I don't understand the mentality of intentionally damaging guns solely for photo ops and to make some thinly veiled suggestion that it comes from honest use. I've got 120+ year old milsurp guns that don't have the beating marks on them some of these guns do. Submerging guns in creeks, throwing them on rocks, then photographing the abusively inflicted damage and suggesting it's from hard use. Whatever. His junk, he can do whatever he wants with them. But not a person here believe all that [bleep] came from hard use. It came from intentional abuse.

[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]
https://vcdl.org/