<font color="#ffffcc">I would have thought he would be scared in a Colonel sort of way, not a Major sort of way :D

Seriously. I live and work right in the middle of where these shootings are happening. Im no more scared than ever of being shot. The odds are so low as to be infinitesimal that any one individual would be targeted. Your just as likely to get struck by lightning, so why worry. Just be aware of your surroundings. Don't let the media get you worked up into hysterical fits.</font>

I dont think it is the scare for oneself... it is the scare for others. when there is a drive by shooting, the crowd can scatter and take covers. some can run, some can hide. normal firearms has a poor accuracy in untrained hands. it is crazy but less life-threatening. with a sniper rifle, thats a different matter

Groj, not only CAN i imagine footballhooligans with firearms, i also knew a couple of em. They're all behind bars now, but the fact that they exist remains. There are a lot more people in Holland that own pistols or rifles than you can possibly imagine. Of course that doesn't mean they put it in their pockets when they go out for a snack or something, but they ARE out there. Gunlaw or no.

That's funny, I've _always_ viewed it as abuse!

The government is supposed to protect me from violations of my rights - not be the prime violator of said rights.</font>[/QUOTE]Agreed. :D

and Magick: There are quite a number of people here who have the intelligence to realize that prohibition doesn't work, wether for alcohol, tobacco, drugs or firearms. As for helmet laws and seatbelt laws those are two prime examples of the national nanny movement.

Agreed again. :D

The number of people who find seatbelt laws silly (as evidenced on this thread) makes me wonder how it got passed into law (or stays that way).

As for the sniping wacko, I hope there is a pattern. Magick pointed out that you may not be able to see patterns until after the fact. Let's hope. Otherwise, it's incredibly more difficult to catch the guy.

Are we seeing the newest face of terrorism? Twenty terrorists plotting a large tragedy is one kind of thing to fear - but individual fanatics randomly causing havoc is quite another. I will be so very relieved if this does turn out to be your typical middle-aged mal-adjusted white man.

I'm all for the repeal of helmet and seatbelt laws. On the condition that anyone riding/driving without them has a filled out organ donar card. I am always happy to help St. Darwin thin the population and improve the gene pool.

Having survied two motorcyle accidents where wearing a helmet made the difference between surviving and dying I am astounded when people whine and bitch about helmet laws.

[quote]Originally posted by Timber Loftis:

Quote:

Originally posted by Night Stalker: Well, so much for not introducing the gun debate. Does that mean you can't outlaw something if it is considered a social ill? What about drugs?? A proactionary law (outlawing something seen as a social ill BEFORE it can be put to ill use) abounds in the law. Sorry, but if the government can tell you you must wear a seatbelt, it can certainly tell you you can't own a gun. (Note - I'm NOT saying it *should*, just that it *can* and *does* and it is not seen as abuse).

Slightly [img]graemlins/offtopic.gif[/img]
[img]graemlins/rant.gif[/img]
Depends on who you talk to TL. IMNSHO I cant stand seat belt laws. And I find it incredibly offensive, as well as a violation of my rights, that the govt *tells* me that I *must* wear a seat belt. Same thing with helmet laws. If I choose to wear one then it's my business and noone elses. I happen to think that it is a gross abuse of power on the part of the federal govt. It's not that I object to wearing a seatbelt(I almost always wear one), I just dont feel it's the place of government to tell me what I can and cant do as regards my personal safety.
[img]graemlins/rant.gif[/img]

As for the sniper issue. I agree that it is completely heinous(sp?)! When they catch this SOB, I hope they string him up by his thumbs, do a few unspeakably vile things to him, then execute him. Unfortunately, I think Maryland is a 'No Death Penalty' state.

PS: To Grojlach...As a courtesy to other posters, could you not make comments patently designed to invoke the issue that you're supposedly 'not invoking'? It's petty and rude.

Erm...sorry...didn't see this before I posted. But, you're right.

Back on topic: I heard on the news that the boy who was recently shot was still in 'stable, but critical condition'. Thank goodness for small miracles. I hope he ends up being ok. *sends positive thoughts Maryland way*

[quote]Originally posted by Night Stalker:

Quote:

Originally posted by Grojlach: [qb]I'll refrain from introducing anti-gun propaganda into to this debate. ;) But it's terrible something like this happens, of course... :(

ive said it before, and i'll say it again. if you stop GOOD Americans from having guns, the only ones that would have them are the BAD Americans. drugs are illegal, yet people can get them pretty much anywhere. some guns are illegal, yet people own them. if this guy wanted a sniper rifle to kill innocent people, he would get one illegaly. he is killing innocent people, i dont think getting an illegal weapon will pose much of a mental delema. he is sick, plain and simple.

I dont see why we dont just get a professional group of CIA snipers to snipe this sniper... I mean.. like... get people on top of every tall building in the maryland/virginia area and wait for a shot to go off, the screams alone will point a man being within that distance then they just have to sweep the area from above and look for him... satelite tracking is good too... if someone can get the exact coordanents of the victim as they are shot and the angle of fire then one can angulate the height and direction which the sniper was at... and thus he can be tracked, and found quickly... escpecially if law enforcement and the national guard is posted in the right place at the right time in great enough number... unfortunelty these things are impossible to do and maintain ordinary life,[sarchasm] so I suppose i'ts beter to let a few more hundred people die then let hundreds of thousands of man hours go down the drain just to catch one man...[/sarchasm]

Frankly I think this guy is picking his targers, see how he is making his targets diverse? he's trying to kill one of everyone [img]tongue.gif[/img] His next target will probably be an african american little girl, considering... but then again we don't actually have enough information and evidence to truley say what he's aiming at, or if what he's aiming at has anything to do with anything at all... maybe he is unsatisfied that the yound boy he fired at didnt die and will try to finish the job later... who knows!?

I dont believe that is possible. you can possibly discern the shooter location by checking the impact, and the sound of the general direction of the gun shot.. like I said, this is not a combat situation, the shooter can blend in with the civillian after he makes the attack. and by the time the CIA snipers found out where the shooter was located, he would be long gone.

I sorta remember seeing a thing on the Discovery channel about gunshot sensors that can pinpoint the location of a shot from over a mile away. I seem to recall to that Redwood City (a suburb of San Francisco) was experimenting with them about a year ago. If these are available they should get em deployed.

The thing that is really bugging me is not who it is, but why this person is doing this. While I, as would all of you I expect, would rather have this person caught than listen to his reasons, I really do want to know what would drive a person to this. I am ruling out the possibility of mental illness, BTW.

/)eath, you live on a miliatary base or so I seem to recall. Anyway, the range on a sniper rifle goes up to thousands of yards. In trained hands anyway. This guy has some skill obviously, but its unknown if hes really good in the same way miliatary snipers are.

Anyway, lets be conservative and say he can hit someone from 1000 yards. Thats a long way. Now imagine yourself as a sniper on top of a building 1000 yards away. You hear screams, someone goes down, what do you do. You havent seen the flash. You havent heard the shot. You see a white van and BANG!, you waste another innocent.

Snipers are not the answer. IMHO the most likley end to this will be either the guy get bored and starts a new hobby, or hell get unlucky and some armed citizen will come round the corner at the right moment. Im sure there are plenty armed citizens walking around right now.

for the off topic topic of gun control: i think the only gun control NEEDED is parental gun control. there was a time when parents (mostly fathers) spent enough time with their children (mostly sons) to teach them respect not only of guns but people as well. if nathan wishes to hunt with his sons (when we get one at least) that will be fine, as long as he takes the time to teach respect as he teaches him to aim. a lot of the misuse of guns, i believe, stems from the breakdown of family values, and id on;t mean we should stay in bad marriages, or get into bad marriages for the kids sake, just that kids need more family then they're getting. i also believe in not having a gun int he house. family owned guns, imo, should be kept separate from bullets and one of two being outside the home, in a shed or garage.

on topic: i am happy the boy is doing better. i hate hearing about children being hurt. i am very scared of the fact iw ill someday have to send my kids to school. i am scared tot ake them to the grocery store with allt he abductions lately.

motive?

I've explained my opinion on sniper as a terrible killing tool, and the effect is creating a maximum amount of fear. the method of his killing, the route he picks and the victim he chose in itself is sending a message. the whole picture's message. as to exactly what it is, I have no idea but to wait for someone more versed on the details of the crime.

but one thing I know is, random killing instills fear, more so with sniper rifle. the terror disablizes the victims' ability to function socially. I dont want you to read as I believe this is a terrorist attack. it may not. it has to be examined through many ways.

first, whats the simplest way of killing and getting away? sniper rifle is a perfect choice. so that leads me to think, how did he get the sniper rifle in the first place? was he a soldier? if so, what rank? has he participated in any combat? whats his family background?

lets say the second case, he is an american hating terrorist. terrorist do not just kill, they send messages along the killing. I am sure a lot of things can be uncovered from a more learnt person, by examing (that leads me back to the above) the methods of the killing.

[ 10-08-2002, 01:10 PM: Message edited by: 250 ]

well said, everything. personally I think those retired soldiers or soldiers on vacations can hunt this guy down and shoot the crap out of him.

you will be fine. I am sure american armed forces will deal with this incident with great efficiency

[ 10-08-2002, 01:17 PM: Message edited by: 250 ]

<font color = lightgreen>One of the latest news articles here.

They are saying some things I have already said. However, they cannot assume that the Shooter is unemployed simply because the attacks took place during normal working hours; he could be self-employed.
Of course he is becoming more brazen and challenging authorities; like I said, he views himself as superior and will not be stopped until he is killed. The Shooter will not allow himself to be captured alive, but he will leave some sort of note or video explaining himself behind.
The Shooter has not suffered a recent traumatic event and subsequently snapped. The profile of those who "go postal" is to attack their family or former place of employment, kill as many people as they can, then kill themselves.

The article asks what kind of political statement the Shooter is trying to make. What is the single largest political issue right now in America? Iraq. The Shooter is not a Middle Eastern man trying to terrorize America into not attacking Iraq. Rather, the Shooter is an American who wants us to think that terrorists are attacking us so that we will hit Iraq right now. No, he's not doing that with the permission of some secret government conspiracy, he doing it on his own. Besides, do you think two Middle Eastern men driving around a lot during working hours would be a little suspicious these days? The Shooter relies on anonymity and his ability to blend in; hence, he is American.

Could the Shooter be simply a thirll-killer? Perhaps, but soon the thrill of killing people from a distance will wear off and he'll want to try and kill someone up close, just to see if he can get away with it.</font>

well said, Azred, except I dont believe he is a thrill-killer

there is also a possibility I did not see the article listing. in sniper school, the graduate test include a list of difficult tasks involve target identification, ranged shooting, stealth and stalking, with stalking being the MOST difficult task. would this guy be a sniper school-drop out and venting his anger at the unfair system? the article said the shooter appeared to be an expert hunter, so it would be ironic if the hunter stalks innocent just to taunt the military system, expressing his under-estimated ability and neglacted ego.

if this is true, it could explain the experty this man possessed and his culture back ground...

just a guess

[ 10-08-2002, 01:34 PM: Message edited by: 250 ]

<font color="#ffffcc">Just some comments on some comments that have been made.
The .223 round is not considered a "sniper" calibre. The .223 in civilian life is considered a "varmit" round. The popular "sniper" calibres are .308, .50 and 30-06....oh the 7.62mm is also used in some places. The .223 is a rather light rifle round and is subject to windage over distances.

People keep talking abut the degree of profesional training this guy needs to have to accomplish these shots. With a .223 Remmington with a 5x Redfield scope at the age of 12 I was killing groundhogs out to a distance of 200-250 yards. If a 12 year old can hit a varmit the size of a rather large cat or small dog, think how easy it is to hit a person sized target.</font>

<font color=orange>The .308 and the 7.62x51 are the same round. The .223 and the 5.56x45 are the same round. The accuracy of the .223 (5.56x45) has greatly increased over the last decade. While the US Army says that it's maximum effective range is 600 meters in the hands of a expert; with the proper load and a built rifle, 1000 meters isn't out of the question. If one loads up a heavier bullet windage isn't that big of an issue. Most national match target shooters are now taking the AR15 (civilian version of the M-16) and building 1000 yard rifles out of them.

Of course it could be a bolt gun, which might explain why no spent cartridges have been found. Most of the Rifle makers in the Us and abroad make a .223 heavy barral rifle for varmit hunting. They also make dandy sniper rifles. Lots of police departments use them (.223 bolt guns) as opposed to larger calibars because they don't over penetrate.

My personel take on this situation is:
A) It's a couple of terrorists (possibly of mideastern descent, but most likely Americans that sympathize with Osama) bent on creating chaos.
B) A couple of guys with a grudge against who knows what and they are taking
it out on civilians. Maybe some militia group or something.
</font>

To follow up on what Sir said and connect the dots, the .223 (5.56 mm NATO) round is the round used by the M-16 and the Colt AR15, as far as I understand it. Though it may well be considered a varmit-hunter among civilians, it sees a lot of battlefield usage among NATO arms, including (and I feel sure I'll get corrected if I'm wrong): the FN-FAL and the very reliable Steyr-AUG, both bullpulp designs.

Have all the shootings been distance shootings? I mean - they've been very accurate for the most part, but haven't some of the shootings been from closer range? Sorry for my ignorance of the facts on this one, folks.

[ 10-08-2002, 05:14 PM: Message edited by: Timber Loftis ]

correct - we use the M-16 in DK. Only we call it M-95 to confuse the enemy ;)

The Swedish Army has a sniper rifle that uses 7.62

All from long range

[ 10-08-2002, 05:38 PM: Message edited by: Ar-Cunin ]

<font color="#ffffcc"> Gaaaaaaaah Im locked out from work again. :(

Sir T. [img]smile.gif[/img] lookforward to discussing firearms with you when I get the next chance. In all my years using Rifles and Pistols I have never heard anyone promote the .223 as a "sniper" round. the .223 is a far cry from a .308 and that has always been the round of choice by anyone I have been associated with for a sniper round unless you start talking 3/4 mile or so then they start talking about about the big .50. The AR15,M16 are assault type weaposn and are not designed for long range fire. THe M16 round is designed to tumble..definately NOT something you want happening for long range shots.

The M14 was used in a pinch as a sniper weapon but was not Ideal and before that they used the 30-06 (talk about over penetrating)

Maybe for short range urban situations they use the .223 but I would think they would rather use some kind of expanding round out of a .308 so that you had essentially the same balistics.

As for effectiveness we would never use our .223 for a human or deer size target if we had access to a larger round, such as a .243, .284 or .308 (I really like the .284 but they are hard to find. We lost several deer after we hit them and knocked them down with the .223, found one of them later and there was a circular bare spot where the hot load .223 exploded on contact with the skin and blew all the hair and surface level of the hide right off but didnt stop the deer :(

You can turn an M16 into a distance weapon but out of the box it isn't desigend for that.....I know I guy who had a special built 7mm Mag desigend as a sniper weapon...he uses it to pick white tail deer off at 700 yards [img]smile.gif[/img] It has a 22lb match barrel.

the last thing this "stream of conciousness" wants to say is that there are differences between civilian rounds labeled as .308 and military rounds labeled as 7.62 anyway, here is hoping I can get in from work again tomorrow...I tried the host file trick to no avail...I can get to the IP addy, but not into the forums via the link from that page :( Im afraid Z might be using some kind of non-standard port for his forums :( </font>

[ 10-08-2002, 05:52 PM: Message edited by: MagiK ]

[quote]Originally posted by Morgan_Corbesant:

Quote:

Originally posted by Night Stalker: ive said it before, and i'll say it again. if you stop GOOD Americans from having guns, the only ones that would have them are the BAD Americans. drugs are illegal, yet people can get them pretty much anywhere. some guns are illegal, yet people own them.

This is EXACTLY why I'm against any kind of firearms prohibition. You can look at the history of ANY particular country with regards to violence and legal possession of any kind of weapon and EASILY see that the law abiding citizens aren't the problem.

Does anybody _really_ believe that disarming the law abiding people actually achieves a desirable goal?

Self-defence is a RIGHT, and disarming people seriously cuts into that right; especially when all the criminals just laugh at the law and arm themselves anyways.

I read a study recently about two different jurisdictions in the US; one of these jurisdictions had the highest murder rate in North America - it also had the most strict gun laws in all of North America. The other jurisdiction (that just happened to be across a state border) had much easier access to firearms - it also had the LOWEST murder rate in the US (if not all of NA).

(Some of you might guess the first one mentioned is Washington D.C.)

A couple of comments. Yes, I agree with your assessment, but it's important to note that the caliber he's discussing here is a center-fire cartridge - MUCH more powerful than yer typical varmint round (usually .22LR; though .223 is used) It has sufficient velocity to get good accuracy out to 600+ yds. I still prefer the .243 for nuisance varmint hunting, mainly because wolf and coyote are a problem up here. (Can you say *splat* when shooting groundhogs?? ;) )

Also...addressing a popular misconception here...the M-16 round is *NOT* designed to tumble!! The M-16 is a rifle, this means that there are a number of spiral grooves inside the barrel designed to impart a spin to the projectile that leaves the barrel. This spin is exactly why rifles are preferable to old style smoothbore weapons -- they impart a stability to the round that makes it much more accurate. By nature, a spinning bullet does not tumble. In fact, studies by Dr. Fackler have shown that .223 rounds (such as those fired by the M-16) only tumble when fired through foliage; and even then they tumble EXACTLY ONCE, and then resume a steady trajectory.

A Marine armoury sergeant tells me that older M-16s with worn barrels (and less twist) were prone to tumbling, but these weapons are obviously not desirable for sniper use.

You need to learn how to shoot! [img]tongue.gif[/img]

I know Indians that shoot whitetails and *moose* with .22LR single-shots!

The .223 is not a sniper round as MagiK has said. When I was in the Marines we qualified from 200,300,and 500 yards on the M-16A1. And 500 was really pushing it. Marine snipers use a Remington .308, 30-06, or .50. Likely this guy was trained on a .223 and has a spiffy assault rifle that he thinks makes him cool. Personally I'd like to shoot him with my own spiffy assault rifle.
And 250 I read the book by Carlos Hathcock also, the guy was amazing. He has since died of Parkinsons disease a few years ago.

Well, it is very close to home here. This is a very weird thing out of the "ordinary" shootings and battles. Bad, and very sad. Everyone is pulling together---> My prayers and ears, eyes ..

*\Conan/*

<font color=orange>Hi LofA and Majik! Been a while since I talked to you both! My last tour of duty was with the 125th ARCOM Rifle team. I personally used a National Match M-14 (7.62x51 or .308), but those rifles are now being phased out of the inventory. The ALL ARMY Rifle Team switched over to the AR15 National Match Rifle and went to a heavier bullet than what is currently used by the US and NATO. They use a Speer 82 grain match grade bullet. Their particular load is as accurate as any match grade .308 currently on the market. Now that bullet has to be matched with a certain twist (1 in 7 if my memory is correct) in barrel. The venerable M-16a1 had a twist rate of 1 in 12 and fired a much lighter bullet, which decreased it's range to 600 meters. When the Marines adopted the M-16a2, they went with a heavier barrel and a 1 in 9 twist rate to match the slightly heavier NATO adopted round. The M-16a2 is a much more accurate weapon at a longer distance. The National Match is even more so!

Where am I going with this you ask? Well if you go purchase a Shotgun Newspaper at your local Walmart, you'll find that you can purchase one of these babies at about $200 more than a standard AR15. I should think for around $1000. That's another reason why police departments like them so much.

BTW, at Camp Perry (The biggest Rifle Match in the US), the National Match AR15 is the Target Rifle of choice in the Service Rifle catagory. the Marine Corp Rifle Team as won several Service Rifle Matches with and no longer use the M-14NM.

LofA you are correct in stating that the Sniper rifle of choice is a 7.62x51. (Remington makes them). But next time you watch the news pay close attention to what the SF guys are using on their M-16a2s and M-4s.</font>

[ 10-08-2002, 10:02 PM: Message edited by: Sir Taliesin ]

hey sir T , my dad was in that rifle unit as well. If you shoot like he does then maybe you should go to D.C.,find the sniper , and shoot back. My pops was out last weekend banging bulls eyes at 2000 yards with iron sights as preparation for hunting season this year.

A couple of comments. Yes, I agree with your assessment, but it's important to note that the caliber he's discussing here is a center-fire cartridge - MUCH more powerful than yer typical varmint round (usually .22LR; though .223 is used) It has sufficient velocity to get good accuracy out to 600+ yds. I still prefer the .243 for nuisance varmint hunting, mainly because wolf and coyote are a problem up here. (Can you say *splat* when shooting groundhogs?? ;) )

<font color="#ffffcc">My varmit gun IS a .223 and it IS a center fire and I WON't use it on Deer or other large game because there is too much of a chance of just maiming the animal rather than a quick kill. Oh and I have seen groundhogs shrug off LR rounds from 100 yards. The .243 is a better all round varmit gun I think because you can better take down the bigger critters but I never liked it for white tail....too many shoulder shots didn't drop. (yes I hit them..you can hear the impact when you hit an animal with a bullet) We also used the .223 for picking off Turkeys at 100-300 yards with head shots. (ok we used a bench rest and a scope)</font>

Also...addressing a popular misconception here...the M-16 round is *NOT* designed to tumble!! The M-16 is a rifle, this means that there are a number of spiral grooves inside the barrel designed to impart a spin to the projectile that leaves the barrel. This spin is exactly why rifles are preferable to old style smoothbore weapons -- they impart a stability to the round that makes it much more accurate. By nature, a spinning bullet does not tumble. In fact, studies by Dr. Fackler have shown that .223 rounds (such as those fired by the M-16) only tumble when fired through foliage; and even then they tumble EXACTLY ONCE, and then resume a steady trajectory.

<font color="#ffffcc">You must not be watching the same gun shows that I have then [img]smile.gif[/img] And I do know that they are absolutly crap for real long range shooting. It isnt the barrel or rifeling that causes the tumble by the by, it is the standard round that is fired that does that.>

A Marine armoury sergeant tells me that older M-16s with worn barrels (and less twist) were prone to tumbling, but these weapons are obviously not desirable for sniper use.

Quote:

Originally posted by MagiK: <font color="#ffffcc"> As for effectiveness we would never use our .223 for a human or deer size target if we had access to a larger round, such as a .243, .284 or .308 (I really like the .284 but they are hard to find. We lost several deer after we hit them and knocked them down with the .223, found one of them later and there was a circular bare spot where the hot load .223 exploded on contact with the skin and blew all the hair and surface level of the hide right off but didnt stop the deer :( </font>

You need to learn how to shoot! [img]tongue.gif[/img]

I know Indians that shoot whitetails and *moose* with .22LR single-shots!</font>[/QUOTE]<font color="#ffffcc">LOL I didnt say you COULDNT kill a deer with a .223 I said we lost too many for it to be really humane or economical...I have never taken a White Tail with a .22LR but for a while we did use a 22Hornet which is not too much beefier. Basicly we wanted clean clear 1 shot 1 kill with little chance for error. We prefered head shots because we don't waste the meat, but on the first day of Buck season we allow Heart/Lung/Shoulder shots.

Anyway [img]smile.gif[/img] thanks for the info, I love talking guns...though it is off topic and um annoys some people. [img]smile.gif[/img]

PS. I was never on any rifle team (not many of those in the Navy [img]smile.gif[/img] ) but I did consistantly qualify expert both with the M14 and M16 and Pistols (9mm, 38 and yes with my .357 (a Smith 686) I could never get expert with the 45 for some reason though..I just couldnt shoot straight with it) :(
</font>

Hope I can get back in here form work tomorrow.

<font color="#ffffcc">Nobody has mentioned my favorite smokin hot long range critter killer ;) the 22-250 [img]smile.gif[/img] </font>

<font color=orange>The 22-250 tends to wear barrels out way to quick for me!
I always liked the .222 Remington! That was a great flat shooting, hard hitting round! The smallest round you can hunt deer with in Tennessee is the .243. I wouldn't dream of hunting one with a .22LR though it seems to be the round of choice for poachers!

Well time for bed! Night guys! Sorry we got off topic a little. Maybe we need a Favorite Fireams thread!</font>

<font color=orange>The 22-250 tends to wear barrels out way to quick for me!
I always liked the .222 Remington! That was a great flat shooting, hard hitting round! The smallest round you can hunt deer with in Tennessee is the .243. I wouldn't dream of hunting one with a .22LR though it seems to be the round of choice for poachers!

Well time for bed! Night guys! Sorry we got off topic a little. Maybe we need a Favorite Fireams thread!</font></font>[/QUOTE]Really ? Or you could search and bump a couple of old ones. There were plenty fire arm threads here. :D

Agreed. It's just that having a rifle makes it so, so much easier and somehow, a little less personal.

In 1994 farmer Jerry Kulpin was killed in Christchurch, New Zealand, when a 280lb pumkin fell on him from a lorry. Prhaps we should ban pumkins.

I'm baffled as to why people think this might be a terrorist. It's just another sicko killing for fun.

Does anybody else find it slightly weird that a thread discussing a maniac shooting innocents at random has evolved into a discussion about different rifle types? [img]graemlins/confused2.gif[/img]
Ah well... just wanted to send my sympathies to those of you who live close to the area and I hope he gets caught soon! :(

You've pretty much said word for word what I was about to post Mel (I would put a smily face at the end of the sentence but it's not much of a smiling matter. Damn that sounds lame...). It's easy (and natural) to let politics seep into controversial events. But best not to cheapen the tragedy by forgetting the feelings of those involved in favour of placing blame for it all.
I hope all of the Marylanders (and their neighbours) are able to rest easy knowing that it is just one singular son-of-a-bitch on a depraved power-trip (whatever the motive, whatever the affiliation). Here's hoping that that hospitalized boy makes a complete and speedy recovery, maybe then this whole affair will be ever so slightly less sickening (sniping CHILDREN! it's just incomprehensible :( ).
My heart goes out to all involved and affected. Hang in there and keep on truckin'.

<font color=orange>Not really, since the maniac's weapon of choice is a sniper/hunting rifle. The latest news is about what police found at the scene of the latest shooting. They found a spent casing and a Tarot Card representing Death. Written on that card was "I am God"... Funny, I didn't know God worked that way. Obviously this nut case has a very high opinion of himself.

I know somewhere in this thread there was a post about a sniper being a very brave person. I agree with that in the case of war, but this isn't war. This animal is nothing more than a coward! It doesn't take courage to kill random civilians who can't shoot back! Especially children

Donut, I thought Terrorists were sickos killing for fun.

he is not branded as a SNIPER, war or not, sniper IS a brave person

[ 10-09-2002, 09:30 AM: Message edited by: 250 ]

<font color=orange>Not really, since the maniac's weapon of choice is a sniper/hunting rifle. The latest news is about what police found at the scene of the latest shooting. They found a spent casing and a Tarot Card representing Death. Written on that card was "I am God"... Funny, I didn't know God worked that way. Obviously this nut case has a very high opinion of himself.

</font>[/QUOTE]WONDERFUL. Now the idiots will be talking about outlawing Tarot decks. [img]tongue.gif[/img]

-Sazerac