Someone mentioned to me that it is troubling that in my “about page” interests, I include the phrase “sniper rifles.”
Sniper rifles.
What is it about this term that sends shivers of horror down the spines of otherwise sensible members of our society?
First off, what exactly is a sniper rifle, and how is it different from, say, a “politically correct” hunting rifle that, at least in the eyes of some politicians, is allowed for your “Second Amendment privilege to keep and bear guns for hunting or for sport”?
Well, to answer the first part, let’s answer the second:
The difference is…
The Name.
A sniper rifle is, for all intents and purposes, a hunting rifle. The difference between them is that, in the case of the hunting rifle, it has a nice “sporting” name like “Browning Safari” or “Remington Sendero”; whereas in the case of the sniper rifle, it has an evil, sinister, military name, like “Springfield M-21 Tactical” or “Remington M-24 Sniper.”
But, apart from the name, what is the difference?
Nothing. Zero. Zilch. Zip. Nada.
Let’s take the Browning Safari. This is a semi-automatic rifle, available in high-powered chamberings, made to kill big game. It has a detachable magazine, which allows rapid reloading. And it can be equipped with a telescopic sight, allowing pin-point precision at long range. It makes a good hunting rifle.
Now let’s compare this to the Springfield M-21. This is a semi-automatic rifle, available in high-powered chamberings, made to kill big game—or bad people. It has a detachable magazine, which allows rapid reloading. And it can be equipped with a telescopic sight, allowing pin-point precision at long range. It makes a good hunting rifle—or military and police sniper rifle.
Same types of bullets. Same rate of fire. Same ability to reload. Same degree of precision at long range. One just sounds sinister—and costs twice as much because of it.
Now let’s compare the two Remington models:
The Sendero is a hunting rifle made for long range shots at big game. It is a precision bolt-action rifle, made for extreme accuracy and reliability at the expense of rate of fire. It has a long, heavy barrel for increased accuracy. It has a synthetic stock to handle rough terrain and adverse weather conditions a hunter might face. And it is made to be used exclusively with a telescopic sight, the bigger the better. It is perfect for bagging an elusive elk high up in the Rockies where the snow comes early. A popular chambering is the powerful .300 Winchester Magnum, ideal for bringing that big elk down clean.
Let’s compare this to the viciously named M-24 sniper rifle. The M-24 is a precision bolt-action rifle, made for extreme accuracy and reliability at the expense of rate of fire. It has a long, heavy barrel for increased accuracy. It has a synthetic stock to handle rough terrain and adverse weather conditions a hunter—or a soldier—might face. And it is made to be used exclusively with a telescopic sight, the bigger the better. It is perfect for bagging an elusive elk—or a military target—high up in the Rockies—or the Mountains of Afghanistan—where the snow comes early. A popular chambering is the powerful .300 Winchester Magnum, ideal for bringing that big elk—or that dangerous enemy—down clean—and fast.
It’s the same bloody thing! My goodness, compare the pictures of them. All the parts are interchangeable. Same action, same trigger, same bullets. What the heck is the difference?
NO. DIFFERENCE. AT. ALL.
But one of them, your local anti-gun liberal fifth-columnist politician swears up and down “we don’t want to take away your deer rifle” while the other one he says is “a dangerous weapon of terror we must keep out of the hands of the public.”
Nonsense.
So all you deer hunters out there, stop calling that 50-year-old .30-’06 you inherited from your Grandpa “Old Bessie” and start calling it your sniper rifle. Because a ban on one is as good as a ban on the other.
UPDATE:
See my new post on the M-24 and Remington's new model 700 VSF.


Huh. You know I never thought about it like that. Been hunting deer for 10 years using a 60 year old '06 Garand that my Uncle bought after WWII. He used one just like in Germany. Back then, civilians could get one just by being part of a gun club and paying a small fee. I guess nowadays it would be labelled an illegal assault rifle and impossible to get the way he did. But it brings down deer perfect, I just have to put a plug in the magazine so it only holds 5 and it's legal for game. Now I'm calling it my WWII sniper rifle from now on, just to piss off people like Kerry.
Posted by: Bubba_Lou | Thursday, 14 October 2004 at 05:23 PM
Hey Bubba, actually the assault weapon ban is history now, although your rifle, an M-1 Garand .30-'06, was never included in the ban (but the .308 version was!). You can still get them the way your uncle did. It is called the civilian marksmanship program sponsored by the government. You have to be a member of a sporting gun club (not the NRA, it has be something that is based on shooting competitions), take part in recognized shooting events, and pay the fee to the Department of Civilian Marksmanship. The fee is up around $600 right now, which is pretty steep. But you still receive a surplus M-1, and they sell used for 2-3 times that at gun shows. Imagine, the government on the one hand is banning all these "dangerous" rifles but with the other hand is literally giving away dangerous military weapons to gun club members. How is that for hypocrisy?
Now that you reminded me about this, keep an eye on the Second Amendment sidebar list for a link to the program.
Posted by: Gullyborg | Thursday, 14 October 2004 at 05:29 PM
definition of sniper from Dicitonary.com
A skilled military shooter detailed to spot and pick off enemy soldiers from a concealed place.
One who shoots at other people from a concealed place.
So, correct me if I am wrong, anything that fits the criteria of a rifle (no idea what that might be) that is shot from a place of concealment, including behind the sofa and loaded with cotton balls, is a sniper rifle? Or have I missed something critical here?
Posted by: niloniak | Friday, 15 October 2004 at 04:58 PM
This falls into the same category as the “plastic" guns of the '80s when the new polymer frames were introduced. At that time, the libs were screaming that these guns had the ability to bypass all forms of metal detecting security. I recently ran into some lingering stupidity over this issue at a seminar at the UofO. I simply replied, (to paraphrase Gulliver) “you say that because you know absolutely NOTHING about firearms.”
Cliff
Posted by: Cliff@Ihop | Saturday, 16 October 2004 at 01:31 AM
Yes, they keep bringing this up in their attacks on Dick Cheney. You see, as a Congressman, Cheney (along with a lot of other Congressmen, since it never became law...) voted against a ban on plastic guns. He knew, of course, that the ban was simply an unadulterated attempt at handgun control, banning Glocks and their kin. But the only rationale was that they could supposedly bypass metal detectors. Cheney knew that was crap because only the grip frame is made from polymers. The barrel, slide, internals, and bullets are all still metal. Don't believe me? Take a Glock to the airport and see how long it takes for them to bust you!
Posted by: Gullyborg | Saturday, 16 October 2004 at 10:38 PM
What are you guys talking about guns for, you are the ones that didnt want to go to war in the first place. As far as im concerned you can all go puritan and leave us the fuck alone. Oh and by the way, George Busch won so you can take your kerry bumper stickers and shove them up your ass
Posted by: Torch | Friday, 11 March 2005 at 06:23 PM
I think Torch may have torched one too many.
Posted by: Gullyborg | Saturday, 12 March 2005 at 10:02 AM
Ohh goody, do I get to get into a techno-argument on semantics and guns at the same time? (grin)
Gully, only the M1-A, the 'civilian', semi-auto .308 version of the Garand was potentially covered by the ugly ban, due to it having TWO evil, nasty fixtures, the flash hider and the bayonet lug. (the magazines are separable, only the over 10 round ones were covered) The M-14 is a class III firearm, it has a selector.
I suppose M1 carbines, or the ones without a selector switch, were covered, too, for the same reasons, but who cares about those anyway? (grin)
Posted by: SemiOnager | Friday, 06 May 2005 at 08:40 AM
There's nothing better than getting out in the wodds with your gun. What makes it even better is when you comes across a really nice 12 point buck.
Posted by: jay | Thursday, 10 April 2008 at 06:05 AM