How often is / was using captured enemy weapons against them

File: Belgian_soldier_with_captured_Turkish_M1893_Mauser_WW1.jpg (1MB, 1691x2470px)

1MB, 1691x2470px

>>34274136
>were very undersupplied most of the time,
Maybe those trapped in the Philippines, or on Wake Island.

Generally the only time captured weapons would see service against their former owners is either in dire circumstances, or when such weapons were easily fit into a logistics chain (like pic related, a Belgian soldier with a Turkish Mauser captured by the British in Palestine or Gallipoli)

File: IMG_2195.jpg (415KB, 1898x2426px) Image search: [Google]

415KB, 1898x2426px

>>34274261
Are the ones found on bodies after a battle / captured at least collected and destroyed so they don't fall back into enemy hands?

In ww2 there was alot of the usage of enemy equipment like tanks all the way down to radios.

>>34274136

I'd be willing to bet that it was far more common for Japanese soldiers to use American weapons than vise versa. Japanese soldiers were very often poorly equipped compared to their American counterparts.

>>34274136
Very common, Germans using captured SVT-40's was so common that they actually started issuing manuals on how to use them right

>>34275636
This, the Arisaka rifles were literally the only decent weapon they were issues.

File: Flemish_Waffen-SS_volunteers_at_rest_note_Czech_Vz23_Mauser_rifles_with_sight_hoods.jpg (481KB, 1600x1025px) Image search: [Google]

481KB, 1600x1025px

>>34275673
Germans issued manuals for every damn rifle under the sun they came across. They even wrote one for the sniper version of the Belgian M1935 Mauser rifle, of which there were a couple hundred at most.