But I noticed something about the picture which tells me that this guy was either posing or is ineffably stupid. You rifle-shooters out there should pick up on it easily, as well.
Hint: His accuracy WILL vary...
HT: PowerLine
Sunday, July 16, 2006
A Sniper? Really?
This pic is from a NYSlimes series which lionizes the jihadists in Iraq. (Surprise!!)
But I noticed something about the picture which tells me that this guy was either posing or is ineffably stupid. You rifle-shooters out there should pick up on it easily, as well.
Hint: His accuracy WILL vary...
HT: PowerLine
But I noticed something about the picture which tells me that this guy was either posing or is ineffably stupid. You rifle-shooters out there should pick up on it easily, as well.
Hint: His accuracy WILL vary...
HT: PowerLine
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
18 comments:
For those of us who are gun illiterate, could you enlighten us please? :)
I'm waiting for guesses from the gun guys who hang out here. There are at least 2.
Don't worry--I'll let you know what I saw by close-of-business today.
He's about to join the "Half-Moon" club, or in common parlance, shooter's about to get the scope imbedded in his forehead.
Yah, Fug, I was thinking of the barrel resting on the windowsill.
StJ, I didn't really see the 'half-moon' possibility until you pointed it out.
Between the barrel, the cheekweld, the sling-thing and the scope proximity, it's clear to me that this pic is "posed"--and by an amateur gunner.
al Slimes fabricating a story?! I'm shocked! Shocked!
A Slimes photographer being completely clueless regarding firearms and their use - now that's believable.
The main thing I notice, along with the other details mentioned already, is, where's the spotter? Surveying the field of fire with the rifles own scope seems to me to be a bit of an amateur way to snipe somebody.
I wonder what the NYT would have said had this 'sniper' drawn return fire, and the photog had been killed?
I don't think this photo is staged. The gun is in all likelihood real, and the guy holding it is in all likelihood real as well. And he's probably shot that gun before, even if inaccurately. I doubt the Mahdi "army" has models hanging around ready for NYTimes photo ops. In any event, the point remains: the guy wielding the gun and the one holding the camera are both scumbags.
His body is square to the "target", as opposed to weak side forward.
It appears he is a left side dominant person, so his right hand should be at the forearm of the weapon allowing for better support and repeatabilit of the weapon.
His head is looking down on the scope which will cause the lense infraction to aim down, if he can see anything at all.
Beyond that, his arms are too little for that weapon, he should be playing with Barbies, not big boy toys.
Hope he is found on the recieving end from his counterpart in Red, White, and Blue.
To repeat, Anony:
If that guy is a "sniper" then I am Dick Cheney's Evil Twin.
Anony, you are ASSUMING that the "sniper" is actually a part of the Mahdi "army."
That's a really big assumption to make.
dad29:
Agreed. Assuming he is in fact a member of Mahdi army then I think it's reasonable to also assume he intends to incompetently try to use that gun to kill our troops or Iraqi policemen.
If the guy in the picture is just a poser with no plans to shoot anyone then the photographer is still a scumbag. Just how much of a scumbag I guess is open to debate.
As already noted:
crappy position and lack of support, this is the quintessential "High Kneeling Homie"
That Dragonov Scope has a rubber eyepiece that you have to push in with your eye to open the shutter. Without a solid position he's gonna eat it.
I doubt its fake, that guys fortunately not a professionally trained sniper. Pressure-pointing the barrel is gonna cause a nice flyer, feet over the targets heads.
If he knew what he was doing he would be elevated, a few feet back from the window with some kind of support to prevent telegraphing his position, and silohuetting himself.
Keep it up Haji, and present those nice square targets.
I dont doubt the legitimacy of the photo, just the legitimacy of the sniper's ability with that UberLeet shooting position. They do have some legit snipers, one was recently capped by Marine Snipers, turned out he was using a captured Marine M40. He was good, just got cocky and complacent.
That "journalist" is a sympathiser and should be tried for T or S, maybe even both.
With luck this scumbag will be taken out through his ineptitude before he gets a chance to refine his skills. I personally think it would have been funny if Haji and the treacherous 'journalist' had been counter-sniped by a HEAT round from an Abrams, but that's just me.
I'm not a gun guy, but he sure looks awkward. Wouldn't that thing put him on his back if he pulled the trigger in that position?
Yah.
So far, the list:
1) Eyepiece WAY too close for 7.62x54 ammo.
2) Lousy body position for holding rifle, including no solid support AND awkward/uncomfortable hold.
3) He's an open target where he is; likely to get return fire very soon.
4) NEVER NEVER NEVER use the barrel as a resting point. Changes point of impact--and at >500 yards, it's really significant.
5) No spotter.
6) No apparent effort to blend in--no camo at all.
But other than that, I'm just certain that the NYT photographer found an outstanding "sniper."
Yup.
I guess the civil war photographers who captured images of Confederate soldiers were treasonous snakes just like the NYT photographer.
Evidently, Redleg, you didn't read the post. I don't care about the fact that the photo was published.
I care about the fact that this "sniper" is a moron.
Post a Comment