glenn1
Lifer
- Sep 6, 2000
- 25,383
- 1,013
- 126
Ya know, this article is right. If only we had a universal "ballistics fingerprint" database, a usable bullet specimen, the assurance that the shooter is still using the weapon as originally bought and hasn't switched barrels or other components, and a few hundred thousand hours of computational time to come up with a match out of the hundreds of millions of "fingerprints," we might find out from what store the gun was originally purchased. Of course we don't have any of the above, but I'm sure if we did that information would be most helpful to the police in cracking the case a few months or years down the road once the match came back.
"WTF does an American citizen need with a sniper rifle? Why are they even legal for citizens to buy? "
What makes you thing it is a sniper rifle?
Just being a 223 as I have heard reported would make it not a sniper rifle. No Sniper would pick a 223 as a caliber for his tradecraft.
Everything that makes a good sniper rifle makes for a good target rifle.
What makes you thing it is a sniper rifle?
Just being a 223 as I have heard reported would make it not a sniper rifle. No Sniper would pick a 223 as a caliber for his tradecraft.
Everything that makes a good sniper rifle makes for a good target rifle.
"Ya know, this article is right. If only we had a universal "ballistics fingerprint" database, a usable bullet specimen, the assurance that the shooter is still using the weapon as originally bought and hasn't switched barrels or other components, and a few hundred thousand hours of computational time to come up with a match out of the hundreds of millions of "fingerprints," we might find out from what store the gun was originally purchased. Of course we don't have any of the above, but I'm sure if we did that information would be most helpful to the police in cracking the case a few months or years down the road once the match came back. "
And of course since people do sell and give guns to others, the police or milirtary would have to search every single residence for all the guns in the country to get those "fingerprints". Since we all know gun owners will do anything to keep their guns safe, every house, yard, car, office and person will have to be searched to be sure we have all those fingerprints. While they are there, maybe they will find something else that you arent doing according to the law. There's no sense in wasting all that police time, they should get as many busts in as possible, because all this has to get paid for somehow and we all know tickets and property seizures are HUGE revenue sources for law enforcement.
And of course since people do sell and give guns to others, the police or milirtary would have to search every single residence for all the guns in the country to get those "fingerprints". Since we all know gun owners will do anything to keep their guns safe, every house, yard, car, office and person will have to be searched to be sure we have all those fingerprints. While they are there, maybe they will find something else that you arent doing according to the law. There's no sense in wasting all that police time, they should get as many busts in as possible, because all this has to get paid for somehow and we all know tickets and property seizures are HUGE revenue sources for law enforcement.
glenn1
Lifer
- Sep 6, 2000
- 25,383
- 1,013
- 126
Sniper rifles generally are the same thing as a hunting rifle. The U.S. Army's M24 sniper system is simply a Remington 700 rifle in .308 NATO (a.k.a. .308 Springfield) caliber.
Besides, the rifle used doesn't really matter compared to the skill of the person firing it. If you gave everyone on ATOT an M24 and me a beat up old POS Ruger Model 96, i could probably still outshoot all but a handful of folks.
Well wouldn't the .223 make less noise than, shall we say a .308? I don't think the sniper is making long range shots either (200+ yards).
What is your definition of a "sniper rifle"?
The fact that the media is referring to this whack job as a 'sniper', does not mean that he is using what is referred to in the military as a Sniper Rifle. He may be, but I doubt it.
A deadly shot at 100+ yards should be a snap for most any decent marksman, even with an M-1.
"Well wouldn't the .223 make less noise than, shall we say a .308? I don't think the sniper is making long range shots either (200+ yards). "
You might think so, and it is measurably quieter, but not significantly so.
My guess is the 223 was picked for reasons along the lines of, billions of rounds made in the last decade, the weapon is inexpensive and again there would be many of the same model built and sold in many different stores. Reasons that would make it harder to narrow down the suspect.
It could also be that the shooter dislikes heavy recoil, and is not a good enough shot to make hits at longer ranges.
This person must have been practicing recently and sighting in the weapon. Somebody has seen him/her do that and or sold them ammo. I'm sure the police are scouring the local ranges, but as I said above, that is still going to leave alot of suspects. that doesnt even take into account that this could have been done at places other than a range.
swiped from
Decibel rating
223, 55GR. Commercial load 18 " barrel 155.5dB
.243 in 22" barrel 155.9dB
.30-30 in 20" barrel 156.0dB
7mm Magnum in 20" barrel 157.5dB
.308 in 24" barrel 156.2dB
.30-06 in 24" barrel 158.5dB
.30-06 in 18 " barrel 163.2dB
.375 18" barrel with muzzle brake 170 dB
You might think so, and it is measurably quieter, but not significantly so.
My guess is the 223 was picked for reasons along the lines of, billions of rounds made in the last decade, the weapon is inexpensive and again there would be many of the same model built and sold in many different stores. Reasons that would make it harder to narrow down the suspect.
It could also be that the shooter dislikes heavy recoil, and is not a good enough shot to make hits at longer ranges.
This person must have been practicing recently and sighting in the weapon. Somebody has seen him/her do that and or sold them ammo. I'm sure the police are scouring the local ranges, but as I said above, that is still going to leave alot of suspects. that doesnt even take into account that this could have been done at places other than a range.
swiped from
Decibel rating
223, 55GR. Commercial load 18 " barrel 155.5dB
.243 in 22" barrel 155.9dB
.30-30 in 20" barrel 156.0dB
7mm Magnum in 20" barrel 157.5dB
.308 in 24" barrel 156.2dB
.30-06 in 24" barrel 158.5dB
.30-06 in 18 " barrel 163.2dB
.375 18" barrel with muzzle brake 170 dB
A sniper rifle can be anything from a 22 with a scope to a .50 BMG with a leupold, in the eyes of the media, as long as it kills enough people. Usually, sniper rifles are chambered in larger calibers, such as a .308 or a 30-06, rather than varmint rounds like .223. For all the police know, it can range from a .223 Remington to a match-grade AR-15.
Don't our military snipers use 50 cal bolt action rifles? I've read articles of how tey can pick off a target at up to 1 mile. Enlighten me.
BTW, I had a buddy, now dead rest his soul, who had a Hawkins 50 cal and could hit a knothole at 1000 yards. He was a killing prodigy. He also had a compound crossbow that he could hit a marble with at 100 yards.
BTW, I had a buddy, now dead rest his soul, who had a Hawkins 50 cal and could hit a knothole at 1000 yards. He was a killing prodigy. He also had a compound crossbow that he could hit a marble with at 100 yards.
BrunoPuntzJones
Lifer
- Feb 24, 2001
- 14,513
- 4
- 81
There are several .50s in use. Some autos, some bolts. Used for vehicles and stuff, not people. Like said above, most of them are large caliber. The M24 and the M40A1 being the most common military ones. Both bolts (both the same gun really)
It's not like you walk into a store and buy a sniper rifle. There are very few true sniper rifles. Reason being they are normally HUGELY freaking expensive. PSG1 runs $10k, SR90 Robar $4k, etc. Then add a few hundred/thousand for the scope.
What they are showing on TV are just match rifles. Your own government subsidizes the sales and supports clinics/matches for them. The .223 isn't anything close to a sniper round, it's for shooting groundhogs. Remember the military isn't supposed to kill people :disgust:, just wound them. Shoots a similar round to the one they keep showing on tv. The thing is that there are tons of .223 rounds. 22-40, 22-250, .223, .224, 22 Hornady, 22 swift, etc.
Majority of folks don't put scopes on them, as most can't accept them right out of the box. They make some with detachable handles with a scope mount. Just used for match shootings.
Who is to say it's not some foreigner with some foreign weapon chambered in a foreign round?
wow, that was a wonderfully balanced, well-researched, and logically constructed editorial written with no discernible agenda.
I'm sure the NRA will be willing to help with all the bullets they can send the snipper's way.
_______________________________________________________________________________________
Fuckng asshole!
_______________________________________________________________________________________
Fuckng asshole!
Think of the difference between a 'sniper rifle' (as the media uses it) and a common hunting rifle as being essentially the same as the difference between a stock Honda Civic and a totally riced-out Civic complete with non-functional body treatment, lowering kit, custom wheels and tires, Maxwell House exhaust tips, and a huge spoiler on the back.
Nobody except the ignorant would refer to the riced-out Civic as a 'race car', it only tries to mimic the appearance of a race car. Any common hunting rifle can be made to look like a military rifle, but the changes are largely appearance oriented and do not make the rifle any more 'deadly' than Ricer Accessories make a stock Civic a 'high performance racing machine'.
Its unfortunate, but a lot of people are ignorant about firearms, that they are easily mystified and propagandized by those who want to portray firearms in a 'demonizing' or 'sinister' way. The same is true for 'assault rifles'. True military 'assault rifles' are not available to the general population without strict regulations. The 'assault rifles' as the media commonly describes them are no different from common hunting rifles in function or capability, and are inferior to many hunting rifles in capability.
I mean let's use a little bit of logic here. Hunting rifles are designed to take down large animals from great distances. A 165lb deer is more physiologically robust than any human, has more muscle mass and density than all but perhaps the most elite world class athlete. Bear, elk, moose, caribou, gazelle, mountain goats, all of these critters are a hell of a lot stronger, faster, more agile, and physiologically robust than a human, all of which make them more difficult to bring down than any human.
For over 100 years, hunting rifles have been designed, in all sorts of calibers, actions, and loads, to exceed at this task, and brother do they exceed at this task.
Humans by comparison are weak critters whose brains are sufficiently advanced enough to contemplate our own pain, suffering, and mortality. If you shoot us, we obsess over the realization 'OMG, I've been shot! I don't want to die!' making it possible to incapacitate us just by psychological effect alone induced by even a non-lethal wound.
As far as 'sniper rifles' go, the 5.56mm (.223cal) is pretty damned weak compared to several very common hunting calibers such as a Remington .270. In fact, the .223 is inferior to MOST common hunting calibers.
The following is ballistic data comparing the .223 to another very common hunting cartridge - the .308 Winchester.
223 Rem 55gr. JHP or Blitz King Bullet
Range ..... Velocity ..... Energy ..... Path
0 ............ 3200 ........ 1251 ........ -1.50
300 ........ 1671 ........ 341.2 ........ -15.21
.308 Win 125gr. HP
Range ..... Velocity ..... Energy ..... Path
0 ............ 3150 .......... 2755 ........ -1.50
300 ........ 2349 ........ 1532 ........ -10.64
At 300 yards the .223 has lost half of its muzzle velocity and over 70% of its energy, whereas the .308 has by comparison still retains 70% of its muzzle velocity and more than half its energy, which is nearly 4.5 times as much energy as the .223. At 300 yards, the path of the .308 is superior to the .223 by 5 full inches. A trained sniper would chose the .308 over the .223 any day of the week.
The fact that the .223 is a "military round" doesn't mean it explodes or blows people to smitherines or can go through tanks or shoot down airliners. Its just a standard infantry round with no special or unusual capabilities.
What makes it a 'sniper rifle' is the fact that its being used to 'snipe' people and nothing more. By that standard, if I hid and in the bushes and killed people from 100yds with a 12-gauge (provided I were using a rifled barrel and sabot rounds to achieve that distance with accuracy), I would be using a 'sniper shotgun'.
Umm, I don't think so. I'm not saying you're lying to us, only that your buddy was lying to you. Unless you were just being funny or sarcastic and I missed it.
If the sniper was using a blowgun or a slingshot or frozen pigeons would that make all of you little gun-grabbing-piss-in-yer-pants-and-yell-for-mommy-turnip-brained idiots feel better about how the victims died? Well, would it? If brains were pennies there ain't a one of you that would be worth two cents.
Oh yeah, the NRA backing up some idiot on some stupid gun regulation would definitely make me feel safe the next time I happen to stop at the local Sonoco in Manassas, VA.
This all, of course, must bring any thinking person to confront the absurd and nonsensical logic of those gun control advocates and antigun politicians who claim they want to ban those 'evil awful deadly high powered military rifles and assault weapons whose only purpose is to kill people' while assuring the hunting and sportshooting communities that their 'legitimate' firearms will be left alone because they're 'not after legitimate firearms'.
Ok, so let me get this straight: You want to ban military and paramilitary firearms, but you want protect hunting and sporting rifles which, on average, can range anywhere from being two to five times MORE POWERFUL than the 'awful deadly and high powered' firearms you want to ban? ALLLL-RRRIGHTY THEN!
This position completely defies reason, logic, and common sense. There are only two possible reasons for advocating a position which is positively contradictory and illogical in nature:
- these gun control advocates and antigun politicians are fantastically ignorant about firearms and they don't realize the inherent contradiction and absurdity in what they're advocating
- these gun control advocates and antigun politicians are not ignorant at all and are well aware that what they advocate defies all reason and logic, but they have a hidden agenda which is exceptionally dishonest and deceptive
We know that antigun organizations and gun control advocates enlist the services of people who are very knowledgable about firearms, for purposes of research, formulating position papers articulating their support for gun control, rendering testimony and expert opinion, and who damned well know that hunting and sporting rifles are typically MORE POWERFUL than the 'military' and 'paramilitary' firearms they seek to have banned.
I personally, just as few thousand other gun owners, enthusiasts, and firearm experts, have written letters to more than a dozen gun control supporting politicians plainly spelling out for them with painstaking and easily verified clarity how their position defies all logic and reason. I usually get nothing in response, or a form letter response parroting the same ridiculous rubber stamp position.
One would have to be exceptionally naive or just deliberately blind to conclude that their flawed position is the result of 'innocent ignorance'. Bullsh-t, they know damned well what they're doing.
I at least half-way respect those antigun organizations such as the Violence Policy Center who do not attempt to deceive people about their goals and agenda. The Violence Policy Center freely admits it seeks to have all guns banned, every last one of them, starting with the public, and moving on to the police, then to the military. I respect that, its honest, unlike the other 90% of the gun control community.
Actually I think there was a guy in DC shooting people with a blowgun not to long ago. It would be kind of interesting to see someone try to kill a person with a frozen bird, I would probably use a turkey or chicken over a pigeon though.
Nope. Those are only good for short range assaults. Cornish game hens for medium duty killing, pigeons for long range, and the ever desirable hummingbirds for stealth sniping.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter