Trigger pound pull

[NV Ranger]

As others have stated, I don't think your choice of rifle is going to get you to 1500 yards. Look at it like this:

You want to drag race over a mile stretch and get there the fastest (Gun wise - Most accurate). Instead of a sports car (Bolt gun) you chose a pick-up (Modern Sporting Rifle semi auto). The pick-up (308 Win.) has the same cubic inch V8 motor (Bullet Weight) as the sports car (.300 Win Mag) but the sports car has more horse power (Higher velocity) and a higher Power to Weight ratio (Less drop/drift). The sports car has a tuned race suspension (Stiff 24" free floated barrel), the pick-up is tuned for rough terrain (mid-weight maybe free floated 20"). While the pick-up is just fine for what is was intended it is not the right choice for the application at hand. You could add some drag slick tires (High end optics) but it is not going to fundementally change the resulting outcome. The sports car will always get there first because it was designed to do that job at the expense of other tasks.

Back in the day, I shot M60 MGs out to 2,000 yards. I hit the target a couple times but it wasn't because I was a good shot. It was beacuse I expended A LOT of Uncle Sam's ammo.

 

[bogeybrown]

[MENTION=90]Mike[/MENTION], [MENTION=21660]Chiller[/MENTION], and the rest of my Hide brothers.

Those of you who "know" me know that I am not a foil hat kind of guy, but let's look at the OP in totality for a second:

He's brand new to the forum with a bullshit profile

Many of us suspect that English is not his native language

All of his posts thus far (averaging over 16 a day) ALL center around a shot with a semi-auto out around a mile

He has no interest in shooting any shorter than a click

This guy is racing towards a very specific shooting scenario in his mind with absolutely no background or interest in the "why" of a firing solution


Am I the only guy drawing a parallel between this guy and a bunch of guys taking flying lessons with no interest on how to land a plane?


Sorry if I end up being totally off-base, but this guy just seems to be on a totally different track than the average mall ninja.

 

[bogeybrown]

Dup, sorry.

 

[dmike]

Any LEOs out there?

 

[Understated_in_Accuracy]

Ok.

 

[Rhyno]

To show you how hard this is, here's a video.
Most likely this rifle is a DTA, and the shooter knows his shit, and is good. Yet here he is missing and missing and missing.

 

[Understated_in_Accuracy]

To show you how hard this is, here's a video.
Most likely this rifle is a DTA, and the shooter knows his shit, and is good. Yet here he is missing and missing and missing.

Wow...still can be done.

 

[Rhyno]

It's more luck then anything.

 

[Understated_in_Accuracy]

Luck can become skill with time.

 

[Nailedit]

Luck can become skill with time.

Sorry, but that is some terrible logic, even if a tangible factor such as "luck" were to exist. Building skills will require a thing called LEARNING, and If you think you are going to become any sort of marksman by starting on page one, ignoring those with experience, skipping the basics and just winging it, you are in for a rough ride.

Your outlook would make some sense if your expectations were minimal, but you are talking about shooting a gas .308 at extreme long ranges...Do yourself a favor and build a genuine interest in marksmanship as a whole before going down this road and making any purchases (bad choices). I've been shooting for over 20 years and yet I'm still committing myself to a TON of research before jumping into the long range game.

I didn't want to sound so personal, but you seem to be quite dismissive when it comes to reality. That attitude (the opposite of humble) will not get you very "far" at all.


My $.02

 

[Understated_in_Accuracy]

Sorry, but that is some terrible logic, even if a tangible factor such as "luck" were to exist. Building skills will require a thing called LEARNING, and If you think you are going to become any sort of marksman by starting on page one, ignoring those with experience, skipping the basics and just winging it, you are in for a rough ride.

Your outlook would make some sense if your expectations were minimal, but you are talking about shooting a gas .308 at extreme long ranges...Do yourself a favor and build a genuine interest in marksmanship as a whole before going down this road and making any purchases (bad choices). I've been shooting for over 20 years and yet I'm still committing myself to a TON of research before jumping into the long range game.

I didn't want to sound so personal, but you seem to be quite dismissive when it comes to reality. That attitude (the opposite of humble) will not get you very "far" at all.


My $.02

I will post results to your .02.(Just adding to the list of people to prove wrong, I've been getting good at that lately.) Thank you for your opinion.

 

[Subwrx300]

I will post results to your .02.(Just adding to the list of people to prove wrong, I've been getting good at that lately.) Thank you for your opinion.

Understated, FWIW, it seems that a lot of the members here are frustrated/confused with the lack of desire to take there honest advice seriously. Many of us take this sport very seriously, nearly to the point of the absurd: endless hours working on dry fire drills, learning to make various shooting positions repeatable, improving accuracy of custom reloaded ammo by eliminating variables one by one and dedication to learning/sharing information with fellow shooters through forums like this.

You certainly seem to have the desire to want to shoot long range and extended long range. While the original post question (trigger break weight for 1-mile like shots) may seem like a valid question, it was answered by several people that is a personal preference but generally 1.5 to 5lbs is good for many rifle applications. From that point the other advice (learn to shoot at shorter ranges consistently and with 1-shot fire solutions at ALL ranges) seemed to fall on deaf ears. Maybe its just me, however, to say/imply that all the time and work that we collectively apply to LR shooting doesn't apply to you because you enjoy a challenge is somewhat insulting.

We would appreciate that when a self proclaimed Newbie to shooting/ballistics in general (let alone LR and ELR shooting) would take the advice given seriously with an amount of deference to those that have spent time to learn all skills related to accurate/precise shooting.

And I would like to add that I am also new to this forum and feel that learning from those who have more experience and sound advice is the more humble approach humble approach when joining a specialized online-community such as SH.

I wish you the best of luck in your endeavor into LR shooting but what you are trying to accomplish is much being made more difficult with your approach. Truly hope that you take my comments with a modicum of understanding and no offense...just my obersvations.

BUT I did get a seriously heathly laugh from the 12 pages of posts and yes, I stayed at a Holiday Inn last night.

 

[bogeybrown]

I will post results to your .02.(Just adding to the list of people to prove wrong, I've been getting good at that lately.) Thank you for your opinion.

What exactly have you gotten good at?

As I understand it you don't yet own a rifle; nor do you possess the faintest understanding of how a rifle scope works; nor do you have any understanding of external ballistics. A number of members have, in my opinion, wasted their time in a futile attempt to at least give you a hint at what you don't even know you don't know.

At this point you've demonstrated not only complete ignorance, but complete contempt for some really bright guys who have tried to remedy your ignorance by providing you with some knowledge.

You ask your mom for your allowance early this month and slap together your Sportical and Counter Sniper scope, slap 42MOA of elevation on it, and go out and fucking prove us wrong there Ace. Me, I'll keep listening to guys on this forum who know WTF they're talking about, and I've shot a .308 a helluva lot farther in real life than you're doing in your fantasies.

 

[woostri]

Refilling the popcorn....

 

[Boxcar]

Well I have to say, this thread has been entertaining.

I guess some people don't understand that fire is hot until they get burned.

 

[Understated_in_Accuracy]

Ok

 

[GhengisAhn175]

Fuckin let this thread die along with this retard. Ignored

 

[woostri]

Just a funny tale about .308's at long range. I took a buddy out to ping steel at 1000 yards. It was his first time at 1k. He had a modified rem700 SPS with 20" barrel and was shooting 168 Amax at unknown velocity.... I spotted while he fired and we walked in the impacts until we finally got a hit. The target was a steel plate about 2.5 ft wide by 1.5ft tall. We walked out to the target which was freshly spraypainted white before we started. No kidding the impact point resembled a sideways .308. The muzzle velocity related to the drop we saw was about 2400 fps. We're not sure if the bullet was tumbling and actually hit the target or if it actually hit low and ricocheted up into the target. Either way, pretty entertaining day. I remember the drop adjustment being well over 40moa from a 200 yard zero. Quite a lobber compared to the 6mmAI I was shooting next to it, only requiring 20moa.

 

[Understated_in_Accuracy]

If I don't understand, how am I able to make shots at 1,000+ yards with only a few misses? I must understand quite a bit to even make shots at that distance considering it's a "challenge" for others...
Wind, Elevation, Gravity, Spin drift, Trigger control, Breathing, and other stuff that I can think of off of the top of my head.

 

[flounderv2]

The fact that you actually listed gravity pretty much sums it up. Do you give lessons because I may need to sign up for one.

 

[Understated_in_Accuracy]

The fact that you actually listed gravity pretty much sums it up. Do you give lessons because I may need to sign up for one.

No no, listen to the others because "they have much more experience than I have with "shooting" and they can give you the most suitable "advice." Lmfao, sounding ignorant just to see the result of those who judge on someone's interest is amusing to say the least, let alone easy to do so but by my last statement, I'm guessing a few people don't know what to think of me because I am clearly not ignorant.

 

[Rhyno]

If I don't understand, how am I able to make shots at 1,000+ yards with only a few misses? I must understand quite a bit to even make shots at that distance considering it's a "challenge" for others...
Wind, Elevation, Gravity, Spin drift, Trigger control, Breathing, and other stuff that I can think of off of the top of my head.

An old saying comes to mind.

"Even a blind squirrel finds a nut sometimes"

 

[Understated_in_Accuracy]

An old saying comes to mind.

"Even a blind squirrel finds a nut sometimes"

Sometimes more often than others.

 

[Understated_in_Accuracy]

You are really funny.


Jt

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

It's funny how people are quick to judge I already knew the outcome of this thread just because of the way I seemed to be and the reactions of others.

 

[Nailedit]

"...clearly I'm not ignorant." You have got to be joking right? Ignorance is the defining quality of your posts, along with delusion.

Hello everyone, my question is how much MOA of elevation and windage is needed for adjustments at 1,760 yards or a mile considering the objective lens size and magnification of the scope. Thank you.

Just 5 days ago you thought that developing a firing solution only depends on three things: range, objective size and magnification. I think I had a better connection with physics by the time I could walk...

 

[ahhshoot]

It's funny how people are quick to judge I already knew the outcome of this thread just because of the way I seemed to be and the reactions of others.

Where do you live and what is your first language?

 

[Understated_in_Accuracy]

"...clearly I'm not ignorant." You have got to be joking right? Ignorance is the defining quality of your posts, along with delusion.



Just 5 days ago you thought that developing a firing solution only depends on three things: range, objective size and magnification. I think I had a better connection with physics by the time I could walk...

Actually I didn't think that, I was simply asking about it.

 

[Understated_in_Accuracy]

My first language is english and my location will be unknown to you all.

 

[ahhshoot]

My first language is english and my location will be unknown to you all.

If you're going to lie about your language, not disclose where you live (at least a country would be nice), threaten other users on the Hide, then I will not help you by answering your questions because I can only reasonably assume you intend to use this information for interests that are not in good nature. I hope others here follow suit, however entertaining this may be.

 

[Understated_in_Accuracy]

United states, I wouldn't really consider what I was doing to be lieing, just keeping my mouth shut about facts rather than ignorance. I have no intentions of doing harm to anyone. Plus my first language is english

 

[Nailedit]

Actually I didn't think that, I was simply asking about it.

What are you talking about? You asked for a firing solution and only provided us with the range. You also thought objective size and magnification has something to do with it. This is undeniable proof that you have little to no understanding, and the fact that you don't see my point only solidifies the point itself.

Why do you think people keep questioning your native language, age, etc? Becuase we are looking for an explaination as to why you seem so lost and unable to follow a thought process correctly. We all would have liked to see that your issue is simply a language barrier or immaturity, but it's looking more like you just have a serious inability to rationalize and form proper logic.

It's a tragedy that none of us can get through to you.

 

[Understated_in_Accuracy]

What are you talking about? You asked for a firing solution and only provided us with the range. You also thought objective size and magnification has something to do with it. This is undeniable proof that you have little to no understanding, and the fact that you don't see my point only solidifies the point itself.

Why do you think people keep questioning your native language, age, etc? Becuase we are looking for an explaination as to why you seem so lost and unable to follow a thought process correctly. We all would have liked to see that your issue is simply a language barrier or immaturity, but it's looking more like you just have a serious inability to rationalize and form proper logic.

It's a tragedy that none of us can get through to you.

Thank you and I'm done with this thread.
Subject ended because I give up, knowing that everything I've said until a few posts ago is still on your minds or not, I've lost interest in trying to reason. Everyone have a nice day.

 

[bogeybrown]

Thank you and I'm done with this thread.

And on to start the next brilliant one no doubt. God I'll be glad when school starts back up.

 

[Understated_in_Accuracy]

And on to start the next brilliant one no doubt. God I'll be glad when school starts back up.

Not really.

 

[Subwrx300]

Understated, it really seems that the issues and frustration with your questions/replies is the lack of clarity as to the question, which stemming from a lack of basic knowledge of shooting and exterior ballistics that would answer many of your questions. To make matters worse, (using only this thread and the above thread referenced by Nailedit) your questions involve factors that are unrelated to the outcome you are asking about.

For instance, if you fully understand the basics of rifle optics, then it would be readily obvious (no question needed) that objective size and magnification level do not have any bearing whatsoever on developing a dialed elevation/windage solution at any yardage. Which is different than a holdover/hold off and can be affected by magnification level scope to scope, but you didn't say it was a manual holdover but instead dialed solution.

In this particular post, if you understood the mechanics of riflemanship (at ALL yardages not just 1000k+), you would also know that that trigger pull weight or break weight (not "trigger pound pull" as the thread is titled) will affect your consistency at all ranges. This is because of the angular nature of shooting a rifle.

Asking the right question and internalizing the answer before responding is important to the learning process. As it applies here, many of the posters (including myself) are in complete bewilderment that you state you have no desire or even willingness to shoot at "shorter" range due to the "lack of challenge".

If your method and reasoning doesn't make sense to guys who have learned how to shoot to 1500+ yds to achieve first round hits, why would you continue to insist that you are correct and retort against guys who jumped in here to help?

Just because a 308 will push a piece of copper covered lead over a mile, doesn't mean that it's capable of doing so reliably, safely and continuously nor does it imply that you, as the owner of said rifle, are able to safely and reliably shoot to that range. And that is what the guys here are trying to impress upon you. Your questions and subsequent responses decrease our confidence that understand the basics of what you are trying to achieve.

At 1760 yards, a 175gr Berger Match BT fired from a .308 Win zeroed at 100yds started at 2600fps MV in 70deg F at 800ft above sea level with baro pressure of 29.92 inHg and 50% humidity in ZERO wind requires a drop correction of 123.1MOA.

That is still only a partial solution because I left out several critical pieces of information needed for a shot that far with a 308 Win...

If you know what they are, they maybe you can accurately develop a fire solution and have away with 1760 from a 308 or hell 1000yds with a .17 HMR!

But if you didn't realize that I didn't include latitude or azimuth to determine Drift and drop from Coriolis effect and I didn't indicate whether spin drift was accounted for in my fire solution. Which it wasn't ...

Above that you would need to know if the scope/rifle are even capable of dialing a complete solution at that yardage given the above ballistics.

Even if you have a 45MOA base with a Nightforce ATACR with 60MOA useable vertical travel, you are still only able to dial 105MOA of correction and must manually hold over the target 15MOA at the prescribed ocular magnification power for a second focal plane scope. If using a First focal plane scope, any magnification will allow a manual holdover with reticle remaining true to scale....

But I'm sure that you knew all that to begin with. Besides, isnt shooting all about watching dirt so fly and dialing a correction ... And more correction....and more... Oops ... Too much, back the other way.

Just say thanks to everyone that tries to help and learn a bit along the way!

 

[bogeybrown]

Understated, it really seems that the issues and frustration with your questions/replies is the lack of clarity as to the question, which stemming from a lack of basic knowledge of shooting and exterior ballistics that would answer many of your questions. To make matters worse, (using only this thread and the above thread referenced by Nailedit) your questions involve factors that are unrelated to the outcome you are asking about.

For instance, if you fully understand the basics of rifle optics, then it would be readily obvious (no question needed) that objective size and magnification level do not have any bearing whatsoever on developing a dialed elevation/windage solution at any yardage. Which is different than a holdover/hold off and can be affected by magnification level scope to scope, but you didn't say it was a manual holdover but instead dialed solution.

In this particular post, if you understood the mechanics of riflemanship (at ALL yardages not just 1000k+), you would also know that that trigger pull weight or break weight (not "trigger pound pull" as the thread is titled) will affect your consistency at all ranges. This is because of the angular nature of shooting a rifle.

Asking the right question and internalizing the answer before responding is important to the learning process. As it applies here, many of the posters (including myself) are in complete bewilderment that you state you have no desire or even willingness to shoot at "shorter" range due to the "lack of challenge".

If your method and reasoning doesn't make sense to guys who have learned how to shoot to 1500+ yds to achieve first round hits, why would you continue to insist that you are correct and retort against guys who jumped in here to help?

Just because a 308 will push a piece of copper covered lead over a mile, doesn't mean that it's capable of doing so reliably, safely and continuously nor does it imply that you, as the owner of said rifle, are able to safely and reliably shoot to that range. And that is what the guys here are trying to impress upon you. Your questions and subsequent responses decrease our confidence that understand the basics of what you are trying to achieve.

At 1760 yards, a 175gr Berger Match BT fired from a .308 Win zeroed at 100yds started at 2600fps MV in 70deg F at 800ft above sea level with baro pressure of 29.92 inHg and 50% humidity in ZERO wind requires a drop correction of 123.1MOA.

That is still only a partial solution because I left out several critical pieces of information needed for a shot that far with a 308 Win...

If you know what they are, they maybe you can accurately develop a fire solution and have away with 1760 from a 308 or hell 1000yds with a .17 HMR!

But if you didn't realize that I didn't include latitude or azimuth to determine Drift and drop from Coriolis effect and I didn't indicate whether spin drift was accounted for in my fire solution. Which it wasn't ...

Above that you would need to know if the scope/rifle are even capable of dialing a complete solution at that yardage given the above ballistics.

Even if you have a 45MOA base with a Nightforce ATACR with 60MOA useable vertical travel, you are still only able to dial 105MOA of correction and must manually hold over the target 15MOA at the prescribed ocular magnification power for a second focal plane scope. If using a First focal plane scope, any magnification will allow a manual holdover with reticle remaining true to scale....

But I'm sure that you knew all that to begin with. Besides, isnt shooting all about watching dirt so fly and dialing a correction ... And more correction....and more... Oops ... Too much, back the other way.

Just say thanks to everyone that tries to help and learn a bit along the way!

Pearls before swine, brother.

 

[Understated_in_Accuracy]

Understated, it really seems that the issues and frustration with your questions/replies is the lack of clarity as to the question, which stemming from a lack of basic knowledge of shooting and exterior ballistics that would answer many of your questions. To make matters worse, (using only this thread and the above thread referenced by Nailedit) your questions involve factors that are unrelated to the outcome you are asking about.

For instance, if you fully understand the basics of rifle optics, then it would be readily obvious (no question needed) that objective size and magnification level do not have any bearing whatsoever on developing a dialed elevation/windage solution at any yardage. Which is different than a holdover/hold off and can be affected by magnification level scope to scope, but you didn't say it was a manual holdover but instead dialed solution.

In this particular post, if you understood the mechanics of riflemanship (at ALL yardages not just 1000k+), you would also know that that trigger pull weight or break weight (not "trigger pound pull" as the thread is titled) will affect your consistency at all ranges. This is because of the angular nature of shooting a rifle.

Asking the right question and internalizing the answer before responding is important to the learning process. As it applies here, many of the posters (including myself) are in complete bewilderment that you state you have no desire or even willingness to shoot at "shorter" range due to the "lack of challenge".

If your method and reasoning doesn't make sense to guys who have learned how to shoot to 1500+ yds to achieve first round hits, why would you continue to insist that you are correct and retort against guys who jumped in here to help?

Just because a 308 will push a piece of copper covered lead over a mile, doesn't mean that it's capable of doing so reliably, safely and continuously nor does it imply that you, as the owner of said rifle, are able to safely and reliably shoot to that range. And that is what the guys here are trying to impress upon you. Your questions and subsequent responses decrease our confidence that understand the basics of what you are trying to achieve.

At 1760 yards, a 175gr Berger Match BT fired from a .308 Win zeroed at 100yds started at 2600fps MV in 70deg F at 800ft above sea level with baro pressure of 29.92 inHg and 50% humidity in ZERO wind requires a drop correction of 123.1MOA.

That is still only a partial solution because I left out several critical pieces of information needed for a shot that far with a 308 Win...

If you know what they are, they maybe you can accurately develop a fire solution and have away with 1760 from a 308 or hell 1000yds with a .17 HMR!

But if you didn't realize that I didn't include latitude or azimuth to determine Drift and drop from Coriolis effect and I didn't indicate whether spin drift was accounted for in my fire solution. Which it wasn't ...

Above that you would need to know if the scope/rifle are even capable of dialing a complete solution at that yardage given the above ballistics.

Even if you have a 45MOA base with a Nightforce ATACR with 60MOA useable vertical travel, you are still only able to dial 105MOA of correction and must manually hold over the target 15MOA at the prescribed ocular magnification power for a second focal plane scope. If using a First focal plane scope, any magnification will allow a manual holdover with reticle remaining true to scale....

But I'm sure that you knew all that to begin with. Besides, isnt shooting all about watching dirt so fly and dialing a correction ... And more correction....and more... Oops ... Too much, back the other way.

Just say thanks to everyone that tries to help and learn a bit along the way!

Congrats for somewhat comprehending everything I've said until a few posts ago, pretty much bs except for the shot with the .338 and the rifle I'm going to mod, Thank you and have a nice day, good luck to your shooting. My point was proven on judgements. Also goodbye.

 

[Subwrx300]

Pearls before swine, brother.

Well said...

 

[bogeybrown]

Congrats for somewhat comprehending everything I've said until a few posts ago, pretty much bs except for the shot with the .338 and the rifle I'm going to mod, Thank you and have a nice day, good luck to your shooting. My point was proven on judgements. Also goodbye.

I weep for our educational system.

 

[Subwrx300]

Congrats for somewhat comprehending everything I've said until a few posts ago, pretty much bs except for the shot with the .338 and the rifle I'm going to mod, Thank you and have a nice day, good luck to your shooting. My point was proven on judgements. Also goodbye.

FWIW, I think a simple, "hey guys sorry for not clarifying earlier and will be more clear next time..." would suffice and also improve your overall level of maturity with the members of this community.

If you don't care about civility and/or how you are perceived by others in SH or any other forum, then by all means keep throwing stones.

We are in fact trying to be as gracious as possible but replies like the one above are not engendering any feelings of reciprocity or kindness.

Too bad that you aren't able to draw up a small amount of humility in this ever growing thread about nothing.

Sorry we aren't able to meet you at your level. Life lesson #23,456 learned: don't offer advice to those unwilling to listen or worse yet, unwilling to change.

 

[lash]

<snip>... Also goodbye.

You keep promising this...but dang if you don't keep coming back like a bad case of STD.

 

[29aholic]

give the guy SOME credit...he DID post on the stupid question board

 

[bogeybrown]

give the guy SOME credit...he DID post on the stupid question board

Yeah, but it's more of a disclaimer than an invitation.

 

[Subwrx300]

I don't think anyone here thinks its about the original question anymore (asked and answered) but more of the continued lack of maturity and calling out others for trying to help his understanding. Which he wouldn't take.

But agreed that he posted in the right spot!

 

[29aholic]

Yeah, but it's more of a disclaimer than an invitation.

lmfao...and I actually did laugh out loud

 

[Rhyno]

You keep promising this...but dang if you don't keep coming back like a bad case of STD.

Diesel fuel and flames works good for crabs.

 

[lash]

Diesel fuel and flames works good for crabs.

I'm sure the story as to how you know this would be a good one.

 

[Whit]

Dpms sportical in .308
Rainier ultramatch barrel 20"
Grg 308 muzzle brake
Daniel defense quadrail rifle length
Probably a Nikko targetmaster until I get a Nightforce.
And a jard trigger...that's all I'm saving for.

What barrel twist? You will definitely need longer then a 20" barrel to reach that range with some sort of accuracy. You could squeeze by with a 300 winmag with at least 200gr bullets.

Look at this AR
OnlyLongRange - Noreen Firearms BN36

 

[Mike]

Everyone needs to stop feeding the troll. He's not serious, he's not listening, and he's not worth it. There are too many new shooters willing to learn and actually listen to sage advice rather than argue over a subject on which they are completely ignorant.

 

[Whit]

[MENTION=90]Mike[/MENTION], [MENTION=21660]Chiller[/MENTION], and the rest of my Hide brothers.

Those of you who "know" me know that I am not a foil hat kind of guy, but let's look at the OP in totality for a second:

He's brand new to the forum with a bullshit profile

Many of us suspect that English is not his native language

All of his posts thus far (averaging over 16 a day) ALL center around a shot with a semi-auto out around a mile

He has no interest in shooting any shorter than a click

This guy is racing towards a very specific shooting scenario in his mind with absolutely no background or interest in the "why" of a firing solution


Am I the only guy drawing a parallel between this guy and a bunch of guys taking flying lessons with no interest on how to land a plane?


Sorry if I end up being totally off-base, but this guy just seems to be on a totally different track than the average mall ninja.

I thought that after the first page. But if he is on a Internet forum such as snipers hide with there being high probability of federal "workers" as members who probably thinks the same thing is looking into it as we Speak b/c if this sounds suspicious to us you know big brother is wondering about it also.