My pleasure to announce the death of another left-wing-nut narrative

AR isn't full auto unless it has an illegal modification. Suppose a shooter wouldn't care much about an illegal mod though.

You thought it was an apolitical rando that got bushwhacked, by another apolitical whack-job? This didn't happen in Baltimore or Chitcago on an average, random weekend. Also obvious on how quick some are compelled, no - commanded, to make it about Trump.

But, the OP was more geared towards the death of the AR15 narrative, i.e. being so super scary looking, holds a million rounds and is full auto, like a gatling gun, compared to something that is basically a single shooter and has been in use since the turn of the last century, yet is readily available globally.

Basically, it is an actual weapon of war, unlike the AR15, as the left-wing-nuts claim constantly in hyperventilating short breaths. Originally Posted by Why_Yes_I_Do

Disagree totally. It would have been totally visible, given the level needed. It's not like he was wearing a polar parka. He was wearing a T-shirt.

You must watch too much John Wick flicks.

Originally Posted by Why_Yes_I_Do

I trust my eyes over a chart, there is obviously some mechanical movement under the shirt. I can plainly see the round corners of some sort of armor. Was it good enough to stop a rifle round, maybe not. Could it slow a bullet to non lethal penetration? Most likely. No armor is 100% guaranteed to protect from all shots.

I trust my eyes over a chart... Originally Posted by royamcr

Take a gander with yer own peepers.
It tells you everything ya need to see, courtesy of the NY Post:

Gun recovered in Charlie Kirk assassination revealed — as ammo had pro-trans, anti-fascist messages: sources //trib.al/UMAi4X9

The headline?: Clearly political in nature.



Lower left inset?: A conservative icon, wearing a T-shirt, sitting down on a stage, rapping with about 1,000 college (indoctrination center?) young adults.

Lower right inset?: A teensy spec of a bug, 200 yards away. Charlie, sitting down, would look like 1/2 of a teensy spec of a bug from that vantage point.

Main picture?: Looks like a polymere stock, i.e. newer fangled edition. On quick glance, looks like a Burris 4-10x scope, not sure, but it likely cost almost as much as the rifle.

If this thread was in a gun magazine it would be 100x more technical. As it relates to this here OP, the 2 most recent Trantifa mass shooters used an AR15. In addition, scan the headlines to see what the left-wing-nuts are yammering on about, especially the Congress-critters and main-scam news sites. (this last paragraph is aimed towards a different VP)

From before LE recovered the weapon.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/...134509897.html

“That’s a buffet for someone who wanted to kill someone,” he said, noting the lack of serious security and the easy angle for a shooter. Ranstad explained that the 200-yard distance was simple for even an average marksman.

Calm winds outside the city made the shot easier.

“Any bloke can go to the range three or four times and make that shot,” he added, suggesting police look at gun range visitors.

“It sounded like a high-powered rifle, possibly bolt action,” he explained, saying it may have been a .308 bolt action or 7.62 caliber weapon.

Mr Ranstad would know

Sergeant Nicholas Ranstad, who once set a U.S. record with a 6,778-foot kill in Afghanistan, told the Daily Mail that Kirk’s shooting was carefully planned but not perfect.

Regarding the OP's position:
This was not a 'mass shooting'
AR15s (or similar assault rifles), due to large magazine capacity and semiautomatic action, remain popular with those intending to inflict multiple casualties.
In no way does Charlie Kirk's killing put lie to any 'narrative'


As AI put it
The best choice depends on your specific needs:
- Choose an AR-15 if you prioritize: High customization, faster follow-up shots, lower recoil, and a rifle for small-game hunting, home defense, or recreational target shooting.
- Choose a Mauser 308 if you prioritize: Maximum power, longer-range precision, and a durable, classic firearm for hunting large game.

That info really doesn't show anything but hardware used.

I think a neck shot at over 2500fps would have exploded the soft neck tissue? Initial impact would have been a mist of skin and blood and whatever else. The bullet could have also hit another victim standing in line behind.

Take a gander with yer own peepers.
It tells you everything ya need to see, courtesy of the NY Post:

Gun recovered in Charlie Kirk assassination revealed — as ammo had pro-trans, anti-fascist messages: sources //trib.al/UMAi4X9

The headline?: Clearly political in nature.



Lower left inset?: A conservative icon, wearing a T-shirt, sitting down on a stage, rapping with about 1,000 college (indoctrination center?) young adults.

Lower right inset?: A teensy spec of a bug, 200 yards away. Charlie, sitting down, would look like 1/2 of a teensy spec of a bug from that vantage point.

Main picture?: Looks like a polymere stock, i.e. newer fangled edition. On quick glance, looks like a Burris 4-10x scope, not sure, but it likely cost almost as much as the rifle.

If this thread was in a gun magazine it would be 100x more technical. As it relates to this here OP, the 2 most recent Trantifa mass shooters used an AR15. In addition, scan the headlines to see what the left-wing-nuts are yammering on about, especially the Congress-critters and main-scam news sites. (this last paragraph is aimed towards a different VP) Originally Posted by Why_Yes_I_Do

Clearly you don’t do much shooting... Originally Posted by Jacuzzme

Well... not anymore. Maybe I mentioned that tragic boating accident, years back and my guns went to the bottom.

..By 14 my youngest could consistently ding an 18” steel plate at 400 yards with a Ruger 10/22 and whatever pos scope he could afford with birthday money... Originally Posted by Jacuzzme

Well... Ja-cuuuuuz-meeeee. <Steve Martin reference> But are you seriously comparing a 10/22 to a 30-06? Regardless, even with the 10/22, that still took a lot of practice and coaching. Good job Dad...

Not that I need to know or even expect an answer: do you recall the first time you shot a 12 gauge? Might have been kinda young. Did you want to do a 2nd shot right away?

Welp... gots to go on down to the range. I'm, err, uhm, gonna borrow some guns from a friend. Yea! That's the ticket b-o-r-r-o-w...

That info really doesn't show anything but hardware used... Originally Posted by royamcr

...to remember Daft Punk as a band.


I just don't think I can help you, in any meaningful way, in the OP conversation.

This was not a 'mass shooting'
AR15s (or similar assault rifles), due to large magazine capacity and semiautomatic action, remain popular with those intending to inflict multiple casualties.
In no way does Charlie Kirk's killing put lie to any 'narrative'

Just as this does not put an end to any assault rifle narrative.
A man in Dallas, Texas, is accused of using a machete to behead his boss in front of his family at the motel where they both worked, according to local reports that cite arresting documents.

This guy seems to show evidence of body armor but is speculative like everything else posted.

Conclusion I've read on the president shooting is the bullet hit a telepropmpter and a piece of glass from it hit his ear.

The reason I believe this is the simulations shortly after of a near miss of an ear would have destroyed the ear lobe. The shockwave of the bullet alone would have pulverized the soft tissue of the ear. And that doesn't grow back. It could be reconstructed with plastic surgery to look sort of normal but it would take months to look just ok, and might need a couple surgeries to get right. His ear was healed up from whatever hit it in a few weeks. Originally Posted by royamcr

did a piece of glass kill that retired fireman?

Just armchair experting here. We may never get a full ballistics report with video due to the sensitive nature.

I don't think we ever got a full report on trump either. Trump wants the narrative to be a near miss bullet cause it looks better than getting hit from a piece of glass. Originally Posted by royamcr

since when did you become an expert? an expert at ballistics, an expert of plastic surgery and an expert on tactical shooting?

This guy seems to show evidence of body armor but is speculative like everything else posted.

Originally Posted by Iceman

interesting video. more breakdown, if Kirk had a plate under his shirt then both Utah police and the medical staff and the FBI know it. so when are they going to confirm or deny it?

did a piece of glass kill that retired fireman?





since when did you become an expert? an expert at ballistics, an expert of plastic surgery and an expert on tactical shooting?





interesting video. more breakdown, if Kirk had a plate under his shirt then both Utah police and the medical staff and the FBI know it. so when are they going to confirm or deny it? Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

I don't think it matters if he had one or not. He's dead either way. I doubt they are going to put the video out on mainstream media showing what they found.

As far as forensics, there were many simulations after trump was shot. I didn't say there weren't live bullets, one hit the fireman. But a bullet grazing an ear and leaving it mostly intact was shown to not be realistic.

An ear is cartilage and soft tissue, sure it could be reconstructed over time. But a month after the incident it was fully healed like nothing happened.

Trump preferred the story of dodging a bullet, glass hitting his ear wasn't as heroic.

I don't think it matters if he had one or not. He's dead either way. I doubt they are going to put the video out on mainstream media showing what they found.

As far as forensics, there were many simulations after trump was shot. I didn't say there weren't live bullets, one hit the fireman. But a bullet grazing an ear and leaving it mostly intact was shown to not be realistic.

An ear is cartilage and soft tissue, sure it could be reconstructed over time. But a month after the incident it was fully healed like nothing happened.

Trump preferred the story of dodging a bullet, glass hitting his ear wasn't as heroic. Originally Posted by royamcr

was it heroic for that kid to try to assassinate Trump?


heroic for that kid who did assassinate Charlie Kirk?

Not really, but trump wanted to maximize the situation to his benefit. His life depended it on it at the time with the legal stuff piling up. Glass to the ear was Meh, boring. But I dodged a bullet and won, that's what trump needed. Trump knew his life was over if he didn't win, essentially the same as being shot dead. Many people have offed themselves for far far fewer reasons to avoid the consequences of their actions.

I'm pretty sure losing kirk is a big blow to the republican party, he owned the young voters. It will take years to replace that if at all possible. His wife vowed to continue TPUSA, but we will have to see if that can stay together.

Not really, but trump wanted to maximize the situation to his benefit. His life depended it on it at the time with the legal stuff piling up. Glass to the ear was Meh, boring. But I dodged a bullet and won, that's what trump needed. Trump knew his life was over if he didn't win, essentially the same as being shot dead. Many people have offed themselves for far far fewer reasons to avoid the consequences of their actions.

I'm pretty sure losing kirk is a big blow to the republican party, he owned the young voters. It will take years to replace that if at all possible. His wife vowed to continue TPUSA, but we will have to see if that can stay together. Originally Posted by royamcr

the radical left is about to get a lesson about what a martyr is .. the hard way

There is no such thing as radical leftism. At least not in the same sense as right, alt right, and extreme right.

The right may see progressive democrats as radical. In reality they want the nation to progress to be better. Republicans resist change at all costs, it is one of their traits.