I agree with Kraig on the music. We had the best music ever and I still listen to it daily on Classic Vinyl.
- Thread starter hrfunk
- Start date
Kevin, not sure what Ferguson was at the time of the incident you mention, but, he was a Colonel at King's Mountain when he was shot.
I would have to submit a sniper who is actually in my VERY Extended Family as one of the most significant snipers in history.
My Aunt Jean just remarried in the last couple years. She married a man named Larry Whitener. I got to meet him last summer, just about exactly a year ago. He has an interest in History and Genealogy, so he and I hit it off immediately---it does help that he brought great happiness to my aunt. Anyway, while chatting with him, he told me a very interesting piece of History, It seems that in the early to mid 1700's, a man by the name of Henry Wiedner immigrated to the Colonies from Germany. He spent considerable time in Philadelphia, in which time he commissioned the build of an unusually long musket. He eventually settled in the western mountains of North Carolina, where he raised two sons of his own, and a third adopted son. Then, the Revolution broke out, and all three of his sons enlisted in the Continental Army. They fought at King's Mountain, where one was shot and killed, and one was wounded. When this took place, the third son was so enraged, that he "took his Father's Musket, and placing a double charge of powder in the barrel, loaded a round, and seeing a British Officer, he took careful aim and fired, killing the officer." This officer was Colonel Ferguson, the leader of the British Regulars at King's Mountain. The British Troups, having lost their commander where decimated, and defeated, becoming the first time in the Revolution where British Regulars where defeated by the Colonists. This was arguably a major turning point in the War for Independence.
For this reason, I nominate my Great-Great.....Great Uncle (by marriage) as one of the most significant single snipers in history..... Yeah I am biased a little bit.
Wiki has the following to say about sniping in the American Revolution:
Greg
Greg
Quite possible, Tim, and I'll defer to your sources here. My post was strictly from memory, as I'm up at Camp Perry right now shooting the Nationals. In other words, my library's not exactly handy! May dig out a bit more info on this when I get home next week, but for now, the days are plenty busy on the range.
LMAO at that one JL!
Simo was incredible. My only issue is what number of sniper kills did he have vs. kills in infantry duty. Meaning: He was known to gun down Russian squads up close and personal with a sub-machine gun. These were given to him as kills, but they weren't "sniper kills". Mark my words though not many with cojones such as he had. He did his utmost to aid and assist his countries best interest.
On the flip side, Vasily Zeistev did a huge amount to stop the German war machine. His numer of kills easily eclipses any Allied or even later American, British, French, Belgian, Canadian for sheer volume of work done in the field.
One could argue that Rob Furlong and Craig Harrison deserve some serious title. #2 and more recently #1 in the distance aspect. Keep in mind while sniping is about staying hidden, the degree of difficulty is high enough without going to the ranges these guys shot at and made hits. A truly landmark piece of work on both their parts as oftentimes, the kind of shooting they did is frowned upon. But, in both cases it meant a huge difference. Opening back up the fact that snipers need to be able to range out to effectively protect the men they mean to help. CO's thinking that going 'too long' is detrimental got another think when their stories hit the news.
What can you say, Galliland had to suppress a bad guy taking aim at out people. Again, by ranging out he accomplished (while not specifically intended) not only the capability of the current M118LR/M40, but also put on notice bad guys who want to pop off too close. I have found even one good hit as a sniper will make the enemy pay very particular attention to where they are at. And of course, what they do.
Carlos gets my vote because he was a super promoter of the value of long range sniping. He may have told his men not to take foolish long shots, but he also displayed and taught the necessary factors to know before making a long shot. He was the one who formalized it for us finally. From WWI on through Viet Nam, no one had truly formalized the training and standards that he did.
Honorable mention is Chuck Mahwhinney, a contemporary of Carlos. While Chuck did an out standing job as a sniper and achieved the most kills up through the Vietnam War, of any American, he didn't further the skill after he left the Area of Operations. Carlos' Legacy wins out IMO because he was in the position to get one of the best schools ever, off the ground.
Added:
If you think about Simo's kills vs. the number of students going through the Marine Corps Sniper School based on his recommended syllabus, you would find Carlos so far in the lead it would make your head spin. In truth what he was able to do was not only able to accomplish what he did, he was able to extend the capability of his feats through students of his and future students. Many of them students of his students.
Added more:
One of the two campaigns see where snipers were trully effective was the Russians on the Russian front in WWII and also the Germans against the Allies in the battles of the Bocage. Fighting in the Hedgerows post 'D-day' and prior to "The Breakout". In that campaign German snipers were so effective as to bring allied officers almost complete abandonment of their rank while in any sight of German snipers. This was, IMO, the second most effective sniper campaign worldwide and timewise for any army having at least designated snipers to do a job.
Last edited:
He is the most influential in my personal history. I had the honor of spending a lot of off time with him back in '99 during a comp down in Mississippi. I picked his brain as much as I could for philosophies and techniques. The biggest one I came away with was (paraphrasing) "Remember you're there to support the riflemen; take care of them and they'll take care of you". I still try to always live by that philosophy as a manager. Thanks Chuck.
My thoughts exactly. "Most Influential" puts it right there, who has the most enduring legacy. Maybe I'm biased being a Marine Sniper myself, but when we look at the establishment of tactics and doctrine over time, I believe Hathcock's work is the most enduring and influential of all. Much credit to Maj Land, Maj Culver, Col Walsh and Col Cuddy as well because we all know it takes the officers to push through actual doctrinal change. Careers were laid on the line for that one.
Here's a great read on the subject by Maj Culver: http://www.bobrohrer.com/sea_stories/history_of_the_usmc_sniper_school.pdf
Now if we are going to add those who are responsible for getting Sniper Schools started, I going to have to mention a Non-Sniper as being the most influential, and my vote would have to go to Gen/President Eisenhower.
Ike, being concerned about the overall marksmanship in the Army established the Army Marksmanship Unit. The were no established sniper schools until the AMU went to Vietnam and started Sniper Programs, continuing their school until the late 80s when the Infantry Center got theirs up and running.
During this period pretty much everyone sent people to the AMU school to develop cadre for their respective sniper programs, FBI, Secret Service, several civilian LE agencies, National Guard and Reg Army Units and yes, including the Marines, when they first got their schools started they sent prospective instructors to the AMU School.
Even now the SEALs call on the AMU to provide the marksmanship phase of their Sniper School (read the "Red Circle" by Brandon Webb"). For the most part, the AMU dominates the International Sniper Competitions.
So I contend, it was President Eisenhower as the most influential in this country.
Ike, being concerned about the overall marksmanship in the Army established the Army Marksmanship Unit. The were no established sniper schools until the AMU went to Vietnam and started Sniper Programs, continuing their school until the late 80s when the Infantry Center got theirs up and running.
During this period pretty much everyone sent people to the AMU school to develop cadre for their respective sniper programs, FBI, Secret Service, several civilian LE agencies, National Guard and Reg Army Units and yes, including the Marines, when they first got their schools started they sent prospective instructors to the AMU School.
Even now the SEALs call on the AMU to provide the marksmanship phase of their Sniper School (read the "Red Circle" by Brandon Webb"). For the most part, the AMU dominates the International Sniper Competitions.
So I contend, it was President Eisenhower as the most influential in this country.
Doing a little more research into the Battle of King's Mountain, I read a rather different account of the composition of troops on the British side, the battle itself, and the death of Ferguson. Hence, I cannot be at all sure of the facts. The story I relayed earlier is an account from my uncle, but appears on further inspection to be very possibly factually in-accurate. Seems a shame, because it was a neat story....
Also perhaps not a Sniper, I nominate Jim Land anyway.
Neither the most decorated, nor the most prolific; GySgt. Carlos N. Hathcock embodies, in my heart and mind, the core values of a true Sniper. I also nominate the Gunny.
Greg
Neither the most decorated, nor the most prolific; GySgt. Carlos N. Hathcock embodies, in my heart and mind, the core values of a true Sniper. I also nominate the Gunny.
Greg
Last edited:
I think it would "belittle" all those that served, to "make hay", about the most famous Snipers. They all went into the field. They did their 'jobs" They're all HEROS!Just because one made a great shot shouldn't put the others at a "lower rating". They're all "top flight", and should be revered, and respected, for what they do!
Last edited:
This was not at all my intent when I started this thread. Rather, I would say I was seeking to honor all who have answered this calling by recognizing those who have achieved the admittedly ambigious status "Historically Significant."
HRF
I avoided an answer to the original question but I was leaning heavily toward Simo from the get go. I did a bit more research and so many articles say Simo is considered by most to be the greatest sniper in history. Wiith 505 confirmed sniper kills with the m28 and/or 28-30, this is with no scope and in less than 100 days. Many shots were significantly long but I can not find reference to the longest or average. Those that say he did many kills with a sub-machine gun, those are in addition to his bolt action rifle sniper confirmed kills and were at least 200 more. Some sources say a total of 800. It gets hard to argue with those kind of numbers even though one Soviet sniper had 500 confirmed kills but few give him top billing.
To me, the guy that gave him a bit of a challenge for top billing is Carlos, primarily for his ability to stalk and successfully infiltrate and exfiltrate without detection. His marksmanship and field craft were top notch, no doubt. I knew he contributed to later sniper training and development, but see now that his contribution was even more significant. Of course, IMO, many Americans will give Carlos lots of credit but with hundreds of snipers having much higher confirmed kills, I can not be sure of how much my personal bias influenced my selection, which is another reason I hesitated to opine.
There are many more that deserve lots of credit and recognition and a salute to them all.
To me, the guy that gave him a bit of a challenge for top billing is Carlos, primarily for his ability to stalk and successfully infiltrate and exfiltrate without detection. His marksmanship and field craft were top notch, no doubt. I knew he contributed to later sniper training and development, but see now that his contribution was even more significant. Of course, IMO, many Americans will give Carlos lots of credit but with hundreds of snipers having much higher confirmed kills, I can not be sure of how much my personal bias influenced my selection, which is another reason I hesitated to opine.
There are many more that deserve lots of credit and recognition and a salute to them all.
Last edited:
I would Honor "all". My thoughts: They all went into the field. Some "sat", with no shots. They were still "out there", doing the job.That's what they got. Some "had shots", and took them, and made history. They all did their job. I'm sure, that if "any of the others", were given the same scenerio, they would have performed, just as well! I'm just proposing my thoughts. Don't take it the wrong way. I just wanted to state, for those that served, that I feel they were all "Special", and deserve a "piece, of the notoriety", of their "more famous brethren." They're just my thoughts.Now, saying that, Their are some that excelled at there "job", and they should be "honored", for the job they did. It's a fine line. I just didn't want a "man who served", to read this, and feel bad, cause he didn't make the 'record books" . We're proud of all that serve.I'll leave it at that. .
Last edited:
I didn't really know about Simo Haya until this thread. I'm not saying he was in the same league as Hathcock in terms of field craft, etc..., but WOW, did he ever kill a lot of Russians! Given how brutal the Russians were, especially in victory, I'm surprised he wasn't later killed just on principle alone. I'm sure they hated facing the likes of him on the battlefield.
I think that some good about this thread is that some infos in it were news/unknown from some of us_
I think also that the "significance" should not be influenced from the confirmed/unconfirmed k. nr. alone because, if not all, any number could having been under the influence of some convenient propaganda (workin'on advertising,I admit to be quite sensitive about that),or contitioned
as well from other environmental factors on the batte scene_
50 less confirmed for mr.Haja, or 50 more for mr.Hathcock could not change their heavy "significance"_
Must be reminded one episode, not particularly bright , but significant under the "human" point of wiew:
one or the celebrated top shooters mentioned in this thread admitted in his biogr. that, lightly injured, the first impulse to find "his" next shooter vocation has mainly been the need to find whatever way to escape from his former machinegunner role, having learned how the mg squads were a short-life selected target_
It has "exfiltrated" from his war alive,after having destroyed "his"rifle because it must remains "his"rifle only, after leaving behind himself,somewhere, an umbrella skeleton only,without silk_
I think also that the "significance" should not be influenced from the confirmed/unconfirmed k. nr. alone because, if not all, any number could having been under the influence of some convenient propaganda (workin'on advertising,I admit to be quite sensitive about that),or contitioned
as well from other environmental factors on the batte scene_
50 less confirmed for mr.Haja, or 50 more for mr.Hathcock could not change their heavy "significance"_
Must be reminded one episode, not particularly bright , but significant under the "human" point of wiew:
one or the celebrated top shooters mentioned in this thread admitted in his biogr. that, lightly injured, the first impulse to find "his" next shooter vocation has mainly been the need to find whatever way to escape from his former machinegunner role, having learned how the mg squads were a short-life selected target_
It has "exfiltrated" from his war alive,after having destroyed "his"rifle because it must remains "his"rifle only, after leaving behind himself,somewhere, an umbrella skeleton only,without silk_
Last edited:
3 pages and no mention of john plaster....ya know being ultimate and all
This has been a great thread but two thing to consider, with respect to confirmed kills, is political correctness which really changed post WWII and no American sniper has had to defend his home land as most of the Euro's have. If our country was invaded I guarantee the 500 number would be obliterated by a hand full of guys on here, home defense + home terrain = ...... lambs to slaughter
Be that as it may, numbers are still numbers.......
Be that as it may, numbers are still numbers.......
Excellent point. In his biography, he also states how his heart / life was scarred and remained hard the rest of his days. Whether 'only 25' confirmed kills or 500, I would imagine that "job" would leave a pretty significant impression on just about anyone, IMO.
both these posts reinforce partly my point. Our top shooters have had to worry about rules of engagement, war crimes and the like. US snipers are not celebrated as hero's at least by the entire country, unlike Simo and Vassili who were national heros. When you have the backing and support of your piers and countrymen the levity of the job would seem to be less burdensome, I mean hell it was widely reported CK got what he deserved last summer, WTF......
DOCTAYLOR,
I had never seen written or in the news that people felt he 'got what he deserved' - WTF indeed! Liberal white-trash that think along those lines will be among the first to squeal if any of the horrors of war ever make it to our shores. They'll be asking where all the CK's are, and who will defend them? What a crazy world.
I had never seen written or in the news that people felt he 'got what he deserved' - WTF indeed! Liberal white-trash that think along those lines will be among the first to squeal if any of the horrors of war ever make it to our shores. They'll be asking where all the CK's are, and who will defend them? What a crazy world.
I often wonder why people get hung up on one individual soldier and look at them as a super star. They don't accomplish anytHing alone. It's the cohesion with others,that form a network of individuals that make a change in the outcome of a war.
The spotter is the sr. Guy, (that's how we rolled anyway) so his experience is the backbone of the team. He makes the wind calls, well all the calls, and provides the shooter with the information needed to place the projectile on the threat. Without the rear security guys, who is going to make sure the shooter and spotter don't get smoked from behind, or overwhelmed from the front or flank? (we used two 4 man teams with a 9th man serving as a section leader, keeping comma with higher up and keeping both teams in harmony. What about the necessary gear the rear security guys helped carry. Or when the shooter/spotter get eye fatigue or just plain exhausted and switch roles with the other two team members? What about the guy who spells you while you take a shit or eat a fullahful? Now, how far could you engage a target if nobody built the rifle? Will you live to make another shot if the blackhawk pilot never comes to extract you? The list goes on, but I hate typeng on an iPad.
I'm not trying to be a tool, or end an interesting conversation. I'm simply bringing some other thoughts to said conversation.
The spotter is the sr. Guy, (that's how we rolled anyway) so his experience is the backbone of the team. He makes the wind calls, well all the calls, and provides the shooter with the information needed to place the projectile on the threat. Without the rear security guys, who is going to make sure the shooter and spotter don't get smoked from behind, or overwhelmed from the front or flank? (we used two 4 man teams with a 9th man serving as a section leader, keeping comma with higher up and keeping both teams in harmony. What about the necessary gear the rear security guys helped carry. Or when the shooter/spotter get eye fatigue or just plain exhausted and switch roles with the other two team members? What about the guy who spells you while you take a shit or eat a fullahful? Now, how far could you engage a target if nobody built the rifle? Will you live to make another shot if the blackhawk pilot never comes to extract you? The list goes on, but I hate typeng on an iPad.
I'm not trying to be a tool, or end an interesting conversation. I'm simply bringing some other thoughts to said conversation.
This isn't a debate about the collective force, that is an entire different topic. I would concede it is a topic worth mentioning.....Who has the most significant program/training? but again this topic is about one person so lets leave the masses for another tread.
While I see where you are coming from, and respect it, my point was the individual wouldn't be in the position in the first place if it wasn't for their comrades, yet the one person gets the credit. Granted, while some of the snipers mentioned in the thread have a resume filled with propaganda and impossibilities, most of them are straight up bad to the bone warriors, whom I wouldn't volunteer to square up against.
The real fear factor is another point never popular among biographers or moviemakers, intended as the afterward effects of the "sustained fear" as well as the effects of the "immediate"fear: I can personally state that once your sphyncter has unmistakeably teached something to you, the action movies will never be the same_
some individual soldiers can become super star thank to good press and savvy biographers: the cynics would call it now advertising, once was called propaganda,the truth is that people even today need heroes, but dont'like think about crippled heroes,or plainly heroes with the same socks after one month outside_ It's the same reason about the James Dean's or Che Guevara's myths: would them survive partially burned or paralyzed,at their times,nobody today would wear their t-shirts_
thats' the reason behind my thinkin'that mr.Hathcock "don'got what he deserved",and because the last part of his bio.,at my eyes,has ever leaved me bittered_
with respect_
some individual soldiers can become super star thank to good press and savvy biographers: the cynics would call it now advertising, once was called propaganda,the truth is that people even today need heroes, but dont'like think about crippled heroes,or plainly heroes with the same socks after one month outside_ It's the same reason about the James Dean's or Che Guevara's myths: would them survive partially burned or paralyzed,at their times,nobody today would wear their t-shirts_
thats' the reason behind my thinkin'that mr.Hathcock "don'got what he deserved",and because the last part of his bio.,at my eyes,has ever leaved me bittered_
with respect_
Perhaps not germaine, but I am a Marine, and a Veteran of the 1st AmTrac Bn. When Carlos suffered his burns, he was rescuing 1st Trakker AmGrunts. I was en-route home at the time, but the folks he helped were friends of mine. The world has always been somewhat smaller than we usually think it is...
Fear; fear is customary when fire is incoming. It's not the fear that's memorable, it's the realization that fear is not a constructive part of survival that sticks with us. But fear never wanes; it's part of the human condition, given the proper circumstance...
If you don't feel fear, you're not from this planet; it's right down there at the snake brain hormonal level.
Greg
Fear; fear is customary when fire is incoming. It's not the fear that's memorable, it's the realization that fear is not a constructive part of survival that sticks with us. But fear never wanes; it's part of the human condition, given the proper circumstance...
If you don't feel fear, you're not from this planet; it's right down there at the snake brain hormonal level.
Greg
Last edited:
It's interesting the twists and turns this discussion has taken. We've gone from the value of an individual target to total of targets eliminated to include those accomplished with a sub-gun. Not to mention the recent intro of the idea that we need to take into account the group as opposed to the individual.
There is a legitimate reason Gunny Hathcock is the poster boy for the modern sniper. He was the perfect storm. He was an extraordinary long range marksman as demonstrated by his performances at Camp Perry which required an advanced understanding of both ballistics and the influence of environmentals. He was an experienced hunter which undoubtedly contributed to his superb fieldcraft similar to the use of ghillies and jaegers in WWI. He had a mindset that was typical of a highly effective hunter in that he possessed an extreme level of patience and an understanding of his quarry. He was not limited by convention and and recognized the value of heavier cartridges for longer distances. He was instrumental in the development of training, equipment and doctrine for the modern sniper.
Hathcock's fingerprints are all over everything from the .338LM to the reading of "Gates of Fire". No one has had more influence.
There is a legitimate reason Gunny Hathcock is the poster boy for the modern sniper. He was the perfect storm. He was an extraordinary long range marksman as demonstrated by his performances at Camp Perry which required an advanced understanding of both ballistics and the influence of environmentals. He was an experienced hunter which undoubtedly contributed to his superb fieldcraft similar to the use of ghillies and jaegers in WWI. He had a mindset that was typical of a highly effective hunter in that he possessed an extreme level of patience and an understanding of his quarry. He was not limited by convention and and recognized the value of heavier cartridges for longer distances. He was instrumental in the development of training, equipment and doctrine for the modern sniper.
Hathcock's fingerprints are all over everything from the .338LM to the reading of "Gates of Fire". No one has had more influence.
+1 Simo for sure.
And opposed to Adelbert Waldron................oh wait, Waldron was army, guess that don't count even though with 109 confirmed kills he was the most successful US sniper until Chris Kyle.
He did not publish any books or do lectures and refused many requests for interviews, he simply did not want the notoriety for what he did. Notoriety or not, he was an excellent sniper.
I have much more respect for a man like that.
Craig, first let me agree with you as regards the music of our era. There is no question that it still gets plenty of air-time but many of us are still around. What will be interesting is if it survives our approaching demise. Second, I was Army not USMC. Waldron is certainly an interesting character and he accomplished his record in a short period as well as being highly decorated. The OP's question was concerning the "most historically significant" sniper. If it was acknowledged kills than Kyle is the answer but that was not the question. If one looks at the the overall contribution, by one individual, to the evolution of the modern sniper it is hard to not arrive at Hathcock. As regards his high profile, that probably enhanced his influence.
I was just signing on to "put forth" a thought, about the "first guy" that decided that "honor be damned" and he wasn't going to "stand in Ranks" as an easy target, and get himself killed, and decided to "hide" behind a tree, and hit em, from distance. Of course, some "more knowledgable" fellas, are already on it. I guess I'll head back upstairs, and rejoin my wife, who's in a Downton Abbey Marathon. All 3 seasons! Oh joy.
Are we talking classic rock, or Big Band? I was schooled in Benny Goodman, Harry James,Tommy Dorsey, ETC.
Kraig,
Quick correction on SFC Bert Waldron; he had 113 confirmed. Met him once, and had a nice visit with him.
Quick correction on SFC Bert Waldron; he had 113 confirmed. Met him once, and had a nice visit with him.
Thanks KS,
What I like best about him was he was humble, he did his job, saved lives, came home to a normal life without glorifying his sniping and accomplishments. No books, no movies, no brag,
My opinion of a real soldier.
Although, from one of his rewards he received he had it was the reported on the citation his 900 yard shot from a moving boat down the Mekong River with his M21. But you never hear about that on internet sniping sites.
What I like best about him was he was humble, he did his job, saved lives, came home to a normal life without glorifying his sniping and accomplishments. No books, no movies, no brag,
My opinion of a real soldier.
Although, from one of his rewards he received he had it was the reported on the citation his 900 yard shot from a moving boat down the Mekong River with his M21. But you never hear about that on internet sniping sites.
Seems that we must weight the pros & the cons of the media reports about that : without press,books,etc.,even the best known shooters could today be unknown to all, excluding their colleagues and close friends, and being unknown can have as consequence even a shrinking of their "historical significance" (not a shrinking of their really fielded proficiency ,valor,or influence on their close next followers)_
I understand that that's not an easy choice but, as silly exemple, if at today nobody could see the Leonardo da Vinci's works, or read about it, even Leonardo could be only an outstanding but obscure and unknown artist of the past _
I understand that that's not an easy choice but, as silly exemple, if at today nobody could see the Leonardo da Vinci's works, or read about it, even Leonardo could be only an outstanding but obscure and unknown artist of the past _
If I'm being honest, I have to admit that in my infancy as a Sniper, I found his book and videos informative. If everyone else is equally honest, I'll bet I'm not alone.
HRF
Kraig,
Roger that, and the same with Chuck Mawhinney. Nobody had ever heard of either of them until just a few years back when Carlos' history began to be repeated and became better known. Learning that there were at least two snipers with higher confirmed kill counts seemed to come as quite a surprise to many. I've chatted with Mawhinney on several occasions now, as he's become something of a regular at NRA conventions over the past few years. Quiet, unassuming guy, just like Carlos and Waldron were.
Roger that, and the same with Chuck Mawhinney. Nobody had ever heard of either of them until just a few years back when Carlos' history began to be repeated and became better known. Learning that there were at least two snipers with higher confirmed kill counts seemed to come as quite a surprise to many. I've chatted with Mawhinney on several occasions now, as he's become something of a regular at NRA conventions over the past few years. Quiet, unassuming guy, just like Carlos and Waldron were.
From the jungles of Vietnam, to the ruins of Stalingrad, the frozen landscapes of Finland to Iraq and Afghanistan...WWI, WWII...tough question. Several names come to mind and in all fairness, what about the ones who "disappeared" through the pages of history?
Nevertheless, to give somewhat of an answer and to the best of my limited knowledge, I would go with the ones who had/have a particular feel for the "art of sniping". Hunters, often they were but not always; they were/are all 100% thinking men and great shots.
Yes, HayHa absolutely fits the profile, his strategy, tactics and attention to details, added to his shooting skills were out of the norm.
Long story short and for the all the reasons mentioned in the OP and more, there is one name, IMHO, that sticks out; the same name that Chief Petty Officer Chris Kyle recognized as being the best in sniping and he explained it well on many occasions.
Gunnery Sergeant Carlos N. Hathcock, USMC.
You are still the best, Gunny. Semper Fi!
Last edited:
Interesting in that Oswald surveyed the target area, planned his approach, created a hide and waited until a specific high value target presented itself and reduced that target.
If that isn't a sniper, what is it? (not withstanding the fact that he apparently didn't plan for exfil).
Not defending his actions, just sayin'.
Sniping is military in it's concept, whereas Assassination is political.
Sorry, but that's inaccurate. Clausewitz said war is the extension of politics by violent means. That being said, actions taken during war are always political in nature, thus "military sniping" is political in nature - an extent of the will of the nation's politicians who sent the 'military sniper' to his/her field of battle. If you believe military actions are politically neutral, you may find yourself sadly mistaken, IMO.
If we're going to go this route, then it will end up as being nothing more then another "What is the definition of a sniper?" thread. If you can't see that that's what I'm trying to avoid when I posted, then I'm sorry for not clarifying
Now if we are to use the mainstream media logic of every active shooter who fires from an unseen vantage point being a sniper, then the logic can easily be flipped to include every kid who's fired an airsoft gun at a neighborhood cat.
There needs to be a standard, you can speak of Clausewitz, Machiavelli, and Baron Fredrick Von Steuben, or anyone else, all you want, but if your definition of sniper becomes as all encompassing as the media's, then everything is a sniper. If you can piss really far, and hit one spot, guess what? You just qualified.
It's not, and shouldn't be, an all encompassing definition, for the same reason you don't call a police officer a politician, or a mass murderer a "confused individual". There are BIG differences between the two.
Anyways, From...
Assassination - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary
[h=2]Definition of ASSASSINATE[/h]1
: to injure or destroy unexpectedly and treacherously
2
: to murder (a usually prominent person) by sudden or secret attack often for political reasons
From...
Sniper - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary
[h=2]Definition of SNIPE[/h]1
: to shoot at exposed individuals (as of an enemy's forces) from a usually concealed point of vantage
2
: to aim a carping or snide attack
Now you can use all your Lee Harvey Oswald/JFK conspiracy theories you want as to there being some shadowy group behind JFK's murder, but right now Lee Harvey Oswald is either a assassin, or obviously, a murderer.
Now if we are to use the mainstream media logic of every active shooter who fires from an unseen vantage point being a sniper, then the logic can easily be flipped to include every kid who's fired an airsoft gun at a neighborhood cat.
There needs to be a standard, you can speak of Clausewitz, Machiavelli, and Baron Fredrick Von Steuben, or anyone else, all you want, but if your definition of sniper becomes as all encompassing as the media's, then everything is a sniper. If you can piss really far, and hit one spot, guess what? You just qualified.
It's not, and shouldn't be, an all encompassing definition, for the same reason you don't call a police officer a politician, or a mass murderer a "confused individual". There are BIG differences between the two.
Anyways, From...
Assassination - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary
[h=2]Definition of ASSASSINATE[/h]1
: to injure or destroy unexpectedly and treacherously
2
: to murder (a usually prominent person) by sudden or secret attack often for political reasons
From...
Sniper - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary
[h=2]Definition of SNIPE[/h]1
: to shoot at exposed individuals (as of an enemy's forces) from a usually concealed point of vantage
2
: to aim a carping or snide attack
Now you can use all your Lee Harvey Oswald/JFK conspiracy theories you want as to there being some shadowy group behind JFK's murder, but right now Lee Harvey Oswald is either a assassin, or obviously, a murderer.
Billy zane
Topic = Who is the most historically significant SNIPER?
Let use your definitions and list two cases.
Case # 1: Carlos Hathcock leaves the wire and from a concealed point of advantage and assassinates a VC General
Case #2 Lee Harvey Oswald goes to a book depository and from a concealed point of advantage assassinates the President of the United States
Both meets the two definitions you listed above. Both "injured or destroyed unexpectedly and treacherously" Both "shot at exposed individuals from a usually concealed point of vantage".
Ask yourself which most meets the "Who is the most historically significant SNIPER?", Which one of the two changed history the most?
Criminal vs. non-criminal depends on who's side your on. I'm sure the VC/NVA thought Hathcock was a criminal and I'm sure Castro and the Soviets (though I don't think they were involved) thought Oswald was a hero.
I stated in an earlier post on this topic that there are three types of snipers, understanding the difference of the three will give you the idea of your counter sniper tactics.
The Russians used artillery and air strikes to deal with Simo Hayha, (they certainly thought he was a criminal) that would have not been practical in dealing with Oswald.
Throughout history sniper (military or not) were considered criminals when captured. If not captured then their country considers them national heros.
Let use your definitions and list two cases.
Case # 1: Carlos Hathcock leaves the wire and from a concealed point of advantage and assassinates a VC General
Case #2 Lee Harvey Oswald goes to a book depository and from a concealed point of advantage assassinates the President of the United States
Both meets the two definitions you listed above. Both "injured or destroyed unexpectedly and treacherously" Both "shot at exposed individuals from a usually concealed point of vantage".
Ask yourself which most meets the "Who is the most historically significant SNIPER?", Which one of the two changed history the most?
Criminal vs. non-criminal depends on who's side your on. I'm sure the VC/NVA thought Hathcock was a criminal and I'm sure Castro and the Soviets (though I don't think they were involved) thought Oswald was a hero.
I stated in an earlier post on this topic that there are three types of snipers, understanding the difference of the three will give you the idea of your counter sniper tactics.
The Russians used artillery and air strikes to deal with Simo Hayha, (they certainly thought he was a criminal) that would have not been practical in dealing with Oswald.
Throughout history sniper (military or not) were considered criminals when captured. If not captured then their country considers them national heros.
This is interesting, and I alluded to it previously. In the "Most historically significant sniper rifle" thread, people mentioned Oswald's 6.5 M/C rifle pretty early on. As that thread progressed, it seemed that many agreed IT was the most historically significant sniper rifle. When it comes to the shooter himself, though, we are loathe to cast him in the same light as we did the weapon he fired. For some psychological reason, we find it more palatable to accept the historical significance of the inanimate firearm, than we do the man who wielded it. Believe me, I don't LIKE the fact that LHO's actions cause him to be considered in the same conversation as the Hathcocks, Simo's and Kyles, but if we are brutally honest, I'm not sure we can completely discount him. I think Kraig is right, hero or villain depends largely upon which side of historical coin you happen to find yourself upon.
HRF
HRF
Case # 1: An airsofter leaves the wire and from a concealed point of advantage and assassinates a neighborhood cat.
Case #2 An airsofter goes to a book depository and from a concealed point of advantage assassinates the neighborhood cat.
Kraig, throw the term out as much as you want until it has no meaning. Keep in mind that you're arguing for more commonality in the word sniper so there is no describable difference between military and police snipers, versus psychopathic nutcases with scoped rifles.
As for who was the most significant between Oswald and Hathcock, I would still say Hathcock. Just about everything he has done, in regards to training, is still available to this day, being taught, and making future snipers. He has passed on, but is still a force multiplier to this day.
It's all linear...
I'll not comment on the selections, but rather on the fact that we're jumping right over the American Civil War. There are any number (quite a few actually) examples of Union and Confederate officers that fell to single, well placed rounds (no other choice, given the firearms technology of the times) at/in locations that they themselves felt certain of their safety and at ranges, in their considered opinions, well beyond the range of a well trained rifleman and the best firearms and equipment of the day.
There comes to mind at least one Confederate General, that made it a habit to exit his tent at the same time, every morning, in preparation for his personal shaving and grooming regimen. His tent was situated well behind his front lines, set apart on a barren hillside, above his troop encampments. His rigid morning schedule and grooming habits did not go unnoticed. A savy union sharpshooter, literally, took days, maybe even a week, constructing a heavy wooden shooting bench/platform to totally support a large bore, telescopic sighted, heavy barreled target rifle, taking his time to observe his targets routine, do all of the range estimations, elevation and wind calculations (sounds like real math) and then killed him one morning, from over a mile away, while he was doing his (last) early morning arm stretch in front of his tent.
There also comes to mind a Union General who having just smugly declared, from atop his horse, to his attending staff members (who wanted him to dismount and move further back,) that he was too far behind his own lines to be killed by even a skilled rifleman, was killed, forthwith, by a Whitworth slug placed just underneath his eye, which, of course, not only made a liar out of him, but killed him instantly. I think they estimated that the shot was taken in excess of 1,200 plus yards.
Every time something like that happens, the boundary of the sniping (sharpshooter) craft - the equipment, the skill sets, the effective ranges - and the attendant potentials that they bring into the battlefield - are expanded upon. Only a fool would ignore those signs, and toss it up to just luck. Obviously somewhere out there (when that sound wave has finally reached them,) is a person that has a special knowledge and special skill sets and nothing is going to be the same again. Unlike years gone by, instead of being set aside and forgotten (only to have to be relearned,) today, they are constantly being built upon.
Which, in summary, pretty much makes them all significant.
Having written that, I will withdraw from this topic and remain just a quiet man among you all.
I'll not comment on the selections, but rather on the fact that we're jumping right over the American Civil War. There are any number (quite a few actually) examples of Union and Confederate officers that fell to single, well placed rounds (no other choice, given the firearms technology of the times) at/in locations that they themselves felt certain of their safety and at ranges, in their considered opinions, well beyond the range of a well trained rifleman and the best firearms and equipment of the day.
There comes to mind at least one Confederate General, that made it a habit to exit his tent at the same time, every morning, in preparation for his personal shaving and grooming regimen. His tent was situated well behind his front lines, set apart on a barren hillside, above his troop encampments. His rigid morning schedule and grooming habits did not go unnoticed. A savy union sharpshooter, literally, took days, maybe even a week, constructing a heavy wooden shooting bench/platform to totally support a large bore, telescopic sighted, heavy barreled target rifle, taking his time to observe his targets routine, do all of the range estimations, elevation and wind calculations (sounds like real math) and then killed him one morning, from over a mile away, while he was doing his (last) early morning arm stretch in front of his tent.
There also comes to mind a Union General who having just smugly declared, from atop his horse, to his attending staff members (who wanted him to dismount and move further back,) that he was too far behind his own lines to be killed by even a skilled rifleman, was killed, forthwith, by a Whitworth slug placed just underneath his eye, which, of course, not only made a liar out of him, but killed him instantly. I think they estimated that the shot was taken in excess of 1,200 plus yards.
Every time something like that happens, the boundary of the sniping (sharpshooter) craft - the equipment, the skill sets, the effective ranges - and the attendant potentials that they bring into the battlefield - are expanded upon. Only a fool would ignore those signs, and toss it up to just luck. Obviously somewhere out there (when that sound wave has finally reached them,) is a person that has a special knowledge and special skill sets and nothing is going to be the same again. Unlike years gone by, instead of being set aside and forgotten (only to have to be relearned,) today, they are constantly being built upon.
Which, in summary, pretty much makes them all significant.
Having written that, I will withdraw from this topic and remain just a quiet man among you all.
I said no such thing, there are differences between military/LE and criminal snipers. Criminal Snipers do exist even if our egos fail to let us admit it. As far as the OP's topic, " historically significant SNIPER" then that would be Oswald, as the killing of an American President would change history. That would include criminal snipers who led to the development of LE Counter Sniper programs.
There is the ego-harmonious sniper: Those who are essentially an adjusted, stable individual aware of the moral implications of his acts. Military snipers, urban guerrillas, and even contract killers theoretically fit that category.
There are ego-nonharmonious sniper: Those ho have some kind of emotional conflict amplifying his fears and anxieties into disproportionate magnitude because of his inability to reconcile his problems. That would cover Lee Harvey Oswald.
Then there are psychotic snipers: They suffer a severe personality maladjustment and who may have a distorted relationship with others and the world around them. These would be rampage killers applying the sniper tactics.
Failing to understand the differences would greatly hamper the ability of the counter-sniper.
Another way to look at it. Prior to 1960 criminal sniping was a rarity, seldom reported in the news. The next 15 years (60-70's) criminal sniper increased dramatically. We had Whitman in the Texas Towers, there is Essex and the Howard Johnson's Motor Lodge in New Orleans, and hundreds of other lesser know incidents.
What do these individuals have to do to effect the sniper community? Prior to that period there wasn't much in the way of LE Counter/Sniping programs. These criminal sniper acts brought out the need for a method to counter act the crimes.
The only major contributor who was set up at the time to assist the Civilian Counter Sniper Programs was the Army Marksmanship Unit. In the mid 70s they started their sniper school, which was more of an sniper instructor program, as to get into the school you had to convince the AMU that you would take what you learned back to your respective state, department, unit, and start a sniper program.
The FBI, ATF, the Secret Service, the Marine Corp and several state and local civilian police departments sent future instructors to the AMU course and they did go back to their respecting dept, unit, state and start their own programs. Bringing us to where we are today. Sniper/Counter Sniper Schools of all sorts.
Without the criminal sniper there would be no need for Civ. LE counter-snipers.
As I said, its our ego who fail to recognize the fact that there are criminal snipers. Many say that only military school trained snipers are snipers. Many say Civ. LE counter/snipers aren't really snipers.
But using your own definitions they are, as are the criminal sniper, saying they aren't is just fooling yourself.
You have to understand the criminal sniper to have an effective counter-sniper program, just as military snipers are trained to seek out enemy military snipers.
Personally I wished they never came up with the word sniper, but they did, and they defined it. They glorified it, or for your side, the other side thinks you're just a criminal as you thing the enemy's snipers are criminals.
But we glorified it just the same. The word "sniper" has become so glorified its become a selling point.............like tactical. Go to the hunting section, see how many post you find about hunting with tactical rifles.
I'm a school trained sniper, I was a LE sniper, I've taught sniper schools for the military and LE, but none of my rifles are sniper rifles, I don't use them for sniping. I have hunting rifles, I have target rifles, I have military surplus rifles, but no sniper rifles. I have a rifle I used in LE, but its a prairie dog rifle now. I guess the closest I have would by my M1903A4, which is built to compete in the CMP GSM Vintage Sniper Rifle Matches, but in reality its a target rifle.
But if I was to clime a tower with any of my rifles and start shooting people, which ever rifle I used would be a sniper rifle and I would be a criminal sniper.
But go ahead, deny that there is no such thing as criminal sniper makes no never mind to me.
HRFUNK,
...I'm fascinated about the "sides of the historical coin": during WWI, Germans were quite interested in sniping Italians,as well as Italian generals were enthusiast about launching their troops against the German MG's_ You can understand how the average italian soldier could be seriously preoccuped about both the initiatives above, so preoccuped that our MP, named Carabinieri, beside the dangerous primary duty of escorting the food supplies,was employed from the high brass to execute the most preoccupied among the italian soldiers,_
Knowing the proficiency of German snipers, and the intensity of their attention on some particular italian trench passage points, you can understand how good-willingly those soldiers were proud to take some among the more enthusiast high officers on inspection tour along exactly "these" zones,inviting them to scan around with binos_
of course,thank to a superior instruction level,the next surviving high officers soon learned to stay utterly away from the front line and from binos_
for this reason, I think, at today the glorious hat of one of our brightest & enthusiast mountain troops generals, Gen.Cantore, is conserved as relic of his immature departure_
as ever, some scharfschutze was suspected, even if nobody today would admit that the hole in his hat isn't from a 8mm.german bullet: it's a tinier hole, like if produced from a 6,5mm. Carcano_
(that's not a yoke : it's the third side of the coin)
...I'm fascinated about the "sides of the historical coin": during WWI, Germans were quite interested in sniping Italians,as well as Italian generals were enthusiast about launching their troops against the German MG's_ You can understand how the average italian soldier could be seriously preoccuped about both the initiatives above, so preoccuped that our MP, named Carabinieri, beside the dangerous primary duty of escorting the food supplies,was employed from the high brass to execute the most preoccupied among the italian soldiers,_
Knowing the proficiency of German snipers, and the intensity of their attention on some particular italian trench passage points, you can understand how good-willingly those soldiers were proud to take some among the more enthusiast high officers on inspection tour along exactly "these" zones,inviting them to scan around with binos_
of course,thank to a superior instruction level,the next surviving high officers soon learned to stay utterly away from the front line and from binos_
for this reason, I think, at today the glorious hat of one of our brightest & enthusiast mountain troops generals, Gen.Cantore, is conserved as relic of his immature departure_
as ever, some scharfschutze was suspected, even if nobody today would admit that the hole in his hat isn't from a 8mm.german bullet: it's a tinier hole, like if produced from a 6,5mm. Carcano_
(that's not a yoke : it's the third side of the coin)
Last edited:
Similar threads
Rifle Competition Events Major Land Sniper’s Cup
