Talk:Sniper rifle/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Zoom power

What are some usual zoom levels for a sniper rifle scope and how far can you shoot accuately for each zoom level? Wizrdwarts 02:10, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Most sniper rifles are at about 10x. DMR rifles can be as low as 3x or so, and a steyr aug is 1.5x. High power rifles go to as high as about 17x. Some specialized rifles may use higher power but that's rare. Qwasty 22:32, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

The scope's magnification doesn't determine the rifle's accuracy, it only makes it easier to see targets further away. Target scopes (sometimes called "target/varmint") can be up to 40x magnification [1], but at these levels it becomes difficult to follow movement and the scope becomes larger, heavier and possibly more fragile. The happy medium with sniper rifles seem to be 6x to 12x. Deon Steyn 08:54, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Legality

Are there any special laws against sniper rifles similar to the laws on automatics (in the United States)? Or are they completly legal? Zachorious 04:32, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

currently there are no laws relating to sniper rifles specifically. There are laws about things such as flash hiders and suppressors that affect sniper rifles, however. Probably the main reason there are no laws regarding sniper rifles is that there is no distintive feature of sniper rifles that can be used to decide which rifles are legal and which are not. Consequently, any law addressing sniper rifles is likely to affect nearly everything. Qwasty 05:18, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Indeed, the only difference between some sniper rifles and some hunting rifles is the targets to which they are applied. — DAGwyn 22:47, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Indeed, some of the the current crop of bolt-action models are civilian hunting or target types that have been modified to increase accuracy and adapt the mounting for optics to the more "universal" Picatinny rail. Restrictions on "sniper rifles" fould either have to be made on what the target is--which is essentially already done by laws regarding homocide--or rather nebulous traits like accuracy or accessories. Deathbunny 21:03, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Too much focus on US equipment?

Just an observation... all the images are of US military personnel and equipment... surely there are some suitable photos of military sharpshooters from other countries using their rifles as well?--Commander Zulu 13:37, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

I also think so and it's not just the images, the content seems to have turned towards "modern US sniper rifle tactics and training". There are plenty of other images out there, more focused on RIFLES and not snipers (which belong on the sniper page. I will source some better images from other articles. Deon Steyn 14:49, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

I have replaced the two images at the top of the article with one showing a typical sniper, which I feel is more appropriate since the articl's subject is the rifles and not people shooting them only and this is a typical sniper rifle. I have also found a historical pic and added it to that section and further one replaced one of an M14 with another of a French FRF2 which is also bolt-action. Deon Steyn 17:59, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

I can't tell whether that french rifle has a magazine or not. At first glance it appeared that it did and I was about to note that some bolt actions have magazines similar to semi-autos, but the other photo on the page for that rifle doesn't appear to show a magazine. Neither photo is clear enough to tell for sure.

The article started out being too US centric, and it's gradually improving. As far as photos go, it's hard to find photos of non-US stuff on wikipedia sometimes.

Qwasty 19:34, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Types of sniper rifles

How can we class the different types of sniper rifles? Here's a list of what is possible:

• antipersonnel
• antimateriel
• military
• police
• covert urban, assassin
• criminal
• semi auto
• bolt action
• small caliber and ultra-quiet (used equally for for materiel such as lights, personnel, and other living things like dogs and birds)

Any other ideas? I'm not sure if it's even possible to come up with a consistent classification method

Qwasty 21:54, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

That's not much of a classification method, since most of the "categories" you listed are overlaping. For instance, a military sniper rifle may be anti-personnel or anti-materiel, bolt-action or gas-operated (semi-automatic), and so on. Also, I don't think "covert urban/assassin" and "criminal" are much of a categorization either.

If we have to come up with a classification method, it has to begin with the most general "classes", which in my opinion consists of military and law enforcement types, and then breaking these two categories down into more specific types. A separate section/subsection could then be used for weapons that don't fit on neither categories. —Squalla 02:08, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Why categorise them at all? "Military" and "Police" really seems to sum it up pretty well- there are no "Civilian" Sniper Rifles, AFAIK, beyond commercial hunting rifles which have been accurised and had a scope mounted on them. While we're here, there seems to be a little bit of Tom Clancy-esque Ninja Fanboy tone to the general article- it's 1000 percent better than it was before, but I can't help but feel the article still seems to be aimed at people who play CounterStrike a lot... I'm just not entirely sure what I can add to the article, since modern weapons really aren't my area of expertise. --Commander Zulu 05:19, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Agree with Commander Zulu. The commonly accepted categories are the ones I left after cleaning up the section, namely military, police and anti-materiel. It is also a categorization used by other sources like World Guns (although he calls uses large caliber instead of anti-materiel), see [2]. This covers all types of "sniper rifes" in the scope of this article without including completely different weapons that snipers might also use (pistol, suitcase guns and goodness knows what else) that is outside of the scope of this article, but might be relevant to the sniper article. Deon Steyn 08:46, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Whatever we decide on, I think there ought to be a "special" category to cover the oddball weapons that don't fit neatly in any category. The ideal example of this, with common usage all over the world, is the suppressed .22 long rifle. That weapon is used equally for anti-materiel and anti-personnel, and both by military and police. The rifle-caliber thomson contender pistols are another good example. There may be others that I haven't thought of.

For example, the scoped crossbow was used before the suppressed .22 became popular, so if there's odd weapons like that, I'm sure there's others that don't immediately come to mind. I have heard that the scoped crossbows are still used by countries that can't buy the suppressed .22's due to sanctions or whatever. So, while not a rifle, it fills the same niche as the .22 and may deserve a mention if it turns out that it's still actually getting used somewhere

Qwasty 20:46, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Introductory definition

We need consensus on the introductory definition. Firstly, I think we should remove any mention of "stealth" or "from a concealed position", because these rifles are not specially designed to cater for this (any more so than any other rifle). "Agree" or "Oppose"? Please keep answers as short as possible. Deon Steyn 18:12, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Agree. (Refer to the "Intro" discussion for reasons.) —Squalla 18:23, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

They are designed for stealth. The stock's butts usually have a butt hook, and a relief bevel, that are solely for use in the prone position. (mcmillan A3, A4, and a few others). The forends are flattened rather than rounded so they're more suited to resting on something that helps conceal the sniper, such as a window sill, rucksack, logs, etc. (hunting rifles have round forends to be rested on a hand).

We've argued this back and forth for a while now, and to me it seems obvious that a sniper rifle would be intended for exclusive use in a concealed fashion. Otherwise, the lousy bolt action must compete with machine guns. The only times I've seen snipers operate unconcealed is when they're part of a force that has already so-thoroughly dominated their enemies that they can get away with it. That's more like shooting fish in a barrel than true sniping, and I've only seen it happen in extremely one-sided conflicts involving the USA somewhere (although the sniper may be canadian, or whatever).

Qwasty 20:24, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

The stock and forearm of a sniper rifle are designed for comfort/stance reasons, not "stealth". You should stop making these narrow-minded statements about sniper rifles being used exclusively by snipers in a "stealthy" fashion—this is simply not true.

—Squalla 21:25, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

My narrow minded statements about stocks having features designed for stealth are industry facts you fool. Talk to Rock Mcmillan at Mcbros and try to convince him you know more about it than he does (Yes, I have done it myself). Here's his phone number: 623 582 9635.

We've already expanded the definition of "sniper rifle" to include marksman rifles. If you expand the definition of sniper rifles to rifles not used for sniping (or not designed for it), then there is no longer any such thing as a sniper rifle. The subtle differences blur away very quickly. I haven't written the stocks section yet, but I'm nearly ready to, and when I do, you'll see more clearly. Or, you can start it yourself, and I'll pick up on it later today. Here's a starting point for you (all of these features aid stealth):

• The rounded forearms on civilian hunting rifles neatly fit into v-shaped padded rifle bags.
• The flat forearms of a typical modern sniper rifle stock does not fit in v-shaped rifle bags, but is better suited to impromptu rests such as a log, rock, rucksack, etc.
• The butt of a civilian hunting stock is rounded on the bottom to better fit in fancy shooting bags
• The butt of the sniper's stock is flat on the bottom so a sand sock or micrometer can be used to change the vertical aim point
• The civilian usually fires from a standing position ("stance"), or from a sitting position with bags on a shooting bench
• The sniper usually fires from a low-observable prone position, the stock has bevels and cutouts to support that ("comfort")

Or, if you prefer, watch some TV and play some computer games to come up with your ideas about what a sniper rifle is. As for me, I have more knowledge on this topic than all the other editors combined, including you. That's not a jab at anyone, it's a fact. This article has exploded with a tremendous amount of information since I started editing it. Look at the history if you want to know who's been putting it all in. On top of that, I've found cites without fail on every fact where I've been disputed, and eventually I'll put in cites (or information that makes it obvious) for everything we're talking about here.

Qwasty 22:37, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

How exactly does everything you wrote in your reply directly relate sniper rifles to stealth? It relates them to the stance they are supposed/normally fired from—a prone position—which is exactly what I stated. "Prone position" does not equal "stealth". You have just confirmed my point, which is kinda ironic when you consider yourself such a good writer and expert on the subject.

By the way, I'm not exactly sure, but I think personal attacks aren't exactly encouraged in Wikipedia. Keep the attitude up and I'll find out about it. —Squalla 23:09, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

You called me narrow minded. You could have said "narrow statements" instead of "narrow-minded statements".

Back to the stealthy stocks issue. Lets see if I can make this more clear for you:

• Stocks on sniper rifles have features to accomodate the prone position
• The prone position accomodates stealth more than any other position
• Sniper's use the prone position more often than any other position

As you said, the features I mentioned don't directly relate to stealth. But, as a matter of fact, little if anything about a sniper rifle does. As I've said before, sniper rifles aren't much different from any other rifle, and so if we don't include some reference to "used by a sniper" as part of the distinguishing criterion, we don't have much to write about. I think it's ridiculous I have to argue this in an article called Sniper rifle.

Additionally, if the rifle is not used stealthily, then:

• It's not being used for sniping (which requires stealth, by definition)
• A "sniper rifle" is not required

And then the scope opens to include pretty much everything. I accept the inclusion of DMR and marksman rifles because they are closely related, and are frequently used in sniper roles, and so they sometimes have correspondingly suitable features - but not always!

Sniper rifle logic leading to a definition, with article scope breakdown:

• Used by a sniper - see Sniper
  • Sniper uses his rifle stealthily - details on usage, see Sniper
  • Rifle features must accomodate stealthy usage - within scope of this article
• Not used by a sniper - outside scope, and not a sniper rifle, see Rifle

There's no defining physical feature of a sniper rifle that makes it unequivocally identifiable as a sniper rifle. Here's some things that do not count towards defining a rifle as a sniper rifle, with examples:

• Caliber - BB, .22 Long Rifle, .338 Lapua
• Range - 3 inches, 5 meters, 2500 meters
• Accuracy - 40 MOA, 1 MOA, .5 MOA, .25 MOA
• Sights - 1.5x scope, 40x scope, iron sights, laser sight, dot sight, none at all
• Model numbers - M40A3, M21, Remington 700
• Model names - Tasco Super Sniper Scope, Remington PSS (Police Sniper System)
• Who uses it - US Army, LAPD, Charles Whitman, Carlos Hathcock, Vasily Zaitsev

So, to sum up, there's only 3 canonical rules of what a sniper rifle is, and that this article should be primarily built around:

1. Rifle is used for sniping
2. Rifle is used stealthily
3. Rifle features accomodate stealthy usage

Qwasty 00:31, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

...Which brings us back to the previous "Intro" discussion. You refuse to accept that a sniper rifle is not necessarily used by a sniper, and thus is not necessarily used in a "stealthy" fashion. There are several physical features that set what we call a sniper rifle apart from other types of rifles. As with pratically any other type of firearm, there is rarely a consensus for classification; as an encyclopedia article, the page should offer reasonable distinctions that set a sniper rifle apart from other weapons, and as much as you want to convince me otherwise, "stealth" is not a very reasonable one. I've said it before, and I'll say it one last time: a sniper rifle, despite its name, is not necessarily A) used by a sniper, B) used in a "stealthy"/concealed fashion, and C) designed to accomodate stealthy usage (but rather stance, which may not necessarily be prone). I'm not the only one who thinks you are wrong, but you refuse to accept anyone else's opinions, and this is getting old, really. You can't just pick an article and do whatever you feel like with it, especially when there are other users repeatedly questioning your opinions and editing work. —Squalla 01:44, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

"Stealth" is definitely the wrong word to be using here, IMO... it has far too many "l337 CounterStrike pl4y0r" connotations in this context for an academic work. FWIW, I'd argue that a Sniper Rifle can be defined thusly:

• Rifle is specifically designed or modified for accuracy;
• Used by Military or Police
• Has a telescopic or other special purpose sight.

The "Military or Police" thing is very important, IMO... after all, simply bolting a Leupold 3-9x40 scope and a bipod onto an over-the-counter Remington 700 does not automatically make it a "Sniper Rifle" (unless you're one of those people who hang out at rifle ranges with a backwards "SWAT" hat or USMC cover on, yet are not actually in the police or military), and the article should reflect that. Otherwise, I Agree with Squalla. --Commander Zulu 02:13, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

I prefer the older version that said the rifle is used from a concealed position, but since we've expanded the scope of this article to include DMR's and marksman rifles, "stealth" covers everything without implying it's required.

Your definition is incorrect:

• Rifle is specifically designed or modified for accuracy - This applies to most rifles, but may exclude some like .22 cal sniper rifles
• Used by Military or Police - plenty of organizations and individuals use sniper rifles that are not formally part of any government recognized military or police organization
• Has a telescopic or other special purpose sight. - Once again, this applies to most bolt action rifles, but may exclude .22 cal sniper rifles

Qwasty 02:59, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

I've changed the phrase "obsolete antiques" in the opening paragraph to "obsolete miltary surplus or sporting arms"- "Antique" has a specific definition in the Arms Laws of most countries, being any gun (or modern replica thereof) manufactured before 1898 in the US, and any gun (for which cartridge ammunition is not available) manufactured before either 1901 (in Australia) or is more than 100 years old (New Zealand, UK?). Whilst some of the muzzleloading rifles- such as the 1853 Enfield and the Kentucky Rifle- were capable of incredible accuracy (for their day), they're not even close to the accuracy levels required by "Modern" Sniper rifles- but most of the WWI/WWII rifles are, hence the change to clarify this, without changing the overall thrust of the intro. --Commander Zulu 02:41, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

The sentence where you changed that is about civilian arms, not military surplus, so I changed it back, but I also changed the phrase "obsolete antiques" to "obsolete models" to avoid definitional vagaries. That should fulfill your intent in fewer words. Qwasty 03:09, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, you're right- "obsolete models" does make more sense in context and is a better term. --Commander Zulu 03:41, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

So myself, Commander Zulu and Squalla agree that the term "stealth" and "concealed position" be removed from the definition on the following grounds

• This article doesn't cover all weapons used for sniping
• By far the greatest majority of sniper rifles around the world and throughout history have had no special features designed to aid stealth or concealment.

I will change the intro accordingly. Deon Steyn 05:56, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Those changes are outside the scope of sniping. I will revert until the cows come home. I would like to add that the sentence refers to requirements, so if it makes you feel better, just think of sniper rifles as rifles that aren't required to be used stealthily (however wrong that may be). Qwasty 06:15, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

---

The next item in the definition I feel should be removed is selective engagement of specific targets. This is redundant when the subject is already defined as a rifle which by implication is used to engage a target of the shooter's selection and therefore this definition can apply to pistols, missiles or clubs ans as such serves no purpose. Remove this? Agree or Oppose? Deon Steyn 06:09, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Oppose. Sniper rifles are the most selective in their targets, of all other rifles. Since this article is primarily about rifles, comparisons to clubs and missiles don't really apply. Qwasty 06:15, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Agree in Principle. I agree that Sniper rifles are designed for precision accuracy (and are considerably more selective than, say, an AK-47), but the phrase "selective engagement of specific targets" sounds like the PR department of the US DoD came up with it- it should be changed to something a bit less "doublespeak", IMO. --Commander Zulu 06:28, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

I would support changing the word selective to tactical, since that leads to some more depth of meaning than is immediately apparent from the word selective Qwasty 06:33, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Again Qwasty attempts to divert attention from the issues at hand. tactical makes even less sense. Deon Steyn 06:44, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Maximum effective range ammunition table

I'd like to see some check boxes in the table for police and military usage so that people can see that police usage is mostly 7.62 and under, and military usage is mostly 7.62 and over, with the crossover being at 7.62. Maybe just add two columns titled "military usage" and "police usage" with asterisks in each cell corresponding to each category? Qwasty 23:21, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Gadget Guns???

Sorry, what have these got to do with Sniper Rifles? That sort of stuff belongs in James Bond Movies, not a serious article on Sniper Rifles... besides, the fact that they aren't scoped and have to be used at close range kind of precludes them as being classified as "Sniper Rifles". Opinions? --Commander Zulu 02:28, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Range isn't really relevant. .22 caliber sniper rifles have ranges of only about 10 meters. Some of the gadget guns are fully functional scoped sniper rifles. I'm looking for more cites, but I've seen some that were assembled from pieces that looked like common objects: The scope was a flashlight, the stock was a book, and the rifle was a cane. Granted, since this stuff tends to be highly clandestine, not much info on modern weapons is available, but I included a wikipedia link to a man who was assassinated with an umbrella gun, and I've seen video of one of Saddam Hussein's secret police machine shops where a much more capable umbrella gun was found partly-finished. Qwasty 02:47, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

I still don't think they qualify as "Sniper Rifles"... "Assassination Weapons", yes, but the two terms aren't synonyms. Why not start a new article- Assassination Weapons- link it to the main Sniper Rifle article, and then put the Gadget Guns information in the Assassination Weapons article? That way, it's still tangentially linked to "Sniper Rifles" without straying un-necessarily into James Bond territory. --Commander Zulu 03:01, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

That phrase about gadget guns is there to illustrate the wide scope of sniper weapons. It's only a few words long, and while they are known to exist, not enough specific information is available on them to justify a seperate article. Qwasty 03:07, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

This is exactly the point you are missing, this is not a page for sniper's weapons, that can be discussed on te sniper page. This page if for a specific type of rifle (who happens to share it's name with it's most common user), but it by no means defined by only one of the groups who use these rifles or the way they use them. Deon Steyn 06:46, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

.22 caliber sniper rifles

Doesn't ".22 calibre sniper rifle" strike you as an oxymoron? A .22 rifle has trouble killing a hare at 40yds, never mind being able to kill a person. If you're referring to the sort of .22 rifle used in The Day Of The Jackal (loaded with special ammunition) then maybe- but if it hasn't got a telescopic sight, then it's either a standard commerical .22 rifle (and thus not a Sniper Rifle), or it's designed to be used at point-blank range, in which case it's an assassination weapon- which is an entirely different kettle of fish to a Sniper Rifle. Some sniper rifles are assassination weapons, but not all assassination weapons are sniper rifles. "Military" can include "Paramilitary" organisations, but "individuals" with sniper rifles are either target shooters (most of whom dislike being called "Snipers" because of the Tom Clancy fanclub), or Assassins. Can you give me an example of a ".22 calibre Sniper Rifle"? Quite frankly, I really don't see how any gun that has to be used at point-blank range- even if it is from cover or concealment- can really qualify as a "Sniper Rifle". --Commander Zulu 03:41, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Click on the cited references. Also read some of the other references in the article, they get a lot of press. They can be quite lethal, even with subsonic rounds. They have replaced crossbows for ultra quiet work, and in fact they are even quieter. .22 cal sniper rifles do pretty much everything:

• anti-materiel on lights, radios, etc
• anti-personnel on sentries
• "anti-guard-animal" on dogs and other critters

As I've said before, sniping is about stealth, not power, range, or even accuracy. In many ways, the suppressed .22 is the ultimate sniper rifle since it can do ANY task that ANY other type of sniper rifle can do, albeit at much shorter ranges.

Qwasty 04:03, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

I still think we're talking at cross-purposes, especially with regards to what a sniper is. A soldier picking off enemy soldiers across no-man's land with a scoped rifle is a sniper. Someone hiding behind a tree and shooting a guard dog from 6ft away with a silenced .22 is not a sniper, IMO. I strongly disagree that sniping is solely about stealth. Remaining concealed is a part of what a sniper does, but you're making them out to be some kind of "Ninja with a tricked out gun", which I don't think is right. Snipers are supposed to be able to hit a target with unerring precision on the first shot, and in many cases- for example, involving police marksmen/snipers- it's actually an advantage for the sniper to be visible, so the (potential) target realises what they are up against. --Commander Zulu 04:24, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

These weapons fall completely outside of the scope of this article, Qwasty you have been directed to the sniper page several times. If these weapons are user by snipers as you claim, feel free to add it to that article. Deon Steyn 06:01, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

They aren't outside the scope. I've already added several cites. Maybe you haven't read them? Qwasty 06:10, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

They are outside of the scope, perhaps you haven't read my reply and this relates to your concerns over "stealth" and other topics too. This article is not about the "rifles of snipers" is is a specific type of rifle, that happens to include the word "sniper". Deon Steyn 06:37, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

That's the most ridiculous thing I've heard so far today. I can't reason with ideas like that. I think what you want is an article about sniper rifles as shown in the entertainment media. Qwasty 06:47, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

You can't reason with ideas like this, because you continue to make basic mistakes in logic and you continue to ignore consensus opinion. Deon Steyn 06:56, 25 July 2006 (UTC)