Fixed it for you.killerfly128 wrote:Nope. The military will issue him what they've decided he should have, regardless of actual needs, Besides, it is a big no no to carry a personal weapon in a war zone.
Can civilians send pistols to deployed US forces?
Moderator: carlson1
-
HankB
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 1
- Posts: 1394
- Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2005 2:03 pm
- Location: Central TX, just west of Austin
Re: Can civilians send pistols to deployed US forces?
-
Silverhawk
- Junior Member
- Posts in topic: 1
- Posts: 18
- Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 11:39 am
- Location: Dallas Area
Re: Can civilians send pistols to deployed US forces?
Could be they pick an AK to have a weapon that will fire everytime you pull the trigger. Everything since the M16 has had a tendency to jam, misfire and lock up. Got a lot of good people killed or captured. Treat a AK bad and it just keeps working. Combat weapons should be designed to work in the worst of conditions. Another lesson we DIDN'T learn from our Southeast Asian wargames. Of course, this is just my opinion.
"NECESSITY is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tryants. It is the creed of slaves." William Pitt, 1783
-
Liberty
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 2
- Posts: 6343
- Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 8:49 pm
- Location: Galveston
- Contact:
Re: Can civilians send pistols to deployed US forces?
Our government didn't want to win in Viet Nam, Johnson and Nixon didn't like many of the young men at the time. The M16/AR 15 was the solution.Silverhawk wrote:Could be they pick an AK to have a weapon that will fire everytime you pull the trigger. Everything since the M16 has had a tendency to jam, misfire and lock up. Got a lot of good people killed or captured. Treat a AK bad and it just keeps working. Combat weapons should be designed to work in the worst of conditions. Another lesson we DIDN'T learn from our Southeast Asian wargames. Of course, this is just my opinion.
Thats my conspiracy theory and I'm sticking to it. Might sound silly but we sure were drafting and getting a lot of young men killed for a war nobody wanted to win, and no one seemed interested in getting out for many years
Liberty''s Blog
"Today, we need a nation of Minutemen, citizens who are not only prepared to take arms, but citizens who regard the preservation of freedom as the basic purpose of their daily life and who are willing to consciously work and sacrifice for that freedom." John F. Kennedy
"Today, we need a nation of Minutemen, citizens who are not only prepared to take arms, but citizens who regard the preservation of freedom as the basic purpose of their daily life and who are willing to consciously work and sacrifice for that freedom." John F. Kennedy
-
bdickens
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 3
- Posts: 2807
- Joined: Fri Feb 29, 2008 10:36 am
- Location: Houston
Re: Can civilians send pistols to deployed US forces?
Every - and I mean EVERY - malfunction Of an M-16 I ever saw in 7 1/2 years of active duty was caused by a dirty weapon. I can't believe that the old saw about the M-16/ AR-15 being prone to jam is still going around after more than 40 years. If you keep it clean, that platform is absolutely reliable.
Byron Dickens
-
Liberty
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 2
- Posts: 6343
- Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 8:49 pm
- Location: Galveston
- Contact:
Re: Can civilians send pistols to deployed US forces?
This might be true today, but the original ones without the assist were called Mattel Jamomatics for a reason, jungle fighting is tough conditions to keep clean for man or gun. The North Vietnamese and Viet Cong didn't seem to have the same problems with their rifles.bdickens wrote:Every - and I mean EVERY - malfunction Of an M-16 I ever saw in 7 1/2 years of active duty was caused by a dirty weapon. I can't believe that the old saw about the M-16/ AR-15 being prone to jam is still going around after more than 40 years. If you keep it clean, that platform is absolutely reliable.
While I wasn't around M16s much, but I saw them Jam up real tight so that they couldn't be cleared at thew range, All the guns in my units were cleaned and inspected before they were allowed to be put away. the A1s were supposed to better, but a lot of soldiers got killed before they did.., Most Vietnam vets hated the 16 but had a lot of respect for the enemy's rifles.
Liberty''s Blog
"Today, we need a nation of Minutemen, citizens who are not only prepared to take arms, but citizens who regard the preservation of freedom as the basic purpose of their daily life and who are willing to consciously work and sacrifice for that freedom." John F. Kennedy
"Today, we need a nation of Minutemen, citizens who are not only prepared to take arms, but citizens who regard the preservation of freedom as the basic purpose of their daily life and who are willing to consciously work and sacrifice for that freedom." John F. Kennedy
-
bdickens
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 3
- Posts: 2807
- Joined: Fri Feb 29, 2008 10:36 am
- Location: Houston
Re: Can civilians send pistols to deployed US forces?
It isn't the forward assist that makes them more reliable.
The 5.56 mm NATO cartridge is ever so slightly larger that the .223 Remington that it is supposedly identical to. Colt refused to share its engineering drawings with the other manufacturers also contracted to supply the M-16 rifle, so those other manufacturers reverse-engineered the design but built them with a .223 rather than a 5.56 chamber.
Every manufactured item has allowable tolerances + or - however much, rifle chambers and ammunition included. Whenever the tolerances stacked up unfavorably, i.e. a chamber on the small end of the allowable tolerance (that was designed for a smaller cartridge anyway) and a round that was on the large end of the allowable tolerance, that was a recipe for disaster. Compounding the problem, the first M-16s were sold to the government as being self-cleaning so no cleaning kits were purchased or issued.
Small chamber + large round = jam.
Dirty weapon = jam.
Small chamber +Dirty weapon + large round = catastrophic jam.
The millitary soon figured out that cleaning kits were needed and started issuing them. The problem abated somewhat, but the small chamber/ large round issue still existed. Some enterprising armorers figured out that they could polish out the chambers of their rifles (I think they used a peice of brillo pad on a drill) to enlarge them by the few .0001" that was necessary and their problems went away.
Once the engineering and training problems were fixed, the M-16 became an extremely reliable weapon and the American GI in fact came to like it very much. Unfortunately, the rifle's early poor reputation still persists among the uninformed today.
The 5.56 mm NATO cartridge is ever so slightly larger that the .223 Remington that it is supposedly identical to. Colt refused to share its engineering drawings with the other manufacturers also contracted to supply the M-16 rifle, so those other manufacturers reverse-engineered the design but built them with a .223 rather than a 5.56 chamber.
Every manufactured item has allowable tolerances + or - however much, rifle chambers and ammunition included. Whenever the tolerances stacked up unfavorably, i.e. a chamber on the small end of the allowable tolerance (that was designed for a smaller cartridge anyway) and a round that was on the large end of the allowable tolerance, that was a recipe for disaster. Compounding the problem, the first M-16s were sold to the government as being self-cleaning so no cleaning kits were purchased or issued.
Small chamber + large round = jam.
Dirty weapon = jam.
Small chamber +Dirty weapon + large round = catastrophic jam.
The millitary soon figured out that cleaning kits were needed and started issuing them. The problem abated somewhat, but the small chamber/ large round issue still existed. Some enterprising armorers figured out that they could polish out the chambers of their rifles (I think they used a peice of brillo pad on a drill) to enlarge them by the few .0001" that was necessary and their problems went away.
Once the engineering and training problems were fixed, the M-16 became an extremely reliable weapon and the American GI in fact came to like it very much. Unfortunately, the rifle's early poor reputation still persists among the uninformed today.
Byron Dickens