No announcement yet.

Aug 1st - Aug 15th

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Aug 1st - Aug 15th

    The new poll and discussion topic is up on the main site. You can go to, Vote in the Poll, to vote, then discuss it here.
    Knowledge comes from retaining what is learned,

  • #2
    Yes, a responsible civilian should be allowed to attend any training they desire and can afford. If a person can obtain a CCW from their home state or pass a background check then training should be theirs.

    If one wants to read and teach one's self then we all here at SP know its do'able. There are hundreds of books out there that can be bought that explain in detail how to use a "sniper rifle". Even the training manuals from the Armed Forces can be had at your local book store or online from Amazon. com.

    So thinking that by denying training to a responsible civilian will deter them from leaning is silly and not well thought out.

    "Courage is not the absence of fear, but rather the judgement that something else is more important than fear"
    Ambrose Redmoon

    "To the American soldier, whose fidelity, patriotism, and valor have made this land the last best hope of earth."


    • #3
      Interesting topic. Most of the info is out there for people to learn, books, internet, videos, etc. However, actually training them to be a sniper is something else. The problem will arise when the general public asks "why is it necessary for a civilian to be trained as a sniper." And if we allow this, then shouldn't the normal course be to allow any civilian to receive training in explosives??
      Life's Tough, but it's a lot tougher if you are stupid.
      John Wayne


      • #4
        I think you also tend to create more of an "us and them" attitude when you restrict information of any kind to select groups of people. Specific operational details need to be kept pretty close to the chest, but that's a legitimate officer / operator safety concern, not just a "we have the coolest toys and you can't play with them" attitude.

        If you have the time and resources, take the training. Wannabes will find out that it's too hard and serious folks will gain a new respect for the discipline.
        The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing. Edmund Burke


        • #5
          What are the differences in “sniper training” and long range hunting or precision rifle courses? Is the shooting aspect different between the two, or is just in the application and tactics? If it is just the tactics, then aren’t 90% of the basic sniper courses built around basic skills applicable to hunters as well as snipers?

          I think skills like target detection, range estimation, accurately shooting a rifle, as well as other basic skills are shared between the hunting world and the sniper world. Because of these similarities, I know that the two worlds can be crossed and both types of shooters can learn from each other. As far as basic skills are concerned, I see no difference and no reason to limit the courses. When you start getting into advanced skills and advanced classes, you start getting into tactics. I think tactics are where the lines need to be draw and the distinction of who needs what needs to be addressed.
          Knowledge comes from retaining what is learned,


          • #6
            I agree with Snipler.



            • #7
              I too would have to agree w/ snip1er. From my POV as a civ. I would like to have most all of the tactical rifle classes open for myself. When and if I go into the LEO area in about 2 or 4 yrs I would think having a few of those classes would help me in the long run of getting jobs and maybe going SWAT later on. I feel that yes the lines should be drawn when it comes to the very detailed parts of "becoming a sniper" as for the most part there isn't any civ. out there that really needs to know that type of info. That kind of information should only be known to the ones that have busted their A$@ to get where they are at and that can truely call themselves a "sniper".

              "I think you also tend to create more of an "us and them" attitude when you restrict information of any kind to select groups of people. Specific operational details need to be kept pretty close to the chest, but that's a legitimate officer / operator safety concern, not just a "we have the coolest toys and you can't play with them" attitude." - Rule.308

              I feel that anyone that doesn't see that specific operational details shouldn't be kept to LEO and MIL ppl only really aren't the type of ppl who need to be taking the classes to began w/. Most everyone taking those class should see and understand that parts are not to be taught and kept LEO MIL only.
              So w/ the proper background checks or whatever it may be, I would think that we should be able to take most all classes.


              • #8
                I'm a civilian with a newfound interest in long range shooting. In my case, I am VERY interested in the marksmanship skills of the sniper and would like to take classes in that part of the art. I have no need for a ghillie suit or some of the "tactics" topics as identified by snip1er. My goals are to be able to shoot sub 1.0 moa at unknown distances using mil dot range estimation with a single cold bore shot. If a school can help me with that, I don't see why I should be denied the opportunity. If you need to do a background check on me first, I'm perfectly ok with that. And just for the record, I am NOT talking about benchrest shooting.

                I do believe there are probably some elements in the training of a real world sniper that should be kept for those in service only although I can't identify them specifically. I would defer judgement on that to those already in the field. However, there already is an enormous body of knowledge out there in print so I do wonder how much is even left to keep "secret." I don't need to know how to build a hide, operate the radio, conduct the stalk, etc. and even if I did, those types of things are already in print. I do need to learn about ballistics, reading mirage, reading wind, keeping accurate records, proper shooting form or technique so any school that could help me with those things would be of interest to me and of course some of that transfers over to hunting game as well although I'm not engaged in that.

                Bottom line is I think snip1er pretty much has the right idea. Now then, if you can share it, exactly what would be a "tactic" you think should not be taught and can you be very specific?

                Isshin Ryu Student


                • #9
                  I think that the basic sniper/long range shooting courses should be open to responsible adults. However, I draw the line when you start getting into the operational side of the house. That is why this forum has a duty only section. There are methods and techniques out their for defeating intrusion systems, IR and Thermal detection equipment. Things like this should be limited to a need to know and do not effect precision long range shooting or hunting.
                  On the plains of hesitation lie the blackened bones of countless millions who at the dawn of victory lay down to rest, and in resting died.


                  • #10
                    I agree that certain portions of tactics should not be taught. I'm all about equal rights and, as an NRA certified firearms instructor, all for private citizens learning a myriad of weapons skills. An armed, well-trained and well-educated populace is a free populace. If the brown stuff really hit the oscillating wind maker and I couldn't get "official" back-up, I'm not too proud to take all the help I can get!

                    I don't think that the reason "you don't need it" is good enough to preclude someone from training. I attended the Richard Petty Driving School and drove a stock car close to 200mph. Do I need those skills? No, but I am a tax-paying, non-felon citizen of the USA and have the freedom to do such things.

                    I think that the reason comes closer to the overly, and oftentimes wrongly, used phrase of "officer safety", or maybe "operational security" or OPSEC. I have seen injustices and wrong committed under the umbrella of officer safety, but more good than bad. I believe topics like Rules of Engagment (ROE's), tactical communications, and movement to contact shouldn't be taught to non-LEO/military students. Let's learn from the mistakes of the Romans.

                    Just because someone has a clean background doesn't necessary mean that they are a "good" person. Every criminal has to commit his or her first crime. I don't believe that Charles Whitman had a criminal history prior to climbing that tower with a Remington 700 and an M1 carbine.

                    I don't think that there should be a law against it. We have too many laws as it is. It should be up to the individual school as to what to include in their curriculum and to whom to teach it.

                    With that said, I would be proud to attend a school with honest and earnest private citizens who are there to better their skills or learn new ones. If I wasn't, I wouldn't be posting on the site!

                    It's knowing that when I get up in the morning and my feet hit the floor, the Devil says, "Shit! He's awake!"

                    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: "We will shoot twice and go home."

                    "There are so many Russians, and our country so small, where will we find room to bury them all?" - anonymous Finnish soldier


                    • #11
                      I would say yes. But with a background check like the one used for concealed carry. Our country's borders are wide open. Also there are civilian shooters out there who are deadly with a sling out to a thousand yards and then there are the extreme varmint hunters who shoot prairie dogs out to 1700 yards. Don't believe me, check it out. Tactics and training are moot when someone is sniping you at 1500 yards. There is already a butt load of information out there. What many think they can surpress is in print in magazines and books that are available overseas. A free press in America means anybody, ANYBODY can get a hold of advanced material on sniping. Guys the cats already out of the bag.


                      • #12

                        I for one believe that there is an operational need for some aspects of the sniper weaponscraft to stay out of the public’s eye. I know this is an unpopular view and can live with that. IR defeating/detection, Movement, tactical communications, etc…… but not the fundamentals of long range target shooting under various conditions

                        What are your feelings as to the Sniper Comps question? Open/closed to the public and why?

                        If I submit my app for a comp and I have a verified CLEAN record . . . should I be allowed to compete against LEO/Mil Snipers?

                        This is one area that I feel that should be opened up to the public.

                        ?Thought becomes action, if action is a result of thought, can action obtain the speed of thought??


                        • #13
                          And then there's people like Feinstein that say civilians have no need for big guns like a .50. It absolutely is the same and one either agrees or not. -Rod-
                          USAPatriot's America Forum <<--New Location, New Database!

                          Registered Democrat Republican Yeehadi


                          • #14
                            "why is it necessary for a civilian to be trained as a sniper." And if we allow this, then shouldn't the normal course be to allow any civilian to receive training in explosives??[/b]
                            Civilians don't have access to explosives, Alph.... unless you know where I can score some? j/k
                            However, I DO have access to firearms. Moreover, this nation was founded by rifleman. The amount of civilians that actually express a sincere interest in sniping is extremely small, and most are really only interested in improving their extreme distance marksmanship.
                            "Droll thing life is - that mysterious arrangement of merciless logic
                            for a futile purpose. The most you can hope from it is some knowledge of
                            yourself - that comes too late - a crop of unextinguishable regrets."
                            -Joseph Conrad "Heart of Darkness"


                            • #15
                              I have to agree that certain subjects should not be discussed due to need to know. Tactics are not only what make us successful, but are what keep us alive while we are on the mission.

                              I have no problem with any of the rifle training, range est, balistics, or building a rifle. These are skills that I believe anyone can learn. There is just no reason IMO that we should be teaching the tactical skills to the average civillian. Back ground checks I feel are not the answer, since most on this form know that it is possible to create an identity.

                              Sorry about the soapbox, I've been out on an OP looking for smuglers the last 3 days, and it could get even more dangerous if the general pop. got a handle on how we do business.

                              "It is foolish and wrong to mourn the men who died. Rather we should thank God that such men lived.'
                              --George Patton

                              "Speed's fine, but accuracy is final."

                              There's no such thing as "unfair advantage."