wrote:
On Thu, 05 Oct 2017 13:20:02 -0400, John H
wrote:

On Thu, 05 Oct 2017 12:36:11 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 5 Oct 2017 12:02:26 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote:

On 10/5/17 11:36 AM, wrote:

BAO has just watched too many Dirty Harry movies. He also does not
understand that these are shaped charges that basically poke a hole in
something. It is not going to blast out several rooms.

I have also heard the range was more like 300 yards. When you look at
the ballistics of the 5.56 (.223) you see that out beyond around 300
yards the bullet starts dropping pretty fast. Unless he was shooting
tracers and walking the rounds in it is unlikely they would have been
that effective. I read one person saying 1000 yards and that would
have required holding 50-60 feet high.
This was a fat retired clerk, not Chris Kyle.



"Better to think first in terms of mid-range, in the 400- to 600-yard
ranges. For this type of shooting the .223 is ideal. In fact, there are
shooters doing outstanding work at 1,000 yards with the .223 cartridge.
But this is post-graduate stuff. For now let’s stay in the medium ranges."

http://tinyurl.com/y95ov8x2


The shooter likely wasn't targeting individuals, but, rather, just
shooting in tight bits of crowd. And I thought he had .308 rifles, too.
Range wasn't an issue.

You are talking about bench rest shooters (sighted in at the range
they are shooting at) and this guy was shooting off hand with a bump
stock. At 1000 yards those rounds would have been landing in the
parking lot if he did not use tracers or something to walk in the
fire.
At 300 yards he could shoot point blank and only be a foot or so off.

300 yards was the far target for qualifying with the rifle during basic
training. Couldn't be a foot
off either!

... but you were not trying to control a rifle with a bump stock and
you were sighted in at 200, cranking in the necessary elevation for
300.


Effective range less than 300. Shooting downhill. That 200 meter sight
might be correct for a 300’ elevation.