Gun shots at Trump rally

[lee n. field]

Tangent, but how common are these "gun range sign-in sheets"? I've never belonged to a gun club that required them. The first one back in the day just had a combo lock for shooting weekdays, etc. The current one just uses a card to open the gate, which I guess could record when I've gone there (but not when I left), but certainly there are no sign-in sheets for where on the range I shoot. Though it has been years, I don't recall sign-in sheets at any indoor ranges I ever used.

Ditto, card for the main gate.  Years back it was a literal key and padlock.  And sometimes the gate is just open, for one thing or another.

[Ben]

I should add that mine has a camera at the front gate, but I think all that can reliably capture is the vehicle if the driver is aware of the camera. I might have to drive through wearing a shemagh wrapped around my head and staring at the camera the next few times I go there.

[WLJ]

It shows he signed in for the rifle range, but it doesn't say 100-yard. An article I read says the club has a rifle range that goes out to 187 yards. It doesn't seem likely that he would have been zeroed for 25 yards.

A lot of people on the internet push a 25yd zero claiming it will be also zeroed for 300 calling it a 25/300 zero and many take that at face value but when you run it trough a ballistics cal you'll see depending on cartridge you'll actually be ~8-9" high at 300.
Trouble is many don't run it through a bal cal themselves and take what they read on the internet as gospel and I see it repeated a lot and combine that with it's easy to do a 25y zero, but not actually test it, at most ranges it wouldn't surprise me if the kid did.

Edit: Alarm bell went off in my head after I typed that that I forgot the elephant in the room.
But if you change yards to meters and shoot 62gr it's close and kind of works.

But again I'm doing this for S&G based on Reeve's speculation.

[griz]

Mine does require sign in (and out).  Knowing you're supposed to sign in is one of the main ways the RO knows you're a member.

[Ben]

Mine does require sign in (and out).  Knowing you're supposed to sign in is one of the main ways the RO knows you're a member.

I haven't seen an RO since I signed up for my place five years ago. I occasionally see the maintenance guy, but I generally only go there weekday mornings.

To tie it back to the topic, one of the reasons I was curious is that the shooter seemed to worry about covering his tracks in some ways, but in others left an easy trail to follow. I recognize that public land to shoot on is scarce East of the Rockies, but it seems like he could have found some way to practice without leaving a paper trail, given he managed to do things like suppress his social media presence.

[Jim147]

A lot of people on the internet push a 25yd zero claiming it will be also zeroed for 300 calling it a 25/300 zero and many take that at face value but when you run it trough a ballistics cal you'll see depending on cartridge you'll actually be ~8-9" high at 300.
Trouble is many don't run it through a bal cal themselves and take what they read on the internet as gospel and I see it repeated a lot and combine that with it's easy to do a 25y zero, but not actually test it, at most ranges it wouldn't surprise me if the kid did.

Edit: Alarm bell went off in my head after I typed that that I forgot the elephant in the room.
But if you change yards to meters and shoot 62gr it's close and kind of works.

But again I'm doing this for S&G based on Reeve's speculation.

I used to use some targets that you put at 25M and it would zero you to 200M with iron sights. I may be off on my distances and I'm not going to go search fofr my ballistic calculator.

[Hawkmoon]

Tangent, but how common are these "gun range sign-in sheets"? I've never belonged to a gun club that required them. The first one back in the day just had a combo lock for shooting weekdays, etc. The current one just uses a card to open the gate, which I guess could record when I've gone there (but not when I left), but certainly there are no sign-in sheets for where on the range I shoot. Though it has been years, I don't recall sign-in sheets at any indoor ranges I ever used.

The indoor range I belong to signs in each shooter. The gun club I belong to has a sign-in log. A friend belongs to another outdoor gun club and periodically pulls range officer duty. That range has a sign-in book. I don't know of any around here that don't.

[Hawkmoon]

I used to use some targets that you put at 25M and it would zero you to 200M with iron sights. I may be off on my distances and I'm not going to go search fofr my ballistic calculator.

My only AR has a 16" barrel, so that alters things a bit. Look up "battle sight zero" for specifics, but be advised there's no true consensus on how to do it. Here's one: https://www.gunsite.com/battlesight-zero-bzo-who-has-it-right/

My only AR has a 16" barrel, so that alters things a bit. I ran the external ballistics for both M193 and M855, looking for a 200-yard zero, and here's what I came up with:

[Hawkmoon]

I just did a bit more dredging up of research I performed years ago. As stated above, my only AR-15 is a 16" carbine. I have an older, tube-style red dot optic for it, and I also have a clone of the original U.S. military 4x carry-handle scope with a range adjustment dial that has stops from 100 yards (I think it's yards) to 500 yards, in 100-yard increments. Since the scope mounts on the carry handle, it's pretty high above the bore centerline. IIRC, I think it's about 4 inches.

I regard 200 yards as the maximum effective distance for either M193 or M855 out of a 16-inch barrel, so I started trying to figure the battlesight zero for an actual 200-yard zero (because I don't have access to a range that goes beyond 100 yards). With the standard carry handle open sights, to get a 200-yard zero my battlesight zero distance is right around 50 yards. With the scope, though, that changes to 75 yards.

[dogmush]

It should be remembered that a battle sight zero is not a precision thing.

It is an idea that the military and shooters use to limit the importance of accurate range estimation when shooting at people.  For example: a 50 yard zero, or 50/200 BSZ will keep the trajectory of 5.56 and 7.62 within 3 or so inches from the muzzle to 250 or so, and within 6" to 300.  This is pretty much true from Mk18 to M16A4, M193 to M855A1, and iron sights to an Acro on a 2.6 Unity mount.  It'll let you hit the "C" zone without trying to guess range.  Just hold COM and send it.  Also worth noting that this concept is designed for 3 MOA guns shooting 3-4MOA ammo, and (optimistically) 3 MOA shooters.  The Marines are using a 36/300 BSZ these days, because they still like to pretend they shoot to 400M on a battlefield.

IMNSHO if you are running ballistics calculators and checking height over bore of your optic, you don't need a BSZ.  You are branched out into a different kind of shooting, which is fine, but probably the BSZ isn't for you.  At that point, your ability to range targets matters, and your zero doesn't really, because you are probably either dialing range, or holding in a reticle, the two things a BSZ was specifically invented to avoid. 

As far as the Trump shooter, I know nothing about his shooting ability, or how much his MKUltra handler taught him, but we know he had a range finder, and had concerned himself with ranging his shot.  Assuming a functional Google, it's probably safe to assume that he had zeroed for that range, or [thought he]* knew his holds, so conjecture of one of the popular BSZ's is probably just navel gazing.  If I knew I was taking that shot with an unmagnified red dot, I'd have zeroed for the known range myself and if I was using a 25YD range I'd have calculated the offset needed for my 130yd or whatever zero, but again, this kid's knowledge is still a mystery box.

*I say thought he knew, because there's been no mention of a chrono in his stuff, and that kind of "sniper" gear I think would be mentioned.  If he was going by velocity data on the box of whatever he was shooting, he could be WAY off.

[Bogie]

My guess is that Doofy was somewhat more advanced than the guy from near me who bought an SKS and then tried to bag himself some ball-playing congresscritters with his magical semi-automatic rifle...
 
But not a lot.
 
He was using a magical semi-automatic rifle, guaranteed to shoot through schools, and basically went through a handful of rounds in spray and pray mode, without a great deal of actual precision aiming, because, frankly, that rig was not capable of real precision. The shot that tagged Trump's ear was LUCKY - both in that he actually contacted the actual target, and if you're gonna get shot, that was a good spot to get shot...
 
A real marksman would likely have been another 3-400 yards distant, with a better rifle and scope, and Trump would have gone down.
 
What am I worried about at this point? They get another Doofy, and have him light up a stadium, and a few hundred people get trampled or fall to their deaths...

[Hawkmoon]

It should be remembered that a battle sight zero is not a precision thing.

True. But it's dang close.

Looking at my data, I worked it backwards, starting with a 200-yard zero to see where I would have to shoot at closer ranges to be zeroed at 200 yards. With open (carry handle) sights, 50 yards is pretty dang close. To two decimal places, a 200-yard zero is -0.19" at 50 yards, and M855 is -0.16" at 50 yards. I probably can't shoot a 0.2" group at 50 yards with open sites, so that's a "zero" for my purposes.

With the 4x carry handle scope, the battlesight zero distance moves out to around 75 yards. Again, the actual zero was plugged into the calculator as 200 yards. The near-in zero approximations were -0.04" at 75 yards, and for M855 it was -0.01" at 75 yards. That's far too close to worry about.

[Bogie]

Just how big was the magical dot anyway?

[Northwoods]

Just how big was the magical dot anyway?

2 MOA

[dogmush]

True. But it's dang close.

Looking at my data, I worked it backwards, starting with a 200-yard zero to see where I would have to shoot at closer ranges to be zeroed at 200 yards. With open (carry handle) sights, 50 yards is pretty dang close. To two decimal places, a 200-yard zero is -0.19" at 50 yards, and M855 is -0.16" at 50 yards. I probably can't shoot a 0.2" group at 50 yards with open sites, so that's a "zero" for my purposes.

With the 4x carry handle scope, the battlesight zero distance moves out to around 75 yards. Again, the actual zero was plugged into the calculator as 200 yards. The near-in zero approximations were -0.04" at 75 yards, and for M855 it was -0.01" at 75 yards. That's far too close to worry about.

If you do it in real life it won't be that precise. M855 is 2.5 -3 MOA ammo, and M855A1 is worse.

I'm a believer  in the BSZ concept, and rock a 50/200 by preference on my red dot ARs. But it's important  to remember the reasons for the concept. It is not a precision concept, and when applied to real life, isn't that precise.  If you are looking for .19" precision you are in the wrong aiming concept.

[Bogie]

I currently have one rifle that is a solid 3/8" grouper... It weighs in at about 17 pounds, and the scope is a fixed Weaver K12...
 
That is with match-grade handloads, with prepped brass and sorted bullets.

[MechAg94]

Just remember that the shot that got Trump's ear would have been a killing shot if he hadn't turned his head.  No, it wasn't quite dead on accurate, but it was accurate enough.  A body shot probably would have been more effective, but less impact on TV.  If he wanted more precision, he shouldn't have used a red dot.

[Hawkmoon]

If you do it in real life it won't be that precise. M855 is 2.5 -3 MOA ammo, and M855A1 is worse.

I'm a believer  in the BSZ concept, and rock a 50/200 by preference on my red dot ARs. But it's important  to remember the reasons for the concept. It is not a precision concept, and when applied to real life, isn't that precise.  If you are looking for .19" precision you are in the wrong aiming concept.

Exactly. That's why I'm not going to worry about a couple of tenths (or hundredths) when I'm zeroing for mil-surp ammo (or XM193, which isn't exactly mil-surp, but sorta kinda like mil-surp). As long as I can get a zero that's likely to be good for center-of-mass hits at 200 yards, that's all I'm looking for.

I ran the calcs because most of the articles on the battlesight zero are based on a 20" barrel, so I wanted to see what adjustments I might need for a 16" barrel. Turns out -- if I'm shooting at 50 yards with the open sights --not much. With the scope at 75 yards -- no adjustment necessary.

[Ben]

The latest whistleblower leaks say that the DHS agents detailed to Trump were given a two hour Webinar as training, and the Webinar lost sound for like half the time.

https://www.foxnews.com/us/trump-assassination-attempt-whistleblowers-claim-woefully-unprepared-provide-security

[WLJ]

In the comments to an article that showed this image that stated that the round that hit the stock disabled the rifle by damaging it's buffer tube I pointed out that the buffer tube may be fine as it ends just before the break. I have that exact same stock and I even double checked to measure exactly when it ends but apparently to some other commenters I know nothing about ARs because obviously a chunk of the buffer tube has been blown off or something. Ooookay, I give up.

[WLJ]

FBI let suspect in plot to kill Trump into U.S. on parole despite terror ties, Iran trip, memos show
https://justthenews.com/government/security/fbi-let-suspect-plot-kill-trump-us-parole-despite-terror-ties-iran-trip-memos

Sounds like the 911 terrorists who were let in.

He wasn't in Washington on J6

[dogmush]

In the comments to an article that showed this image that stated that the round that hit the stock disabled the rifle by damaging it's buffer tube I pointed out that the buffer tube may be fine as it ends just before the break. I have that exact same stock and I even double checked to measure exactly when it ends but apparently to some other commenters I know nothing about ARs because obviously a chunk of the buffer tube has been blown off or something. Ooookay, I give up.

Other pics in that same article clearly show the buffer tube is, in fact, intact.  You can't fix stupid.

[WLJ]

Other pics in that same article clearly show the buffer tube is, in fact, intact.  You can't fix stupid.

To be fair as that was a different site but same photo. The site didn't show the other photo. The link for the one I used was convenient at the moment.

[JTHunter]

Back in the late 80s, I bought a second-hand Rem. 700 (.243) with a 3-9x scope already mounted.  Starting with Federal, Remington, and Winchester 100 gr. factory loads, they were all over the paper at 200 yds.  Between and older gent at a used gun store, a co-worker who shot at the Missouri Benchrest Club, and several powder manufacturers that I wrote to, I started reloading for this gun.
I got it down to near max loads of 100 gr. SpBTs, and 60 & 75 gr. HPs that I could cover with the palm of my hand at 200 yds.  This was with mixed used brass (Rem./Peters, Savage, Fed., & Win.) and without actually weighing each bullet the way the BR shooters do.  When I showed the co-worker the target and explained what I had done, he seemed impressed.  I had shot one round at a time and laid the rifle down between shots.  This caused the sight picture to change with each shot, yet I still got a decent group.
Unfortunately, I haven't been able to use this rifle the way I had intended.  Nor has it been shot in over 20 years. 

[dogmush]

JT that's impressive for that rifle and the times.  Good job getting that knowledge and groups. Really.

But it goes to show how lucky we are as shooters to be shooting now.  You described a 2.5 ish MOA group. These days that can be pretty easily accomplished with a nice of the shelf semi auto, and AAC ammo from PSA.  Truly, Capitalism has delivered us wonders.  The whole industry pushes each other to make better and better products, and we all benefit.