The hunter vs Military sniper

[nrvnqsrxk]

I would say sniper, because they train, train, and train some more. One vs. one? My money goes to the soldier.

[Maddog5150]

What's with the deer hunting allusion again? The comparison you should use is a dangerous game hunter. Your whole argument is based on the hunter shooting some game animal that won't come charging back at him.

All I'm saying is that for anyone hunting Grizzly, to some degree moose, and certainly any dangerous game in Africa such as elephant, the big cats, or cape buffalo, you have a similar scenario.

You must get in close to the quarry while avoiding detection. Each of these animals hear and smell better than you do even if their vision isn't as good. You have probably one chance to squeeze off a shot, and that's it. Why? 'Cause if you've been hunting, you'll know that you need to hit heart / lungs / spine on the first shot, because if whatever it is you shot at turns and charges (and these animals have an uncanny ability to charge where the shot came from)they will be facing you and there is no good way to get a shot off....in many cases the bone is too thick and sloped for any size bullet to penetrate. It will merely make the charging animal more angry.

So is a hunter better than a sniper? I'd say generally no.

Still, it's foolish to dismiss a dangerous game hunter out of hand as he possesses much of the same skill set as a sniper. And all dangerous game is hunted MUCH closer than sniper shots out of necessity. You don't take grizzly at 1000 yards. you take him at 50-100. Definitely makes you check your underwear after it's all over.

Dangerous game hunters usually have a guide with a back up rifle in case the hunter doesnt kill the charging animal, in some places its illegal to hunt without a guide so that the hunter wont get hurt.

[bigstick61]

Like I mentioned, if we're talking about a professional sniper, perhaps it would be best to have a professional hunter be the other side of the coin. Professional dangerous game hunters in Africa have to have many of the skills necessary for a sniper or they will not last very long. It's a pretty dangerous job, actually.


I've actually forgotten, is the OP about a duel between a hunter and a sniper, or a comparison of their potential results on the typical targets of a sniper?

[The Director]

Dangerous game hunters usually have a guide with a back up rifle in case the hunter doesnt kill the charging animal, in some places its illegal to hunt without a guide so that the hunter wont get hurt.

This is true.

[Rogerbutthead]

The very best hunter against the very best sniper would be an interesting duel.

An average hunter against an average sniper - no one would bet on the hunter - without heavy odds.

[bigstick61]

The very best hunter against the very best sniper would be an interesting duel.

An average hunter against an average sniper - no one would bet on the hunter - without heavy odds.

Pretty much. The average hunter is unlikely to be able to beat a sniper in either a duel or in a comparison of success against the enemy. On the other hand a great hunter with the right skillsets required for what he does and with much experience under his belt, can definitely give a good sniper a run for his money. I think it all comes down to the criteria and how you set the whole "competition" up.

[Draankol]

Sniper.

[xrMike]

It would all depend on who had the Glock, or the 1911.

Whoever had the 1911 would win.