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>