Ask Hammer Redux

OnTheBounce · Post by **OnTheBounce** » Thu Dec 04, 2003 9:44 am

Hammer wrote:I've always had problems with Stripper clips though, I found the Garand's system, while very similiar, much easier.

I've known people that have had more problems w/one or the other. I wonder if the gov't ever did a study on this to find out which was easier for most people.

Hammer wrote:Just move your thumb out of the way in time

Yes indeed!

I remember one time a couple of friends and I were shooting in the boonies on Ft. Riley and one guy had brought his newly bought Garand. He was something of a BS'er -- but a decent friend none-the-less -- and said that he'd been shooting Garands since he was knee-high on a squashed grasshopper.

"You sure you know what you're doing?"

"Of course I know what I'm doing!"

SNICK!

WAAAAAAHHHHHH!!!!

He split his thumb wide open. Worst I've ever seen that happen.

So we bandage his thumb up and he starts shooting. He got three rounds off, then the op rod broke. He was using civilian ammo w/the wrong bullet weight in it...

An amusing day, but we didn't get much shooting done.

Kashluk wrote:If you're sitting in a trench/a castle/a bunker, indirect fire is the *only* option to kick your butt efficiently.

Artillery isn't just indirect fire, Kash. Things like Infantry Guns (which aren't in use anymore) were only direct fire, but they figure into claims like the one you mentioned. Most Napoleonic-era art'y is also direct fire only.

OTB

Franz Schubert · Post by **Franz Schubert** » Thu Dec 04, 2003 9:47 am

Hammer what part of Pennsylvania do you live in?

Also: Is there such thing as a fully automatic Glock?

airsoft guy · Post by **airsoft guy** » Thu Dec 04, 2003 11:05 am

Franz_Schubert wrote:Hammer what part of Pennsylvania do you live in?

Also: Is there such thing as a fully automatic Glock?

Ooo, I can answer the Glock question the Glock 18c and I think the Glock 26 are fully automatic, or maybe they just have three round burst, the point is they have a selector switch, I know that much.

trythebill · Post by **trythebill** » Thu Dec 04, 2003 11:15 am

glock 26 is just a 9mm pocket pistol.

glock 18c is full-auto. the selector is for safe-semi-full and is on the side of the slide near the rear.

here's more on the teutonic tupperware:
http://remtek.com/arms/glock/model/9/18/

FYI: there is also such thing as a fully-automatic 1911.

Kizmiaz · Post by **Kizmiaz** » Thu Dec 04, 2003 1:19 pm

Thanks for the answer, dear Hammer.

Hammer wrote:A Mauser 98k, 8mm, standard issue to all German soldiers in WW2 was more accurate then the M1 Garand past 500 yard

However, mine was m/96, that is 1896. (Mine was manufactured 1912 according to the stamp.)
But I guess they're pretty much the same.

OnTheBounce wrote:

(There were exceptions, like Soviet Guards infantry which was liberally equipped with SMGs, but at range that advantage still stood.)

Stoopid question, but SMG stands for Sub-Macine Gun or something right?
Not Schweres Machinen-Gewehr? (Pardon my German. English too btw.)

Franz Schubert · Post by **Franz Schubert** » Thu Dec 04, 2003 2:38 pm

Yes sub-machine gun.

Kashluk · Post by **Kashluk** » Thu Dec 04, 2003 2:40 pm

OTB wrote:
Kashluk wrote:If you're sitting in a trench/a castle/a bunker, indirect fire is the *only* option to kick your butt efficiently.
Artillery isn't just indirect fire, Kash. Things like Infantry Guns (which aren't in use anymore) were only direct fire, but they figure into claims like the one you mentioned. Most Napoleonic-era art'y is also direct fire only.

Well, uh... All artillery isn't indirect fire, but all indirect fire is artillery? :oops:

Forty-six & Two · Post by **Forty-six & Two** » Thu Dec 04, 2003 2:53 pm

Kashluk wrote:Well, uh... All artillery isn't indirect fire, but all indirect fire is artillery? :oops:

Oh yea, now it all makes sense

Jawz II · Post by **Jawz II** » Thu Dec 04, 2003 3:42 pm

hey hammer,how come all army rangers ever manage to do is to get themselves killed?

im talkin about tehran,mogadishu etc

oh wait those r delta force right?
those r even more 1337 than rangers yeah?

ps.do u know what sigmund freud would have to say about your obsession with big guns?

Kizmiaz · Post by **Kizmiaz** » Thu Dec 04, 2003 3:43 pm

Franz_Schubert wrote:Yes sub-machine gun.

Yeah, I thought so. I can't really imagine Soviet Guards infantry liberally equipped with water-cooled Maxims or something similiar.

Franz Schubert · Post by **Franz Schubert** » Thu Dec 04, 2003 4:36 pm

Jawz II wrote:ps.do u know what sigmund freud would have to say about your obsession with big guns?

His obsession has more to do with quality, effectiveness, and usefulness, not size.

Question for Hammer: Do you think citizens should have the right (as granted by the second amendment) to carry nuclear arms, or like cruise missiles or ICBMs?

MurPHy · Post by **MurPHy** » Thu Dec 04, 2003 4:42 pm

He split his thumb wide open. Worst I've ever seen that happen.

Now that's a nasty case of Garand thumb. I saw some photos of a certain way to hold the rifle when you load it so that doesn't happen. Something involving holding the action back with your right hand (and holding the rifle with that hand too), and using your left hand to load ammo.

Franz_Schubert wrote:
Yes sub-machine gun.
Yeah, I thought so. I can't really imagine Soviet Guards infantry liberally equipped with water-cooled Maxims or something similiar.

I believe the SMGs that the Russkies used was the PPsh-41, which had a 71 round drum magazine, and a copy of the MP 38/40, which used a 30 round stick magazine.

Kashluk · Post by **Kashluk** » Thu Dec 04, 2003 4:47 pm

It is NOT a copy of the MP38/40, it's a copy of the Suomi SMG. That 71 rnd drum magazine was identical with Suomi, some of them actually had Finnish manufacturer's logos on them.

MurPHy · Post by **MurPHy** » Thu Dec 04, 2003 5:07 pm

Sorry, Kash. Maybe I didn't make myself specific enough in my last post. When I said a copy of the MP38/40, I was referring to another SMG, not the PPsh-41 (which is based on the Finnish Suomi SMG, as you said).

Mandalorian FaLLouT GoD · Thu Dec 04, 2003 5:33 pm

Slave_Master wrote:
Jawz II wrote:ps.do u know what sigmund freud would have to say about your obsession with big guns?
1. English motherfucker, do you speak it?

2. Who gives a damn what Freud would think? He was a shitty psychoanalyst, because he projected his feelings onto all his patients. A (shitty) example would be if I went up to him (Yes, I know he's dead, to preempt any smartass remarks) and told him I had dreams about a dog pissing in my yard. He'd start rambling about how I wanted to fuck my mom or something, without bothering to find out what dogs, piss, and the yard mean to my subconscious, not his.

I could bend Freudian psychoanalysis to say that, because of your apparent phobia of the big American with the big gun, you're insecure about your penis size, since you just hate anybody with a hugeass gun that can spray bullets all over people.

To conclude, Freud was full of shit, and you're full of shit, too. By the way, it was a nice try citing Freud to sound educated.

the only reason people know who freud is because he related everything to penis size.

"what you like pie? SMALL PENIS"

OnTheBounce · Post by **OnTheBounce** » Thu Dec 04, 2003 6:44 pm

Kashluk wrote:Well, uh... All artillery isn't indirect fire, but all indirect fire is artillery?

Yes, indirect fire weapons are a subset of artillery. Note that "artillery" is not to be confused with "field artillery" which is something different altogether. (I know, this shit is confusing, but then again the military of any country has it's own logic, which often seems arbitrary or even irrational to the uninitiated.)

Jawz II wrote:ps.do u know what sigmund freud would have to say about your obsession with big guns?

An infantryman once explained the following scheme to me:

An infantryman's rifle is an extension of his penis.
Those infantrymen who are not secure about the size of their phallus end up as mechanized infantry, that way they have a 25mm Bushmaster to compensate where a normal infantryman would be satisfied with a 5.56mm rifle.
Tank crews, on the other hand, are definitely under-equipped in this department, and hence opt for a 120mm cannon. (Things must have gotten worse during the '80s, because a 105mm was good enough back then.)
Finally, we get to the artillery men...

Kizmiaz wrote:Stoopid question, but SMG stands for Sub-Macine Gun or something right? Not Schweres Machinen-Gewehr? (Pardon my German. English too btw.)

Not a st00pid question. Yes, the others are correct, SMG is "sub-machinegun". If I had meant schweres Maschinengewehr I would have written "sMG".

(See boys and girls, that is why capitalization is important even on message boards.

)

Cheers,

OTB

Kashluk · Post by **Kashluk** » Thu Dec 04, 2003 7:02 pm

But aren't the Germans giving up capitalizing their nouns? That means it would be written "smg" in the near future??

Ugh, getting too far off-topic.

Menno · Post by **Menno** » Thu Dec 04, 2003 10:41 pm

Jawz II wrote:hey hammer,how come all army rangers ever manage to do is to get themselves killed?

im talkin about tehran,mogadishu etc

oh wait those r delta force right?
those r even more 1337 than rangers yeah?

ps.do u know what sigmund freud would have to say about your obsession with big guns?

If you call the kill ratio of Rangers/Delta/SEALs to Somalis at the firefight of Mogadishu [estimated to be around 31:1] "getting themselves killed", then you'd be a complete moron. Oh wait...you already are. That's almost like one Ranger coming to your neighborhood and beating the living shit out of you and thirty of your other mutant-looking friends before taking him down. Nevermind, bad analogy. If that were to occur I'm sure the ratio would be 1119:1 instead. They also did complete their mission objective I might add.

About Desert One and the Iranian hostage rescue, the mission was aborted after a helicopter crashed into a C-130, adding to several other mistakes made (the Marine Corp. pilots not having enough training for this type of mission; a low-level dust storm that hampered visibility; and even a pilot who had to ground his aircraft after being unfamiliar on how to operate it, since the air support was thrown together at the last minute). The Rangers had nothing to little directly to do with the failure (since the mission was aborted). Yet you criticize two of the operations they were involved in, even though they've been in over a thousand(s) missions that were accomplished successfully.

Yes, Delta Force is more "1337" than Rangers. But both have different roles.

Aren't you that kid who was whining about the CIA's involvement in South America? Why are you concerned about Army Rangers in that case? Instead you should be "WOrrIED AboUt US ARMY GREEN BERETS MOThAFUcKa!1!1!" I hope they train some gay Marxist guerillas to track your ass down, open your mouth wide, and give you a hot-beef "injection". Time to earn your name "Jawz"!

johnnygothisgun · Post by **johnnygothisgun** » Fri Dec 05, 2003 5:05 am

What packs more stopping power, a 5.56 round or a 7.62 round?

Maybe it should be self explanatory, but I've read that some larger rounds just pass through their targets and don't have any real stopping power. Just make you bleed. A lot.

Kizmiaz · Post by **Kizmiaz** » Fri Dec 05, 2003 9:33 am

Menno wrote:I hope they train some gay Marxist guerillas to track your ass down, open your mouth wide, and give you a hot-beef "injection". Time to earn your name "Jawz"!

Uh, you ought to see the movie "Iron Cross" by Peckinpah. Or was that what you were referring to?