om@news.eternal-september.org> 6dc9c3b2
XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.law-enforcement, alt.politics.trump
XPost: sac.politics, talk.politics.guns
From: recscuba_google@huntzinger.com
The dildo of consequence wrote:
> On 10/21/25 9:40 AM, -hh wrote:
>> The dildo of consequence wrote:
>>> On 10/20/25 2:54 AM, -hh wrote:
>>>> useapen wrote:
>>>>> Fox News broke the story that the FBI is now investigating a hunting
stand
>>>>> the U.S. Secret Service discovered with a “direct line of sight” to
where
>>>>> the president exits Air Force One in Florida at the Palm Beach
>>>>> International Airport.
>>>>
>>>> Having a “direct line of sight” doesn’t make it a meaningful
threat. Case
>>>> in point, we also have a direct line of sight to the moon, and it is well
>>>> out of anyone’s firing range.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> He said that Secret Service agents were conducting their "advance
security
>>>>> preparations" prior to the president’s arrival in Palm Beach when they
>>>>> found the stand.
>>>>
>>>> Which merely means it was probably within the radius circle of their
>>>> security sweeps, not that it was also close enough to be a tactical threat
>>>> risk.
>>>>
>>>> -hh
>>>
>>> The specific area where the hunting stand was found— a wooded perimeter
>>> along the northern boundary of PBIA—is not formally known or designated
>>> as a hunting ground.
>>
>> So? Doesn’t mean that local bubbas haven’t been doing it anyway.
Poachers
>> often choose the best spots too.
>
> I'm not saying this was a definitive set up for an assassination
> attempt. I am saying that it's location, line of site, distance, not
> being a hunting ground, recent attempts on Trump's life, etc. all
> warrant a serious look and should not be dismissed as lightly as you are
> doing.
But of course one should investigate it, but that the news release from the
start was “sniper’s nest” is unprofessional and irresponsible. Given how
much false propaganda this Administration has been slinging, my default
posture is that it is excessive hype and more likely a nothingburger than
not.
>>> Given the recent attempts on the pres' life I'd simply say, connect the
>>> dots.
>>
>> Nah. One can easily look at how old the wood is in the stand for how long
>> it’s been there, to see if it is deliberate or coincidental.
>
> It has been there for a couple of months, apparently. It's up in a tree
> with a direct sight line to the tarmac. Coincidence? Maybe. Maybe not.
> Let's see what the investigation uncovers.
If so, it suggests deliberate preparation well in advance, but if they’re
that well prepared, the “hide” would have also been very well hidden, so it
doesn’t make sense that it was built for this purpose…ie, it’s merely a
coincidence.
>> Plus what the
>> actual engagement range is, for no one sane is going to try to make a
>> 1000m+ shot (even a professional): has the SS actually said what the
>> notional range distance would have been? If not, it obviously ain’t
close.
>
> Where are you getting this 1000m+ idea from?
Lack of data to make the point.
> Estimates indicate the
> stand was approximately 200 yards (about 183 meters or 600 feet) from
> the Air Force One exit stairs and tarmac zone.
Whose “estimate”, published where?
> That's a gimme putt for even a half decent shooter.
Eh, sort of. The dilemma is that it is easy enough to do on a gun range
with warmers and low stress…
…but doing it for real under stress, with a fixed time window constraint
and with a CCB lowers the P(s) considerably. Getting this wrong by
ignoring the variables and similar factors is a very common enough aspect
of shooting which I’ve even seen flags fall for - - IIRC, I first
encountered it circa 1986, while I was being mentored by the likes of WCD,
WOH, & JC (only met CH later).
>> Free clue:
>>
…which was roughly coincident with the above contents’ origins.
-hh
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
