…this:
…is at least better staged than this…
…or this (yup, Chuck Schumer firing a TEC-9)…
…and then there was this Russ Carnahan classic…
…oh, yeah, don’t forget this particular Dianne Feinstein dive-for-the-floor special…
…oh, wait, there’s more:
And that’s just at the federal level.
So, comparatively speaking, Obama’s photo op isn’t that bad. Sure, as somebody noted on Twitter Obama isn’t going to hit jack or sh*t by focusing on the gun barrel, and he’s pretty much begging for a nasty shoulder bruise by not having any padding there, but at least I’m not saying Get that gun away from that idjit before he hurts somebody with it. Swear to God, but it seems like the people who we need the most gun control over would be Democratic politicians mugging for the camera.
Obama’s Got A Gun
.
Have fun. I made a couple.
I went a bit wild, here is an example.
.
Early Democrat gun control was an excuse to murder freed slaves too heavily armed to quietly murder or intimidate into silence or cooperation. After Reconstruction, the Democrats owned many Sheriffs. Sheriff approval of gun ownership meant that they had an excuse to legally bring in any armed former slaves who wouldn’t bow down to Jim Crow. If they went peacefully, they could be quietly lynched once in jail. If not, Democrats had stuff like resisting arrest as an official excuse for hunting them down and killing them. The NRA was founded to counter this gun control closely tied to white supremacist terrorism. For those who remember this, modern Democrat gun control efforts could be seen as a sign that they hadn’t changed at all from their heavily white supremacist period.
.
This may be PR for continued gun control efforts. If so, he is still plausible as a White Supremacist. (Thinking about Critical Race Theory suggests that it is most plausible if those behind continuing white supremacism are those with the most relevant influence and authority, whose policies resemble historical white supremacist policies or which are otherwise horrifically destructive to human societies.) If your counter argument to that is the color of his skin, you are a racist.
.
Yeah. My usual illegible wall of text. I do think that there is an argument that if CRT has validity, it is most plausible that Sharpton et al, with their combination of historical white supremacist policies like gun control, the new great society type policies with white supremacist like effects, and being in a significant position of influence over much of those populations being oppressed, are themselves White Supremacists.
.
Post Reconstruction Jim Crow era gun control is perhaps the most significant reason why I am so rabidly opposed to gun control. Note that I described it as early. It was not the earliest. Remember the restrictions on slave access to guns?
I got you back.
Technically speaking, we don’t know for sure he wasn’t a history major. It is just likely. If he has a grasp of history, he probably is trying to implement a plan that has some secret element to it.
I have never gone in for conspiracy theories, and I am not capable of doing the photo shop sleuthing you other righties do. But my first impression was, “why is he standing as straight as a police trophy when the weapon goes off?”. Maybe we caught him just before the recoil, and maybe he really is as cool as he says he is, but wow, he is like a statue there.
Isn’t it a shotgun? Can’t a shotgun of that sort be loaded with a shell that is mostly cosmetic without too many issues?
oh easily. The Cowboy Action shooters do all these amazing things, but with loads that are 1/3 of what would be used for serious business, and I am including skeet and birds.
That barrel is darn near horizontal! He can’t be shooting skeet, unless they’re already on the ground. I see only one plausible explanation …
“Be vewwy, vewwy quiet … I’m hunting wabbits!”
Or they pulled the shot, and most of the powder out of the shell, and that is the first time he’s held a shotgun.
let me be clear. I doubt there are many good citizens who dislike Obama as much as I do. But I really can’t think of a sound reason why they would fake a photo of him shooting skeet. No one is really going to hold him to his word other than Fox, Limbaugh, and the right blogs, and the MSM and low information voters don’t care what we think.
If Obama faked this, it would reach a level of hubris yet to be imagined. My guess is that it is real. Yet, this shot is so much like Obama. A single picture with no background at all. Where are his pals? What do they have to say about their “all the time skeet” shoots?
I just think that it’s hilarious that we pissed off the White House enough that they had to get Obama to shoot some skeet. And that we make them nervous enough that they made sure that Obama at least avoided the obvious dumb mistakes. He looks like a guy trying it out for the first time and not like a deranged lunatic, in other words.
What would be REALLY funny, of course, is if Obama discovers that he likes shooting skeet. Then he’ll have to hide it like he hides his smoking.
Heh, I am with ya there Moe. That is the first thing I thought when I saw the photo. The fact that they released this picture is a sign of weakness. He said he will put all the weight of the office towards gun grabbing, but then he has to put out a photo saying “I like to bust a few caps as much as anyone else.”
If the press and electorate were inquisitive, it would all seem quite hilarious.
So…is this Obama’s Mike-Dukakis-in-a-tank moment?
Notice that the barrel is ported? I wonder why? Depending on your school of thought (and if you have no shooting experience, you could easily be sold), barrel porting can reduce recoil and reduce muzzle flip. Hopefully increasing your chances of killing clays. The combination of porting, backboring, and forcing cone lengthening can all combine to reduce recoil, too. Of course, this can all be accomplished by using a lighter load or a flight control wad. But the “optics” for a photographer wouldn’t be as good.
What is porting supposed to do? Help control muzzle jump/flip, and bleed off gas/pressure behind the wad. If you slow the wad and allow it to separate from the shot column, supposedly you get a better pattern downrange. Better pattern = easier kill, right?
I’ve used both ported and non-ported shotguns, but couldn’t really see or feel a difference. Porting on a higher velocity weapon is much more effective than porting on a shotgun, but, I’m just a silly girl. What would I know…
The shotgun doesn’t seem to fit, either. In my experience, fit, fit, and FIT are more important than any modifications you might make to the barrel. Maybe, if I had an inexperienced shooter who was a chicken, allowing my shooter to think that I was handing him a shotgun with lower recoil and a better pattern might convince him to “give it a shot”.
Well, I am hardly a target shooter, myself – when I DO get to go out to shoot things at other things these days, which I haven’t been able to do in several years, it’s going to be with a recurve bow – but I imagine that the goal is to get people on the range and thinking Hey, this is fun. As long as it’s safe, I dunno whether I’d say flashy was bad.
I am perfectly happy to be corrected on this by people with actual experience and training. I’m just this guy on the Internet. 🙂
A commenter at Steven Den Beste’s blog, Chizumatic, ID’d the gun as a left-handed Browning Citori 725 Sporting, IIRC. It’s a $3000+ scattergun. It has ported barrels because people willing to spend $3000 for a gun to bust clay pigeons want a gun that will bust clay pigeons really, really well.
.
I believe a recent release (last day or so, after your comment was posted) by the National Shooting Sports Foundation mentioned that several gun manufacturers have provided guns for sport shooting at Camp David. This may be one of those.
.
There’s probably some commentary in the Browning company being an American name on a Belgian enterprise (Browning-the-gun-company is, and always has been, to FN Herstal much as Chevrolet is these days to General Motors, or Mercury is to Ford), but I suppose I’ll let somebody else worry about it.
Heh. I’m actually cool with it being an expensive gun; the man is the President of the United States, after all. I have no desire to look chintzy about PotUS’s personal gear. 🙂
The funny part is that the picture can be used as evidence against O’bama as an admitted user of illegal substances he is in violation of 18 USC922(g)Section 3 who is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802));
I prefer crossbows myself.
h/t tip Open Blogger over at Aces