Cheaper Than Dirt recently posted an interview with Former U.S. Navy SEAL Chris Kyle, author of American Sniper: The Autobiography of the Most Lethal Sniper in U.S. Military History. It seems the shooting instructor doesn’t have much time for civilian sniper wanna-be’s. “We do not teach civilians sniping. We do teach precision shooting, which can be employed in self defense and hunting. If someone wants to be a sniper, then they need to enlist in the military or in law enforcement.” A distinction without a difference? Code for “preppers welcome”? Let’s think about that one for a moment. What good would civilian snipers be if Uncle Sam turned into Uncle Adolph? Ace snapper Oleg Volk has some thoughts on that subject . . .
Surprisingly, Volk, an uncompromising Second Amendment supporter, isn’t optimistic on that whole “sniper behind every blade of grass” thing.
I am a great fan of armed and trained civilians. But I’d like to point out that the “hundreds of thousands of deer hunters” are no military snipers and do not overmatch regular infantry. A very well trained rifleman with a sub-MOA rifle can indeed score a first shot hit on a 500 yard foe. What happens then? . . .
Assuming that the sniper can manage to retain his stand-off distance, what can he do about air or artillery response. Insurgents world-wide have to brave close combat to get away from the firepower available to the regulars with one radio call. Against well-designed sniper hides that cannot be reached by artillery or airpower, short-range rockets would be used. The hide would have to escape detection in visible, near and far infrared ranges to remain secure.
Multiple snipers might do better, but the regulars can just continue using smoke to remain safe from long shots while encircling the whole area and plastering it with mortars or just mining the perimeter and leaving it at that.
So the man who makes a rifle look more glamorous than Esti Ginzburg in a bikini reckons a civilian sniper’s prospects against an organized force are ugly. How weird is it that the gun fetishist’s fetishist titles his blog post “The mis-directed fetish of marksmanship”?
I guess no matter how good it looks, the truth still hurts.
I am a great fan of rifle marksmanship. But we shouldn’t overestimate its value in warfare. Unsupported by regular troops, most snipers die quickly. Most hunters may be marksmen, but they aren’t even snipers — that skill set goes far beyond the basics of fieldcraft and marksmanship required to bring down deer . . .
So our best bet is political proselytizing and raising the next generation to love freedom, and to respect the freedoms of others. The opium pipe dreams of the “restoration of the Republic” through another revolution are best left for those who don’t much value a connection to reality.
Fair enough?
He’s right. Anyone who doesn’t think so is living in a dream world. Tacticool only takes one so far, like the guy who made the video yesterday advertising “civilian smoke grenades” and ran a silly demo on his YouTube channel showing what looked to me to be no more effective than a cherry bomb.
The Range Ninjas who think that just because they can plink away at steel plates from 400 yards in a comfortable gun club setting are somehow qualifying themselves to be snipers are nuts.
Whether or not I can stand against a trained/professional military force is not the issue. I pray that the need to stand against other Americans whether they be military or civilian never happens and at this point prayer is the only answer. The issue as I see it is how can give myself and those I am responsible for the greatest hope to live as a free people. If the need should arise I have a responsibility to defend my family and our beliefs and if during that defense my family and I should lose our lives, there are worse things than dying to this world and joining Jesus. Living as a slave or being held in a modern day Auschwitz would be a much slower much more painful death.
I have only one comment to this. I may not have unlimited training ammo at my disposal. I am a former Sniper in the military. Do you honestly think our military will rise against its own? There would be widespread diserters for one reason. Our family. The U.S. is the closest to civil war as ever before. Why? Let me ask you this. Kennedy wanted to take the CIA and break it into pieces after the bay of pigs. He wanted to remove troops from Vietnam. His Generals were Communist hating dudes. Eisenhower was worried if Vietnam fell that Japan and South Korea were at a disadvantage, and prone to being ovwrrun from within. I have been through 6 different sniper schools civilian and Military to be taught this art. The average sniper must prove he is a marksman with his rifle, become a designated marksmen in the Army. After that they go through basic sniper school. Then Special operations sniper school, sister services, and Civilian marksmen schools. They shoot over one thousand rounds in training alone, stress drills, etc. How some people remain in office without attempts on their life is beyond me. Making adversaries of Russia, China, and Iran will be our undoing. We will never turn into what Germany was despite what people think. To many other countries need us. The 112th congress purpose was to stop one thing. Obama from passing more than a health plan deal that will bankrupt us. Kennedy chose his largest critic as Vice, told the CIA they were on a leash, and then go into your biggest critics home state?
E-1 E-2 E-3 E-4 E-5 E-6 E-7 E-8 E-9 E-10 CO1 CO2 CAP MAJ COL GEN PRES. CIVILIAN WITHOUT U.S. YOUR NOTHING
This is probably correct given the scenario he imagines, in which Adolph Obama and his minions have taken over and are suppressing civilian insurrection. We’ve all seen war porn of how that turns out in Iraq and Iran. This is not 1776, and modern armies do not wear red coats and go into battle standing up in straight lines. We get it.
This does not, however, address the WROL or TEOTWAWKI scenarios, in which long-range marksmanship (if not actually being a military-grade sniper) may still be a significant tactical advantage.
Another example of a tenuous connection to reality. “…Adolf Obama and his minions have taken over…”? Good grief. I don’t like the guy either but the truth is damning enough without resorting to paranoid fantasies. Let’s not give them more – er – ammo with which to discredit 2nd Amendment supporters. Just the facts, man.
You are right. The authors scenario is limited….to say the least. A whole country of armed patriots with M1A’s can wreak havok in an asymetrical way. What army would blow itself (and its inferastructure) up? Nobody in their right mind would attack a tank column (a la ‘Red Dawn) that is supported by air power. But, you can certainly make it a wasteful fools errand to go against the will of said armed patriots.
If the sniper is an idiot he’ll get caught or killed by firing more than once from the same spot. It’s also important to have an escape route available at all times. Read Sniper on the Eastern front by Albert Wacker for some pretty good idea of the tactics involved. The book details the war time experience of Sepp Allerberger, one of Germany’s most successful snipers.
Also, snipers strike fear into enemy soldiers. They never know when they’re going to be hit and from where.
Sepp Allerberger’s “Sniper on the Eastern Front” and Chris Kyle’s “American Sniper” were both great reads I absolutely could not put down upon starting. They both show the stark contrast between the open season that was WWII and the bureaucratized mess we call warfare today. And yet sniping tactics haven’t changed too much in 73 years.
After reading this article I gotta say, he’s right. Bearded Rambo Jesus with an M1A isn’t going to “win” jack shit. That doesn’t mean a civilian or group thereof with good marksmanship, patience, and a quick escape route wouldn’t be able to inflict some kind of damage over time.
A good soldier has mastered how to fight, but an excellent soldier knows when not to.
Sure if you are going to face an american army gone rogue on the battlefield. But what if they are engaged not in their fighting positions but instead when they are walking to their cars in the morning? Insurgents do “do” those kind of things. The problem is you go to what you know but instead of thinking Iraq or Afghanistan he should be thinking Syria or a well armed Northern Ireland.
I agree. There is some contextual observations that need to be made. While I agree that even the above average civilian marksman doesn’t know the first things about sniper hide/stalk/evasion/escape-craft, and probably not even target engagement, there is a huge difference between a force on force engagement, and the partisan/insurgent use of sniping. Any kind of large scale civil unrest/war would quickly entail policing large urban areas, not open field or rural battlefield engagements, and under those conditions a small flock of determined marksmen who can quickly disappear into the urban population and landscape, can play hell with an occupying force, both in terms of bodies as well as psychology.
Lets not forget that any such insurrection would not be about individual victories in any given engagement, but about the protracted and determined resistance of a force that has nothing left to loose. Add to that the fact that the policing force is fighting their own and you have a very strong weapon in a civil war, and it starts and ends with civilian marksmanship.
Yup. Its eating and sleeping where you poop…..on a country wide level. It would be a price no would be dictator could think would be worth the cost. Assassins with an M1A behind every blade of grass would be Afganistan times 1000……in their own backyard.
“I am a great fan of rifle marksmanship. But we shouldn’t overestimate its value in warfare. Unsupported by regular troops, most snipers die quickly.”
The PIRA’s South Armagh Brigade would disagree.
Can’t stand Chris Kyle one bit, but he’s right.
Yes, we all know the armed citizenry stands no practical chance against a well-trained / equipped / motivated professional military. But with a rifle and some respectable marksmanship skills, I stand a fighting chance. Which is better than no chance at all (as history illustrates right up to the present day in Syria). When you come for me, you’re gonna get hurt. You’re probably gonna get dead. And I’ll do my best to provide you with company.
A fighting chance is all I want and it’s all I need. A free people can expect no more and deserve no less.
How long have we been in Afghanistan fighting their “armed citizenry” with our well-trained / equipped / motivated professional military?
Read the book “Outlaw Platoon” we are not fighting mere armed citizens, but well trained experienced experts in light infantry combat.
I think it’s safe to say that a large amount of our hypothetical resistance force will be former military personnel.
and what is your point? our theoretical tyrants wouldnt be fighting mere armed citizens either, but rather well-trained experienced experts hardened from counter-insurgency operations.
The civilian resistor doesn’t have to win. He has to cause enough damage and chaos to force the government oppressor to use actual overwhelming force, instead of just a show of force. This escalates to massacres and other atrocities, which brings more of the population onto your side while also, maybe, causing members of the armed forces to reconsider their participation. Lots of military types may be willing to “just follow orders” to intimidate civilians with shows of force, but killing them wholesale is a whole ‘nother thing.
The British didn’t leave India because they were outgunned – far from it. They gave up because they could not stomach what they would have had to do to win.
Ding! *cigar*
Bingo!
This is the only grand strategy that might work against a rogue federal government.
indeed just a “armed citizen” stands no practical stance. A trained and battle-hardened veteran??? a entirely different story.
One example: The Taliban
Yes! Everybody’s got to die sometime. There are no guarantees except the Second Amendment in that respect. 🙂
I’m going to offer a two word rebuttal to the conclusions in that article: Vasily Zaytsev
I see yours and raise:
Simo Häyhä
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simo_H%C3%A4yh%C3%A4
This was an ego piece, nothing more. “Just because you may be able to shoot as well as me, me and my buddies will still kick yer ass and I’m cooler than you!” was the basic gist. Dorner proved just how completely inaccurate Mr. Kyle’s suggestions are. No support, lousy planning, and it took thousands of cops and tens of thousands of man-hours to get close to him. Then they had to burn him out. One man. Imagine if he had planned better, or had any support?
Innumerable historical examples, plus thousands of years of experience in A-stan alone by, well, everybody proves that some smart locals can confound any invading force. Or other locals. Will you be gotten eventually? Likely. Will the “pro soldiers” and all their whiz-bang tech get you inevitably? Not necessarily before you do some serious damage. Which is the whole point.
Mr. Kyle thank you for your service, stick to what you know. The realities of insurgency/counter-insurgency are apparently not in that skill-set.
Care to write this up as a full post? Send it to [email protected]
Untrained, rag tagged snipers (compared to coalition forces) have sure made an impact in the desert. We may get them with airstrikes eventually, sure, but not before they do their damage to morale and do millions in damage by disrupting day to day routines. I agree with him on the best way to affect a change, he’s absolutely correct. However, he underestimates the effectiveness of a smart civilian with an accurate rifle.
I agree. I think he’s a defeatist. Somebody who you could equate to a Tory. A sympathizer. A collaborator. How many damned military veterans do you think are out here in flyover country, who’ve lived here all our lives, who know the terrain, the population? And in point of fact, not much maneuvering you can do when your being hounded on all sides in small, vicious bites. History is RIFE with evidence that small rag tag forces can grind a huge organized military unit to a halt. Mobility = Victory
With all due respect to Mr. Volk and his work, I believe he is making the mistake of considering the sniper as an individual, rather than as a part of a larger force. Snipers perform three functions:
1. Take out high-value targets.
2. Demoralize the enemy.
3. Tie up lots of resources for those who want to get at them.
Artillery and air strikes are expensive. If you’re bringing them to bear on one sniper, they are unavailable somewhere else, and the sniper has done his job.
That’s one scenario. What about the scenario where order has dissolved. Local volunteer militias post sniper/observers in the community to respond to lawless looters/pillagers/rape squads. Not every scenario involves open rebellion.
Of course in the rebellion scenario there may be significant benefit to taking out a single important person. Such as a leader giving unlawful orders or an equipment operator doing significant damage. But what do I know? I’ve never been in the military so feel free to tell me to piss off. I willingly concede my ignorance in these matters.
Volk needs to read Sun Tzu.
Why did we leave Iraq and why are we leaving Afghanistan? Primarily, if not exclusively, IEDs and snipers. These tactics may not have defeated our soldiers, per se, but they defeated our politicians’ and most civilians collective will to fight.
After all, if it were for expertly trained military, this country would not exist. It was farmers with rifles deploying Native American gorilla tactics that won the Revolutionary War. I was born into a military family, my dad retired after 26 years as a Senior Master Sergeant. I am former law enforcement, believe me, hiking into the woods with a possible sniper would make any Army platoon a little nervous. So with all due respect, an enemy would not need to engage in force or even shoot more than once to strike fear into a platoon. Btw, if one was a sniper you would shoot and scoot, not hang around and wait for them to pinpoint your location. Just saying, I think this was a statement about a rifleman attacking an army, not a sniper.
Sure, against the fully capable US armed forces, and in situations where they can effectively bring that full force to bear, a civilian sniper won’t last long. This is obviously a situation to be avoided. In CONUS how often could the US military bring their full force to bear?
As a number of commenters noted, there are many different situations and tactics that can be used, including sniping.
Sniping in the desert is different from sniping in the woods or the jungle, very different. Sniping in an urban environment is different from the above three. Each environment has advantages and difficulties, for the sniper and the ‘enemy’. Beware the one who ‘knows it all’.
+100
Kyle is making a common mistake, assuming that civilians would be dumb enough to go head to head with the military.
It would be guerrilla style warfare with the logistical tail of the army being attacked. Soldiers without supplies become targets.
Ask the Germans how their supply lines did against Russian Partisans.
All that aside, is Kyle assuming the Army would follow orders and engage in suppressing/oppressing the civilian population of the US?
Exactly. We didn’t win the Revolution with the Regulars going toe to toe with the Recoats, we won by the Militia using guerrilla tactics that they learned from the Indians.
The Art of War should be read by anyone willing to defend their family/home and country.
That being said it has been proven time and again by “ragtag” bands of people that you cannot fight and win guerrilla warfare style conflicts with modern technological superiority.
Hit and run, harass and interdict guerrilla tactics will win 99% of the time.
And if they don’t win they make it very very costly !!!!!!!
Hello, I was a sniper, took out this many of the enemy, saved this many lives, ect. Ect. However, sniping is pretty useless, especially for you. Now that that’s over with, please take my class, so I can teach you how to practice self-defense at 800 yards!
This.
We just have to learn from the lessons of history; all empires ultimately collapse into chaos because of to many wars, high taxes, top heavy beauracracy, to many people feeding at the public trough; to much regulation; debasement of the currency; sound familiar?
The jewish people 2000 years ago should have remembered thier history; instead of fighting the Roman Empire at the height of thier power; just wait a few centuries until Roman empire would have collapsed and then regain thier independence.
Our empire will collapse for the same reasons and in the death throes there will be a short time when the iron fist will be deployed in a desperate attempt to preserve the status quo; Patriot Act anyone? but we are much more fragile than the Roman culture was; the collapse, I believe, will happen faster and the chance to rebuild from the ashes of what we once were is possible.
If you know a tidal wave is coming; do you stand on the beach with a rake to hold back the wave? or do you head for the hills to wait out the destruction to come back and clean up the aftermath?
Blake,
“is Kyle assuming the Army would follow orders and engage in suppressing/oppressing the civilian population of the US?”
The answer is yes, and he’s correct. Those opposing Govt action would be labeled “terrorists” and the military would do what it does best… follow orders.
I would agree, people talk about how only 3% of the colonists were fighting in the field; but that was after all 13 colonies voted to secede from the control of Britain; those 3% had the support of the people and their local governments; how many states today would vote to secede from the union over questions of constitutional violations? One or two, if that, anyone else acting alone without support of thier local communities and governments will, as you said, be labeled terrorists and quickly be eliminated.
But…. I bought all those multi-cam BDUs for when I take my SR25 to the range!?!?!?
I read the interview… There are precision rifles that are as tough as the sniper rifles carried by the army/marines/etc. I could order one in tomorrow. I don’t claim to be the tacticool type but I do know that with the right books and help from the correct instruction without being in the military, one can be a force to be reckoned with. Seals are another level of physical ability but I take issue with his assumption that a civilian couldn’t harass a professional force with decent firearm and fieldcraft. He puts up the straw man argument that a civilian sniper would intend on taking out a whole unit of professional force military which is not claimed by really anyone, nor would a professional sniper do the same unless he was willing to cede his position. There have been plenty of snipers who started as hunters and some self-trained despite the military to become great men of the one shot one kill club. The Boer wars, HW McBride, Chuck Mawhinney all come to mind.
Distinction without difference? I would offer that the nomenclature is often the defining part of perception. Rightly or wrongly.
You have just had to defend yourself/home/family from an attack by utilizing deadly force.
You A: Shot the perp with gramps’ Colt 1911 and used a 125 Grain defensive JHP of some ilk.
Or B: You used your “Bad Azz Boys” products tacticool 12 gauge with “I’m Gonna Get You Sucka” shells, and more crap hanging on rails than the gun itself weighs.
Which do you want to sell to a potential Grand Jury?
Both are legal, and so was your use. Ideally, it doesn’t matter, but we all know real life ain’t always so.
Beyond the usual (and legit but still childish) penis waving the X-SF guys who go public are wont to do, the fact remains Kyle apparently still trains people and gets paid (I’m guessing rather well) to do so.
All he needs is one student to climb up in a tower, or simply miss a long shot and inadvertently hit someone. Then, were you Kyle, would you want to be on record any where, at any time suggesting for a picosecond that you ‘trained him to be a sniper’?
I think only a few would try (in)formal resistance. For
the rest it’d be like the IRA or one of the many factions
in Bosnia/Serbia.
I’m also not sure they’re giving civilian shooters as much
credence as they should either. There’s more than a few
that could give professional snipers a run for their money.
Consider also the history of snipers in the US. It’s only
recently that snipers have been trained from the ground up.
For most of our history, snipers were recruited from the
ranks for ability; which almost always came from a lifetime
of hunting. Chuck Mawhinney or Sgt York anyone?
Chris Kyle is on the whole correct about a sniper operating alone against well equipped regular military.
However his example is in a setting of domestic civil war, pitting civilian gun owners against the combined US military. He is saying that in this situation our military would act as an unthinking monolithic whole. In fact I think that in such a situation a great many members of the US military would stand down or defect. I would cite the actions of members of the US military in 1861 as my example.
If ever such an event came to pass. It would far more complex, and far more awful than the silly example given above.
Like most military trained guys/gals, he can’t fathom the prospect of a civilian trumping his elite skills in any form. He can teach you to hit a target at 800 yards, but don’t bother thinking you can equal his abilities as a sniper. Never mind that before the rigorous and formal sniper training he’s undergone has really only been around for a few decades. So his youth betrays his perpestive. Even in Vietnam, our snipers were not far removed from the WWI and WWII era snipers who were mostly just good riflemen using only moderatly better tools than their regular infantry companions. If they survived long enough to pass on their secrets then so much the better. Those guys, on all sides, did pretty good with that system until the modern military schools finally caught on to teaching it as an MOS.
So while he has a good points about marksmanship, he falls short in his underestimation of what a motivated, intelligent person can accomplish if they need to. He’s assuming such a civilian would be stupid enough to take on an organized, first world military. He’s also assuming that the first world military would be using its
full combat potential in a wartime situation. Both of those only offer a narrow range of scenarios as many of the posters before me have pointed out.
Please note: the comments after the jump are from Oleg Volk. NOT Chris Kyle.
As others have commented, I don’t think Oleg Volk knows much about the principles of unconventional warfare.
Absolutely agree that the best way to change the coming disaster is at the ballot box. Our best first option. As far as snipers go:
1. Simo was so effective because of his stalking ability and his target rich enviroment and his enemies own lack of skill and organization. Stalin’s purges had castrated the Russian military.
2. The russian’s and German’s employed batallions of snipers and the attrition rate was horrendous. How many untrained civilian shooters will be motivated and discaplined enough to stay in a slugging match with regulars?
3.Marksmanship is only a very small part of being a sniper. Buying a surplus ghillie suit and a scoped rifle is a long way from being a sniper.
4. Usinf the events in Astan as a proof that irregulars can beat regulars is being dishonest with yourself. The people of Astan are not fighting in a vacuum, they recieve aid and fighters from all over the muslim world. They are all of the same religion. They are used to a hard scrabble life with few luxories and they’re on their home turf while our soldiers are a long way from home and looking forward to going home.
5. The people of America are not hardened mountain villagers. We’re fat, lazy disconnected people wallowing in the good life. We are disconnected from one another and don’t share a common faith. I don’t even know my neighbers.
6. The majority of Americans will not resist an illegal takeover of the government so long as they can shop eat and play video games. The few who do resist will be too few to accomplish anything but a few minor casualties before they die.
7. We can barely get Americans to turn out for an election? How motivated will they be to rebel?
Consider this also. If you and some like minded individuals have planned to go rebel when the moment comes you will have to face the fact that fully half of your buddies will get cold feet, think about their families and not come out for the cause. They are a source of intel for the government to mine to find the few of you that went active. One of your buddies, or a family member or casual friend will sell you out to gain favor or release from the government’s clutches.
Unless you can guarantee a general uprising or split in the military leading to civil war you might as well stay home. You will cause some suffering, like the DC sniper. But like him you will end badly and will have accomplished nothing.
Sounds more like the cherished “my job is so special no one else could possibly acquire the same skills unless they do it the same way I did.” argument. It’s ok though because that kind of hyperbolic self confidence and elitism may have a positive effect on performance (unless of course the overconfident military snipers vastly underestimate enemy civilians with the same skills and then lose a war to them because of it…[lessons of history])
-D
“unless of course the overconfident military snipers vastly
underestimate enemy civilians with the same skills and then
lose a war to them because of it”
Which is why no army since Alexander has successfully taken
over the Afgan/Pakistan region. “Those who fail to learn history….”
The Mongols conquered Afghanistan, along with almost the entire known world of the time.
I’ll see your Khan and raise both the Brits
and USSR.
“Esti Ginzburg in a bikini”
— When I turn 60, I am going to retire and move to Israel. Once there, I reckon it will take a month or two to find and marry a 19-year-old Israeli supermodel, and start making babies. My plans are to kick back at the pool, sip something cool and tropical, and let her modeling work bring home our million$ and then she can change my son’s diapers too. Oh’ the good life 🙂
LMAO!!!
Been there done that, rode the ride and got a T-Shirt!
I read through all the comments and they are great. My thanks to all.
I strongly disagree. A armed citizen is valuable, even in the 21st century. There are also a lot of assumptions being made about “armed citizens” being comparatively unfit, incompetent, and unskilled compared to regular soldiers, which is a folly even with the technologically advanced army that the US has.
1.) “armed citizens” are also composed of former military and law enforcement; many of which were in elite units. Enough said about doubts in fieldcraft and experience…
2.) Most infantrymen in our military are young kids and many of them were raised in urban environments. Sure, they may be experienced, though soldiers of this day in age are generally not accustomed to surviving without their logistics chain or even basic creature comforts. Multiple days, weeks, or months in the field with a consistent supply chain is not a indicator of survival skill. The notable exception are units specifically trained and experienced in field craft; i.e. USSOCOM personnel.
3.) Our military is logistics intensive. Disruptions in the supply lines would cripple fleets of Abrams, Stryker, and Bradley AFVs due to the shortage of fuel, spare parts, and ammunition. You can bet civil unrest in the states would create severe energy shortages, which would also limit the advantages of air power and medical evacuation; without oil, expect such a conflict to get very medieval.
4.) The Taliban and Al Qaeda in Iraq and Afghanistan, located in countries smaller than CONUS, have deadlocked the most fearsome military machine in human history. Think about that for a moment. “they are experienced fighters”, “they have outward powers supplying them”, “blah blah blah, ad nauseum”, are just excuses and doesnt change the fact that small arms and improvised explosives are deadlocking a military armed with stealth bombers and ICBMs. Another example? Chechnya. And who is to say that such American resistance fighters wouldn’t receive arms and aid from other powers??? to say that they wont is incredibly naive and stupid (though from the same heads that thought the same things about the two aforementioned countries too…with predictable results).
5.) Guerrilla warfare is a snowball effect, meaning what starts off as small gains momentum into something significant. Deer rifles can yield M4s, which can field heavier weapons. That is also not even mentioning arms from foreign powers.
6.) Finally, since when were we a nation of wimps and softies that cared about the odds against us in the pursuit of liberty? Nowhere in the 2nd amendment does it absolve you from prosecution by the power you are rebelling against, it is just there to ensure you have a means to resist and protect liberty. I for one would rather fight and die than live as a slave in a orwellian nightmare straight from a Stalinist’s wet dream.
Anybody with doubts should read works by John Poole and 4th generation warfare.
I felt i would have something to add after reading all the comments. Got to yours and changed my mind. Very well said. I beleive some ones been reading mountainguerilla. Mosby?
400 yards?? My Gun Club’s mini-snipers are grumpy old guys shooting at a 100 yards with their chronographs and notebooks.
I certainly agree, that there is a huge difference between hunting and being a military sniper. Just like there is a huge difference between being a police officer and an armed civilian. So, the point is what?
You’ll always have some “wanna be’s” in any arena. However, I am a firm believer that us being armed, against a rogue military or an invading force, makes all the difference in the world, why it’s less likely to happen here.
Our military is made up who? US. I see national guard going to make sure that George Wallace, follows the law and lets black kids go to school. But, I don’t see them sacking an American City, just because ordered to.
I say, that in the Revolutionary War, George Washington, lead, a rag tag, bunch of civilians, against the most powerful superpower of the time and against all Odds, we are all Americans today and NOT British.
I may not be a sniper, I may just be a range shooter. But, I don’t think it matters to the guy, who just had his head splattered against the wall, if I am a professional sniper, or just a guy defending freedom. He’s just as dead and I am just as free.
Honestly, I couldn’t disagree more with this article. I think it is unrealistic that our entire armed forces would fire on the flag. Also, history is littered with examples of how armed citizens went up against the might trained army and won. The minute men against the red coats, the taliban against the russians, IRA, etc… Would it be a blood bath? Yes. Could the armed citizenry put up a hard front, HELL YES. One thing you have to remember, this scenario would be fought in our streets. The armed forces would have a hard time telling the difference between regular joe and the armed resistance. Isn’t this the issue we are having with the insurgents right now? Unless the military is prepared to start wiping out whole city blocks I would give the armed citizen with ambush tactics the upper hand.
If you’re in a war, how free are you really?
Fighting a war = Choice aka Freedom
No resistance to government authority or tyanny = Slave
Sadly, you miss the point entirely. Fighting for freedom and liberty and having freedom and liberty are not the same thing. If you’re actively engaged in fighting a war, rightly or wrongly, you’re either a slave to the cause or you’re a deserter or shirker. Sarge says, “Boys, take that hill.” Do you have the freedom to say nah, not this time, Sarge, or Sarge, I’ll take that hill over there instead if it’s all the same to you, thanks? Let me know how that works out for you.
I stopped reading Oleg Volk’s site several months ago, for various reasons.
What has the author of “The Mis-Directed Fetish Of Marksmanship” done with the real Oleg Volk?
If I were to try to take on the US Army I wouldn’t do it by buying an MOA rifle and thousands of rounds of match grade ammo. I would buy a whole lot of fertalizer, diesel fuel, copper wire, washing machine timers, cell phones and twelve volt batteries. A lathe capable of turning a thin copper disc would come in handy too. Trust me, IEDs, especially EFPs (Explosively Formed Penetrators) strike much more fear in my heart than snipers.
The best part is a victim triggered IED doesn’t even require me to be in the same zip code as the weapon when it goes off.
spoken like a true, battle-hardened student of 4th generation, asymmetric warfare. My thoughts exactly!
Anybody that thinks such insurrectionists would JUST resort to long ranged rifle fire will be rudely surprised.
I pray that such subjects are limited to theoretical discussions on a gun blog and not from the actual experiences of a terrifying new battlefield.
Amen Sir!!! As a 15 yr vet in the US Army(11Bravo) one thing I have always believed and remembered is the absolute fear factor of seeing 6 or 8 of your brothers in arms go flyin thru the air because of an IED!!!!
Having been through various schools at Ft Benning Ga and Ft Bragg NC I can tell you the lone shot from nowhere causes some temporary fear and confusion but the mass explosion of an IED is vastly more devastating both morally and physically!!!
As the Taliban are well aware, an IED is a great way to initiate an ambush. Or you could even wait to shoot down the medevac. Any time the other side is reacting to you is a good opportunity to inflict some serious hurt.
Now your talking! No good rebel trash!
The founding fathers would be proud of you!
They might try to breed it and train it out of us and they are, however we have another point of view. One that we find fair and just and says to us that we are not the abusers of power and have not sought to become targets of their abuse. It therefore follows that we do not feel constrained in our responses, which will be considerably more than a suppressed, bolt action, large bore rifle, although they have their place.
If a bunch of half-assed tribesmen can produce fully automatic weapons, rocket launchers and ammunition by hand in a remote mountain village, it doesn’t take much to imagine the quantities nor qualities of difficulties and casualties that an American can produce if they choose to. This is why we have a Constitution and Bill of Rights, so that we and our children might live in peace. Politicians and bureaucrats however and their media friends are attempting to destroy those concepts and redefine their meaning in order to seize power and money from the average citizen, leaving they and their children little more than slaves.
One might be able to understand if citizens object to this and to those who facilitate it. I dare say they will understand it completely and in detail if they continue to pursue that course.
That others, that their children may live, in freedom.
can a civilian force armed with deer rifles win against the current US Army? maybe, if enough turned out, but doubtful. could a civilian force armed with tanks, artillery, light & heavy MGs, rocket & grenade launchers, AA guns & missiles, body armour, etc., win against the current US Army? Abso-freakin’-lutely! which is why we need to restore the 2nd Amendment to what it was meant to be: arming the civilian militia so as to allow it to keep the government’s power in check and keep them honest.
I find nothing wrong with citizens taking in depth courses to learn to shoot better. Are they Seal grade snipers, with the self defense training, evasion techniques and physical fitness, no. Does that really matter? The fact is taking the time to learn to shoot better, whether it is for up close personal defense, or long range shooting is never a bad thing. I am sure there are civilians out there that could give a military sniper a run for their money. One thing people forget is that a sniper is a single cog in a wheel. As a unit you have many roles, and a sniper is a single role. Together they work as a team. With coordination and might, they are a formidable obstacle. So really a lone sniper is not affective in many cases. With communication and other roles being filled it is an important piece of a team.
As far as revolution..
As best as I can tell we see the following traits in America today. Military personal vote republican at an almost 2 to 1 ratio based upon recent poles. We know 88,000 or so LEO’s are also NRA card carrying members.
In a hypothetical revolution, I see many military personal, LEO’s and civilians banding together. I am not saying that many will not simply follow orders. However, in this specific instance, the implementation of a hard tyranny, I fell many might defect or refuse orders. If we see a hard tyranny, there will be reaction on this site and many like it, where individuals will begin to communicate about what to do. Some have pointed out this will start small, and grow. What would bring about such change? What would be the straw that would break the camels back as it were?
To be honest a second term of Obama might not do it. I think we would see states which are predominantly red fight at the federal level on policy. Similar to the Affordable Health Care act, there are states who have simply chosen not to participate. If at all possible these states would also not take part in other legislation which might pass during a second term. This would hamper the implementation of the legislation to full affect.
I am sure there might be other areas which might force a tipping point, but it would be at a state level. It would be a judgment call from the state, where it felt it was fighting for it’s sovereignty and took to a vote to succeed from the federal government. This could be brought about by a group of states, and force the federal government to reverse course on a particular policy.
One area I do see this being a tipping point is you guessed it, guns. This would be an area of personal infringement which would tip the citizens to action. Let’s say the current administration or any administration passes the UN treaty on small arms. Once passed, either through executive order or lord knows it passes through congress, they outlaw guns. This might simply be an implementation of an AWB which is all inclusive of all AR and AK style rifles. Mandatory confiscation or voluntary doesn’t matter. At this point we have thousands of Americans who are now essentially criminals if they don’t turn in their guns.
It might start with one or two people fighting back. They might die or be arrested, but it throws the gauntlet down for others to follow suite. Maybe some police forces decide not to enforce the new law, or maybe some even help with resistance. Citizens will begin to communicate on how to stop the government.
At this point the administration now has a decision to make. do you send in the army, or ATF to get those weapons or do you simply ignore it and move on without taking action. If you decide to forcibly disarm your citizens, I feel this will be the tipping point for gun owners across America. G-d help us if this day should ever arise. For many of us it isn’t even a question of armed resistance or not. It is simply being ready. Many may have some serious soul searching to do. Others might be at the front of the line. Some might simply stand quietly by and do nothing.
I pray this day will never come, but based on the Constitution we as citizens should be ready. both in heart and mind to deal with any internal or external threats to our liberties, and freedoms.
What scenario are we talking about? Being a rifleman will not help if the military is used against the population and doesn’t have to worry about collateral damage.
However, if you’re going up against paramilitary police, an armed and trained population would be very useful. Do you see how scared the SWAT teams are when they go against one cretin selling George Washington’s toothache medicine? Imagine them taking sustained accurate fire from afar. I don’t see tyrannical police action as any match against a small, organized civilian force.
No one has addresed the real reason Kyle engaged in Truth Speak and that is DHS. Who wants to find themselves trapped like that GI on leave FRom Afsandalot who once he hit HI discovered himself on a No Fly List?
and that is why we were able to pacify Iraq, Afghanistan, and some time ago Vietnam in 6 months time , and control them effortlessly until their elections. then we left.
yep, it’s that organization,equipment and discipline that crushed the resistance in no time flat.
it is futile to resist. or think of resisting, or not to do exactly as you are told, happily.
the us army never leaves a conlflict without complete victory.
Or not….
I find the immediate jump to a conclusion interesting. Are there no possible scenarios other than our current situation (well-ordered society in which one can always call for help) and open rebellion with some kind of authoritarian crackdown?
I have ZERO interest in or intent to engage in open warfare with the US Gummint, or law enforcement. Nor do I imagine it will ever be neccessary.
I can, however imagine a scenario in which the infrastructure we all rely on to keep us safe, warm, and fed isn’t working the way we have all come to expect. My firearms ownership, and interest in my proficiency, while primarily focused on other, more likely uses, is partially driven by the concern this creates.
And before anyone calls me “Mall Ninja”, I dont even own an EBR, and am not sure I will ever bother.
The ability to put rounds on target at long range is only part of being a sniper. Stalking and hiding are even more important. That said, taking one shot and bugging out can do a lot of demoralizing damage if repeated frequently at many locations. It could be a .338 at half a mile or a drive-by with a Raven that is dumped in the next available sewer. Amateurs can’t win set piece battles against well equipped professionals, but guerilla tactics work.
As has been stated, shooting is only a small part of being a sniper. When I was in the USMC, I had a higher rifle range score than a lot of the people in the Battalion sniper unit. But they were ghosts. Ghosts that could run a long goddamn way carrying a lot of weight.
However unlikely it is, if the U.S. Government every truly did become third reich-like, I don’t think we civvies would be all alone. Yes, the Afghan fighters that have been giving American troops fits are experienced warriors. But don’t we have some of those ourselves??? Wouldn’t it be logical to assume that a significant number of experienced combat veterans would be on “our” side? What about active-duty servicemen? I think if orders were being given to commit atrocities against fellow Americans there would be a whole lot of refusals, deserters, and even “misappropriation” of heavy weaponry. In that scenario, I could see the good guys winning.
I somewhat agree, but smart civilian snipers can do a lot of damage if they know their area and plan. It’d take a lot of effort to kill a good civilian who knows how to do it right, and I mean, shoot one and scoot, how long would it take them even if you didn’t hit to decide that you have gone away and aren’t just extremely patient?
Two words. Red Dawn. Remake opens Nov 21.
Unintended Consequences by John Ross
Absolved by Mike Vanderboegh
The Revolutionary War. Examples abound.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gy7FVXERKFE
Red Dawn doesn’t terrify me. Gray State does 😀
I fear my own government than I do the North Koreans. Is there something wrong with that picture?
I seem to recall that our most vicious, bloodthirsty, expensive in terms of lives lost conflict was when we took on ourselves. It gets to that point, kiss the Hague convention and Geneva accords goodbye. I can be as bloody minded as the next guy (Islam delenda est) but we really, positively, absolutely need to be double damned sure we’ve exhausted every alternative before going to that particular place.
Tell that to those who would start such a conflict.
Why would you snipe vs a combat platoon? Hit them where they are weak, hit their support. Sabotage their jets, cripple their artillery. Never tackle problems head on when you can do something else.
Sniping is a job, a mindset and an acquired skill. Someone with a modicum of innate talent and a sufficiently high level of motivation and dedication can, if not exactly master a given profession, they can none the less become quite competent at it. One can banter on at length about different scenarios, social and political, as to how effective “civilian snipers” would prove to be in a given set of circumstances, but to what end? Until the actual experimental data is in, it’s all just conjecture and speculation, notwithstanding the historical data points that we already have.
People are often prone to indulging fantasies and delusions of martial grandeur. My guess would be that in the Revolution V3.0 situation, the New American Militia Corp, all volunteer, Sea to Shining Sea Sniper Brigade would be winnowed down quite rapidly were things to go truly sporty and non-linear. That said, those that survived the first and second cuts may well find a new avocation suitable to their talents and dispositions and may make it along far enough to have stories for their grandchildren.
Both Kyle and Volk bring up some good points and miss or disregard others. They have their opinions and perspectives and they are entitled to them. By examining them carefully, we might learn something that can be useful to us down the road.
Perhaps someone could enlighten me as to why the police need snipers? Marksmen, certainly but snipers, I don’t think so. I guess it just goes along with the militarization of the local popo’s. Next I guess they will add armored cav… oh, too late.
For the sake of argument suppose the American people, the gun owning freedom loving bunch at any rate, decide that the G has gone 1 step to far and it’s time to rebel. Where do the rebels get supplies and support from.
During the American revolution we recieved money and equipment from the french who saw our fight against the Brits to be to their advantage.
What nation today would supply money and weapons to people rebelling against a repressive American government? Remember that the G still has a huge nuclear arsenal.
It’s one thing to fight a proxy war against the US in places like Viet Nam or Astan. It’s quite another thing to land loads of AK’s and RPG’s on American shores.
Remember the rebels are fighting to overthrow a G that wants to restrict their rights, especially 2a. What other G in the world respects individual rights so much that they’d be willing to risk an all out, maybe even nuclear war with a rogue American G? I can just see the UN sending in troops to restore our 2a rights.
What about China? If they were to decide it was worth the risk to help the rebels what would they want in return? They surely wouldn’t want to leave a restored free America to oppose them in years to come.
Hopefully the fantasy American civil war 2 will stay just that, a fantasy.
Remember the ballot box before the cartridge box.
Chris kyle could get a job for recoil magazine
Fire for effect!! Ouch!!
ITT, a whole lot of people without their B4 designation direct oceans of butthurt at the most successful real-world sniper in American history. Nods to the LTC for best response.
It’s sort of like watching fifty pre-schoolers argue evolution with Dawkins.
Lads, here’s the bottom line. I served in the US infantry, my last posting was in Scout/Sniper platoon, and I have a sniper deployment under my belt. And I’d not presume to contradict Mr. Kyle on my most presumptuous day. Add to that the fact that he’s right…….well, you get teh idea.
Thank you for serving, and surviving to come home, hope the transition back was smooth.
Not denegrating the skills of Kyle and yourself, its just a simple matter of numbers, and those 30-35 million, geez, far out number the entire complement of active military numbering around 3 mil around the world, in all 5 branches, of which only a little over 1 mil are combat troops, the rest support.
As for the firepower and air control, geez, you going to unleash such destruction on US soil, lol, and all the collateral damage such firepower brings? We see and hear it everyday, civilians hurt or killed in Iraq or Afghanistan. You do realize that such actions, as a rule, generate support for the insurgents who bluntly arent going to play fair.
So many other technicalities that the author of the article, just seems to forget, but forgetting those things would likely cost any military person supporting such a civil war intiated by our government, their lives. Dont doubt that a special way of “educating” such military personel who supported and participated in such an act would be found. Maybe not that day, but sometime, somewhere as the proportion of those as skilled as you or Kyle who would support such an action, are very small indeed, or are we wrong about that?
I agree… sort of. But the author seems to forget a few facts. Some of the most snipers in history, had no sniper training and were just hunters when they went to war: Vasily Zaytsev, Simo Häyhä, Carlos Hathcock, etc.
On the modern battlefield, just think at the damage Iraqi and Afghani snipers did to our troops with old Soviet SVD’s, Mosins, and what ever else they could stick a piece of glass on. Yes, we did kill a lot of them. But it took whole platoons of men to chase down and kill one guy.
Does being able to drop a deer across a farm quarter make a man a sniper? No. But in a “Red Dawn/SHTF” scenario, an otherwise untrained guy with a rifle that can make a hit at 500 to 600 yds can be very effective, as history has shown us.
I love the assumptions here that ALL armed citizenry would be strictly civilians with only civilian backgrounds. LOL. What is even funnier is the idea that these exclusively “civilian” armed men would be armed with only hunting rifles. One absurdity after another.
That is the biggest folly on here that I see many assume and assume over and over again. If these are the same class of professionals that intend on siding with the tyrants, then god help them; no wonder their hubris yielded 10 years of fruitless war.
Any siding or ostracizing should be focused on oleg volk since he wrote “the mis-directed fetish of marksmanship”, not chris kyle.
If action is ever taken against the American people and the constitution, you will not only face bubba in mossy oak with a deer rifle. That is the same wishful thinking that is the reason we’re balls deep in the empire maintaining mess were in right now.
Read Kyles book, rather entertaining how the massive majority of his confirmed kills, were targets who carelessly placed themselves in open targeted areas. He himself mentions this multiple times.
What he doesnt acknowledge verbally in written admission is they kept coming, and coming and coming, and coming…..
Kyle and no number of skilled, specialist military personnel, who number in the thousands at best, cant disseminate their skills to everyone in sufficient time or numbers, and be in every place at once, and in turn couldnt kill them all, never could, never will.
Yet that would be different in the US how?
The American public is the most heavily armed group on the planet per population. Why do you think the Marxists want to diisarm us. Per Bloomberg, Obama, Holder, etc. Not to mention ex military of all ages.
Seems to me that the scenario described depicts a situation where both sides are “ready” before the first shot. While regulars can no doubt establish and guard “green zones”, there is no war plan that allows for guarding everything everywhere all the time. The essence of sniping is partly surprise. It is the bright Spring day with the smell of flowers in the air when a silent bullet unexpectedly arrives from an unknown direction, making its mark and taking out the regular. This results in yet more vigilance, tension and anxiety on the part of the regulars.
Long periods lived in situations where death may arrive unannounced at any time from any quarter of the compass have been known to break the will of occupiers before. But beyond that, there is no protecting the home or the logistical rear. In Iraq, the wives, children, parents and siblings of American forces were not under threat. In war waged by the Obamination (whether actually named “Obama” or something else – like “Romney”) all these become targets. Food supplies will be poisoned. Aircraft and weapons systems will be sabotaged. The “enemy” will look too much like the regulars to be easily differentiated. There will be no language gap. Perhaps the biggest advantage is that the “enemy” will have been trained by the regulars, and in some cases, will be within their ranks.
Sniping will be just one part of the war, likely used on high priority targets and chiefly as a psychological weapon. But it will be used.
But soldiers wouldn’t be your primary targets anyway, now would they?
“And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling in terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand? […] The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin’s thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt!” —Alexander Solzhenitsyn, The Gulag Archipelago
You raise some very good points about eh will of the people. The answer to whether people will rise up and fight or whether they will sit back and be complacent is how much the level of discontent is raised.
Hunger will turn not just man against Government, but man against man.
There appears to be an assumption that the military will be on the side of a future dictator, which quite possibly wouldn’t be the case.
The opposition to any hypothetical revolt would first & foremost be civilian law enforcement agencies.
They aren’t trained infantry.
I don’t understand the hate that comes from some ex military types, does it really matter what “wannabe” sniper does with his “tacticool” rifle at the range? Does it really effect your life? Maybe we don’t care what you think, seems to me you forgot why you joined in the first place, to defend effing freedom, that includes the freedom to look like an a-hole with your gear as long as you aren’t out killing people.
Let’s see now! We didn’t win in Korea, we didn’t win in Vietnam and we way out gunned them all. Iraq is going back to worse than what it was and we are not winning in in Afghanistan. So much for your over whelming fire power.The Russians civilians turned sniper killed almost all of the German officer corps in Stalingrad. You military boys are very confident. Oh by the way I served two tours in Vietnam in a very active combat unite. The Vietcong snipers took a very heavy toll on US forces so get over your idea that professionally untrained snipers won’t wreck havoc on a military force. Most of you wormy civilians won’t even show up for the fight so shut up.
From a sniper’s perspective, those of you that think a large or even massive group of well armed marksmen stand a chance against the modern American war machine are absolutely out of your minds. Yes, these civilians would wreak utter havoc by means of guerrilla tactics and asymmetrical warfare IF well organized on a large scale by former military personnel who truly understand command and control. There are those people out there. But it wouldn’t be a sustainable effort. You talk about disrupting supply routes and the effect that would take on the modern soldier, but you fail to see the other side of the coin. Those supply routes would outlast the rebel forces’ tenfold. and a large but loosely organized MODERN army without a continuous supply of food and medical supplies has a short lifespan. Think about entire towns cut off from the outside world and with no power. Losing electricity alone would cause so much chaos among the modern population that you’ll be lucky enough to survive your neighbors, much less motivate them to serve a greater cause. This isn’t 1776. Those men are long gone. You’re telling yourselves lies.
It’s not about taking on the military head on. It’ about who you shoot and when and where you shoot them. It’s about sabotage and recruiting disenfranchised citizens who would be sick of a tyrannical regime. You don’t have to stand toe to toe with the military to win. You have to shoot key personnel like Bureaucrats and Politicians to change the mindset of the regime. You go after the “soft” targets and you hit what can be hit….it eventually rolls the shit uphill if you will or more accurately brings the elitist “would be” tyrants down to our level. I believe it would become more of a psychological warfare rather than a civil war where civilians stand toe to toe with conventional military personnel and their hardware. Oh and DESPERADOmm just remember what one man can do…. another can do. Where do you think our military comes from…..the citizenry of this country. Most people who make good snipers usually have grown up with guns. Granted their training puts them ahead of the curve, but there are a lot of fine rifleman out there with adequate accuracy to shoot 800 to 1000 yards….definitely talented enough to shoot a Politician or Bureaucrat….that’s all that would be needed.
Blah, blah, blah….
Just because I didn’t join the military or police force doesn’t mean that I should be “prevented” from learning the skills, or that it is pointless for me to learn the skills. I want to learn to the skills to shoot, and think like a scout sniper – So why shouldn’t I be able to? I don’t think that makes me a wannabe or tacticool. I think that means that I want to learn.
Some peoples vision is colored by the fact they they think only school trained snipers are capable of making 500 meter and greater shots. Got my sniper training OJT in Vietnam. No fancy schools,( Army schools had been closed years before didn’t re-open until the 80’s). Even at my age, I can consistently make 600 meter shots with off the rack rifle and ammo. With the right platform, I prefer McMillian, Accuracy International, or the Draganov , I have made 1500 meter killing shots. Oh, by the way, I was one hell of a deer hunter, gave it up, no sport in killing a deer at 600 meters or more,(it was just too easy). For those that doubt my skills, would be happy to demonstrate. I get $1000.00 a day for my skill in this area.
If you’re going to say you’re an expert at using a particular tool, your credibility would be enhanced by not misspelling 2 out of 3 of the names of the tools you claim to be an expert with. Not blowing smoke out your backside would do wonders as well. Really.
And I wonder if the last few posters realize that they’re responding to a 2 year old thread resurrected by a spam bot advertising a herpes picture website? Cool thread though..
Those that can do. Those that can’t do nit-pick and snipe (no pun intended) at the doers.
If you’re so concerned about spelling, become an English teacher. ” This comment I often give to the wanna bes”: ‘ I was killing real men while the best part of you was running down your momma’s leg.’
I was trained to avoid snipers, avoid them lol, 4/36 infantry. 2/36 infantry 3/5 cav.
Laugh all you want about ‘civilian snipers’. Volunteers during that little dust-up with England called “The War For Independence” or ‘The Revolutionary War’, fielded deer hunters, etc. as sharp-shooters. Don’t know if the term ‘Sniper’ had come into general use at the time. They did pretty good for ‘mere deer hunters’. Some stories suggest hits to 600 yards and beyond. A civilian buffalo hunter at The Second Battle of Adobe Walls, played hell with Indians from nearly 1500 yards. A good military sniper has usually started with a good civilian hunter. Anyone remember Carlos Hathcock or Alvin York? Too, field craft is field craft whether you’re stalking a deer or a human. The same skills are employed.
What the man says is true. One guy with a deer rifle cannot beat an infantry squad, much less air power or armor. From another perspective though look at any war that has taken place in mountainous terrain. These usually end up at least stalemated between the local, or relatively local, fighting force and the invading force. So the whole lone gunmen thing is pure fantasy. If it was however a lot of TRAINED guys with guns with the advantage of terrain and local knowledge, maybe there would be something to that. But at the present how about we concentrate on what good can be done instead of how badass it would be to get shot at, oh wait it FUCKING isn’t.
Perhaps one shooter with a scoped rifle can’t hold of an infantry squad, etc. Though, I not so sure. Two certainly can and three, absolutely. In military speak a (Triad) of properly trained individuals could effectively hold out against infantry squads, in fact a company of infantry, armor and air support. Shooting down, or at least disabling aircraft is not impossible, if you know where to shoot. Armor is just as effectively disabled if you know where to shoot. All mechanical devices have a weak spot, if you know where to look. Tanks, APCs, Helicopters, even Fighter Jets. For examples, just look to Iraq and
Afghanistan for the numbers of choppers and low flying jets that have been shot down or crippled.
And absolutely, being shot at or shot is not my idea of fun and I have been shot at and shot. I really didn’t enjoy either one.
Whenever we are attacked as a country or as individuals, whatever “sniper” training you have had will certainly be helpful. End of story.
Robert Farago…Don’t make me laugh ! I would hate for my team leader to have his attitude…the no matter what- you’re not going to win unless you’re Rambo attitude. If some beer breathed dude with a deer rifle makes a 600 yd shot but then gets killed…so what ! The swat team guys going from house to house beating up women and stomping pets have to be engaged- better one for one than not at all. Civilian marksmen not only need to train but organize. Any sniper school needs to have an organizational factor to it to learn the tactics of militarized police and swat teams. Our threat is from people like Farafo who says don’t bother, you’re not as good as me.
Here is a hypothetical question and every one has an opinion and you know what! Snipers have been around since Biblical time’s, {David and the Giant}
Most wannabes do not have the gonads to squeeze the trigger on a live moving target of the human variety, US History says that during the American Revolution Civilian men with rifles were used quite effectively, Another vet brings up the point of snipers working against you, most sniping books nowadays are pretty one sided accounts, Do you suppose a electrical activated IED is another form if sniping { see target through field glasses} the push a button to detonate} Just because the Government controls massive amounts of Hard ware, do you not think that during a confrontation on home turf that the home town boy might have access too some of the same weaponry!
maybe, but we’re not talking about “hundreds of thousands” of hunters. That’s just any one of a dozen southern states. We’re talking about TENS of MILLIONS of hunters, capable of lethal shots easily out to 500 yards. Many with rifles MUCH more potent than the classic .308. To quote a notorious Swiss Militiaman: “Shortly before World War I, the German Kaiser was the guest of the Swiss government to observe military maneuvers. The Kaiser asked a Swiss militiaman: “You are 500,000 and you shoot well, but if we attack with 1,000,000 men what will you do?” The soldier replied: “Shoot twice and go home.””
Ever time, I think this subject has died a natural death, I get another notification about a new comment.
So, for those that think a ‘rag-tag’ group of irregulars has no chance against a well trained, well armed military, forget the history of the birth of the U.S.. The British Army, arguably, the best in the world, at the time, came up against a group of poorly trained, poorly armed, fledgling American Army made up mostly of militiamen. The British numbered in the tens of thousands, the Americans in the thousands, yet this bunch of squirrel hunters, as one British General is said to have called them, drove the pride of The British Empire int the sea. There have been recorded for posterity, 700 yard shots by the Americans. This, once they were provide with Jagger Rifles.
The British relied heavily on the Land Pattern Musket (Brown Bess). At fifty yards, it was a very unlucky person, indeed,to be hit by one of these. So, hunters (squirrel hunters) and just sport shooters, can and have stood against better trained, better armed and organized armies.
Cracks me up. These idiots see a movie and they go off into dreamland. The hit a target on a range a few times and they think they have a gift. I was in an elite unit, one of the best. I’m not going to brag about how good i was, all I know is I trained with the best. Many of them have careers in the Special forces and it’s not a game. They train their whole life for situations. It’s not gears of war with a high score on a video game. Anyone who thinks they are a gifted sniper and has not been in the special forces is a JOKE. You had your chance in life and now you think you have what it takes? You don;t get to party your whole life on spring break and then wake up one day and decide….”Hey I want what Kyle did, I’m just as good as him, but let me bypass all the training because I played gears of war for 6 years now.” Please. Get off the drugs and go get a job.
And anytime you little gears of war playing ghillie suit I bought on ebay chumps want a lesson on how bad you are, please look me up, bring as much cash as you want too loose and I will out shoot you any fking day of the week. bring a pistol, a rifle, a mortar, and I will show you that you are not the shot you think you are. Anyone can hit a target. Not everyone is trained for war. There are so many factors civilians know nothing about yet they all think they do with speculation. Speculation is a death sentence.
It is the military, vets and law enforcement who will lead at that time. Civilians should become trained with firearms. No one is asking them to perform leadership roles given some major calamity such as EMP, nuke, yellowstone, hurricanes, dirty bombs etc… It will be us military/vets/LE who will lead, survey, secure, fortify, establish comm/supply and aggressively defend as necessary. I will be glad to take on a few expert marksman with gear should the need merit such participation. A little OJT is a good thing. Adapt and overcome!!!
Cool story, bro.
Bet it gets you lots of tranny head down at the VFW.
No matter how “elite” you’re still an order following douchebag.
Never underestimate a few highly trained and motivated patriots. Our military is duty bound to protect the constitution. The people are duty bound to throw off tyrannical government as well under the constitution and that is why they must get rid of that document. Underestimating people defending their homeland is a grave mistake in my opinion. Adapt and overcome. Si Vis Pacem Para Bellum!
If Our Founding Fathers had taken this advice the minute men would not have formed up on the nights before Lexington and Concord battles and they wouldn’t have decimated the British troops piecmeal on their way back to Boston. The British thought the Americans were NUTS to take on the most powerful Army in the world at the time – literally they thought they were nuts for farmers and merchants to take up arms against them. I THAN GOD THEY WERE WRONG. Downgrading the abilities of the civilian population raised on guns and gin marksmanship was a mistake then and it would be a grave mistake for either and enemy country or a rogue internal government to think so. Although I thank Mr. Kyles service I will NOT take his advice which seems to be, “Don’t arm yourself because it would be hopeless to fight against your own rogue army.” Fiddlesticks.
Creative commentary , For what it’s worth , if someone is requiring a Family Group Sheet , my business partner saw a blank form here
https://goo.gl/MhzUou.He’s wrong on the fact that their can’t be a civilian sniper. For on their are people in this country that can shoot 2ft targets from miles away. That means with all the infantry or mortars they have aren’t going to do shit at 2.4 miles away, let alone the enemy even being able to spot a person from that far away. My point is their that they wouldn’t even hear the bullet when it hit them. With that said air strike would be a problem but the military isn’t going to use an air strike that cost millions of dollars to do just for one person. The person who posted this has use the word marksman to compare to sniper, these are two different things. A sniper is a person who hide from his enemies and uses his huge distance to gain an advantage over his enemy, a marksman can be anyone in the military or general population that’s just really good at shooting and most of the time they shoot as the post said, 500 yard give or take a couple hundred yard out. That;s not nearly a mile out let alone over the 2 mile range that some people can shoot in the USA and all over the world. Keep in mind that not all these people that can shoot that far are ex military and are just people who like to shoot. The guy who posted said hunting deer isn’t the same. Yes and no are my opinion on this, while you have the yes being you don’t have people shooting in your direction and the no being its harder to shoot a deer ( if running of course.) and to sneak up on a deer you must be even more quiet then to sneak up on a person. And don’t get me wrong here I’m not saying the military isn’t the best at what they do, I fully understand what the experience of doing anything means and that they would have a lot more combat experience then any civilian who isn’t ex military. But to say a civilian can’t be a sniper at all is a absurd notion and just makes the person who posted this seem arrogant and biased like most military I’ve ever had the pleasure of talking to. But i do realize that this is how our military is trained so they don’t fear as much when being shot at, you have to believe your the baddest of the bad to go to war mentally. But that’s not the topic, I’ve seen civilians post videos on youtube that make some of our even navy seals look like they can’t shoot for shit. So stating that a civilian can’t be a sniper is BS. Now a marksman in a combat situation is a different story, marksman are normally closer to the combat and a untrained civilian who is good at shooting would not be as successful. I hope i don’t offend anyone but this is my un biased opinion about the subject.
I feel you are grossly underestimating The American Patriot…
Let’s take a minute and remember what happened to Chris Kyle.
Mr “I’m an untouchable god of war” got killed stone dead by an ex-Marine who was nuttier than a Payday bar. So much for Kyle’s theory… What was that word the Greeks used to use? “Hubris”?
Oleg Volk? He’s a sad little gun pornographer, nothing more. If I want advice on photography, I’ll ask Volk. If I want advice on insurgent warfare I’ll ask someone who has actually done something a little more kinetic than snap pictures of bimbos with guns. His scenario reeks of total ignorance. And a hefty dose of that hubris stuff too.
Seems to me that people confuse what an actual sniper does. Being a sniper is NOT based solely on the military or law enforcement. A sniper can function in a number of applications, including as a civilian. It truly does not matter if you wear a uniform or not, it is all about knowledge of tactics and precision rifle performance/marksmanship. The role of a sniper varies depending on the type of warfare being fought and the assets that are available to them.
A civilian who has trained to be a precision marksmanship who can engage targets out to 1,000 yds and implement tactics to evade enemy counter attacks, is a sniper. They don’t require support forces like artillery because they are not part of a military force. Snipers in the military have additional training due to the nature of military operations. A civilian would not be fighting under those conditions, so their sniper role wouldn’t be as dynamic, nor does it need to be.
Knowledge of tactics is critical for civilian snipers. They must develop TTP and learn how to effectively plan operations in a variety of terrain. I get what Kyle and the author were saying, but tying the term “sniper” to the military and law enforcement is very short-sighted. Any trained and competent individual can fill a sniper role, no matter their status.
Comments are closed.