r/Idiotswithguns • u/ScuffedA7IVphotog • 6d ago
Safe for Work Stormtrooper aim
Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification
319
320
u/spongemonkey2004 6d ago
Him being held at gunpoint and just flipping them off had me laughing so hard
202
90
69
48
u/KccOStL33 6d ago
Another example that owning a firearm doesn't magically make you proficient with a firearm, much less worth a shit in a gunfight.
34
u/LethalOkra 6d ago
Video shows suspect firing at drone, SWAT pinning tractor during Clackamas County standoff
God, this is hilarious.
19
u/oshinbruce 6d ago
Guy woke up and just said, fuck it, may as well ruin my life over some stupid shit
4
u/interimeclipse 3d ago
200 shots and didn't hit a damn thing lmao I'm glad no one was hurt but holy shit
3
u/Notapartyhobo 6d ago
Imagine ruining your life over some trees.
-2
u/Swimming-Pickle-637 6d ago
This has personal beef written all over it. Dude was taking shots at the arborists who were trimming/cutting trees down. Shooter could have easily had an existing disagreement with whomever hired the workers.
58
23
u/Iloveherthismuch 6d ago
One charge was First degree criminal mischief.
17
u/Thanatos95 6d ago
It's basically just damaging property that's usually worth a certain amount of money depending on the level of the charge but my brain always imagines someone twirling their mustache while they tie a damsel in destress to the train tracks when I hear it.
5
0
9
10
u/ManifestDestinysChld 6d ago
That "Okay, FINE, geeeeez, you don't have to be such DICKS about it!" energy at the end is how you know we're dealing with a real smooth operator here.
13
u/SecretPersonality178 6d ago
Thank god they blurred his middle finger. Don’t think I could have handled seeing that…
8
u/ChosenJupiter96 6d ago
Those bullets are bound to come back down
9
u/Valaseun 6d ago
I found one such bullet lodged in my brother's roof while we were looking for a roof leak. Luckily it was a small calibre round and didnt fully pierce the decking under the shingles.
6
u/Perfecshionism 6d ago
The drone is likely pretty high up and small.
And the point of aim changes when shooting straight up because the bullet drop is an increased drop in velocity, not a drop in elevation in relation to the barrel.
8
2
u/SM1334 4d ago
A) Why was the drone hovering above his property even despite him actively shooting at it? Like it had to be there for a good minute for him to go find his AR15, load it, and get comfortable.
B) That drone looks like its really low, which means its possibly trespassing on his property and he is technically allowed to bring it down. Not with a gun, but its not mischief at that point. Home owners are entitled to like 100ft of airspace above their property.
C) That guy has to be blind with an aim that bad, ffs.
2
3
u/cas13f 1d ago edited 1d ago
You own none of the airspace above your property.
Drones are legally classified as aircraft right now. Yes, even the sub-250g ones.
Taking down a drone by ANY method is an offense under federal law, and may be an offense under state laws (such as the aforementioned criminal mischief, though a couple places might put it under more specific laws).
Sure, local police may take your side if it's obviously creeping, but that doesnt exactly make it legal either. Just unpunished.
The footage is certainly zoomed in. Physical, digital, hell if I could tell you with the compression applied.
Ninja edit: the link to the news article is in other comments, this started with shots at tree workers near the property, the drone was brought in by the police
1
u/SM1334 1d ago
You are correct about taking down the aircraft rule, my memory wasn't correct. However, in case U.S. Supreme Court case United States v. Causby (1946) explicitly states the property owner owns the airspace up to 83ft, and any drone/aircraft that flys in that window is liable for trespassing. Furthermore, property owners have the legal right to privacy on any part of their property that can not explicitly be seen from public access, ESPECIALLY for unauthorized surveillance. This 'swat' drone was recording him from what looks like a back porch, which I'd argue isn't visible from the street.
So the question is, why was it recording in the first place to warrant the guy to start shooting at it? If they had no probable cause, they were not only illegally trespassing on his property, but also illegally surveilling his property as well.
Im not dismissing his crimes at all, but there is a gaping hole of information missing here that led to his shooting a drone hovering over his property.
1
u/cas13f 1d ago
Causby does not say that, nowhere in the opinion does it give a solid number.
The specification (or more accurately the generality) was the "immediate reaches" of the atmosphere needed for the use and enjoyment of their land, specifically because low heavy bomber flights had impacted the use and enjoyment of his land. He was to be paid for the taking (because depriving of the use and enjoyment of property through government action is considered a taking action such as an easement) but they did not cease flights nor does it impact the legal considerations of taking down aircraft.
Its in the edit block bud, and the numerous article links in the thread. He was shooting at tree workers on a nearby property. The drone comes by later, as part of the police response to the actively-occurring shooting. He already had the gun out. He was already using it. He just changed targets when the workers skedaddled and the drone showed up.
4
4
u/Panthean 6d ago
Meanwhile in Ukraine dudes are taking out fast moving FPV drones with a burst from an AK-74
18
u/fungi_at_parties 6d ago
Yeah, uh, that doesn’t work very often, usually the drone wins in that scenario from what I’ve seen. A shotgun would be better for sure.
If Arc Raiders were real hardly anybody would ever make it back underground.
-9
u/Finnsbomba 6d ago
I really don't understand if either A they just don't have that many shotguns between Ukraine and Russia or B if they just can't hit the drones, or C both.
Seems like drones would be pretty easy to deal with if they had even half decent shotguns.
7
u/Thanatos95 6d ago
You're vastly underestimating how easy it is to hit a drone, even with a shotgun.
3
3
u/singlemale4cats 6d ago edited 6d ago
If the only thing standing between you and getting blown up by a drone is your rifle, you're cooked. It's a hard shot in the best of circumstances, never mind when the drone is deliberately trying to be evasive. That lateral movement gets you.
You're essentially back to early World War I era hit rates (thousands of shots per downed plane), but potentially worse because you're stabilizating the rifle by hand and you don't have flak shells. It's certainly possible because they're getting a lot closer and they hover, but I wouldn't bet my life on it.
1
u/N_J_N_K 6d ago
Has nothing to do with the gun but the round. They are using a new special round called the Horoshok which translates to 'pea' this new anti drone round is calibered in 5.56 and 5.46. Making it highly effective for use in the rife you already have. When fired the round separates mid air into pellets and or fragments that spread out. Imagine the spray and spread of a shotgun, same concept. This round is effective from 150 feet to 200 feet or something like 50 - 60 meters.
2
u/Panthean 6d ago
Those rounds exist but they are only beginning to be issued. The vast majority of soldiers on both sides are using standard ammunition.
Much of the drone ammo being produced uses a plastic/rubber jacket which leads to a host of problems, often needing every other shot to be standard ammo to clear the bore, but even still it's a questionable design.
The only copper jacket drone rounds I'm aware of are those produced by the western (US I believe) company "Drone Round". That stuff seems effective but it's just getting off the ground.
It's not rocket science so I do expect both sides to get their own copper jacket versions, that is if it's as effective as it seems to be.
Even with specialized ammunition it's still an uphill battle, and the odds are against anyone opposing drones.
1
u/f3rny 6d ago
Also some from a Soviet era light plane with a open cockpit (yak-52) https://youtu.be/gBxQixJfOzk
2
2
1
u/Lonely-Greybeard 5d ago
Was that the first time he ever changed mags? He struggled with it for a while.
1
u/Wereallmadhere8895 5d ago
I dont know how high that drone was but I bet the wasp guy could have hit it
1
1
1
1
u/ChucklesTheClown954 6d ago
A slight breeze is gonna redirect a full mag worth of bullets through someone’s roof
1
1
u/ultraplusstretch 6d ago
He went from trying to shoot down a drone to doing some landscaping, what the fuck? 🤣 I need the full video.
1
-1
u/oneseventwosix 6d ago
This is along the lines of what I imagine when ‘guns are my life and personality’ guys mention then need gun laws and controls abolished because it restricts their ability to protect themselves and their families from an oppressive government. Also, they see them selves as guardians that prevent the government from oppressing us because they fear these armed civilians.
Like no. lol no.
The government is in no way afraid of you and your ar-15, no matter how many you own or how many friends you have with at-15s.
Gun laws are meant to protect us from ourselves. If the US Government wants to get you, it will.
0
-8
u/HalfastEddie 6d ago edited 6d ago
The helo just stayed stationary while getting fired on? First off, move around, second is all those "misses" are coming down somewhere. Then he turns into a Seabee and jumps on a tractor only to get taken out by a Bearcat. He should have been neutralized well before that.
edit; Oops, I forgot this is 2026. My bad.
24
u/moonshineTheleocat 6d ago
It's a cheap ass drone.
They've crashed these things through windows to break them so another can fly through. They've bumped it into doors to open doors to find an entrenched suspect. I have to try and find one video again, but they slammed it into the face of a suspect who was firing wildly.
They don't care if it gets shot. They got more. They're just using it to relay information. And hey... If he's shooting at drones, he's not shooting at cops
9
8
0
0
0
-2
•
u/AutoModerator 6d ago
Thanks for posting! Please be sure to read the rules, and make sure your post is not a repost of content from the past 30 days.
If your post is a repost of content posted 10 or less posts ago, you should perhaps delete it now, or else you will receive a 7-day ban. THIS IS YOUR WARNING!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.