How long of a distances is it actually practical to be able to shoot at for a normal person?

How long of a distances is it actually practical to be able to shoot at for a normal person? I've heard claims that about 200 yards is the upper limit for practical purposes.

  1. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Depends on the type of shooting. Position, optics or no, what type of optics, all that.
    I usually shoot to 300m with irons but prone with a bag. I wouldn't do it offhand

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      thats a cool target detector thing

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Tldr us on the gadget pls

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Depends on the type of shooting. Position, optics or no, what type of optics, all that.
      Not the distance you can reasonably get hits at given your gun and shooting ability. The distances you'll reasonably want to be able to shoot out to for various practical purposes.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        afaik 200ish is what's generally accepted as "combat range" but if you're not doing any combat you're better off training for whatever type of shooting you'll be doing the most

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >The distances you'll reasonably want to be able to shoot out to for various practical purposes.
        Ah, that all depends on your geographical location and what you are choosing to do with your gun. What game are you hunting and where? Or if you're worried about defense do you live in an apartment building in the city, out in the suburbs, in a rural area in the middle of nowhere? Is the land around you flat and clear or are there hills, trees, etc?

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          >that depends on tons of specifics
          I'm looking for a more general answer of what the upper limit would reasonably be.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >I'm looking for a more general answer of what the upper limit would reasonably be.
            Try answering those questions I posed for you and then I can give you a good answer.

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              The general answer would be what the upper end of those would realistically be without requiring a specific scenario.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                I'm not interested in giving you a general answer because general answers are pointless.
                I tried to give you a good answer instead but you don't seem to want that. Carry on, you do you.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >I tried to give you a good answer
                I've been in 7 different areas both rural and urban across 5 different states in the past decade, and am currently looking at moving anywhere other than where I am now. A good answer for me is a general answer.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                2000yd then. lots of the best snipers on the planet seem to manage. >2250 gets even rarer. there you go congratulations

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >2000yd then. lots of the best snipers on the planet seem to manage.
                Shots taken by snipers backed by all the intelligence and planning that an army has at its disposal are completely outside of what you might encounter as a normal person outside of specifically setting up for those shots at a rifle range.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                git gud fag

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                I'm trying to remember these numbers off the top of my head but here is what I can try to tell you.

                As a general average, about 90% of firefights occur within 300 meters. This is just kind of a conglomerate of different environments, some biased more towards shorter ranges and some biased more towards longer ranges, but with -overall- relatively moderate deviations from the average. I believe engagement distances in Iraq followed a more typical range profile.

                There are of course anomalies and outliers that break this trend, by a lot. In Afghanistan only about 50% of engagements occurred within 300 meters. If you live in the Rocky Mountains or something then this may be very relevant for you. Keep in mind that this was partially also because Afghan insurgents deliberately tried to force longer range engagements since they were at a severe disadvantage up close.

                Notice that this isn't necessarily a reflection of the limits of marksmanship, rather more just the interaction of probability and environment. It should also be pointed out that casualties are not proportionately distributed across engagement ranges - long range Taliban gunfire for example seems to have been far more useful for harassment than actually inflicting any meaningful damage.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                That seems a bit different from "practical to shoot at". Serious answer to OP, 800-1000yd is the fairly standard "distance shooting" point. Don't need really exotic ammo, a normal person can learn to make fairly tight groups. Do need to be somewhere with that kind of shooting, the West would be the most common area. And it'll take lots of practice of course and good glass.

                400-700yd I think is pretty practical for almost anyone. Even pretty bog standard 308 will not be getting into really challenging territory and can retain about or above 1000 ft-lbs energy. You can hunt with that at least theoretically (though you shouldn't if you're not a very good shot and in the right area).

                As you say for "fire fights" shorter is more likely, but is that even something other than gay LARP in the US?

                As far as civilian defense engagements, like 97% are <10yd, and nearly 100% <20yd. At over 100yd you might face more challenges making the case that it was still defense at all, though if you're on your own rural property and they were armed that'd help.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                also energy chart related.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >That seems a bit different from "practical to shoot at".
                OP is asking for "practical to be able to shoot at" not "practical to shoot at". I really have to question if being able to shoot at 800-1000 yards would ever make a difference in a practical situation as an average Joe. From my understanding, hunting at that distance involves scouting beforehand out of seasons, then setting up at that distance from a popular spot because you want to shoot that far rather than out of necessity.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                OP is a gay and refused to get specifics so I took a guess at "practical". Like I'd call 800-1000yd a "practical" though challenging long distance precision competitive shooting goal, because you can still go a long ways with relatively cheap basic bolt action 308. Like almost anyone living in the west near blm land or owning enough of their own who can afford guns at all could have that be a hobby they could get into, don't need 400+cpr ammo (cheapest 338lm I see right now lol) or $5-10k in gun setup or something nuts. If we're considering 'average Joe' then probably 100-400 would be as far as anyone would consider hunting typically, and 500-700 would be into unusual extreme hunting or alternatively middle-range competitive/hobby precision shooting.

                But who knows what they want to do. They got mad when asked, wanted a "general answer".

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >long distance precision competitive shooting
                Competitions aren't practical situations you tard.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Yes they are, that's what probably the majority of gun usage by volume is for lol. Don't need to shoot much if you purely want to hunt for meat, or just stay in sufficient practice for home defense. It's very practical.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Yes they are

                >going so far down the consumer rabbit hole that you start using a different definition of the word practical to justify dropping more money on capabilities you will never be able to utilize outside of a controlled environment

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                practical
                /ˈpraktJk(ə)l/
                Learn to pronounce
                adjective
                1.
                of or concerned with the actual doing or use of something rather than with theory and ideas.

                Competitions is something you can and will do if you're interested. Training for them is practical.
                Combat is something you're very unlikely to do.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >football is practical
                >video games are practical
                >ironing clothes in situations where it would make no practical sense to iron clothes is practical
                Fuck off retard.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Yes ESL-kun. Here in America where we speak English we do indeed use "practical" for things like "what's a practical sport to get into" where various ball games often are (since they can be practiced all over the country) and skulling might not be (equipment cost and rivers etc). Skiing is a very practical sport to get into in much of the country and utterly impractical in other parts, etc. Video games are highly practical everywhere which is part of why they're so popular, very very cheap to get into, can be incredibly high value in terms of $/hr, etc. The last one is you just being mad because you're a retard and don't speak English very well.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                You are the retard, possibly with a side of autism.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Yes they are

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                practical
                /ˈpraktJk(ə)l/
                Learn to pronounce
                adjective
                1.
                of or concerned with the actual doing or use of something rather than with theory and ideas.

                Competitions is something you can and will do if you're interested. Training for them is practical.
                Combat is something you're very unlikely to do.

                I think there is some confusion between connotations of practical here here.

                The first is "what can I realistically do". Can I practically play video games? When you phrase it like that, we understand the answer to be yes. And so shooting out to 1000 yards etc is practical.

                The second connotation is "for purposes of necessity". Are video games practical, are they a practical matter. In that sense, much less so.

                Obviously you can get into target shooting relatively easily whereas the question of "can you practically engage in combat" comes off as much more confusing. However, if you ever do need to engage in combat, then it is a matter of extreme importance.

                >preparing for the possibility of combat is gay larp

                Am I on PrepHole right now? The board that came up with /bag/ and who knows how many memes about ' ' that ' ' subject? Heckin' reddit demonstrates more aptitude for that kind of stuff than this thread has.

                Then again, I suppose talk of long range shooting generally attracts recreational plinkers/hunters who acknowledge and appreciate this aspect of the 2A's spirit only in a very abstract and impersonal manner.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                There is no such thing anon. Like, you want true ultra upper limit, I think the longest 100% confirmed kill for a US military sniper was in 2004 during the Iraq war when Sgt. Kremer killed an insurgent at 2500yd. Longest confirmed kill in military history I think was by a Canadian sniper at 3,870 yards, also in Iraq:
                >https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/canadian-elite-special-forces-sniper-sets-record-breaking-kill-shot-in-iraq/article35415651/
                So there you go for upper limit. You need specialized gear for that, that was with a Tac-50, previous record was 338 lapua magnum, other people use fancy stuff like 416 barrett etc. You can't do that with typical rifles.

                But those kinds of ranges wouldn't be considered as practical or for that matter ethical at all for hunting. And in heavily forested hilly areas there may never be a shot even to 1000yd. I live in northern new england and typical hunting range is <200yd. There aren't fixed numbers here so much as equations and math and rules of thumb for a given environment and target. Like military considers even 60 ftlbs useful energy because it's enough to cause serious injury, and casualties are useful too not just kills, but for self defense 240ftlbs is often considered minimum target, and for hunting medium game or bigger 800-1000 ftlbs is often the benchmark. So you take your gun and bullets and their ballistic coefficient and expected altitude/environment and run the numbers, then tie that back to operator capability, bullet drop/drift and so on. Or for that matter budget.

                As far as hard data goes, I was surprised to discover that when some eggheads literally collated every SWAT sniper shooting that ever happened on US soil, they discovered
                >the average distance to engagement was 51 yards
                >the single longest shot ever taken by a police sniper was 187 yards

                Those seem like almost comically close distances, especially for the ultra glassed up $10k+ specialist match grade rifles you know they get.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >especially for the ultra glassed up $10k+ specialist match grade rifles you know they get.
                Eh. If I was called for shit like a hostage situation with children I'd want every last minuscule bit of advantage possible. You're not hunting deer there, if you need to make a good shot and fail result could be pretty bad. 5 figures on kit is kinda irrelevant compared to training and salary too.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                https://i.imgur.com/6UeClxC.jpg

                [...]
                As far as hard data goes, I was surprised to discover that when some eggheads literally collated every SWAT sniper shooting that ever happened on US soil, they discovered
                >the average distance to engagement was 51 yards
                >the single longest shot ever taken by a police sniper was 187 yards

                Those seem like almost comically close distances, especially for the ultra glassed up $10k+ specialist match grade rifles you know they get.

                Yeah. With those rifles and raining and at those distances you would be able to make a shot within a width of the bullet of a shot. Basically be able to hit the pupil of the eye if you had to, reliably. Not bad.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                My condolences. Life must be hard with an intellectual disability.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            There is no such thing anon. Like, you want true ultra upper limit, I think the longest 100% confirmed kill for a US military sniper was in 2004 during the Iraq war when Sgt. Kremer killed an insurgent at 2500yd. Longest confirmed kill in military history I think was by a Canadian sniper at 3,870 yards, also in Iraq:
            >https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/canadian-elite-special-forces-sniper-sets-record-breaking-kill-shot-in-iraq/article35415651/
            So there you go for upper limit. You need specialized gear for that, that was with a Tac-50, previous record was 338 lapua magnum, other people use fancy stuff like 416 barrett etc. You can't do that with typical rifles.

            But those kinds of ranges wouldn't be considered as practical or for that matter ethical at all for hunting. And in heavily forested hilly areas there may never be a shot even to 1000yd. I live in northern new england and typical hunting range is <200yd. There aren't fixed numbers here so much as equations and math and rules of thumb for a given environment and target. Like military considers even 60 ftlbs useful energy because it's enough to cause serious injury, and casualties are useful too not just kills, but for self defense 240ftlbs is often considered minimum target, and for hunting medium game or bigger 800-1000 ftlbs is often the benchmark. So you take your gun and bullets and their ballistic coefficient and expected altitude/environment and run the numbers, then tie that back to operator capability, bullet drop/drift and so on. Or for that matter budget.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        No further than 200 yards IMO.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Depends on the type of shooting. Position, optics or no, what type of optics, all that.
      this.
      It really depends on the situation. Are we talking shooting offhand with iron sights? Or are we talking off a bench with fancy glass and match ammo? And what standard of accuracy are we talking here? Hitting a torso at 200 yards? Hitting a deer's vitals at 200 yards?
      Hitting a bullseye at 200 yards?

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Tldr us on the gadget pls

  2. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    yeah

  3. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Fucking shitposters

  4. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Off a bench you should be able to hit a couple hundred yards with irons. If you have a scope it's mostly a limit of other factors like knowing your dope and what the weather is like. I've hit big targets over irons with my nug at over 500 meters, but that was a huge target (1/2 scale buffalo) even then, it's a long fucking way to shoot over irons.
    With 10x that target is hilariously easy to hit with practically any rifle cartridge.

  5. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Fairly easy to consistently hit head size target from prone at 300 with service rifle.

  6. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    I practice shooting every weekend in the desert.
    What's a reasonable level of accuracy to achieve for shooting offhand with irons using a 7.62x39 and 5.56 rifle?
    Rifles are vz58, wasr-3 (5.56), and mini14 (pre-79).
    I try to ding a 12" plate at 100yds, and depending on the wind and the gun I can hit between 3 - 6 out of 10 shots.
    I am practicing to get up to 7/10, but I want to eventually hit 28/30.

  7. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    If a normal person had to use a gun for self defense it would be within like 10 yards. Shift Maybe 100.

    Hunting I've seen people hunt over 100 yards but I've seen way more hunt around 50 - 60 yards

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      People who haven't hunted do overestimate range a lot. Even out here almost all hunting is <200yd. And seriously if you can't close to <100yd you are just shit and need to practice non-gun stuff. That said in the west stuff like Elk hunting often does have to be done at longer range, but that's pretty specialized.

  8. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    200 yds is probably about right with standing shots for an average shit shooter but it doesn't take all that much practice to extend that farther. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eHTsaCo03Q

  9. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    At what ranges does it become difficult to shoulder and hold the rifle steady enough to hit a man sized target?

    I’m not a nogunz, I rarely shoot and have never shot beyond 100yd

  10. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >one scope for normal daylight conditions
    >one for NODs
    >one for hipfire

  11. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    300-400 yards with a standard ar-15 and optic. Past that something with more magnification and power.

  12. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    you should be able to hit a person sized target from the prone at 300m
    that being said this thread is b8 for noguns

  13. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Bunch of non-shooting fucks ITT.

    When I was in the Marines, you fired M16A1 with iron sights seated, kneeling and offhand at a bullseye target from 200 yards.
    You fired at the shoulders and head silhouette target kneeling and seated from 300 yards, and at full human silhouette from 500 yards prone.

    Again, all this over iron sights.

    The secret is in a good tight loop sling and lots of practice snapping-in.

    You had to qualify at the range every year.

    I hear people bragging about 100 yard accuracy and it's hard for me not to sneer.

  14. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    I did some training with the Aussies when I was on Talisman Saber 14. Good group of guys. I like the uniforms.

  15. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Variables matter, but I am a normal person. I shoot 100, 200, 600 and 800m cos those are the distances my range operates. With a bolt action .308 and a 4.5-30 scope, from bipod
    Shooting offhand? With my rifle i think i'd be pretty rubbish, its extremely heavy and long. Probably only practical accuracy to 100 or 200m offhand.

  16. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    With a spotter with optics and a M2, over a kilometer. Spotter walks the machinegunner onto the target.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *