Archived threads in /k/ - Weapons - 965. page

So is this the happening yet

>>34252782
forgot link to article
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/337717-report-shooting-near-congressional-baseball-game-practice-field

Rep Steve Scalise has been hit at least once in the hip, several congressional aides were also struck to unspecified degree. Scalise is still alive at the moment, no fatalities reported yet. Shooter was spotted with some kind of rifle, unspecified type.

>warfighter

This meme dies now

File: 1486038960055.png (97KB, 246x232px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 246x232px

>>34252797
o-ok

USA is behind once again. Mig 31 existed for 50 years and isn't a meme plane that'll burn up on supersonic cruise.

sounds cooler than 3rd stunk army

File: Finnish-ww2-soldiers.jpg (151KB, 498x640px) Image search: [Google]

151KB, 498x640px

>>34252671
Lots of nationalities use special designations for the first wave of formation to come in contact with the enemy. Storm, Shock, Assault, Strike etc take your pick.

>>34252671
They're called a shock army because their role in Red Army doctrine was that of shock troops. Soviet shock armies were generally infantry and artillery heavy formations with their mobility restricted to pretty much just a head on attack. Their role was to make the initial attack and break the enemy lines, so that more mobile mechanized units could rush through and exploit the breach.

Think of a big blob of guys with submachine guns, engineers for breaching fortifications, and field guns for support, with nary a motorized vehicle in sight. That's a shock army.

File: PodsTB2Hangar.jpg (174KB, 800x544px) Image search: [Google]

174KB, 800x544px

I imagine it would be handy for deploying tanks in the midst of combat, or if you want to be more true to the original applications of the Thunderbirds, a bridgelayer or transport vehicles

Okay, make one that works in real life and then tell us how that goes.

>>34252713

i understand the speed is not feasible at all but i dont know enough about aircraft to consider the design over all

>>34252651
Due to their variety I'd recommend the H&R Handi-Rifle, nothing fancy but they are generally good shooters and there are a lot of barrels available. Even a couple long 45-70 and 38-55's if you wanted to get into BPCR competitions.
Otherwise you have the Ruger No.1 which is a wonderful rifle based loosely on the Farquharson design and in an assload of chamberings, I've seen everything from 220 Swift to 450 Nitro Express and everything in-between. Beyond that you have the big classics like the Sharps, High Wall, and Rolling Block. Uberti makes damn good repros of all of the above and you can get Sharps and High Walls pretty reasonably if you avoid the Deluxe Sporting models and the like.

>>34252683
Thanks, I'll look into those ones.

Henry is bringing out one in blued or brass and in a lot of sweet calibers. Should be shipping out soon

File: Formula.gif (19KB, 719x483px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 719x483px

>>34252631
The final answer approaches ZERO miles per hour (0 km per hr) as the guns will all drag. Durr. Summerfag, you will test positive when school starts again.

>>34252667
im a brainlet so can you elaborate?

>>34252707
the true answer is the A10 would collapse into a singularity and probably destroy the universe

>>34252423
>500 feet
>feet
i believe its supposed to be meters/yards

British Expeditionary Force had to qualify on 15 rounds on a target at 300yards, within one minute
They used irons
The record was 38 hits in one minute

>>34252561
Were the rifles bolt action, because the mosin simo used was
>>34252531
No it's 500 feet, so around 170m

>>34252350
no, not really.

I've been in a lot of violent situations, and I can say that i really wouldn't want to be put back in a situation where I'd need to use my gun. i wouldn't hesitate to use it when needed, but I have no real desire to be forced to do so.

besides, there's a shit ton of legal issues involved with that. I like my guns for hobby shooting. if i have to use my guns, I expect they'd be taken as "evidence" indefinitely. so anytime i use a gun, the situation needs to present risk greater than the cost of the gun at minimum.

so no, i don't ever want to use my gun.

>>34252350
>>34252433
Not really. I haven't been exposed to much violence, and under all the SHALL I'm a bit of a Bambi fag. I don't like hurting things, or even really causing discomfort I don't have to. Frankly I'm a little worried I might hesitate if shit really went down, home invader or animal. I'd have an easier time of it if I had someone depending on me to protect them

>>34252350
Yeah shooting bad guy is totally worth it for all 3 seconds of it happening until you have to wait in your house with a dead body for the police to come and then pay thousands of dollars in legal bills that you could be spending on more guns.

File: 1496580801652.gif (3MB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 320x240px

>>34252331
So they don't have to get into a fistfight? Firearms give you a great amount of mobility and freedom when it comes to the usage and escalation of force. An unarmed, untrained fellow has about two solid choices when it comes to serious, violent and often belligerent threats. Retreat or go apeshit.
The former is of course preferable in certain situations, but many times it's not an option; you're surrounded, your home is being invaded, your family is behind you, there's a wall at your back, you can't outrun someone, there are lives to defend. They have a gun.
Situations like that offer you no choice but to submit or fight back, but fighting back is often dangerous and if the other guy is armed and you aren't, or if there are multiple people accosting you, you're not getting out of it in the shape you got into it. Even if you have a knife, it'll only be truly effective for intimidation and any actual knifefight will not have real winners. Both sides are going to be stabbed and cut, dead, even.
With a handgun, many of those problems can be solved simply by brandishing and if necessary shooting. Even the possibility of you being armed will seriously curtail the willingness of redguards and other undesirables to jump you, try to rob you, invade your home, get in your face or cause you harm. And the best thing about it all is that guns work the same for everyone. It doesn't matter if you're some faggot twink, some officelady or a disabled retiree. If you have a gun, it evens the playing field and lets you defend yourself effectively against most anyone.

File: racism doesn't exist.png (670KB, 600x884px) Image search: [Google]

670KB, 600x884px

Because freedom. The 'why' is irrelevant.

>>34252331
The reason why those neighbourhoods are low crime is because the people living there aren't the type to get into random fistfights and they understand civic responsibility and gun ownership.

Are you fucking serious?

.45ACP

>>34252327
45-70, but we all know your fatass isn't going into the woods.

Glock 40
Although I EDC a 20

Have to know people to acquire illegal goods, duh. It is possible to reactivate a bricked wallhanger with a bit of machining, but based on your posting style you aren't someone up to task.

>>34252278
Three options: (i) get a section 5 license - you won't - (ii) get a deact - now, due to new regs, COMPLETELY welded up (magazine even unremovable) - (iii) use the money to go to, say, the US and have fun with a borrowed one for a day.

Most I can get is a firearm licence which apparently covers anything that aint a shotgun.

Now, obviously using google aint gonna get me websites where guns are sold. Not sure if any U.Kfags here own guns or rifles, but if you do, how'd you go about getting your mitts on one?

Also: Leyonhjelm, is there actually any hope of people being allowed to carry tasers, let alone guns around in light of the seemingly ever increasing threat of terrorism?

>>34252241
>in light of the seemingly ever increasing threat of terrorism?
don't you know, aussie? If you kill your enemies, they win.
So if you defend against, or emu forbid, kill a bad person trying to do you harm, they win.
And if the bad people kill you, YOU win!
It's that simple!

File: Australian gun laws.webm (176KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

176KB, 600x600px

>Do we really need a cat d license for it?
Yes you fucking baby killer.

It's been scientifically proven that the more rounds a firearm holds, the more likely you are to become a spree killer.

>>34252241
>is there actually any hope of people being allowed to carry tasers
No, you fucking psychopath.

Self-defence is for the government only. Stop trying to compensate for the size of your primary and/or secondary sexual characteristics.

>>34252101
It might have lasted a bit longer but the Allies still inevitably win. Using saner designs does not magic up a fuckton of fuel for the Axis nor does it end the naval blockade that pretty much guaranteed they'd run out of major resources.

Also the Japanese and Italians by and large did stick with practical + affordable designs, it's just that the Italians didn't have much of an industrial base to make them and the Japs concentrated on naval shit instead. The USA also already built some pretty expensive and inefficient small arms (Thompson, B.A.R.) but could simply brute force them with their superior industrial capacity.

File: B.jpg (11KB, 371x236px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 371x236px

>>34252101
the British and Americans have to worry about getting things over open water
Germans only have some rivers to deal with. so they made submersible versions of the pz 3 5 and 6

and in terms of Japanese tanks
3.7 cm pak 36 was pretty much a dooms day weapon
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Taierzhuang

>>34252131
also this
even if the Germans would build more tanks
they have too few people able to crew them
and hardly and fuel or ball bearings to use

>>34252177
>they have too few people able to crew them
They were also too stupid to rotate experienced crews/pilots out of the frontline to train new recruits.

pigfat useless old and busted old cold war whore

They were extremely maintenance intensive. Also, the navy tried to play silly games by buying them with placeholder engines and got called out on it when they tried to replace them with what they were supposed to have.

They were unfortunately pointless. What's there to been to intercept since it's retirement? Nothing. The F/A-18E might not be as good at being a high speed missile truck, but it does everything a naval fighter has been needed since the Tomcat's retirement. Even the

>>34252036
2003 was a weird fucking period
It's like retrofuturism where everything was chrome, but it was real life so they used plastic instead of chrome. But then it was a uniform so they used plastic chrome coloured digital camoflauge

I thought it was supposed to be for the mountains in Afghanistan? Like yeah, stone gray isn't going to blend with darker greens, but neither is snow white and that still works fine be in the correct environment.