How do these police snipers not see the guy on the closest roof to Trump’s rally?
The trained police snipers on the roof of the building to the right did not see a strange man with camouflage gear and a military assault rifle climb onto the roof of the building on the left. And they also ignored eye witness warnings of him being there, such warnings given three to four minutes prior to Trump being shot at.
This is seconds before Trump was shot – note how the snipers are aimed at the building that the shooter was on. There is You Tube coverage of these snipers firing back immediately after Trump was shot.
So what we know briefly is: 1) an eyewitness saw the shooter on the roof and told police a few minutes before Trump was shot; 2) the shooter managed to climb onto the roof of the nearest building to Trump, unsighted, in camouflage gear and with a military-style assault rifle: 3) the police and secret service did nothing/saw nothing prior to Trump being shot; 4) immediately after he had been shot, the very same snipers saw the suspect and returned fire onto the suspect’s rooftop.
No Minister 
Good work Nick, brings the old chestnut to mind.
“Didn’t see you at camouflage training this morning soldier”, “Thank you sir”
How odd… waiting for the perp to shoot first?
https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1812278791105913068?
Questions need to asked and answered…
https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1812278791105913068?
Thank you for the site maps/images.
Many, many moons ago, in the times when the MT in my handle stood for “Mount” I fed about 400 policemen and army personnel in one day.
It was the time little Willy and his assassin wandered through Queenstown and overnighted near Arrowtown (Millbrook). That 400 was approx half the New Zealand contingent of security spread around the area to protect Willy.
There were almost as many Seppo security people around as well, every one of them armed to the teeth.
While history suggests at least half of that force was to protect New Zealand from Hilary it was still a massive force – and that in New Zealand, basically still a closed country.
Assuming in gun-riddled America the security would be higher I too wonder just how a gunman, an obvious gunman not even hiding in a folio depository, could get onto the roof in question, let alone damned near make the shot – not a seasoned sniper but a 20 year old.
Maybe Joe and his Hawaiian controller are indeed desperate. It’s hard to steal billions from the opposition benches.
The rifle was a AR 15, not an assault rifle. The A refers to the company that designed it. Armalite, fires semi automatic one shot at a time, rechambers another round automatically.
if the comments are correct, it was an Accuracy International bolt action rifle in a chassis. Not even a semi automatic let alone an assault rifle “tm”
These are really expensive rifles used by military and police. How did a 20 year old antifa dude get one?
I understand Para the weapon was his father’s.
I must admit that I’ve never fired an AR-15 or any 223 rifle. Either 22 or 17 or the classic 7.62mm bolt-action rifles.
So…. any readers here with experience of an AR-15 or other 223 rifle? Because frankly it’s not the sort of weapon I’d want to use over 100 yards, even though it’s a slightly heavier bullet with more oomph behind it than a 22.
I ask because I see Paul Buchanan over on TDB with his podcast talking about a “heavy” bullet and military aspects and so on and so forth, and I don’t think he knows what he’s talking about on that specific aspect.
The reason NATO shifted from the 7.62mm round to the 5.56 (223) was that it allowed soldiers to carry more ammo into combat and be able to pour more fire downrange. And when people had looked at past combat, going into WWII they found that it wasn’t the killing power of a heavier round that counted but the ability to keep the other side’s heads down while you got around them: “fire suppression”.
Moreover, the analysis showed that it was more effective to wound enemy soldiers than kill them because wounded men pull more resources from the enemy – so who cares if it’s a lighter round.
I’m going to have to go back and pick up the classic book, Blackhawk Down, because if IIRC the American soldiers in the fight had trained on 7.62mm weapons and 5.56 (I think the NATO change happened in the late 80’s) and were none too impressed with the number of Somalis they hit who kept fighting and shooting at them with 7.62mm AK’s. It should be noted that the snipers kept their 7.62mm, and their targets went down, with even wounds diabling them from further fighting.
Anyway, a bit of a diversion I know and maybe worthy of a post in itself, if we have enough firearm-knowledgeable people here to contribute.
Most hunters can use it out to between 400- 600 m.
There are a lot of factors that affect accuracy and performance, apart from the atmosphere on the day, such as bullet weight, use of a scope, target size and weight, barrel length, number of twists in the barrel, etc etc.
A lot of hunters use them so they are good out to 600m.
Certainly the guy behind Trump was dead, as a head shot will do that to you, and could not be revived by an ER surgeon who was in the stands at the time.
I also believe the bullet will tumble resulting in grievous wounds. I suspect the wounded at the event are in that category.
I dont know about MT’s comment below but an AR15 is not bolt action, it was described by the Guardian as a semi auto, so around 5 shots would be possible.
Really? Wow. Things must have changed in hunting.
Have you used one in the fashion or talked to hunters who have?
Put it this way, as a 16 year old I got a 243 for my birthday because the bloody Sako 30-06 was as heavy as shit, especially when you’re slogging through bush
But I was also made well aware of the fact that I would not be able to take 500m shots on deer and guarantee a kill unless it was a head shot, simply because the 243 round was lighter than the 308 rounds that my older compatriots were using.
So I look at a 223 round and similarly assume down for success at 100 yards plus with wind and temp affecting the trajectory of a smaller. lighter bullet. Based on my experience with the 243 there is no way I’d use the 223 for hunting anything much beyond small game.
sadly I had to hand in my AR15 thanks to Jacinda. It was insanely accurate out to 200metres plus.
The original AR15 design by Armalite had a 55grain projectile through a 1:12 twist (1 rotation in 12 inches) that just barely stabilised the round out of a 20 inch barrel. This meant wound channels were significant as the bullet tumbled on impact. Also meant a twig would throw it off course in jungle situations.
As an aside with the move to shorter barrels in the M4 they found the lethal range was only 70 or so yards so they changed to a 63grain projectile with a 1:8 twist barrel. Heavier rounds would not stabilise in the slower twist barrel.
.223 (or more correctly 5.56 x 45) gets it’s lethality from the speed of the bullet. Muzzle velocity for the 55grain projectile is 3,100 fps, about the same as your .243 with a 95 grain projectile.
in short 120 yards with a .223 is well within its capabilities.
Thanks for that Paranormal. I stand corrected – and now I’ll never get the chance to test it in NZ.
But what sort of game were you comfortable shooting at those ranges? As a 14 year old I vividly recall working with my uncle to take down an old tusker who got bailed by the dogs, and actually saw my 22 shot, from no more than 10 yards bounce off the bastard’s shield. I couldn’t fucking believe it, but both my uncle and Dad, who’d done a lot of pig hunting, told me that it was not unknown for that to happen with a 22. Uncle came up behind me a few seconds later and dealt to the bastard with a 308! 🙂 I’d only bought the 22 along in case I saw rabbits. Hadn’t expected the dogs to flush an old boar and they were all bloody sheep and cattle dogs aside from one boxer-cross who showed no fear and got stuck in by grabbing a piece of him.
Personally I never did get into pig hunting, and not just because of that incident, though I had several Maori mates who fucking loved it and couldn’t be bothered with deer, ducks or really anything else.
Just on the confiscation, the guy who did a service on my central heating system a couple of years ago told me that as pissed off as he was with the whole AR-15 thing, he was also left out of pocket for a substantial amount of money from all the ammo he could no longer use and which was not included in the buy-back deal.
Yup we were all well and truly fucked over by Jacinda. We all lost out when they unnecessarily banned all sorts of ammo.
My ar15 was mainly used competitively on the range, but was also good for varmiting. Smartass magpies who thought they were safely out of .22 range got a nasty surprise. I now have a bolt action .223 https://www.gunsupplies.co.nz/new-arrivals/discounted-gbc-abyss-sp-i-series-iia-service-rifle-223-rem/
Whilst you can use any centrefire rifle larger than .222 on the DOC estate, even though a well placed shot is effective, I wouldn’t chase deer with a .223.
As an aside in the 30s my grandfather fed the family with pigs shot with his .22lr out of Pureora forest that backed onto the farm. My grandmother couldn’t eat pork, bacon, or ham at Christmas as a result. He headshot them. I’ve read reports of guys using black powder .577 sniders pig shooting bouncing off the shield.
@Paranormal.
Sorry about that. I guess it was the link that did it.
A 20 year old fired five quick shots from a bolt action rifle in a high stress situation?
Is that rodent in the air?