What can I say

[Dave Grubb]

Maybe hot dog

[Mike]

I've seen this before. I call BS. Fake picture.

On edit : Or, perhaps a false caption if the scope is mounted correctly. Either way, I cannot believe that the commander of one of our warships would be firing a rifle with a wrongly mounted scope.

[UTAH]

Caption says "backward scope." How does one tell? (sez the guy who is obviously not a firearms expert)

Hunter

[Truckman]

I haven't been around optical sights in a while...The scope (if mounted correctly) reminds me of a low-power variable Swarovski I had on a Ruger 10-22 I built...That was some fine glass on a very accurate rifle......Ben

[UTAH]

Hmmm... saw the Swarovski name and thought of the shining reflective crystals one can purchase. Looking Swarovski up on Wikipedia shows they're made by the same conglomerated company. Cool.

Hunter

[FredK]

Not good.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/commander...3844_129322662

The commander of a Navy destroyer that’s helping protect the San Diego-based aircraft carrier USS Theodore Roosevelt in the Middle East has been relieved of duty about four months after he was seen in a photo firing a rifle with a scope mounted backward.

The image brought the Navy considerable ridicule on social media. The San Diego Union-Tribune reported that Cameron Yaste, commanding officer of the destroyer USS John McCain, was removed on Friday.

The Navy said Yaste was relieved of duty “due to a loss of confidence in his ability to command the guided-missile destroyer” that's currently deployed in the Gulf of Oman. The statement didn't elaborate about why Yaste was replaced.

In April, a photo posted on the Navy's social media showed Yaste in a firing stance gripping the rifle with a backward scope.

Might have been a better photo op.

[Dave Grubb]

Here is a Military Source.

[Mike]

Wow, I had greater confidence in our military leadership. I am surprised. I wonder if the armorer set him up by mounting it backwards?

[Truckman]

The more I look at the picture, he is looking through the objective lens......Ben

[Dave Grubb]

It could be worse guys----had he known, he could have turned the gun around so the scope was going the right way

[UTAH]

Wow. This issue became much larger, and important, than I thought it would be.

Hunter

[Sandman]

Wow, I had greater confidence in our military leadership. I am surprised. I wonder if the armorer set him up by mounting it backwards?

Agree.. if picture is real.. it looks like he was “set up”.. maybe the Gunners Mate affixed the scope that way intentionally.. may be part of the root cause of skipper being releaved..

The command staff of a destroyer wound not normally handle small arms..

[Honda]

Back in the day when the military was not vilified by ranking officers this would have been nothing more than a haha.

[Sandman]

Back in the day when the military was not vilified by ranking officers this would have been nothing more than a haha.

Agree..

Note the hand on the Skippers shoulder in the picture..

Just a thought..
the original picture could be a “moral event”.. one of the Northern Virginia Power Stroke guys was a Gunners Mate on a frigate and told of “shooting events “ .. twenty five years ago the Navy/USMC still had a lot of Korea and Vietnam ammunition, because of its manufacture date they didn’t want to issue it in combat situations but it was ok for target practice. Story is that the frigate had several 30 cal machine guns in the weapons locker.. the ship ordered a pallet of old practice ammo and while at sea for extended deployment the weapon would be set up and the crew could sign up for a class that included target practice.. it provided training but gave a bunch of boarded sailors a chance to “play” with a real machine gun, something that they would probably never be able to experience otherwise..

Just a thought..

BTW.. in x1993 I qualified at NAS Patuxent River on an M-14.. fired Korea ammo.. we could examine an M-16 but we didn’t have an ammo allowance for the M-16..

[Truckman]

Note the hand on the Skippers shoulder in the picture.. it provided training but gave a bunch of boarded sailors a chance to “play” with a real machine gun, something that they would probably never be able to experience otherwise.

Both thoughts hold water, Joe...The spent brass in the air suggests full auto or burst fire, but look at the position of the buttstock against the Commander's shoulder...It would hurt to fire it, and offer less control unless the buttpad was lowered to a more comfortable spot...

And the hand on the shoulder not only looks abnormally large, but the shadow on it is in the wrong place compared to the rest of the picture...Also the "at sea" background seems out of place in contrast to the shooter's outline...I now agree with Mike's original idea that the picture is photoshopped......Ben