I'd certainly hope that those stating that the decision is the photographer's responsibility would consider the repercussions of such an incident happening at KHSC.

If similar situations exist or have existed at KHSC, specifically at one of the action bays, regardless of livefire or simply dry firing with someone down range or in that specific "safe direction", I'd hope and expect it to be reported to a KHSC RSO or the KHSC Range Master immediately.

Consider any death at KHSC as a result of the death of a down range photographer would result in immediate range closure for an indeterminate amount of time.

Uhhh, did he bust out a Heraclitus quote in order to justify his bad judgment? If you think that was dangerous, then you are one of the 10 that don't belong or at least the 80 who are targets. It is in fact you who should be ashamed for not always shooting at a live person, you are just Peloponesian fodder.  Guess it worked because now I feel like a pu$$y for thinking what a dumb a$$ he was for putting someone's life in danger for no good reason then trying to justify it.  All that crap about creating realism and mastering shooting near people is BS.  He did not put the camera man there for training purposes otherwise he would have put a man between every target.  If I were one of the other guys in the class, I would ask for my money back because they didn't get the "realistic but not really dangerous" training.  I don't see his ass standing by the targets.

His incoherent posturing reminds me of the French taunting in the Monty Python movie. Well...minus the flying livestock.


Modified for this situation:
Arthur: Go and tell your master that we have witnessed an unsafe practice in his shooting class.  If he will change his ways, he may join us in our quest for training without going to jail for murder.
Frenchman: Well, I'll ask him, but I don't think he'll be very keen-- he thinks you are pu$$ies for even thinking that is unsafe, you see?
Arthur: (to Lancelot) What?
Lancelot: He says we're all pu$$ies....
Arthur: (confused) Are you sure that we are pu$$ies for thinking that?
Frenchman: Oh yes, you are all pu$$ies, even Heraclitus and the Pellaponesians say so.
   (whispers to the other soldiers:)  I told them Heraclitus think they are pu$$ies!
   (they snicker)
Arthur: (taken a bit off balance) Well... ah, um...   Can you not shoot two feet from a camera man's head?
Frenchman: Of course not!  You are internet commandoes who are too afraid to get out and train.
Arthur: Well, what are you then?
Frenchman: (Indignant) I am a real warrior!  Why do you think I do this bad ass training, you silly wimps.?!
Galahad: Why are you shooting at your cameraman?
Frenchman: Mind your own business! 
Frenchman: You don't frighten us, pu$$y pig-dogs!  Go and boil your bottoms, son of a silly person!  Ah blow my nose at your, so-called "safety rules"!
 
(the Frenchman proceeds to bang on his chest with his hands and stick out his
tongue at the knights, making strange noises.)
 
Galahad: What a strange person.
Arthur: (getting mad) Now look here, my good ma--
Frenchman: Ah don' wanna talk to you no more, you empty-headed animal food-trough
   wiper!  Ah fart in your general direction!  Your mother was a hamster, and
   your father smelt of elderberries!
Galahad: Is there someone else up there we can talk to?
Frenchman: No!!  Now go away, or I shall taunt you a second time!

I'd certainly hope that those stating that the decision is the photographer's responsibility would consider the repercussions of such an incident happening at KHSC.

If similar situations exist or have existed at KHSC, specifically at one of the action bays, regardless of livefire or simply dry firing with someone down range or in that specific "safe direction", I'd hope and expect it to be reported to a KHSC RSO or the KHSC Range Master immediately.

Consider any death at KHSC as a result of the death of a down range photographer would result in immediate range closure for an indeterminate amount of time.

But this DIDN'T happen at KHSC.  I think it's a pretty safe bet that this occurred on a private range owned by Tactical Response.

As a long time military aviator, I heard the words "safety is paramount" more times than I can count.  It always seemed a little odd to me, because if safety was truly paramount, we'd never fly any airplanes, or shoot any guns.  Flying involves inherent risk... and so does shooting.  Aerobatic maneuvers involve significantly higher risk of crashing than cruising straight and level to a destination, but pilots are still allowed to assume that risk for themselves.  Federal aviation regulations restrict where and how a pilot may fly acrobatically, primarily to protect others (in the air and on the ground) who are not involved in that activity.  In like terms, shooting involves inherent risk.  Drawing from holsters, shooting fast, and shooting while on the move involve more risk than standing at a square range popping off one round per second... but we're still allowed to assume that risk for ourselves.

I stand by my words.  Everybody involved in that video knew the level of risk involved, and I didn't see any evidence that the guy that runs Tactical Response in any way forced that photographer to take pictures from in between targets.  If ALL of those consenting adults understood the risk, it's THEIR choice to participate, and I've got no dog in that fight.  Like I said, I wouldn't be anywhere near one of those classes, I wouldn't sell them insurance, and if I had certified anyone there as a range official, I'd pull their certification.  But it's not up to me to make them stop.

But this DIDN'T happen at KHSC.  I think it's a pretty safe bet that this occurred on a private range owned by Tactical Response.

As a long time military aviator, I heard the words "safety is paramount" more times than I can count.  It always seemed a little odd to me, because if safety was truly paramount, we'd never fly any airplanes, or shoot any guns.  Flying involves inherent risk... and so does shooting.  Aerobatic maneuvers involve significantly higher risk of crashing than cruising straight and level to a destination, but pilots are still allowed to assume that risk for themselves.  Federal aviation regulations restrict where and how a pilot may fly acrobatically, primarily to protect others (in the air and on the ground) who are not involved in that activity.  In like terms, shooting involves inherent risk.  Drawing from holsters, shooting fast, and shooting while on the move involve more risk than standing at a square range popping off one round per second... but we're still allowed to assume that risk for ourselves.

I stand by my words.  Everybody involved in that video knew the level of risk involved, and I didn't see any evidence that the guy that runs Tactical Response in any way forced that photographer to take pictures from in between targets. If ALL of those consenting adults understood the risk, it's THEIR choice to participate, and I've got no dog in that fight.  Like I said, I wouldn't be anywhere near one of those classes, I wouldn't sell them insurance, and if I had certified anyone there as a range official, I'd pull their certification.  But it's not up to me to make them stop.

So you are saying that all participants were completely willing and not pressured even unintentionally to go along with it?

In the military, we have this thing called ORM or Operational Risk Management. This means you weigh the risk vs gain of each activity.

Are cool action shots worth risking the camera man's life and the livelihood of the shooter and range owner? Have they never heard of a tripod?

As for legality, I'm pretty sure it's legal for consenting adults to play russian roulette too, until someone looses.

So you are saying that all participants were completely willing and not pressured even unintentionally to go along with it?

In the military, we have this thing called ORM or Operational Risk Management. This means you weigh the risk vs gain of each activity.

Are cool action shots worth risking the camera man's life and the livelihood of the shooter and range owner? Have they never heard of a tripod?

As for legality, I'm pretty sure it's legal for consenting adults to play russian roulette too, until someone looses.

Actually, it's against the law in all 57 states to commit suicide.

The penalty is death ....   

Actually, it's against the law in all 57 states to commit suicide.

The penalty is death ....   

Nice Obama joke... Never forget

Everyone one of the shooters and the photographer are nothing but a bunch of FUCKING IDIOTS!!!

Everyone one of the shooters and the photographer are nothing but a bunch of FUCKING IDIOTS!!!

You're obviously not training realistically...

So you are saying that all participants were completely willing and not pressured even unintentionally to go along with it?

In the military, we have this thing called ORM or Operational Risk Management. This means you weigh the risk vs gain of each activity.

Are cool action shots worth risking the camera man's life and the livelihood of the shooter and range owner? Have they never heard of a tripod?

As for legality, I'm pretty sure it's legal for consenting adults to play russian roulette too, until someone looses.

I'm not saying that it's a fact that "all participants were completely willing and not pressured."  Note the word "If" at the beginning of my sentence.  IF anyone was coerced into participating, then that would be a different matter...  but we have no evidence of that.

Very familiar with ORM, and when we started using it, everybody quit saying "safety is paramount" because we realized it wasn't.  Once again, if safety was truly paramount, we wouldn't do things like shoot guns, fly airplanes go underwater in submarines, or get out of bed in the morning.  If the photographer was willing to put himself in that position (which it certainly appears he was, based on a follow-up video he did), and the class participants were willing to shoot with him there, that's their choice.  And they'll all have to live (or not) with the consequences of their choices.  Who should intervene?  Law enforcement?

Are cool action shots worth life and livelihood?  I don't think so, but once again...  Not my choice to make.

Everyone one of the shooters and the photographer are nothing but a bunch of FUCKING IDIOTS!!!

I'm with you 100% on that one.  And they have every right in the world to be idiots, as long as no one was/is coerced into accepting risk they would otherwise not be willing to accept.

You're obviously not training realistically...

Obviously.