Archived threads in /k/ - Weapons - 2811. page

SWAT with Colin Ferrel

File: IMG_2410.jpg (71KB, 1031x583px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 1031x583px

Way of the Gun
Zulu
Sicario
Heat
Jack Reacher
Glory
John Wick
True Grit
Death Wish
Collateral

>>31967388
Glory is shit, Gettysburg all the way

Men still train with irons

>>31967161
Yes everyone always learns iron sights.

>>31967161
do the muhreens still do bayonet training?

>>31966908
God I hope this is true.

>>31966908
>be a larping underage tard
>spam out /k/ because I have no friends
GET OUT OF MY K

Politely decline

File: questionable.jpg (4KB, 141x222px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 141x222px

>>31966874
home defense AND carry?

i consider a good CCW something that you'll carry 24/7, so anything up to a single stack 9mm. I don't think people actually carry their double stack glock 19/26 with them 24/7, but maybe I'm wrong. At the end of the day, unless your home is getting invaded by some gang with firearms, even ~7 rounds of 9mm will do a lot of damage.

revolvers(with a hidden hammer like the 442/642) are nice because you can shoot them through a pocket or something if you really wanted to and have maximum surprise in some situation, and they won't jam. are you really okay with 5/6 rounds of .38sp though?

If you can deal with carrying it, it's probably going to be a Glock 19 or something equivalent to a Glock 19, or a Glock 26 if you can't deal with the Glock 19. Carry one extra mag and if you can't do enough damage in 20-30 rounds of 9mm, you were fucked no matter what.
>but it will stove pipe and you'll get assraped and stabbed to death by jamal anyway :3

I use a standard, normal ass anti-special snowflake black Beretta 92FS that I bought for $500 new for home defense and carry. I have it on me at all times. It's great to shoot, reliable, double action so perfect for carry, holds a lot of rounds and they give you 3 mags. 45 fucking rounds of 9mm is enough. generic because i know the cops are going to take it away after i have to use it and I won't see it for possibly a long time, so I don't want it being some really nice piece that I cherished or whatever. It would have been a CZ75B but I really hated operating it.

a little 380 will be great as a CCW, but home defense? I'm not so sure. All of these guns are going to be loud, so the size of the round isn't going to make a difference to your hearing. i think a full size(or compact if you're small) double stacked, inexpensive, non-special snowflake 9mm is optimal.

File: Weapons trivia - guns on a budget - update 2.5 - what 2.4 should have been - smaller.jpg (4MB, 3900x5008px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 3900x5008px

>>31966874
>posting the old, outdated version
Here. Newest update from the update thread made specifically to update your pic.

>>31966874
Revolver.

+simple to use
+won't jam
+won't fail
+needs no maintenance
+inherently more accurate because fixed barrel
+can use higher power bullets
+holds 6 shots, same as many semi-autos
+easier to conceal because shorter grip
+not banned anywhere unlike so called "assault pistols"
-gas from the cylinder can hurt your fingers if you have a bad hold

Most gunfights have an average of 2 shots fired.

File: 4108015867874175475.jpg (10KB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 250x250px

>>31966795
This

File: 5B_-_First_Handgun_-1.jpg (178KB, 840x709px) Image search: [Google]

178KB, 840x709px

>>31966795

Forget a gun, spend the $100 on a really loud bluetooth speaker so everybody can hear the Dynasty Warriors soundtrack as you go full Guan Yu on the crowd.

>>31966785
do you want the reticle to magnify with the magnification?

File: scout rifle lookup.jpg (40KB, 420x216px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 420x216px

>>31966838
The way I look at it, having a first focal plane reticle will mean that estimating a quick shot will take one less step. Find target, focus in, (skip thinking about what zoom setting the scope is on), estimate range and calculate holdovers due to range and windage, fire)

What benefits am I missing for second focal plane scopes in this setting? My main benchrest rifle is SFP, but I'm always shooting at known ranges and want to take the time to do the calculations.

have a random bolt gun picture

>>31966885
i have a 1-4x second focal plane (Trijicon Accupoint, Tritium+fiber optic), and once you know your dopes for max magnification, it isn't really a second step at all.

If you're going to be estimating, it will probably be at max magnification, right?

I know a couple cav scouts. They hate their lives because their jobs are so boring

>>31966670
Sick of these LARP threads.
Get out of my /k/

>>31966610
Hey vets, thanks for serving your masters who literally conspire to kill their own citizens, plot illegal wars, and massacre people for no valid reason. Bravo. U tha mvp ;)

>>31966616
np thanks 4 the college bucks and free applebees

>>31966622
>college bux and applebees
Lol, could you not afford those before? No wonder we send the poor and stupid to war...Really makes you think...

File: 157642346.jpg (18KB, 500x337px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 500x337px

>>31966588

File: railgun.jpg (101KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 1280x720px

>>31966588
,

File: f31984cd4f5824a6ebc1f74cbbc2aa63.jpg (55KB, 740x533px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 740x533px

>>31966588
.

>>31966382
it's actually like 80% of the time .40 vs anything else because .40 a shit and owners feel they need to justify it

5.45 tends to tumble, 5.56 tends to fragment

>>31966382
5.56
>Negligibly heavier ammo
>M193 fragments within about 250yd from 20" barrel
>M855 fragments even less reliably

5.45
>Mags generally a little bit heavier
>7N6 tumbles reliably at just about any range
>7N10 performs similarly
>Shorter casing makes for easier ejection
>7N6 penetrates better than M193
>7N10 penetrates better than M855
>Slightly less recoil impulse

I believe 5.45x39 to be better than 5.56x45 in almost every single way, and I also think the AK-74M is on the same level as the M4A1 in most regards, including accuracy. I believe the AK-12 to be as good or superior to the M4A1 in all ways except possibly weight, and it is not much heavier.

>>31966428
How does 5.45 perform is shorter carbine barrels?

File: M40.jpg (203KB, 1022x509px) Image search: [Google]

203KB, 1022x509px

>>31966147
also does anyone have any experience with an M40?

>>31966147
Better than m4. But attaching that shit to a plastic handguard is retarded.

>>31966147
Good tier rifle. Lots have been written about them and their C8 counterpart. Lots of spec ops units use them.

>>31966106
What the fuck is this and why do I want it

File: nice.png (2MB, 948x787px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 948x787px

>>31966106
I mean, god damn that must feel amazing.

>>31966106
Grampa or the gun?
I'd agree on both.

nothing for 286 will be bad ass but it will do the job, and just go fucking watch a review or two or three and make a decision from there.

Decent. They lose in every way to higher end subcompacts but they go bang. Distant relative has one... first shot was a squib round, bullet didn't leave the barrel. Second shot ruptured the barrel. SCCY took the return and replaced the gun for free to see what went wrong. So good customer service.

Sccy is pronouced Sky. Better than a hipoint since its smaller. Double action only so you'll have to learn that kind of trigger. Its made in the U.S. I think.

If you wait till Black Friday sales it might be cheaper. Also check out the Taurus Pt111 G2 and the Taurus Slim 9mm. Those two are about the same price as the sccy at my stores

>>31966041
I am someone who was in training to be an officer, but chose not to continue and go back to being enlisted because of what it entails.

90% of what officers do is cover your ass bullshit. Very little of their time is spent solving problems, and the time that is spent solving problems is because that looks good on their OER.

Advancement for enlisted is determined by how good at your job you are, how good at general tasks in your service's mission, and personal qualities such as leadership. Advancement for officers is based on how directly you can comply with directives sent down from higher officers and force your enlisted to comply. These aren't things related to the mission, they're things like sexual harassment.

Being an officer requires one to be morally and ethically flexible, dependent upon the ever-changing moral compass of the civilians that run the military. Officers are taught to disregard the impact tactical decisions may have on their own soldiers in favor of the impact tactical decisions may have on the civilian population. Officers are taught to make ethical judgements with completely arbitrary factors in mind, such as how this action will make American civilians see the Army, how this action will change how the indigenous population will see the Army, instead of accomplishing the mission and getting your guys back.

Being an officer demands that you become, completely and entirely, a hypocrite. Someone who is able to do something sneaky and wrong for their own advantage, and then punish those who also do it. It demands that you force your men to do things that you would never do yourself, or believe in things you would never believe in, under threat of punishment.

The way officers are expected to act and are trained to act, at present, is dangerous and destructive. Destructive to morale, destructive to the ethical direction of the military, and detrimental to the very mission of a military force.

>>31966100
>I am someone who was in training to be an officer, but chose not to continue and go back to being enlisted because of what it entails.
t. failed officers course

>>31966105
You can't really fail any officer course. With pretty much every way to commission, all you have to do to pass is keep showing up.

>>31966037
Could have Googled this, faggot.
After the Vietnam War finished, most army use of flamethrowers was stopped by the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (concluded at Geneva on 10 October 1980 and entered into force in December 1983). See the Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Incendiary Weapons (Protocol III), which the United States ratified on 23 December 2008.[27]

File: 1261433292053.jpg (31KB, 591x444px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 591x444px

>>31966037
'Cause they're banned by the Geneva protocol for causing undue suffering.

Also, if the enemy catches you with a flamethrower, they'll gouge out your eyes, cut off your hands and split your dick.

>>31966037
Very short range
Not much "ammo"
Difficult to operate safely
Grenade launchers are overall better
Charred corpses smell funny
Muh feelings