One of the police officers responding to the Uvalde shooting had the chance to take down the shooter, but didn't take the shot because he was unsure of his ability to hit a moving target at 150 yards with an elementary school as a backstop. How many posters here are confident that they'd actually be able to make this shot? How many of you even have experience shooting a moving target outside of video games?
https://time.com/6194220/uvalde-school-shooting-report/
I feel that when taking longer distance shots in the civilian world gets brought up here, too many posters approach this issue from a flat range aspect where targets are stationary and you have unlimited time to shoot, or from a military combat aspect where knowing what's beyond your target isn't much of an issue, tons of misses for every hit are to be expected, and fighting generally doesn't take place around civilians.
150 yards against a snap moving human sized target, standing free hand, with a pistol?
Good fricking luck. I would have to follow up like a motherfricker with my AR, and anyone who says differently is a liar.
>with a pistol?
The cop had a rifle.
Changes little. Backdrop a school? Forget about it.
Just about the only right decision they made that day.
Seconded.
They already killed children, and that's why they're refusing to publicize the CCTV footage.
You have absolutely no real life experience whatsoever, no offense meant. If you did, you would know police snipers are held back to the tightest limitations. Solid tactical doctrine says a police sniper should not even exist at all. A 100 yard shot for an active on duty lawman is risky buckaroo, crazy stuff. Meanwhile, military snipers have 1000 yard kills. /k has become kinda lame like your thread. Sorry man
What do snipers have to do with this?
Replace "snipers" with "shooters" you basedboy zoomie homosexual
What the frick are you on about? This is about a fleeting shot that a normal cop ended up in the position to take. This has nothing to do with people taking time to set up for a shot beforehand like snipers do.
Go back to vidya
>didn't take the shot because he was unsure of his ability to hit a moving target at 150 yards
He could have stepped towards the threat to get better chances.
>He could have stepped towards the threat to get better chances.
And another, and another. Quite quickly even.
And if the shooter turns; then you dive, brace, aim and fire.
But everyone knows the cops should have pressed the attach and run after/in, should have attacked at all even.
I'm saying nothing new here.
>How many of you even have experience shooting a moving target outside of video games?
Outside of shooting varmints where misses and bad shot placement are more acceptable than normal hunting, where do you even get this experience as a normal person?
Shooting at sticks floating down a river.
Duck hunting, kind of
Hunting birds and shotgun shooting sports are different though, considering the proper aiming method is more pointing the gun and the whole point of a shotgun is to increase your chances of hitting what you're aiming at.
Driven hunts. That being said, shooting a boar at 100 meters with a proper backstop is hardly comparable.
Solution here is obvious, just armor elementary scho exteriors to withstand common rifle rounds out to a few hundred meters.
>1cm RHA over brick
>design walls so most shots would impact at excessive angles to force a ricochet
Next cop can spray and pray, star fort schools are the future
I suspect that officer would have taken the shot in hindsight
>How many of you even have experience shooting a moving target outside of video games?
Trained for it on a known distance range at boot camp. Also with gas mask on. It wasn't scored so I don't know if I hit anything.
I'd still take the shot. I'd rather risk hitting a bystander than an attacker with a rifle getting inside.
Cops need to spend more time on the range so they can take shots like that with confidence.