Bolt Action Assault Rifles Are “Insane”
BY Herschel Smith
5 years, 9 months ago
So says Salon.
Take a minute and look at all the military-speak gun-culture nomenclature babble they slap down: “match-grade” and “muzzle brake” and “infinitely adjustable folding stock” and all the rest of that crap. That’s the way they market guns like the “Scorpion,” and you know what it is? It’s insane.
OK, their use of “insane” is a kind of gun-lover-hipster-speak, and the Scorpio isn’t a semiautomatic assault rifle like the ones used to kill 20 children and six teachers at Sandy Hook, or the the 50 Muslim worshipers in Christchurch, New Zealand, or the 17 students and faculty killed in Parkland, Florida, or the 58 concertgoers in Las Vegas. But it’s the same style of weapon, with the same style aluminum stock and ventilated “rails” alongside its barrel, and it’s got capabilities far in excess of what would be necessary for any sort of legitimate civilian usage. “Loaded up with the faster 230-grain Berger round, I got hits on a 3-by-3-inch steel target at 2,000 yards,” the reviewer boasted. That is 1.13 miles, folks. This guy hit a target about the size of your forehead from over a mile away.
Who the hell needs to hit something, anything, from over a mile away? I’ll tell you who: an Army or Marine sniper, that’s who. They’re selling military-grade rifles to the general public. That’s what this sniper rifle is, and that’s what all the various iterations of the AR-15 style assault rifles are. Military-grade killing machines. All of them are for sale on the open market here in the United States of America. You can go down to your local gun store and buy one tomorrow. That means you’ll be able to set the damn Scorpion up on its bi-pod and hit a so-called “soft target” so far away you need a goddamn telescope to see it.
Oh, I can hear them now. The NRA and its ilk will tell you that this military-style assault rifle is just the thing to use hunting deer, or elk, or some other poor creature. But it’s really a killing machine, a thing you can buy that is designed for one purpose: to kill a “soft target” from up to a mile away. That is insane.
Even for your bolt action guns, they want to restrict the muzzle velocity, ballistic coefficient and bullet mass. Funny how the sons and daughters of hippies and beatniks morphed into communists so fast, yes? Say, maybe they were never really libertarians to begin with. Perhaps all they wanted was liberty for them – and slavery for you. Yes?
Crosby, Stills, Nash and Young grok the French revolution and Karl Marx.
On March 24, 2019 at 10:14 pm, Dan said:
The goal is and has always been TOTAL eradication of private firearms ownership. ANYTHING else they say is a lie. OF COURSE they are now
seeking a ban on “sniper rifles”. Once you eliminate “assault weapons”
there
On March 25, 2019 at 4:20 am, Nosmo said:
“…I got hits on a 3-by-3-inch steel target at 2,000 yards…”
Citation, please.
I very strongly suspect that was a 3-by-3 foot target, not inches, and at 2K yards that’s pretty good shooting but not remarkable (IIRC, the current record is 5,280 yards on the same 3 ft X 3 ft square target). But, given the media’s usual “attention to detail” and complete ignorance about anything related to firearms, I’m not surprised.
I think media is plenty gullible enough – and more than sufficiently ignorant – that we could start saying “3X3 millimeters” or, for that matter, “3X3 parsecs,” and they’d publish it accompanied by the usual outrage.
On March 25, 2019 at 5:38 am, Duke Norfolk said:
Yeah, it doesn’t matter what kind of gun it is, eventually they’ll want to ban it. If they took everything but your .22LR rifle they would then see that as a scary killing machine.
As for soft targets, I’m thinking this guy/gal has quite the soft head.
On March 25, 2019 at 6:53 am, Longbow said:
A raving leftist proves once again that it (the poor thing doesn’t like being objectified) knows nothing about firearms.
On March 25, 2019 at 7:39 am, Bill Sullivan said:
These idiots don’t realize that a lot of military rifles are developed by and for civilians. A sniper rifle is a target rifle with camo paint.
On March 25, 2019 at 9:22 am, Duke_Digger said:
LUCIAN K. TRUSCOTT IV
Where have I heard that name before??????
Oh wait one, isn’t he the one who wrote the novel “Dress Grey”? Yes that’s him, you remember it was about a West Point Cadet involved in a homosexual murder.
I wonder if it was really an autobiography?
On March 25, 2019 at 9:29 am, moe mensale said:
““…I got hits on a 3-by-3-inch steel target at 2,000 yards…”
Citation, please.”
https://www.tactical-life.com/firearms/rifles/victrix-armaments-rifles-scorpio-best/
The shooter claims 3″x3″ target. This isn’t a $300 Remington 700. It’s an expensive $7,500 precision long range rifle. Not including glass. Chambered in .300 Norma Magnum. We’re talking 1/4 MOA accuracy. That’s not unheard of for a high end gun in the hands of someone who can shoot it.
On March 25, 2019 at 11:26 am, Towser said:
Heck, I knew a feller who could take out the eye of a fly at two miles with just t’bacca spit. Whatr they gonna do? Ban chew?
On March 25, 2019 at 11:34 am, Frank Clarke said:
Well, if they ever decide to come and get the 350 million (est.) firearms in the hands of 120 million (est.) American gun owners, they’re going to have a very uncomfortable experience with the 300 billion (est.) rounds of ammunition in various folks’ gun safes…
On March 25, 2019 at 11:42 am, MTHead said:
Sorry Moe, 3″x3″ at 2,000 yrds. is total BS. Even a 3ft. plate at that distance is 80% miss. yes, even with a 7,500 dollar 1/4 moa shooter. Why? because long range shooting is mostly about the conditions your shooting under, than the equipment your using.
The rifle is just the one thing that’s under your control. so you spend the money to eliminate as many variables as possible. even if we use the spec. on the rifle itself, it’s impossible, as 1/4 moa is 5″ AT 2,000 yrds! that’s with all things being equal. and they NEVER are.
Miss a 1 mile per hour wind call at the 1,000 yrd mark, and you missed by 20″ inches at 2,000! go calc. a 10 fps standard velocity variation at 2,000yrds. this list goes on and on. Ballistics is the study of decaying curves, go play with any ballistics program and you will see for yourself.
These people LIE, mostly to themselves. the gun culture is not far behind in this respect. having worked in a gun store, just down the road from a V.A. hospital. I’ve personally met 300% of the snipers in Vietnam! and the long shots made on game! we shouldn’t be buying into something so easy to disprove.
It makes your enemy seem bigger than he is. put’s him inside your OODA loop. that’s how the commies brainwash the left into fear. leave them to it.
On March 25, 2019 at 11:52 am, Eric said:
Did happen to notice who this guy is related too? I wonder if his father is rolling in his grave
On March 25, 2019 at 4:09 pm, scott s. said:
” I got hits on a 3-by-3-inch steel target at 2,000 yards using 17.7 mils of elevation. After accounting for wind, I placed three consecutive shots on steel, with an overall vertical spread of about 25 inches. My horizontal spread was more like 10 inches”
Obviously a typo. And BTW, can anyone explain what “Teach Your Children” means?
The purpose of the NRA is to promote civilian marksmanship with weapons of war, as are the National Matches at Camp Perry.
On March 25, 2019 at 6:21 pm, Nosmo said:
@ moe mensale:
I said: “…I got hits on a 3-by-3-inch steel target at 2,000 yards…”
Citation, please.
You said: https://www.tactical-life.com/firearms/rifles/victrix-armaments-rifles-scorpio-best/
Copied from the link you provided:
“Loaded up with the faster 230-grain Berger round, I got hits on a 3-by-3-inch steel target at 2,000 yards using 17.7 mils of elevation. After accounting for wind, I placed three consecutive shots on steel, with an overall vertical spread of about 25 inches. My horizontal spread was more like 10 inches, which is pretty tight for that range.
You may have provided “citation” but not verification; neither my calculator nor my tape measure will accommodate a “vertical spread of about 25 inches” on a 3 inch-by-3 inch target, nor will either accommodate a “horizontal spread …more like 10 inches.” Maybe my calculator needs fresh batteries.
The author claimed: “At 100 yards, my best group came from by (sic) Berger 230-grain handload at 0.47 inches. Four of the five shots were actually closer to 0.3 inches before a flyer opened things up.” 0.47 @ 100 yds is .4489 MOA, extrapolating from 300 yards to 2,000 (6.66X farther) at .47″ = 3.13″ so – mathematically – hits on a 3″ target at 2K is possible. (“…closer to .3 inches…” doesn’t specify how close – .4699″ is “closer” – so I’ll stick with the published .47″). Extrapolating 300 yards to 5,280 yards – the current distance record, 17.6X farther – keeps the hits within 8.27″ of each other. The guy should try for the world record with that rifle.
On March 26, 2019 at 7:17 pm, moe mensale said:
@ whoever,
I provided the source. I didn’t say I vetted the article nor do I intend to. Not my job. I certainly can’t shoot that well and I’d wager most of us here can’t shoot that well either no matter how much “fine points” you want to throw around.
Regardless, there are people who can shoot that well. If you want to shit on someone shit on the guy who made the claims. Buy him a beer and ask him to prove you wrong. Personally, I don’t give a shit about it either way. I wouldn’t spend $10K on a setup even if I could afford it and I don’t shoot at targets a mile away. And I’m not losing any sleep over it.
On March 26, 2019 at 10:46 pm, Stacy0311 said:
Lucian K. Truscott IV is proof that sometimes the slowest sperm reaches the egg.
His grandfather had some big brass ones, his dad apparently did too. Lucian IV apparently has marshmallow for nuts. West Point grad (sometimes legacies turn out to be flaming failures) who resigned his commission when he got orders to Vietnam. Discharge was characterized as general under less than honorable conditions.
So yeah he’s a little bitch. But he writes for Salon so what can you expect