• HelixDab2
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    Accuracy at the level available today is the difference between the Las Vegas shooter’s success and far less damage.

    That’s just… No. Wrong.

    .223 is not a long-range bullet. It’s “accurate”, sure, but any bullet that’s made with reasonable care care fired from a decently made barrel is going to be consistent. Sure, I can get 1MOA accuracy from a bench rest with my AR-15, but it’s really not very effective past about 500y, and 500y is really pushing it. If I had a gun made in an obsolete caliber like .32-40 or .45-70, with a good barrel, good headspace, and mach-grade ammo, I’d be getting 1MOA performance out of that too, although I’d have ridiculously large holdovers, and a shorter effective range, since they’re lower velocity bullets.

    On the other hand, I can reach out to 1000y or more with .338 Lapua Magnum (although IMO that’s too far for ethical hunting), .300 Win Mag, and probably even my 6.5 Creedmoor.

    As other people noted, the Mandalay Bay murderer was shooting into a crowd from an elevate position, and he was using bump stocks to get a rough approximation or automatic fire. He could have been using lever-action rifles and murdered nearly identical numbers of people. Especially since what stopped him was suicide, not cops; he had killed himself well before cops managed to breach his hotel room.