A Scout Sniper’s Forensic Analysis of the Charlie Kirk Assassination: Terminal Ballistics, Hydro-static Shock, and the Science Behind the Shot July 11, 2026
Posted by Chris Mark in Uncategorized.Tags: Assassination, ballistics, Candace Owens, Charlie Kirk, Charlie Kirk Murder, Chris Mark, security, Shawn Ryan, sniper, TPUSA
6 comments
UPDATE! I have expanded upon this post and turned it into a much more comprehensive whitepaper. You can download here at Zenodo.org! or directly from this site below!
This is a long post but I think it is important. Recently I came across what I can only describe is an offensive AI ‘explanation’ by Candace Owen’ group that attempted to refute that Charlie Kirk was killed by a rifle round. More disturbingly, the ‘video’ is a mocking explanation of ‘conspiracy theorists’ who know what happened. The video was wrong at nearly every turn and was, quite frankly, offensively incorrect. Unfortunately, reading numerous comments on her page, a number of social media members believe and bought into her commentary. I want to refute her and explain with very direct math and science why it is 100% how Charlie Kirk was killed. Who am I to comment on this? I am a former Marine Corps Scout/Sniper, and Urban Sniper with combat time as a Sniper in the USMC. I was also a Force Reconnaissance Marine, and I have not only shot tens of thousands of rounds through rifles and am an avid hunter, but I also write extensively on firearm technology. In fact, I was selected for a DARPA counter sniper project during my time in the military due to my knowledge of ballistics and shooting.
Every time a high-profile shooting makes national news, social media fills with confident proclamations from people who have never fired a weapon in anger, never studied wound ballistics, and whose entire frame of reference comes from action movies and video games. The commentary ranges from the merely ignorant to the dangerously misleading (as in Ms. Owen’s) — and in some cases it is being amplified by public figures with large platforms who should know better. Recently, I was on a popular political commentator’s website and was amazed at how many people are now, suddenly, ballistics experts. Some of their comments were staggeringly ignorant. One person actually justified her very incorrect statement by saying she was the “ex-girlfriend of a hunter.” That is not a ballistics credential.
This post is not political. It is a ballistics education to provide insight into a terrible murder that is being overshadowed by a person’s pursuit of clicks, and money. That being said — for every so-called “ballistics expert” on social media who is doubting that Charlie Kirk was actually killed by that rifle at that distance, you need to read this post and understand a bit about how terminal ballistics actually works.
On September 10, 2025, at 12:23 PM local time, a single shot was fired from the roof of the Losee Center at Utah Valley University in Orem, Utah. The shooter was positioned approximately 142 yards from where Charlie Kirk was speaking. The weapon recovered was a Mauser-type bolt-action hunting rifle chambered in .30-06, loaded with (what appeared to be) Sierra GameKing 180-grain soft point ammunition. For consistency and we will simply say a non-bonded soft point bullet. Kirk was struck in the neck by a single bullet and was pronounced dead at Timpanogos Regional Hospital a short time later.
Within 5 minutes of the shooting my phone was blowing up with people asking what happened. My response: “Watching the impact, he was hit hard by a .30 cal. From an incline, close range. He was smacked so hard it looked like a .30-06”. Then, the hard question. Do you think he will live? My response? “No chance. His brain was dead nearly immediately and that was not a survivable wound. People asked why I thought that? Easy. He showed Decorticate posturing immediately upon being hit. Decorticate posturing is when arms flex inward, hands curl in. Indicates cortical or upper brain stem disruption. This is classic with hydro static shock impacting the brain (to be explained later). Classic high powered rifle shot that impacted the brain or nervous system.
People are claiming the distance is too far, the rifle was not ‘zeroed’ etc. etc. etc.. Many claimed that the wound characteristics don’t add up. That the bullet behavior was inconsistent with the stated circumstances. Every one of those claims reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of projectile physics, atmospheric ballistics, and terminal wound mechanics. This post addresses them directly, with math and science. What I am seeing circulate on social media right now needs to be corrected with facts, not speculation. A hunter is not a ballistics professional nor a professional at shooting humans.
I have radically updated the whitepaper as I received a number of requets from people wanting more information. You can download the whitepaper here or at Zenodo.com
Suddenly, EVERYONE is a SNIPER July 20, 2024
Posted by Chris Mark in Uncategorized.Tags: Assassination, Scout Sniper, Secret Service, Thomas Cooke, Trump
1 comment so far
With the attempted assassination of former President Trump on July 13, 2024, it seems as if everyone has become a firearm’s expert and self proclaimed ‘sniper’ or expert on precision shooting. Today, FoxNews ran a story lauding the Secret Service Counter Sniper who took out the wanna be assassin and called the shot “1 in a million”. This blog post is simply an opportunity to educate people on ballistics and shooting and to correct some misconceptions. First things first. I have read people say that the assassin wanna be (won’t name him) ‘intentionally shot Trump in the ear’. Uh….no! Let’s talk about rifles, ballistics and accuracy. First a couple of terms:
Precision- Refers to how close a measurement is to a true or accepted value. (Rifles are measured by their precision)
Accuracy- Refers to how consistently a measurement produces the same results under unchanged conditions. (Shooters are gauged by their accuracy on a given platform)
Rifles are typically ‘rated’ or measured in terms of precision of angular measurement known as Minutes of Angle or MOA. 1 MOA is equal to 1/60th of 1 degree of a circle or 1.0472 inches PER 100 yards. For simplicity’s sake we simply use 1 inch per 100 yards. So a rifle guaranteed to shoot 1 MOA will shoot most (nearly all…but it is a statistical distribution) within 1 inch.
So, if the rifle is put in a vice, with match ammo and under perfect conditions (no wind, no temperature fluctuation or other variables during the shooting), the 1 MOA rifle will shoot nearly all rounds within 1 inch at 100 yards(not all rounds as it is a statistical measurement). This does not account for shooter ability or environmental variables. Even a world class shooter shooting a 1 MOA rifle will only be able to shoot 1 inch per 100 yards consistently as that is the capability of the rifle. This is why benchrest and other competition shooters get high precision rifles that shoot much tighter than 1 MOA.
According to news accounts, the wannabe assassin was using a DPMS or similar model AR 15 type platform. These generally only shoot about 3-4 MOA even with Match ammo. So…..the wanna be assassin at 130 yard would likely (given a 3.5 MOA rifle) only be capable of, at best, a 4.55 inch group. now…it looks like he was shooing without optics, he was wearing glasses and, being 20 years old, likely did not have a ton of shooting experience. The adrenaline and other environmental factors would have likely played a major role. I could not see the shooter being capable, under those conditions, of better than a 5 inch group (likely much more). I short, that shot in Trump’s ear was likely as much luck, as skill.
Now…the FoxNews Article talking about the SS Sniper taking a “1 in a million shot” is really reaching. That sniper likely had a high precision rifle (shooting at least 1/2 MOA if not 1/4 MOA) and that sniper had been through some top tier sniper training and had high quality optics and many thousands of rounds of experience in urban shooting scenarios taking no reflex shots. It is highly likely that sniper could shoot to the capability of his rifle and was using match ammo and was very familiar with the platform. His shot was in an estimated 2 inch spot above the shooter’s left eye. While certainly a good shot, it would have been a ‘day at the job’ for a sniper of that skill level shooting that type of platform.
Remember, shooting is a craft that is a combination of art and science. The limitations come from both the shooter and the inherent accuracy of the platform. So the next time you hear someone tell you that “years ago my mom used to drive tacks with an old .30-.30 with open sights at 100 yards” (I actually read that and was derided for correcting that statement online) it is simply not true.
“The Enemy of My Enemy is My Friend”…US to Remove MEK from Terrorist List? May 19, 2012
Posted by Chris Mark in Politics, terrorism.Tags: Assassination, Iran, iraq, MEK, Mujahedin-e Khalq, Peoples Muhajadin of Iran, politics, terrorism
add a comment
If asked to name a terrorist organization most Americans could likely name Al Qaeda, Al Shabbab, and a few others. Few are probably familiar with the Mujahedin-e Khalq or Peoples Mujaheddin of Iran known by its initials MEK. Accused of killing American servicemen and contractors in the 1970s and supporting the takeover of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran before breaking with the Iranian mullahs in 1980 the MEK has been designated a terrorist group by the US State Department since 1995. The MEK, however do not simply attack Americans. According to The American Muslim: “The M.E.K. are terrorists. They were driven out of Iran and given a home at a place called Camp Ashraf in Iraq by Saddam Hussein, who they supported. Saddam Hussein used the M.E.K. to carry out terrorist acts in Iran.” In 2001, the MEK “renounced” terrorism. Irrespective of this renunciation, a 2004 FBI report on the MEK which was revealed in June 2011 states that the MEK The long and short is that the MEK are current terrorists not former terrorists. So why would the US consider removing the designation from the group?
Many people are likely familiar with some of the more recent activities of the MEK. The MEK is responsible for assassination of 5 Iranian nuclear scientists since 2007 and possibly destroyed a missile site. Trained, financed and supported by Isreal, the MEK has been used to disrupt the Iranian nuclear operations causing a delay of years to Iran’s objective of creating a nuclear weapon. In March 2012 Richard Engel & Robert Windrem of NBC News reported that:
“Deadly attacks on Iranian nuclear scientists are being carried out by an Iranian dissident group that is financed, trained and armed by Israel’s secret service, U.S. officials tell NBC News, confirming charges leveled by Iran’s leaders.” And then “”… Two senior U.S. officials confirmed for NBC News the MEK’s role in the assassinations, with one senior official saying, “All your inclinations are correct.” A third official would not confirm or deny the relationship, saying only, “It hasn’t been clearly confirmed yet.” All the officials denied any U.S. involvement in the assassinations.””
It is certainly interesting that a terrorist organization that is now taking action which supports the US’ agenda may suddenly be reclassified as not being a terrorist organization. This post is not intended to question the validity of the decision simply educate and highlight the point that in world politics “the enemy of my enemy is my friend”.
