Riot stopper

Status
Not open for further replies.
XavierBreath said:
Just a regular woman with a uber-tactical ninja type squirrel rifle, right? Or does a uber-tactical ninja type rifle mean you do not need tactics?
Click to expand...

Okay, let's take a poll: how many guys here own an AR?

How many of these guys who own an AR have taken an Urban Rifle or Defensive Carbine course -- not simply a "shooting" class but a class which teaches defensive rifle tactics?

How many of these guys who own an AR have wives who've taken Urban Rifle or Defensive Carbine?

Sorry to offend, just trying to give constructive criticism rather than blind adulation.
Click to expand...

Sure, because of course what I was doing was simply stupid, blind adulation. :rolleyes:

Wasn't offended by disagreement (that's how things improve after all, and if two people agree on everything one of them is unnecessary).

But I might be a tad irritated at your closing line, which was rather rude since it implies that anyone who disagrees with you is a blind fool.

pax
 
Isn't "riot stopper" a bit... ambitious? I don't recall any of the various people on roofs with weapons actually stopping the riots, so much as changing the riot's direction or target. And unless you've got something beltfed and plenty of ammo, you're still at at distinct disadvantage against any decent sized mob, just less of a disadvantage than without a weapon. So "standing between her family and the mob" would kinda be the last ditch, all other options exhausted, course of action. So (IMHO) a slightly greater sense of urgency would give it better context. A burning car or two Photoshop'd in beyond the window, or smoke/flame reflections, the room not brightly lit (and backlighting our anxious homeowner), crying kids in the corner, a now useless cellphone tossed on the floor. And lose the muffs.

I think you lose the point when it appears to be a Mom coldly deciding to face a mob with other options available, as opposed to a Mom having that choice thrust upon her and chosing action over passivity.
 
Oleg:

I likely.

pax:

How 'bout guys who have had training (courtesy of Uncle Sam) but don't own an AR15?

--

As much as it pains me to admit it, the AR15 is a terrific weapon for some circumstances & users.

For instance...my 5-foot-nuthin' wife, who likes low-recoil and light weight in her long arms. When I eventually buy an AR15, I will ensure she has the "tactical" telescoping buttstock, so she can get the correct LOP.

Showing a gal/mom/wife/etc with an AR15 as their HD weapon implies they know to choose the right tool for them for the job at hand, not that they are GI Jane.

--

Also, I would reiterate that mobs are not phased by the presence of daylight, especially if they have already scared off the local LEOs.
 
I don't remember any riots in New Orleans in 2005.

Lots of devastation from Katrina, lots of confusion and some roving bad guys, but no riots.

One of the most surreal things that I have ever personally witnessed was members of the 82nd Airborne patrolling down by the Superdome in an otherwise deserted city.
 
I like it, including the muffs. Look like Tac-7s. They also look (to me) like they are on backwards. Don't you wear them with the microphones pointing forward? Great image, though.
 
Pickin' Nits

Isn't "riot stopper" a bit... ambitious? I don't recall any of the various people on roofs with weapons actually stopping the riots, so much as changing the riot's direction or target.
Click to expand...
Technically, redirecting isn't stopping, but if firefighters re-vector a forest fire and it doesn't burn down your house, from where you stand they "stopped" the fire from getting to you.

I'm okay with "stopped" in this context.

I think you lose the point when it appears to be a Mom coldly deciding to face a mob with other options available, as opposed to a Mom having that choice thrust upon her and choosing action over passivity.
Click to expand...
Assumes much. While its possible, as you suggest, to stage it more explicitly, but my first impression seeing this is that mom has kids somewhere away from the windows and she's making sure nothing's headed her way.

One problem with explicit staging is that it makes the picture "busy" and requires more "gaze time" to get it. Many folks have a low "gaze time" threshold and you'll lose them if they have to spend any time on it.

I'd leave this photo pretty much as is.

There's room for a more "darkness" oriented picture, too.
 
i have a couple of issues with it

1. the earmuffs as other have mentioned. I think it distracts the viewer who isnt already a person knowledgeable about guns from the purpose of the image.

2. It doesnt seem like a situation of distress. The setting is too comfortable and she is overdressed and kempt. It just doesnt appear from the image that she is defending her home in a civil unrest situation. It just looks like she is modeling the gun. you could easilly replace the gun with a windex bottle and it will look like shes listening to her music while cleaning the windows. I just think the image should say what needs to be said in itself. And the words should just be to drive the point home for those who cant take it in visually.
 
i dont have a problem with her peeking through the blinds...but

i just the image as a whole doesnt say "im defending myself in a desparate situation" like this classic image.

by_any_means.gif
 
Standing menacingly on the front porch.
And she'd have to be a bodybuilder with bandoliers of ammunition slung across her chest.
Kind of a female Arnold Schwarzenegger.
Oh, and she'd have to be very scantily clad. Think Baywatch.

I'm kidding, of course.

But really, I think that the picture doesn't communicate the gravity of the situation. The picture's lighting is wrong (to me at least), and, though real, doesn't make it plain to the audience that she is fighting for her family and her life. Darken the lighting, make it seem like light is coming through the window(s). I know it's not as realistic as we'd all like, but neither are the people we're trying to communicate the message to. Also, drop the earmuffs. I'd wear them too, but they're distracting to the point. Contrast is a great way to communicate seriousness, so use it.

Just some constructive criticism from one artist to another. Good work, again, though, Oleg.
 
i noticed even the fact that she is standing casually and directly in front of the window could play a part.

if she was standing to the side of the window, inconspicuously leaning and peeking out instead of directly in front of it casually looking out

her body language and postitioning just doesnt say "defensive" to me.
 
Indie,

My photo was designed to mimic the one you posted!

Looking through all available photos, looks like I'll have to re-shoot.
 
I thought so Oleg.

I just think the body language and the other distractions such the earphones, the lighting, the perfect hair, the bright blue shirt, and it just appears that she is delicately lifting the blinds. It just doesnt seem like she is expecting to see anything hostile beyond that window, or it doesnt appear that there would be anything hostile on the other side of the window.

I think its a great idea. I just think the picture without any words communicates any outside threat like the Malcolm X shot.
 
During the Greater Los Angeles County Inter-ethnic Spring Festival of 1992 (we lived in Long Beach at the time) I seem to recall that some Korean-American businessman defended their property by force of arms, and those who did were not burned out by the rampaging sub-humans (term based on conduct, not race or ethnicity). Arson, assault, and looting went down in broad daylight, and the lady in the picture would be a lot safer than the groveling enuretics who depended on the government to save them.
 
I like it and the real beauty is that rifle would go with almost any shoe color that would go with the blouse
 
Pax,
I am finally back on.......

It does not take an "Urban Rifle or Defensive Carbine" course to come to the realization that it is foolhardy to stand in front of a window and peek through the blinds. All it takes is the fear of getting shot. This is not super duper stealth stuff. This is common sense when you have the fear of being shot with no chance of EMS to save your life.

I said neither stupid nor fool. Those are your words. I said blind adulation. Please do not try to make my words mean something they do not.

ad·u·late
–verb (used with object), -lat·ed, -lat·ing. to show excessive admiration or devotion to; flatter or admire servilely.
Click to expand...

As a writer, you know the value of constructive criticism, I am sure.

Sure, because of course what I was doing was simply stupid, blind adulation.
Click to expand...
I did not infer that you were providing blind adulation. I admire Oleg's work greatly. I was stating that I, myself, could give constructive criticism or blind adulation. I prefer to give constructive criticism. Again, please do not try to make my words mean something they do not.
 
I'm not too hip on the word "mob". Makes me think of Goodfellas or that Soprano crap. How about just "Rioters"?
 
And, I would probably ditch the muffs and go for a little more profile on the face. You can't really see an upset expression.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

B
  • Locked
Crime Stoppers
Replies
16
Views
945
damien
D
M
  • Locked
Crime Stoppers: pros and cons?
Replies
6
Views
2K
Thain
T
R
  • Locked
Crime stoppers asking for illegal guns
Replies
20
Views
862
jeepmor
J
O
  • Locked
UK Riots...
2 3 4 5
Replies
101
Views
4K
Larry Ashcraft
Larry Ashcraft
N
  • Locked
Similarities of the LA riot 1992 and Indonesian riot of 1998
Replies
9
Views
620
Al Thompson
A
Back
Top