I completely forgot. Do you know what they say about pistols in the army? If you are gouging and left without a gun. A gun is needed to shoot yourself. This is such an almost useless weapon. Needed exclusively for bandits. Sometimes they use the police. But who are the police? The same bandits, but in the service of the capitalists. In the USSR, the police did not carry pistols. They were not needed. If weapons were required, they received machine guns. A gun. Why is he?
I can talk a lot about weapons. There are a lot of myths about weapons. Few people know that throwing requires special knives. If they are supposed to be used, then special forces are issued. In films, you can throw any knife. Can. You can throw an ax. But you can fight with a double-barreled hunting, but why?
Exaggerated. It’s difficult to show tactics, planning, headquarters and more in a cartoon. But essentially true. It is rightly shown what will happen when the regular army and the rebels.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Pistols aren't memes, my friend. Due to their size and means of handling, they have different uses than shoulder fired weapons, but police are deployed as a gang of thugs, and in such use they are intended to just throw a lot of lead, rather than aim.
There is a reason 5.56 Nato is the round of Western militaries, and that's because it's a wounding round. Wounding an enemy requires the enemy to spend personnel and treasure on rescue, healing, and retirement of ex-combatants too damaged to continue to fight. Just killing the enemy only removes one soldier, far less expensive.
Asymmetric warfare is not focused on such engagements, and tends to focus on aiming at specific targets, rather than overwhelming them with volleys. Different forces have different purposes, and use different weapons. Pistols have a place in arsenals.
Where I grew up hunting for a living, U. horribilis was a common threat, and as a result I would hardly consider hiking, hunting, or fishing without a nominal sidearm. .44 Mag was considered the go to round for the purpose of dropping charging Grizzlies in their tracks when they were attacking. The reasons for carrying a sidearm, particularly a wheel gun (revolver) were several, and included redundancy, ability to be operated one-handed, and ease of carry in terrain difficult to carry a shoulder fired weapon in.
Yes, the caliber is reduced. We have a standard of 5.45, it used to be 7.62. There was a lot of controversy. Supporters of AK 7.62 have arguments. Supporters of the AK-100 of caliber 5.45 have arguments, a long conversation.
Shoot the bears I am against. Although we do not have grizzlies, they say they are aggressive. The main thing is not to play with the teddy bear with the bear, it can kill. So bears are not aggressive. The main thing is not to scream, not to scare. Better feed.
The Russian Brown Bears are practically the same as Grizzlies. While they often aren't aggressive, they can be, and if they do attack little people aren't very able to preserve their lives when attacked by predators weighing up to a ton, as they do where I grew up. About a decade ago a teenager was attacked by a mother who felt he was a threat, and he managed to beat her to death with a stick. A singular achievement IMHO.
I'd rather depend on a .44 than a stick.
With animals you can only caress. Kindness and affection subordinate better sticks or pistols.