5 ms·

What kind of non-military applications are there for sniper missions in the US (say, California)?

by pekk 14y ago

mjmahone17 14y ago
Do the police count as military? Because SWAT would almost certainly love to have better snipers. Also, javelina hunting.
aidenn0 14y ago
SWAT, though they tend to be much shorter range than this.
bmelton 14y ago
More accurate hunting results in a cleaner kill for the animal being hunted, as well as keeps missed shots from potentially ricocheting to unexpected places. Further, missed shots potentially contaminate water supplies (lead bullets). Otherwise, defense of one's home / ranch? I know that there are routinely horrible instances of drug cartels trespassing during the commission of drug or people smuggling across private property and literally killing anyone that gets in their way. Also, a more accurate rifle provides better defense against coyotes, bears, predatory animals.
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
- thefreeman 14y ago
  I know that there are routinely horrible instances of drug cartels trespassing during the commission of drug or people smuggling across private property and literally killing anyone that gets in their way. You know of this routinely happening? In the US? I'd like to see some sources for that. Also, a more accurate rifle provides better defense against coyotes, bears, predatory animals. You need to tag the animal, then keep the sight on the reticule for up to a few seconds before the weapon will even fire. I'm pretty sure if your 1000 yards away from a coyote or bear you're already safe. And if not, this thing is going to be far less useful then a regular firearm. edit: removed snarky question about whether the parent read the article. my b.
  - bmelton 14y ago
    I did read the article, thank you very much. If you look elsewhere in this thread you'll see that I remarked that after a few more iterations of the technology, they'll likely be able to sort out the delay from being necessary. Regardless, I think you're overlooking that the animal doesn't need to be 1,000 away for the technology to be effective. It also doesn't seem to indicate whether or not weapon need engage the targeting computer for each trigger pull either, but I think that, at least in future iterations if not right now, I would likely be able to manually fire via the trigger where it wasn't necessary. As for citations: - http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/director_staff/media_and_communications/pr032713.htm http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/director_staff/media_and_commun... - http://www.elpasotimes.com/news/ci_11770847 http://www.elpasotimes.com/news/ci_11770847 - http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/director_staff/media_and_communications/threatOverview.pdf http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/director_staff/media_and_commun... (linked to from the first reference I believe) - http://www.protectyourtexasborder.com/portals/border/Narco-Terrorism%20PowerPoint%20(2).pdf http://www.protectyourtexasborder.com/portals/border/Narco-T... Also worth noting that there is an unknowable amount of cartel-related crime that goes unreported for fear of getting on a hit list.
sliverstorm 14y ago
He's not arguing for it to be legal, he's making a jab at California gun legislation, which many people believe wastes time banning things that seem frightening but in actuality are not much of a threat. I think the subject he had in mind may have been the ban of .50 BMG: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.50_Caliber_BMG_Regulation_Act_of_2004#Controversy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.50_Caliber_BMG_Regulation_Act_... Such rifles are, as one result on Google put it, "the Rolls-Royce of rifles", and as my wiki link puts it: not only has the .50 BMG never been used to harm or kill anyone in California, there is no record of a .50 BMG rifle ever being used in the United States to commit a crime. One particularly choice comment from the time the subject was being discussed: we certainly don't want to wait until a terrorist buys one before we ban it Just think of all the things we could ban with that kind of logic.
- bmelton 14y ago
  Honestly, I don't think I was making a jab at anything in particular, just observing that it likely would be banned soon given California's gun politics. That said, I am politically biased in favor of the Bill of Rights, so I probably couldn't swear that my bias wasn't showing -- but at least consciously I didn't intend anything more than what was said. Regardless, you bring up some interesting points -- specifically that the 50 cal has never been used in a crime, but at least in today's political climate, the least criminally used guns are the most targeted by gun control legislation. I guess that logically, if the 50 BMG has never been used in a crime, then it should be obvious that it's already banned. I know that you can reload "California Fifties", which are just slightly shorter, which I think does point out the ridiculousness of the ban, but that's probably digressing.
  - sliverstorm 14y ago
    Aww man, and I thought I was so clever :(
    - bmelton 14y ago
      You might just be the "Obama Translator" of my own personal subconscious. I had to be careful about the way I refuted what you wrote because I might very well have been thinking exactly that, and it looks exactly like the sort of thing I might have said.

What kind of non-military applications are there for sniper missions in the US (say, California)?

by pekk 14y ago

What kind of non-military applications are there for sniper missions in the US (say, California)?

Do the police count as military? Because SWAT would almost certainly love to have better snipers. Also, javelina hunting.

aidenn0 14y ago

SWAT, though they tend to be much shorter range than this.

bmelton 14y ago

More accurate hunting results in a cleaner kill for the animal being hunted, as well as keeps missed shots from potentially ricocheting to unexpected places. Further, missed shots potentially contaminate water supplies (lead bullets). Otherwise, defense of one's home / ranch? I know that there are routinely horrible instances of drug cartels trespassing during the commission of drug or people smuggling across private property and literally killing anyone that gets in their way. Also, a more accurate rifle provides better defense against coyotes, bears, predatory animals.

deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
thefreeman 14y ago
I know that there are routinely horrible instances of drug cartels trespassing during the commission of drug or people smuggling across private property and literally killing anyone that gets in their way. You know of this routinely happening? In the US? I'd like to see some sources for that. Also, a more accurate rifle provides better defense against coyotes, bears, predatory animals. You need to tag the animal, then keep the sight on the reticule for up to a few seconds before the weapon will even fire. I'm pretty sure if your 1000 yards away from a coyote or bear you're already safe. And if not, this thing is going to be far less useful then a regular firearm. edit: removed snarky question about whether the parent read the article. my b.
- bmelton 14y ago
  I did read the article, thank you very much. If you look elsewhere in this thread you'll see that I remarked that after a few more iterations of the technology, they'll likely be able to sort out the delay from being necessary. Regardless, I think you're overlooking that the animal doesn't need to be 1,000 away for the technology to be effective. It also doesn't seem to indicate whether or not weapon need engage the targeting computer for each trigger pull either, but I think that, at least in future iterations if not right now, I would likely be able to manually fire via the trigger where it wasn't necessary. As for citations: - http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/director_staff/media_and_communications/pr032713.htm http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/director_staff/media_and_commun... - http://www.elpasotimes.com/news/ci_11770847 http://www.elpasotimes.com/news/ci_11770847 - http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/director_staff/media_and_communications/threatOverview.pdf http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/director_staff/media_and_commun... (linked to from the first reference I believe) - http://www.protectyourtexasborder.com/portals/border/Narco-Terrorism%20PowerPoint%20(2).pdf http://www.protectyourtexasborder.com/portals/border/Narco-T... Also worth noting that there is an unknowable amount of cartel-related crime that goes unreported for fear of getting on a hit list.

sliverstorm 14y ago

He's not arguing for it to be legal, he's making a jab at California gun legislation, which many people believe wastes time banning things that seem frightening but in actuality are not much of a threat. I think the subject he had in mind may have been the ban of .50 BMG: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.50_Caliber_BMG_Regulation_Act_of_2004#Controversy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.50_Caliber_BMG_Regulation_Act_... Such rifles are, as one result on Google put it, "the Rolls-Royce of rifles", and as my wiki link puts it: not only has the .50 BMG never been used to harm or kill anyone in California, there is no record of a .50 BMG rifle ever being used in the United States to commit a crime. One particularly choice comment from the time the subject was being discussed: we certainly don't want to wait until a terrorist buys one before we ban it Just think of all the things we could ban with that kind of logic.

bmelton 14y ago
Honestly, I don't think I was making a jab at anything in particular, just observing that it likely would be banned soon given California's gun politics. That said, I am politically biased in favor of the Bill of Rights, so I probably couldn't swear that my bias wasn't showing -- but at least consciously I didn't intend anything more than what was said. Regardless, you bring up some interesting points -- specifically that the 50 cal has never been used in a crime, but at least in today's political climate, the least criminally used guns are the most targeted by gun control legislation. I guess that logically, if the 50 BMG has never been used in a crime, then it should be obvious that it's already banned. I know that you can reload "California Fifties", which are just slightly shorter, which I think does point out the ridiculousness of the ban, but that's probably digressing.
- sliverstorm 14y ago
  Aww man, and I thought I was so clever :(
  - bmelton 14y ago
    You might just be the "Obama Translator" of my own personal subconscious. I had to be careful about the way I refuted what you wrote because I might very well have been thinking exactly that, and it looks exactly like the sort of thing I might have said.