Posted on 06/02/2013 6:16:57 PM PDT by Sawdring
Today while I was planting the garden, a neighbor started shooting his guns. He is known to do this during the summer and for his bachelor party he and his crew shot constantly for four hours. I do not mind the noise and before today my only concern was how he could afford all the rounds he fires.
Today was different because he would shoot and then I would hear a bullet "whiz" through the air above the swamp and then thwack into the woods on the other side. This was right behind my property and I knew the bullets were ricocheting so I didn't know which way they would go next.
I live on the edge of a subdivision and his property is rural farm land. Another neighbor lady asked if it was dangerous to be in the back yard because she heard bullets in the air as well. I assumed it would be so she went in and I crossed a swamp and started whistling to get his attention. I introduced myself and told him what was happening and he wouldn't believe me. I explained to him that I didn't mind his shooting and actually appreciated that he was a gun owner but he needed to know where his bullets were landing.
I looked at his setup and all he was shooting was a Glock .40 caliber pistol, he had a berm in back that goes up to the railroad tracks and then our houses are at about a 30 degree angle from where he was standing and the barrel he was shooting at.
When I saw what he was doing I didn't think he was doing anything wrong but he would not accept that he bullets could even come close to our houses. When I got home I looked up our properties on Google Earth and found he was shooting at barrels about twenty yards from him and the barrels were about 480 yards from where the bullets hit woods.
Unless he takes some sort of corrective action, I'm going to play indoors when he starts shooting and if he hits my house I will have to call the authorities, have them extract the bullet and then we can match it up. I don't really know what else I should do.
Nice!
(you have powers :))
Looks like a farm building just to the right of the plotted path that is even more exposed.
LOL...The power is strong with this one...:)
Agreed.
Glock is OK for carrying in a holster (non-concealed). Please tell me how you can carry a Glock concealed - reach into concealment and grab it in such a manner as to not accidentally disengage the grip safety and touch the trigger.
If you answer it’s not a problem, then by all means, go ahead and let Darwin’s law get engaged.
Insult or no, it’s the truth.
If a volvo had a “feature” that turned off you brakes if your butt was in the seat, you would get what you deserve.
My SIG doesn't have a safety at all. When I pull the trigger, I expect it to fire. The real safety is between your ears.
Glocks do not have grip safeties.
It’s generally illegal to shoot across roads, and presumably railroad tracks, as well...
you are right. Even stupider, it has a “Trigger” safety.
That’t ok strapped to the side of your leg. Try pulling it from concealment and get back to me.
Or just watch the large number of videos on the internet of people shooting themselves accidentally with Glocks (trigger safety = no safety).
Hunting guns have safeties, and I grew up hunting with guns with safeties. You get used to the action, and it becomes automatic. Birds, deer flushed are much faster than you will encounter humans reacting, and you CAN walk through the woods with the safety on, and still drop game when it flushes....
It’d make quite a war cry as you flipped the release lever..”don’t shoot at me I’m just the piano player!”
Very practical
Interesting. I would like to see that done. I don’t think it would be as trivial as simply reverse engineering a gaussian blur and doing the obverse of the setting to put it back.
Once the data is destroyed (as it would be in a jpg once you apply the blur and save the image) the data is gone.
The analogy would be a picture that was not exposed correctly. There is a limit to the amount of manipulation that can be done on an image if the data simply isn’t there. If someone is wearing a black shirt and the basic image doesn’t have enough shades of gray to distinguish detail, then you will never get the detail out because it isn’t there to begin with.
I didn’t see where concealed carry entered anywhere into this particular instance. BTW concealed carry should be in a holster regardless of what firearm you carry.
So you doubled down and made a bigger fool of yourself. I’m done with ya.
I think you could have made your point without intentionally insulting people.
What you say may or may not be true, but there was no call to refer to Glock owners as the stupidest at anything.
Thanks I’ll give it a try.
I went out and looked around, and I did find a white paper that explained how it might be done mathematically, so I follow the rule of thumb: If someone can think of it, someone can probably do it.
I suppose it would depend on the type of filter that is used. If there is one that uses a more random algorithm to produce an effect, then it probably becomes a lot more difficult to reverse engineer.
I will keep that in mind for the future. Thanks for the tip.
Not to be picky, but . . .
F=M*a.
E=(1/2)M*V2.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.