this post was submitted on 15 Jul 2024
692 points (97.7% liked)

politics

18883 readers
3694 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Pistcow@lemm.ee 26 points 2 months ago (4 children)

He's a bad shot because anyone with any bit of training or even youtube experience knows to aim center mass. More chance of hitting. I picked up shooting for sport in 2017 and can hit center mass with iron sites at the distance this kid was. With my cheapo scope, I can hit out to 300 yards.

He tried lolz x-gamer headshot and failed miserably.

[–] davidgro@lemmy.world 42 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Maybe he did aim for the center...

[–] Pistcow@lemm.ee 14 points 2 months ago

And that would be even worse for a stationary target.

[–] andrew_bidlaw@sh.itjust.works 22 points 2 months ago (1 children)

He had a lot of shots, at least three, so I'm not even sure he aimed at the head. If the story about the policeman distracting him is true, it means a boy on adrenalin tried his best to keep his aim straight in a hurry. I believe hitting Trump at all was an accident.

[–] Killing_Spark@feddit.de 22 points 2 months ago

This. I'm guessing that police man actually saved trumps life because the attempt had to be carried out in a rush and with at least a mild shock still in the system.

[–] the_crotch@sh.itjust.works 15 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Trump was almost certainly wearing a vest

[–] conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works 30 points 2 months ago (1 children)

A hit to a vest definitely has a real chance to kill him. Vests distribute the impact, but they're still massive chest trauma for a 70-something dude.

[–] the_crotch@sh.itjust.works 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Absolutely it could. Vest or no vest, I don't want to get shot. But "aim for center of mass" is only the rule of thumb when the center of mass is unprotected. Otherwise, it becomes "aim for the material specifically designed to stop bullets" which is not a great rule of thumb.

[–] vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works 5 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

It also depends on the bullet and rifle, I kinda doubt there are many bullet proof vests that can br qord under clothes that can hold up against a .308.

But im gonna hazard a guess that some 20 year old trying to do an assassination was probably using an AR-15 chambered in 5.56. Which I would coin flip on if the vest could handle it or not.

[–] Carmakazi@lemmy.world 12 points 2 months ago (1 children)

No way would USSS be able to get his fat ass to wear a vest consistently, let alone the plates needed to stop a rifle round. In this heat?

Though I'm sure now he may reconsider, or be forced to.

[–] the_crotch@sh.itjust.works 8 points 2 months ago

Like all bullies, trump is a coward. Wouldn't blow my mind if he wore a vest before he even ran for president.

[–] Raiderkev@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

I'm perplexed by the lack of a scope. I honestly think it was a machismo move. Wanted to try n headshot him with iron sights so people would talk about it or whatever. Maybe it was all he had, but I doubt it. There are articles saying he was a member at a local range and practiced there all the time. I'm sure he owned a scope. Maybe he didn't think he'd have time to line up a shot with a scope? Idk, it was just weird.