Minority Rights

[Michael McMahon]

Once more, can you answer the question ?
Have you forgotten what it was ?

A sniper at the highest vantage point in the city with a 360 degree view could overlook several square kilometres around them. The number of snipers would depend on the size of the city and the number of other skyscrapers that block their view. They'd probably be able to multitask and do other office work on the top floors when they're not alerted to an emergency.

 

[Rich2018]

A sniper at the highest vantage point in the city with a 360 degree view could overlook several square kilometres around them. The number of snipers would depend on the size of the city and the number of other skyscrapers that block their view. They'd probably be able to multitask and do other office work on the top floors when they're not alerted to an emergency.

You need the question again ?

 

[Michael McMahon]

You need the question again ?

A sniper outpost could reduce casualties for outdoor mass shootings. For attacks that happen indoor they'd then have to travel to the building. Nonetheless a dedicated sniper team in the SWAT unit could come in handy.

 

[Michael McMahon]

It still runs foul of the 2A.

Americans will have to decide whether to interpret the 2nd amendment metaphorically in the sense of representing minorities or literally where everyone is armed. They say the gun symbolises freedom but a symbol is an abstract comparison after all. If you're a soldier with a gun then it's not immediately obvious that the gun represents freedom because soldiers have to follow the orders of their commanders. There can also be other symbols of freedom like the multiplicity of religions in America.

"The letter of the law is what the law states; the spirit of the law is a social and moral consensus of the interpretation of the letter."

 

[Rich2018]

A sniper outpost could reduce casualties for outdoor mass shootings. For attacks that happen indoor they'd then have to travel to the building. Nonetheless a dedicated sniper team in the SWAT unit could come in handy.

Are you being deliberately obtuse ?

Why don't you answer the question ?

Americans will have to decide whether to interpret the 2nd amendment metaphorically in the sense of representing minorities or literally where everyone is armed. They say the gun symbolises freedom but a symbol is an abstract comparison after all. If you're a soldier with a gun then it's not immediately obvious that the gun represents freedom because soldiers have to follow the orders of their commanders. There can also be other symbols of freedom like the multiplicity of religions in America.

"The letter of the law is what the law states; the spirit of the law is a social and moral consensus of the interpretation of the letter."

What do you mean by "will" ?

 

[Michael McMahon]

Why don't you answer the question ?

I'm not a statistician so I won't be weighing up population concentrations, relative building heights and police to civilian ratios. Anyway I was only commenting on cities and not towns or rural areas.

What do you mean by "will" ?

Not everyone has analysed it yet where a few voters seem to be procrastinating or complacently ignoring the problem and so the future tense will have to be used.

 

[Rich2018]

I'm not a statistician so I won't be weighing up population concentrations, relative building heights and police to civilian ratios. Anyway I was only commenting on cities and not towns or rural areas.

So you've made an assertion, and then admitted you have no idea how many "snipers" would be required ?

1,000, 10,000, 1,000,000, 10,000,000 ?

You have no idea what you're talking about do you ?

Not everyone has analysed it yet where a few voters seem to be procrastinating or complacently ignoring the problem and so the future tense will have to be used.

Who is there yet to "analyze it" ?

 

[Michael McMahon]

1,000, 10,000, 1,000,000, 10,000,000 ?

Well if you had one sniper on the blue roof of the building beside the Eiffel Tower structure then they'd see all the way to the mountain in the distance. Likewise you could probably fit 10 snipers somewhere along those tall buildings to protect the city centre from terrorism. Multiplying the snipers will give you a better safety net in case a sniper's view is occulted by another building. Thus how safe you wanted to make it is subjective depending on your finances. It's also subject to the amount of leeway you deem acceptable for the response times if they needed to travel on foot to get into another location to see the target.

 

[bomberfox]

No, I’m asking you to support your misleading assertion.



Members of both major parties do have a voice in the selection/promotion of flag officers (O7-O10). A flag officer board makes recommendations to the President, who then nominates individuals to the Senate for confirmation.

And as our military has always been, and continues to be an apolitical arm of our federal government, any (irrational) concerns of potential “tyranny” by our military are completely unfounded.

Chile had that tradition before Pinochet.

 

[Rich2018]

Well if you had one sniper on the blue roof of the building beside the Eiffel Tower structure then they'd see all the way to the mountain in the distance. Likewise you could probably fit 10 snipers somewhere along those tall buildings to protect the city centre from terrorism. Multiplying the snipers will give you a better safety net in case a sniper's view is occulted by another building. Thus how safe you wanted to make it is subjective depending on your finances. It's also subject to the amount of leeway you deem acceptable for the response times if they needed to travel on foot to get into another location to see the target.

View attachment 67360568

No they wouldn't, they wouldn't see the sides of buildings that faced away from them.

 

[Michael McMahon]

No they wouldn't, they wouldn't see the sides of buildings that faced away from them.

There are plenty of discussion about ghost guns when you have 3D printers and so forth. Perhaps we'll have to regulate and get licenses for such printers if it becomes a problem! I can go into a forrest and possibly construct a crude bow-and-arrow but I won't ever be able to come out with the ingredients to build rifles and gunpowder. People have been at war since eternity but it was only in the first millennium that gun powder was introduced to the battle scene. Without modern technology we can't make accurate guns. A ghost gun would still need a lot of detail carved into it so as to be more effective than a musket.

 

[Rich2018]

There are plenty of discussion about ghost guns when you have 3D printers and so forth.

What have 3D printers got to do with a field of view ?

 

[Michael McMahon]

What have 3D printers got to do with a field of view ?

If the police knew the GPS location of a sniper mass shooter then a guided missile from artillery would be capable of hitting the perpetrator rapidly.

 

[Rich2018]

If the police knew the GPS location of a sniper mass shooter then a guided missile from artillery would be capable of hitting the perpetrator rapidly.

But he might have fortified his position...

Wouldn't a nuke be more certain ?

 

[Michael McMahon]

Wouldn't a nuke be more certain ?

What if criminals reciprocate with nuclear missiles on the black market! Best to stay with conventional warfare to avoid escalation, civilian casualties and nuclear proliferation. I mentioned before in #410 how common criminals won't have much motive to buy a gun with the risk of added jail time if the police and civilians are also unarmed.

 

[Michael McMahon]

If all 330 million American citizen's had a gun on them at all times, then a gun would never be an extra advantage in a defensive encounter seeing as the perpetrator will always be armed as well.

 

[Michael McMahon]

A further problem with viewing guns as an equaliser is not only the increased arm accuracy that upper body strength gives but also that cardiovascular agility and stamina isn't irrelevant. Running to cover, grabbing your gun and dodging the aim of others all depend on fast movements and reflexive reaction speeds. Granted, running isn't as necessary for snipers and long guns. But when it comes to protecting vulnerable or elderly people with handguns then we do have to take into account that their reduced mobility will put them at a slight disadvantage.

 

[Rich2018]

What if criminals reciprocate with nuclear missiles on the black market! Best to stay with conventional warfare to avoid escalation, civilian casualties and nuclear proliferation. I mentioned before in #410 how common criminals won't have much motive to buy a gun with the risk of added jail time if the police and civilians are also unarmed.

Hard to reciprocate once you've been nuked

But if you're saying they might be armed with nukes, then you sniper idea is like taking a knife to a gun fight.

If all 330 million American citizen's had a gun on them at all times, then a gun would never be an extra advantage in a defensive encounter seeing as the perpetrator will always be armed as well.

Yes it would. You carry a gun and an active shooter shoots you in the head...what use is your gun ?

A further problem with viewing guns as an equaliser is not only the increased arm accuracy that upper body strength gives but also that cardiovascular agility and stamina isn't irrelevant. Running to cover, grabbing your gun and dodging the aim of others all depend on fast movements and reflexive reaction speeds. Granted, running isn't as necessary for snipers and long guns. But when it comes to protecting vulnerable or elderly people with handguns then we do have to take into account that their reduced mobility will put them at a slight disadvantage.

Getting shot will do that to Olympic standard athletes too.

 

[Michael McMahon]

Enemy at the Gates Major König's impossible sniper kill

This video shows the risks of dummy targets (individual in switched uniform) / decoy objects (raised helmet), concealed shooting areas (aiming behind a small hole in the wall) and alternate positions (snipers moving and jumping elsewhere).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_dummy

 

[Michael McMahon]

Was Gunman Plotting Another Massacre Before Vegas Shooting?


Having multiple single shot rifles that are preloaded with ammunition and then firing them all in quick succession would almost be as dangerous as a semi-auto rifle when the target crowd is so large that accurate aim isn't necessary to inflict casualties.


"The “reasons that ran through Paddock’s mind are unknown but it was directly at the same time as Life is Beautiful,” a festival featuring acts including Lorde, Blink-182 and Muse, Lombardo said."
https://www.euronews.com/2017/10/05/las-vegas-shooting-gunmans-girlfriend-knew-nothing

 

[Michael McMahon]

"The Columbine shooting on April 20, 1999 at Columbine High School in Littleton, Colorado, occurred when two teens went on a shooting spree, killing 13 people and wounding more than 20 others, before turning their guns on themselves and committing suicide. The Columbine shooting was, at the time, the worst high school shooting in U.S. history and prompted a national debate on gun control and school safety, as well as a major investigation to determine what motivated the gunmen, Eric Harris, 18, and Dylan Klebold, 17. Subsequent school shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, and Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida continue to raise questions about gun control in the United States."
https://www.history.com/topics/1990s/columbine-high-school-shootings

If there are two active shooters then reloading times will be significantly reduced if one person reloads the other's guns. If both are firing together then the rate of fire frequency will essentially be doubled. If it's a terrorist attack like the November 2015 Paris attacks then the overall rate of fire will be multiplied by the number of perpetrators. So any gun will still be highly dangerous when it's used by a group of attackers no matter what the individual rate of fire is.

 

[Michael McMahon]

"The enormity of Paddock’s crime has created an intense desire to understand his motives, but Paddock was a reclusive, even secretive, man who left behind no manifesto, no suicide note, no explanation at all for his murderous rampage. The absence of clear information has led to much speculation about Paddock’s motives, especially by people with ideological agendas of their own. A host on the National Rifle Association’s television channel claimed the reason for Paddock’s spree was that there were “a lot of pro-America, pro-freedom, quite frankly Trump supporters there.” Others claimed that Paddock was some sort of right-wing extremist."
https://www.adl.org/blog/las-vegas-...ight-difficulty-of-determining-extremist-ties

Extremists can warp and pervert the beliefs of all political ideologies and any worldview for that matter. His primary motives were evil and megalomania no matter what his political tendencies may have been. Although if Paddock was a fascist type of terrorist like Breivik in Norway then it makes it more likely that the "Life is Beautiful" concert was his plan A given the more youthful characteristics of the audience which might be perceived as slightly politically left-wing.

 

[Michael McMahon]

You were talking about a scenario with Paddock on a ground floor
And there would've been a lot of people at the level.

A mass shooter on the ground floor could be just as dangerous as a rooftop sniper even though their field of view is reduced. A bullet angled downwards will go into the ground after it hits someone whereas a bullet fired horizontally will not be stopped by the impact with the floor and sadly it could pass through multiple people. It might be easier for the crowd to return fire against someone at the same height but if the crowd is densely packed then there'll still be carnage.

 

[Michael McMahon]

Paddock used semi-auto rifles but his tactics were akin to a sniper in that he used alternate positions between two broken windows, concealed himself high up in the building, incorporated tripods and had ballistic advantage (a concept whereby a sniper should seek engagements only when he's at least 400 yards away from his quarry and beyond the effective range of enemy riflemen). Any gun can be used to ambush. The speaker in the video below mentions how the bullets would have had a refracted sound to make identifying their source even more difficult.


"Mr. Paddock’s position overhead gave him a vantage point over objects and obstacles that would typically protect people from bullets flying from a gunman at ground level. It also meant that inaccurate shots — the sort common to rapid or hurried fire, which typically sail high or strike the ground short — could still plunge into areas where people were huddled."
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/02/us/las-vegas-mass-shooting-weapons.html
"The possibility that Mr. Paddock used tripods, which two law enforcement officials said were in the room, indicates that he understood how to overcome some of the difficulties of his plan. Special mounts designed to fit the underside of a rifle and sit atop camera tripods allow the gunman to fire more accurately while standing. Military snipers use tripods in urban spaces, often setting themselves back from a window so neither they nor their weapons can be seen from the streets below."

 

[Michael McMahon]

Yet another problem with snipers are aimless potshots. A bullet will veer slightly under gravity and the coriolis effect over a long distance and so detecting the position of a very long range sniper kilometres away will be very difficult. If a sniper shot randomly at the buildings in an urban area from far away in the outskirts or neighbouring mountains, it will be near-to-impossible to identify the assailant unless the victims also had sniper rifles. We wouldn't be able to find the direction from the sound of the bullet or the hole it makes on an object after impact. We'd need scopes or monoculars/binoculars.

Potshot: "a shot aimed at a person or thing that happens to be within easy reach."
Indirect fire: "gunfire by indirect aiming at a target not visible from the gun"



Elements of Long-range Shooting: Coriolis Effect | Applied Ballistics with Bryan Litz

"In small arms external ballistics applications, gravity imparts a downward acceleration on the projectile, causing it to drop from the line of sight. Drag, or the air resistance, decelerates the projectile with a force proportional to the square of the velocity. Wind makes the projectile deviate from its trajectory." (wiki)

"The distance a bullet falls due to gravity is partly based on how fast the bullet is traveling — but not for the reason you might think. A fast-moving bullet does not somehow resist the effect of gravity because it has momentum as it flies forward. In fact, if you dropped a bullet from your hand from the same height and at the exact same time as you fired a bullet from a perfectly level rifle barrel, which bullet will hit the ground first? They will both hit the ground at the exact same time. The fact that one bullet was traveling horizontally at 3,000 fps has no effect on that bullet falling due to gravity."
https://gundigest.com/article/understanding-gravity-effects-bullets