I recently swapped emails with a reader offended by my post on a Glock high-capacity magazine that looked like male reproductive organs. The commentator took me to task for calling the image obscene, and flagged my remark about the mag’s potential to enhance spree killer lethality. Das ist ein witz. I ran into the same problem with my post Three Reasons Not to Home Carry. Some readers thought I was serious. Avoiding irony and sarcasm—or at least slash-tagging it—would be the nice and easy way to do it. There’s just one thing: we never do nothing nice and easy. Nor does gun snapper Oleg Volk. The man just loves to piss off gun grabbers (bless his heart). Hey, someone’s got to do it. That said, tactically, I have issues with his work. In this case, if Mom is drawing, she should already be scanning forwards for monsters and dumping the kid and crouching. At least that’s the way I do it . . .

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

13 COMMENTS

    • Depends on the monster. If it is a sock monster (the guys that leave you with odd socks) any varmint round will work. If we are talking about the Sandman, 9mm through .45 is adequate. But if it’s Beetlejuice, break out the Ma Deuce and RPG’s.

      • Well, I use bird shot on sock monsters, anything bigger just gets buck. Sandman’l just laugh at a 45. You got a point about Beetlejuice, though. Ma Deuce, RPG and a prayer.

  4. My gut tells me that if the situation warrants a hand on the weapon, child should be somewhere bullet-resistant, not in my arms.

    On the other hand, this is hardly a “drop it like it’s hot” moment, either.

  5. “How exactly do you extrapolate that from a still image?”
    “How do you determine that she might be drawing?”

    I would guess the sign about monsters under the bed in trouble. The little girl is pointing somewhere, perhaps where the monsters are.

    That would be my guess.
    But then, that’s just me, I can’t speak for Mr. Farago.

  6. Little girl, “Timmy next door stole my dolly!”

    Mom, “That does it. Time for the mother of all play dates!”

    Sorry, I thought this was the weekend caption contest.

  7. Much of Oleg Volk’s work is encompassing a complex or multi-stage story in one static image. To critique one of those photos based on a fluid timeline (events occurring outside the frame and outside the time point of the frame) is a bit disingenuous. We can take any static image and posit events not portrayed which invalidate or validate what is seen. However, when evaluating an Oleg Volk photograph, it’s more effective to recognize that he is using photography as political speech, to tell a story and make a statement. Not as a primer on tactical DGU or firearms handling.

    That being said, Oleg does a consistently excellent job in portraying safe and reasonable firearms handling. Far above the average for firearms depiction in photography.

    For me, picking a photo and making a spurious critique…smacks a little too much of making points off of someone who is doing good work in firearms photography and advocacy.

    JSG

  8. @Robert F.

    I don’t have a problem with your criticism of the tactic(s) in the image. I mean based on the image, your criticism is founded… unless it’s not. The image depicts a fictional scenario, only the author of the image can expound the story beyond what we see in the image. For all we know the mother could have picked up her frighted child, and then put her down as she was drawing her weapon. In any case, it’s difficult to judge by one image alone.

    Standing alone, the image does serve as a good lesson on what not to do… or at least not what to do for too long (holding your child in front of you while facing a threat).

    What I find rather distasteful, is the disappearance of a comment (not mine) that was critical of you and this post. Just sayin’.

    • Please see the new post on the topic of our posting and editing policy. All further comments about our editorial stance or style should be made there.

Comments are closed.