General GunTuber thread

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
IMO, the biggest reason WWI was fought was due to hubris.
Let's be honest, handle things a little differently and 2.5 generations of men don't get slaughtered.
 
Ian has taken part in an AR video before, he was part of a little skit at the beginning of the Finnish brutality video.

I think this might have nothing to do with Karl, they both seem to have an intertest in historic firearms. Ian from a mechanical and development perspective and AR from a usage perspective. Which personally I'd be willing to bet this having nothing to do with him is probably a bigger sting to Karl than it being a direct insult.
 
TerminalTryHard said:
Ian has taken part in an AR video before, he was part of a little skit at the beginning of the Finnish brutality video.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=rUie5w4r30o
I think this might have nothing to do with Karl, they both seem to have an intertest in historic firearms. Ian from a mechanical and development perspective and AR from a usage perspective. Which personally I'd be willing to bet this having nothing to do with him is probably a bigger sting to Karl than it being a direct insult.
Click to expand...

Well Karl stans are certainly mad regardless. Ian lives in their heads rent free.

tranchdoxjew.png
 
gabebrouse said:
View attachment 4590244
Cross posting this from the karl thread for posterity
archive: https://archive.is/0mEm5
Click to expand...
The best part about Karl being a petty and catty bitch is that it's 300% his own fucking fault for creating that rift, and he did it for absolutely no good reason or purpose. This histrionic idiot never once stopped to consider if his actions had any part in this, and that maybe his actions were ridiculously irresponsible and pointless.

The mere NOTION that he there's any error on his part hasn't crossed his mind at any point.
 
Sleazy Car Salesman said:
The Brits had to be good with rifles since they couldn't build anything else for shit.
Click to expand...
They did have the Webley revolver, which was fast to reload, chambered in the powerful 455 webley, and told mud to go fuck itself, which in WW1, I'm just saying man, I want something a bit more time tested, especially before they got to the 1911. Ian did many videos on all their variants too.
 
WelperHelper99 said:
They did have the Webley revolver, which was fast to reload, chambered in the powerful 455 webley, and told mud to go fuck itself, which in WW1, I'm just saying man, I want something a bit more time tested, especially before they got to the 1911. Ian did many videos on all their variants too.
Click to expand...
lol the proof loads of .455 Webley are the same pressure as .45 ACP. The Webley was a great revolver, for 1890. By WWI all revolvers were bitch slapped by the Luger and 1911. Which doesn't matter because pistols are pretty much useless in actual combat unless you're Alvin York.
 
Molly White's Breast Milk said:
lol the proof loads of .455 Webley are the same pressure as .45 ACP. The Webley was a great revolver, for 1890. By WWI all revolvers were bitch slapped by the Luger and 1911. Which doesn't matter because pistols are pretty much useless in actual combat unless you're Alvin York.
Click to expand...
The luger was good yes. But you could easily be issued a Ruby pistol as well. And fuck me if you were Japanese and got a Nambu in that 8mm weakass shit. I'm just saying there were worse things you could get. And while pistol combat wasn't the most common, it did happen. If I was in early war, on the Allied side, personally I'd just want a Webley, its proven, reliable, the manual of arms is well known, but I am also a revolver guy as well. Now on the opposing, give me that sweet luger baby over that Reichrevolver any day of the week.
 
Molly White's Breast Milk said:
lol the proof loads of .455 Webley are the same pressure as .45 ACP. The Webley was a great revolver, for 1890. By WWI all revolvers were bitch slapped by the Luger and 1911. Which doesn't matter because pistols are pretty much useless in actual combat unless you're Alvin York.
Click to expand...
If pistols actually were pretty much useless in combat, I highly doubt every military worth a single shit for the last century would be so interested in issuing pistols to their soldiers. Yes, they're not useful the majority of the time, but when you need a sidearm during combat, I imagine you very, very much need a sidearm. Of course, I've never been in combat and I am not a military buff, but I can't imagine serious militaries wasting money and materiel on pistols if they were actually that useless.
 
Fount of BadSpeak said:
If pistols actually were pretty much useless in combat, I highly doubt every military worth a single shit for the last century would be so interested in issuing pistols to their soldiers. Yes, they're not useful the majority of the time, but when you need a sidearm during combat, I imagine you very, very much need a sidearm. Of course, I've never been in combat and I am not a military buff, but I can't imagine serious militaries wasting money and materiel on pistols if they were actually that useless.
Click to expand...
They aren't totally useless, just almost useless. Look up the study the US did after WWII on the kills of each firearm type and pistols were responsible for a fraction of a percent. Combat isn't fucking CoD with soldiers switching to their sidearms instead of reloading.
 
Fount of BadSpeak said:
If pistols actually were pretty much useless in combat, I highly doubt every military worth a single shit for the last century would be so interested in issuing pistols to their soldiers. Yes, they're not useful the majority of the time, but when you need a sidearm during combat, I imagine you very, very much need a sidearm. Of course, I've never been in combat and I am not a military buff, but I can't imagine serious militaries wasting money and materiel on pistols if they were actually that useless.
Click to expand...
Heck look at the US, everyone in the military is getting the Sig now, which has MANY videos on it (Garand Thumb's is pretty good). Sometimes close combat just happens, and your rifle is inconvenient because you're in a building, or in WW1, a trench. Its also good for aircrews and pilots since it's so light
Molly White's Breast Milk said:
They aren't totally useless, just almost useless. Look up the study the US did after WWII on the kills of each firearm type and pistols were responsible for a fraction of a percent. Combat isn't fucking CoD with soldiers switching to their sidearms instead of reloading.
Click to expand...
They were low but not non existent. They have their uses, such as guards, urban combat, officers, etc. Hell look at Iraq, pistol use went way up because of how many buildings they were breaching.
 
Molly White's Breast Milk said:
I agree, pistols have their uses and shouldn't be gotten rid of but they aren't commonly used in combat. Kiwis that have seen combat or at least have been in a combat zone, please chime in and prove me right or make me look like a retard.
Click to expand...
I think you're fixating on combat and killing a little too much, when there's a lot more that goes into military tactics and logistics than just pure combat. Just having an armed soldier is a massive deterrent, and ensuring that your soldiers always has a sidearm strapped to their side is going to keep your soldier much more safe than one who is totally vulnerable to anyone with a Saturday Night Special. Also, suppressive fire is very valuable, and having a soldier that is able to send rounds at the enemy is much better than one who is cowering with his dick in his hand, even if he never hits anyone, let alone kills them.

I also welcome anyone with actual military knowledge or experience to chime in. Maybe I'm wrong and a soldier would only ever want or need his rifle.
 
Pistols in the military used to just be a status thing for Officers, to set them apart from the Infantry in another way. As for their combat utility in war, the information is out there but the general consensus is you only use a pistol to get to a rifle.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom