posted
If handguns have no possible modern military application, in this day of big guns and body armor, one wonders why most modern militaries arount the globe issue them as well as big guns and body armor...
Hm.
[ December 29, 2001: Message edited by: First of Two ]
-------------------- "The best defense is not a good offense. The best defense is a terrifyingly accurate and devastatingly powerful offense, with multiply-overlapping kill zones and time-on-target artillery strikes." -- Laurence, Archangel of the Sword
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
Cartman
just made by the Presbyterian Church
Member # 256
posted
Why? For the same reason military fighterplanes still carry a 20mm Vulcan: backup. Small handguns are last-ditch pea-shooters, NOT primary armament.
*Pictures FoT, along with several dozen BookWur... right-wingers, storming Capitol Hill*
posted
If handguns have no possible modern military application, in this day of big guns and body armor, one wonders why most modern militaries arount the globe issue them as well as big guns and body armor
Well, let's see -- did the Taliban's soldiers wear body armor? I don't think so.
When are handguns used in military situations? In Vietnam, to clear out Vietcong tunnels ... of course, a rifle would limit one's manueverability.
As I understand it, handguns are generally issued only to officers, and special forces. They don't give every Private his own .45
posted
Cartman's forgotten that guy who made it into one of the Capitol buildings (was it the white house?) a few years back.
Backup? No. The aircraft gun, like the small-arms gun, is used when it's appropriate to the job... such as when you're too close for missiles. Or in that tunnel example you used.
Or more importantly, when you don't have any missiles, because to anybody with an iota of grey matter, a little defense is better than none at all.
When your armed capability goes up, the number of people who are serious threats to you decreases exponentially.
It's kind of like clothes in winter... a T-shirt and shorts aren't as good as a parka... but they're better than being naked.
-------------------- "The best defense is not a good offense. The best defense is a terrifyingly accurate and devastatingly powerful offense, with multiply-overlapping kill zones and time-on-target artillery strikes." -- Laurence, Archangel of the Sword
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
But they'll keep you alive somewhat longer, thus affording you a better chance to seek shelter / more clothes / some other alternative to freezing to death.
Sometimes a chance is all you need.
-------------------- "The best defense is not a good offense. The best defense is a terrifyingly accurate and devastatingly powerful offense, with multiply-overlapping kill zones and time-on-target artillery strikes." -- Laurence, Archangel of the Sword
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Sometimes people tend to confuse reality with fiction.
Face it, Rob, if the government sent in soldiers and tanks to find you, and you resisted, you'd be dead. No ifs-ands-or-buts about it. Infa-red vision on helicopters, satelites ... you camp, they'd find you. You run, pilots would track you.
Unless, of course, you managed to convince the French to send an army
posted
I dread getting involved, but surely an argument for gun rights or against gun control or for gun proliferation or whatever you want to call it can be constructed without resting on the basic premise that Red Dawn was a wicked cool movie.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Yeah right. If I'm living in "Red Dawn," then he's living in "Patriot Games" or some book in which the military technology is infallible.
1. The government is not going to mount a full-scale military assault on an individual or small group (waco notwithstanding). To do so would invite more trouble than it was worth. Almost certainly stir up support. They're more likely to send somebody like the BATF... and you could see how long a few people managed to hold THEM off.
2. As I said before, anything which would get me that involved would have to be big enough to involve a lot of other people. So the "lone defender" postulate you keep using is silly.
3. By the time the govt. would come looking for inoffensive subtle sneaky little old me, the situation would likely have deteriorated to the point that even parts of the military would be untrustworthy, so the "vs. the whole armed forces" part is equally ludicrous.
4. Even if I agree that a handgun is a 'last resort backup,' other currently legal weapons are not. Shotguns, rifles, etc. A person who knows how to use it can inflict a lot of damage with a rifle and be gone before the airstrikes come.
5. Speaking of these hypothetical airstrikes... have we seen any footage of airstrike victims from Afghanistan? I mean, besides the convoy which was in a nice straight line out in the open? Airstrikes didn't win 'Nam, or Panama, or even the Persian Gulf War. An air attack ended WWII in the Pacific, but I don't think the US is willing to nuke their own neighborhoods.
-------------------- "The best defense is not a good offense. The best defense is a terrifyingly accurate and devastatingly powerful offense, with multiply-overlapping kill zones and time-on-target artillery strikes." -- Laurence, Archangel of the Sword
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Wow. Post a subtle critique of Jeff's hamfisted tactics in this thread and it is apparently either too subtle or one must be registered in the Official League of People Who Like To Blow Things Up to have an opinion worth paying attention to.
Well, lesson learned, I guess.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Well, it's nice to know Rob agrees with me that the military isn't going to turn against U.S. citizens and that thusly, "we need guns to protect ourselves from it!" isn't valid reasoning.
-------------------- "This is why you people think I'm so unknowable. You don't listen!" - God, "God, the Devil and Bob"
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
That doesn't rule out small-scale attacks, ranging from Ruby Ridge-style assaults up to MOVE and Waco. (granted, these folks were nuts, but if they can do it to the nuts they can do it to the rest of ya. -- we're all 'nuts' to somebody else: from 'liberal communists' to 'fundie psychos' to everybody else in between. All it takes is for 'them' to classify 'you' as a threat.
-------------------- "The best defense is not a good offense. The best defense is a terrifyingly accurate and devastatingly powerful offense, with multiply-overlapping kill zones and time-on-target artillery strikes." -- Laurence, Archangel of the Sword
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
