• Futterbinger [he/him, they/them]@hexbear.netEnglish
    24·
    2 months ago

    130 yards? That’s it? From a prone position on a rooftop in perfect weather. What was the shooter crosseyed? God damn.

    The SS certainly fucked up though. They have unlimited resources and couldn’t even bother to have a guy sit up there any twiddle his thumbs. The roof of a building with a perfect vantage from which to fuck up perhaps the world’s easiest shot apparently.

    • InevitableSwing [none/use name]@hexbear.netOPEnglish
      13·
      2 months ago

      What was the shooter crosseyed?

      USA TODAY NETWORK…

      The assailant reportedly used an AR-15.

      How accurate is an AR-15 at that distance?

      -–

      Edit

      My wild hunch is that it actually wasn’t an AR-15. In the rush to get a scoop - information was garbled and then it was media copypasta city.

      • Futterbinger [he/him, they/them]@hexbear.netEnglish
        12·
        2 months ago

        An AR-15 would be perfectly fine at 130 yards. Without even any fancy optics or scopes or anything, just iron sights.

        To your other points, the shooter didn’t fire many rounds, I’m going to guess the rifle was an SKS.

      • BearOfaTimeEnglish
        1·
        2 months ago

        Information wasn’t garbled, it’s the media war on guns, with the AR pattern rifle being used as a scape goat.

        “See, see, even your precious Trump was assasinated with your beloved AR15!” Media asshats would love to print that.

        Nevermind they have no idea what an AR15 is, nor semi-auto, auto, machine gun, etc.

        And yet here we have a crazy, non-conservative attempting to assassinate a president.

      • BearOfaTimeEnglish
        1·
        2 months ago

        Any rifle at that distance is sufficiently accurate for anyone with a little training.

        That’s like level 1 rifle distance.

        A carbine is accurate at that distance.

    • BearOfaTimeEnglish
      1·
      2 months ago

      You’d think the protocol would be to have spotters looking for such things, with just a couple strategically placed riflemen ready to take out someone like that, once spotted.

      That would be my approach, after Kennedy.

      Yes, they first protect the target, but why not both? A professional marksman wouldn’t likely miss someone like this amateur.

  • JoeByeThen [he/him, they/them]@hexbear.netEnglish
    20·
    2 months ago

    9? I mean he got shot at.

    tbh, I think every aspect of the state is falling apart. Blame it on covid, blame it on privatization, blame it on morale. I think the wheels are coming off and it’s showing everywhere. The government is filled with brain damaged fail children, and it shows.

    • BearOfaTimeEnglish
      3·
      2 months ago

      I do.

      They couldn’t be bothered to do the basics.