[xm177e2]

How do you know they didn't fire it once first into a bullet trap to produce striations, and THEN use it in a sabot? That would be fiendishly clever! </sarcasm>

[The KG9 Kid]

That's an interesting idea, but a few things are problematic with it:

1. They might be very hard to find, but the sabot pieces would be left behind at the scenes of the shootings somewhere just ahead of the shooter's position. I think that the investigators that are getting cadets to police the area would have come up with a few sabots by now if your theory is true -- assuming they're smart enough to know to look for them.

2. Small rifle bullets don't survive bullet traps well, even the water tank kind. If they do survive, they might not be very reloadable. If they are in enough shape to reload, they wouldn't be very accurate. Not accurate enough to hit someone in the head at the ranges this sniper is probably firing from.

Clever of you, though.

[dighton]

How do you know they didn't fire it once first into a bullet trap to produce striations, and THEN use it in a sabot? That would be fiendishly clever!

Really and truly, I was hoping someone would pursue the sabot thing (even in jest, as you did) to that point. There's at least one big practical objection, which I trust you and other knowledgable FReepers will point out.

Small hint, which won't need: why would someone use a sabot for criminal purposes?

[Travis McGee]

That's sort of the plot of the Steven Hunter novel "Point of Impact", one of the best 'shooters' books ever.

(Mine will be better.)

[rellimpank]

--or gently tap a .223 bullet through a short section of .22 barrel with a punch, protecting the base of the bullet with a wad, reloading it in a sabot---not too accurate but effective.

I was saving that for my novel, along with a few other tricks--