[ultimafan]

Anecdotally, it seems like many people seem to underestimate how difficult accurate shooting actually is. I genuinely can't count the number of times I've taken someone interested in shooting out to the range for their first time and they get dismayed when they can't place accurate shots even at a fairly close range (<25 meters), from a sitting position, with a rifle rest and being able to aim as long as they want with no stress or pressure before firing.

The general pop culture opinion cultivated by movies, shows, video games, etc. seem to mislead a lot of people towards the idea that guns are just a "point and shoot" type of deal at any range in any situation. When the reality is like any other hobby it takes many many hours of practice and lots of $$$ worth of ammo to get to the point where you can consistently place shots on target at decent ranges and even then that's in a controlled environment with a paper target that doesn't move, no pressure on you, you're probably not firing standing up without a support etc.

[sanswork]

They also forget all those times they've gotten excited in a confrontation and started to shake. Trying to be accurate is hard. Trying to do it while pumping with adrenaline changes it to basically impossible.

[redeeman]

they say it was around 120 meters, the first time i picked up my rifle and went to the range, i was able to consistently put the shots within 4cm at 100 meters. a tiny bit training, and we are talking 5cm at 200 meters.

it is NOT hard. whats hard is from-the-hip shooting like you see in movies.

i dont mean to be (too) rude, but if you have problems hitting accurately at 25 meters with a rested rifle, you have some serious problems that you should probably get looked at (im thinking inability to hold steady etc)

[throwaaway45656]

In your situation you had no pressure at all. I imagine that even getting to the top of the roof without the police spotting hin is enough to give him an extremely high level of adrenaline that causes his body to start shaking.

In addition he knew that snipers and police were constantly watching roof tops, and if he poked his head out he may not have many seconds to actually raise his gun, aim and shoot.

I am not an expert, but I doubt you can compare your experience on the range to a kid full of adrenaline trying to take a shot at one of the most protected persons in the world. It's a completely different situation.

[ultimafan]

A consistent 4 cm at 100 meters your first time shooting, then a consistent 5 cm at 200 meters just a short time later is nothing short of a miracle. That's 1.3~ and 0.85~ MOA respectively.

Hell, many commercial and surplus rifles you buy will straight up NEVER shoot 1 MOA on their own as is even assuming you've clamped them perfectly to a table with no human input for error due to their construction.

[redeeman]

i use a 5 legged shooting rest, which is extremely effective.

my rifle is a 3006 with a cut barrel, and it is extremely precise. There are a couple of guys at my local range that can consistently(aka generally 4 out of 5) put hole-in-hole (with slight enlarging)

[ultimafan]

I don't doubt that you did, just said it's nothing short of a miracle because I don't think your experience is a common one. It also sounds like you did your research, made a large investment, had good equipment, and had knowledgeable people there to help you out all before ever sitting down to shoot- coming prepared like that is a far cry from easy.

Most people aren't buying a $3-4k optic (you mentioned Zeiss in your other post) + what I assume is a (at minimum) $1-2k precision rifle + a fancy rest + I'm guessing match grade ammo and having someone set it up for them the first time they go shooting.

Majority of new hobbyists are buying an off the shelf budget AR15 or surplus rifle around $300-600, using irons or cheap ($100-200 range) optics, and whatever box of factory grade cartridges the guy at the store shoved at them first when they asked for ammo for their rifle, and grabbing the wood block or small sand bag rests the range hands out for free when they shoot. I think that's more fair to judge initial progress/consistency off of a common real world scenario- it's what most new shooters will experience, either at home or in military service, most newcomers aren't instantly splurging on the nicest gear money can buy.

Most rifles straight up can't consistently (and I mean consistently, I don't mean like those guys online or at the range that will shoot 20 groups and cherry pick the 1 lucky group under 1 MOA when the rest are all 2-4 MOA and claim they shoot sub-MOA, or shoot a group of 5 and only mark 3) unless you specifically shopped around for one or made the necessary adjustments (new barrel, etc.) either and know that good ammo can make all the difference.

[redeeman]

the rifle cost ~$1500 including 25%vat, which is on the cheaper end of stuff you can buy (new) in my country. What I did however not pay for is more fancy wooden stock, I got the basic. I splurged on an absolute top end scope yes, because I wanted equipment I can count on :)

as for ammo, i Used the cheapest training ammo the store had (Sellier & Bellot fmj), which many people complain about not being super good, but works extremely well for me. I have noticed that some different boxes has a SLIGHT offset in where the hit is, but groupings are more or less equally good.

edit: I should note that the rifle manufacturer gives a 1MOA garantuee, but most are way better, and for about $1000 more they would take like 10 barrels and test, and give you the best of them. I choose NOT to pay the extra fee

[ultimafan]

>I splurged on an absolute top end scope yes, because I wanted equipment I can count on

I definitely feel that. My father in law is a bit of a precision nut, he has a Zeiss he let me use a few times, I don't know the exact model though. Very nice stuff, always found it hard to justify for myself, haha. Ammo prices nowadays are starting to make range days pricey enough where I look at the cost of nicer equipment and think, man, I can get this or get X more trips worth of ammo instead :)

[more_corn]

Bullshit. In your delusional imagining what caliber rifle were you pretending to shoot with such superhuman accuracy? Did you sight it in yourself or did it just magically shoot straight when you clamped the rings down?

[redeeman]

the guys at the gun shop mounted the scope, and did the preliminary sighting, then at the range we put the rifle in a rifle holder, very sturdy thing, and did the final adjustments, and that was it.

also this is not superhuman, there are other guys at the range WAY better than me.

the caliber is 3006spr, with a cut barrel, nothing special. zeiss victory 2.8-20 56mm scope.

[sam_goody]

How long till we have gun stabilizing, sort of like image stabilization in cameras?

I do not know what it would take to do that, but even if it needs AI it doesn't sound too far off.

[czl]

Aim enhancing guns exist. Example: TrackingPoint Precision-Guided Firearms: uses a computer-controlled firing system Tracks targets and calculates variables like distance, wind, and angle. Only fires when the gun is perfectly aligned with the target Can hit moving targets at distances up to 1,200 yards

[Ekaros]

Electronic firing probably makes more sense. So you put ai/algo between pulling trigger/pressing button and actually bullet firing.

[dredmorbius]

At that point you might as well automate the whole gun.

<https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a37708762/...>

[frankzinger]

A former sniper said on CNN that it should've been so easy to hit from such a short distance that it could only have been "divine intervention" that saved Trump.

[ultimafan]

A former sniper would also have a few hundred to a few thousand hours more range time than a random member of the public. I wouldn't doubt that "easy" for someone like that would have a much different meaning than for everyone else.

[frankzinger]

He was saying it would've been easy for the shooter in question (ie, a random 20-year old).

Mind you, that former sniper was also a Republican congressman so I would not be surprised if he was just using the opportunity to build the Trump Messiah narrative.

[weard_beard]

I'm a god-forsaken liberal with <200 hours range time and I tend to agree. On your 3rd or 4th practice you should be able to put 3 in the 3rd ring at 100 yards.

The real mistake was not going for center mass on someone over 70. A gut wound or lung or even a sizeable chunk from meaty tissue anywhere on the body could put down someone that age from blood loss. There's no achievements for head shots in real life.

[griffzhowl]

Apparently Crooks was rejected from his school rifle team for being such a bad shot they thought it would just be too dangerous if he participated...

[kelipso]

Latest news is that a local cop climbed up the ladder and saw him, he pointed his rifle at the cop, cop climbed back down, and he immediately pointed his rifle back at the at stage and started shooting at Trump. So he would've been panicking when he was shooting.