This is not correct. Target is being used in two ways. One to describe the choice being made by the action player. In another way to describe the model that will suffer the effects of the action. These two things are not the same. You cannot rationally claim that I targeted model X, if I targeted model Y and, through a random process, Model X suffered the effects. These are simply game terms being used to describe "missing". If I(a person in real life) try to shoot person A, but miss, and hit Person B, who was fighting with person A. Did I "target" person B? Or did person B simply suffer the effects of my action?
Trying to appeal to the real world only makes your argument weaker, not stronger. Your only avenue to being correct is to argue that MLH wording refers to any and all version of what "target" could mean, even though I think it is obvious that it does not.
The entire reason why we have the randomization rules is to in game terms describe how likely you are to MISS YOUR TARGET. We know from both real news stories and TV shows/Movies that shooting the wrong target in this way is a pretty common event.