Let’s say I’m having some fun at the rifle range and decide to use a full-size picture of Hillary Clinton as a target. Would I be breaking a law? What if I decided to use a picture of the president?
Not that I would do this. Just curious.
If the local law enforcement felt that your actions were a threat, then yes. If they felt like it was humor, no.
That’s my guess. At least for now, you can get away with quite a bit in the service of humor (remember Hillary in bondage wear on the cover of Spy?) but anything that seems to be a threat against someone, and especially anything that seems to be a threat to the pres, is a no no.
Yeah, this would cross the line. And not just of good taste.
I don’t think it’d be illegal, but it would certainly be childish.
Well, Eddie Vedder of Pearl Jam impaled a picture of Bush on his mic stand, so go for it!
Or you can see Eddie’s act as childish ranting.
BTW, the latest Pearl Jam album is avail in my p2p program. FUCK YOU ED!
I am naturally not an expert on the laws of the US, but in his The Demon-Haunted World, Carl Sagan writes ( in the context of a discussion of freedom of expression)
“Gun collectors are free to use portraits of the Chief Justice, the Speaker of the House, or the Director of the FBI for target practice”
As a former First Lady, I’d suspect that Hillary is under Secret Service protection. Um, that is to say, Ms. Clinton is a former First Lady, not me. And I’ve never thought of members of the SS to have much in the way of senses of humor.
You do what you want, though.
Probably you could get into trouble for shooting at the US flag. I think there’s a law about not desecrating it. Doesn’t apply to me though, as I don’t live in the states.
Oops, got to go and put a few more Bush effigies on the fire, it’s getting chilly in here.
You know, I’ve never noticed that abbreviation before, believe it or not.
IANAL, but this seems like a clear case of free expression to me, although I agree with former posters who said it was in very bad taste. So, it probably isn’t illegal, but don’t be surprised if the owner(s) of the range kick your ass out. Some things just aren’t funny.
Burning and otherwise “desecrating” the flag constitutes protected speech under the first ammendment to the US constitution. There are flag codes that refer to how the flag should be treated, but these are procedures and NOT laws.
What if it was a dartboard or a paintball target? Wouldn’t it just be seen as a political statement, neither humor nor physical threat?
I’m also interested in a cite about desecrating the flag.
I’m not sure where everyone else is coming from. Using images of Hillary Clinton or George W. Bush for rifle practice – absent any other threatening behavior towards said public figures – is perfectly legal provided prevailing weapons-discharge laws are observed.
If you were arrested merely for using images of HC or W as targets, it would be an easy rap to beat, provided you were discharging your firearm in a legal place (a shooting range, a wide expanse of private land, etc.).
Now, if you did this when HC or W were in town … and did it within 200 yards or so of their travel route, or something like that – that’s a different story. But in ordinary circumstances, Crafter_Man, you may fire when ready.
On the contrary, gun enhusiasts of my acquaintance probably wouldn’t mind the Hillary target. 
There was a Supreme Court decision several years ago that said that burning the flag was protected as free speech. Everyone was furious at SCOTUS for it, and there was talk of ammending the Constitution to prohibit desecrating the flag, but nothing came of it.
…or while they were holding it…
Here’s a cite on flag burning, showing the dates of the legislation, the court decisions, etc:
As with most legal questions, this one depends on jurisdiction. I would suggest you check with an attorney or law enforcement in your area. There are laws in some jurisdictions prohibiting the use of actual representations of human beings as targets. Whether such laws would pass constitutional muster is another question.
Sure. Why not make it easier for Sarah Brady to paint every gun enthusiast as a bloodthirsty lunatic? As someone who supports the Second Amendment, I take a dim view of people who don’t think about the ramifications of their actions. Nothing personal here against you, but I think anyone who would actually go out and use a target with anyone’s face on it (possibly exempting Osama bin Laden) is just asking for trouble. Gun owner simply don’t need more bad publicity. In fact, we should be doing everything we can to de-stigmatize/mystify the shooting sports. Stuff like this doesn’t help at all. In fact, it just makes things worse.
Okay, end of rant.
Your link is way out of date. The house passed another call for a constitutional amendment in 2001 and just did so again this year.
Well, in my Sims game, I have a dartboard that’s been hacked to feature a photo of Bill Clinton, for my sims to throw darts at. (Couldn’t find one for Hillary or GWB, which I would have preferred.)
For what it’s worth, it sits right next to another hacked dartboard that pictures Osama bin Laden. Strangely, my sims prefer throwing darts at the Clinton dartboard than the Osama one…and nobody’s arrested them yet. 