224697 Bullies, 3954 online  
  • Register
Our Sponsors:

Results 11 to 20 of 35
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 12 34 LastLast
Sponsored Links Spacer Image
  1. mike321 is offline

    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,461

    Posted On:
    3/22/2009 3:16pm


     Style: kenpo, Wrestling

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    SFGOON,

    Out of curiousity, are carbines, shotguns, and submachine guns useful to modern military?
  2. Cassius is online now
    Cassius's Avatar

    Moderator

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    6,985

    Posted On:
    3/22/2009 3:32pm

    supporting memberforum leader
     Style: Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by mike321 View Post
    SFGOON,

    Out of curiousity, are carbines, shotguns, and submachine guns useful to modern military?
    An M4 is technically a carbine. And at any rate, we have all three of those in our armory, along with many other things. Shotguns can be especially useful for breaching doors. SMGs are useful for other things.
    "No. Listen to me because I know what I'm talking about here." -- Hannibal
  3. hapkido_keith is offline
    hapkido_keith's Avatar

    Crappler Extraordinaire

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,307

    Posted On:
    3/22/2009 4:12pm

    supporting member
     Style: Judo

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by mike321 View Post
    SFGOON,

    Out of curiousity, are carbines, shotguns, and submachine guns useful to modern military?
    For the navy, shotguns are extremely useful for ship security and are widely used.
  4. Gidi is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Israel
    Posts
    871

    Posted On:
    3/22/2009 4:59pm


     Style: Judo (noob) & BJJ (noob)

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by mike321 View Post
    SFGOON,

    Out of curiousity, are carbines, shotguns, and submachine guns useful to modern military?
    many sniper rifles are bolt action as well
  5. The Twitcher is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Here
    Posts
    283

    Posted On:
    3/22/2009 8:54pm


     Style: Freestyle

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by SFGOON View Post
    Consider too, that for the most part, military forces could give less than a **** about handguns. Given the wide availability of rifles which are a few orders of magnitude more deadly, and require a few orders of magnitude less training, pistols just don't measure up.

    Very few people carry them and I don't remember ever meeting anyone who had actually shot an enemy with one - though I did once talk to a guy who almost had.

    In terms of military operations, pistols are nearly useless. The Armies of the world can and do carry powerful rifles openly - what good would a pistol be?
    That's only true on the battlefield.
  6. IMightBeWrong is offline
    IMightBeWrong's Avatar

    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Phoenix, AZ
    Posts
    1,074

    Posted On:
    3/24/2009 1:35am


     Style: 9mm/Judo/BJJ/MT

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Pistols are there for that rare moment when your rifle malfunctions and you DON'T lose your life because of it. At least in military terms. Hence the term "Sidearm". Pistols are better for law enforcement, self defense, and point entry with shield, where they are simply one of the only reasonable measures for the situation.

    As for uses, each weapon has its advantages:

    Shotguns - Excellent close range weapons. 00 Buck 12 GA loads will put down an intruder every time so long as they are in range of about 50 meters or so on average. Plus, in urban environments, they perform their tasks with little or no risk of overpenetration that could hurt any innocent bystanders.

    Sub Machine Guns - Another great entry weapon. Clears out rooms fast. Assault rifles are great, but the rounds are capable of zipping through both their human targets and the walls behind them which isn't a great risk. Plus using pistol-type ammunition like 9mm or .45 can give you less kick than a rifle with often more stopping power due to the shape of the round and its energy dispersal.

    A carbine is just a short rifle. They often have almost just as much accuracy as larger rifles with less weight. I'd rather have a carbine than a full sized rifle if I were in the service. I trust my accuracy plenty with a shorter barrel, and I'd like the advantage of having more mobility and energy due to packing less of a load. Gimme an M4 and a Glock, please!
    "Intelligence is nothing more than discussing things with others. Limitless wisdom comes of this." - 山本 常朝
  7. vigilus is offline
    vigilus's Avatar

    Infidel

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Afghanistan
    Posts
    2,294

    Posted On:
    3/24/2009 10:24pm


     Style: Yoshinkan Aikido, MMA

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    In Afghanistan we weren't allowed using shotguns on people. They were for "breaching" or to disable a car. Guys would carry an M16 (C7 blah whatever) AND a shotgun slung on on our back or hanging off the side of us a la one point sling.
    I wonder if it's an actual rule (Geeneva convention?) that shotguns aren't allowed against pers or some officer just thought it sounded good.
    You are not free whose liberty is won by the rigour of other, more righteous souls. Your are merely protected. Your freedom is parasitic, you suck the honourable man dry and offer nothing in return. You who have enjoyed freedom, who have done nothing to earn it
  8. mrm1775 is offline
    mrm1775's Avatar

    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Right here.
    Posts
    1,220

    Posted On:
    3/24/2009 11:21pm


     Style: This and that

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by zaohu View Post
    Pistols are there for that rare moment when your rifle malfunctions and you DON'T lose your life because of it. At least in military terms. Hence the term "Sidearm". Pistols are better for law enforcement, self defense, and point entry with shield, where they are simply one of the only reasonable measures for the situation.

    As for uses, each weapon has its advantages:

    Shotguns - Excellent close range weapons. 00 Buck 12 GA loads will put down an intruder every time so long as they are in range of about 50 meters or so on average. Plus, in urban environments, they perform their tasks with little or no risk of overpenetration that could hurt any innocent bystanders.

    Sub Machine Guns - Another great entry weapon. Clears out rooms fast. Assault rifles are great, but the rounds are capable of zipping through both their human targets and the walls behind them which isn't a great risk. Plus using pistol-type ammunition like 9mm or .45 can give you less kick than a rifle with often more stopping power due to the shape of the round and its energy dispersal.

    A carbine is just a short rifle. They often have almost just as much accuracy as larger rifles with less weight. I'd rather have a carbine than a full sized rifle if I were in the service. I trust my accuracy plenty with a shorter barrel, and I'd like the advantage of having more mobility and energy due to packing less of a load. Gimme an M4 and a Glock, please!
    A little clarification: most entry teams have switched from subguns to the M4 precisely for reasons of penetration. Apparently, soft- and hollow-point rifle rounds tend to overpenetrate less than pistol rounds in soft tissue due to their high velocity and tendency to fragment (they still get through kevlar, unlike pistol rounds). Sounds counterintuitive, I know, but its true. Of course, military ammo is another matter since M855 ball is steel-core and designed for penetrating armor.

    Also, while it is vastly superior for use in tight quarters, the M4 has lethality (not accuracy) problems at long range, especially using military ammo that was designed for an 18 inch barrel. When I was in Afghanistan, the closest engagement my company got into was 600 meters. I wouldn't have traded my M16 for anything in that terrain.
    Quote Originally Posted by GuiltySpark View Post
    In Afghanistan we weren't allowed using shotguns on people. They were for "breaching" or to disable a car. Guys would carry an M16 (C7 blah whatever) AND a shotgun slung on on our back or hanging off the side of us a la one point sling.
    I wonder if it's an actual rule (Geeneva convention?) that shotguns aren't allowed against pers or some officer just thought it sounded good.
    Someone probably just thought it would seem politically incorrect. There is no specific law against shooting people with shotguns. In fact, it is a time honored tradition going back to the First World War. Shotguns were also used extensively against Charlie during the unpleasantness in Vietnam. You are probably thinking of the Hague Conventions of 1899 which restrict the military use of expanding munitions (the Geneva Convention is often incorrectly cited). Fun fact: the Hague Conventions also restrict the dropping of munitions from balloons.

    And now you know.
    I'm not giving you my opinion, I'm telling you how it is.
    Can't decide which evil black rifle to buy? My thoughts.
  9. thaclient is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Miami
    Posts
    304

    Posted On:
    3/25/2009 12:09am


     Style: MT noob, BJJ even noober

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by mrm1775 View Post

    Fun fact: the Hague Conventions also restrict the dropping of munitions from balloons.

    And now you know.
    Well ****... there goes my weekend. :toothy9:

    Luckily it doesn't apply to civilians!


    Here's a serious question for you guys serving overseas: what shotgun load is used when using the 12ga against people? Is it something like 00 buck or slugs? From this thread it doesn't seem that the shotgun is all that common in that role any longer, but I was just curious.
    Last edited by thaclient; 3/25/2009 12:11am at .
  10. Gidi is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Israel
    Posts
    871

    Posted On:
    3/25/2009 4:54am


     Style: Judo (noob) & BJJ (noob)

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by GuiltySpark View Post
    I wonder if it's an actual rule (Geeneva convention?) that shotguns aren't allowed against pers or some officer just thought it sounded good.
    If anything, certain groups are trying to make 5.56 ammo illegal, under the claim that it causes unnecessary damage, and they claim the same tactical results can be achieved via 7.62 or 9mm.

    my International Law professor kept claiming that the Americans resist this because they have billions of bullets already manufactured.

    I constantly argued with him about the tactical efficiency of 5.56 and not the necessarily capitalist argument he was so fond of, I bet he still teaches it in class...
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 12 34 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Powered by vBulletin™© contact@vbulletin.com vBulletin Solutions, Inc. 2011 All rights reserved.