Finally, an answer to why you need an AR15 with 30 round magazines

[Daryl Hunt]

The mostly do more or less volley fire. Most of those people, hell most of my troops were not expert. A lot of them did not even like going to the range even when qualifying. There are more that qualify "Marksman" than "Sharpshooter" or "Expert". Not all experts become snipers or even try to. I never did. It is just something I did and do reasonably proficiently. I had Sergeants under me that competed in the tournaments and were a lot better than me and were not snipers either. I never had a sniper under my command, even back near the beginning in my Armored Reconnaissance Scout Platoon Ldr days. Can't say for sure I ever even met one.

Ah.. Sergeants under you. 2nd Lieutenant White. Got it.

So you actually don't believe in 1 shot 1 kill and you know it's a crock of shit but it's the standard you want civilians defending their homes from looters and rioters to use. You want to restrict their options to "exactly enough" for some hypothetical scenario that you can't define but you know doesn't take 30 rounds of ammo if they can outshoot every infantry platoon in the history of the Army.

I don't believe shit you say about your service. A person couldn't be as ignorant as you are and have served doing what you say you've done.

You can always tell the blowhards from the actual shooters, can't you. I shoot a LOT. I am real good. When I was younger I used to compete in the 3 gun matches and always did a credible job. But, in a real shooting situation the world changes. Shit happens, magazines fail, ammunition fails to fire, brass fails to eject, we practice so that when those things happen we react quickly, and properly. And. You miss. I don't miss often, but I still DO miss. That's why I have 20 and 30 round mags.


Not one of these "experts" has ever handled a gun. They don't know even the basics.

Yah, you never know when you are going to get an Elk armed with a Bazooka cornered in a Warehouse and you may need more than 15 rounds to bring him down.

Sounds like your style of hunting all right.

Sorry to break it to you but I don't feel the need for more than 15 rounds. When I hunt, more than two (and only if I wound with the first) is necessary. I like a little meat left on the bone.

Yeah, you see, that's the difference between you and me. When I hunt, I won't take the shot if I can't guarantee a one shot kill.

That's the difference between a hunter, and a novice.

I never shot when I didn't believe that I had a 100% chance of success. But there is nothing in life that is 100% successful other than ones own death. I have wounded one animal once in my life and tracked it about a mile and took that second shot. You would have let the animal go off and die a slow death and everything would have been wasted. Until you do track an animal you shot a mile to finish the job you will never understand and you are still a Rexall Ranger and always will be.

 

[Levant]

my comment was specific that most training is for one shot one kill,,,doesnt mean everybody succeeds at it,,,

Other than a sniper, who doesn't achieve that, either, that would be stupid training. The training must match reality and possibility. To train for impossibility means that you don't have a plan when reality hits. They don't train for 1 shot 1 kill. It would just be too fucking stupid. They would have to train to take out the target. That means quick follow-on shots. Even in self-defense, it's double-tap or, even better, two to the chest, one to the head.

No one trains for 1 shot 1 kill. The assumption must not be that your shot killed your enemy; it must be that your shot did not kill your enemy and that you need a follow-up shot... and the assumption stays the same until your enemy is actually killed.

 

[Levant]

I never shot when I didn't believe that I had a 100% chance of success. But there is nothing in life that is 100% successful other than ones own death. I have wounded one animal once in my life and tracked it about a mile and took that second shot. You would have let the animal go off and die a slow death and everything would have been wasted. Until you do track an animal you shot a mile to finish the job you will never understand and you are still a Rexall Ranger and always will be.

Ahhhhh .. I was going to argue but then I see that you mentioned an animal that can't shoot back at you. It would be cruel to shoot an animal that you didn't expect to kill with your one shot. It would be idiotic to wait for that kind of surety when the animal you are hunting is shooting back at you.

 

[Levant]

No one is gonna murder you, kid.

Paranoia must be a bitch.

That's what this guy thought when he got up on June 2, 2020. He was wrong.

 

[Levant]

doesnt change how you train,,,

You're smarter than that. It absolutely changes how you train - unless you're training to act in the next Rambo movie.

 

[Levant]

Sorry to break it to you but I don't feel the need for more than 15 rounds. When I hunt, more than two (and only if I wound with the first) is necessary. I like a little meat left on the bone.

Almost all states, perhaps actually all of them, have laws limiting magazines to 4 or 5 rounds for hunting. And that's plenty because, as has been said, deer don't shoot back. This is not a hunting thread; it's a surviving thread.

 

[Levant]

And then the enemy starts arming and operating the same way. You are back to the 300 rounds per kill rate. And shooting from hidden positions. Who's to say it won't be you that gets that golden BB. You Rexall Rangers all believe it will only be the way your fantasy says it will be.

You're full of shit. I don't care if you have combat experience - which you have not claimed - and I don't care how much you know about it but you're full of shit. There's no 1 shot 1 kill expectation in combat. It's your fantasy if you think you can get one-shot-one-kill in combat except by coincidence. You're not Rambo and you're not Schwarzenegger, and the bullets the enemy is firing back can actually kill you.

 

[Levant]

In my 20s, if I have the proper setup longgun and am shooting from a secure position, I only need one. I pick my shot. I wait. Sooner or later, you are going to cooperate and go stationary or walk in a straight line. So from 800 to 1000 yds, the kill shot happens. Just in case, I fire a second round to reach the next spot before the sound of the first round reaches the target. I am not shooting twice in case of a miss. I am shooting twice in case of a wound on the first round. Chances are, the first one will get the job done as it required and received the most planning and execution. Before the sound reaches the target area, I am moving to a new location or going dark whether I was successful or not. There is always another day.

The longer the shot the fewer rounds you can shoot because the fraction of a second after the sound reaches the target area, your general position is known.

Yes, I don have the training but I failed the Phsyc test. Everyone believes they can be a sniper but it takes a very special person to become one and not put his next round in the roof of you own mouth or become an indiscriminate killer. Snipers are a very special breed.

There's more fucking bullshit. As already stated, the snipers average 2.7 rounds per kill. Unless you're claiming to be the best sniper in the Army, you will not average 1 shot 1 kill even if you get it occasionally. But, still, that's proper gun, secure position, careful aim, and in today's Army a handheld computer, you might get 1 shot 1 kill. No one is getting that when the enemy shoots back.

Anyone who says that they are is just lying and if they're lying about that then everything they claim about their military service is presumed to be a lie.

 

[Levant]

Number 1. You are an utter idiot. You do not know, because you have never been in and been trained. Tactic you are taught are to be adapted in the field, based on other things you have never been trained on. Number 2. Never said I was smarter than everybody else. Other people have had the same training, except for you of course. Number 3. Most Officers do not be come Generals in an average 20 year career, even if they commissioned in from West Point. Most do not eve stay or get to stay for20 years. A huge number stay until they are 1st Lt or CPT and get out. It ain't for everybody. Taught a lot of tactics, but not infantry tactics as I was an Armor Officer after Armored Cavalry Enlisted ranks, after being selected for OCS, never Infantry, although the tactics in OCS were infantry tactics. For more info you may contact Fort Benning, or just live in ignorance, which is probably more your way.
Now all your little crapola started because you think shooting people with an AR-15 is the way to go for riot situations, and apparently on 10 meter unarmed targets. It ain't. You are one of the very few that think it is. You are a symptom of what is wrong with this country. I gave you a day to suffer your prattle of idiocy, but about all your going to get.

I understand promotion timetables. But you did admit that you actually do know nothing about infantry accept what you learned in OCS. More schooling.. more book learning. Still no actual knowledge about shit. And yet you now claim to be an Armor Officer after previously claiming you spent your career teaching on the firing range.

All this started because you said no one needs 30 rounds because there are not 30 targets and that you were taught, and taught in the military, 1 shot 1 kill. You're still fucking lying. You were not taught 1 shot 1 kill in the military and you didn't teach it in the military. Because you lied about that, any claim you make about military service must be presumed to be, at a minimum, a great exaggeration, and likely a flat out lie.

I never claimed that an AR is THE way to go for riot situations. Yet another lie you're telling. But I have seen actual service members, actual national guard, actual police, and most are carrying AR-based platforms. Since full-auto spraying a crowd doesn't make sense, even if they're shooting M-16 or M4, military and law-enforcement would be shooting in semi-auto mode so, really, no difference between them and an AR-15. So, dumbfuck, the Army and the National Guard DO think that the AR is the right weapon for a riot... So, once again, you know more than all the generals and all of the infantry. Why aren't you a general running some infantry tactics thinktank?

As for my own choice, I have an AR, a shotgun, and multiple handguns readily available. The handgun gets into play the quickest so it's probably the starting weapon if I'm taken by surprise. Other weapons come into play more slowly and depend on the scenario. So, no, I didn't claim what you lied to say I claimed but a bunch of generals smarter than you seem to think you're an idiot, too, because they think an AR is a great platform for riots.

 

[White 6]

Number 1. You are an utter idiot. You do not know, because you have never been in and been trained. Tactic you are taught are to be adapted in the field, based on other things you have never been trained on. Number 2. Never said I was smarter than everybody else. Other people have had the same training, except for you of course. Number 3. Most Officers do not be come Generals in an average 20 year career, even if they commissioned in from West Point. Most do not eve stay or get to stay for20 years. A huge number stay until they are 1st Lt or CPT and get out. It ain't for everybody. Taught a lot of tactics, but not infantry tactics as I was an Armor Officer after Armored Cavalry Enlisted ranks, after being selected for OCS, never Infantry, although the tactics in OCS were infantry tactics. For more info you may contact Fort Benning, or just live in ignorance, which is probably more your way.
Now all your little crapola started because you think shooting people with an AR-15 is the way to go for riot situations, and apparently on 10 meter unarmed targets. It ain't. You are one of the very few that think it is. You are a symptom of what is wrong with this country. I gave you a day to suffer your prattle of idiocy, but about all your going to get.

I understand promotion timetables. But you did admit that you actually do know nothing about infantry accept what you learned in OCS. More schooling.. more book learning. Still no actual knowledge about shit. And yet you now claim to be an Armor Officer after previously claiming you spent your career teaching on the firing range.

All this started because you said no one needs 30 rounds because there are not 30 targets and that you were taught, and taught in the military, 1 shot 1 kill. You're still fucking lying. You were not taught 1 shot 1 kill in the military and you didn't teach it in the military. Because you lied about that, any claim you make about military service must be presumed to be, at a minimum, a great exaggeration, and likely a flat out lie.

I never claimed that an AR is THE way to go for riot situations. Yet another lie you're telling. But I have seen actual service members, actual national guard, actual police, and most are carrying AR-based platforms. Since full-auto spraying a crowd doesn't make sense, even if they're shooting M-16 or M4, military and law-enforcement would be shooting in semi-auto mode so, really, no difference between them and an AR-15. So, dumbfuck, the Army and the National Guard DO think that the AR is the right weapon for a riot... So, once again, you know more than all the generals and all of the infantry. Why aren't you a general running some infantry tactics thinktank?

As for my own choice, I have an AR, a shotgun, and multiple handguns readily available. The handgun gets into play the quickest so it's probably the starting weapon if I'm taken by surprise. Other weapons come into play more slowly and depend on the scenario. So, no, I didn't claim what you lied to say I claimed but a bunch of generals smarter than you seem to think you're an idiot, too, because they think an AR is a great platform for riots.

You understand little or nothing. IGNORE

 

[Daryl Hunt]

my comment was specific that most training is for one shot one kill,,,doesnt mean everybody succeeds at it,,,

Other than a sniper, who doesn't achieve that, either, that would be stupid training. The training must match reality and possibility. To train for impossibility means that you don't have a plan when reality hits. They don't train for 1 shot 1 kill. It would just be too fucking stupid. They would have to train to take out the target. That means quick follow-on shots. Even in self-defense, it's double-tap or, even better, two to the chest, one to the head.

No one trains for 1 shot 1 kill. The assumption must not be that your shot killed your enemy; it must be that your shot did not kill your enemy and that you need a follow-up shot... and the assumption stays the same until your enemy is actually killed.

Wrong. When dealing with a long shot, you had better damn well train for a 1 shot 1 kill. It's probably all you are going to get. You think like a mortal. Mortals can go out to 660 yds and sometimes out to 800 yds. But when you go out past 880 yds it's a whole new world and it gets very, very complicated. When you fire, two things happen on your end. One, you have the muzzle flash. 2, you have the sonic boom and bang. Both, if seen or heard gives away your position. So you try and minimize those two. But on a long shot, you can't minimize them at all. Only short shots where you use a less powerful subsonic round. But the further out the shot is going to be the more power you are going to need hence the bigger boom, bang and muzzle flash. Smokeless powder isn't smokeless either. If the shot is needed at 1000yds, you aren't going to get 2 shots. You are going to get one. You fire, break it down, move and let your spotter from another location monitor the hit. If something happens on your end, the spotter becomes the hitter. If it all falls apart, you and your spotter pack it in. It's going to be a new day. Snipers train for 1 shot, 1 kill whether it's always possible or not.

Normally, a sniper is only out a few hundred yards, not past 1000 like the movies say. A normal long shot would be 600 yds. The shooter would be using a heavy powder charge with a heavy grained bullet. More like an Elk Load rather than a Deer load. I won't go into the ballistics but he's capable of hitting a 5 inch target 100 out of 100 times. If he is shooting center mass, he is going to hit within that 5 inch circle and blow a hole the size of Rhode Island on the other side. If he is doing a head shot, he's going to blow off half the skull. The longer the shot, the more likely a center mass shot will be taken.

And to a sniper, what the hell is a double tap? It doesn't exist. Each shot is deliberate and planned and not willy nilly like the second part of the double tap. I learned double tap but it was on a sidearm, not a rifle. And there is a reason for the Double Tap. Can you tell me what that is? I don't believe it's covered in any of the Movies you have been watching.

 

[westwall]

my comment was specific that most training is for one shot one kill,,,doesnt mean everybody succeeds at it,,,

Other than a sniper, who doesn't achieve that, either, that would be stupid training. The training must match reality and possibility. To train for impossibility means that you don't have a plan when reality hits. They don't train for 1 shot 1 kill. It would just be too fucking stupid. They would have to train to take out the target. That means quick follow-on shots. Even in self-defense, it's double-tap or, even better, two to the chest, one to the head.

No one trains for 1 shot 1 kill. The assumption must not be that your shot killed your enemy; it must be that your shot did not kill your enemy and that you need a follow-up shot... and the assumption stays the same until your enemy is actually killed.

Wrong. When dealing with a long shot, you had better damn well train for a 1 shot 1 kill. It's probably all you are going to get. You think like a mortal. Mortals can go out to 660 yds and sometimes out to 800 yds. But when you go out past 880 yds it's a whole new world and it gets very, very complicated. When you fire, two things happen on your end. One, you have the muzzle flash. 2, you have the sonic boom and bang. Both, if seen or heard gives away your position. So you try and minimize those two. But on a long shot, you can't minimize them at all. Only short shots where you use a less powerful subsonic round. But the further out the shot is going to be the more power you are going to need hence the bigger boom, bang and muzzle flash. Smokeless powder isn't smokeless either. If the shot is needed at 1000yds, you aren't going to get 2 shots. You are going to get one. You fire, break it down, move and let your spotter from another location monitor the hit. If something happens on your end, the spotter becomes the hitter. If it all falls apart, you and your spotter pack it in. It's going to be a new day. Snipers train for 1 shot, 1 kill whether it's always possible or not.

Normally, a sniper is only out a few hundred yards, not past 1000 like the movies say. A normal long shot would be 600 yds. The shooter would be using a heavy powder charge with a heavy grained bullet. More like an Elk Load rather than a Deer load. I won't go into the ballistics but he's capable of hitting a 5 inch target 100 out of 100 times. If he is shooting center mass, he is going to hit within that 5 inch circle and blow a hole the size of Rhode Island on the other side. If he is doing a head shot, he's going to blow off half the skull. The longer the shot, the more likely a center mass shot will be taken.

And to a sniper, what the hell is a double tap? It doesn't exist. Each shot is deliberate and planned and not willy nilly like the second part of the double tap. I learned double tap but it was on a sidearm, not a rifle. And there is a reason for the Double Tap. Can you tell me what that is? I don't believe it's covered in any of the Movies you have been watching.

Wow, I don't know how you managed to shove so much shit into one post, but you managed it.

The word you are searching for is firing signature. At ranges beyond 400 yards no one will see a 7.62 NATO being fired unless they happen to be looking right at it with binocs when the shot is taken. If you add a suppressor (which most snipers do) then your firing signature is pretty much nil past 75 yards.

A sniper uses the same loading IN ALL cases. Where do you come up with this bullshit? The only people who use sub sonic ammo are small bore competition shooters, and assassins.

Regular snipers use one type of ammo for shooting at people. They may have other specialized ammunition for material targets, but anti personnel ammunition is going to be a match loading. Period. The other BS you spewed is B movie fantasy nonsense.

 

[progressive hunter]

That's hunting philosophy. No military unit or law enforcement agency has any such belief. It's not possible.

how so???

Like I just told White 6 - you can read it for yourself. If it was so simple then why isn't it happening in the Army infantry? Did you just forget to write them a suggestion? Was the Miami shootout 1 shot 1 kill? Was the video I posted earlier in t his thread 1 shot 1 kill where the police were in a shootout not 20 feet from two bad guys, dozens of shots fired between them all, and not a single person hit... 1 shot 1 kill is a TV movie fantasy.

my comment was specific that most training is for one shot one kill,,,doesnt mean everybody succeeds at it,,,

And as the real statistics show, even the best in the world need 2.7 shots to do it.

doesnt change how you train,,,

Actually, it does. Two CHP officers were murdered way back in the 1960's because their training was flawed.

are you saying they intentionally trained to miss???

and you had to go back 60 yrs for your example I see,,

 

[progressive hunter]

doesnt change how you train,,,

You're smarter than that. It absolutely changes how you train - unless you're training to act in the next Rambo movie.

I train to make ever shot a kill shot,,,

 

[westwall]

That's hunting philosophy. No military unit or law enforcement agency has any such belief. It's not possible.

how so???

Like I just told White 6 - you can read it for yourself. If it was so simple then why isn't it happening in the Army infantry? Did you just forget to write them a suggestion? Was the Miami shootout 1 shot 1 kill? Was the video I posted earlier in t his thread 1 shot 1 kill where the police were in a shootout not 20 feet from two bad guys, dozens of shots fired between them all, and not a single person hit... 1 shot 1 kill is a TV movie fantasy.

my comment was specific that most training is for one shot one kill,,,doesnt mean everybody succeeds at it,,,

And as the real statistics show, even the best in the world need 2.7 shots to do it.

doesnt change how you train,,,

Actually, it does. Two CHP officers were murdered way back in the 1960's because their training was flawed.

are you saying they intentionally trained to miss???

and you had to go back 60 yrs for your example I see,,

The CHP officers were placing their expended brass in their pouches, just like they were trained to do. The bad guy walked up to them and shot them.

It's a very old adage, but an accurate on, "you fight, the way you train".

 

[westwall]

doesnt change how you train,,,

You're smarter than that. It absolutely changes how you train - unless you're training to act in the next Rambo movie.

I train to make ever shot a kill shot,,,

In hunting that is the way it should be. What if the only target you can see is a foot, or a part of a leg, because the rest is behind cover?

 

[progressive hunter]

That's hunting philosophy. No military unit or law enforcement agency has any such belief. It's not possible.

how so???

Like I just told White 6 - you can read it for yourself. If it was so simple then why isn't it happening in the Army infantry? Did you just forget to write them a suggestion? Was the Miami shootout 1 shot 1 kill? Was the video I posted earlier in t his thread 1 shot 1 kill where the police were in a shootout not 20 feet from two bad guys, dozens of shots fired between them all, and not a single person hit... 1 shot 1 kill is a TV movie fantasy.

my comment was specific that most training is for one shot one kill,,,doesnt mean everybody succeeds at it,,,

And as the real statistics show, even the best in the world need 2.7 shots to do it.

doesnt change how you train,,,

Actually, it does. Two CHP officers were murdered way back in the 1960's because their training was flawed.

are you saying they intentionally trained to miss???

and you had to go back 60 yrs for your example I see,,

The CHP officers were placing their expended brass in their pouches, just like they were trained to do. The bad guy walked up to them and shot them.

It's a very old adage, but an accurate on, "you fight, the way you train".

neither debunks the fact you train to put the bullet where you intend,
you dont train to miss,,,

 

[westwall]

That's hunting philosophy. No military unit or law enforcement agency has any such belief. It's not possible.

how so???

Like I just told White 6 - you can read it for yourself. If it was so simple then why isn't it happening in the Army infantry? Did you just forget to write them a suggestion? Was the Miami shootout 1 shot 1 kill? Was the video I posted earlier in t his thread 1 shot 1 kill where the police were in a shootout not 20 feet from two bad guys, dozens of shots fired between them all, and not a single person hit... 1 shot 1 kill is a TV movie fantasy.

my comment was specific that most training is for one shot one kill,,,doesnt mean everybody succeeds at it,,,

And as the real statistics show, even the best in the world need 2.7 shots to do it.

doesnt change how you train,,,

Actually, it does. Two CHP officers were murdered way back in the 1960's because their training was flawed.

are you saying they intentionally trained to miss???

and you had to go back 60 yrs for your example I see,,

The CHP officers were placing their expended brass in their pouches, just like they were trained to do. The bad guy walked up to them and shot them.

It's a very old adage, but an accurate on, "you fight, the way you train".

neither debunks the fact you train to put the bullet where you intend,
you dont train to miss,,,

Yes, you train to hit your target. But to make the claim that you train for one hit one kill is silly.

You train to be as accurate as you can. But that is in a non combat situation. Far better would be to claim you train to be as accurate as possible.

In the real world people don't just stop like they do in the movies.

 

[Marion Morrison]

Number 1. You are an utter idiot. You do not know, because you have never been in and been trained. Tactic you are taught are to be adapted in the field, based on other things you have never been trained on. Number 2. Never said I was smarter than everybody else. Other people have had the same training, except for you of course. Number 3. Most Officers do not be come Generals in an average 20 year career, even if they commissioned in from West Point. Most do not eve stay or get to stay for20 years. A huge number stay until they are 1st Lt or CPT and get out. It ain't for everybody. Taught a lot of tactics, but not infantry tactics as I was an Armor Officer after Armored Cavalry Enlisted ranks, after being selected for OCS, never Infantry, although the tactics in OCS were infantry tactics. For more info you may contact Fort Benning, or just live in ignorance, which is probably more your way.
Now all your little crapola started because you think shooting people with an AR-15 is the way to go for riot situations, and apparently on 10 meter unarmed targets. It ain't. You are one of the very few that think it is. You are a symptom of what is wrong with this country. I gave you a day to suffer your prattle of idiocy, but about all your going to get.

I understand promotion timetables. But you did admit that you actually do know nothing about infantry accept what you learned in OCS. More schooling.. more book learning. Still no actual knowledge about shit. And yet you now claim to be an Armor Officer after previously claiming you spent your career teaching on the firing range.

All this started because you said no one needs 30 rounds because there are not 30 targets and that you were taught, and taught in the military, 1 shot 1 kill. You're still fucking lying. You were not taught 1 shot 1 kill in the military and you didn't teach it in the military. Because you lied about that, any claim you make about military service must be presumed to be, at a minimum, a great exaggeration, and likely a flat out lie.

I never claimed that an AR is THE way to go for riot situations. Yet another lie you're telling. But I have seen actual service members, actual national guard, actual police, and most are carrying AR-based platforms. Since full-auto spraying a crowd doesn't make sense, even if they're shooting M-16 or M4, military and law-enforcement would be shooting in semi-auto mode so, really, no difference between them and an AR-15. So, dumbfuck, the Army and the National Guard DO think that the AR is the right weapon for a riot... So, once again, you know more than all the generals and all of the infantry. Why aren't you a general running some infantry tactics thinktank?

As for my own choice, I have an AR, a shotgun, and multiple handguns readily available. The handgun gets into play the quickest so it's probably the starting weapon if I'm taken by surprise. Other weapons come into play more slowly and depend on the scenario. So, no, I didn't claim what you lied to say I claimed but a bunch of generals smarter than you seem to think you're an idiot, too, because they think an AR is a great platform for riots.

You understand little or nothing. IGNORE

This guy disagrees:

 

[White 6]

That's hunting philosophy. No military unit or law enforcement agency has any such belief. It's not possible.

how so???

Like I just told White 6 - you can read it for yourself. If it was so simple then why isn't it happening in the Army infantry? Did you just forget to write them a suggestion? Was the Miami shootout 1 shot 1 kill? Was the video I posted earlier in t his thread 1 shot 1 kill where the police were in a shootout not 20 feet from two bad guys, dozens of shots fired between them all, and not a single person hit... 1 shot 1 kill is a TV movie fantasy.

my comment was specific that most training is for one shot one kill,,,doesnt mean everybody succeeds at it,,,

And as the real statistics show, even the best in the world need 2.7 shots to do it.

doesnt change how you train,,,

Actually, it does. Two CHP officers were murdered way back in the 1960's because their training was flawed.

are you saying they intentionally trained to miss???

and you had to go back 60 yrs for your example I see,,

The CHP officers were placing their expended brass in their pouches, just like they were trained to do. The bad guy walked up to them and shot them.

It's a very old adage, but an accurate on, "you fight, the way you train".

neither debunks the fact you train to put the bullet where you intend,
you dont train to miss,,,

Yes, you train to hit your target. But to make the claim that you train for one hit one kill is silly.

You train to be as accurate as you can. But that is in a non combat situation. Far better would be to claim you train to be as accurate as possible.

In the real world people don't just stop like they do in the movies.

It is well understood, the difference between paper targets and human being targets, in general, military combat and sports hunting. Are you sure you are remembering the thread is about protesters, random rioters looting for themselves during the opportunity of chaos? As pointed out, all the possible targets shown in the picture for the thread were within 10 meters, not to mention unarmed. Is there not any possibility in your mind at all, that the AR-15 for riot control supporters, could be a little out in the weeds, so to speak?