if marine recon or a seal team is bent on doing you in, you may rest assured that if they shoot at you it is purposeful, with an intent to kill you right now. if you have a chance to shoot back, it had better be with a sense of mission, because you are not going to get many chances to return their favor.
such is their marksmanship and skill at trade craft that if they close with you, your demise is likely pretty quick.
such is not the marksmanship of massed armies, even when joined in great epic battles upon which rest the very survival of governments and societies, not to mention masses of people. armies, in general, do not shoot very well.
such is their marksmanship that even if they close upon you, you may escape with your hide reasonably intact.
if you doubt these general propositions, i suggest that you ponder the import of a statistical fact, and that is, armies expend great sums of small arms fire to kill very few people. even in protracted "fire fights" in which combatants are relatively close to each other, say 800 to 1,000 yards or so, few small arms casualties are suffered, by either side.
this fact, of course, if of little solace to you, if you happen to catch a bullet. your day is probably not going to end very well. the analysis i have seen is that while few are wounded by small arms fire, for those who are, the chances of dying are relatively high.
these thoughts came to mind, as i considered three comments to my post, "notes from a scavenger." http://wintersoldier2008.typepad.com/summer_patriot_winter_sol/2013/08/notes-from-a-scavenger-.html . these notes repeated a certain mantra, accepted as by and large true, that if you sight a high powered rifle in at 25 yards, meaning the bullet will strike a target at point of aim at 25 yards, then it will also strike a target at point of aim at the greater distance of from 250 to 300 yards.
i think that the u.s. army has a manual entry to that effect.
without getting into that much, my response if, "well, yes, and well, no."
whether such a proposition is generally true depends upon a lot of things, including bullet velocity, form of the bullet, wind, and the distance of the sighting apparatus above the line of the bore.
and, to a very large extent, it also depends on what you mean by "target," and what you mean by "point of aim." in the immortal words of bill clinton, "... it all depends upon what your definition of is, is."
and, to a certain extent, it depends on what you intent in shooting involves, and whether you are intent upon hitting a target the size of a golf ball at 450 yards, or whether you are satisfied with hitting a volkswagen beetle at 450 yards.
if you are in the business of hitting a volkswagen beetle at 450 yards, or even just coming close to it, or in making those standing next to it jump into fox holes or flee, then yes, by all means, sight your rifle in at 25 yards and forget about it.
if, by contrast, your are very seriously intent on hitting a golf ball at 450 yards, and i mean popping it right on a dimple and not just coming close, then, no, by all means, do not sight your rifle in at 25 yards and forget about it.
i shoot with a very serious long range shot. when he comes to the range, he sets up a table with a wind gauge which also measures barometric pressure, and when he determines the range to a target, he enters that into a handheld computer which also requires will accept entries as to the known muzzle velocity of the bullet he is shooting (an as affected by ambient temperature); entries as to the weight and ballistic coefficient of the bullet, atmospheric temperature; elevation to the target; direction by compass heading of the path of the bullet; and, wind speed and direction of the wind by compass heading.
in giving him a ballistic solution, e.g., in telling him how many minutes of arc he is to come up on, or dial into, his scope, and how many minutes of arc he is to aim, or dial, into the wind to compensate for drift, the ballistic calculator will calculate the direction of travel and the impact the coriolis effect will have on it, e.g., how much to compensate for the earth's rotation, the drag effect the atmosphere will have on the bullet slowing its travel, and how high the gun has to be aimed in order to defeat gravity on its way to the target.
and, even after all that, if he has not input the exact distance to the target into the computer, he will miss. and, even after all that, if he has not input the wind speed, and direction correctly into the computer, then his bullet will sail away harmlessly, ... , unless of course, it hits another target entirely by mistake or happenstance. (to the armies of the world, this would not be a bad thing. an accidental hit is just as good as a purposeful one, over the long run. to a sniper, it wouldn't be so good. and, to you, it would serve no purpose at all, and might involve your neighbor. think about that.)
i would suggest that if the marine recon or a seal team is after you, that you be proficient in hitting a golf ball at 450 yards, and that you can do it repeatedly. if a seal team or a marine recon team is after you, they mean to kill you, or capture you now, and kill you later. there is no dissuading them by bluff, or by making noise and then retreating away, or by leaving the battle field in a gracious and comradely way.
they mean to close on you, and kill you. your only recourse is to shoot straight, and quickly, and kill them before they do you in.
if an unruly crowd of load mouths has gathered out front, and wants to ransack your larder which you have put aside for skinny spots, and they are not well led except for the neighborhood loud mouth, then being able to hit a volkswagen beetle at 450 yards, and being able to hit a volleyball at 25 yards will probably serve your purposes. a few shots in the air might dissuade them, and run them off, and some poor guy with a finger shot off is likely to scatter the crowd until what is left of the cops gets there.
if not, a few shots to the belly ought to take the fight out of even the most ambitious of them.
by all means, sight you gun in for 25 yards, and forget about it.
let's discuss another case.--
let's assume that you are an outspoken, opinionated, and nettlesome advocate of positions diametrically opposed by a regime in power. and, that your continued existence on earth has become irksome to said worthies, and that the regime in power determines to eliminate your voice, and indeed, to do you in.
let's assume they send the local cops after you, and it comes to shooting. a 25 yard sight in, and the expenditure of many rounds, should do the trick if you are not persuaded that your time on this vale of sin and tears should be brought to a premature end.
let's assume they send a detachment of the local national guard after you, instead of the local cops. i'd say you better have your rifle sighted in pretty well at 100 yards, and that you had best be able to hit a soft ball pretty regularly at that distance, and that you are a disciplined and cool headed shot.
let's assume that they send a contingent of f.b.i. agents and an f.b.i. swat team led by lon tomohiso horiuchi after you, horiuchi being the f.b.i.'s sniper who killed randy weaver's wife while she stood unarmed in a doorway holding a new born baby in her arms, and who has done quite a bit of the f.b.i.'s dirty and "wet" work in years past. (i've always been sort of fascinated how he killed with such precision by "mistake," yet had the skills not to kill the baby she held in her arms. he was also at the demise of the branch davidians, if i am not mistaken, an implicated for misconduct there, as well.)
then, my friend, you had best be able to defend in depth, and shoot well at least to 7 or 800 yards, and shot well at lesser distances.
a bolt action rifle to 800 yards. a good shooting ar-15 to 400 yards. and, a pump or semi-auto shotgun and a .45 acp for when you are driven to your last stand in your bedroom, if you live that long.
if they send the f.b.i. horiuchi team after you, or if a seal team is put on your bug, don't count on the 25 yard zero. the people you are after will not be dissuaded, and they will not give up their task, if a little un-pleasantry is thrown there way by the death of one of their fellows. they are still coming after you.
you are shooting at them not to make noise, and not to scare them, and not to deter them, because they will not be frightened, they will not be deterred, and they will come for you. so, you are shooting to kill them, dead, with every shot if you have enough time to prepare for each shot. you won't have too many chances, so don't waste them.
you must know the distances around you, and have them fairly well plotted out in your mind. you must know the exact trajectory of the ammunition that you are using. you must know the "come ups" and "go downs" as that distance contracts, as the attack is pressed against you. you must know when you can switch to your ar-15, abandoning your bolt action, to substitute rate of fire for exact accuracy to hold them off. i would suggest around 200 yards or so, and then the "battle sighted" semi-auto comes into its own.
but, still, you must know that when you shoot, that you strike your target.
in the final analysis, this is the difference between wars fought by armies, in which the taking of ground is paramount and grievances against opposing soldiers may be forgotten a bit, and the sort of political war fought in civil war or revolution in which grievance and not ground is the motivator, and their is no forgiveness, no quarter asked and no quarter given.
in short, if you are intent upon shooting in an environment in which you may be allowed to live if you surrender after a certain amount of fight, a 25 yard "battle sight" will do just fine. in short, if you are intent in fighting in a conflict in which killing is the sole aim of the conflict, then you had best know your trajectories, and you distances, and be deadly assured of you ability to inflict death with your own rifle.
the rules of the conflict, my friends, or the fundamental absence of such rules, determines how you must develop your skills as a marksman. when you opponent is keen to kill or silence you, or imprison you, or to re-educate you, than your aim had better be as true as his will be. and, quicker.
remember, lon horiuchi ain't dead yet.
john jay @ 08.09.2013
p.s. i will make this additional comment. in my estimation, if they send a lon horiuchi team after you, you will not be going to the hospital to be saved from the impacts of any wounds you receive, if you are not killed outright.
you will bleed to death, as you are being "secured." just like the dumb bastard who bled to death over the course of the better part of an hour when he got into the gun fight with the cops in los angeles after an aborted back robbery. you remember, the dipshit who ambled through the streets, in his "body armor," shooting the ak-47 at the police who huddled behind cars with pistols drawn.
they did not think kindly of him, as he bled to death in the streets, as they secured him for arrest. over many minutes.
neither will lon horiuchi think kindly of you, if you put a bullet in him.
he will harbor a grievance.
if you harbor any thought of fighting these people as they stomp your rights into dust, you had best be committed to shooting straight, shooting true, and with a mortal grievance in your heart and mind. you must understand the nature of the battle you join, and it is not a "25 yard battle sight" sort of fight.
it simply is not.
final comment. i do not mean to compare marine recon or navy seals with lon horiuchi, or to impugn their service in any respect. nor do i mean to impugn the service of any service person or police agency officer.
they serve and protect us honorably.
and, as a matter of fact, i view the military and national guard as a bulwark of our freedoms, and the most formidable defense we as citizens have against the overreaching left, as typified by obama, and holder, and pelosi, frank and reid.
but, they have decisions to make, whether to continue the honorable service and tradition they uphold so proudly, or whether they will blindly follow the orders of those higher in the chain of command, to include the president of the united states, or the chiefs of staff, or the head of police agencies.
lon tomohiso horiuchi was a west point graduate, who served as a u.s. army officer. he was an f.b.i. agent of some 15 years or more when the ruby ridge and waco seiges occurred. yet, at ruby ridge he fired at individuals who posed no threat of harm to he him or his fellow agents at the time, and killed an innocent woman carrying a child in her arms.
he did so because he followed deadly force "rules of engagement" penned by a superior in direct contravention to u.s. constitutional standards, and the standards of the federal bureau of investigation. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruby_Ridge.
at waco he was suspected of firing illegally upon the branch davidians, but shell casings found at his position/vantage could not be tested because the f.b.i. altered the evidence, replacing a barrel and doing other work to the rifle he carried when another f.b.i. agent raised allegations against him, claiming to have heard shots from horiuchi's position. the agent later withdrew, and then explained his comments, and then denied them. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lon_Horiuchi .
he was once a military officer, sworn to uphold and protect the constitution.
he turned his back on that, and became something else. he chose a path of dishonor, and became an instrument against people, at the behest of "higher ups."
those who serve in the military, the national guard, in the federal agencies and in state and local police forces are also sworn to uphold and protect the constitution. they serve the constitution, the country, and us and not the dictates of politicians who would subvert our rights.
i impugn no person, but, i note that all men face choices, and must answer to the dictates of their honor and duty.
lon tomohiso horiuchi did not chose well.
something to remember. end final comment.
Comments