Mods, if this is too offtopic, or potentially too incendiary a topic, I understand, I just do not know where else to post this.
Further, I fully agree with the sidebar rule here, let us please keep this civil and keep politics out of this to the greatest extent possible.
DISCLAIMER: Please, everyone and anyone, do not consider any of this discussion to be 100% confirmed fact, this is meant for reasoned consideration, not wild speculation nor justifying motivated reasoning of any kind or flavor.
Further: I do not endorse any political views of this guy, but I think his ballistic analysis is worth consideration.
Please at least watch this linked ~20 minute video.
The guy claims to be either a current or former USMC Scout Sniper, and while I cannot confirm this beyond a reasonable doubt... I also do not really have any reason to doubt that he is.
There is also a longer 2 1/2 hour livestream where this guy presumably goes into more detail, which he has linked on his YT vid page.
Essentially, the guy goes through 4 different camera angles.
He explains that the movement of Kirk's shirt is almost certainly not a result of any kind of body armor as is widely being speculated; instead, it is from how Kirk's lapel mic and earpiece and the wire for such were affixed to him.
He shows that the earpiece actually was captured flying off of Kirk's right ear, and that this is what caused the movement of Kirk's shirt.
But also... he believes that the shot did not come from from straight on.
He believes that the shot came from Kirk's right, and he believes that the wound which....featured the 'geyser' of blood coming out of Kirk's neck... he believes this was an exit wound, not an entry wound.
He believes that the entry would was somewhere on the right side of roughly Kirk's jaw, to behind or around his right ear, that the round traversed through Kirk from his right, to his left, and that it likely functionally killed him instantly either by obliteration of the lower brain, or severing of the spinal cord.
He also believes he may have captured a reflection of a muzzle flash, as well as potentially the muzzle flash itself... indicating a shooting position from Kirk's right... and that the currently most popular and widely accepted (?) idea that the shot came from 150 - 200 yards/meters away, basically from nearly directly in front of Kirk... cannot be the case.
Finally, be believes that the caliber used was not 30.06, that the visible wound is simply too small to indicate a 30.06, that it is more likely a lower caliber round.
At least this is inline with ... what I have been able to gather / opinionate based on the published image of what is supposed to be the weapon used in the incident.
Long story short, I think it is more likely that the rifle is not 'an older Mauser in 30.06' as officially described, but instead, more likely to be either a Remington 700 or Ruger American, a model from roughly the 80s - 90s - 00s, and that it is likely to be in caliber .270 or .243.
Hopefully I have linked this correctly, here is the start of a comment chain from myself, in another thread, a few days back, when I attempted to analyze the presented image of the weapon being claimed to be the weapon.
https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/comment/21325405
If you would, please discuss in the most objective manner you are capable of.
I have no idea why you think I am a Republican.
I am not.
I am a left wing anarchist.
Go read my comment history if you doubt this, maybe sort by 'top'.
You very clearly are not interested in attempting to objectively analyze the actual scenario of the shooting.
You are interested in doing partisan reasoning, blame assignment.
I am again interested in the opinions of people who may actually have real experience with firearms, you know, relative subject matter experts... to attempt to analyze the plausibility of the assasination scenario that is being pushed, is being popularized.
Having some practical familiarity with firearms is not totally exclusive to those on the right.
If you only have opinions about firearms, and no practical experience with them, and you simply wish to discuss the potential motives or political alignment of the current primary suspect: please go away.
this is just a blatant attempt at seeding doubt about what is clearly caught on film. in hd. like it is literally a 4chan conspiracy. you are talking like this is a scientific post and you ask for pier review. it is fucking ridiculous if you are honest in your inquiry.
Do you have an actual specific criticism?
Grounded in ballistics?
Or just the notion that other team than you thinks this way therefore it is wrong and bad?
How does your intepretation of the footage ... which has apparently led you to conclude the shot came from Kirk's front... differ from this guy's interpretation of the footage, which to him indicates the shot came from Kirk's right?
Also, its 'peer' review, we are not talking about shipping or boating.
sry firend, i only speak english, german, french and a bit of russian. so excuse the odd mistake in my writing. who is the "guy" in the video? why should his opinion count? because he said he was/is a scout sniper? you stated yourself you could not vet those claims, so why the fuck would you propagate them? you are just furthering alt right conspiracies and cannot cope with being called out for it.
... What I was trying to say is that he claims to be a Scout Sniper from the United States Marine Corps.
What I mean by saying I cannot 100% prove this is that I do not personally know him, I do not have a copy of his discharge or leave papers that would definitely prove that he is or was a member of the military.
On the other side of that:
He talks and acts and looks exactly like an actual military sniper would, and, if you go look at another comment I made, he knows things about ballistics that most laypeople do not know.
I do not know who this guy is.
I randomly found, on youtube, what appears to me to be a well thought out and reasonable ballistic analysis.
Myself, I grew up conservative, in the US, around guns, but I myself later became leftist when I realized the hypocrisy of the conservative world view.
I am thus familiar enough with shooting weapons, using them, their mechanics, as well as first aid training in how to at least immediately deal with the effects of gunshots, and I have been around enough other range shooters and hunters and such that I think I can reasonably discern that:
Yeah, this guy probably is an actual sniper, he acts very similarly to many other actual military snipers I have met at shooting ranges.
yeah brother you are beyond saving so i wont bother any longer.