Democratic Senate candidate Lucas Kunce’s recent attempt to court gun owners in Missouri backfired spectacularly when one of the reporters covering the event was struck in the arm by shrapnel because Kunce and former congressman Adam Kinzinger were standing too close shooting at steel targets without a proper backstop. Now it seems there are even more troubling issues arising from the epic campaign fail.
Here’s a recap according to The Kansas City Star. The Oct. 22 event held on a range near Kansas City featured Kunce and Kinzinger firing handguns and an AR-15 at steel targets positioned dangerously close to the shooters. Experts in firearms safety noted that such close proximity—around 10 to 15 yards—posed a high risk.
“It looked like they were way closer than they should have been if they were shooting steel,” said Steve Hendrick of Shield Firearms Training, who further cautioned that a cluttered shooting bench and lack of eye protection were evident safety missteps.
Kunce’s campaign responded to the incident by highlighting the presence of an NRA Training Instructor, although they refused to name the person. But when the Star dug a little deeper into the matter as any good journalistic news outlet should, they discovered Chad Everett Downs was the instructor. And here is where the other BIG issue arises: Downs is currently facing 17 counts of felony perjury related to a past child abuse case, according to Missouri court records. That suggests he shouldn’t even be in possession of all of those firearms, some or all of which may have been his according to unconfirmed reports. Downs insisted the shooting setup was safe and suggested the reporters had moved too close after being instructed to stay back. The article didn’t mention him saying anything about the shooters who, especially when failing to wear eye protection, should’ve also been farther back.
But these aren’t the only red flags; safety standards were reportedly compromised across the board. Hendrick and another firearms instructor raised concerns over the range setup, pointing out the lack of a dirt berm or sufficient backstop, making the scene more dangerous for ricochet and collateral shrapnel. Dave Kingsbury of PRS Tactical underscored the importance of a solid backstop when using high-powered weapons, especially in a public or media-filled setting, emphasizing, “One of the fundamental firearm safety rules is to always know your target and what’s beyond.”
The event’s planning and choice of location drew additional scrutiny when it was revealed that the range Downs maintained was part of a neighboring property, not his own, according to the Star. Downs reportedly displayed firearms at the event, although his ex-wife alleges he was prohibited from possessing weapons as a bond condition related to his perjury charges.
This photo op misfire, in a campaign already trailing incumbent Josh Hawley, opens a vulnerable flank for Republicans. Hawley and his team have since doubled down on mocking Kunce’s apparent lack of judgment, with Hawley himself questioning if the mishap was even reported to law enforcement, a requirement when any shooting-related incident occurs.
Cam Edwards of Bearing Arms criticized the campaign’s lack of vetting and disregard for basic gun safety.
“Kunce intended for this event to show he’s not a typical gun-grabbing Democrat, but the stunt instead revealed a shocking disregard for actual gun safety and a staggering lack of vetting on the part of his campaign team,” he said. Edwards notes that the situation adds to Kunce’s woes in a state where he already lags significantly in polls and certainly won’t help him with the much-needed 2A crowd.
At the very least, the Kunce campaign’s questionable choice of Downs is a head scratcher, given all of the great firearms instructors out there. Or perhaps their first choice was Hannah Gutierrez-Reed, but they learned she’s still a little tied up since her stint as the armorer on the movie set of Rust.
It’s okay, it’s okay.
We now have a Bush campaigning for us with the Cheneys. We got this.
Bush let the 1994 sicko clintoon/biden AWB sunset so everyone owes him credit for that. After numerous DC heart attacks and the passing of time I suspect liz like cackles of elderly abuse by underhanded man manipulation…connect the h…
h ttps://youtube.com/watch?v=zqeHVGXvyTc&feature=shared
IIRC didn’t W state he WOULD have signed an extension of the AWB, but Congress didn’t pass it?
His whole administration and family have turned out to be utter trash. I don’t care if he loves Trump, but tacitly supporting Harris? Pure evil.
some Republicans want their party back so they can conduct business as usual….Trump has interfered with that…the whole point of his administration
She is a longtime idiot prog lefty. More entitled Yale trash.
If not for the various drone options the idea of commies starting shit would be(tragically) hilarious.
Stupid is as stupid does.
If you need a Range Master to tell you the most mundane common sense rules for action reaction then you need training wheels on your firearm. If you are a dumbfuk who does not have the sense to walk away from a clown show then reap what you sow.
The safety issues and stupid here are obvious, but I do have one question…under the photo with this article, the caption “Senate candidate Lucas Kunce forgets to put his eye protection on while shooting an AR-style rifle for the media.”
So looking at that, it looks like he is wearing eye protection ‘glasses’.
Is that the correct picture? Because there are pics where he is NOT wearing eye protection.
I noticed that too. He has ear protection and what looks like eye protection on.
BREAKING NEWS: NEW SCOTUS 2A ORDER OUT NOW!
The United States Supreme Court has just entered an order telling Delaware to submit an opposition to the petition for cert in the Jennings v. Gray case. The order from the high court and the timing of it may have significance to whether the Supreme Court grants cert in the Snope semiautomatic rifle ban case.
h ttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=17U-5dhVMto
Neat was wondering when we would see more AWB movement.
Indiana Prosecutors Say Mass Shooting at Halloween Party Stopped By Armed Citizen > h ttps://bearingarms.com/camedwards/2024/10/25/indiana-prosecutors-say-mass-shooting-at-halloween-party-stopped-by-armed-citizen-n1226687
Giffords Blew It in Touting Gun Control’s Efficacy > h ttps://bearingarms.com/tomknighton/2024/10/27/giffords-blew-it-in-touting-gun-controls-efficacy-n1226696
Kamala’s Problem is We Know Exactly Who She Is. > h ttps://www.shootingnewsweekly.com/nra/kamalas-problem-is-we-know-exactly-who-she-is/
We need to make these dangerous weapons of war illegal.
which “dangerous weapons of war”?
There aren’t any ‘dangerous weapons of war’ mentioned in this article, and, to be fair, no such ”dangerous weapons of war” were not in use by this idiot. So what ‘dangerous weapons of war’ are you referring to?
If a weapon isn’t “dangerous”, is it really a weapon?
something being ‘dangerous’ does not mean its a ‘weapon of war’ or a ‘weapon’.
The point: If a weapon is not dangerous, than why use it or threaten to use it. I don’t want a firearm that cannot pose a danger.
As for a “weapon of war”; any weapon can be used for “war”. So they are being disingenuous when they claim one weapon is for war and another is not.
Most of my M4 engagements in combat were fired on semi-auto. I could have used one of my many AR platform rifles in combat just as effectively as a full-auto rifle. That still doesn’t mean one is for “war” and one is not. Stupid distinctions from our government.
I understand your point, it was the way you said it so broadly.
Weapons of war include flinging dead cows over the ramparts, and the occasional corpse that resulted from the Plague or small pox..
Show me a weapon, any weapon, that has NOT been used in war.
Every weapon in human history has been used in war.
When the left says “make weapons of war illegal” – what they really mean is make ALL weapons illegal.
They want you fat on processed foods and disarmed – like pigs to the slaughter.
“Show me a weapon, any weapon, that has NOT been used in war.
Every weapon in human history has been used in war.”
My AR-15 rifles have never been used in war.
I do have some firearms that were used in actual war, but they are ‘collection’ items kept for their historical or family history value. I even have a firearm that was actually used by a patriot ancestor to shoot British soldiers during the revolutionary war. Our family tree branches are heavy with family members who have served, I have some firearms from some of their service that were actually used in war including ‘captured’ enemy weapons family members took from enemy soldiers on the battle field or by capturing them.
zero – remember that the first murder was committed with an ordinary rock, hardly a ‘weapon of war’.
sticks and stones were the first weapons of war
designing a semi-auto rifle to look exactly like its full-auto counterpart is a major sales technique…when that was stopped briefly back in the nineties sales plummeted…today you have a hard time giving those guns away
And people buy dish detergent because one brand has cute commercials about how their detergent was used to clean an oil spill off of ducks . . . so the f*ck what??? I don’t buy my dish detergent because some cute little ducklings were saved from “Big Oil”, and I don’t buy a firearm based on it looking tacticool.
People who make buying decisions like that are the definition of low information consumers. The Garand M-1 rifle was OBVIOUSLY a weapon of war (the actual issue battle rifle of the US military through most of WW II, and for years afterward. For most urban combat, the M16/M4 platform is a demonstrably more usable weapon. But I’d take the M-1, all day, every day, if my battle conditions suggested I’d be having engagements at 400+ yards, or against larger (or soft ballistic protection) targets.
Choice of weapon for any given defensive scenario is based on . . . the specifics of that scenario (and what works for that defender, personally). What “works” for one person, might not work for another, and what works in one situation might not be ideal for another. IF you have the luxury of knowing your battlefield, and you have a wide selection of options, then hell yes, pick the one you feel most comfortable with. If (the most common situation) you are facing a battlefield where you are likely to confront a variety of situations, and you have to pick from a limited array of choices, you pick what is likely to be at least functional in most situations.
When I acquire a new firearm, I am familiar with what my preferences/needs are, I usually read a lot of reviews, and I have a budget to work with. Whether it looks “tacticool” or not, doesn’t appear on my list of criteria.
they love misinformation…always assuming the ignorance level of the public will let it fly
Guns are dangerous even in the hands of trained professionals.
KH/TW
Time to end this gun fetish madness.
Long live the Queen.
Go Away.
try ending criminal behavior first…and the queen Is dead…
None of those laws or safety rules apply when we are talking about democratic politicians and activists.
The entire Second Amendment debate could be resolved by simply prohibiting people who register as Democrat or vote for Democrat candidates from purchasing, owning or possessing firearms. Everyone else can manufacture, buy, possess, carry and shoot whatever they want.
The injury of the reporter is just another example of the firearm being blamed for the action of the human behind it.
Choices have both rewards and repercussions.
Are we gonna gloss over the fact that there’s also tannerite on the table?
While retarded not a particular danger with velocity involved for ricochet or splatter. Besides there was a lot going wrong long before that is an issue.
That’s my favorite of their retarded decisions.
This is what happens when the very people who are trying to rid us of our firearms are given a chance to show they are the ones that shouldn’t be anywhere near a firearm-
I have not seen any indication of what type of ammo was used, IF it was frangible I could ‘almost’ excuse them for their lack of proper safety protocols since those rounds are designed to be used on steel. Since the reporter was (allegedly) struck by ‘shrapnel’ I’ll speculate that they were using fmj rounds.
in a .223 even those are somewhat frangible…
Those were 25 yard pistol targets. At my club the steel pistol targets are designated as such with signs clearly stating rifles will not be used on the steel pistol targets. A 5.56 round will damage these targets and will blow back fragments as happened in this situation. Members of my club have been permanently dismissed from the club for doing exactly as these liberal idiots did. On top of that they had tannerite sitting all over the table. These idiots were bucking for a Darwin Award.
Before subsequent releases of cropped photos of the incident, I also noticed firearms on the table which were pointed in unsafe directions, what appears to be a propane tank just to the left of the targets, and many other no-nos. With all the left’s talk of “common sense gun safety laws”, they have no concern for real safety, rights, or lives of common people.
Pure idiots! Do as I say, not as I do!
A friend once told me , you know all those vc the moutanyards killed with their little bitty bows, were just as dead as those killed with m16s. All you eggheads don’t need to comment on my spelling, what do you expect from an old redneck. I reckon there be some panthers, bears, boars, wolves, and even wild dogs, in them there parks in Az.
Shucks replied to 2@ once without realizing it
anybody knows you do not shoot steel targets from 15′ to 20′ away with a high velocity weapon. and this man claims to be a Lt. Col. in the Marine Reserve, I have serious doubts!
Comments are closed.