h a l f b a k e r yThere's no money in it.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
I like street musicians and always throw them a buck even
if they're lousy.
I also like the idea of having cops around, both uniformed
and undercover to catch bad guys.
The idea of combining them would be two-fold: When you
hear street music nearby, criminals would think "This area
may
be under the protection of an armed officer." and we'd
get to have some nice live music as we walk down the
street as well.
They'd rotate from city to city so they wouldn't get
recognized. I think the kind of person who wanted to take
this job would be pretty interesting. "I can hit all the notes
to this song on key as well as a bullseye at 100 yards."
Not exactly widely known, but...
http://www.facebook...268439535686&type=3
[normzone, Aug 14 2012]
http://7.62x54r.net...inID/MosinHumor.htm
[FlyingToaster, Aug 15 2012]
Bad Boys by Marley
http://www.youtube....watch?v=S9XEGBrA99E
[doctorremulac3, Aug 16 2012]
El Mariachi
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_Mariachi
"Play It Again, Sam ..." [8th of 7, Aug 17 2012]
[link]
|
| |
I'd be more inclined to check as to whether the violin case is open or closed to recieve offerings. |
|
| |
I'm sure this is probably baked in all sorts of surveillence methods. |
|
| |
Let me clarify: This wouldn't be secret, this
program
would be widely advertised. The only information
not available would be exactly which of those
street
musicians were also cops. |
|
| |
The sound of street music, already something very
pleasant, would also be the sound of a protector
of the public being nearby. (possibly) |
|
| |
I think it would give a kind of "all is well"
vibe to public places. |
|
| |
...and the money in their hats, guitar cases, cans etc
would all go to charity. |
|
| |
I'd certainly attack more street musicians than usual. |
|
| |
//bullseye at 100 yards// |
|
| |
You don't know many cops, do you? |
|
| |
If it was //widely advertised// no one would give money to the poor street musicians, because they would assume they were making police man salaries. |
|
| |
//I'd certainly attack more street musicians than
usual.// |
|
| |
Well, if he turned out to be an armed cop that
probably wouldn't be such a great idea. |
|
| |
//The first time a cop broke his cover to
apprehend a shoplifter or pickpocket he'd lose his
effectiveness// |
|
| |
As I said, they'd rotate from city to city. |
|
| |
No, it's just that the voices in your head are
particulalrly loud and insistent today, [bigs]. |
|
| |
<wince> I'ma let somebody else jump all over your explanation [21] but meanwhile, for a concise list of the differences between the AK-47, M-16 (both are assault rifles, btw) and an old battle rifle, go to <link> |
|
| |
What if they have menacing song choices like 'We're gonna get you' or 'guilty'? |
|
| |
I can think of nothing creepier than being stalked by perfectly-harmonised serenading policepersons. It's enough to make any crim turn over a new leaf, or at least invest in earplugs. |
|
| |
Like to the tune of "Sweet Adeline"? |
|
| |
Cop: "Hands on the carrrrr" |
|
| |
Backup officers: "Hands on the carrrrr" |
|
| |
"Well, what's in your front pocket herrre?" |
|
| |
Perp: "Hey that's my junk!" |
|
| |
Backup cops: "You grabbed his junk!" |
|
| |
Well, they could play the entire Police back catalogue, not to mention "I fought the law, and the law won".. |
|
| |
You know, the right song selection might be good
psychological warfare against potential criminals,
the latter example you gave being a good one. |
|
| |
I think this idea, good or bad stems from my
hearing that samurai monks used flutes that
doubled as weapons. I don't know why I always
loved that idea so much. I think it's the message "I
can play beautiful music with a flute or smack you
upside the head with a stick, it's your choice." |
|
| |
The ladies working vice sing "What you gonna do with all that junk, all that junk inside your trunk"... |
|
| |
And then you hear "Julie's been working for the drug squad, Julie's been working for the...drug squad...She could even look you in the eye..." |
|
| |
Battle Rifles: Designed with trench warfare in mind; all of these are good up to at least 6-800m easily, weigh 10-15 pounds, loaded. |
|
| |
Lee Enfield - 3.5kJ - .303Brit
M1 Garand - 3.8kJ - .30-06
M14, FN-FAL - 3.5kJ - 7.62x51mm |
|
| |
Assault Rifles: Designed for small packets of people running around the country/cityscape against other small packets of people. Weight: 5-7 lbs and useful in fully automatic mode. |
|
| |
M1/M2 Carbine - 1.2kJ - .30Carbine (probably 300m on a really good day)
M16 - 1.6kJ - 5.56mm NATO (400m)
AK-47 - 2.0kJ - 7.63x39 (can hit the side of a barn from inside the barn)
|
|
| |
or, to make a long story short, you may notice that not only is the AK-47 cartridge much shorter than the other 7.62 cartridges, it's even shorter than the M16 cartridge. |
|
| |
Neither the AK47 or M16 are battle rifles. |
|
| |
It's my understanding that an assault rifle is simply
a weapon that was inspired by the German's
mixing a submachine gun with an automatic rifle.
The Sturmgewehr 44, literally "storm (or assault)
rifle (model of 19)44", was the first such combo
weapon. So the "assault rifle" title was just a
catchy propaganda name that stuck rather than a
specific designation of a particular kind of
weapon. Now other weapons that followed, the AK
and the M16 do pretty much the same thing so
they're "pretty much" assault rifles. You could
theoretically call them "storm rifles". If that first
German weapon was called a "Smurf Duster" we
might refer to the M-16 and similar weapons as
such. |
|
| |
To illustrate the diff, there are automatic rifles
like the BAR that aren't called assault rifles
because they don't shoot a pistol cartridge and
"assault weapons" that aren't necessarily assault
rifles but are, to my understanding, anything that
looks scary like it's something you'd see in a
gangster movie. |
|
| |
I'm sure that clears things up. |
|
| |
// there are automatic rifles like the BAR that aren't called assault rifles because they don't shoot a pistol cartridge and "assault weapons" that aren't necessarily assault rifles but are, to my understanding, anything that looks scary like it's something you'd see in a gangster movie.... I'm sure that clears things up. // |
|
| |
The BAR and the Bren are "squad level" light support weapons; capable of (and intended for) both repetetive and automatic fire, and capable of a high degree of accuracy. The term Light Machine Gun is applicable. Both weapons are capable of being deployed as a personal weapon, the primary problem being ammunition. |
|
| |
Generally speaking, Sub-Machine Guns fire pistol rounds like 9mm P and .45ACP; the M1 carbine is "almost but not quite" an "assault rifle". Then there are Light, Medium and Heavy machine guns; medium and heavy machine guns typically fire a "fullbore" round like the 7.62 NATO. |
|
| |
It's more that there's now a continuum of personal weapons, with the traditional Pointed Stick (even in these times, remarkably effective in the right circumstances) at one end, and (at one time) the Davy Crockett at the other. |
|
| |
What was the question again ? And where was Antonio Banderas when all this was being decided ? |
|
| |
To which point? But make it quick I'm leaving town
for vacation in 5 minutes. |
|
| |
It's probably just his brain going on vacation
... seems to happen a lot ... |
|
| |
// they are too heavy for a single infantryman
to carry for extended periods of time. // |
|
| |
<anally-retentive gun-geek pedantry> |
|
| |
An infantryman can carry an LMG (L3, Bren) or
a BAR without too much difficulty; but add
more than a couple of mags of ammo and
you've got a problem. So the gun team needs
one guy with the weapon, cleaning kit and
ready-use ammo, plus two or three more with
spare barrels, more ammo, and their own
personal weapons; in WW1, Vickers gun crews
typically carried pistols as sidearms, despite
mostly being enlisted men or NCO's - pistols
were
otherwise (except for tank crews) a de-facto
rank badge of officers. |
|
| |
Don't make us load up the PowerPoint … |
|
| |
/they'd rotate from city to city/ |
|
| |
Always one step ahead of the FBI. I envision this as sort of a cross between The A Team and Josie and the Pussycats. |
|
| |
BAR, Bren, SAW-240 are light machine guns. A bit of disambiguation may be called for: |
|
| |
machine gun:
- TV: anything capable of fully automatic fire.
- Really: a *very* heavy weapon, the lightest of which is usually carried by the biggest guy in the squad, assisted by the second biggest carrying the ammunition. |
|
| |
assault weapon:
- TV: anything shootable that doesn't *look* like a hunting rifle/shotgun, dedicated target rifle, or pistol, wieldable by one person. It's a catchphrase promulgated by anti-gun lobbyists, solely for the purpose of obfuscation.
- Reality: no such thing. |
|
| |
//[light machine guns] they are too heavy for a single infantryman to carry for extended periods of time. // //Ummm … no// |
|
| |
LMG's are pretty useless as personal weapons. While they're sturdy enough to handle being fired automatically, they're also too heavy to carry around comfortably, can't be swung around fast, and both the long magazine and bipod gets in the way. //Vickers// is not "light" by any definition. A BAR *might* be considered a personal weapon by somebody of Schwarzeneggian proportions. |
|
| |
SAW crew is a two-way street, the rest of the gang is protecting them as much as the other way'round. |
|
| |
That may indeed be what you meant, but it's
not what you wrote … |
|
| |
// LMG's are pretty useless as personal
weapons // |
|
| |
// they're also too heavy to carry around
comfortably // |
|
| |
That rather depends on how much other gear
you're carrying. |
|
| |
// can't be swung around fast, and both the
long magazine and bipod gets in the way.// |
|
| |
Admittedly a disadvantage for FISH. But in
open country, there are advantages. |
|
| |
// //Vickers// is not "light" by any definition.// |
|
| |
It is a medium machine gun; standard rifle
ammo, but a crew-served weapon. We
mentioned it only to point out that a Vickers
crew had so much load to carry that the
standard infantry rifle was not an option as a
sidearm. However, since the firepower of the
MMG substantially exceeded the combined
firepower of the crew with rifles, as a group
they were better armed overall. |
|
| |
// A BAR *might* be considered a personal
weapon by somebody of Schwarzeneggian
proportions // |
|
| |
Tell It To The Marines … at Iwo Jima, and
many other engagements, BARs were often
used as such. They're lighter than a Lewis … |
|
| |
If you're coming around the corner with 50lb of Vickers, and I'm coming the other way with a pointy stick, I may have to change my underwear, but at least I'll be able to. |
|
| |
//Counterpoint: //The BAR and the Bren are
"squad level" light support weapons; capable of
(and intended for) both repetetive and automatic
fire, and capable of a high degree of accuracy. The
term Light Machine Gun is applicable.// // |
|
| |
RIght, which is why I said they're NOT assault
rifles, they're automatic rifles. Although what I
said about the smaller cartridge isn't strictly
speaking true though. My son carried a M-249 SAW
on his first tour in Iraq with the Marines. This is
most definitely not an "assault rifle" but as far as I
can see that's just because you can load a massive
ammo can onto it. It uses the same ammo as a M-
16 and has a similar barrel length but it doesn't
remind people of a Sturmgewehr 44 so it's a "squad
automatic weapon". Pretty sure you can take
single shots with it but I'll check. I'm beginning to
think "assault
rifle" should have the same quotation marks you
put around "assault weapon". I'll ask him about it.
He's the definitive expert on machine guns having
made his living with them for 4 years. |
|
| |
//And you sure seem to have a lot of vacations for
a person of the employed variety.// |
|
| |
Just because you work doesn't mean you have to
like it. I take off every chance I get. These trips
are
more like probational furloughs from work than
vacation. Saw Adam Carolla live last night and I'm
going to watch him race at Laguna Seca tomorrow.
But today it's a glass of wine or two on the beach
which is my true calling in life. |
|
| |
Ok, I checked and here's the word on assault
rifles from
somebody who's used them. |
|
| |
It's called an assault rifle because it's used in
assaults. It's got enough accuracy and
controllability to set up your assault and enough
ammo get the job done when that assault turns
into a close quarters engagement. It's also
adjustable to match whatever part of that assault
you're engaged it from single shot, to burst to full
auto. Oddly enough, full automatic isn't always
the best way to hit a target and the assault
weapon
is built with this in mind. It's also got to be light
enough to be maneuverable in a close combat
situation. A BAR by comparison is the size and
weight of a canoe. |
|
| |
The SAW is for suppressive fire and otherwise
laying down big walls of lead. It's got two modes,
"no" or "go" and it's not particularly controllable. |
|
| |
(Note: I edited this post after the below comments were written because I wrote "assault weapon" when I meant to write "assault rifle". This is why the below comments don't make sense now. However, they do however critique the goofy concept of there being such a thing as an "assault weapon" so I'll leave them. |
|
| |
"assault weapon" isn't a real (compound) word; it's just a catchphrase so all the various factions of anti-gun people, ie: |
|
| |
anti-full-auto
anti-converted-from full to-semi-only
anti-could-be-converted-to full-auto-by-a-gunsmith
anti-could-be-converted-to full-auto-with different-parts
anti-military-weapon
anti-looks-like an-assault-rifle
anti-scary-looking
and probably a few more,
can stick together under a common anti-banner which wording none-too-subtly implies such as machinery used in criminal assaults. |
|
| |
It's an insult, not only to the English language, but to soldiers. |
|
| |
The word that you're looking for is "assault rifle". |
|
| |
SAW's are plenty controllable: much moreso than an assault rifle; they're just not quickly moveable. |
|
| |
<Inevitable additional pedantry> |
|
| |
Yes, you're right, and no, you're wrong. |
|
| |
The term "assault weapon" is too open ended
to have any technical meaning. It's a
portmanteau word. |
|
| |
An assault weapon doesn't have to be a
firearm; that's just an interpretation. |
|
| |
Now, "assault rifle" is sufficiently narrow to be
aalmost useful. it implies: |
|
| |
i) A firearm with a rifled barrel.
ii) A firearm with a stock, allowing it to be
fired from the shoulder, or intended to be
manipulated using two hands.
iii) Calibre and muzzle velocity chosen for
effectiveness at medium and short range, plus
relative portability of the ammo/mag
assembly in terms of mass and overall size. |
|
| |
The point is that in any given combat situation,
the assaulting force requires a specific mix of
weapons appropriate to the situation. In a
company attack, that could mean that although
the majority of the force would use an AR16
or an AK47, other individuals might be in
contact using a knife, grenades, shoulder
launched rockets, or be sitting in a tree some
distance away with their dear old Lee-Enfield,
ready to knock over any of the Ungodly who
show themselves at twice the accurate range of
their weapons. So that's an assault rifle, right? |
|
| |
The definition of a weapon class is strictly
dependant on its physical characteristics, not
the circumstances in which it is used. |
|
| |
or, while "assault rifle" is a military contextual term, "assault weapon" is a civilian contextual term which implies that such a weapon is meant to be used for criminal assault. |
|
| |
<goes off to find a topper for 8/7's definition> |
|
| |
// civilian contextual term which implies // |
|
| |
"... a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing." |
|
| |
Not "nothing", more "not not nothing". With very little surprise it may be noted that a purpose-designed hunting or target rifle is better at the aforementioned pastimes than an ex-military rifle or some lookalike rifles, albeit at a greater unit cost and decreased broad-spectrum usefulness and reliability. |
|
| |
However forcing somebody to buy a different rifle for each day of the week, for hobbies/skillsets they might not be completely involved in, is more than a bit silly. |
|
| |
<rant>
Personally, if I had my druthers (and the money, and was willing to invest in a decent safe, and had less acquaintances who are idiots) I'd own an inch-pattern FAL (preferably Cdn or at least with a Cdn dust-cover), a No.4 Lee-Enfield (local historical), a Steyr Y1903/14 rifle (M-S's are neat), and a decent low-powered .177 repeater air-rifle (for actual shooting). The FAL, which I personally am least likely to accidentally shoot myself or anybody else with, is one of the top targets on the anti-gun hitlist and they've succeeded up here in moving it to the "prohibited" category mostly because it's a scary looking gun.
</rant> |
|
| |
(My post) //It's called an assault weapon// |
|
| |
AHHHHRG! Misprint alert. I meant to write "assault
rifle" not "assault
weapon".
"Assault weapon" is a bs term that means
absolutely
nothing. You can see what I meant in previous
posts when I specifically addressed that. |
|
| |
//SAW's are plenty controllable: much moreso
than an assault rifle; they're just not quickly
moveable.// |
|
| |
Well, no. Dragging my son back into it since he's
used both the SAW and the M-16 in combat he
explained it this way: With an M-16 you can aim
and shoot and aim and shoot again. With a SAW
you've got immediate lift and movement to the
right and after the first couple of rounds your
third shot will be off target unless you're pretty
good. It takes a great deal of skill to use a SAW in
combat. That's the reason M16 and other assault
rifles have single shot and burst modes,
specifically so they'll be more controllable. |
|
| |
With your permission, I'll edit my explanation of
what an "assault rifle" is by taking out the "assault
weapon" misprint because it's a pretty good
explanation except for that misprint. |
|
| |
And I'd be embarrassed to be on record as thinking
the term "assault weapon" meant anything. It's in
fact one of my pet peeves. Like when news
people use the term "automatic weapon" for
anything that's not a muzzle loader. |
|
| |
//Like when news people use the term "automatic weapon" for anything that's not a muzzle loader.// LOL, okay that's a new one on me; I'll try to remember... are you one of those people who wander through the bush with .75 caliber muzzle-loaders ? I always wanted to try one but I watched too many Bugs Bunny cartoons when I was a kid: I'd be thinking it'd go off while being loaded. |
|
| |
re:SAW: doing a bit of backpedaling of my own, I meant that in full auto it's more controllable than a rifle in full auto... but after a bit of research I'll admit that it might not entirely be true concerning the M-16 vs. M-249 which appears to have been designed solely as a personal light-caliber no-compromise machine-gun. |
|
| |
However it was the case a few decades ago when I carried a SAW that was a heavily reinforced full-auto version of the standard issue rifle. |
|
| |
Never saw combat; kudos to your son and his fellows for the job they're doing. |
|
| |
Thank you FT, will do. And same to you for your
service. You don't need to have seen combat to
have been helping your country out. In fact,
standing the line scaring off the bad guys is the
optimum use of the military and if everything works
right we don't have to fight. |
|
| |