Sniper Rifle/Scopes/Maximum Ranges/LE vs Mil?

Question
Dear GCH,

Greetings sir.  I have some questions on sniper rifles.

(1) What makes a rifle qualify as a "sniper rifle" for police or military?  Can civilians purchase these weapons?  Would they be of any useful purpose to civilians besides hitting targets consistently a mile or two away at night time?

(2) Is there "one" super-dupper  sniper scope that does everything? For example, see in the dark, pick up body heat, see in the daylight, and other doo-dads that would make the "sniper rifle" truly accurate at long range with great consistency?  

(3) And is it true that some modern sniper rifles can consistency hit a target at 2,000 plus meters?!?  At night or day?  If so what would be this type of rifle and its price?  It must cost of fortune if a rifle can hit a target consistently at almost 2 miles.

(4) Are military sniper rifles different than police sniper rifles?  What would be the closest thing a "civilian" could get to purchasing one of these sniper rifles with a truly remarkable scope so that he could practice hitting tin cans at two miles in the dark?

This is a fascinating field of study I find.  And I know nothing of this field at all.

But as an aside, I think back a few years ago to 2 criminals in California who wore body armour and had AK47s and were shooting people and police and not getting shot in return since the police only had hand guns and shotguns. It became a tactical nightmare as I recall from the news accounts.  Had the police had a "Super dupper sniper rifle" wouldn't they have been able to deal with these killers at a long distance with "great finality?"  And ease?

Also, I continue to see excepts from the war on terror in Afganistan/Iraq where our troops fall under attack from ambushes and hit and run tactics by guerrila type forces.  I would think that the role of a sniper who had a scope that senses heat and sees long distances/day and night, would be a VERY useful instrument in "destroying" a target before it even knew it was being tracked. Those deep valleys for example in Afganistan are "death traps" for US troops who simply drive down the road.  A night time sniper team would appear to me to be the most pleasant surprise we could give a terrorist. Please correct me if my imagination is getting away from me.  

I don't even own a rifle or any firearm for that matter but value your expert opinion.

Best always,
Michael

Answer
Dear Michael,

You honor me too greatly with the appellation 揺xpert?when it comes to sniper rifles.  The courses I teach all have to do with interpersonal defense (unarmed, impact and edged weapon, handgun).

However, I do shoot rifles some, have 揵een to school?with them, and will make some observations in answer to your questions.

1)  A 搒niper?is someone who strikes at a target from an undisclosed location.  A sniper rifle, therefore, would be any rifle a sniper uses.  But commonly, a 搒niper rifle?is the name given to any rifle with inherent accuracy, and modifications made to wring the most accuracy out of it.  Most common sniper rifles are built from a Remington 700 bolt action rifle.  That gun is readily available at most gun shops as an well made and accurate hunting rifle.  Modifications may include a cryo-stress relieved heavy barrel, a composite dimensionally stable stock with aluminum bedding blocks to 揻ree float?the barrel (the barrel is not touched by the stock, so that there is no stress placed on it, and each shot is allowed to harmonically resonate without interference), and a good quality scope.  Each rifle is an individual, but I have seen some capable of shooting into a 紨 at 100 yards if the operator can do his part.  Last I checked, our military generally does not use night vision scopes.  Rather, they use night vision headgear through which they look when operating at night.  The only purpose for which non-combatants or police would need such equipment would be if they had a serious coyote or other nocturnal predator problem (the distances you cite will be discussed presently, but they are fairly unrealistic).

2)  Scopes don't make rifles accurate.  They don't help you shoot better.  They help you see better, and seeing can be an aid to shooting.  But people who don't know how to shoot won't be helped much by any scope, regardless of the cost of it.  Some years ago the military was experimenting with propriety technology in regard to a sighting system, but to the best of my knowledge, the project has been abandoned.  The cost was very prohibitive, and somewhere along the line someone figured out that seeing better does not equal shooting better.

3)  Although the military has experimented with other cartridges, you will still find the .308 (7.62mm), in use since Korea, to be the most common 搒niper?cartridge.  It is a good cartridge, but it has more to do with the fact that we have guns chambered in it, and have more data on the effects of wind and drop that for any other cartridge.  The army sniper school requires shots to 800 meters with this rifle.  The USMC sniper school requires shots to 1000 meters.  Those are extraordinarily long shots.  If the average rifle can shoot into ?MOA (= ?at 100 yards), that means that it can (all this is predicated on the operator doing his part perfectly, and taking out variables such as wind, etc.) shoot into 1?at 200 yards, 4?at 800 yards, 5?at 1000 yards.  Beyond that distance, drop and velocity become such a factor as to make the round fairly ineffective.  The ? mile?shots are typically done with .50 BMG sniper rifles.  These huge cartridges and projectiles are not anti-personnel rounds ?they are used to take out equipment (communications, truck engines, etc.)

4)  The mission of the military sniper is different from that of the police sniper.  E.g. The military sniper often looks for targets of opportunity; the police sniper a specific target.  The military sniper tries to take his shot from as far away as he can (once he gives away his presence by the shot, the enemy will be looking for him); the police sniper tries to get as close as he can; the military sniper operates in less than ideal conditions; the police sniper usually has a matte to lay on, a flat surface to shoot from, etc.  The military sniper is at the mercy of his environment; the police sniper is in control of his environment.  A miss by a military sniper usually causes no immediate harm; a miss by a police sniper means likely that a hostage will die.  Because of their different operational situations, the military sniper's equipment will trade some accuracy for ruggedness and dependability; because the police sniper shoots 搊n his terms?his equipment can be the most accurate available, and ruggedness is not an issue (e.g. until very recently, USMC snipers had fixed power scopes, because variable power was just too fragile for the field).  To answer your question specifically, unless you are talking about 50 gallon 揷an,?you're not going to hit them from 2 miles away.  If that's what you want to do, you'll need a rifle chambered in .50 BMG (ranging from $1800-5000 without bipod, scope, etc.).  If you want to do it in the dark, you'll have to get night vision equipment.  Cheap ($300-500) obsolete Soviet stuff is readily available,  but modern manufacture is also, if you're willing to pay for it.

RE:  The LA Bank Robbery.  What the police needed (and what they borrowed from a local gun shop) to stop that carnage was AR15's.  Body armor will stop handgun projectiles, but it will not stop any rifle projectile, not even a .223 (5.56mm).  Sniper rifles would have done the police little good.  First, it takes time to mobilize the SWAT guys (having a sniper rifle does not insure success ?the man is always more important than the equipment.  A good shooter with an AK47 will often be able to outshoot a novice with a 搒niper?rifle to 100 yards).

RE:  The Sandbox, and guerilla tactics.  They have all that stuff over there, and use it with some success.  But equipment will not solve all our problems, any more than throwing money at schools makes the kids better educated.  Take, for example, night vision equipment.  It's not infallible, and harder to use in the desert because residual heat tends to hide body heat signature.  But if someone picks up some signature, so what?  It could be an old lady, or a child (or biggest problems are in the cities, not in the caves).  Unless you are going to adopt a policy of 搒hoot everything that moves,?just seeing body heat won't tell us whether we're dealing with a threat or not.

I hope this has been some help in answering some of your questions.