Things that never make the news...

This site contains affiliate links for which LandyZone may be compensated if you make a purchase.
Jonathan Spencer wrote:

> How? Where is the data going to be stored? Where are the batteries?
> What resolution? Have you ever examined CCTV footage: most of it is
> useless.


Have you ever seen proper CCTV ? I have hi-res cameras at work which are
more than adequate recorders.


> 1. how do you covertly carry a rifle? one reason for carrying pistols
> is that they can be covertly carried: what the public doesn't see the
> public doesn't worry about.


the whole idea is that the public should worry when police carry guns.
> The pistol
> is a close-quarter weapon, the rifle is not.


You make my point.

Steve
 
On Tue, 18 Oct 2005 08:58:13 GMT, Jonathan Spencer
<[email protected]> scribbled the following nonsense:

>In message <[email protected]>, Steve
><[email protected]> writes
>
>>Use the army. Don't arm civilians. And I class the police as civilians.
>>Put recording cameras on all police firearms

>
>How? Where is the data going to be stored? Where are the batteries?
>What resolution? Have you ever examined CCTV footage: most of it is
>useless.
>
>>And only permit the use of rifles and not handguns,

>
>1. how do you covertly carry a rifle? one reason for carrying pistols
>is that they can be covertly carried: what the public doesn't see the
>public doesn't worry about.
>
>2. pistols are relatively low powered, and the bullets used by the
>police in their pistols and 'sub-machine guns' are designed not to leave
>the body ('over penetrate').
>
>3. Rifles deliver >very< much more power than pistols and a rifle
>bullet will readily pass through the intended target and go on to strike
>anyone else in its path. Is that acceptable?
>
>4. Rifles are much less manoeuvrable than either pistols or sub-machine
>guns. How do you manoeuvre a rifle on a crowded tube train? The pistol
>is a close-quarter weapon, the rifle is not.
>


Pistols low powered?? Ever tried firing a Browning 9mm? Even a .22
pistol round will over penetrate...

It is not neccesarily the weapon that is low powered, but the round
that is used. In real life Operations in Built Up Areas (OBUA), it is
normal practice to issue the troops that are assaulting with low
velocity rounds for their rifles. Not because they don't want to kill
the defenders, but because of the risk of over penetration causing
casualties to the assaulting teams. A standard 5.56mm ball round will
over penetrate bodies, and will also quite easily pass through a brick
wall. Low velocity rounds when fired from rifles have a lower risk of
over pentrating or passing through brick walls.

When I was in the TA I used to be able to achieve groupings of less
than 4" at 100m using the L85A1 (SA80 to you), but with a pistol, be
it the 9mm Browning or the 5.56 Heckler and Koch I would struggle to
achieve a 12inch group at 5m. Now translate that to a busy tube
station, could make the difference between a dead bady or dead
goody...
--

Simon Isaacs

Peterborough 4x4 Club Newsletter Editor and Webmaster
Green Lane Association (GLASS) Financial Director
101 Ambi, undergoing camper conversion www.simoni.co.uk
1976 S3 LWT, Fully restored, ready for sale! Make me an offer!
Suzuki SJ410 (Wife's) 3" lift kit fitted, body shell now restored and mounted on chassis, waiting on a windscreen and MOT
Series 3 88" Rolling chassis...what to do next
1993 200 TDi Discovery
1994 200 TDi Discovery body sheel, being bobbed and modded.....
1979 Range Ruster body shell and chassis
 
In message <[email protected]>, Simon Isaacs
<[email protected]> writes

>Pistols low powered?? Ever tried firing a Browning 9mm? Even a .22
>pistol round will over penetrate...


Yes, pistols are low powered and yes, I've not only fired the Browning,
I was armed with one for 10 years. And I do know what I'm talking
about, it's what I do for a living.

Let's put it in perspective. The 9mmP pistol used by the police fires a
125 grain (8g) bullet at about 1050fps, delivering 300 ft-lbs of kinetic
energy. This is a hollow point bullet, designed to expand and remain
within the target (i.e. the person's chest).

The 7.62x51 rifles used by the police can fire a variety of bullets
depending on the task, e.g. someone out in the open or inside a building
behind load-bearing glass (up to 4" thick). But if we consider a
typical police sniper's bullet, it will weigh 150 grain (9.7g) fired
with a velocity of 2600fps and deliver 2250 ft-lbs of kinetic energy.

So, relative to a rifle, the pistol is low powered:

pistol = 1050 fps, 300 ft lbs
rifle = 2600 fps, 2250 ft-lbs

An order of magnitude difference. As for the .22, of course the .22 is
capable of inflicting a lethal wound, but a .22 is very unlikely to pass
through and exit either the human torso nor the human skull.

>It is not neccesarily the weapon that is low powered, but the round
>that is used. In real life Operations in Built Up Areas (OBUA), it is
>normal practice to issue the troops that are assaulting with low
>velocity rounds for their rifles.


Kindly name your source for that information, and the nomenclature of
the ammunition you say is issued.

>When I was in the TA I used to be able to achieve groupings of less
>than 4" at 100m using the L85A1 (SA80 to you),


Which the typical deer stalker would consider to be pretty poor
shooting. An out-the-box run of the mill bolt action sporting rifle
will group around an inch at 100 yards. But the L85 shoots 'good
enough' for military purposes.

>but with a pistol, be
>it the 9mm Browning or the 5.56 Heckler and Koch I would struggle to
>achieve a 12inch group at 5m.


That's because you were not a skilled pistol shot, not any failure of
the pistol or ammunition. The team that took out the IRA in Gibraltar
had no such problem. It boils down to good tuition and lots of
practice, practice, practice.

>Now translate that to a busy tube
>station, could make the difference between a dead bady or dead
>goody...


And wielding a high velocity rifle within a crowded rush-hour tube train
is a better idea? Answer: no it isn't.

The officer who killed the suspected bomber did what he was supposed to
do: he got up close and personal and killed the man by shooting him
multiple times in the head. Unfortunately for all concerned, the man
who was killed wasn't a bomber: if he had been, the officer would be a
hero of course.

--
Jonathan

The worst time to have a heart attack is when you're playing charades
 
On Tue, 18 Oct 2005 19:41:40 GMT, Jonathan Spencer
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Yes, pistols are low powered and yes, I've not only fired the Browning,
>I was armed with one for 10 years. And I do know what I'm talking
>about, it's what I do for a living.


Allowing another thread to 'drift' is one thing. Starting a new
thread (for those with news clients that thread on subject) is
another. What you say may, or may not be quite correct, it may also
be complete bollocks, whatever the case, it's off topic and NOT worth
its own thread.

There are plenty places in usenetland where gunnies can go talk guns.
Please don't think it's alright to just do so here because another
thread has drifted.


--
"We have gone from a world of concentrated knowledge and wisdom to one
of distributed ignorance. And we know and understand less while being
increasingly capable." Prof. Peter Cochrane, formerly of BT Labs
In memory of Brian {Hamilton Kelly} who logged off 15th September 2005
 
In message <[email protected]>, Mother <"@
{mother} @"@101fc.net> writes
>On Tue, 18 Oct 2005 19:41:40 GMT, Jonathan Spencer
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>Yes, pistols are low powered and yes, I've not only fired the Browning,
>>I was armed with one for 10 years. And I do know what I'm talking
>>about, it's what I do for a living.

>
>Allowing another thread to 'drift' is one thing. Starting a new
>thread (for those with news clients that thread on subject) is
>another. What you say may, or may not be quite correct, it may also
>be complete bollocks, whatever the case, it's off topic and NOT worth
>its own thread.


That *is* the point. To make clear that it's off topic so those who
don't want to read it can see as much without opening the article, and
those who want to kill the subject can do so, i.e. a courtesy to those
who'd prefer to talk Land-Rover, not my intention to start a sub-thread,
nosiree.

'nuff said

--
Jonathan

The worst time to have a heart attack is when you're playing charades
 
On Tuesday, in article
<[email protected]>
[email protected] "Jonathan Spencer" wrote:

> In message <[email protected]>, Simon Isaacs
> <[email protected]> writes
>
> >Pistols low powered?? Ever tried firing a Browning 9mm? Even a .22
> >pistol round will over penetrate...

>
> Yes, pistols are low powered and yes, I've not only fired the Browning,
> I was armed with one for 10 years. And I do know what I'm talking
> about, it's what I do for a living.


[Figures snipped]

> >It is not neccesarily the weapon that is low powered, but the round
> >that is used. In real life Operations in Built Up Areas (OBUA), it is
> >normal practice to issue the troops that are assaulting with low
> >velocity rounds for their rifles.

>
> Kindly name your source for that information, and the nomenclature of
> the ammunition you say is issued.


It doesn't seem credible, simply from the logistics. Also, with modern
body armour (which, I have heard, makes most pistols ineffective), low
power rounds are useless.

>
> >When I was in the TA I used to be able to achieve groupings of less
> >than 4" at 100m using the L85A1 (SA80 to you),

>
> Which the typical deer stalker would consider to be pretty poor
> shooting. An out-the-box run of the mill bolt action sporting rifle
> will group around an inch at 100 yards. But the L85 shoots 'good
> enough' for military purposes.


According to my sources, the L85 is capable of better. I've shot better
with a cheap Chinese air rifle.

> The officer who killed the suspected bomber did what he was supposed to
> do: he got up close and personal and killed the man by shooting him
> multiple times in the head. Unfortunately for all concerned, the man
> who was killed wasn't a bomber: if he had been, the officer would be a
> hero of course.


I don't trust the accuracy of the news reports, but I think there was a
chain of mistakes, of various sorts, which put the officer in that
situation.

Psychologically, it was a mad dash to catch up with the situation: not a
good situation for decision-making.

--
David G. Bell -- SF Fan, Filker, and Punslinger.

"I am Number Two," said Penfold. "You are Number Six."
 
On Wed, 19 Oct 2005 00:08:08 +0100 (BST), [email protected]
("David G. Bell") scribbled the following nonsense:

>On Tuesday, in article
> <[email protected]>
> [email protected] "Jonathan Spencer" wrote:
>
>> In message <[email protected]>, Simon Isaacs
>> <[email protected]> writes
>>
>> >Pistols low powered?? Ever tried firing a Browning 9mm? Even a .22
>> >pistol round will over penetrate...

>>
>> Yes, pistols are low powered and yes, I've not only fired the Browning,
>> I was armed with one for 10 years. And I do know what I'm talking
>> about, it's what I do for a living.

>
>[Figures snipped]
>
>> >It is not neccesarily the weapon that is low powered, but the round
>> >that is used. In real life Operations in Built Up Areas (OBUA), it is
>> >normal practice to issue the troops that are assaulting with low
>> >velocity rounds for their rifles.

>>
>> Kindly name your source for that information, and the nomenclature of
>> the ammunition you say is issued.

>


Errm, my training with the TA was the source, and we were told it was
a low velocity rund

>It doesn't seem credible, simply from the logistics. Also, with modern
>body armour (which, I have heard, makes most pistols ineffective), low
>power rounds are useless.
>
>>
>> >When I was in the TA I used to be able to achieve groupings of less
>> >than 4" at 100m using the L85A1 (SA80 to you),

>>
>> Which the typical deer stalker would consider to be pretty poor
>> shooting. An out-the-box run of the mill bolt action sporting rifle
>> will group around an inch at 100 yards. But the L85 shoots 'good
>> enough' for military purposes.

>
>According to my sources, the L85 is capable of better. I've shot better
>with a cheap Chinese air rifle.
>


Maybe so, but this was using iron sights, not the SUSAT telescopic
sight, the RLC are not a "tooth" arm, and so are not issued with the
SUSAT. All figures for the L85 are given using SUSAT. The 4"
grouping is part of the weapons tests required to qualify for your
bounty, along with many other criteria.
--

Simon Isaacs

Peterborough 4x4 Club Newsletter Editor and Webmaster
Green Lane Association (GLASS) Financial Director
101 Ambi, undergoing camper conversion www.simoni.co.uk
1976 S3 LWT, Fully restored, ready for sale! Make me an offer!
Suzuki SJ410 (Wife's) 3" lift kit fitted, body shell now restored and mounted on chassis, waiting on a windscreen and MOT
Series 3 88" Rolling chassis...what to do next
1993 200 TDi Discovery
1994 200 TDi Discovery body sheel, being bobbed and modded.....
1979 Range Ruster body shell and chassis
 
Back
Top