[Gunpacker]

Been a bit ill lately, watching a lot of TV. One of the shows was an examination of a crime where a police officer was shot at night by a either his partner and brother or a suspect firing a 30-30 Marlin from 217 yds in the darkness. Now, there were several things about the shooting to question, but one thing presented by the defense "expert marksman" as evidence made me want to scream, and no one really questioned his expert marksmanship. :fire::scrutiny:
The defense hired an ??Expert Marksman?? who proceeded to do a thorough examination of the ability of someone to hit someone else from 217 yds at night with the aforementioned 30-30. (As if there were no light to shoot by)
Now, I know that I am not the "most expert" marksman around, but have competed enough that I consider myself having been knowledgeable at least.
The defense marksman proceeded to shoot in daylight from an elbow rested position in daylight to make the test even more absolute. He fired a total of 14 shots at a head simulated target at 200 (or 217) yds and this is the result.
1 (one) hit on the head size target. And one close. He stated that he was surprised that he hit it even once. AAAAIIIIIIEEE.
I am sure that there are more than just me here that would be disappointed if they missed such a target more than a couple of times from that range with support. Not to mention that elbow support is not real great. This guy was supposedly shooting from his pickup, allowing hand support, which is much more solid.
As for darkness, the prosecution did bring out that the officers were standing by and well lit by a patrol car with flashing emergency lights.
I cosider myself a sort of expert on that too, having attended a police academy where one of the full stages of qualification was fired using only emergency lights for vision. I fired 100% on that stage, as I did on all stages of my qualification thru the academy. Man, I was really good with that 685 at that time, and I really look back on that accomplishment as one of the highlights of my shooting career.
The outcome of the trial was that the suspect was found "not guilty" and set free. It really was a strange and questionable shoot, but even so, the lack of knowledge on the part of prosecutors and police failed to present the evidence in proper light. With jurors knowing even less, this could have tipped the trial. Can't say for sure, but man, it had to be hard for jurors with testimony almost saying that it was it was impossible for the suspect to have hit the officer.
No one ever even mentioned bad luck or chance.

[Grandpa Shooter]

Expert only means someone with passable knowledge who is willing to make statements and get paid for them. Those of us with proficiency in firearms know better than to claim to be "experts."

[hnk45acp]

The percentage of people in the general pop. that can make a 200 yard headshot in the dark is probably pretty slim, thereby the "expert" moniker

[nitesite]

I know that what I'm about to add isn't to the point of your post.

I spent eight years in the Regular Army. There are three levels of competency for rifle marksmanship:

Marksman - the lowest tier of a passing qualification score

Sharpshooter - the middle tier of points scored

Expert - the highest level for points achieved on the Army qualification course.

It's a pet peeve of mine to hear that somebody is an Expert Marksman. It is practically an oxymoron.

Anyway, on the subject of your post, I find it deplorable that such an outcome was arrived at by a competent jury.

[Doggy Daddy]

Speaking of being "practically an oxymoron", I think "competent jury" also qualifies.

[Feanaro]

The percentage of people in the general pop. that can make a 200 yard headshot in the dark is probably pretty slim

Just because he hit the head doesn't mean he was aiming for it. Even the dumb and blind get lucky sometimes.

[Avenger]

Speaking of being "practically an oxymoron", I think "competent jury" also qualifies.


And I'm starting to wonder about the phrase, "practically an oxymoron" as well.....LOL

I haven't trusted expert testimony since the OJ trial.

[nitesite]

Sheesh~ Tear apart my intended meaning simply because of the words I hurriedly typed.

Would you feel better if I used the phrase "contradiction in terms"? Would that make you feel better?

And from a Constitutional standpoint, we all must accept the jury process as being made up of competent individuals, or else the whole judicial system as we know it is meaningless. And YES, there are such things as competent juries. Have any of you who found some reason to mock my words ever served on jury duty? Ever been a police officer? Ever served in the military? If so, did you feel competent?

Like it or not, that's how it is.

We now take you back to the point of the original post....

[Limeyfellow]

The guy who made the shots was an airforce officer who qualifed as expert. Besides he made two hits in fourteen shots. He only made one in the first ten shots.

Suffice to say it is not too bad shooting with iron sights at 217 yard with a 30-30 lever action and the idea who shot twice and hit twice at that distance in the dark.

The officer claimed his partner was hit through the window in the right eye socket, and that the shot officer was on the drivers side of the car. Then there was the lack of blood inside the car where he just had been shot through the head and the powder burns on his face, from which the defense claimed that the officer who survived was shootly wildly, supported by the officer's handgun rounds being found embedded in the car and when the shot officer looked back to see what the hell he was doing, his partner accidently shot him in the head.

There was some questions though on what type of bullet did the damage. One forensic team claimed it was a high powered rifle bullet, and the other a 9mm bullet.

[jerkyman45]

I saw a little of this program, didn't the brother fire wildly into the night, striking and killing his brother/partner? IIRC, the two were driving in a patrol car, following a pick up. They stopped the car 217 yards from the pick up when it stopped, they heard a shot, and both got out. The driver called it in, and the passenger started firing blindly. He struck the hood of the car, and accidently shot his brother in the head. They determined the brother shot him because of the evident stipling on the face and neck of the victim. Didn't see anything on this "expert marksman" but he sounds pretty much like an idiot.

[Gun Wielding Maniac]

I don't know about you guys... but in broad daylight 200 meters is a long way for me to be taking head shots at the Ivan targets on a USGI range. Yeah, yeah, "I must be an awful shot" no doubt. But I've been shooting a long time and I wouldnt be confident with such a shot.

Now, make it the same shooting at night and it becomes even more questionable. Could an average person be reasonably expected to be able to make such a shot under stress with iron sights in the dark?

[plexreticle]

200 yard head shot with a 30-30 lever gun is a good or lucky shot.

[Don't Tread On Me]

Only two possibilities.


One, this was a super lucky (or unlucky depending on how you want to look at it) shot. OR, the brother (cop) shot his partner. Whatever the case, this guy was shooting at police.


Here's what I think happened. The guy DID fire 2 shots at them, hence the shell casings found at the scene with very, very similar case head markings. However, I don't think he hit anything. Meanwhile, the rookie cop gets out of the car and starts blasting over the roof of the car (note the bullet hole he put into the patrol car's roof - this guy was slipping on the mud as well as spraying wildly, not to mention the poor judgment of firing at a target 217 yards away with a 9mm). His brother probably wanted to get out also and get behind the car for cover. When he did so, he got hit in the head by his trigger-happy panicked brother.


I think the cops know that it was friendly fire, but in their whole gang-like brotherhood mentality, feel as though it is still the fault of the other guy because he instigated or engaged in a gunfight. Much like how if I hit an innocent bystander in Florida trying to defend myself, it falls on the perp - not me. Cops are very clannish like that. His death is in their view and the state's view the fault of the suspect regardless of who actually sent the bullet through his skull.


There was some blood in the car, but c'mon. A headshot WITH exit wound in a car from a .30-30 and there's going to be a huge mess. The prosecution's story? The hat he was wearing contained the spray. That's total bs. How could it do that? Does the spray come out only at 170-180 degrees in a perfect flat cone with no center spray from the exit wound to stay caught in the hat? Ridiculous.

The bullet would have had to gone 217 yards, through the crack in the window, into the cop's eye, out the back-side of his head...then were did it go? Are we to believe that it went out the other window with an officer standing there shooting? Or somehow vanished into thin air? Did it not hit the windshield or something else? It did not exit perfectly at the rear of his head. So if he was facing the shooter and took it in the eye, it exited more on the rear right side ...so it would have had to hit the dashboard or windshield. It this shot happened, a .30-30 at 217 yards, in the middle of the night, just happened to go through a half opened window, strike the cop in the eye, exit the rear-right side and then somehow exit the vehicle without striking any other part of the vehicle, which would imply the passenger side window or door, of which the brother cop was standing in that space firing over the roof of the car....then that is a MAGIC bullet.


Whatever the case...the real point here is about the standards of justice. Beyond a reasonable doubt. There's plenty of doubt. He goes free. If you disagree, I know that stinks - but that's the price we pay for liberty and freedom. Trust me, you wouldn't want it the other way.

[Don't Tread On Me]

As for all these people saying the shot isn't that hard....I think it is, for just about everyone.


Reminds me of these accuracy rants I have here on THR. Magically on the internet, groups from such a rifle are 1" maybe 2" (which would make you a contender for Highpower championships) ...meanwhile, EVERY SINGLE TIME I am at the range, the lever guys are making paper plate groups at best. At best. Most of them do not even shoot 100 yards. They all shoot on the 50 and there they are still making large groups. Many even have scopes! I guess my area is full of terrible shots. Or maybe I'm unlucky and have only seen dozens upon dozens of lousy lever gun shooters who can't shoot 217 yard head shots. Same thing with milsurps, AK's and everything else. I haven't seen any magic sub-2 MOA AK's ...nor do I see many sub-moa AR's either. They are pretty rare, sans the guys with match-grade ammo and a freefloated Krieger shooting off a rest using a good scope.


I'd be willing to bet 9 out of 10 THR lever gun shooters cannot score a single headshot on an IDPA target at 200 yards in 5 shots. Forget 217 yards. Irons just like this guy did in this case.


If we reject the aimed shot theory of the prosecution, then we are putting a highly improbable shot up against the theory of a wild blasting rookie cop who just happened to be shooting over the door of his partner.


You can criticize the definition of "expert" too. The point was to show the improbability of the shot. Which greatly reduces the chance it was him. At least the Airforce guy has had some training. He was firing during the daylight, off of a rest and barely hit the target. Ridiculous to attack that based on his skills. The idea is that it's not impossible. I'm sure if you dug up some trick-shooter or true expert they could do it and do it a lot. We don't put people in prison for what .000000001% of the population can do when it is their life-long profession or possess some type of unique talent.


Think about it. Most people are not gun knowledgeable. A jury, who will like have received all their gun knowledge from TV could be easily made to believe that shot isn't that hard, or at least believe it is likely enough to have been from the defendant. I can't even begin to describe the ignorant things non-gunowners say all the time about firearms. People believe TV is exaggerated and fake of course, but believe it or not they still apply a radically fictional standard of shooting to what they think is real. Everyone I know or talk with in the other areas of recreational interests I have are not into firearms. People have crazy ideas.


It is any wonder that when you take them to the range for the first time, the first thing they say when shooting a B-29 silhouette at 5 yards is "wow, that's a lot harder than TV" ...because they usually only hit it once.

[oldcop1971]

I was not convinced that the 30-30 shooter was the actual guilty party. IIRC, the partner officer was the deceased's brother who was riding as a reserve officer, and who had little police experiance. I would consider a fully llighted car a "bullet magnet" in the dark and would either dark-out or get away from the car. I also seem to remember that there had been previous trouble (with gun involved?) with this perp, which was why they stopped so far away from him. I can easily see the panicky rookie accidentally hitting the other officer. I can also see where it MIGHT be possible that the investigators a) reached the wrong conclusion or b) tried to cover up the facts and improperly charge the 30-30 guy with murder. However, if he was shooting at the police, the death would have been related to his felonious assault on the police and thereby make him culpable for the death.
I emphatically reject the previous poster's blanket assertion that ALL cops are 'gang like' and routinely conspire to cover up/ misstate facts in an investigation.
oc71

[bogie]

1894 Winchester, at 200 yards...

I'd figure 2 MOA, plus 2 MOA shooter error.

Which means I'd figure that the shooter would have about a 30% chance of scaring the bleep out of the cop.

Unless the shooter sucked. In which case, we're looking more like 95%...

[browningguy]

I definately would be lucky to make a head shot at over 200 yards with an open sighted 30-30. Now if it was scoped, maybe.

[ilbob]

Open sights with a 30/30 at night? I think the expert did about as well as could be expected on a head sized target.

I have seen gun test type reports where they rave over 3 inch groups at 100 yards with special ammo with this type of gun.

[rdhood]

Anyway, on the subject of your post, I find it deplorable that such an outcome was arrived at by a competent jury.

The guy is an "expert marksman" until the opposing attorney proves otherwise, or provides his own expert to testify. A jury with absolutely no rifle experience would have no way of knowing... in the confines of the jury box... whether this guy truly was expert or not. Certainly they could research it outside of the jury. But they are supposed to come to a conclusion from the testimony and evidence ONLY. Thus, it is the opposing attorney's job to either show that this guy is NOT an expert marksman, or to provide his own rifleman to give evidence to the contrary.

[farscott]

Open sights with a 30/30 at night? Heck, seeing the stock iron sights on a Marlin lever action is impossible for me at night; I lose the front sight very quickly with stock irons in certain daylight. I had to switch to the Ashley/XS sights with a Williams peep insert to shoot the irons with any kind of consistency at 75 yards, which is where my 336 is .35 Remington is sighted.

No way I could use that 336 at night to deliver aimed fire.

[JamisJockey]

Tv, People....tv....
:rolleyes:

[Headless]

Man, I have really got to come watch some of you guys shoot. 217 yards is a really long way to shoot a head sized target with any kind of certainty without any optics using only the stock iron sights...
And this was in the dark.

[K3]

I definately would be lucky to make a head shot at over 200 yards with an open sighted 30-30. Now if it was scoped, maybe.

I could hit a head sized target at 200 with a .30-30 using irons.


An elephant head maybe.


But, the bullets would probably just bounce away and piss the elephant off.

[Poper]

I know that stinks - but that's the price we pay for liberty and freedom. Trust me, you wouldn't want it the other way.

+1 - And that's a fact!

I sat on a jury (grand theft case) where the perp had burglary tools, opportunity, motive and skill set but verdict was not rendered because one jurror was convinced the cops had "framed" him. There was no testimony or evidence presented for this defence but she could not be convinced her opinion was invalid or not applicable. The Judge ruled a mistrial and scheduled a later hearing date. I never heard the final resolution of the case.
Another example of your tax dollars (and freedom) at work.

Poper

[ARK9mm]

Was this a made-for-tv movie or a bio of a real case?

Either way, i bet Mark Wahlberg could do it!;)

[XDKingslayer]

I definately would be lucky to make a head shot at over 200 yards with an open sighted 30-30. Now if it was scoped, maybe.

Scoped or not, that's a hard hit for a lever-action 30-30. You might get the first two or three rounds in, but once the barrel starts to warm you aren't hitting a head target at 200 yards.

Level action 30-30 are notorious for becoming more innaccurate the warmer they get.

[Grizzly Adams]

That would be a very difficult shot to make. Not impossible but the shooter would have to be very lucky. I also resent the comment about all cops being "gang like" and conspiring to cover-up their mistakes.

[ilbob]

I also resent the comment about all cops being "gang like" and conspiring to cover-up their mistakes.
You may resent it, but it is widely believed, for pretty good reasons. It may not be as widespread as believed, but neither behavior is rare.

[Jdude]

I think i could hit a 6 inch (head size) target at 200 yards. Next time I go shooting I'll try.

I don't have a lever action rifle though. Have to use something else.

[azredhawk44]

I'd be willing to bet 9 out of 10 THR lever gun shooters cannot score a single headshot on an IDPA target at 200 yards in 5 shots. Forget 217 yards. Irons just like this guy did in this case.

I didn't do it with my thuddy-thuddy, but I did it at 250 yards with a Mosin Nagant 91/30. The sights on a Win94 or Marlin are worlds better than those of the Mosin Nagant.

I was shooting at a pumpkin @ 250 yards about a month ago, from prone, using elbow for support. I have a couple of witnesses.

I wish I had brought the Win94 also and shot it, but I just had an itch to shoot the Mosin that day. I'm certain I could repeat the same results with my M14, and reasonably confident that with an extra click up on the rear sight to provide some kentucky windage I could drill a pumpkin with the Win94. They aren't as inaccurate as everyone claims.

Anyone want to go to Avery next week (can't this week/weekend) and see it done? We'll put a pie plate up at 200 yards and set a spotting scope to witness the shots. I'll shoot from prone, not from the bench.

And no, I'm not an expert marksman. Frankly, since I've gotten my Mosin and M14, I haven't put more than maybe 20 rounds through my 30-30 in the last 2 years. Could be a good chance to watch an internet blow-hard eat crow.

But we're only talking about 4MOA shooting here.

ETA: In regards to the police shooting, I find it hard to believe that the forensics guys couldn't tell the difference between a 150/170gr 30-30 projectile's damage and a 130-ish grain 9mm JHP at point blank range.

[outofbattery]

The bullet would have had to gone 217 yards, through the crack in the window, into the cop's eye, out the back-side of his head...

Back in the early 80's or late 70's there was a mysterious shooting of a car driver on Long Island.Somehow,a girl was shot in the head while driving in her car but with the windows up,it didn't seem possible as to how anyone could have accomplished it.

It turns out that her wing window was open literally a crack.A couple guys were out in the sound shooting a .303.One of the roundes ricocheted off the water,crossed 2 lanes of traffic,enterered through the smallest crack possible and struck her in the head.

While almost impossibly unlikely,some very strange ballistic events happen.


I watched this program and though that the jury made a very poor decision.I actually have a bigger problem with firearms forensics experts with little real life experience than so-called expert marksmen.I would like to know how many shootings the defense witness has actually dealt with wherein the knowns: rounds used,distances,angles and so on were in any way similar.It seemed to be she jumped to conclusions far too early,much like a kid in science class not waiting for the entire experiment to be completed to come to a conclusion-she had her pet idea and tried to find ways to reinforce it rather than look at other possibilities.

As to the reaction of the brother to fire wildly,while improper I have never been shot at by someone with a much more powerful and longer ranged gun whom I could not see not to mention the part about seeing my brother shot in the head.I reckon that could change things and as " they're professional,it's what they're trained to do" arguments go: they're small town cops,not soldiers.

[Bwana John]

am sure that there are more than just me here that would be disappointed if they missed such a target more than a couple of times from that range with support.
So....
You are saying you could make a headshot with a opensighted .30-30 @ > 200 yds 90% of the time? :rolleyes: With a NM AR or M1A from prone, with a jacket and sling, sure.

Expert Marksman, :confused: is there a Master or High Master Marksman? :evil:

[Grin Reaper]

Expert only means someone with passable knowledge who is willing to make statements and get paid for them. Those of us with proficiency in firearms know better than to claim to be "experts."
I attended a seminar on malpractice suits a few years back; the lawyer who did most of the talking explained that an Expert Witness was unofficially defined as an 'expensive smart-a$$ from out of town.'

On topic -- I have exactly ZERO experience with lever-action rifles, so I don't have anythng useful to add to the original topic, BUT...
hitting a head-sized target at 200 yards with my rack-grade CMP Garand (no scope) is very challenging, but it can be done (even by me). For the record, if I ever found myself in a situation where I had to shoot a Bad Guy (y'know, Alien Invaders from Planet X-type scenario) at 200 yards, I doubt I'd feel confident enough to take a head-shot, but a center-mass shot would be no big deal.

[funfaler]

I have found my Marlin 30.30 to be more accurate than my Ruger 77, bolty.

As far as a 217 yard head shot, well, it is not a skill that most rifle owners have, but it is a skill that most rifle owners CAN learn.

I say someone takes AZRedhawk44 up on his offer to duplicate this task, and report back to us here.

[azredhawk44]

No takers?

I wasn't being fascetious. I'm not an expert marksman by any measurable certifiable standard. I've been to one rifle class my entire life... an Appleseed clinic, shooting at targets only 25 yards away. I did shoot "expert" on the AQT, but that was only at 25 yards.

I have never competed in NRA High Power or any other rifle or pistol competition. I've never harvested any big game animal.

I can make the described headshot at 200 yards from prone. I'd even give it a reasonable comfortable try from a kneeling/sitting position.

I'd be willing to bet 9 out of 10 THR lever gun shooters cannot score a single headshot on an IDPA target at 200 yards in 5 shots. Forget 217 yards. Irons just like this guy did in this case.

With five tries, I MIGHT even keep one or two of those shots on the pie plate at 200 yards while standing.

With 5 rounds as a warm-up and verification of sight-in (I haven't been shooting this rifle often enough to claim to do it immediately), I will put at least 3 of the next 5 shots into an 8" pie plate at 200 yards from prone. We can even let the bore cool from one shot group to the next... wait for cease fire, target change to complete then do the "real" thing when the line is hot again.

If anyone wants to watch me accomplish this or watch me eat crow, meet me at Ben Avery shooting range in Phoenix on either Wednesday or Thursday morning of next week.

Frankly, it irks me that 9 out of 10 of you have been called bad shots. It irks me that 9 out of 10 of you (as well as the jury in this trial) accept the misguided idea that this shot is not possible with the described equipment. It irks me that this "expert witness" got paid to do a piss-poor job (sorry, Art's gramma) and make Americans out to be bad shots. It irks me that a professional forensic examiner doesn't have the expertise to tell the difference between a .30 caliber flat-point rifle wound and a 9mm hollowpoint handgun wound. And it irks me that either a guy who was shooting at police officers (and may have killed one), or a fratricidal policeman, got off scott-free due to technical incompetence all around.

I just want to raise the bar for our expectations.

[Gun Wielding Maniac]

If anyone wants to watch me accomplish this or watch me eat crow, meet me at Ben Avery shooting range in Phoenix on either Wednesday or Thursday morning of next week.

Frankly, it irks me that 9 out of 10 of you have been called bad shots. It irks me that 9 out of 10 of you (as well as the jury in this trial) accept the misguided idea that this shot is not possible with the described equipment. It irks me that this "expert witness" got paid to do a piss-poor job (sorry, Art's gramma) and make Americans out to be bad shots. It irks me that a professional forensic examiner doesn't have the expertise to tell the difference between a .30 caliber flat-point rifle wound and a 9mm hollowpoint handgun wound. And it irks me that either a guy who was shooting at police officers (and may have killed one), or a fratricidal policeman, got off scott-free due to technical incompetence all around.
'

Dude... Whatever. Somehow, this has turned into an opportunity for you to showcase your perceived shooting skills. You obviously know that people arent going to drive halfway across the country just to watch you shoot.

That isnt the point. The point isnt how good of a shot you think you are. Its whether or not an average person could be expected to make the shot described under stress and in the dark in the manner indicated.

For your information... I've been shooting for about 17 years. I've attended a bunch of schools, served seven yers in the army including two combat tours and I'm about to go back for another. I'm also instruct on marksmanship for the army national guard. I've attended 3 Appleseed clinics and I'm also on my state's military combat rifle and pistol team and have competed at the national level. So, I think I have a reasonable feel for what is an "average" shot (and shooter) and what is above average.

I never said the shot was impossible. I said that I wouldn't be confident in such a shot and that it was unlikely. Most of the others have said basically the same thing. I dont think I read anyone use the word "impossible".

[azredhawk44]

Dude... Whatever. Somehow, this has turned into an opportunity for you to showcase your perceived shooting skills. You obviously know that people arent going to drive halfway across the country just to watch you shoot.

Between snowbirds and locals, there are a lot of Phoenicians on this board. Not asking folks to fly anywhere... just for a couple of the retired members here (or anyone who can go shooting on a weekday morning) to come and try with me and act as witnesses for the total count.

Also... is this not a shooting board? Let's experiment. I've got a pair of Win94's and 500 rounds of 30-30 ammo. Let's get 10 americans out to the line and see how many can hit 1/5 on a pie plate at 200 yards.

I don't want to showcase me, I want to showcase US.

And I want to find a way to get this information back to the "expert marksman", the judge, and the jury. Whatever the outcome might be.

But I want to put fact to speculation. Maybe the guy is an expert marksman.

[Gun Wielding Maniac]

What would 1/5 prove?

The guy who did the shooting didnt have 5 shots. He didnt have any "warmers" or "fouling shots". He had ONE shot... that is, if it actually happened. Also, to do the experiment correctly... you'd have to do it at night or in near-darkness, with only flickering blue and red lights providing the illumination. Whats more, you'd have to provide an element of stress to simulate what the shooter was undergoing.

[azredhawk44]

The guy who did the shooting didnt have 5 shots. He didnt have any "warmers" or "fouling shots". He had ONE shot... that is, if it actually happened. Also, to do the experiment correctly... you'd have to do it at night or in near-darkness, with only flickering blue and red lights providing the illumination. Whats more, you'd have to provide an element of stress to simulate what the shooter was undergoing.


I haven't shot my 30-30 in forever, whereas the shooter in this situation had it as a "truck gun". He was more familiar with the weapon. I want 5 shots to get re-acquainted with how this rifle feels since I've been shooting M14 and Mosin for the last couple years.

From the description by the OP, the shooter had more than 1 shot. If he did not, I apologize. But the "expert witness" had 14 shots, in daylight, and only connected with one.

The assertion was made that 9/10 THR members could not connect with 1/5 shots at 200 yards. I want to find out if that assertion is correct or not. I think we're better shots than that.

[Gun Wielding Maniac]

If the shooter had more then one shot and those shots did not connect with the officer, they would have at least connected with the car he was sitting in... or else that would belay his status as a good shot.

No, the proposition was that this fellow did his dirty deed in ONE shot. In any case, that was what I was labeling as unlikely.

5 shots? Ok. Maybe.

[cracked butt]

I'm going to side with the view that its a very difficult and/or lucky shot.

At 200 yards I can put ever shot in a head sized target with iron sights, provided that the rifle is a 03A3 springfield or AR-15, shooting prone.
I demonstrated this once when I took a friend to a range- he asked me why I don't have scopes on my rifles, I told him irons work just fine but he didn't believe me. I set up 5 milk jugs full of water at 200 yards, slung up my 03A3, loaded 5 rounds and picked off all five- some of which were 1/2 obscured by the terrain, he was in awe. I told him that was easy, the x-ring I'm trying to hit is less than 1/2 that size when shooting high power. A lever action is not a springfield or an AR-15, and the cartridge it fires has a rainbow trajectory after 125 yards or so.

I owned a Win94 once, I might have been able to pull off a shot like that at 125 yards in daylight. The rifle had mediocre accuracy coupled with gawd-awful sights.

[General Geoff]

217 yard head shot with a .30-30 lever gun... sounds interesting. If I had one, I'd give it a try.

Remember that the guy with the .30-30 in this case was not an "average american." From what I read, he scored expert in the air force. If he was familiar with the gun, I'd say it's very possible he made the shot.

[whitetiger7654]

Expert only means someone with passable knowledge who is willing to make statements and get paid for them.

Nail on head. My law professor said "Everyone is an expert on something."

[Limeyfellow]

Was this a made-for-tv movie or a bio of a real case?

It was a real case.

Oh and the shots by the rifle were uphill too, to add a little more difficulty to the shot.

[TCB in TN]

I'd be willing to bet 9 out of 10 THR lever gun shooters cannot score a single headshot on an IDPA target at 200 yards in 5 shots. Forget 217 yards. Irons just like this guy did in this case.

I would completely disagree with this statement, especially since this comment does NOT limit its scope to the ole 30-30. I would be willing to bet that I could pull it of within 5 shots with my lil BLR 308:evil:!

The other point of contention I have is below.

Its whether or not an average person could be expected to make the shot described under stress and in the dark in the manner indicated.

No the point is could the guy in question pull the shot off. The average person (most of whom are not gunnys) would probably not know how to load the ole 30-30, but the guy in question might just be a regular shooter who knows his weapon and can use it well. (beware the man with one gun :D )

During my past there have been times when I was shooting enough with my rifles to be pretty decent. I have shot 2 1/2 to 3 inch groups at 200 yards standing (when I was really shooting a lot), I knew my rifle, my body, my mind, and was putting enough rounds down range to be pretty decent. Now'a'days, not so much so, with a good rest, no wind, and plenty of time I might do that one out of 5 times. But again the question is not my abillity to do so, but the guy there that night.

[Headless]

Everyone's arguing over weather or not they could do it in x shots, or x% of the time - you just gotta keep in mind that you not only have to do it in 2 shots or less - but in the dark too, to replicate what happened in this scenario. Darkness makes iron sights just a little difficult to see, don't you think? 217 yards in the dark...someone make this shot and record a video of it, i'd love to see that kind of shooting from iron sights without lighting.

[junyo]

Keep in mind it was the prosecution's contention that the shots were in fact a miss. Their expert said that with bullet drop shots from the 30-30 aimed directly at the cruiser's rooftop flashers would be entering the the car at head height. They never really claimed the guy was aiming at a head, just that he was humping shots at the car, and the officer turned and caught one in the eye.

Nevertheless, his brother was blazing away, and there was little to no blood in the car, so the defenses theory seemed more reasonable, their expert notwithstanding.

[Wheeler44]

What ammo was used by the guy with the 30-30? Was it factory flatpoints or leverevolutions or hand loads painstakingly worked up by a passionate shooter?

When I was younger I lived in Alaska. It would get dark pretty early in the winterime so we would have to shoot in low light conditions if we shot after school.
My buddy and I were passionate shooters. We would develope loads for our rifles and handguns for accuracy or velocity or how loud or how big a fireball it would make.

So to sum all of this rambling up, I sure wouldn't have wanted my buddy shooting at me with his old Winchester '94 30-30. Even in low light, even only one shot.

And I mean it.

Wheeler44

p.s. as for the stress the shooter was under, if he deliberately set out to shoot it out with the officers he might not have felt much stress at all, depending on his frame of mind at the time.

[rcmodel]

I've known a lot of old farmers & ranchers that would take you apart at 217 yards out the truck window with just an old Thutty-Thutty.

My dad regularly killed coyotes at 200 yards+ with his almost new Teddy Roosevelt Commemorative 94 rifle, and also his old 94 carbine, with 150 grain factory loads.

And he was still doing it quite regularly when he was almost 80 years old.

I have a 94 Carbine almost as old as I am that will shoot under 2 MOA all day long with 125 grain Sierra handloads, with factory sights.
And I'm going on 64!

http://i81.photobucket.com/albums/j219/rcmodel/KTOG/1224.gif
rcmodel