Annoyed at History Channel show

During the shootings, I poo-pooed the idea of the murderer as being some sort of Carlos Hathcock. Right from the start, I said he ("they", as it turns out) exhibited no skill not required for a wouldbe cook to graduate from Army Basic Training.

But then I've had supposed "shooters" disbelieve that somebody can shoot accurately over iron sights at 600 yards. 1,000 yards they wouldn't even consider.

But that's what happens when you learn about guns from TV. It's like learning about astronautics and astronomy from watching the first "Flash Gordon" serial.

Maybe one day I'll own a High-caliber rifle and be able to make amazing shots at 100-200 YARDS!

Click to expand...

That's what I have a S&W Model 14 REVOLVER for...

People don't want to believe that such things are easy, therefore they ascribe superior skill to the people who did it. They don't want to believe that it is in fact quite easy to do and the only reason it doesn't happen every day is that every other rifle owner in the country isn't a sick **** like Mohammed & Malvo. Enter History Channel, telling people what they want to hear.

I thought it was interesting the way the SWAT team set up their lines, at 90 degree angles to preclude shooting at each other. I also thought asking the truckers to block the highway was pretty resourceful on the part of the police who were rushing to the rest area. The organization of the teams that extracted the killer from the car was also very interesting; as two of them bashed in the windows, two kept guns aimed on the occupants. Without this organization, extraction would likely become a Chinese fire drill.

Good thing the killers had big egos and tiny brains, lest their killing spree go on ad infinitum. Bad enough that they got away with what they did.

I agree that the History Channel is laden with "junk" history, but that's want the general public seems to want these days. After all, the station is there to make money first and educate a distant second. But all in all, I found this program illuminating.

"An incredible 100 to 200 yards away. The only weapon capable of such precision is a high-caliber rifle. Forsythe realized he’s not just up against a guy with a gun, he is facing off with a highly skilled sniper. The long distance of the shot a testament to killer’s terrible skill."

Click to expand...

Guess that makes my 10 yr old a "highly skilled sniper".

The only thing worse than The History Channel is The History Channal International. Just wait for the onslaught of 2012 end of the world garbage over the next couple of years.

Hopefully they just leave The Military Channal alone. (even if they are wrong about the top ten assualt rifles of all time )

pith43 wrote:

Hopefully they just leave The Military Channal alone. (even if they are wrong about the top ten assualt rifles of all time )

Click to expand...

I did find it odd that the AUG was on there, and given it's influence and revolutionary design, I'd have put the Sturmgewher higher-up on the list. How would you rearrange the list?

Yeah, I used to enjoy the History channel, but they have been losing me lately with the wall to wall coverage of Nostrodomas and Mayan calendar crap. It is really unbelieveable.

1) It is THREE YEARS in the future.
2) It is FAKE.

So what, exactly, qualifies it to be on the "History" channel?

I really don't understand the obsession with this 2012 crap. Some batch of retards is ALWAYS predicting the end of the world tomorrow. Not that the Mayans were a batch of retards, but why is their end of the world prediction getting so much more traction than most of the others? It is really tiring, and apparently will be ongoing for the next three years. I think a one-month run-up would suffice nicely as far as getting everyone's SHTF fantasies flowing, and we wouldn't have to be subjected to this crap in the 3 year interim.

I loved the history channel back when it actually had some, you know, history on it.

What I hate about so-called educational shows now (and it's not limited to HC) is the constant restating of what was done just prior to the last commercial. It seems the first 5 minutes after each commercial break is devoted to reminding folks of what they saw before the commercial. Then you get maybe 10 minutes of fresh material before they break again. Drives me nuts.

Figure it out:

History Channel ----> ABC - Disney

National Geographic ------> Fox

I can easily see the difference in bias.

It was tv man, it was dramatized. Was it total BS? Of course it was.

Deanimator said:

That's what I have a S&W Model 14 REVOLVER for...

Click to expand...

I just bought a S&W .38 spec. Mod 14-4" (1958). It really is an accurate revolver. I'm NOT a good shot so having this one helps. I told myself I was getting it for a carry gun....lol. I've fired 12 rounds with it and have spent much more time just looking at it. Somebody took extremely good care of this gun over the years.

I did find it odd that the AUG was on there, and given it's influence and revolutionary design, I'd have put the Sturmgewher higher-up on the list. How would you rearrange the list?

Click to expand...

I hesitate to answer, only because its a total thread hijack issue, and has probably done to death, but essentially I disagree with the criteria that they used to come up with the top ten battle rifles. they used Innovation, Styling, Handling, Accuracy and Length of Service. I dont think style or maybe even service length has as much to do with it as effectiveness for it's time and how it changed the course of history.

In a nutshell I think the M-14 and Sturmgewehr should be much higher on the list, the Garrand should be in the top 3 if not the top 2. I also think the Kentucky Long Rifle should be on there.

Of course it's only an opinion, now back to our regularly schedualed thread.

I just bought a S&W .38 spec. Mod 14-4" (1958). It really is an accurate revolver. I'm NOT a good shot so having this one helps. I told myself I was getting it for a carry gun....lol. I've fired 12 rounds with it and have spent much more time just looking at it. Somebody took extremely good care of this gun over the years.

Click to expand...

Try shooting it from the recumbent (on your side, feet toward the target) position at 100 yards. You WILL be surprised, even with mediocre Winchester White Box 130gr. FMJ ammunition.

Give me SyFy or give me death!

Click to expand...

Yup...Ghost Hunters is far more factual. Every time someone passes gas on that show, it must be a spirit come to haunt them.
I take the History Channel, History Channel International, Military Channel, etc with a gigantic grain of salt. They have some entertaining shows on, but keep in mind that it is only "entertainment" designed to provide something to separate the product adverts. Most TV shows are that way.....it's just entertainment. Sort of like the NEWS.
BTW: History Channel International has been running an interesting series called "Guns Of The World". Some pretty cool stuff in several episodes.

The military channel is even worse than the history channel. I suppose they don't think it's worth spending any time or money to do any fact checking or they believe their viewers are so dumb they won't notice their screwups. Guess I'll go back to reading books for the winter. Can't wait until it gets warm enough to hang out in the garage again.

Holy Crap!!!

I just found out I'm a sniper!!! A paper target sniper,but still...

I quit watching the History Channel years ago when it was The Hitler Channel. All Hitler, all the time. Now, if I happen to flip past, usually what I see is a program on what "really happened" in the Bible...

No thank you.

Three words, which can be applied to nearly any situation:

The Media Sucks

O.K. not to be anal but what exactly constitutes a "high calibre" weapon, in theory the term would indicate an acending scale meaning a larger projectile the farther up the scale you go. So how can one call a round that fires a .223 inch, .40-.75 grain bullet high caliber, as I understand, we are talking about the very low-end of the scale, but mabey they didn't learn me that kind of ciferin when I were in skool.

I love the terms that these idiots come up with to make things sound more exciting and grafic than they really are, such as,

Person who murders with a rifle(sniper)

More than three guns in one home(arsenal)

FMJ or steel core ammo(cop killers) or (armor peircing)

Magazine-fed, semi-automatic rifle based on an issue military weapon(assault rifle)

Any rifle used in a crime that is chambered for any thing larger than .22 L.R. (high caliber)

And my favorite of all time as explained by the Chief of Police in the city of New Orleans while holding M-forgery (This weapon is capible of firing hundreds of rounds without reloading, and it's armor peircing bullets will shoot through any bullet proof vest, or armored vehichles, this gun is more deadly than the guns our troops carry.)

This is this! It's not something else, it's this

Click to expand...

Don't pull it if you don't plan to use it, and don't use it if you don't plan to kill!

Click to expand...

ALWAYS REMEMBER OUR MEN AND WOMEN OVER THERE!

WOW !!! I didn't realize that both my son and myself (& 95% our 650 rifle range members) are considered

highly skilled snipers

Click to expand...

by the media. What an honor.

We all take turns shooting a 4" steel plate from 400 yards with AR's, bolt-actions, semi-auto Remingtons/Winchesters, and even the occasional Marlin lever .30-30. Most can hit it several times in a row while it's still swinging. I don't think any of us think of ourselves as "highly skilled snipers".

I'll have to make up about 625 awards so these dudes know that they are highly trained marksmen (instead of just a group of hunters/rec. shooters/friendly competative shooters who practice just enough to be fair at what they do.)

My favorite was a crime show--might've been Tru (Court) TV or ID. Anyway, the voiceover tells you how a women committed a murder with her cop boyfriend's "service revolver." The problem was that the gun pictured on the screen was a 1911. I think they just like the way "service revolver" sounds.

Sam1911 said:

When I was in college a girl brought her father's deer rifle to one of the college's greens, lay down on the gentle hill, and shot at two people. She killed one and wounded the other. She instantly became a "The Sniper." The quad where she shot was next to my dorm (I heard the shots) and I later paced off the distance to about 70 yds. Some "sniper." This kind of hyperbole is nothing new.

-Sam

Click to expand...

Most of us can do that with a pistol.

I like the "high caliber" part. Now lots of people make 300 yard shots at prairie dogs with 17 or 22 caliber rifles but that sort of shot would be a bit tricky with a 45-70.

When I was in college a girl brought her father's deer rifle to one of the college's greens, lay down on the gentle hill, and shot at two people. She killed one and wounded the other. She instantly became a "The Sniper." The quad where she shot was next to my dorm (I heard the shots) and I later paced off the distance to about 70 yds. Some "sniper." This kind of hyperbole is nothing new.

-Sam

Click to expand...

She may not have been a great sniper, but she was sniping. Specific distance really isn't definitional to the term. Look at it another way, how many police snipers end up taking shots from that far or further? The 2007 study by the American Sniper Association lists the average police sniper distance shot at 54 yards and the closest at 5 yards.

Most of us can do that with a pistol.

Click to expand...

It has been my experience that most pistol owners most definitely cannot make those shots with any consistency at 70 yards. In fact, most can't make head shots with any consistency at 25 yards. Help as a RSO for the shooting portion of several Texas CHL classes, I can say that there are too many of us who have trouble hitting a human silhouette with consistency at 15 yards.

----

The History Channel is a LCD broadcast network, just like most other networks. If there isn't a certain amount of drama and entertainment to keep the attention of the masses, the will lose advertising and hence their ability to remain on the air. It is out job as viewers to separate out what is good information and what is sensationalized.

So they referred to the "skill" of the snipers being attested to by the distances involved. It is sensationalized but carries some truth. How many hunters do we know that have missed whole deer at closer distances? So it is all relative. Sure what the DC snipers were doing wasn't all that impressive to a lot of shooters, but then again, it is better than a lot could do as well...primarily because a lot either don't shoot or don't practice shooting.

Have you all been to a university history lecture lately? I am just happy the History Channel talks about something besides Lesbian Quilt Makers of the Plains.

I do admit I am sick of the Loch Ness Monster hiding in Hitler's bunker with Mayans who use the Divinci Code to build UFO's. What's Ivan the Terrible been up to lately?