From: viking@iastate.edu (Dan Sorenson)
Subject: Re: Premeditated Murder - Part 2 (was Re: No charges filed in SWAT killing
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames IA
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 23:00:20 GMT

In <rxgnvq_@dixie.com> jgd@dixie.com (John De Armond) writes:

>viking@iastate.edu (Dan Sorenson) writes:

>>	I think you meant "intentionally" in that first sentence.  In any
>>event, what's the cyclic rate of the MP5 versus the M3?  I can get a one-
>>shot from a full-auto M3, but it's a slow firer and I really have to try
>>to get it.  If that MP5 has a faster cyclic rate, what are the odds of a
>>one-shot to the neck from this weapon on full auto?

>Uh gee, dan, I thought one shot from a weapon "on full auto" was the same
>as the first shot from, say, a bolt action gun.  I believe muzzle climb
>becomes a factor only on subsequent rounds.

	So where are the subsequent rounds?  If they're still in the
magazine, and the weapon was on automatic when fired, that points to
either Tony having the fastest trigger finger around, a possible weapon
malfunction, or a semi-auto shot then a quick switch to automatic by the
operator.  That there was only one round fired from a 600rpm weapon does
strike me as a bit odd if the weapon were truly in automatic mode at the
time of firing.  I also have to wonder why Tony stopped firing?  Is he
so good he can recognize a stopping shot and let off the trigger fast
enough to avoid that second shot?  That's 1/10th of a second for an ID
on shot placement and the decision not to fire again.  If the selector
was on semi-auto, then switched to automatic after that first shot, all
this is moot.

>  The first, aimed round from
>an MP5 would be expected to be as accurate as any first round fired from
>a similar dimentioned weapon.  Who knows, then again I could be wrong.
>After all, I've only fired a few hundred rounds through such a critter
>so I'm by no means as qualified as Dan, our armchair expert and resident
>police appologist.

	Cheap shot, John.  I don't apologize for being willing to examine
evidence and post postulations, questions, and ambiguities.  I also don't
get uptight if I'm wrong or have misinterpreted something, and I damned
sure don't keep defending myself when I've recognized my error in the
hopes that my cries will somehow overcome the facts.  That's an HCI tactic,
not one of intelligent adults discussing possibilities and theories on
the net.  I've fired a few hundred rounds through the M3, and I doubt that
if the cyclic rate were doubled I could get off less than a two-shot
burst.  That makes for a lot of questions on this case if we accept that
the shot was made on full-auto.  If it wasn't, why the switch to full-auto
from semi-auto?  Was it done before or after he recognized a stopping shot?
Did he aim for the neck, or just for center mass?  Since you've fired a
few hundred rounds through such a critter, what does it take for an
automatic burst of one round at a 4" x 3" moving target at, say, ten feet?

<Dan Sorenson, DoD #1066 |"There'll be angels on Ariels in leather>
<z1dan@exnet.iastate.edu | and chrome, Ridin' down from heaven    >
<viking@iastate.edu      | just to carry me home." -- R. Thompson >
< ISU thinks I need more education, which they provide for a fee. >
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns