from turning into a shooting you will wail and moan about.

        And haven’t you heard…they are all innocent! Just ask any inmate in any jail or correctional facility in America…they’ll tell you! Just like all cops suck…and all whining Internet posters are experts.

        • avatar16V says:

          Well, since the paramilitarization started in the early 70s and was in most major metro training programs by the mid 80s, saying you were on the street in ’89 fits the definition just fine.

          Once again, assuming you actually are a cop, someone who is carrying does not mean they are threatening or brandishing. I didn’t say “assault” which is what an actual use of one of those weapons is.

          Frankly, since you can’t even keep your basic legal terms straight, I really doubt you are POST certified. You sound like Paul Blart, wannabe.

  10. avatarNDS says:

    You can’t have targets with black people on them, how racist!! Think of the children.

    Everybody knows the standard silhouette target is the reason violence is out of control within the black community.

  11. avatarChuckN says:

    I have a few zombie targets. Do you think I’d get in trouble
    if I painted “Vote Obama” stickers and SEIU t-shirts on
    them?

    • avatarRalph says:

      I think you’d be hassled by many people in uniforms with a lot of guns and no morals who don’t care about your First or Second Amendment rights. After all, what’s the point in having power if you can’t abuse it?

      • avatarSGC says:

        You’ve got a real hardon for anyone in a uniform don’t you Ralph? How about walking a mile or two in those shoes before you curse them so loudly…? I bet you couldn’t if you had to…

      • avatar16V says:

        Stanford Prison Experiment.

        Wanna guess what role SGC likes?

        • avatarAlphaGeek says:

          Was the ad hominem really necessary? I usually consider the appearance of an ad hominem a heartening sign that the other guy is losing the argument.

        • avatar16V says:

          Let’s try this again, as my last one disappeared into the aether…

          I saw it as an observational statement, nothing more. I was not attempting to allude to anything beyond guard status.

          He has already stated views that are what you learned goes wrong in SPE. I do generally try to avoid ad hominems for the reason you mentioned. (Except for that frakkin’ DD kid…)

        • avatarSGC says:

          I gotta stop feeding the trolls…they don’t die they just multiply…

  12. avatarAharon says:

    I’ve recently spent some time on black media sites reading imaginative stories about the 2A being written primarily or exclusively to enable the institution of black slavery. Those same authors will probably try spinning the no-hesitation targets all being white people as ‘proof’ the USG only wants to protect whites. Only in their racist anti-white paranoid minds.

    • avatarRalph says:

      Those black media sites are Judas goats, leading their people to the slaughterhouse. Or Chicago, whichever they get to first. The result is the same.

  13. avatarJustAJ says:

    Can you just imagine the outrage if any of the targets HAD been non-white people? Ole rev and JJ woulda been screaiming bloody murder!

    • avatarSpoons Make You Fat says:

      So why aren’t the people who look like those targets in an uproar? Probably because historically it has been a case of “it won’t happen here, it won’t happen to me.”

      Enjoy condition White. These are the good ol’ days.

  14. avatarSchizuki says:

    Yeah, there’s a huge problem in this country of cops being too hesitant to shoot.

  15. avatarSchizuki says:

    Only a brain-dead imbecile could not see that using these targets will prime an officer’s brain to shoot ANYONE.

  16. avatarTod says:

    This is hilarious. I’m good friends with the woman that created these “controversial” targets. She’s LEO and has been for many years.

    There’s no conspiracy here. The people in the targets are her family (they’re cheap models, and support what she’s doing). I know this because I know them. The two younger females are the woman’s daughters. The older people? Her parents.

    There really are some things not controlled by Nazis…yet! Geez.

    • avatarLucas D. says:

      Thanks for adding that “yet,” but I really don’t give a damn why this woman and her family are making these targets. Why the DHS thinks they need them bothers me a hell of a lot more.

    • avatar32x20 says:

      So…that makes it OK? I’m not sure I see your point.

    • avatarMichael B. says:

      She’s LEO and has been for many years.

      There’s no conspiracy here. The people in the targets are her family (they’re cheap models, and support what she’s doing).

      She has a sick mind, so make sure to tell her that she’s in the right profession. Does this vile creature shoot these targets, by the way?

      I mean, really, what kind of person gets up in the morning and decides to market their family members as targets for people to shoot?

  17. avatarjwm says:

    The race of the target has fvck all to do with it. Pregneant women, kids, i find this
    whole concept repugnent. i normally just plaster Shootnc’s all over whatever the cheap target is at the range.

    But then, I’m not hoping to engage women and kids.

    • avatar16V says:

      God I hope your FTI sets you straight before they turn you loose solo.

      Put down the Gall’s and go to a tt bar.

      • avatarSGC says:

        Cops suck…anarchy rules! Kill all the pigs…9v for prez!

        Seriously, your swat operator buddies that work at the DMV or mall security are really steering you wrong 9v…wake up and smell the kiwi.

        • avatar16V says:

          Assuming you are a cop, I’ve seen exactly how your career ends a dozen times.

          Between the dirty jacket that moves you to from the big time to crap muni, to crappier muni, the drugs, and the anger issues it ain’t good.

          Get help.

  18. avatarokto says:

    O NOES POOR DOWNTRODDEN WHITE PEOPLE

    Maybe when we don’t enjoy so much privilege at the expense of others just for being born, this will be worth caring about. Until then, I don’t really feel the need to get bent out of shape about being theoretically almost slightly discriminated against in a purely abstract fashion.

Leave a Reply

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