One Sixth Warriors Forum banner
21 - 39 of 39 Posts

·
Sam Peckinpah's Advisor
Joined
·
971 Posts
I've barely scratched the surface on the 1977 Protocols and the U.S. objections to it, but it has to do with the structure and charter of the International Criminal Court, specifically the enforcement model.

You think that's gobblediguck? It obviously makes sense to somebody, but not me. :p
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,107 Posts
Just a funny tidbit. When I did our M-16 training a month ago, out instructor was required to ask if any of us objected to using a firearm. If so, he said, look at the top of your ID card and read the first word on the top. Of course it said," Armed...Forces of the United States." Havoc, do you know anything about the different catergories of the Geneva Convention? I'm just curious.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
684 Posts
Striker76 said:
Just a funny tidbit. When I did our M-16 training a month ago, out instructor was required to ask if any of us objected to using a firearm. If so, he said, look at the top of your ID card and read the first word on the top. Of course it said," Armed...Forces of the United States." Havoc, do you know anything about the different catergories of the Geneva Convention? I'm just curious.
Pave knows more than me. I know that as a junior enlisted, you are a Cat 1 and NCOs are Cat 2, etc. What is supposed to happen is that if you are a POW, you are treated as per your Category. Junior enlisted are workers, NCOs supervise, officers manage, etc. If I am screwing this up, pavespawn will chew me a new one since I am supposed to know all this.
 

·
Gunslinger, chef, guitars
Joined
·
2,132 Posts
Thanks for the intel Havoc. Maybe the when I heard it, the person was confused with the fact that we don't necessarily have to abide by it or the fact that we never ratified the '77 version. Nice to have some people in the know here! We all appreciate your info!
 

·
All Decade's Fault
Joined
·
2,422 Posts
Discussion Starter · #26 · (Edited)
Urgh. Too bad; the Walther P99 with LAM looked good when I was posing it with the figure, but given that some people with 'small hands' could request for the Sig--I guess I could replace it with that, as well.

The P99, BTW, if I recall well enough, it has easily removable, adjustable grip sizes so that women or others with small hands can use the pistol without having to go to a gunsmith to change the weapon.

Oh yeah, forgot to also ask: Are drop-leg holsters only used by Spec Ops? I suddenly recall most regular troops with pistols using the standard belt holster, and the only troops (not counting SWAT and other CT organizations) I see with the drop-leg holster are Special Forces...

Is there a website listing which countries are and aren't signatories of the Geneva Convention, BTW?
 

·
All Decade's Fault
Joined
·
2,422 Posts
Discussion Starter · #28 ·
From what I've read (Guns and Ammo for Law Enforcement, May 2002 ish), the P990 (DAO version) has two replacement backstraps (three is you include the one already on the gun), three replacements sights, and two tools specifically for these adjustments.

This is a dumb one, but are all pistols with underbarrel slide rails (USP, newer Glocks and Sigs, Walther P99) standardized for the LAMs?

And yes, I know that the Mk23/USP Tactical have tailor-made LAMs which are larger than (and incompatible with) civilian-issue LAMs...
 

·
All Decade's Fault
Joined
·
2,422 Posts
Discussion Starter · #30 ·
Errr...I mean, are they standardized enough that the LAM of one pistol can fit on another (i.e. USP LAM on a P99, Glock LAM on a USP, etc.) I noticed that the P99 LAM looks exactly liek the LAM on the FN Five-seveN as seen in the game Splinter Cell.

I can't tell with the DML pistols since the DML P99 LAM is too small to fit on the (older?) DML USP40 pistol that came with the Spec Ops Handguns set.
 

·
OSW Trade Police (Retired)
Joined
·
11,749 Posts
In real life...no they're not. Each LAM is designed to fit only the pistol it was designed for, interchangability is not a requirement for most pistol manufacturers.

Just for the record, I have fairly small hands. Short stubby fingers actually, but anyway. The Beretta 92F is a fairly large pistol, but it fits me fairly well, not as well as the Sig Sauer P226 though. The Glock (due to it's polymer construction) is even smaller around the "grip" and is a very good fit depite the fact that it "points" rather poorly (for me Glock fans, I also own one and have a set of Mitch Rosen leather gear for it if you know what i mean), from what I remember (because I don't own one) the Walter P99 has an amazing "feel" and would "fit" even the smallest of hands. So that would be a good choice for a female figure in a non-military bash.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
684 Posts
wavehawk said:
Oh yeah, forgot to also ask: Are drop-leg holsters only used by Spec Ops? I suddenly recall most regular troops with pistols using the standard belt holster, and the only troops (not counting SWAT and other CT organizations) I see with the drop-leg holster are Special Forces...
In the beginning of the whole drop leg holster era, it was pretty much limited to Spec Ops types. This is mostly because the spec ops community is often the test bed for products like this. The drop holster is not a new idea by the way. It was in common use in the old west and even before. Today, the military has recognized the usefullness of the leg rigs and are allowing soldiers to use it. It is still not a common issue item though. If Joe Snuffy wants a leg holster, he has to buy it out of pocket. I myself have been issued a few and I prefer the Safariland. If you don't know, it is the one that comes on the Hot Toys Airborne Ranger and the CQB SEAL, etc. Nowadays it is not uncommon to see your standard issue REMF wearing a drop holster. Interestingly enough, your fastest draw is not with a leg rig. You will be much faster with your sidearm up higher on your hip. The other side to that is that it is much harder to get to when you have all your gear on or are in a vehicle. Fortunately for us though, the days of the quick draw and the OK Corral are over. Today, if you are going for your pistol, it is probably in transition from your rifle if it malfunctions. With practice, you can let go of your rifle and have your pistol out and on target before the rifle hits bottom.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,310 Posts
Havoc said:
Pave knows more than me. I know that as a junior enlisted, you are a Cat 1 and NCOs are Cat 2, etc. What is supposed to happen is that if you are a POW, you are treated as per your Category. Junior enlisted are workers, NCOs supervise, officers manage, etc. If I am screwing this up, pavespawn will chew me a new one since I am supposed to know all this.
Havoc is correct here. Without getting into to much information, you are supposed to be given quarters, and duties that are in line with your rank. Of course this doesn't mean that Saddam will be given the entire camp to run but you get the idea.

As far as the drop holster business goes, I have like 5 or 6 laying around here somewhere. Mostly leftys since I shoot left handed (I am left eye dominate but right handed so I can and have fired expert with both hands but left feels more comfortable) All of mine are the blackhawk style rigs though. I also have a leather half holster that I have started wearing some. I like it as long as I don't have to much gear on because it keeps the gun off my leg. Drop holsters will sometimes get in the way in the cockpit so many of our guys experiment with shoulder holsters or even lashing a holster to their chest pocket on thier vest. Shoulder holsters are good when flying as long as you aren't wearing waterwings (see the bbi Apache pilot).
 

·
wave man TDY staff
Joined
·
41,776 Posts
a couple of items...perhaps of little help

"Dropdown" holsters were issued to British armoured vehicle crewmen in WW2, and there's evidence that some of these rigs found their way into the hands of Commandos. As Havoc pointed out, the high-ride holster is a far more efficient platform for fast and deadly shooting with a handgun.
I roomed with a guy who was 3rd in the state of Kansas in fast-draw competition, in the late 60s/ early 70s. His rig was cutout and rode low, and he was the first to admit that it's utility was competitive. I studied his technique for the purpose of speeding my "employment time" with my 1911A1, it being a single-action weapon, as I initially drew it. A martial art is a martial art.

While attending a "Shawnee Days" celebration, I watched an exhibition by a former Border Patrolman, Bill Jordan, a true "pistolero" and author of No Second Place Winner, a book on practical combat handgunning. Probably because of my size (as well as stunning good looks), I was picked to be Mr. Jordan's demo subject. He made quick work of me, working all the time from a high-ride holster and a back-pocket pistol. In his 60s, he was at least as fast as my roomate, more accurate, and shot from field-practical gear.

The second pertains to the "no rule is without it's exceptions" situation. A good friend, recently returned from Iraq, was talking with me about the daughter of another friend, who looks to be deploying to Iraq soon. She's a Reservist, MOS Band, now rewired to Transport. Growing up on a farm, she's a good shot, but mostly with shoulder arms. We helped scrounge her up the gear to practice with a 92F, which her retired law ofcr father had bought for the purpose. I inquired how hard it would be for her to obtain a Beretta, if not issued one. My bud told me that there are ways to obtain sidearms, and that some non-issue handguns had appeared from time to time, in his area. Getting them into Iraq was not particularly a problem, but most people who had them, left them with another soldier, upon their return stateside.
He said that Berettas were pretty much the preferred weapon, as they didn't arouse as much "interest". This is something that occurs among soldiers who take a bit more than the officially approved interest in their armament. The same guys who find ways around cleaning regulations and prohibitions, to make sure that their weapons and those of the guys in their units function, even in the bad environment they're employed in.
 
G

·
I was in Cavalry and Armored units from 1977 to 2000, I much preferred the Colt 1911. It's rugged, slim (easy to carry out of the way in a shoulder holster), easy to shoot & maintain, & it kicked booty. The Beretta seemed like a popgun and was uncomfortable for my small hands. I also fired the .38 S&W & Colt revolvers that the pilots carried, they were anemic but accurate.
Of course any handgun can be improved with proper ammo & souped up with custom parts.

Hey Bulldog, were you in the 158th Cav in Maryland? If so you were part of THE BEST! If you ain't Cav, you ain't sh--! (Apologies for the almost cussing, it's what us hooligan Cavalry guys used to holler)

Felices Fiestas to all you folks from Spain.
Charles
 

·
All Decade's Fault
Joined
·
2,422 Posts
Discussion Starter · #37 ·
Cavscout--A bit OT (seeing as it isn't adopted by the US Armed Forces--yet), but have you tried out one of those .45 ACP Glocks? They're still a bit thick, but they're easier to hold than the 92FS and still carry more ammo by comparison.

I agree with you on the Beretta, though. Never actually fired an M9/92FS, but that's one thick grip. I fully understand why some people prefer the HiPower or the CZ75/85 series in terms of grip comfort (but still prefer the 9mm rounds).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25 Posts
I was most fortunate that I was able to get a M1911A1 while operating in Iraq. I have always hated the M9 because of my small hands but when I had one fail to function in Bosnia, I really lost confidence in it. I know, probably a freak thing, but I have always been uncomfortable depending on it since.
 

·
Inspector 12
Joined
·
3,419 Posts
When I was in CID in the 80s thru early 90s... our agents were first issued the .38 snub nose pistol. This made sense since we wore civilian clothing (coat, tie, dress shirt thing) in a post or garrison environment. It was easy to conceal. In the reserve components, many of the agents were in civilian law enforcement full time and had this penchant for huge .357 and even .44 revolvers. I guess on the streets, the size was as much a deterrent as the badge.

In the late 80s/early 90s, they began to phase out the .38 while the M1911 was being phased out in favor of the M9. Our agents were then issued the M9. The younger guys loved them for their accuracy, stopping power and clip load compared to the .38. Of course, by then the mission of CID was changing somewhat and the Gulf War had broken out. Being in the field with a snub nose .38 is not something you want to do.
 
21 - 39 of 39 Posts
Top