[ overboard / sfw / alt / cytube] [ leftypol / b / WRK / hobby / tech / edu / ga / ent / 777 / posad / i / a / R9K / dead ] [ meta ]

/777/ - Weapons and War

"An oppressed class which does not strive to learn to use arms, to acquire arms, only deserves to be treated like slaves" - V. I. Lenin
Password (For file deletion.)

Matrix   IRC Chat   Mumble   Telegram   Discord

| Catalog | Home

File: 1706825348683.png ( 856.14 KB , 1320x862 , 871c2e71cded7486aaacdbea18….png )


It has been decided that the new theme for this board will be the discussion of weapons, warfare and military history.
As ever, we ask you to stick to the rules, including remembering to clearly mark any posts generated by AI as being so. Enjoy!

File: 1707331984839.png ( 784.64 KB , 960x615 , benelli-m4-18076.png )


How overrated is this shotgun, if at all?
5 posts omitted. Click reply to view.


High rate of fire is absolutely necessary for the proletariat. I am just questioning the value proposition of a 2k shotgun when you could have a 300 usd shotgun that's nearly as good and spending that 1700 on a mid tier AR or even high quality AK if you're obsessed about that sort of thing. There's no downsides just carry your ammo on your rig.


>High rate of fire is absolutely necessary for the proletariat.
I don't see why, and you admit that it's expensive and requires lugging lots of ammo.

The reason for arming the proletariat are political. The goal is to make it very difficult to brutalize people, not to create a militarized formation.


File: 1707372991224.gif ( 2.53 MB , 600x429 , 1707372900234.gif )

you're either sour grapes, an opportunist, or book worshipper


File: 1708710510488.mp4 ( 7.15 MB , 1280x720 , 1708710501943.mp4 )

I'm beginning to reconsider. In modern combat against drones it may be worth it to have at least one semi shotgun in the arsenal


Nova is always better!

File: 1707031894510.png ( 442.28 KB , 888x888 , 1707031640092.png )


- Guns You Can Buy General -
Post guns that you want to buy or have already. Eurocucks welcome as is discussion of regulation.
14 posts and 8 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


not mine. I have a Beretta 92x RDO >>1446. I like it over a 1911 because the single action trigger is pretty good though not as good as a 1911, it has 18rd standard capacity which is pretty good, and it is in 9mm which is pretty budget friendly compared to 45 or 10mm. Don't just get a gun because you like the look though. I got the Beretta over a CZ75 because I could also reach the slide stop, safety, and magazine release. The trigger was also the correct distance from my finger, since when I adopted a good grip in the shop (with the beaver tail maximally compressed against my hand and my hand as close to the slide as possible), I was able to place the tip of my finger on the trigger face with the pad of my finger and/or at the first joint with my fingertip still sitting at 90 degrees to the gun.


File: 1708119270984.jpg ( 39.95 KB , 877x536 , 1708119263460.jpg )

forgot pic


Well, I really want the 1911 because it's the gun you start with on hard mode on RE3 for the PS1, kek. I've never shot it, though, truthfully I am still new to guns, but, I do enjoy my highpoint. I'm glad you like that 92x. It does seem like a good gun.It's a 9mm?


Mine is. You can get a 96 like >>1471 but it will be in 40s&w which is alright but people don't trust it because it used to blow up guns that were hastily created for it and it has nebulous benefits over 9mm.


IMFDB is pretty cool because you can look up your gun and see what it's been in as well as movies so you can see what guns were in it. https://www.imfdb.org/wiki/Resident_Evil_(disambiguation)

File: 1707011212671.jpg ( 174.38 KB , 1080x1337 , shell production.jpg )


>From 1914 to 1918, Germany and Austria-Hungary produced up to 680 million shells and the industries of the Allies France, Britain, Russia (to October 1917), Italy, the U.S. and Canada, produced up to 790 million shells (the statistics vary greatly). The U.S. produced between 30 million and 50 million of these shells.

<[2023] - European Commissioner for the Internal Market Thierry Breton suggested that Europe could now make some 400,000 rounds annually. Estonia’s Pevkur, speaking at a November media roundtable, put the figure between 600,000 and 700,000—and said it would reach one million rounds in 2024.

So what happened? Were European countries in the early 20th century just built differently? Even France, who had much of its industrial regions occupied by the Germans, were producing 200,000 shells A DAY by the end of WWI. That's half of current European annual output in a single day.
Why are Europeans struggling to mass produce something as simple as the artillery shell, even though they managed it just fine 100+ years ago?
5 posts omitted. Click reply to view.


this is largely correct. the idea behind a lot of neoliberal doctrine regarding this is the false bourgeois theory of "absolute and comparative advantage". It would support the idea that since the US handles shell production and steel, it would actually be negative to develop your own manufacturing. It is this same ideology driving globalists to keep Llatam an agrarian shithole. Read:
The Russian case

General historical critique




>just get shells from the US
Ukraine tried that, didn't go so well.

I agree with this to an extend, but some parts of comparative advantage theory are not wrong. Like climate dependent crops for example.


That's because the West and NATO rely on air supremacy and not on heavy use of infantry and artillery. It's not a problem for the West. It's like complaining the West is not producing enough arrows.


>rely on air supremacy
That works until you pick a fight with an opponent that has competent air defenses

>It's like complaining the West is not producing enough arrows.

<implying artillery compares to bows and arrows
nothing survives an artillery barrage, so that comparison doesn't work.
20th century industrial warfare is crude by modern standards but you can't say that it's not effective.

File: 1706982787708.png ( 23.85 KB , 519x661 , gunsrateeuro.PNG )


How come post-Eastern Bloc countries not full of guns?


I think there's a question of how the survey data was collected. Would you tell anyone if you had an illegal rifled firearm it the survey was "anonymous" or not? I also wonder if the guns were acquired by criminal organizations over time post 90s. It was trying times and the cool makarov you found might have saved your son and/or daughter from whoring on the streets for another week.


I wouldn't take this data at face value.

I imagine this survey only takes into account registered guns (or else how would they know they exist?), and there are a lot of unregistered firearms in barns, bunkers and attics all over eastern europe. The countries at the very top of the graph have long traditions of citizens militias, sports shooting and hunting, which gives reason for firearm ownership to be recorded and licensed. The top countries also have low populations which help them to achieve their status. Serbia meanwhile inherited most of the EXTENSIVE Yugo stockpile and was also involved in a war fairly recently. Guns are everywhere after wars.

I am surprised by Czechia though, that country has the most liberal gun laws in Europe. Firearm ownership there is even less restrictive than in some US states. I thought it would be higher.


<How come post-Eastern Bloc countries are not full of registered guns?
there, fixed it.
After the neo-liberal shock-doctrine in 90s people stopped trusting the government.


File: 1707030215645.jpg ( 58.62 KB , 1000x945 , 1707030151978.jpg )

A great follow-up question is: how are they still getting ammo? Is there a significant stockpile circulating in the market or is there illegal manufacturing? If so, what extent?

Do you turn in your brass to get reloaded for a fee? Where would they get primers? Are you at risk of Ivan's pissin' hot reloads? Perhaps new ammo is purchased illicitly from serving military.

With the ammo situation, is it common to practice shooting or just possess the equipment?


>>1438 (me)
further more, what are the implications for collapse in countries without a history of private arms ownership? and how might communist learn from post soviet private weapons acquisition? This of course is less relevant to the US, Canada, Mexico, and Brazil where access to weapons illicit or not has a more clear path.

Delete Post [ ]
[ overboard / sfw / alt / cytube] [ leftypol / b / WRK / hobby / tech / edu / ga / ent / 777 / posad / i / a / R9K / dead ] [ meta ]
Previous [ 1 ] Next | Catalog | Home