Priceless

1.jpg (76 KB)

2.jpg (45 KB)

3.jpg (91 KB)

image005.jpg (47 KB)

Sighting in your expensive new deer rifle

1. Shiny new, high-powered deer rifle…………..$ 1,200.00

2. Quality, high-powered scope……………………$ 550.00

3. Bore sighting device……………………………….$ 140.00

4. Hospital Visit………………….$ 4,893.00

5. Forgetting to remove the bore sighting device prior to actually shooting the damned thing?
Priceless

GAME OVER

“Life’s tough……It’s even tougher if you’re stupid.”
-John Wayne

  • Leave a comment ?

    34 Responses to Priceless

    1. you should submit these photos to myth busters. They believe this to be not possible.

      Reply

    2. Mythbusters did not one, but two episodes on exactly these photos.

      Can sticking your finger in a gun barrel stop a bullet? 11/16/05
      Finger in a Gun Barrel 3/21/07

      Reply

    3. You’ll notice that nothing indicates that a finger was used to stop said bullet. In fact, it shows a legitimate blockage to the barrel, not random debris or someone’s appendage. So, if Mythbusters was so narrow minded as to test something with device A and say that the result shown above is impossible to achieve with not only device A but also devices B through Z, then Mythbusters is almost as stupid as you are, Bicoid.

      Reply

    4. i remember watching the episode when it first came out, but i dont recall exactly everything they did. im pretty sure they didnt try just a finger (ballistics gel) – that isnt nearly thorough enough.

      im calling shenanigans!

      Reply

    5. What’s a bore sighting device?

      What’s a bore?

      What’s a deer?

      Reply

    6. @LordPartyTime

      That seemed like a completely random hateful comment. Too much sand in your vagina today?

      Reply

    7. @evildick:

      For a guy named evildick you’re pretty sensitive. Maybe you should change your name? Huh? May I suggest eviljim.

      Sincerely,

      stupidmagnus

      Reply

    8. The make the bore sighting device bright red for a reason. Now why would they do that? Oh right, SO YOU REMEMBER TO TAKE IT OFF.

      Look at the bright side, the high powered scope is alright.

      Reply

    9. @ eviljim (I assume you’ll take Magnus’s suggestion)

      I don’t ascribe to your school of pandering responses to MCS subscribers personal feelings. It’s not hateful, but it is derisive of someone’s ignorance in relation to firearms, and if Mythbusters is ignorant enough to say that this type of situation cannot occur, then bollocks to them, bollocks to bicoid for listening to them, and bollocks to you for being Bicoids mommy.

      As for the sand, there is none, but my giant epeen is definitely enshrouded in some lovely meat curtains right about now.

      Reply

    10. @LordPartyTime: me thinks your using to big of words for the normal lurker to understand can you dumb that down for us?

      Reply

    11. i thought thats why they have pictures on the interwebs.

      Reply

    12. after about 15 seconds on google:

      Setup
      Shotgun with remote control trigger
      Ballistics gel hand with a skeleton cast inside of it for rigidity. The hand was attached to Buster.
      Ballistics gel bust for the shooter The bust was made from a cast of Grant.

      The Tests
      Test 1 (gel hand): Buster’s gel finger was stuck inside the shotgun barrel. The entire hand was blown apart with no damage to the shotgun.

      Test 2 (wax hand): They used a stronger ballistic hand made of wax to plug the barrel. The wax hand was blown apart but the shotgun barrel was ballooned slightly.

      At this point they declared the myth busted and moved on to trying to replicate the myth. They wanted to get a ‘banana peel’ result by firing the shotgun.

      Test 3 (dirt): Tory stuffed the barrel of a shotgun with dirt. The end of the barrel peeled back slightly, but the shooter was fine.

      Test 4 (Steel spike): They welded a steel spike into the barrel. The gun shot the spike out with only minor damage to the end of the barrel.

      Test 5 (squib load): A squib load is a bullet that doesn’t have enough gunpowder to exit the barrel. Jamie hammered a bullet into the end of the barrel. The end of the barrel bulged, but it didn’t banana peel.

      Not only was this myth busted, but MythBusters failed at even replicating the result of this myth.

      mythbusted While it was cool that they ballooned the end of the barrel, it didn’t explode, the hand was blown apart, and the shooter was safe.

      so they DIDNT use a bore sighting device, because that isnt what was in the myth. their job is to bust the actual myths, which is possible even if they can somehow replicate the results.

      Reply

    13. That Kari from mythbusters is smokin hot! Shiny object……..

      Reply

    14. @Teejx: Indeed… Love Kari. Science hotties are cool… 🙂

      Reply

    15. Hotties who know how to weld, and fire a minigun in a sundress….yup. Smokin. As for the pic itself: proof (to me) that money does not mean working brains.

      Reply

    16. compasseagle89

      It’s good to know, then, that everyone who though Mythbusters busted this myth is an ignoramus worthy of internet scorn.

      “Shotgun with remote control trigger”
      vs
      “1. Shiny new, high-powered deer rifle…………..$ 1,200.00”

      One must take into account muzzle velocity (how fast and how much energy the bullet has upon leaving the barrel) in order to obtain an accurate comparison:

      12-gauge shotgun (most typical shotgun type, since you failed to clarify which type) with a slug (yes, there are many different shot types, however “amie hammered a bullet into the end of the barrel” indicates a slug was used, since you can’t hammer shot) has a muzzle velocity of about 1600 feet per second -http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shotgun

      “The .30-06 remains one of the most popular sporting cartridges in the world.” so we’ll take the 30-06 as the supplied deer rifle.

      “Winchester USA Centerfire Rifle Ammunition USA3006, 30-06 Springfield, Full Metal Jacket, 147 GR, 3020 fps” – www.ableammo.com/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=74272

      So we see here that a standard deer rifle with a 147 grain bullet has almost double the muzzle velocity of said shotgun slug. So, you permutate the transfer of kinetic energy, and you’ll come to the conclusion that Mythbusters, and you, are both WRONG. This type of thing can and does split rifle barrels.

      Reply

    17. By the way, “The .30-06 remains one of the most popular sporting cartridges in the world.” came from wiki here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/30-06

      Reply

    18. That rifle appears to be a .270.. But it’s hard to tell based on the…well..split ass barrell.

      Reply

    19. .270 = even better

      “The load that made the .270 Winchester’s reputation was the 130 grain spitzer bullet at a muzzle velocity (MV) of 3140 fps” – www.chuckhawks.com/270win.htm

      Reply

    20. No information is provided on the ammo used. I’ve seen revolvers and semi-auto handguns blown apart by hand loaded ammo with a double (or more) charge of gunpowder.

      Reply

    21. Shotguns are designed to be highly underpowered compared to their bore size (which is good, since their godawful wide). LordPartyTime, assuming compasseagle89 is right about them using a shotgun, you are correct that Mythbusters has not in fact dispelled this myth, although if this type of thing can and does split rifle barrels as you say, I’d ask if you could provide some documentation. What confounds me is why you are acting so angry and derisive.

      Reply

    22. WistfulD

      I personally haven’t blown up a barrel because I treat guns very carefully, so I don’t have any peronal picture documentation to provide. However, I humbly submit images 1, 2 and 3 shown at the top of this page for your consideration.

      Angry I am not, derisive I am. The appaling lack of topic-specific knowledge that some posters (bicoid and compasseagle89) present in their statements is more than enough for me to curl my lip and sneer. I’ll not claim to be an expert on firearms, but I will not open my mouth and prove myself a fool.

      Reply

    23. Personally, I think relying solely on an episode of mythbusters as evidence of anything is a colossal mistake. They have a rather bad track record of using flawed science and employing incorrect test procedures, which often renders their conclusions invalid.

      Even Grant Imahara, whom I consider the only real engineer in the group, occasionally pulls a doozie. They aren’t all bad, but you’d be better off doing independent research and using their results as supplementary data to help interpret the your findings…

      It is in fact possible to banana peel the barrel of a rifle. Just because the myth busters weren’t able to do it doesn’t make it impossible. All it takes is a little research, to find many factual (not anecdotal) accounts of it happening and the conditions under which it occurred….

      Reply

    24. @LordPartyTime:
      dude, chill the fuck out. i never said what they did was fact. i clearly stated that i pulled that from google, and even then, its just a summary of the episode with it. the only words i typed in that post were “after about 15 seconds on google:” and “so they DIDNT use a bore sighting device, because that isnt what was in the myth. their job is to bust the actual myths, which is possible even if they can somehow replicate the results.”

      even you cant deny those. you can deny whatever else, because i didnt watch the show, perform the experiments, or cite my sources. but that doesnt matter. i was talking about the myth involving shoving your FINGER down a barrel.

      i dont understand why youre acting like such an ass. i never claimed to be an expert in this field, i merely provided the summary to a show which Bicoid brought up. point your tiny dick somewhere else.

      Reply

    25. compasseagle89

      You supplied the results of your search (and yes, sadly you forgot to reference your work)in support of someone who was making an incorrect assumption. That makes you, your support, and your views as expressed by your linked support, erroneous. What makes you the final arbiter of what exact verbage constitutes a ‘myth’ or not? I may have heard the ‘myth’ just as the picture describes the situation above: bore sight causes barrel explosion, or some derivision thereof. As you stated, it doesn’t matter: you supported an argument which postulated that this situation could not happen based on incomplete testing. Finger in shotgun vs bore sight in high-powered rifle: obviously not the same thing, quit trying to apply your incomplete mythbusters logic to a legitimate situation.

      I’m not acting like an ass, I’m just cheerily showing you to be the true incompetent that you are. I’ll be the first to admit that I have a smaller than average penis, and I don’t even use it to its full advantage. However, it’s already gotten more pussy than yours ever will.

      Reply

    26. @LordPartyTime:
      im not saying anything about whether or not this myth is busted! if i have no argument, then it makes no difference that the “test” was faulty. i dont care if the mythbusters sucked at proving or disproving this, because im not saying that they are right or wrong, as you seem to think i am.

      grow a brain.

      Reply

    27. @goforbroke:
      yeah, the more i was posting (arguing) with LordPartyTime the more i remember that image. i just felt the need to show LPT why they are being an idiot, though in the process i made myself look like one. i just hate it when someone is trying to make an argument by making counterpoints to the non-existent ones.

      trolling was NOT my intent…bah…

      Reply

    28. @LordPartyTime

      Curling your lip and sneering is almost never a good idea. You admit to not being a firearms expert, but deride others for not having “topic-specific knowledge.” You could have come off as an auspicious knowledgeable indivual, forewarning others from rushing to judgement on a subject just because it was mythbusted. Instead, because you started this conversation on the offensive, you have come off as a pedantic, pathetic douche who does nothing but ruin legitimate conversations and make the internet worse for your presence thereon.

      Knowing fullwell what it is like to accidentally make a fool of oneself on a forum, I will not pass judgement on you personally, but know that despite being “right” (in that mythbusters failed to bust this specific myth), you have utterly failed in all aspects of this topic because you have shown a complete lack of the social skills necessary to convince anyone on this thread to listen to you or treat your argument with respect. I hope that next time you come across a situation where someone believes something because of a faulty justification, you react in an adult manner and calmy and nonjudgementally point out the flaw in their reasoning and then converse, rather than contest, with them about their evolving understanding of the subject at hand. Discussions aren’t contests, and the sooner you learn that, the sooner those around you will treat you with respect.

      There’s a horrible stereotype about the ‘internet pedant’ and you have done your best to prove that stereotype true. I hope you can look at your own behavior and realize that it isn’t making your life better and hopefully change.

      Reply

    Leave a Comment




    Advertisements Alcohol Animated Images Art Awesome Things Batman Cars Comic Books Computers Cosplay Cute As Hell Animals Dark Humor Donald Trump Fantasy - Science Fiction Fashion Food Forum Fodder Gaming Humor Interesting LOLcats Military Movie posters Movies Music Nature NeSFW Politics Religion Sad :( Science! Sexy Space Sports Star Trek Star Wars Technology Television Vertical Wallpaper Visual Tricks Wallpaper Weapons Women WTF X-Mas