Previous Post
Next Post

Guns! From the front! OMG! (courtesy

“This is what it looks like when a gun is pointing at you,” points out (for the visually impaired). “It’s a terrifying view that I hope nobody ever has to see.” See what he did there? Common mistake. Writer Casey Chan assumes that the person looking at the business end of these handguns (feel free to identify them and no cheating) would be a victim of a criminal assault—rather than a bad guy staring down the barrel of a weapon held by an armed American defending themselves against a credible, imminent threat of death or bodily harm (when imminence is imminent). Hopolophobes. Whatcha gonna do? [h/t Our Man Leghorn]

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. This is what it looks like when a gun points itself at you. When a person points a gun at you, there’s usually a hand involved somewhere.

    • Ralph, at a training session, there was a break in the fire so folks could go downrange to change targets. All rifles were grounded on the firing line with instructions that no one handle them while anyone is down range (standard stuff). One student was traversing the range and literally stopped before crossing the muzzle of a grounded rifle, altered his course, and walked behind it. He acted like it was a snake about to jump up and bite him. It was hilarious! Apparently, even for some gunnies, it’s hard to remeber that guns are inanimate objects.

        • To be fair to him, I have cleared a rifle, locked the bolt to the rear, and put it down and STILL have an aversion to walking in front of the muzzle of that same rifle.

      • In the army they teach us not to cross in front of the muzzle no matter what. remember all firearms are loaded all the time even if they aren’t.

    • The only time I have had a gun pointed at me, the only thing I saw was the cannon size hole. No hand, no person, just a huge hole that could spit death.

    • Wrong on that Ralph. Anyone who knows anything about guns, knows that they just go off! Duh.

    • Ralph I think you’ve failed to realize that the hoplophobes don’t realize it’s not dangerous without the hand thingy that goes around. . .

    • There it is. I felt a little odd that I couldn’t identify the revolver on the far left.

      I felt even odder that I could identify most of those from that angle.

    • Wow – you even got the Rhino! Dang, that’s good!

      My only quibble (and it is probably impossible to tell): what make of 1911?

    • The 686 is the most intimidating. The BG needs to see the projectiles that are going to ruin his day! Even better with the 686 plus!

    • ftw. couldn’t id rhino even though it looks like a rhino pointed at me. also, never heard of rhino. also I would only be afraid of the 686 actually hitting me

      • Rhino – Weird-looking .357 with the barrel below the lug and a hexagonal cylinder, made by Chiappa Firearms. The 6″ barrel version looks like something out of a steampunk novel.

    • I think the Glock is a 23, that looks more like a .40 cal barrel than 9MM. I’ve got a Gen3 23 and mine looks exactly like that one.

        • Assuming they are all to scale, and that the DEagle is a .50, then yes I would agree that looks like a G21.

      • The individual photos may not be to the same scale – the barrel on the 1911 looks smaller than a .45, if it is the same scale as the Rhino. And the Uzi bore looks pretty small for a 9mm. GASP! you don’t suppose this photo was … staged! And the handguns did not, in fact, pick themselves up and point themselves at the camera? I am shocked – shocked! to see such deception from a media puke!

        • The photos are definitely not to scale. I was thrown by the Uzi for the longest time, thinking it had to be some sort of airsoft variant.

      • Correction, it’s not a 19/23, I’m going with 22, reasons are the 22 has 3 lines in each finger groove, the 23 has 2/3/2 lines. Also it appears the magwell does have a cutout which the Gen3 22 does not have. I know they’re not to scale, but I was looking only at the glock in determining barrel dimensions. I’ve never seen a 21 so can’t comment, but I own a Gen 3 22 and 23 and after wasting far too much time looking at them and the pic I’m going with 22.

        • I’m offended as a Sig owner that no Sig was included. And of all guns to choose – a Glock? C’mon. Does anyone actually shoot those things anymore? 🙂

        • Well, I still shoot Glocks. Geez.

          Here I thought I was going to be a smarta$$ and be the first to ID all the guns. Damn day job. It’s really been cutting into my posting time…

        • Mark, I happened to have both of them sitting next to me, I wasn’t reciting that info from memory! lol. There’s also really one good reason I own Glocks, I live in MA. Glocks are one of the few decent handguns for which I could find pre-ban standard capacity magazines for reasonable cost. When I get to move to NH I’ll be varying my collection significantly. Might even add in a Sig 🙂

    • I was wondering about that revolver on the right with (what appeared to be) an unusually low bore axis.

      • It shoots from the bottom chamber of the cylinder when in full lock up. It’s apparently supposed to help muzzle flip. Pricey gun, like 800+ for the 2″ model. For that you could get yourself a nice heavy ruger gp100 to suck up the recoil. Also doubles as a hammer/club.

  2. I actually agree with this, personally I hope I never get a view of a drawn pistol on me. However if somebody compels me to present them with a similar view than I will have no hesitation in doing so. Their request may also be followed by an experiment on hollowpoint expansion in a soft target at no extra charge.

    • Another (minor) reason that I carry a SW 642. Unlike some pocket pistols, it’s instantly recognizable as a deadly weapon.

    • I don’t know–You can see the bullet down the barrel of a 4″ 1911 ’cause the hole’s so big.

  3. For me it’s a lovely art photo.

    First thought was, which one would most intimidate your avg., too lazy to get a job, would be best self dense weapon. 1st. on the left looks like a .38 revolver with hollow point bullets. If given the opportunity, I would beat feet if that one was pointed at me, if I were criminally inclined, which I’m not.

  4. first they are going to crap their drawers, then they are going to die. seems fair to me….

  5. 3rd from the right looks more like a 3rd Gen S&W autoloader rather than a 1911. Looks like my wife’s 3913 actually. No barrel bushing for one thing.

  6. Gizmodo (and a couple of other Gawker-owned blogs like Kotaku and Jalopnik) used to feature in most of my daily internet/coffee breaks, but a few too many of these “zOMG TEH EVIL GUNS!!!11” stories after Newtown made me swear them off completely. Good to see that decision vindicated.

    I don’t know when this happened, but somewhere along the way, the meme that all good internet geeks are anti-gun progressives became a thing, and Gawker has done more than their fair share to push it.

      • Fair enough. I actually seem to recall an article on Gizmodo where the author was completely aghast after looking through reddit and realizing that there was stuff about – gasp! – guns on there! On the internet!

        Guess it’s more a symptom of the general push in media to normalize the creator/publisher’s own biases than anything specific to the internet. Still annoying.

    • I know what you’re talking about, exactly. However, I knew it to not be true due to my time on Digg in the 2008 election runup, where a huge portion of the Digg userbase was rooting for Paul and the libertarian party. It wasn’t until the huge Obama media machine ratcheted up their spending, that a lot of Digg users started to switch camps, and Obama became the candidate du-jour of that site.

      It definitely seems like so many tech sites just automatically assume that techies are anti-gun democrat progressives. I mean it just must be, right? Anyone who’s not is just stupid! They couldn’t possibly be ONE OF US!

      Their heads asplode when they realize that the young generation is actually more likely to own guns – the scariest types of guns, mind you – than Gen X ever was.

      • There’s a fairly strong libertarian streak in the tech community as a well, which may be news to people who don’t know a lot of tech people.

        • Uh, yes. 1st generation for our department – 3rd generation for normal people. We could buy our guns for $290 out the door after the upgrade, so I bought mine and an additional one. The govt got them for around $800 apiece, so a good amount of taxpayer money was lost during that transaction. The second one had a high round count, so the deal wasn’t as good.

  7. As a gunsmith, one has to look down the barrels of firearms from both ends quite frequently.

    When sizing up how a shotgun mounts on a person, I have to check to insure the gun is unloaded, have them mount the gun, then I put the muzzle just under my eye and look back down the rib to see where and how the person is mounting the gun.

    I do it all the time, this is how gun fit is diagnosed: looking down the business end of a shotgun, which is a whole lot “scarier” than a handgun. It’s part of the business.

    When the nancy boys at Gizmodo quit clutching their pearls and having an attack of the fan-tods, give me a call.

  8. stop it!!! You are muzzle flagging me! You don’t know the FOUR LAWS!!! You are an idiot. You are a moron. You should never photograph a firearm again. OMGosh rally the Safety Sallies. We have a four alarm firearm safety photo emergency here!!!

    • OK, deep breath, calmness —————– no fingers on the triggers.

      Of course, the twits that published the photo believe that the guns can shoot themselves.

  9. I am such a gun dork that I thought the photo was kind of cool. Until I saw it I did not really get how incredibly rare it is for me to actually see a handgun from the view of the target.

  10. Well, I hope no one ever has to see it either, except when a bore light is involved.

    After all, it’s wishing against holdups of the unarmed, and that bad guys will all get jobs so noone has ever to draw on them.

    Everybody wins…

  11. When I first became a hoplophile I got a piece of advice from a wise old sage I have the pleasure of working with:

    After cleaning your firearms, put them away for AT LEAST a half hour and don’t touch them.

    The reasoning being that while cleaning/maintaining firearms there is a tendency to do all sorts of unnatural things, such as looking down the muzzle. This puts you in an unsafe mindset. The obligatory “cool down” period afterward helps the mind to reset into normal operating procedures.

    • That’s actually pretty good advice. Simunitions training scares the crap out of me because of what it does to gun handling mindset. I suppose I’ve just been at it so long that I feel pretty sanguine holstering my pistol after a cleaning these days, but you’re dead right, the unnatural things ones does with it don’t support a good mindset ones it’s ‘live’ again.

  12. Did anyone else click all the way through and notice on their contact/order page they show a couple of examples that are three and five feet tall?

    Honestly, I don’t really care if the guy that took them is anti-gun (which has yet to be proven). That revolver in a five foot tall print is something I’d seriously consider paying for. (I’d love it if they had a SIG, but since they don’t the revolver is the next best thing from where I’m sitting. The Deagle is neat, but honestly fairly visually uninteresting.)

  13. Hmm, definitely no 1911. . . it’s not that I didn’t recognize most of the rest. . . but due to the take down 1911 guys get to see the muzzles of their pistols a lot. As they say, never point it at anything you don’t want to destroy, except your hand when you routinely take it down for cleaning.

Comments are closed.