If Crooks was a genuine Republican, wouldn’t he have been a better shot? - Politics Discussion

[–] [deleted] 7 months ago

a genuine republican wouldnt try to kill the presidential candidate.

reply

[–] tvfan (14553) 7 months ago

Some people are incapable of understanding such common sense concept.

reply

[–] AndyKing1967 (39849) 7 months ago

Some people don’t get a joke when they read it.

reply

[–] JoWilli (21627) 7 months ago

its not funny, take your hate bait back to the general board and talk about peoples post counts.

reply

[–] AngryViking (779) 7 months ago

https://youtu.be/j3glwtXrj0c

reply

[–] AndyKing1967 (39849) 7 months ago

I’m sowwy 🥹

reply

[–] Kowalski (79077) 7 months ago

😂WHAT A WUSS COMMENT.

reply

[–] SemiAnimus (3267) 7 months ago

You could have added, "or make some dreadfully inane pun," but otherwise you were pretty accurate there.

reply

[–] AndyKing1967 (39849) 7 months ago

Just for you 😘
https://moviechat.org/bd0000082/Politics/6698cb3a5ac0103f12e34829/Do-you-think-the-secret-service-agents-yelled-Donald-Duck

reply

[–] Keelai (36155) 7 months ago

That's no true. There could be many reasons for him to want Trump dead as a Republican.

1. He wanted his name and Trump's to always be linked like the guy who admired and killed John Lennon.
2. He was suicidal and wanted to take his cult leader with him.
3. He suffered delusions or voices in his head telling him to kill Trump similar to Son of Sam.
4.Not kill, but wound him. He wanted to help Trump's campaign with a sympathy vote. He may not have been aiming to kill Trump, but Trump was accidentally winged by the bullet when he moved.

His schoolmates already said he was a Republican.

reply

[–] tvfan (14553) 7 months ago

None of your delusional reasons have anything to do with being a Republican.

reply

[–] Keelai (36155) 7 months ago

A Republican who admired his target.

For you:
RIF.ORG

You're welcome.

reply

[–] SemiAnimus (3267) 7 months ago

You're not clever in posting that link, Keelai. In fact, it was shit the first time you did it, and now it makes you come off as even more intellectually incompetent than your own ideas that you attempt to express here.

reply

[–] [deleted] 7 months ago

You cant use logic on a troll.

reply

[–] B1cKsurN (17826) 7 months ago

A dementia-addled Boomer troll at that.

reply

[–] christomacin (4730) 7 months ago

4.Not kill, but wound him. He wanted to help Trump's campaign with a sympathy vote. He may not have been aiming to kill Trump, but Trump was accidentally winged by the bullet when he moved.

There's the MAGA "prophecy video" four months before this event, describeding in very nearly exact detail Trump being graized in the right ear by a bullet and surviving, protected by God himself. There's no evidence Crooks was even aware of this video and was influenced by it. That's one problem. Another is problem is that would mean he wasn't the worst shot of all time, but actually the most amazing ever. Neither one of these descriptions of his shooting ability are likely accurate. He maybe was an average marksman who was under real-word pressure and had little to time prepare his shot.

Also, many events of this type have had odd coincidences in the past. For instance, John Hinckley, the Reagan shooter had a strange link with Vice President Bush. His father was a friend of Hinckley's father, and the VP and the father dined together a few weeks before the event. This was investigated and deemed a coincidence. Then there was the famous Jean Dixon "prediction" of the Kennedy's assassination. A closer look reveals that her "prediction" was actually extremely vauge and most of her other "predictions" never panned out.

reply

[–] Kowalski (79077) 7 months ago

HELP TRUMP BY SHOOTING A BULLET INCHES FROM HIS HEAD?😂

reply

[–] christomacin (4730) 7 months ago

No, help Trump by bringing to pass (in his mind) a prophecy of Trump surviving an assassination by "divine intervention". I didn't say the theory made sense, I was saying it was an odd coincidence (the "prophecy" I mean), reminiscent of some coindicences of past Presidential shootings. No evidence whatsoever exists that Crooks did anything other than miss and hit the ear, or that it was his intention to do so.

Did you even read what I wrote?

reply

[–] Kowalski (79077) 7 months ago

I DID...AIMING YOUR GUN INCHES FROM YOUR LORD'S FACE IS NOT THAT.

reply

[–] christomacin (4730) 7 months ago

If he was crazy enough to believe Trump was protected by God, he'd also be crazy enough to believe God was guiding his actions. If you're nuts enough to believe that, how could you alter the outcome you believe is preordained? I mean that's no weirder than motivations of other shooters we know of.

Look, I didn't make the video, I'm pointing out it was weird. I think the "prophet" and the shooter are both loons, and have nothing to do with each other. If Crooks never saw it the video question is moot anyway, unless you believe in Biblical prophecy, or prophecy in general, which I don't.

reply

[–] VladPutin (1582) 7 months ago

His ability to aim and shoot was irrelevant. He was a patsy; he only had blanks; Trump nearly ruined the stunt by attempting to grope the SS agent. It is sad that Trump was willing to sacrifice some of his followers to make the stunt appear real.

reply

[–] Keelai (36155) 7 months ago

No. He was lazy and didn't want to practice. He tried out for the shooting team in school and didn't make it and refused to retry.

reply

[–] [deleted] 7 months ago

You sound upset he was a bad shot. Or am I reading your tone all wrong?

reply

[–] Keelai (36155) 7 months ago

He was clearly a good shot. Why do you gun nuts insist on arming deranged individuals?

reply

[–] [deleted] 7 months ago

Are you implying Im a gun nut?

reply

[–] Keelai (36155) 7 months ago

Republicans = gun nuts

reply

[–] [deleted] 7 months ago

Are you implying Im a Rebuplican?

reply

[–] VladPutin (1582) 7 months ago

It shouldn't have been too difficult under range conditions, but stuff happens. 130 yards to 148 yards with any kind of half decent optics is not a hard shot if he knew his gun. However, remember that he was under some duress and was shooting rapidly; his heart was probably beating rapidly and his breathing/squeeze sequence was undoubtedly not what he had practiced at the range. His follow up shots were probably spray and pray.

reply

[–] AngryViking (779) 7 months ago

He would have better luck with a bow and arrows.

reply

[–] VladPutin (1582) 7 months ago

Well, probably not. It's much easier to be good with a rifle than a bow. Remember, people were trying to get up on the roof after him so no doubt he rushed his first shot, and from then on--follow up shots were "spray and pray."

reply

[–] AngryViking (779) 7 months ago

He didn't seem like a worthy assasin. Even the Rus could do better.

reply

[–] Keelai (36155) 7 months ago

Former political strategist Rick Wilson explained that Crooks didn't account for wind direction and used a bullet type that is less accurate.

reply

[–] VladPutin (1582) 7 months ago

I don't think that the wind was blowing too hard that day. A breeze is not going to have a dramatic effect on windage of .223 or 5.56 at 130 to 148 yards. Certainly not to the point where hitting a watermelon sized target is not doable. I don't know what type of rounds he was shooting that day, and a if he was not using what he had zeroed the optics of his rifle with, that certainly could have had an effect. Bulk FMJ ammunition is not nearly as consistent with their groups, for example, as Federal Gold Medal match grade HPs.

reply

[–] Keelai (36155) 7 months ago

I don't do guns. I'm copy/pasting Rick Wilson's explanation:

"A final note on the shooting itself: be grateful the shooter was raised on video games and not actual shooting in the field. From what I can determine of the angles, distance, and wind direction, he didn’t account for windage, and the bullet thankfully passed to the right of Trump’s head. We were extremely fortunate Crooks didn’t understand his weapon: the 5.56/.223 rounds from his AR have pretty shoddy ballistics and likely drifted 1.5-2.5 inches from his point of aim.

For the Secret Service… allowing a shooter so close is unthinkable. 400 feet is nothing. I’ve put rounds on steel at 400 meters, albeit with a much heavier round."

reply

[–] VladPutin (1582) 7 months ago

Not trying to start an argument on this, but

Wilson seems to be contradicting himself. One MOA is 1 inch at 100 yards, so at 148 yards a MOA would be about 1.5 inches which is basically what Wilson says. ("1.5 to 2.5 inches from point of aim.") I've shot a MOA at 200 yards with a .223 plenty of times plenty of times with the wind blowing harder than it was that particular day, so windage really should not have been much of a factor. But assuming some kind of wind did have an effect on the round he fired, an effect of 1.5 to 2.5 inches at 148 yards, it still would have been a head shot. That's why i say that i don't know what Wilson is saying.

What I do see as a factor is that Crooks had just finished climbing up on top of a building with the intent of assassinating an ex-president, and, all accounts and footage indicate that law enforcement was trying to climb up behind him and stop him. Even without law enforcement, I am sure that he would have been excited (adrenaline going on) and with law enforcement right behind him that would have added to his physiological condition at the time. Unless he was a stone cold killer, and that does not appear to be the case.

Shooting off of a sloped roof with his heart pounding and breathing hard is not what the average shooter at the range is doing when he or she is shooting at steel plates or paper 100, 150 or 200 yards out.

148 yards at a head sized target is not a crazy hard shot with a .223 with telescopic sighting, but it still requires a certain degree of "breathe, relax, aim, squeeze;" I am inclined to see where he wouldn't have been doing any of those exercises at that particular time. His followup shots would have been even worse. Not a lot of recoil with a .223/5.56, but enough that it would require re-establishing the picture of the target in his scope.

reply

[–] Keelai (36155) 7 months ago

We're just having a friendly discussion.

"not a crazy hard shot"

There could be multiple reasons. Students said Crooks failed the test for high school shooting club and he wasn't very good. This along with rushing to take the shot, like you wrote, would have caused him to miss.

Some questions? I'm not into firearms, but isn't there a difference in quality between rifles, bullets, etc. that may also affect accuracy? Boat tail bullets are less accurate than flat base bullets?

reply

[–] VladPutin (1582) 7 months ago

Oh yes, there truly is a difference between barrels and ammunition. And optics for that matter. The BT is theoretically a more stable round at long distances (148 yards is not a real long distance, however) and the theoretical disadvantages of the BT have pretty much been discounted. (Personally I like match grade HP ammunition when I am spending extra money for nicer ammo, but I don't load my own, and as much time as I used to spend at the range, it was never a religion for me, so perhaps I would have preferred heavier BT ammo if I would have tried it.)As far as barrels, there are barrels designed for long range shooting as well of different desired twist rates, dependent upon the weight of the round, and desired lengths. But with that typed, there really is no reason an average shooter who knows his gun and has zeroed his scope shouldn't be able to shoot one MOA at 148 yards with just the run of the mill 16 inch barrel that comes on the run of the mill AR 15.

I don't claim to be any better than an average (give or take) shot, but I used to buy a lot of 55 and/or 62 grain FMJ (not BT) 5.56 and/or .223 (that was really nothing special) bulk via mail order, and I remember one day buying a brand new run of the mill Bushmaster with a run of the mill 16 inch barrel at Dunhams and going right to the range and, with a NON-magnified holographic sight system, I hit some large steel at 300 yards after I had zeroed it at 100 yards. And by zero, I mean I was shooting at least an MOA with non magnified sight. And I am not/was not an exceptional shot.

But that was shooting at a range with friendly people around who were not trying to stop me from making my shots and I was not breaking any laws and could take my time and "breathe, relax, aim squeeze." Nothing at stake.

So even if he had found a barrel he really liked and matched the twist rate with some special ammunition, a shot that is not a ballbuster at the range. . . .

reply

[–] Keelai (36155) 7 months ago

He was aiming at a head at that distance. Police are trained to aim for the body since it's a larger target. Students who saw him test said he was terrible.

reply

[–] VladPutin (1582) 7 months ago

Well again, not to keep beating a dead horse, one MOA at 148 yards is 1.5 inches. Which is quite doable by even an amateur. Which makes a head shot easily realistic--under conditions that are not adverse to the shooter. So although a head shot was not unrealistic under favorable conditions, a shot at center mass seems as if it would have almost been a sure thing. Again, if you think about it, considering what his physiological state probably was at the time (adrenaline pumping, heart pounding, rapid breathing) and from a sloped roof while not shooting off of a rest, the shot that he made was not all that bad.

reply

[–] VladPutin (1582) 7 months ago

It is worth adding that this happens frequently: someone goes deer hunting, sits in a tree stand, shoots off of a rest, and then misses a perfect close range shot at a deer. they call it "buck fever." Under the circumstances (meaning he was not a military trained marksman and he was not shooting off of a rest and everything else we have discussed) that was not a bad shot he made. A mistake that he did make, however, speaking only clinically about this event, is a shot a center mass would have served his apparent purposes better.

reply

[–] Keelai (36155) 7 months ago

People miss targets all the time. Nobody has 100% accuracy.

"not a military trained marksman"
Exactly.

reply

[–] VladPutin (1582) 7 months ago

The trigger squeeze and the breathing, for example, has a huge effect on accuracy. Done incorrectly it moves the firearm incrementally immediately before discharge. A good trigger squeeze which is coordinated with one's exhalation is not like performing heart surgery, but it is a skill that is acquired and perfected and enforced with a lot of practice. (I've seen match rifles that had a trigger that literally only needed to be touched to discharge the firearm, therefore taking the trigger squeeze out of the equation and minimizing the effect breathing has on point of aim. Great for match shooting, but not what you want under other conditions.) So even if he had worked on breathing and squeezing and practiced and acquired the skill, that all probably went out the window when law enforcement started climbing up behind him and ect ect ect. Who knows, many times I've been at the range setting up for my first shot of a group I've wanted to shoot and as I followed through with making the shot, the safety was on. I am not the only one. No biggy at the range, but under a tactical situation, someone without tactical experience (as someone with tactical experience would rarely make that mistake) now might likely rush the next shot.

reply

[–] christomacin (4730) 7 months ago

Or he was spotted and under pressure at that point and simply missed, then taken out very shortly after?

reply

[–] VladPutin (1582) 7 months ago

Sure, it was probably a rushed shot and that was why he missed.

reply

[–] MonStar (13552) 7 months ago

You are both correct. Crooks heard the cop climbing onto the roof. He had to turn around and point his weapon at the cop, causing the cop to fall off. The cop was reportedly injured. Crooks knew he was caught and now had to turn back around. I think he just started firing wildly, while he still had a chance.

I finally saw a video today, showing the location of the firefighter who was shot dead. He was nowhere near Trump. He was sitting in the middle area of the stands, but near the end closest to Crooks. You can see the doctor coming to his aid in the video. That's what told me that Crooks was firing and probably not even aiming or using a scope. I'd like to see the exact locations of the two other men were were critically shot, but who are now stable.

TV news coverage has been horrible in this respect. I haven't seen a video showing the air conditioning unit where Crooks apparently climbed on to get to the roof. SHOW US, don't tell us! SHEESH! Then show graphics to pinpoint exactly where the three other people were shot, and how far away they were from Trump.

reply

[–] VladPutin (1582) 7 months ago

Or: he may have taken a relatively quick aim for the first shot, the one that hit the ear, and after that just started banging away at the general vicinity.

reply

[–] MonStar (13552) 7 months ago

That makes sense. A local cop on the ground actually shot at him and missed. He was reportedly put on administrative leave, as standard procedure.

They should interview the cop who took the missed shot, as well as the cop who climbed on the roof, after getting on another cop's shoulders.

The Secret Service snipers probably wondered if Crooks was a local detective or reporter getting on the roof, until they saw the firearm. That was a failure of communication and coverage.

reply

[–] Keelai (36155) 7 months ago

He didn't miss.

reply

[–] christomacin (4730) 7 months ago

He missed hitting him square in the head, which must have been his goal, unless he really was a master marksman who had watched a certain video. The most logical conclusion is that he missed a fatal head shot, whether because he was a "bad shot" or was rushed and nervous.

reply

[–] VladPutin (1582) 7 months ago

That is a legitimate statement.

reply

[–] Keelai (36155) 7 months ago

He didn't miss Trump. He didn't kill him.

Some people shot in the head survive. I saw a graphic on TV which appeared to show the bullet's trajectory hitting the side of Trump's head if he hadn't moved. Who knows? Reminds me of Reagan. He was hit, but could've been killed if the bullet had been larger.

reply

[–] christomacin (4730) 7 months ago

I mean that Crooks wasn't shooting to wound him. I believe Hinckley (spelling?) used explosive tipped bullets, and Reagan still lived.

reply

[–] VladPutin (1582) 7 months ago

Well, depending upon the load and the barrel length, the .223 or 5.56 has a muzzle velocity of around 3,000 FPS. The writer you quoted earlier (Wilson?) didn't sound as if he was crazy about the .223/5.56, but I think it is a great round for close range to intermediate range shooting, and 148 yards is basically relatively close range. At 148 yards it is still a flat shooting round and it is still moving at a quite high velocity. These days I never say "never" (ha ha, I just did) but a true head shot with a .223 or 5.56 at 148 yards would probably always be fatal. The skull would probably always burst wide open, unless it was some type of special frangible round that I am not familiar with, and even in that case I wouldn't place high bets on head shot survival at 148 yards.

reply

[–] Gd5150 (11965) 7 months ago

If he were a Republican he wouldn’t have done it.

Any questions?

reply

[–] Keelai (36155) 7 months ago

Never Trumper Republican

reply

[–] chumbawampa (858) 7 months ago

What the hell is a "genuine" Republican? There's nothing genuine about any of them.

reply