It Could Have Been Worse Gun Control by Robert Farago | Mar 06, 2011 | 33 comments facebook twitter linkedin email comments JOE MATAFOME says: March 6, 2011 at 20:35 This looks like a lot of the internet gamers we have at the range, they just shoot as fast as possible and don’t care what they hit. The shooters that worry me the most at the range are the “gamers” who don’t have a clue about real guns, but think they know it all because they can tell you everything about these guns that they use everyday in their fantasy play world. I was at the range one morning with my nephew and there was a group of nine gamers waiting for some range time. They were checking out all the cool “assault” guns on the wall and asking about the most powerful handguns that could be rented. The instructor behind the counter then asked the group if anyone had ever shot before. Only one of these guys had fired a real gun before, and it was his uncle’s big bad mossberg. I could tell that the instuctor wasn’t the least bit thrilled that he had to oversee these fools. I then turned to my nephew and told him that we would get some breakfast and come back after the “rambo” wannabes were finished. They last thing I needed that day was to get myself or my nephew shot by some yahoos who shoot at cartoon characters in video games. I love powerful guns(I’m into extreme firepower), but I fell safer when these guns are handled by people who know what they’re doing . Reply James says: March 7, 2011 at 00:40 So what? At least they have an interest, however deranged it may be. If it takes a few video games to get people interested in 2A, then so be it. You could have used it as an excellent opportunity to introduce them (along with your relative) to gun safety, safe handling procedures, safe shooting, and maybe taught them that real life isn’t like a video game. Instead, you turned your nose into the air, and in a very snobbish manner, waltzed out of the place leaving a small handful of uninitiated ignoramuses to fend for themselves. Just because someone didn’t get the introduction you got when you were young doesn’t make them dipshits unworthy of interaction. Reply Buuurr says: March 7, 2011 at 04:37 Jamie says, “So what? At least they have an interest, however deranged it may be. If it takes a few video games to get people interested in 2A, then so be it. You could have used it as an excellent opportunity to introduce them (along with your relative) to gun safety, safe handling procedures, safe shooting, and maybe taught them that real life isn’t like a video game. Instead, you turned your nose into the air, and in a very snobbish manner, waltzed out of the place leaving a small handful of uninitiated ignoramuses to fend for themselves. Just because someone didn’t get the introduction you got when you were young doesn’t make them dipshits unworthy of interaction.” Joe says, “The instructor behind the counter then asked the group if anyone had ever shot before.” I would say he did the right thing and left all that to the man getting paid to be in harms way wouldn’t you, Jamie? No? Reply JOE MATAFOME says: March 7, 2011 at 07:47 You make a good point James and I respect your opinion, but I know the instructor who helped these guys very well. His top priority is EVERYONE’S safety, and he watched these guys like a hawk as he does with every new shooter. I leave the coaching to the pros because I don’t need someone else’s AD to ruin my day or end my life. These guys were left in the hands of a very capable pro who would enforce every safety rule without exception. I,m better at attempting to help one or two with a few hints and I’ll even let them try my guns under my supervision. I hope I wasn’t being a snob because I love to see new shooters, but it just didn’t seem like the thing to do that day. Maybe next time I’ll try a little harder to help out some newbies as you suggested. Thanks for the helpful advise as it may encourage others to do the same. Reply Foghorn says: March 6, 2011 at 20:50 There is one good thing about the kids that just magdump at the range at nothing in particular: they never want to keep their brass. Every time I need new once-fired brass I just head down to the local range and wait. Works every time. Reply Wes says: March 6, 2011 at 21:27 I don’t care what anyone says; dual-wield mag-dumping is fun. Reply ScottyV says: March 6, 2011 at 21:46 Nah, He was left or right handed, and two handing it might have made it better, not allowing aim with the good hand…. duh Reply Jake F. says: March 6, 2011 at 22:12 It looks fun and all but would be irresponsible in pretty much any real situation I can imagine. I doubt that group was any better than 6 foot across. Reply Chris Dumm says: March 6, 2011 at 23:00 He somehow avoided shooting himself in the hand, and it looks like most (maybe even all) of his bullets landed in the same zipcode. Other than the Matrix-style flourish at the end, he didn’t look too much like a Darwin Award contestant. Just silly and borderline unsafe. Reply mikeb302000 says: March 7, 2011 at 02:23 It may be fun, but it’s totally irresponsible. The guy in the video is not much different from the young video gamers Joe described. In fact, those young men will become the guy in the video, who still obviously lives in a fantasy world. I don’t see how this kind of shooting fits in with responsible training and preparation. Guns are suppose to be serious business, isn’t that what you guys say, not playthings. Reply Anon says: March 7, 2011 at 11:46 …but it’s totally irresponsible Why? Reply Magoo says: March 7, 2011 at 12:45 Because the shooter does not maintain control of his weapons or the ordnance he is sending downrange. Maybe a third of his rounds find home and some are off by four feet. Reply Anon says: March 7, 2011 at 16:23 Not hitting your target on the range is not equivalent to being irresponsible. Likewise, up until that cute little flourish at the end, it seems both firearms were adequately controlled – all rounds went down-range, and at a shallow, downwards angle, from all appearances. Magoo says: March 8, 2011 at 00:46 Firing your weapon when you know you will not be hitting your target is not just irresponsible, it’s reckless. Target and Intention: When you fire your weapon, you need 1) a target and 2) every intention of hitting it. If you don’t have both these elements, there is no point or purpose in firing the weapon. Never shoot into the air, into the woods, in the general direction of something, or downrange for the hell of it. You must be in total command of your weapon and every round of ammo that leaves the muzzle. Anon says: March 8, 2011 at 07:08 So close, and yet still so far. We can assume (though we have no way of knowing) that the range this person was shooting on was declared “safe”, whatever that might mean to the people who did the declaring. We can likewise see that all rounds went downrange and, as I said, up until the end, all firearms were consistently pointed downrange. No one other than the shooter was endangered, and if he wants to risk his limbs to try out double-fisting, that’s his call. Your arbitrary requirements for “responsible” shooting (as if you were somehow declared the Grand Arbiter of such things) would preclude such things as ‘sighting in’, Knobb Creek, and countless other perfectly safe, perfectly reasonable shooting scenarios wherein no one is endangered or risked. Way to stay in the box. Magoo says: March 8, 2011 at 09:40 You know that guy who can think up ten reasons the rules are stupid and don’t apply to him? You’re that guy. If you pull this stunt at my range or club, you’ll be thrown out. Grownups are so unreasonable about these things. Anon says: March 8, 2011 at 10:52 Since my last comment got deleted, maybe this one will be permitted: exactly what rules did the shooter violate and how? Because assumptions on your part do not constitute rule violations. Magoo says: March 8, 2011 at 15:44 Well, rapid fire is against the posted rules at most gun clubs and ranges, including the ones I frequent. As is firing two weapons at once. Meanwhile, uncontrolled fire is against the rules at pretty much any range or club that HAS rules. This being uncontrolled fire since a good two-thirds of the rounds miss the target completely, many of them by several feet — at close range. Are these the rules you mean, or don’t these rules count? Anon says: March 8, 2011 at 16:37 Actually, you yourself said that those rules don’t count – the key word in your comment was “most” (which, by the by, is yet another assumption on your part, and a flawed one at that). If all ranges don’t hold to those rules you quoted (and they assuredly do not – some hold to even tighter [for example, two seconds between shots, which is completely asinine for self-defense practice, and a ‘rule’ every IDPA/USPSA/etc. shooter has violated], and some hold to even looser [do not hurt yourself, others, or any permanent structure at the range – and, yes, those were effectively the rules of a membership-only range I once belonged to]), then your entire comment didn’t count. Care to try again? And, for clarification, “because I don’t like it” doesn’t make something against the “rules”, despite your phobias about scary-looking guns and people sending lead downrange. Perhaps we should go back to the beginning? Specifically how was the shooter unsafe? Specifically how was the shooter “irresponsible”? Specifically who was endangered by his actions? And do frame your answers based off what little we can authoritatively know based off a few-second video, rather than the assumptions and prejudices that seem to run wild throughout your head. Magoo says: March 9, 2011 at 04:34 You asked why this stunt is unsafe. I explained. You asked for rules against it. I cited three. What more is there to say? Anon says: March 9, 2011 at 06:38 I explained. You explained what you thought, which is largely irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. I’m looking for something a bit more solid. I cited three. And simultaneously admitted that they’re likewise irrelevant, by not being standardized across ranges. I’d point out the obvious that he was not shooting at “your” range. What more is there to say? For you? Not much, considering you didn’t have a case to begin with. Magoo says: March 9, 2011 at 07:03 If you say so, but I still assert it’s pointless, stupid, and reckless to simply dump ammo downrange in rapid fire with no hope of hitting the target. And that’s with one pistol. Doing this stunt dual-wield merely doubles the stupidity on display. You may as well paint a big L on your forehead. Along with its complete ineptitude, it’s totally juvenile. It accomplishes nothing except to make a lot of noise. Firearms are not toys. If you only want to make noise, get a toy gun. You can run around in the parking lot yelling “bang! bang!” while the adults are on the range practicing real shooting. Anon says: March 9, 2011 at 18:01 And that’s what this all comes down to, isn’t it? Your self-perceived superiority over people who seem to enjoy the shooting sports’ different aspects other than attempting to shoot the fly off the dog’s back (figuratively speaking, of course). It was hardly pointless, given he enjoyed the experience. It was hardly reckless, given that the firearms remained pointed downrange (again, up until that stupid little flourish) throughout the entire shoot. And, as for stupid… well, frankly, that’s nothing more than your opinion, and thus completely irrelevant when it comes to how other people choose to spend their time and money. I’m so very sorry that not everyone shares your narrow viewpoint on the shooting sports, but that doesn’t make you any more right than an archer looking down on compound bows. AntiCitizenOne says: March 7, 2011 at 13:23 You should learn to fire with your support hand if somehow your primary hand is disabled or it is not economical to use your primary hand. Two-handing is still a bad idea though. Reply Ralph says: March 8, 2011 at 00:00 C’mon, mikey, and stop BSing us. You don’t really care about responsibility. You just want to outlaw guns. We’d respect you more if you were honest about it. Reply mikeb302000 says: March 8, 2011 at 16:03 C’mon Ralphy, you know I don’t. You’re just breakin’ balls again. Reply Magoo says: March 7, 2011 at 05:49 The guy is not an Internet gamer. He’s an experienced (?!) shooter who owns a number of serious handguns. Click through to his YouTube channel with 58 videos. Reply JOE MATAFOME says: March 7, 2011 at 15:25 This is hard for me to admit, but I agree with Mikeb and Magoo. LMAO Reply Buuurr says: March 7, 2011 at 17:10 You poor bastard, Joe. I know how it feels. I had to agree with Magoo the other day. Reply R. Stanton Scott says: March 7, 2011 at 19:08 I think it’s cute the way gun nuts put “Gun Control Means Hitting the Target” bumper stickers on their cars and then say uncontrolled firing of a firearm is OK as long as it indicates interest in the 2nd Amendment. Reply Ralph says: March 8, 2011 at 00:03 New troll alert. Reply mikeb302000 says: March 8, 2011 at 16:05 No, Ralph, new someone-who-disagrees-with-us alert. Reply John Fritz says: March 8, 2011 at 01:49 If I (or anyone) pulled that stunt at my gun club I/they would get my/their ass handed to me/them. Two-fisted terminator rapid fire is the kind of stuff I’ve seen at the public range. Talk about making you cringe! Interestingly, that’s one of the worst places to do this sort of thing because if a Pennsylvania DCNR Ranger caught you doing that, you’d be going for a ride. Reply Write a Comment Cancel replyYour email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *Comment Name * Email * Website Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment. Notify me of follow-up comments by email. Notify me of new posts by email.