Across California, police departments are rapidly expanding “Drone as First Responder” programs, triggering intense public backlash over warrantless surveillance and corporate overreach.
Across California, police departments are rapidly expanding “Drone as First Responder” programs, triggering intense public backlash over warrantless surveillance and corporate overreach.
I would advise you look into terminal velocity and see just how much power you’re working with firing 20 guage birdshot. There’s a reason you never see anyone getting injured by crossfire when hunting birds or skeet shooting, it simply doesn’t have the power.
You’ll definitely get rained on by birdshot though, it just won’t hurt.
I very much want you to try that
I’ve been rained on by birdshot, now go look at what I said
It’s very annoying how nerds who don’t even shoot spout confidently incorrect bs.
Guns are scary arcane sticks that go boom, infinitely complex and unable to be deciphered - better to never touch them or try to understand the physics behind them.
You said it won’t hurt.
So like… I chuck a small pellet into the air and it hits some child in the eye. And your claim is it won’t hurt.
And that sounds right to you?
Oh, you’re worried about kids?
Ok, I’ll tell you what - find me a list of kids injured by birdshot in the past 10 years and I’ll find you a list of kids killed by cops. We can compare the difference.
Also yes, outside of a freak accident it’ll feel like getting hit by airsoft pellets. Should we ban kids from playing with airsoft guns or paintball guns because they might get hit in the eye?
Well, they have helmets and eye protection for paintball and airsoft, at least where I live, so I suppose it has already been banned.
Maybe in commercial settings, none of the home games I’ve played ever involved protection. Ultimately there are no laws requiring glasses or helmets to be sold alongside either airsoft or paintball guns, which means it’s up to the people who buy them.
I’m not saying it’s right, mind you - airsoft/paintball effectively act as training wheels for gun safety. You should treat them the same way as a real gun, you can genuinely hurt someone if you’re not being careful.
That being said, I stand by my statement - if you’re concerned about kids you should 100% be more concerned with the inevitable confrontation with police forces across the U.S. than potentially harming someone while resisting them.
For what it’s worth, I’ve had birdshot bounce off a hard target and hit me in the cheekbone, and it stung but didn’t do much damage
You probably should’ve done a quick Internet search on that first.
Maybe you should have read what you shared.
The person I am replying to specifically mentioned crossfire… please read before trying to gotcha.
You’re right, now find enough instances of crossfire with birdshot that proves this is a regular occurrence and not a freak accident.
Edit: also the issue here is more that I said never. I acknowledge that there are freak accidents that prove exception to the rule.
You are correct and I missed the crossfire bit. Never point a ballistic weapon at anyone you don’t want to injure or kill.
That acknowledgement out of the way, I think you are trying so hard to win an argument, rather than acknowledge that your initial comment was incorrect, that you have drifted into making yourself look foolish (no hostility intended)
I think it has been well established that this was incorrect. Birdshot fired at an airborne drone is extremely unlikely to injure anyone, much less kill them.
Although technically true, these are not available for civilian purchase and/or are highly illegal to use, so they might as well not exist.
I get that your original reply was well intentioned, but it was ill informed. Hopefully this discussion has helped.
As long as we are assuming that “skeet shooting” always means birdshot then sure… but I grew up around enough rednecks to know better than to make that assumption.
As I said to the other commenter, so is shooting a police drone… the legality of disposing of police equipment isn’t what is up for debate here.
Yeah typically speaking what you shoot at will get hit. This is why gun safety is important, the people who unsafely shot directly at her are a hazard and shouldn’t have guns. She’s especially unlucky in the sense that she was struck in a sensitive area.
That being said, I’ve been rained on by birdshot and I’ve never had something like this happen to me. YMMV, but you couldn’t have found a more freak accident scenario to present.