I'm not sure how your reply would be "graphic" but understand given the current generations sentiment of being triggered.
150m is more likely. I grew up in a community where shooting deer at this range was not uncommon.
Loading their own ammo? I disagree wholeheartedly. I hit this range of targets very easily during qualifications in the military with crappy training ammo with iron sights, no optics.... And sighting in iron sights for this range is realitivley easy to learn if you are motivated to learn shooting basics. It doesn't require somebody to be trained. Just an understanding of marksmanship basics.
I agree targeting a human is a different requirement of staying calm.
I don't understand how you would say this is presumably a male. I grew up with country girls that could shoot as good, if not better, than their brothers.
Replies (5)
And I want to make it clear that this argument is meant to counter any insane premature conclusions that it was professional hit. It isn't that far fetched given what we know. Speculating that it is a trained spook or something doesn't do anything but erode the societal fabric that is already being ripped apart.
1000 to 1 odds it’s a male. Name even one female shooter in all of the mass shootings, or any other political assassination in the history of the US.
Hitting a deer at 150-200 yards is much different than hitting a guy in the neck.
You could be right though. It’s been a few years since I’ve been to the range. I’ve shot .223 at long range before, like 400-500 yards. But that’s multiple shots at a target sheet. I don’t think I could hit a 3 inch pattern, for instance.
Looks like the shot hit a bulletproof vest and the bullet fragmented / slid off upward into his neck.
That’s my exact argument against everyone who swiftly attacked “Leftists” for this murder.
This morning the investigators are saying video evidence points to a college age individual, so that doesn’t sound like a professional spook.
