What effect does civilian gun ownership have on military capability?

[GEM]

Didn't Glock come of the blue specifically for an Austrian Army contest for a new firearm? Now, we can buy them here.

The XD's were developed for the Croatian military first. The 50 BMG round was military but Barrett spread it to civilian usage.

You see a lot of back and forth crossover.

The 40 SW round was developed for LEOs.

 

[Moonclip]

Yes the Glock was pretty much a new civilian idea though Gaston Glock IIRC did start off selling the Austrian Army shovels and knives and such.

Usually the military round of a country becomes popular with it's citizens if allowed to own guns partly because oll the time and money the government can spend designing a good round.

Example include .30/06, 7x57, 6.5x55 Swede, 7.5x55Swiss,all good rounds.

 

[RoadkingLarry]

The example of SGT. Alvin York comes to mind.

And...

What was the original intent of the CMP?

 

[velobard]

Just my simple input to the original question, I see it as a positive for the very reasons that were listed. My son just finished basic training and on his first trip to the range with the M16 he qualified expert with 39/40. I started him off plinking in the desert with my 22 rifle when he was 4 years old. He kept it up, and I'd have to say it looks like it paid off and gave him a decent head start.

 

[Andrewsky]

That makes me grin velobard.

You sent them a ringer.

 

[woodybrighton]

well most uk soldiers do not touch firearms before they join the army and they manage to acquit themselves in battle fairly adequately
ok we still go in for bayonet fighting but thats cultural innit get close and kick the **** out of the enemy

 

[John-Melb]

What effect does civilian gun ownership have on military capability?

In answer to that question, I suggest you read the history of the 2/2 Indepenent Company on Timor in 1942.

Most of the members of that unit were recruited from rural areas of Western Australia, generally they were farm boys familiar with firearms. A number of them had been professional "roo shooters" before the war.

Using the military tactic of "shoot and scoot" they raised merry hell with the Japanese Army for over 12 months. This force, which never numbered more than 350, fought a guerilla war, much of that time without any outside support, which tied up 15,000 experienced Japanese troops desperately needed elsewhere.

Wasn't there a study done by the US Army in the sixties which found unit's which had a high proportion of soldiers previously familar with arms were more likely to take their objectives and suffered fewer casualties?

 

[gym]

So a question comes to mind, Did we have an advantage over the Socialist and Communist regimes of old, because of our countrys hunting and outdoor activities. Or did all those Germans, Japaneese and Russian soldiers, have similar upbringings? Did the French hunt, or just piss off the animals till they surrendered?

 

[GRIZ22]

Marksmanship and fieldcraft have some bearing on military capability but not as much as many think. Modern warfare is a very technical field and the ability to use technology is very important. More important is the ability to adapt to changing situations, work in a unit, innovativeness, and be able to be successful at multi-tasks.

I knew many guys in the military that could shoot well, start a fire with two sticks, and build a condo with a pocketknife but when it came to other things they were dumber than sled dogs. You seem to get an equal number of country boys (shooters, campers, hunters, etc) that make good soldiers or marines as you do city boys. Each has to learn different new skils in the military.

 

[Kino74]

I can say from personal experience in the military that those with firearm experience prior to military service were far and away the best shooters. I can also say from personal experience with a few friends of mine that became cops that those who had familiarity with firearms definitely were better shots.

 

[velobard]

That makes me grin velobard.

You sent them a ringer.

The lousy part of it is that the whole deal is that when they went back to the range to let the straglers qualify his M16 jammed several times and he wound up with a lower qualifying score. Of course they take the most recent qualifying, not the highest during training. At BCT graduation (just 10 days ago!) the Soldier honored for the highest qualifying score in the company during training was a guy who got 37/40. Just to rub it in a little, the program said 39/40, my son's score, although they did announce it correctly from the podium.

My son also had a little fun during training when they had a moving vehicle on a track and told him to give them a warning shot to with the .50 cal, as if it was a threatening vehicle approaching a checkpoint. It was at about 200 meters and moving toward him. With one shot he blew out both tires on the left side of the car and watched it veer off the track. He said the DS just looked at him and said, "Well, no one's done that before. I guess you got them to stop, all right."

 

[frogomatic]

I remember seeing an interview with Chuck Yeager, he was talking about WW2 pilots, and according to him the pilots that shot down the most planes were almost exclusively from rural backgrounds, and had grown up hunting, and understood how to lead a target.

 

[EricTheBarbarian]

carlos Hathcock started shooting and hunting at an early age. He's an example that comes to mind.

 

[GEM]

I've read that the variance in ace pilots is more a personality and aggressive attitude. Some folks who qualified very well in training went on never to hit anyone in a dog fight.

Probably both contribute.