Weapons tangent thread

Discussion regarding the Outsider webcomic, science, technology and science fiction.

Moderator: Outsider Moderators

User avatar
icekatze
Posts: 1399
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2011 8:35 pm
Location: Middle of Nowhere
Contact:

Re: Weapons tangent thread

Post by icekatze »

hi hi

While I cant speak for a cricket bat, I can say with certainty that a baseball bat is a deadly weapon. So is a golf club. If you're locked in a fight with someone and can't run away, having something that is sturdy and has a longer reach is going to be really important.

I think I'd probably go with the broom too.

discord
Posts: 629
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2011 7:44 am
Location: Umeå, Sweden

Re: Weapons tangent thread

Post by discord »

dragoon: well said, but there is a few factors you skipped.

shape(since that not only changes the point of balance even if that is the most obvious it also changes how it should be used, compare a european longsword with a katana, similar weight, balance is similar too, reach is similar but once you hold it it is a very different thing indeed and it should be used very differently.)
that includes but is not limited to how to hold it, does it have space enough for effective two handed wield? is it a stabbing, cutting or perhaps bashing weapon? precision or more brute force approach?
shape is the problem with using a baseball bat as a weapon, it can do immense damage just likes it is designed to do(fast swing to whack the ball far) but it is not very good at hitting hard repeatedly in fast succession, or at different targets..and once you swing it is a rather big movement, easy to predict and difficult to change in mid swing, all in all making it a rather suboptimal weapon.

surface, most obvious is gripping surface but the business end can be changed by it too.

mentioned materials, but composites and material can change how it behaves a lot too, for instance you want SOME flex in a weapon you strike with, if only to save your hands from rather horrible vibrations, this is another point many baseball bats suffer, try using a bat and just hit something hard lightly, not a full swing just hit it, a tree works just fine, you will notice the vibration of the bat is rather annoying, rubber 'glove' of the area you hold helps a lot with this, this effect is much worse with a metal bat.

Dragoon
Posts: 131
Joined: Wed Nov 07, 2012 8:28 pm
Location: US North Carolina: Eastern standard Time Zone
Contact:

Re: Weapons tangent thread

Post by Dragoon »

there are even more factors than we have mentioned. Depending on what you want a weapon to do any singe factor can radically change it's effectiveness.

Baseball bats and cricket bats are only the best weapon for the job when you don;t have a real weapon handy. A friend of mine even managed to KO a guy robbing him with a can of V-8 ... I still have that article around here somewhere ... even after 20 some years it gives me a chuckle.

What an object is made of and how it's put together is sometimes very important.

Had a drunk swing at me with a pool cue one night,(I really should avoid night shift at stores next to bars :roll: :P ) stung like the devil when I blocked it...and left a bone deep bruise across my forearm after a few swings. the third time it snapped in half at the joint between the two halves of the cue. At which point i made one heck of a strategic withdrawal once I didn't have to worry about being binged in the head as I ran. ( my arm was numb and about useless for a few days, but my skull was intact :D )

In this case. the fact the cue was made in two sections and I managed to catch it where those two sections joined ( pure luck, 8-) I didn't know that it was a two piece cue) played into my favor. If it had been a single piece of hardwood I'd ended up with a broken arm at the least after another block or two...

discord
Posts: 629
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2011 7:44 am
Location: Umeå, Sweden

Re: Weapons tangent thread

Post by discord »

usually the correct way to handle that would be to close in, long weapon that needs wide swings, take a step in and it is mostly harmless(tm).

strangely enough that is often the best defense, step in and get closer.
<edit>
to note, even if the theory is simple, actually doing it takes guts, lots of guts.
</edit>

Dragoon
Posts: 131
Joined: Wed Nov 07, 2012 8:28 pm
Location: US North Carolina: Eastern standard Time Zone
Contact:

Re: Weapons tangent thread

Post by Dragoon »

Oh my instructor and every senior student in the class made sure to dissect my actions in extreme detail later.( but he gave me an over all "acceptable" rating...no one got seriously hurt, no one died, I went home..they went to jail. :D )

Problem was he was faster on his feet them me.. I retreated, he advanced....I advanced, he retreated... (just my luck he was drunk enough to be in a fighting mood but not drunk enough to forget basic tactics. :| )

plus I was having to watch out for his brother who was trying to recover from a face full of pepper spray.( Pointed it at the idiot with the pool cue, and it went Ptthhhhppptttt evidently I had used it all on his much larger less drunken brother.)

All in all I'd normally designate a pool cue as a better defensive weapon than offensive. you can use it in two hands to block and deflect attacks, but unless you have a lot of swinging room( or have some training with a staff/broom) it's not very good on the attack.

now baseball/cricket bats on the other hand are not worth a bucket of spit on the defense. but they are definitely a pretty powerful offensive weapon.

and to all I definitely recommend that if you by one of those Key chain Pepper spray things...get two.( seems they are great on potency but lacking in the ammo capacity area.)

discord
Posts: 629
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2011 7:44 am
Location: Umeå, Sweden

Re: Weapons tangent thread

Post by discord »

not exactly true about the capacity of a pool cue, you just have to stop thinking about it as a deformed baseball bat and understand it's a less pointy spear, or a unbalanced staff.

but then again, it takes some skill to use those anywhere near properly...*shrug*

Dragoon
Posts: 131
Joined: Wed Nov 07, 2012 8:28 pm
Location: US North Carolina: Eastern standard Time Zone
Contact:

Re: Weapons tangent thread

Post by Dragoon »

POINT DISCORD!

You're dead on there when you say it takes some skill to use anything at it's potential. I'd take my chances against an untrained thug with a machine gun, over a trained SEAL/SAS operator with a cricket bat.

discord
Posts: 629
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2011 7:44 am
Location: Umeå, Sweden

Re: Weapons tangent thread

Post by discord »

dragoon: depends, is the thug stupid enough to let me get within arms reach sure, no problem, if not....
well a quote from somewhere 'I do not fear a bullet with my name on it, i fear one addressed to whom it may concern.'....ah got it slightly wrong, it's murphy's law on warfare "It's not the one with your name on it; it's the one addressed "to whom it may concern" you've got to think about.".

Dragoon
Posts: 131
Joined: Wed Nov 07, 2012 8:28 pm
Location: US North Carolina: Eastern standard Time Zone
Contact:

Re: Weapons tangent thread

Post by Dragoon »

Once upon a time in my hometown a young lad thought he could take on four cops with a fully automatic weapon...the officers went scrambling for cover and the youth gained a sense of invulnerability as he hosed down everything in sight.

of course 30 rounds went into cars, trees, ground..then the gun went click..at which point the officers stood up from behind the engine blocks of their cars, fired, and said youth discovered he was gravely mistaking in his sense of invulnerability....

And I am beginning to wander why the heck I am still living in this town....I should move somewhere safer...like Baghdad or Benghazi.... :roll:

fredgiblet
Moderator
Posts: 983
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2011 4:02 pm

Re: Weapons tangent thread

Post by fredgiblet »

That is something that is amusing about restrictions on automatic weapons. For targeted attacks they are actually really poor. It's true that in the case of indiscriminate mowing-down-a-crowd attacks they would be great, however in situations like the North Hollywood Shootout there probably would have been greater danger with semi-autos.

javcs
Posts: 179
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2011 10:05 pm

Re: Weapons tangent thread

Post by javcs »

fredgiblet wrote:That is something that is amusing about restrictions on automatic weapons. For targeted attacks they are actually really poor. It's true that in the case of indiscriminate mowing-down-a-crowd attacks they would be great, however in situations like the North Hollywood Shootout there probably would have been greater danger with semi-autos.
True ... but full-auto can be really hard on random people in the path of fire. Plus, let's be fair here, it isn't really a feature one would normally use for hunting game or defending against criminally-minded home invaders.

There's a little bit of tradeoff, I think - attempt to force gunmen to work on their accuracy, thus reducing their odds of shooting someone they aren't trying to shoot, but at the same time, you improve their odds of being able to hurt law enforcement and any of the other people they're trying to hurt (when it's another crook, that's a bit of a wash, though).
And, of course, trying to reduce people's efficacy when they go off and commit rampages/mass shootings.

User avatar
Arioch
Site Admin
Posts: 4486
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2011 4:19 am
Location: San Jose, CA
Contact:

Re: Weapons tangent thread

Post by Arioch »

fredgiblet wrote:That is something that is amusing about restrictions on automatic weapons. For targeted attacks they are actually really poor. It's true that in the case of indiscriminate mowing-down-a-crowd attacks they would be great, however in situations like the North Hollywood Shootout there probably would have been greater danger with semi-autos.
That's something that I think most people don't realize. Many assault rifles don't even have full-automatic settings anymore (the current M16 fires either single shots or 3-shot bursts). Squads have a few fully automatic machine guns (M60 and M249), but these are used primarily for suppressing fire -- to make the enemy keep their heads down.

Dragoon
Posts: 131
Joined: Wed Nov 07, 2012 8:28 pm
Location: US North Carolina: Eastern standard Time Zone
Contact:

Re: Weapons tangent thread

Post by Dragoon »

Full auto is a waste of ammo in most situations that's a fact :D

Suppression fire or close range room clearing by well trained soldiers are the only two really effective uses of a full auto weapon. Short tight bursts, ( of the sort the three round burst setting creates) are about the best use of an automatic weapon.

The often overlooked fact is that shotguns are more effective in some cases than automatic weapons.
The average Buckshot round is more effective than a sub machine gun it tosses out a dozen or so 28-30 caliber rounds every time you pull the trigger. You can get fairly lethal accuracy at 15-30 meters. at close and point blank range your dealing with a pattern of shot from about as big as your fist to the size of a typical serving tray. Which insures multiple hits,
The standard 3 round tube magazine of hunting shotgun loaded with light buckshot is about the same a a 30-40 round rifle magazine only without the long range and precision ability of a rifle in single shot mode.
If You have the nerve and strength to tame it pulling both triggers on a double barrel shotgun is a truly murderous blast at close ranges, and will with some skill ensure you can get at least one solid hit on a target at a decent range.In all honesty those long barreled hunting guns allowed in England and other restricted ownership countries are a good choice for about any thing short of actual combat.
As long as you don;t have to fire it more than twice.

fredgiblet
Moderator
Posts: 983
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2011 4:02 pm

Re: Weapons tangent thread

Post by fredgiblet »

Arioch wrote:That's something that I think most people don't realize. Many assault rifles don't even have full-automatic settings anymore (the current M16 fires either single shots or 3-shot bursts). Squads have a few fully automatic machine guns (M60 and M249), but these are used primarily for suppressing fire -- to make the enemy keep their heads down.
Yep. It's funny in the movies when you have soldiers or SWAT teams blazing away with full-auto weapons or supposedly intelligent criminals wielding full-autos when all it's going to do is add years onto their sentences. Or going back to a previous thread when you have games like Halo where the "Assault Rifle" is actually more like an SMG with a ridiculously large magazine than a rifle.

User avatar
Mr Bojangles
Posts: 283
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 1:12 am

Re: Weapons tangent thread

Post by Mr Bojangles »

Arioch wrote:
fredgiblet wrote:That is something that is amusing about restrictions on automatic weapons. For targeted attacks they are actually really poor. It's true that in the case of indiscriminate mowing-down-a-crowd attacks they would be great, however in situations like the North Hollywood Shootout there probably would have been greater danger with semi-autos.
That's something that I think most people don't realize. Many assault rifles don't even have full-automatic settings anymore (the current M16 fires either single shots or 3-shot bursts). Squads have a few fully automatic machine guns (M60 and M249), but these are used primarily for suppressing fire -- to make the enemy keep their heads down.
The myths that Hollywood pushes. A fully automatic gun looks good on screen (it looks good in real life, for that matter). But, at the level of individual soldiers that would be a waste of ammunition. With modern machine guns, like the ones you mention, one is more than enough for suppression fire. Most militaries want the soldiers hitting their targets.

However, pretty much every assault rifle has a full auto variant (often several). The M16s you're talking about are the A2 and A4, which have elements preferred by the USMC. The USMC has always favored accuracy of fire over volume. The US Army still uses the original full auto variant of the M16, and elements of the US Navy use the full auto A3. The US Army is moving to the M4 Carbine, which is semi auto or burst, but it also has a full auto variant, the A1.

And, with the increase in urban combat, you really don't want full auto. Too great a chance of stray shots hitting noncombatants.

User avatar
Trantor
Posts: 780
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 1:52 pm
Location: Hamburg, Germany

Re: Weapons tangent thread

Post by Trantor »

Mr Bojangles wrote:...
And, with the increase in urban combat, you really don't want full auto. Too great a chance of stray shots hitting noncombatants.
Or simply waste ammunition, wich causes supply/logistic problems. Same with the Wehrmacht 70 years ago: The troops loved their MG 42s, the planners hated it.
sapere aude.

User avatar
Smithy
Posts: 60
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2012 6:10 pm
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Weapons tangent thread

Post by Smithy »

Mr Bojangles wrote:And, with the increase in urban combat, you really don't want full auto. Too great a chance of stray shots hitting noncombatants
Depends, in modern British military theory at least. When I was a cadet in the Royal Engineers we only had the SA80 in bolt action and semi automatic versions (L98 A1 & A2). However we were taught that if we were regular Sappers then when we assaulted positions (at a range of about 20 metres), houses or rooms that we would go fully automatic. British soldiers (and by extension cadets) are effectively taught to saw people in half. You should aim your L85 A2 rifle towards the bottom of the hostiles torso, and then ride the recoil of the weapon up their chest on full auto. Fully automatic weapons also have their uses in the critical first minute of a fire fight. It's imperative to get out a wall of lead and win a firefight quickly as to suppress your enemy, if you lose a firefight, ie suppressed, your trained to effectively evacuate the combat area by deploying smoke, mainly because once you have your oppo pinned, you can move to assault their position, or call in all manner of nastiness to rain on them from 81mm mortar shells to 500 pound bombs. Getting as much lead in your enemies direction is a very good way of winning firefights quickly and as such keeping you alive. Once you win a firefight, firing discipline returns to an aimed rate of fire of about one round every 5 seconds, with rapid at 1 round every 2 to 3, the fire team's light machine-gun (FN Minimi/L110A1) is the most important aspect of keep your enemy hot under the collar as it has a large "beating zone" and fires in bursts of about 5 rounds every 5 seconds or so, it also sounds terrifying.

User avatar
junk
Posts: 210
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2011 11:52 am

Re: Weapons tangent thread

Post by junk »

Not sure why you don't just follow suit and use what's found in a lot of handbags. Mace sprays.

User avatar
Trantor
Posts: 780
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 1:52 pm
Location: Hamburg, Germany

Re: Weapons tangent thread

Post by Trantor »

junk wrote:Not sure why you don't just follow suit and use what's found in a lot of handbags. Mace sprays.
Against headwind and protection masks?
sapere aude.

Post Reply