Tennessee congressional candidate Adam Heimerman was arrested for shooting four Flock Safety ALPR cameras, facing felony vandalism charges in the same district debating the tech.
I broke my foot a few years ago and can’t run anymore. I can’t play anymore but I’ve really been considering pulling my paintball gun out of the closet.
Let’s cheer you up by going to the paintball range and purchasing far more paintballs than we’ll be able to use in our allotted time. I’m sure you’ll dispose of the extras safely.
Basic gun safety states to know your target and what lies beyond it. Even a simple .45 has the potential to go through a camera, wall, and into a person, meaning that a perfect shot still has a non-zero chance of your bullet taking out a person or ruining someone’s day.
Using one of the first gun types displays foresight and consideration that I’d desire in a politician. The second type indicates a reckless figure who is uninformed about the tools and power that they wield, and doesn’t embody the values of a politician I’d trust.
It’s not enough to take action and be a badass; it’s important to also show that you’ll at least try to keep your constituents safe.
Well, shotguns generally are extremely range limited, and birdshot is pretty mild after a couple dozen feet. You’re not gonna hurt someone accidentally, even if you completely miss the thing.
Handguns and rifles have an extremely high likelihood of hitting something or someone behind whatever you’re shooting at and travel great distance. Miss the camera, and you end up doming some poor bastard just walking down the street a mile away, or hitting some kid chilling in their room.
If by “extremely high likelihood” you mean “a remote but non zero chance” then I agree. It’s obviously too high a chance to take when it could result in someone’s death, but there’s just to much empty space between people to make it likely he would hit someone.
I’ve seen people completely miss a target from 5 feet out lol. And even then, the cameras are mostly plastic. A higher-powered rifle or handgun round would just go right through and keep going like nothing.
Using what? Shotgun, paintball gun, pellet gun: I’ll donate to this campaign/defense fund. Handgun, canon, or rifle: go fuck yourself.
I broke my foot a few years ago and can’t run anymore. I can’t play anymore but I’ve really been considering pulling my paintball gun out of the closet.
Let’s cheer you up by going to the paintball range and purchasing far more paintballs than we’ll be able to use in our allotted time. I’m sure you’ll dispose of the extras safely.
Also, going to the beaches here in San Diego and harassing the people harassing the seals and sea lions.
Couldn’t have said it better myself.
Lol, what?
“I support it if he used a shotgun but by gawd if he used a handgun he can burn in hell”
This makes no god damn sense man.
Basic gun safety states to know your target and what lies beyond it. Even a simple .45 has the potential to go through a camera, wall, and into a person, meaning that a perfect shot still has a non-zero chance of your bullet taking out a person or ruining someone’s day.
Using one of the first gun types displays foresight and consideration that I’d desire in a politician. The second type indicates a reckless figure who is uninformed about the tools and power that they wield, and doesn’t embody the values of a politician I’d trust.
It’s not enough to take action and be a badass; it’s important to also show that you’ll at least try to keep your constituents safe.
That’s fair actually and does make sense.
Well, shotguns generally are extremely range limited, and birdshot is pretty mild after a couple dozen feet. You’re not gonna hurt someone accidentally, even if you completely miss the thing.
Handguns and rifles have an extremely high likelihood of hitting something or someone behind whatever you’re shooting at and travel great distance. Miss the camera, and you end up doming some poor bastard just walking down the street a mile away, or hitting some kid chilling in their room.
If by “extremely high likelihood” you mean “a remote but non zero chance” then I agree. It’s obviously too high a chance to take when it could result in someone’s death, but there’s just to much empty space between people to make it likely he would hit someone.
That’s fair acrually but I would hope he would walk up to it and shoot it and not try to hit it with a scope from 100 yards away.
There is truth in what you say though.
I’ve seen people completely miss a target from 5 feet out lol. And even then, the cameras are mostly plastic. A higher-powered rifle or handgun round would just go right through and keep going like nothing.