Replies

Can you explain your opinion to me (I'm not trying to pick a fight, but rather would like to understand your viewpoint)?

I just don't see how taking a single shot creates more terror. I think people would be just as terrified, if not more so, if the shooter was taking several shots, especially if the murderer was firing on wounded victims.

mulitable shots from a rifle could be located quicker. Single shots helps them in concelment and being located at or around the seen. Im not even sure there as been a report heard from a rifle/handgun in these crimes. Thats even more of concern to me.

In the military, there's nothing more unnerving than having one of your buddies fall dead and then hearing the report of the shot a few seconds later. A single shot gives very little chance to get a fix on the sniper's location, meaning there's no way to hunt him down.

Translated to a civilian setting, you have someone who is coldly efficient at murdering innocents from a distance. This person strikes randomly, killing with a single shot before ghosting away. That makes everyone look over the shoulder, question every hint of activity around them (even in what was once "safe" surroundings), and strikes fear of having the proverbial "bus" (from the old saying - no one is indispensable; anyone could step in front of a bus tomorrow) come looking for them.

I can agree to disagree with you on this point, and as a matter of fact I hope I'm wrong, but I tend to think this is terrorist related.

A single shot is a lot quicker than spending 10 or 15 seconds to spray bullets at a crowd. Its faster and doesn't attract as much attention at first. Not as many witnesses. Remember the restaurant shooting in The Godfather? Use 1 or 2 bullets, leave the scene quickly, calmly and don't look at anybody directly. These shootings are very calculated I think.