Military Science Improvised Weapons Detonation and Demolition Weapon

Home , Aramid, English wheel, Firearm modification, Ithaca 37, Sentry gun

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science

Lo g in View Full Version : Military Science

Improvised Weapons Detonation and Demolition Weapon Science and Technology Gunsmithing and Firearm Modification Tactics, Training, Defense, and Safety Ammunition and Reloading Rifles and Shotguns Handguns Automatic and Assault Weapons Blackpowder and Muzzleloaded Guns Firearm Accessories

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Tactics, Training, Defense, and Safety

1. Sniper Training Simulator (1 replies) 2. Judo or JiuJitsu (10 replies) 3. Pre-SHTF Tactics (6 replies) 4. SHTF Scenario - What would your tactics be (93 replies) 5. Pistol shooting: through videos (0 replies) 6. Long Range Rifle shooting: Sniper shooting (6 replies) 7. Titanium armor (12 replies) 8. Plausible deniability. (34 replies) 9. The 357 SIG round and Impac ST, or, The Futility of Shooting on the Move (71 replies) 10. Close-quarters combat training aid examples (6 replies)

The Explosives and Weapons Forum

Lo g in View Full Version: The Explosives and Weapons Forum

User Nam e: Password:

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Tactics, Training, Defense, and Safety > Close-quarters combat training aid examples

mrtnira October 19th, 2006, 04:32 PM These scans come from different periods in Russian training. The older images show World War II period methods of training for close-in combat. Those soldiers are wearing garrison caps. The World War II Soviet reconnaissance men were the raiders mentioned in other posts that referenced http://www.vrazvedka.ru/.

A newer graphic shows how to turn a blade in the hand, and it is followed by a diagram showing how to run through a series of stand-up targets. It's for training against multiple opponents. The guy in the baseball cap-style hat is a post-1990 graphic.

The images are interesting, but you won't see me in a knife fight. And, at 47, my days of active training are behind me. However, the pursuit of truthful knowledge about how training was conducted in different periods of military history by different nations is fascinating.

At some point, I'll scan in relevant texts from my inventory of period bayonet manuals. Military history -- there is a reason the History Channel is so popular. And, for someone not given to lifting weights and running, using these patterns for personal exercise is a benefit.

http://i11.tinypic.com/2lt53eo.jpg http://i11.tinypic.com/4hmrk1i.jpg http://i11.tinypic.com/29z7fa0.jpg http://i11.tinypic.com/43zrymv.jpg http://i11.tinypic.com/2ug2gsk.jpg http://i11.tinypic.com/35lxcad.jpg http://i11.tinypic.com/2z4aji0.jpg http://i11.tinypic.com/48gv0cy.jpg

mrtnira October 28th, 2006, 01:24 PM These are from Russian sources, although in various publicly available information I have seen similar in Chinese martial artists clubs.

The training aids are inexpensive in real terms, and allow a martial artist the practice of balance and timing while impacting a solid object, instead of just boxing the air. (I box the air.... My days of pretending to be a combatant are long ago). So, this is for you young guys with the energy!

Training aid graphic 6 is a representative room for station training. That will cost more, and is probably only going to work with well funded clubs.

The last image is a graphic of what was supposed to have been (emphasis on supposed to have been) the Shaolin testing hall. I used 250 dot per inch scan, so you might be able to enlarge it some and see some details of the obstacles in the maze. The document was sourced, but was in Russian. I put it in for interest, not for serious consideration.

http://i14.tinypic.com/2ppmuwx.jpg http://i13.tinypic.com/29zpmpy.jpg http://i13.tinypic.com/3449hsh.jpg http://i14.tinypic.com/43nht38.jpg http://i13.tinypic.com/2yos4du.jpg http://i13.tinypic.com/2v2fo7t.jpg

Shaolin -- I wouldn't put too much stock in it, but it's an interesting concept. http://i14.tinypic.com/2wd8rad.jpg

nbk2000 October 28th, 2006, 03:07 PM That last picture looks like something out of a Dungeons and Dragons game manual! :D

mrtnira November 2nd, 2006, 08:02 PM The following 20 tinypic link-lines are to images scanned in from the 1927 U.S. Navy Landing-Force Manual. It's from the days of gunboats on Chinese rivers. Sailors would have secondary assignments for landing party and boarding party, to secure ports and wharves, to restore order, or to inspect shipping and seize contraband.

There is a lot of text about how to train, how to do repetition drills, make an assault course, and howto make a wooden training dummy. The described assault course included trenches, walls, and wire. There are instructions about how to go over walls, and how to clear trenches.

It's for educational purposes (my comment is genuine). The validity of this material is in understanding how training was done in the 1920s. It does show you how things have changed. Also, I cannot see anyone doing it for real today, unless it is in a limited fashion for physical fitness.

http://i12.tinypic.com/35aoxzp.jpg http://i11.tinypic.com/2hxx9ag.jpg http://i11.tinypic.com/400uxxf.jpg http://i12.tinypic.com/2s7j0w3.jpg http://i12.tinypic.com/2pt53jq.jpg http://i11.tinypic.com/40kvcpi.jpg http://i11.tinypic.com/35jic7b.jpg http://i12.tinypic.com/358phsl.jpg http://i11.tinypic.com/2s7vub7.jpg http://i12.tinypic.com/4g8ic7a.jpg http://i11.tinypic.com/2rfsf9k.jpg http://i11.tinypic.com/49jsd9x.jpg http://i11.tinypic.com/3yci913.jpg http://i11.tinypic.com/437w8t2.jpg http://i12.tinypic.com/2ewclkg.jpg http://i11.tinypic.com/2hds1vm.jpg http://i12.tinypic.com/34dom76.jpg http://i11.tinypic.com/4026p0y.jpg http://i11.tinypic.com/2mm7ogg.jpg http://i12.tinypic.com/2s788jr.jpg

The manual also has diagrams of how to set up road blocks, strong points, check points, and how to set-up buildings for urban combat. They are of interest because it does two things: 1. shows how some things have not changed; and 2., shows detailed diagrams of things photographed during the 1920s and 1930s in China, which show up on the History Channel or in history books. I will scan those in later, and would come under a different topic header.

mrtnira November 2nd, 2006, 08:52 PM This is the last of the bayonet training-related scans. It comes from a 1950s book by Lt. Col. Robert Rigg. If you can find a copy of it, Realistic Combat Training is a very valuable book for reference, or for ideas on how to make your own ranges (night, urban, patrol, unit, individual, etc.)

http://i11.tinypic.com/3yx3xub.jpg http://i11.tinypic.com/33ymlwy.jpg

barrettm203 March 17th, 2008, 12:23 PM :DHere are some basic concepts on CQ Tactics This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter Smart Movement is a vital part of success for a CQ Op. Movement in CQ is swift and silent. There should always be a purpose for movement. Never move unnecessarily because it just puts your team in danger. When moving be sure to stay low and present as little of target as possible to the enemy. Running is usually a last resort. Quick and silent movements are preferred to running which is more noticeable and makes more noise. Of course if your team is compromised (discovered), running is required because you need to get some cover to engage and neutralize the packages. Covering areas is a crucial aspect of movement. If you approach an open hallway, staircase, intersection or some form of open area, your team's movement needs to be covered. Hallways and intersections are the most commonly encountered obstacles. When moving across a "T shaped" hallway, the point man approaches the area and peeks around the corner. If a tango is there, the scout should neutralize the threat. If not, the scout should drop to a knee and cover the corner he just cleared. The next man in line should cross the open hallway and leave enough room for the rest of the team on the other side. Once across the other side, the OIC (second man in formation) is responsible for covering directly ahead of the way he just came. Once the point man gives the word, the next man crosses. He then aids the point man in covering the open area. The team crosses the open area one by one until the point man comes across and assumes the position of point and the "patrol" continues.

Clearing and covering corners

Clearing and covering corners is another important aspect of movement. If you approach a corner, the point man should tell the rest of the team they've reached a corner. The point man then "slices the Pie" on the corner. Slicing the pie involves maximizing the team members view while limiting the reaction time of the tango. Slicing the pie involves making a 90 degree movement around the corner. In other words, the point man takes a step back from the corner turns his body so his point of view is looking directly past the edge of the corner. He then side steps turning his body slightly as he moves to maximize his field of vision.

When encountering opposite corners as in the "T Shaped" hallway, you need to separate the team. The OIC and one other team member goes to the opposite corner as the point man. On a three count, the Point man and the OIC slice the pie at the same time which prevents the chance of a rear ambush. The man coupled with the OIC covers the OIC's movements remaining approximately three steps behind the OIC incase the OIC goes down. After both corners are clear, the OIC or point man decides which way to proceed and the team regroups and begins the "patrol" again.

Clearing Rooms

Clearing rooms can be very difficult. If you approach a room with an open door the team needs to set up on both sides of the opening. When moving across the opening, do not be detected. If you are, you're screwed. The point man should give warning to the team when he first sees the doorway and the team should act appropriately. When the team splits up, an assaulter should accompany the OIC to the opposite side of the door opening as the point man. On the OIC's order, the Point man swings in through the doorway making a 90 degree turn to his nearest side. For example, if the point man is on the left side of the doorway, he'll enter and turn left. Right after the point man enters, the OIC follows and turns to the opposite side of the point man. Be sure to make those turns 90 degrees because room corners are a favorite for tango campers. After the OIC, the next man on the point man's side enters and follows the same path as the point man but makes approximately a 60 degree turn focusing more on the center of the room. The next man on the OIC's side enters in the same fashion but follows the OIC's path instead of the point man. This continues until the entire team is in the room and the room is deemed clear by the OIC. Example of entry based on six man team: Point man goes left, OIC goes right, Corpsman left, 1st Assaulter right, 2nd Assaulter left, Rear Security, right.

Finally

A closed door is handled differently however. If a closed door is encountered, the point man and OIC line up on the opposite sides as before. The OIC moves first and positions himself on about a 45 degree angle opposite the door swing. In other words, if the door opens and swings left, the OIC will be on the right side of the doorway. The OIC then kneels and has his weapon trained (aimed) directly ahead into the open space laying beyond the door. The OIC must leave enough room for the door to open! The point man opens the door on the OIC's order. At about .5 seconds after the door is opened, the point man makes his normal entry procedure as above and the operation continues as normal with exceptions to the OIC and the 2nd Assaulter. Instead of the OIC clearing the room, the next man in the line, in the case above, the 1st Assaulter clears in the OIC's place. Everything goes accordingly except for the 2nd Assaulter who positions himself next to the OIC and covers the team's rear. Once the room is clear, the OIC and 2nd Assaulter move in with the rest of the team and the "patrol" continues.

An important point to remember is when clearing a room; do not engage targets of opportunity. Engage targets that lie in your path only. If you turn to shoot the package, you'll hit your own man before you hit the enemy. Strict fields of fire are required in order for this method of room clearing to be efficient. Rear should DT (double tap) each package in the cranial cavity as insurance. These are US tactics on engagement.

condor_b75 March 23rd, 2008, 12:15 AM I'd like to add a few things about CQB.

- Double tap. Works fine for SWAT teams, but in the real world you shoot until the target goes down. It is more important to knock the target down he can get off a few shots (You never want that.) that to kill him with a surgicaly placed shot (Aim small miss small).

- Magazine change. Before you enter the next room you should always put in a fresh mag. Might seem like common sense, but that should become a second nature. Same goes for speed in changing the mags.

- Handgrenades. Never "roll" a handgrenade into a room, throw it high. There is a god chance it will bounce back off the furniture or intentionally placed baricade to block your path. The thickness of walls is another thing you should be concerned about when using handgrenades.

- The enemy. Never underestimate the enemy! Think of him as better or at least equal to you ...

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Tactics, Training, Defense, and Safety > The 357 SIG round and Impac ST, or, The Futility of Shooting on the Move

InfernoMDM January 2nd, 2007, 08:27 AM I know many of you have talked about rounds and penetrating body armor etc. I have noted speculation on rounds penetrating ____ armor etc. Well I thought I would show you guys a real video of some great body armor, and I also want you to take note of the 357 SIG round as well.

http://www.streichers.com/download/ImpacST.mov

First lets talk about this plate. I believe it is rated as a IIIA plate not III(which is more resistant to a larger variety of bullets at close ranges). However make no mistake the manufacturer has test several rounds many of you guys have claimed to penetrate armor. It is tested to stop .30 cal, 7.65x25 Tokarov, and 12 guage slug. The plate is around 100-150 dollars making it far more affordable then most plates. Also this plate unlike most of the plates on the market doesn't require soft armor under it to prevent fragmentation.

Now if you look a little over half way through the video you will note the competitions plates being shot with 357 SIG. I would like to note that it did quite nicely to the metal plate. This is apparently pretty normal for police armor, although a combination of the plate and soft armor will potentially stop the 357 SIG, the soft armor alone will not stop it. I must confess I love the 357 SIG round a great deal, and think it was the best capabilities of the 9mm and the 45 combined unlike the 40. Thats just opinion backed up with some facts.

Just food for thought, and maybe other plans.

nbk2000 January 2nd, 2007, 12:25 PM After shooting the plate with the .357SIG, he takes the plate out and flips it over (4:17 in that video), showing a complete penetration, but without any commentary and with an immediate cut to another scene.

Also, who are the other people in the video? Probably employees.

What about backface deformation? He shoots a dummy with a 12guage slug right over the sternum. Sure, the plate stopped the slug, but what if the slug pushed the vest 4 inches into the chest? That's a shattered sternum and ruptured/punctured heart.

Always take manufacturers claims with a handful of salt, and watch for tricks and weasel words in their videos and product literature.

InfernoMDM January 2nd, 2007, 03:25 PM Do NOT quote whole posts, only what's relevant!

I know a cop that uses it after a demonstration he was at where they did basically the same thing. The guy said it doesn't matter which side is shot, that the designed works both ways. He also stated that the best results are with IIA armor and the company doesn't recommend it being used as a stand alone item.

I am sure the shotgun blast is livable just not a good thing.

Remember 90% of soft body armor is designed to stop the bullets penetration, not prevent ribs from breaking. You only see that kind deflection ability with IVA and IV. Even then the military has had issues with plates spalling and killing soldiers. Thats why the newest plates come with a thin layer of kevlar to prevent this.

nbk2000 January 2nd, 2007, 05:49 PM Yes, the vest isn't intended to prevent all backface deformation, but if the slug shatters your sternum and pushes the broken ribs into your heart/lungs/aorta, it doesn't really matter that the bullet didn't penetrate the vest, now does it?

Reminds me of a british squadie who was on checkpoint duty in Ireland.

An IRA sniper shot him with a .50 from long range.

The bullet didn't penetrate the vest. :)

But the bullet did pull the vest COMPLETELY THROUGH the squadies body, killing him instantly. :(

And, like I said, the video showed the plate having been completely penetrated by the .357SIG round, but no mention made of that, and an immediate cutaway from it.

Seems deceptive to me. :mad:

Also, the plate only covers a very small portion of your torso, so it's simply icing on the cake.

A plain metal plate may not stop the bullet, but it will deform it and slow it down, making the impact on the vest underneath the plate much less severe. :)

InfernoMDM January 2nd, 2007, 06:04 PM I agree, how ever I can atest to the 357 SIG I had two different people shoot IIIA plates, but didn't have my camera on hand. Good observations though:) Ohh I forgot to add they were steel plates, haven't shot a titanium one. This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

Cobalt.45 January 2nd, 2007, 10:02 PM Steel and/ or Ti plate will stop projectiles, up to a point. But they depend on mass to provide protection.

Ultimately, it'll take something along the lines of composite materials to make a "livable" piece of armor. It's no good if it weighs you down/ hinders your maneuverability.

defiant January 2nd, 2007, 10:37 PM Penetration of armor depends on caliber, range, type of armor, and other variables (as discussed).

Side note: The Sig's slide rides high - resulting in recoil and second round target acquisition difficulties in calibers over 9mm. I carry a Sig 226 in 9 - and can't see myself carrying anything else - but for larger calibers I'd go with another manufacturer.

If armor piercing handguns is a hobby of yours, check out the FN 5.7 x 28mm.

Armor also doesn't provide much protection against an experienced marksman armed with a large caliber rifle. Head shots and follow up shots, etc.

Those I know in law enforcement who wear armor do so to reduce the odds - nothing more.

nbk2000 January 2nd, 2007, 11:20 PM If you know (or suspect) someone will be wearing body-armor, for CQB range, use a shotgun with a duckbill choke and #1 hevi-shot, aiming for the groin.

Otherwise, use a large caliber rifle to punch through vests, or a pistol carbine for rapid headshots.

atlas#11 January 3rd, 2007, 12:22 AM Or avoid combat all together:) . If I suspect people of wearing body armor I'm definatly going to hesitate before jumping into a gunfight.

defiant is right, it only reduces odds, don't count on invincability. The idea behind swat and basic police training is that in the heat of the moment an attacker should not have adequate time to aim for anything but central mass, by protecting that the police reduce alot of risk, but that doesn't mean police work is the safest job in the world;). Remember kids, head shots = dead cops, aim high.

The .357 mag was used by police for a while, due to the recoil reducing the cops ability to maintain fire they resorted to the 9mm. I'll admit I like the stopping power of the .357, though the recoil can get annoying.

I've never had the pleasure of firing any fabrique national weapons, that calibre is supposedly quite good at penetration though. I saw a p90 for sale in my local gun shop the other day, but it was on consignment and the guy had never fired it. Has anyone ever played with either of these guns?

InfernoMDM January 3rd, 2007, 12:24 AM If you know (or suspect) someone will be wearing body-armor, for CQB range, use a shotgun with a duckbill choke and #1 hevi-shot, aiming for the groin.

Otherwise, use a large caliber rifle to punch through vests, or a pistol carbine for rapid headshots.

That would be a serious waste of time in most aspects. As Defiant said an experienced marksman maybe able to kill you even with body armor, nearly all engagements even by skilled shooters only hit about 10% of the time. Stress and other factors will tense you up and pull rounds off there mark. That being said going for the groin is not a smart plan. Furthermore a shotgun, although called many names from scatter gun, to room broom should never be employed like that. No military, paramilitary, or law enforcement agency even looks at a shotgun like that. If it was effective you would see greater use of that by at least a few organizations.

Also Defiant the 357 SIG comes in various weapons from Glock SIG HK Springfield XD 1911 variants etc. The recoil in the SIG I might add is probably less then you would expect as the mass of the weapon drastically reduces muzzle flip. The SIG is not for the gun manufacturer.

Also I would love to quote a guy about the 5.7 "its the coolest 22 Mag ever!" Not only is it nearly impossible to find the armor piercing rounds for it on the streets, the round itself has been shown to perform less then satisfactory, hence many new PDW rounds and weapons coming to the market. I do not see a beautiful future for the 5.7.

As for the 357 SIG its just an interesting round and I am glad to see debate over the information provided. It is pleaseing to see people at least thinking laterally about firearms.

atlas#11 January 3rd, 2007, 02:56 PM I figured it would be difficult to find armor piercing rounds for, being fairly new and quite well regulated.

As for the use of the shotty, don't cops carry one in their cruisers? Obviously basic police work isn't goning to run into body armor every day, but just one bb from a 00 buck shotty in the head (or any other part of the body) would make body armor alittle less than effective. Even if you hit them square in the chest plate it's going to atleast slow them down.

Obviously a 12 guage isn't going to be used as an anti tank round, It's not built for penetration, it's built for stopping power and the ability to spread the dammage around.

My cousin is a police officer, in a demonstration at his office they put a 5.56mm nato fmj round through the front and rear plates of a piece of body armor. I have heard alot of stories about the .223 haveing excellent penetration but almost no stopping power, however. This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter I'm sure body armor has improved significantly since then, but what I would like to hear is some first hand accounts of the 5.56 in action. I read in leather neck magazine that the marines were fed up with the 5.56 and were experimenting with some new round, 7.2mm or something like that. Anyone hear any news on this?

Also, another tactical weapon that's relativly new from russia, the an-94, I wouldn't mind hearing some first hand accounts of this new weapon as well.

InfernoMDM January 3rd, 2007, 10:00 PM I posted a little comment and a link in this section, that I really didn't know if it belonged here or not. Either its still in que or its been deleted for wrong section, I am not completely sure yet, but I am sure I will find out.

It shows rounds being shot at a building, and of notable interest were the 5.56 from a M-16 A2 at 0 degrees and 45 degrees. They also shot several walls the same way with the 7.62x39. Youtube has the videos if you are interested.

I moved that post to the Forum pics and videos thread, since it didn't warrant a new topic.

Remember most police and military FMJs are SS109 with a tungsten core. This facilitate body armor penetration, but isn't normal on the market and reduces its overall effects in the human body.

First of the 00 buck is basically a 32acp with less force. Although it can kill the penetration of 00 buck isn't great. The shotgun is most effective when all of the projectiles cause mass trauma. Granted one projectile in a vital area can kill but that goes for any bullet from a 50 cal to a 22 short. They have experiment with rounds that have a heavy core with a sharp ballistic point and a soft coating of lead or other substance. I want to say this is called a SLAP round but don't quote me on that.

Lastly the AN-94 I believe has been canceled for production, due to the complexity of the weapons maintenance, rumors(I heard a few from some Russian military) that it was having several more malfunctions then other weapons, and the notable 5- 6 times higher price tag pretty much ended its career.

I probably hate you January 4th, 2007, 06:08 AM Most high power rifles can penetrate body armor , the .223 remington or 5.56x45mm (these rounds are not exactly the same but close enough for me)both are actually a highly effective round , I am going to attach a link to a very informative site (http://www.firearmstactical.com/wound.htm) if you scroll down you can see tests in ballistic gellitan with multiple caliber rounds , I have herd rumors of thin bodies not taking much damage from the .223 round and you can see by these ballistic test why that might be so.

The 12 ga slug is something that should never be under estimated , I am a deer hunter , one day I was hunting and I was in a tree stand a deer wwalked directly under me about 15 to 20 yards away I fired at it and had a hit the slug penitrated right behind the shoulder blade it cleaved the deers heart in half after penitrating the lung it then took a path through the rib cage at an angle towards the stomach it ended up coming out at a flat angle ripping a hole about 12 inches in the deers stomach (which was kinda gross the deers guts fell out) the deer ran about another 20 yards then feel dead.

The moral of this I suppose is after that day I had a whole new respect for a 12 ga slug irreguardless if it can penitrate armor or not a human body can only sustain so much energy to a localised spot.

Check out my link , it is very informative if you have not seen it before , and please forgive my poor spelling.

I am sorry to post again but I forgot to mention the new heavyshot buck shot and slugs they may have increased penitration over the older lead slugs and buckshot , I have used heavyshot to hunt ducks and it is so far superior in performance than steel or lead it is crazy , but I have not been able to find any lets say tatical information on it. If anyone has any of this info please post it.When I am able to post pictures I will post a few pitures of my modified weapons and ways to modify your weapons including trigger jobs.

atlas#11 January 4th, 2007, 06:40 PM You should use the edit feature to edit your posts rather than post a new one.

What size shell do police use? Is it just the 3"? 3, 1/2" magnums can pack quite a punch.

As for the an-94, depressing news. The dual action system seemed quite effective. I can see why russia would have a hard time with it though, another new assault rifle isn't exactly what they need anyways.

As for the 12 guage, my point is that when its a point and shoot weapon it would be easier to quickly point a shotty at an unprotected part of the body and shoot rather than take aim with a rifle or smg. Obviously a shotty has stopping power, its just not fast enough or solid enough to penetrate most armor. Though I bet with a decent sabot and some good powder you could get some penetration, but then you might as well be using a rifle anyways.

InfernoMDM January 4th, 2007, 08:48 PM I probably hate you - Your link is discussing the effects of the JSP in .223 (which has very little difference from the 5.56 except head spaceing and which weapons you can shoot it from).

Most rifle rounds will penetrate body armor up to level IIIA. The SS109 (tungsten core) will penetrate III however the JSP which has better ballistic properties then a FMJ can't penetrate level III. This is where things get odd in the world of ballistics. The SS109 does not have the capability to cause the same wound cavities that are expressed in your link. Thus comparing the SS109 a armor piercing round to a JSP or a JHP isn't a good idea. If you hunt with a SS109 and don't hit in a vital enough area I promise you the deer will run far away. Likewise HP, JSP, and other newer hunting rounds will have a drastically better effect, in my experience.

As for the shotgun being a better weapon to hit non vital areas. If you take into account most effective ranges, and the general shot pattern of the weapon, your looking at the same capability to hit the target as if you had a submachine gun, or a 22 rifle.

Most shotguns although spread out are aimed with sights just like any rifle, and transitioning to say a head shot requires the This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter same time and capabilities in either weapon. Trust me ask damn near any SWAT or active response shooter. The only advantage is if you aren't ass accurate you could possibly get a few projectiles to stray off and still hit the target, depending on the round used, and your choke. However you can just as easily risk bystanders etc and this may mean you wont be able to shoot at all.

Most police departments use either the Remington 870(damn near everyone) or the Mossberg 500/590. Those weapons can be chambered up to a 3inch Mag I believe. I know some departments stay with the 2 3/4" rounds for capacity, but the shotgun unfortunately has been relegated to cruisers and breaching these days.

I to am saddened by the AN-94 not coming to the US however I think with all its complexity its just not a great field combat weapon.

defiant January 4th, 2007, 10:14 PM IZHMASH makes a semi-auto magazine fed 12 gauge combat shotgun based on the Kalishnikov:

http://img441.imageshack.us/img441/7787/saiga12eh2.jpg

The commercial model is $400, but its toned down (a fixed hunting stock rather than the pistol grip/folder, etc.). A tactical conversion is not difficult but needs to be 922r compliant in order to be legal. Idiotic law, but parts and "how to" instruction are available on the net.

Theres a lso a full auto short barrel (6"?) versio n available from Tromix. A full auto 12 is a bit ridiculous, but the vide o of it is amusing:

http://www.tromix.com/saiga12_fullauto.wmv

atlas#11 January 4th, 2007, 10:26 PM I get what your saying, my 12 guage is an old jc higgins and it's sawn off at 18 inches (which I think is the legal limit). I can't say that I've had any combat experience what so ever but I would think that the spread of the relativly light hunting loads we use would get enough pellets into the face area to atleast slow them down.

With someone using body armor I think I would aim high, aiming for the groin won't be a quick death. The pain might debilitate them long enough for you to get a second shot in their head before they return fire, but I wouldn't count on it. Atleast with the head shot you have a chance at bringing them down fast.

The smg/carbine/bulpup (or any other compact design weapon) would probably be just as fast and effective. Still, I can get a 12 guage mossberg for $135 at the pawn shop and ammo is dirt cheap. While a reliable auto loader of sufficient calibre and size will run at twice that or more used.

You seem quite well versed in modern combat tactics, are you a cop or military?

As for the an-94, I think the design wasn't spectacular, but the concept was a great idea. What part of it do you think they were having problems with? I'm sure the great minds of this forum could perfect it, there are enough people on here with autocad to design a space station. Though I'm not sure it would help anyone, very few people have the ability to manufacture their own parts. I think this kind of project was mentioned on the forum before, not sure where though.

Edit: Full auto 12 guage sounds crazy. I think there are some models employed by some agencies somewhere, I don't remember details but it doesn't sound like a viable tactical weapon. Recoil wouldn't be as big a factor as you might think, but still, if you're one to care about bystanders then it's probably not an option.

defiant January 5th, 2007, 12:24 AM You seem quite well versed in modern combat tactics, are you a cop or military?

Answer: Unorganized militia.

Regarding tactics/body armor, we're talking generalities rather than particular circumstances. Its one thing if (1) your positioned 2000 meters away with a .50; (2) on the street with a handgun; (3) at home with a variety of toys to delight yourself with; (4) etc.

Maybe a 12 guage pistol with a hot depleted uranium load might be the solution ;).

Speaking generally, if I was on the street armed with an ordinary pistol I'd be concentrating on head shots (and cover). If I was at home it would be a Saiga 12 or a high powered rifle - probably the Saiga (and cover). A 12g to the chest would probably floor and knock the wind out just about anybody - and it'd take time for them to recover. If there wasn't time to finish them off with a .22 to the head, its worth remembering that leg shots are an alternative with a 12g.

But the best alternative is not to be "there" when the boys in armor come. Ideally the timing and scenario should be of your choosing - its common sense as much as its tactics.

Finally, $400 isn't a lot for a firearm if your life is going to depend on it. Plinking is another matter.

InfernoMDM January 5th, 2007, 03:35 AM Most of my friends are infantry Marine and Army and I have friends who are LE SWAT types. I frequent several sights dedicated to that as well, practice and try to learn from others mistakes.

I to have a love for the shotgun but people think its easier to use then it really is. Hence my points. I think its a great car gun, and awesome how defender if utilized properly. Also I agree groin shots and the like are pointless as they wont truly debilitate and if a man is pissed enough hes going to go down shooting. I would.

As for pistol tactics, no one in the industry really suggest head shots unless the target isn't going down. To use a old idea the Mozambique is a useful tactic for shooting. The USAF finally went to a program promoting the idea. I however don't like it as much because if your shooting with a pistol and you work only with the 2 chest 1 head pattern it wont work out to well. If you hit the guy in body armor and miss the head shot chances are the pattern you have grown into your reflexes will waste two This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter more rounds for a second head shot. Its better to practice the scenarios with a friend who calls out if the target is going down, or make some targets that react to shots differently.

The shotgun posted above is actually on the US market for a bit more then 400. I want to say 600ish. The biggest problem limited import of magazines have slowed US sales. However it is apparently reliable with just about every round from bird to buck shot.

I have a friend, who knows some one who turned a one shot shotgun into a pistol. He said it hurt his hand and he could only shoot it once or twice a day and his hand would swell the first few times he used it. This friend and other friends of his had the same experience and eventually got rid of the illegal weapon.

defiant January 5th, 2007, 08:48 AM The sporterized Saiga 12 is going for $399 - do a Google search. That's for the sporterized version - the military model is not imported, and if it was would not be available to the public. Its not legal under 922r.

Magazines are readily available, but be prepared to pay $50 or more.

Its also relatively useless to have a good discussion about tactics without discussing a scenario. Tactics ought to vary with the circumstances - how good a shot you are, how much ammo is available, the number of assailants, whether or not there's time to reload, how well protected positions are, and so forth.

Even if the 2 chest 1 head pattern was the best training technique - its a waste of ammo against five guys if all you have is ten rounds.

Nor should the 12g leg shot be discounted so readily. Most people go into shock when shot (and missing a leg or two is no exception), nor is it likely that they'd get off an accurate shot as they were falling. If nothing else, a leg shot slows the approach and afford more time to take stock of the circumstances. We're talking body armor here.

InfernoMDM January 5th, 2007, 02:07 PM I was just quoting two different magazines such as SWAT when it came to the magazine info of the Saiga. I should have said that previously.

Let us talking scenarios, you could create a scenario for every weapon at any time of the day. We stick to generalities for a reason when it comes to defense and combat. This allows the prepared citizen or the soldier to set up his kit according to the normal situation encountered. If your going to encounter mass troops you need to have a good plan and potentially lots of ammo. Likewise most people only need to carry one extra magazine for home personal defense.

This drives me into the why two plus shots are fired. First no matter how good of a shot you are it is possible that your first shot or even ten shots won't kill the guy. Figuring the average shoot out people only hit ten percent of what they shoot you can see why a second shot or even third shot is a good idea.

Also not there are several predominate books out one by a guy from the 70s I believe. I always forget his name, but not the lesson. This guy recounts a shootout where a man was struck 12 times in the head and several in the body. This included 1911s and I believe 38 specials. Thinking the robber was dead they move up on him, but the man sits up shoots a bullet out of his nose like a snot rocket and gives up.

If you had shot once and that man had gotten back up or shot you from the ground, you wouldn't have the luxury of eating your words.

nbk2000 January 5th, 2007, 02:36 PM Obviously InfernoMDM is unfamiliar with the function of a duckbill choke, which is solely for combat and not something sportsmen are likely to ever have seen.

The duckbill forces shot into a wide and narrow band that greatly increases hit probabilty at close-range, as well as shot concentration.

By aiming at the upper-thigh and groin, you bypass the armor, and will immobilize the enemy (not neccessarily kill), as the shock of the genitals and lower pelvic region (bladder/colon/rectum/intestines) being penetrated should be adequate to drop them, as well as good possibility of bleed out and sepsis.

#1 shot is the best, as it retains enough energy to penetrate deep enough to reach vital organs, while being numerous enough to keep a dense shot pattern. Hevi-shot increases the shot weight by a good percentage over normal lead, making it even more effective.

Within the confines of a building, a shotgun is equal to, or better than, a rifle.

It may not have the ability to penetrate a vest, but a rifle bullet penetrating a vest is just going to a make a neat hole, while the bloody rat-hole of a load of shot in the lower torso is going to make a mess of 'em. :)

Look at the LA bank robbers shootout.

16 wounded by large caliber rifle fire. NO fatalities.

And the old saw of 'Shoot 'em in the head' is much more difficult to pull of when the target is running, likely wearing a kevlar helmet with possibly a ballistic face-shield, maybe carrying a shield, and you're catching fire from his comrades.

And lets not forget the Dragon Skin armor made by Pinnacle Armor Systems, which is capable of stopping multiple AP shots at CQB range from large caliber rifles, and is going to become more available to police SWAT units as production ramps up for the ongoing war.

Then you won't have anything under a .50 capable of penetrating their vest. :p

The lower limbs are a consistantly available target, because they can't armor the legs without greatly impeding their mobility. In combat, Mobility = Life. This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

Also, the needs of the police are different from that of the criminal.

The cops can't shoot innocent bystanders or hostages without a lot of shit and possible loss of their pensions, so they have to worry about precise shot placement and overpenetration.

The criminal can rock-n'- roll, spray a curtain of lead, and not give a shit if it goes through the pigie, the wall behind the piggie, and into some booger-eating brat in the kindergarten down the road.

But the criminal doesn't need to kill the cops who are trying to get him, only prevent them from getting close enough to capture/kill him before being able to escape.

Police are not soldiers...they're not going to continue pressing the attack after three of their comrades have had their nuts and knees blown off. They'll pull back and set up a containment perimeter to prevent your escape long enough for them to formulate a plan of attack for burning you out and calling it an 'accident'. ;)

InfernoMDM January 5th, 2007, 05:19 PM nbk2000 - Yes I know the duckbill is (haven't shot one) and multiple guys from soldiers on down have pointed out its limited use in Vietnam and its subsequent drop of use in nearly every military. It has been a novelty in combat and isn't even fielded by the people who once used it. I'll post in another forum for specifics as to why that device isn't looked on highly anymore if you are interested. I don't disagree the criminals can get away, but remember when you spread shot out like that you tend to loose force as your distance increase alot faster then you would with a standard full choke.

Also people have now been researching the effects of being shot. I wish I had the article, but the actual effects differ so greatly that trying to play that into a scenario isn't a very intelligent idea. The bad guy may just want to get away but if he dumps a cop he still has to deal with a now pissed/scared aggressor.

I'll see if I can get some info on the subjects although most of the articles aren't online.

I probably hate you January 5th, 2007, 07:46 PM Infernomdm , If I am not mistaken the m855 is the U.S version of the fn ss109 which would make its ballistics identicle (or close enough) if you explore the link more you will see fragmetation is highly dependant on velocity with the 223 round.

As for 12 ga shot spread I have a 18" barreled semi auto shotgun which I cut so it has basically a cylinder choke.At any range in a house (well my house) you are not going to exceed 10 to 15 yards usually below that unless you have huge rooms , the shot pattern is no bigger than a human chest depositing a devistaing amount of pellets on target so a groin,neck face,armpit shot will be very lethal.

All weapons have there advantages and disadvantages I also have a mini 14 ,which I have been increasing its accuacy,which I love and one definate advantage it has is ammo capacity.This is the weapon that sits beside my bed at night with 4 40rd mags ready to go.

If one truly wants to fight off a stronger more organized force some improvided grenades would be very benificial , I dont care how armored you are even if you achived no penatration with frag the concusion would throw you for a loop giving you more than enough time to finish off you enemy even with a sharp knife.This is just my opinion on these matters and I am sorry if they have been noted in other threads.

InfernoMDM January 6th, 2007, 12:55 AM duckbill/oval chokes - Wikipedia can be your friend.

Oval chokes are designed to provide a shot pattern wider than it is tall, are sometimes found on combat shotguns, primarily those of the Vietnam War era. Military versions of the Ithaca 37 with duckbill choke were used in limited numbers during the Vietnam War by US Navy Seals. It arguably increased effectiveness in close range engagements against multiple targets. Two major disadvantages plagued the system. One was erratic patterning. The second was that the shot would spread too quickly providing a very limited effective zone.

Basically you have turned your shotgun, which could be effective against people 50 yards plus into a 5-10 yard weapon. A manufacturer started selling these again, but apparently the military LE and even civilian home defense aren't buying to many of them. If you figure you can't shoot slugs have terrible patterns etc it really turns the shotgun from a multi role weapon to a very limited use device. That really brings home the point that you should keep your weapons multi role.

nbk2000 January 6th, 2007, 01:52 AM Wikipedia...the massively co-authored encylcopedia of herd knowledge...truely a bastion of accurate knowledge on all esoteric and highly technical matters. :rolleyes:

Everyone agrees (you, me, and the wiki) that the duckbill is a close-range proposition (5-10 yards), but you make that out as a failing, not a strength as I do.

True, shotguns are capable of ranges of 50 yards with buckshot, and over 100 with slugs, but that's not playing to its strengths, and those distances are better served by SMG or carbines, both of which have greater accuracy/terminal effects/ firing rates at range than a shotgun.

Where the shotgun is superior is in close range work, as a 'room broom' as it were, to sweep up the enemy in CQB range engagements (as I've previously stated), which is typically in-house fighting.

Also, the modern duck-bill isn't your granddaddy's weapon of the 'Nam.

It's able to much more neatly pattern and does so with modern cupped shot, not the cardboard wads of old.

In fact, a normal rifled shotgun barrel would be good for in-house work, as the spreading of the shot pattern that's caused by the rifle spinning of the shot-cup, which is intolerable in outdoor shooting, works to your advantage indoors, by opening up the pattern which would otherwise make a shotgun a weapon requiring as accurate an aim as a rifle to hit. This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter Or just chuck a fuckin' grenade and be done with it. :D

defiant January 6th, 2007, 02:20 AM NBK: Hadn't heard of a duckbill choke - experimentation is in order. Looks interesting...:

http://img405.imageshack.us/img405/2394/duckbillchokexm3.jpg

...and some Saiga's are threaded for a choke.

Inferno: Don't believe everything you read. A lot of writers are "English majors" who are less interested in research than submitting an article for a $200-300 paycheck - flipping burgers if you will. Not that there aren't journalists out there that don't know their stuff, but you have to be discerning.

Your not totally incorrect about a even the best shooters missing on occassion, but a good shooter who can keep their cool while under pressure misses less often and is observes a miss quicker than an experienced shooter who's still shocked by the recoil or shooting blindly over the hood of a car.

The stats about misses during shootouts are derived primarily from inner cities, where the bulk of shootouts occur. The larger cities I've lived at (U.S.) don't have gun ranges or places to practice shooting (undisturbed). So its no great mystery that stats reflect that people can't hit what their shooting at. I'm not discounting your stats - just interpreting them from a different perspective.

Finally, I indicated above that I'm not military, but I do have informal ties to the military, law enforcement, swat, homeland security, and so forth. We talk from time to time, as I used to work for the government. So let me say right off, these guys are not your friends and they are the one's that are likely to be wearing body armor. That frames the scenario (unless you pissed off a high tech division of the mob). There is always a scenario, circumstances, and generalizing them to the point of utter abstraction is mental masturbation. Instead, think war games.

InfernoMDM January 6th, 2007, 04:40 AM I forgot to add that the plates I posted originally would be great for under the arms where cops have died from 22 shots. Mark Coates shot a guy 4 times with I think a G22(40 cal glock) and the guy got one shot under his arm and he died. A lot extra protection for relatively cheap and with two good front and back plates it would take a pretty lucky hit or a lot of rifle fire to get through.

I know the history of most of the writers I read and take stock in what they say. People like Suarez and individuals he has close ties to, and dozens of others. Much like a science journal you have to know who is writing and what there knowledge background is. I could go down the list of names, Suarez just jumped to my mind because I am planing on taking a class from him.

Any modern shooter will tell you no matter how calm and collected you are misses are common. I know of a only a handful of people that really have such talent as to shoot on the move while being shot at, and hit effectively at distance or close up. With all the amateur, professional, and trainers this isn't a high percentage. These guys also shoot more rounds in a day then I bet most people in this forum shoot in a year. They still suggest to everyone and follow the doctrine of multiple shots per target regardless of the weapon. Obviously sniping this wouldn't be accurate but Close Quarters, even ranged shots most professionals would laugh you off there forums. If you don't believe me ask the people at getoffthex.com These days its all about getting as many rounds into the CNS as you can. The more the better.

I agree on the body armor. Although there has been a sharp increase in the use of body armor in violent crimes its still below 1%. Then again I have 3 sets now. One is a plate carrier with top of the line plates that even prevent incendiaries from cooking through, along with nearly every armor piercing round.

Although unusual to see in the hands of a civilian, I can tell you lots of soldiers are selling them at gun shows for dirt cheap. I watched two plates go for 400 rounds, when one plate is worth 1300 alone.

It's more food for thought.

nbk2000 - I agree it is a wonderful weapon for close up work, but seriously everyone in the field of civilian shooters on up to the elitists shun that kind of choke. Just passing on there opinions. I know they have changed and about two weeks ago someone talked about the new choke thats out. They still aren't impressed. If it works for you thats fine, but tailoring a shotgun to that use only drastically reduces its effectiveness overall. In my opinion thats not a good idea, and many people back it up. Take for instance Mr. Reeves comment about them, "A duckbill choke isn't going to have any real effect at EFFECTIVE shotgun ranges other than fucking up your patterning and preventing you from doing a safe transition to slug"

Wikipedia was only the historical recourse as I don't have the time or will to go hunting through old military books.

defiant January 9th, 2007, 01:00 PM Shooting on the run is a whole other scenario, and needless to say requires training. There are no public gun ranges I know where that kind of practice is allowed. :D A well placed shot while running wasn't the scenario I had in mind though, but for most people the objective of shooting while running is to keep their advesaries heads down - if there's nobody on your side to provide cover. If someone is providing cover I'd concentrate more on running as fast as possible to my new position.

Frequency of practice is something that also depends on one's circumstances. Endless practice isn't necessary for many shooters to make 3" groups, which practically speaking is sufficient if your not a target shooter or sniper going for dime groups. I know guys who hadn't shot in ten years, but on their return to the range shot out a bullseye from 45 meters. Like riding a bike.

Upon acquiring a new firearm I'll shoot rounds through it to 1) properly break in the barrel; 2) sight the weapon, and: 3) get familiar with it. That takes less than a hundred rounds. After I'm familiar with the gun, going to the range once or twice a year is sufficient for me to do 3" groups rapidfire at 45m and 1"-2" with a rifle at 100m. I haven't done competition since I was a kid, and don't need to make dime groups. Moreover, if I put tens of thousands of rounds through firearm the barrel ld end up with a shot out barrel. This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter Also, the beat cops in my neighborhood (a major City) are required to go to the range ONCE A YEAR - thats it - while police snipers train weekly.

The amount of practice required depends on your abilities, finances, goals, and other circumstances. A consistent 3" group ought to be more than adequate in most real life situations.

InfernoMDM January 9th, 2007, 06:11 PM First shooting on the move is not to keep the attackers head down. It is trained to just about every tier 1 and 2 combatant, most firearms instructors of anything above basics teaches shooting on the move and hitting what you aim at.

Next almost anyone can go out and hit what they are shooting at with little practice. You can teach a person to shoot with a video game to hit paper even up to 1000 yards. Constant dry fire and routine training is very important to a good shot in combat situation.

Also on a side not a good breaking in number is about 500 rounds. That puts a fair amount of stress on a weapon, and like most of the 45 guys will say if its gonna break it will by then.

Cops are terrible at shooting for the most part, and even worse on firearm maintenance. You will see the best shooters in any department spend time shooting regularly.

Lastly look around for outdoor ranges they generally have areas specifically designed for shoot and move drills, or even days set aside.

defiant January 11th, 2007, 01:09 AM Now you're just being argumentative :D

Before you said that percentage wise most shots in combat were misses, now your saying that shooting on the run with accuracy is viable. :D :D

Besides, injuries prevent me from running, so I've adopted to shooting with both hands simultaneously with independent target aquisition (pistol). :D :D :D

Again, we're back to scenarios - which is what I've been advocating - critical analysis of scenarios. What weapons are likely to be on hand? Who are the advesaries? Are you alone or with a competent force? Etc.

In a body armor scenario, we both agreed that it would most likely be multiple advesaries (i.e. law enforcement). Even an individual who was skilled at shooting on the run would be insane to do so a multipe of armored advesaries targeting him.

If it's one guy - shoot him in the head and be done with it.

Additionally, as body armor typically implies government forces, it is also not unrealistic to expect a sniper to be deployed. No matter how good you are, running while shooting (accurately) is going to slow you down - better allowing a sniper or marksman to train a round. Sort of like skeet shooting.

While I'm jealous of the advanced shooting special ops training your getting - I don't know a single combat veteran who would adopt the tactics your advocating (except as a last resort). Grenades or an rpg would be preferable.:rolleyes:

Respectfully,

~ defiant

ShadowMyGeekSpace January 11th, 2007, 03:55 AM If I was at home it would be a Saiga 12 or a high powered rifle - probably the Saiga (and cover)Defiant, the walls of your house do not provide cover, nor do any objects within it. You might as well be hiding behind pads of butter.

nbk2000 January 11th, 2007, 04:20 AM Defiant, the walls of your house do not provide cover, nor do any objects within it. You might as well be hiding behind pats of butter.

The walls that won't stop pork bullets from coming in, also won't stop your bullets from going OUT. ;)

Shooting while shuffling your feet or sidestepping isn't what I'd call 'Shooting on the Move'. I'd call that 'Shifting of the Stance'.

Shooting on the move, unless at extremely close range (in the same room range), is a guaranteed miss and waste of ammo, unless you're just making noise with your boom stick to scare off primitives. :p

Trying to shoot on the run...the kind of running you tend to do when multiple people with guns are shooting at you...and hoping to hit anything, is just silly.

If you keep to 2 or 3 second rushes to cover (not concealment), you've got a good chance of not getting hit as long as your movement isn't predictable and are far enough away for some aiming error on their part.

I'd seriously suggest getting some sort of smoke devices suitable for screening your movement. Unless they've TI scopes on their weapons (FBI HRT, Delta Force, etc), smoke will greatly increase your survivability.

InfernoMDM January 11th, 2007, 06:09 AM Shooting on the move, unless at extremely close range (in the same room range), is a guaranteed miss and waste of ammo, unless you're just making noise with your boom stick to scare off primitives. :p

Trying to shoot on the run...the kind of running you tend to do when multiple people with guns are shooting at you...and hoping to hit anything, is just silly. This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

Youre very wrong. Almost all interme diate and advanced courses teach shooting on the move. Its n ot a shuffle and I have done the training. You can shoot on the move with either a rifle or handgun although its easier with a rifle.

http://www.therangeinc.com/graphics/range2.jpg

Pictures like this are on nearly every site now, and you can see the first steps for hitting at ranges beyond CQB distance.

Every nuclear power plant in the US goes through the shoot and move course, nearly all the infantry guys I know have had familiarization with the concept. Blackwater requires all shooters to shoot on the move at a fast walk slow jog out to 75 yards, and many do far better then that.

Although I could explain the basic training to acquire this skill on here I doubt anyone in this forum is interested, much less I doubt it goes here. I am not sure who has told you its n ot a goo d idea , but your recourses or conclusions are extremely flawed. I have a friend who can easily hit targets the size of a average sized paper plate at 50 yards almost at a full run. I have seen him hit the same targets out at 75 yards (the length of the range we can do such drills with). I will be the first to admit my best dista nce with a pistol ha s been 15-20 ya rds wh ile moving rapidly. That ho wever isnt the ca se for the people who practice this regularly.

With a red dot and an AK on my first day I was moving at a slow jog hitting targets at 25 yards. We blew about 2000 rounds between the three of us, but I still can hit on the move with some accuracy, and far more then you claim.

Dont believe me; try telling Gabe suarez, Ye ager of ATI, and other su ch leading trainers. Go to th ere forums and ask them how far they can shoot on th e move. Ill even PM you the forum links.

You really should do some research into the subject more, as this practice has been around for at least over a decade in civilian classes.

festergrump January 11th, 2007, 06:26 AM Although I could explain the basic training to acquire this skill on here I doubt anyone in this forum is interested... Oh no, that's where YOU'D be wrong. I'd be very interested in just how this is trained for. Links are all fine and good, but I'd like to hear from you about your experiences with such training.

I'm familiar with Thunder Ranch and a few other training facilities but could never afford to put myself through such a program. Maybe you could shed some light on the training procedures so I could attempt to implement them at home, with friends, and achieve a higher understanding of the benefits, myths, and common pitfalls of such training (from home)?

Perhaps, since it would be a little off topic from this thread, maybe you could start a new topic in the Water Cooler to tell us of your experiences and also to gauge interest in this type of training for other members. I'll guarantee you that I'm not the only one interested...

InfernoMDM January 11th, 2007, 07:19 AM If nbk2000 says it alright I will do so. I am by no means am an expert and I could probably point you in directions of cheaper training.

By the way thunder ranch has produced DVD's of their training courses. I purchased one about 2 weeks ago that still hasn't found its way here yet. However the DVD is 45-50 dollars.

I probably hate you January 11th, 2007, 07:35 AM Infernomdm I am sorry to be rude but you sound like my 15 year old nephew.Everything you say is right your friends or someone you know can do all of these things everyone else doubts.Always trying to get the last word.

Shooting on the run is mainly just cover fire no matter how well you are trained when you here bullets whizzing by your head your first instinct is to duck.There are times you would not want to shoot on the run (snipers or a battle experienced unit attacking you) because you can run faster when you are just running to cover nothing else fancy or kewl.Even if your cover wont stop bullets it obviously hides your bodies position.

Most tactics are fucking gay unless you have experience you need to know what to do when , you cant just say fire now and always use this weapon (because my buddy said so on this forum he is 16 too he learned it from a game he is kewl)

All of this is gay there is no set of rules that are right for every situation sometimes a shotgun would be the preferred weapon other times a small caliber high powered rifle , some times a large caliber rifle.I mean a 50 bmg would be great for body armor but recoil would suck,shooting on the run would be great with a shotgun but a prolonged battle would suck because of lack of ammo, a .223 is great for ammo but if you are actually trying to hit something on the run or shooting very quickly a miss is likely(by the way the people in that pic are shuffling not running)

Basically don't believe everything you read and then come preach it like it is the fucking bible its not true and I don't want to fucking hear it.Lie to yourself not everyone else,get yourself killed as well but as before leave others out of it

I am sure you will try to think up some cleaver responce but all you really need is to get over your complex and quit telling others what is right or wrong.

I hope this doesn't get me banned but my god what a crock of shit I was going to leave it alone but Jesus what a bunch of shit , and I am a firm believer in free speech

defiant January 11th, 2007, 07:58 PM ShadowMyGeekSpace wrote:

Defiant, the walls of your house do not provide cover, nor do any objects within it. You might as well be hiding behind pads of butter.

My "house" is a steel boat. This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter You make a valid point though. If someone were to live a lifestyle where it was a strong possibility that they might face a force equipped with body armor - it wouldn't be a bad idea to armor plate a room, have escape hatches to the basement (if feasible), or even through the wall to natural cover outside. But if an onslaught by a military type force was expected, it might be prudent to make other sleeping arrangements.

InfernoMDM:

Your right about shooting on the move having advantages. It been around since weapons have existed - be it foot soldiers, or soldiers on horseback or vehicles.

The military/law enforcement style training your refering to is a little different than what NBK and I had in mind - which is running full speed while shooting from side to side and behind. In short escaping or fighting one's way to a better position.

The training pic you posted shows a force advancing forward while shooting at a target in front of them. That tactic is well suited to military and law enforcement engagements (or security forces generally), but I don't see it as advantageous for joe homeowner against a body armored division.

Feel free to correct me if the training consists of more than I've portrayed. From what I heard years ago, liability (i.e. accidents and lawsuits) caused trainers to stop programs that involved running/moving quickly while shooting at multiple moving targets and directions.

That's why paint ball guns were invented. :D

NBK:

Practical recomendations given the scenario.

festergrump January 11th, 2007, 08:39 PM By the way, thunder ranch has produced DVD's of their training courses. I purchased one about 2 weeks ago that still hasn't found its way here yet... Any chance that will accidently find it's way to the FTP or rapidshare when it arrives? ;)

Many will be grateful, but none moreso than I.

nbk2000 January 11th, 2007, 11:21 PM Pictures like this are on nearly every site now, and you can see the first steps for hitting at ranges beyond CQB distance.

In the picture, they are advancing in a direct line TOWARDS their targets, not at angles, and certainly not retrograding.

And while it may be the technique du jour to teach, how many of them are teaching it to you while you're being shot at, paintballs or otherwise? Mmmm...none?

With a red dot and an AK...

That's the problem right there...the reliance upon a device for the skill.

If you can choose the weapons you bring to the fight, and where and when, then you can do anything.

If you have the fight brought to you, where THEY want to fight it, and when you are least prepared, then what?

My philosophy on the subject of guns is make every shot count as if it was the only shot you'll get to make.

If you believe you'll have unlimited ammo, weapons that are excellently maintained and equipped with electronic aiming devices, buddies similiarly armed, and *blah, blah, blah*...then you're in fantasy-land or Special Forces

If you expect to have to fight with a battlefield pick-up weapon that's 40 years old and never been cleaned by the 50 previous peasant conscripts who've used it, with the 3 rounds left in it, at night...you're prepared or in Special Forces. :)

Train for weapons that jam, sights that are misadjusted or non-existant, for darkness/cold/rain/wind, and when multiple oppoponents trying 'High Speed, Low Drag' B.S. tactics that work great on sunny shooting ranges attack...you'll serve them their ass because you've trained for the worst, not the best.

While it's certainly possible for people to develop amazing skill at anything given enough time, do you have the time to develop to this highly specialized skill? Professional gunfighters may (SF soldiers/full-time SWAT), but the 9-5 schmuck?

How often to you intend to be shooting at someone while moving?

Let me rephrase that:

Why would you break from cover (or concealment), waste your VERY limited ammo supply by shooting from an EXPOSED position in the open (moving or not), and expect to not get cut down by the one bullet fired by the man shooting at you from behind cover, using a braced firing position, and taking his time to do it right?

Unless you're expecting to fight someone else equally silly to be shooting on the move while also exposing himself.

If you can't reproduce the skill after having been kicked out of your bed at 3AM, with whatever weapon is handed to you, in the dark, and against an unknown number of attackers armed with an unknown number and type of weapon...it's useless.

The advice of true gunfighters, men who lived and died by the gun in the frontier days of the US, was to take your time and do it right.

For instance, 'Wild' Bill Hickok and Davis Tutt had a gunfight in Springfield, Mo., on July 21, 1865.

At a distance of about 75 yards, they both drew and fired, but Hickok took the time to assuming a braced firing position and This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter killed Tutt with a single shot through the heart, using a single-action Black Powder revolver.

Hickock was meticulous in his aim, and was shot at many times (and missed) by others who couldn't be bothered to take the time to do it right, and this at a time when there was no kevlar, and any bullet wound was more likely than not to kill you through infection.

Someone said once "You can't miss enough to kill". Exactly. :)

While on the subject, I'd also like to mention that, being an individual and (presumably) subject to de facto summary execution if captured after killing any JBT's, you needn't limit yourself in any way, in regards to your weaponry.

Booby-traps, fire, poisonous gases and poisoned blades/bullets, homicide vest...any and all means to kill as many of them as possible before your own death, is a good thing. :D

InfernoMDM January 12th, 2007, 03:55 AM Due to you tu be being down I ca nt show yo u exactly what I wanted. Please follow the link and you can watch Ja mes Yeager and another random guy. I suggest doing this after you have read my replies.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bybVAMJ6J24 Also check out Fighting Rifle Trailer and for shits and giggles XS Sight Demo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lxqgOiq6Fz0 This guy is shooting a AK without optics. As you can see hes doing training, so hes going at a moderate pace and practicing the basic footwork etc.

I probably hate you - I am going to go point for point with you. First off if you want to confirm this please take your know it all attitude and trot your ass over to a few forums that deal with everything from Military tactics down to personal defense. If you would like some suggestions I will be more then ha ppy to PM the links a s I believe nbk2000 doesnt like peo ple promotin g other sites. When you go there please act the same way you have here. Then you will know how some kid from totse feels when he states he has a cool recipe for gunpowder on here. Maybe your even tell them about all your experiences in OIF since your so knowledgeable about the subject and must be so wise to just know I am full of bullshit. I would suggest maybe not calling me out on my age, and knowledge when you really don't seem to be very well versed yourself. Then again you know all about self defense right? Hell you probably wrote the book. No I don't attempt to state I am a expert, but at least I can back up my knowledge with some form of training and experience can you?

From here on out I will try to be resonable as personal insults really don't teach us anything.

Yes shooting on the run is difficult. Most schools teach a slow build up course of stand, walk, jog, and sometimes run. You would know that if you had any classes recently about threat response etc. James Yeager (check you tube for clips of his training and video) will confidently tell you just how important shooting while moving is. He also will point out you should shoot to kill, not to cover.

As for your poin t about, Most ta ctics are fucking gay un less you have experience. Well tha ts why you train now isnt it? We can't always train up to the point of first hand knowledge because that might get us killed, but we can facilitate training many ways. TR, Blackwater, and various other schools have there own take on that.

you cant just sa y fire now an d alwa ys u se this weapon

Absolutely right, but we can use certain weapons that work b etter in many situations then weapons that limit us. Its b etter to have a Swiss army knife then a scalpel. Shotgu ns in my OPINION are great for home defense , and arent to b ad in the vehicle. However an assault rifle be it the AR, AK or even some battle rifles would be just as good or better in most situatio ns. I personally think a shotg un is great, but I can see why most profes sion als dont prefer them as mu ch for hom e defense.

Also I might point out a little deficiency in your logic. Why the would a 50 caliber be great for body armor? Why would you aim for the body armor and not the head if you were a sniper?

Nbk2000 -

And while it may be th e technique du jour to teach, how many of them are teaching it to you while you're being shot at, paintballs or otherwise? Mmmm...none?

Several actually teach classes while being shot at or shot around. Gabe Suarez is one of the leading and radical trainers today. A friend Paul Gomez introduced me to this guys teaching style. Needless to say I was shocked. Suarez will have you go down range while others are shooting to look at your target, or to do some drill. He does this specifically to get people who have never had the stress of dealing with live rounds coming near them some coping skills.

Other companies use simuntions which I am sure you have heard about. Needless to say these are paintballs you here the bang and it will scare you as well as hurt far more then a paintball. At point blank range you have to be careful as the rounds can be lethal. I had the fortune to try some basic little intro course with simuntions and I can promise you it is very realistic and very scary the first time.

That's the problem rig ht there...the reliance u pon a device for the skill.

That isnt the point and I am sorry I should have guessed you ma y not be well versed in the ne wer teaching style. First almost all courses require you to use iron sights for your initial training. This is because if your optic fails they want you to be able to do nearly the same thing with iron sights. Please look up flip up sight, or backup sight. Most classes will test your skills with your optics turned off. Thats why ma ny people like to co witne ss there sights on the AR . Ob viou sly though optics aren't required as you can tell from the video above.

If you can choose the weapons you bring to the fight, and where a nd when , then you can do anything.

I agree, but please see the comments above about choosing the best weapon all around.

If you have the fight brought to you, whe re THEY want to fight it, and when you are least prepared , then what?

In the US I would agree you cant easily brin g the fight to them. This is why many people have bug o ut bags, body armor setup with mags at the ready. What you have and how many rounds you have is up to you, and what you think your threat might be. I have some very nice gear so I have the rounds, and the armor to fight for a while. This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

My average carry for daily life is one pistol and 1-2 magazines. This is where shooting and moving would be most important. If I can drop one attacker while I am moving to cover I am in better shape then if I have to now attempt to fight off 2 or more shooters, and get pinne d down at the cover I was so de sperately trying to get to. If you just run and dont retu rn fire someone can either box you, or lead you. Needless to say not a good thing. On that point you will have to provide your own cover. Which means why just shoot at the persons general direction when you can make your limited rounds count?

Cover is important, but so is killing the bad guy as fast and as efficiently as possible.

As for jab about weapons I am currently sitting next to a very nice AR, and a AK in progress. I have a Eotech which although a bit expensive is nt hard to fin d, try any local gun store. Its n ot imp ossible to obtain and maintain good weapons, and shoot them regularly if you want to. Even without the ammo you can practice many dry fire drills etc. The highly specialized skills arent, and they arent to d ifficult to le arn and maintain to a decent degree.

I am going to now ask you some questions.

Why would you sit in a spot of cover while lets say two drug dealers move in for the kill instead of running? What are the chances of su rvival if you just try to run with out firing a shot, as compared to shooting on the move? Wouldnt it be sm art to be able to shoot and hit what your aiming at on the move instead of wasting rounds?

James Yeager probably has put it best, even if I think the guy is a ass. Get off the X. The X being where you are at the moment the shooting starts. He also pounds home the fact that you should be shooting, moving and finding cover. Please watch the videos on you tube and you will here him say that at least once, and states that over and over on his site. Tons of other civilian trainers say the same thing.

Lastly your true gunfighters are a bit ou t of date , and a bit out of times. I wou ld lo ve to know the last time you saw two arme d citizens pace out 75 ya rds with a single shot pistol? By the way you cant shoot back if your already de ad, so its better to miss one then to have taken to much time aiming and get hit.

Obviously a level of accuracy and speed is a far better option.

I probably hate you January 12th, 2007, 08:20 PM I am a member of several weapons and tatic forums look me up my user name is Shaun,you were the one coming off as a know it all spewing all this crap well joe blow said this and jack said that,yes I will call you on your age you sound very immature and impretionable , training is exactly what you said it is for , but to me it sounds like your training is based off of a first person shooter game or rambo movie , and you can call me on any tactic or training you want I a am quite well versed , an expert no , I am not military or bacon (not that they are experts either). I am just sick of you having to claim what you say is best , being argumentitive as someone else said , you called me on a the us m855 being a soft point which it obviously is not , sniper where are you getting that from sure it is a sniper/light armor weapon but we are talking about shooting on the run now , not sniper shooting and as far as I know there is no body armor that can stand up to .50 bmg.

Basically you and your knowlage imo are questionable it seems mostly based on forums and self proclaimed experts , I appologize for any thing that I have said that is wrong I also appologize if I came off as a know it all , I know there is some really good training out there I personally like ex seal trainers , but I just dont trust most forum info and self proclaimed experts , If you could post some of your sources and there backgrounds as references I would appreciate it .

Your opinion on cover seems to be a bit flawed . You can lead you enemy by fleeing to cover and limit there movement lets say for instance a hallway or alley then set up a very accurate prone firing position picking them off while they fire wildly , painicing and die .

The training you promote in the hands of someone who doesnt train rigorously (not just reading or watching it then tring it at the range a few times) will get them killed . If you want to have the abilities of a expert (not a book expert) you have to train like one , make sure you mention that so noone is killed while tring these advanced tatics . Just something to add to your tatics never go into a fight with a pistol , it is one of the first things you will ever learn in your training , the only people who need a pistol are ones who cannot always carry a rifle or shotgun like bacon or someone with a concealed weapon permit , I really dont know what is with the weapons forums members wanting to work there way to a good weapon with a crappy one , just some kind of dumb fantacy of battle I guess , imo it is a frightening thought with the posibility of death and letting down my family and all of there deaths as a result.

Sorry to come off as an asshole but I am.

nbk2000 January 12th, 2007, 10:40 PM First, let me state policy regarding other sites:

If it's not an E&W related english-language forum, post all the links you want.

If it's an E&W board in a non-english language, post it.

ONLY if it is in english, and E&W related, and a discussion board (like us), is it prohibited.

+++++++++

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bybVAMJ6J24 Also check out Fighting Rifle Trailer and for shits and giggles XS Sight Demo

I watched all his videos, and 'mall ninja' is what comes to mind. The idiots who pay this idiot money to play with all their mall ninja gear are...idiots (only appropriate term)...and I love the graduating class photos where everyone is flipping off the camera.

That's a hallmark of professionalism that is oddly lacking from any posed picture I've ever seen in my life of Green Berets, SEALS, SS, Spetnaz, GSG9, SAS, or other elite warriors.

It's also lacking in candid pictures I've seen of soldiers in Grozney, Berlin, Stalingrad, Iwo Jima, Normandy, Somme, Ypres, or a thousand other battlefields. This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter It's only in the Hippy and Nintendo generations that we see such pride in martial skills demonstrated by one-finger salutes.

To start with the provided YouTube video, the man takes a single side-step, plants his feet in a firm weaver stance, and pumps five rounds sequentially into 3 targets at about 12 feet.

WTF?

The Tueller reaction-drill shows that a single opponent, armed with a concealed knife, can cross 7 yards and gut you before you can draw and fire a single shot from a holstered gun.

To think that you can pump 5 rounds into the first attacker before the other two can either draw and return fire, or stab you, from 12 feet away, is suicide.

This looks like an IPSC shooter thinking he's got the skills to be a teacher. :rolleyes:

If anything, you put 1 round into each of the attackers ASAP, and continue shooting at anyone still moving until everyone is down or you're out.

Even better is to move so that one of the three is blocking at least on of the other two, reducing your threat from three to two, allowing you to deal with the greater danger first.

Best of all is to not allow three threats to get so fucking close, or to have two armed friends yourself. ;)

This guy is shooting a AK without optics. As you can see hes doing training, so hes going at a moderate pace and practicing the basic footwork etc.

He's also advancing across open level ground in broad daylight, standing completely exposed, shooting at stationary targets that aren't shooting back, as well as standing up while changing magazines (rather than getting down to reduce his exposure to return fire), and doing half his shooting while either kneeling/prone or otherwise stationary.

There wasn't any form of cover or concealment in that meadow, otherwise I woulda gotten down behind something big and solid.

That's what PRONE is for! If you're in the open, you kiss dirt, and you do that during training too, no fucking excuses.

If there's even foot high grass, you drop, and roll to the side, so the enemy firing at your drop point is hitting nothing but dirt.

You fire, you roll, so return fire on your muzzle flash/blast/dust kickup is hitting dirt, not you.

Why?

Because you fight as you train, and if you didn't train to go prone when exposed in the open, you'll die when you don't go prone when someone is shooting at you for real.

And, when he's walking backwards, he shoots at targets he passes...targets that presumably represent lethal threats that require shooting...but if they were behind him until he passed them by as he walked backwards, wouldn't that mean they'd have had plenty of time to attack him frm behind, or are they too chivalrous to do so? :p

Oh, and we don't see ANY hits on targets, so we don't even know if he hit them while prone, let alone walking.

Gabe Suarez's having people go downrange of other peoples live fire is stupid, because these other people are likely total strangers, and who knows their level of competency.

Military training involves live-fire, but that's obviously a required risk for soldiers, and you're governent property when you are a soldier, so there's nothing you can do about it, but at least it's with people you know and who know you.

That's not the case at some civilian training school.

The Simuntions training...how many people got shot while trying to shot on the move? How many took cover and stopped being Tacti-k3wL after catching a few rounds in the 'nads?

In the US I would agree you can’t easily bring the fight to them.

What does being in the US have to do with anything? 'They' can be the neighborhood punks at the park or convenience store, or the crazy neighbor, not just JBT's or raghead jihadhi's.

Why would you sit in a spot of cover while lets say two drug dealers move in for the kill instead of running?

Cover, by definition, is able to stop the enemies fire, whereas concealment only hides your location, but won't stop a bullet.

Now, if I'm covered, and the two drug dealers :rolleyes: are 'closing in for the kill', that means they're moving and, thusly, having to expose themselves, however briefly, to my fire.

If I can see them, and my weapon has the range to reach them with lethal effect, then they will die. If my weapon is outranged, I stay in cover until they stupidly approach within range of my weapon, then they die.

You don't shoot just to be shooting, you don't do suppressive fire when you are by yourself, you don't break cover unless you have other cover to go to, and you don't try to manuever against superior numbers.

If there's no cover, and your weapon has superior range, you don't approach them! You maximize the distance between you and the enemy, to take you out of the enemies range, while still being able to kill them. This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter If they have superior range, either retreat out their range using all available cover, or close on them until you can engage them with your weapon (grabbing the belt as it's known).

Break cover without accurate and/or massive suppressive fire by your colleagues, and you'll die at the hands of a competent enemy.

But now I'm explaining the most basic rifleman tactics, which you should already know.

Speaking of knowing, I've heard of, studied, compared, and ruled as crap most of the stuff that you're telling me to look up, and did so years ago.

James Yeager...pounds home the fact that you should be shooting, moving and finding cover. ... Tons of other civilian trainers say the same thing.

Lastly your “true” gunfighters are a bit out of date, and a bit out of times. I would love to know the last time you saw two armed citizens pace out 75 yards with a single shot pistol?

Every generation thinks its way is the best way, but basic truths are eternal, and not subject to the whims of the day, and I'm only interested in what's been PROVEN true by warriors in war, not the latest civilian fool to let his IPSC trophy go to his head. What do civilians know about war, unless they were once soldiers in war themselves?

How many shoot-outs have you been in? Mr. Hickock was in many, and lived. Listen to the advice of the survivors, and study the errors of the dead.

Oh, and your lexdysia must be acting up again, because I said 'single ACTION', not 'single SHOT'.

A single-action pistol is one that requires the hammer to be manually cocked back to fire each shot. Mr. Hickock used a .36 caliber Colt Navy Black Powder revolver, with 6 shots, but he only needed 1 shot because he took the time to aim.

It wasn't a duel, but an impromptu gunfight. Mr Hickock engaged his enemy at a range where he knew he could kill his enemy and likely not be hit in return, which is smart tactics in action.

defiant January 12th, 2007, 11:12 PM This is getting volatile and increasingly enjoyable. And ridiculous.

It isn't difficult to ride a motorcycle with no hands, type 30 words a minute, or shoot while running. But with practice these feats become comparatively easy.

Common sense is more difficult. I can ride a motorcycle without hands (and enjoy doing so for some bizarre reason), but it would be utter foolishness to ride with no hands while evading pursuers at high speeds through traffic. Assasinating a pedestrian in a drive by while riding with one hand is another matter.

TACTICS SHOULD BE SUITED TO THE CIRCUMSTANCES. A tactic that's good in one situation might be foolhardy in another.

Approaching a superior force equipped with body armor is an example of what not to do. It doesn't matter whether you capable of shooting on the mover or not. Its the wrong tactic for the circumstance - one of them is likely to acquire you in their sights and pull the trigger. Its not something someone with combat experience and survival in mind would do unless there was no other alternative. Period.

If you happen to be fighting for a cause, are tired of life, and want to exit this world while making a statement - advancing on a superior force equipped with body armor is absolute genius.

NBK:

When I go to court and such I don't carry a firearm (or haven't yet). Other than that, quality firearms are available. No holigraphic red dot sights, but as advantageous as these devices can be - they can slow down target acquisition. In all likelihood you can point your finger at something with a fair degree of accuracy (within 3-5 inches). If you practice target shooting as if the "barrel was your finger" - you might find that it its allows for rapid target acquisition within (+/-) 3-5" inches.

FUTI January 13th, 2007, 03:53 PM I must side with NBK although I don't like the way he rub people nose in the dirt when they poo around...but when he is right...I lose my arguments. I don't have any combat or army experience, but the guy that does and whom I respect for that said to me that best way to get yourself killed is... to actually try some of those heroic run and shoot-out that Holywood movies feed your brain with. And those links are just that.

InfernoMDM January 13th, 2007, 03:54 PM First maybe you don't understand this, but shooting on the move is just one very important skill set. Accurate shooting, and obviously using cover is important. By the way I was the one that posted the Cover isn't always marine video with the AK's and other weapons shooting right through several different walls. I think you deleted it.

Although I don’t agree with everything Yeager states, he has the experience. The guy is former Law Enforcement, became a private contractor. Went to Iraq, worked with British Marines, and former SAS. The guy has more credentials and more experience then probably everyone in this forum combined. Also if you watch a few of the videos he shows he hits continually in a 4” circle.

As for the No Special Forces thing…. First you say only “military and SWAT” shoot on the move. Then I show you someone who caters to civilian training as well as LE. Which one do you want a course for LE, or civilian. They teach it to both. Well just to let you know US Special Forces aren’t allow to publicize their prior affiliation for profit. They can’t say “Hey I am former Delta Force buy my DVD, or come train with me.” Although if you’re in the community you start to find out whom did what, and they will tell you at classes etc, and generally have the paper trail to back it up. Unless it’s appleseed(not the person) course then your This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter pretty set if you go to the big names.

Next I have stated several companies that teach shooting on the move to civilians and you just ignored that. Maybe its time you go have a course or two? When is the last time you participated in a current Self Defense course, 6 months, 2 years, 5? I have been to three in the last two. Two pistol and one carbine course. Not to mention the extra training I get on the side from people who have been to gun site, and other places. Granted they aren’t instructors but I get to learn a little bit every time.

“How many shoot-outs have you been in?” Two different engagements, but I didn’t get a shot off due to where I was at the time. How many have you been in? Also that’s why I said you can’t bring the fight to the enemy in the US, soldiers in other places of the world bring the fight to the enemy.

If you don't want to believe what’s being taught fine. However most courses last two days and its very intensive, better ones last five days. It usually requires 1000-2000 rounds to go through the training.

Please pick any of the sites. The top ones are some of the best right now, and then I grabbed two off the search. Do your own search ask questions.

http://www.gunsite.com http://www.blackwaterusa.com http://www.tacticalresponse.com/ http://www.frontsight.com http://www.awt-co.com/Defensive%20Pistol.htm

Email them go to their forum, and tell them exactly what you told me about shooting every person once and going back. They will all ask what secret is if you can always make one shot and hit the central nervous system, and control the bullet after it’s left the barrel.

Maybe your information is a little dated, ever think of that or is shooting your primary interest, or job?

I hate to come off being an ass, but every time I try to show something you want to poke holes. My objective was to put new and relevant information don not fight with you on who’s got the bigger dick. You don’t believe me that’s fine, I hope you survive, but people with more combat time, experience, and age are teaching these because they find it more effective then what they were taught.

InfernoMDM January 13th, 2007, 03:57 PM I must side with NBK although I don't like the way he rub people nose in the dirt when they poo around...but when he is right...I lose my arguments. I don't have any combat or army experience, but the guy that does and whom I respect for that said to me that best way to get yourself killed is... to actually try some of those heroic run and shoot-out that Holywood movies feed your brain with. And those links are just that.

Agreed, but if you r trained prope rly you can "shoot on the move" not run through the building spraying everything. Tha ts the difference. I think NBK is wrong and I have training and others experience to back it up. He hasn't really given me any recourses then a 1916 shootout. He's not wrong, I just think others are teaching better ideas these days.

festergrump January 13th, 2007, 05:22 PM When is the last time you participated in a current Self Defense course, 6 months, 2 years, 5? I have been to three in the last two. Two pistol and one carbine course. Not to mention the extra training I get on the side from people who have been to gun site, and other places. “How many shoot-outs have you been in?” Two different engagements, but I didn’t get a shot off due to where I was at the time. I hate to keep on bringing this up, but since this thread was started by you and going off topic seems OK (well, this topic evolved around to it's current state, anyway), I'm still interested in your training experiences, and now also your real life firefight experiences... Would you please tell us about them? Where exactly have you trained? What were the circumstances of the firefights you have witnessed (but not participated in, by your own admission)?

Perhaps by getting it all out there and in the open everyone will better understand where you are coming from. So far, members see someone who lurked for many years then popped their head up almost from out of nowhere and about instantaneously got into altercations with a member of the Administration. Credibility certainly is lacking under such circumstances, I'm sure you will agree.

Who is InfernoMDM and why should we take him seriously all of a sudden? At this point I feel that a definitive introduction is well overdue... Anything short of that will just be a pissing contest with the one of the Admin. Guess who'll win. NBK's credibility has never been in question so far as I recall.

nbk2000 January 13th, 2007, 05:23 PM How did a gunfight in Springfield, Mo., on July 21, 1865 become a 1916 shootout? :confused:

InfernoMDM January 13th, 2007, 06:42 PM How did a gunfight in Springfield, Mo., on July 21, 1865 become a 1916 shootout? :confused:

NBK2000 Did the date ca use confusio n with the point I was trying to ma ke? I am sorry that is my fault sometimes I mes s up dates and numbers, I should have gone back and reread your post again. Even though I did mess up the date did you get my point? I would love to know what you thought of the sites I posted, and my comments.

Ple ase by all means deba te me if you are wron g, I am always looking fo r new ou tlooks on things even I d ont agree with certain aspects of th e teaching or opinion s. I think your self-proclaimed knowledg e that re ally hasnt bee n supported isnt that great, but it isnt complete wrong. Please by all means continue and I will atemp t to keep my calm.

The reason why many p eople dont teach what you perceive as the best idea for combat, is because only a handful of professionals can shoot well at distance, and provide one shot kills with out a scoped weapon. There are a handful of ind ividuals that are as skilled as you claim to be un der comba t and thats why the masses a re now taught wh at I was discussing. This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

The standard training technique I believe is called a regressive (retreating) bulls eye. You start at 5-7 feet and fire at 2-4 inch circles, until you can routinely hit 9 out of 10 rounds in the circle. Once your good to go, then you move the bulls eye out. The same training style is done with shooting on the move. However with the retreating target you also walk slow then speed up as well.

Festergru mp I will PM yo u som e forums and other places to look for the info and ask questions. Maybe yo u can come back and tell the others here what you found, or didnt find.

festergrump January 13th, 2007, 07:27 PM *SIGH*

I'm still interested in your training experiences, and now also your real life firefight experiences... Would you please tell us about them? Where exactly have you trained? What were the circumstances of the firefights you have witnessed (but not participated in, by your own admission)? Festergrump – I will PM you some forums and other places to look for the info and ask questions. Maybe you can come back and tell the others here what you found, or didn’t find. Forget it. What I've already found is you sidestepping issues. What I've yet to find, but gave you opportunity to provide, is firsthand accounts and names of your places of training as well as what the scenarios were which you were remotely involved in regarding lead flying in both directions, and also what you may have learned from them...

I don't think I was out of line for asking and would like to be taken seriously, myself. That wasn't too much to ask, was it? By blowing off my requests you only hurt your credibility worse. You brought these issues up, not me. Now I am interested in them.

Pretty fucking please, with sugar on top...... tell me your stories.

InfernoMDM January 13th, 2007, 08:11 PM Not trying to side step you, I just don't really want a whole bunch of people that wouldn't be welcomed in the LE Military forum rolling into the places I frequent. The community wouldn’t enjoy it. I just PMed you so you can make your own choice.

nbk2000 January 13th, 2007, 09:03 PM Well, isn't that awfully elitest.

Do you think we like pork or their associates rolling in here and reading our discussions and taking away our information without giving any in return?

No, we don't.

But we don't get snotty and say 'Invitation Only'. We're open to anyone who wants to learn, even if it's not the kind of people we'd invite in ourselves.

Taking something without reciprocation or compensation is called STEALING.

As for my own experiences (LE related, I can't discuss):

I've twice disarmed pistol armed robbers, bare hand and unarmored, shooting the first one in the back with his own gun as he ran out the door (it was an airshit replica, which is what saved his life), and body-surfed the second one down a flight of concrete stairs to the street below and walked away. :)

These weren't 'I was present, but not involved' situations, not by a long shot.

And why are you PM'ing Fester with the links? He may be curious, but I'm the one who decides who stays here. I'm the one you need to convince, not him.

+++++++++++++

Related to the mall ninja training videos you linked to on YouTube, I noticed the majority of people there were using the AR series rifles...the gun that eats what it shits. :)

AR's are fine for piggy snipers or plinking, but not for combat, despite the lowest bid contract that Colt won from the US military.

For me, it's a G3 (or HK91), M14 (M1A), AK, CETME, FN-FAL, Garand, or even bolt actions like the M1903 Springfield or Lee- Enfield.

Large caliber, reliable, and accurate (maybe not the AK). Rifles you know aren't going to freeze up from a grain of sand and with enough power to drop a man with one shot, unlike the Mattel gun our guys are using in Iraq.

InfernoMDM January 13th, 2007, 10:39 PM Well, isn't that awfully elitest.

Taking something without reciprocation or compensation is called STEALING.

As for my own experiences (LE related, I can't discuss):

He may be curious, but I'm the one who decides who stays here. I'm the one you need to convince, not him.

+++++++++++++

Related to the mall ninja training videos you linked to on YouTube, I noticed the majority of people there were using the AR This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter series rifles...the gun that eats what it shits. :)

For me, it's a G3 (or HK91), M14 (M1A), AK, CETME, FN-FAL, Garand, or even bolt actions like the M1903 Springfield or Lee- Enfield.

If you follow the links and do a little looking, I posted the same thing I sent him. I am not trying to be elitist but they are. I also said if you want the info PM me, but I guess you missed it. As for stealing that’s why I started participating, and posting threads about things I know and may interest the people on here. If you call that stealing, please divulge all of your worldly knowledge as well.

Honestly I don’t really care if you kick me out or not. It ultimately wont hurt my feels as most of this is above my head, and what isn’t I am purely learning at this point. I am not here to cater to you anymore then you are here to ignore my grammar issues. I doubt anyone else would sway your mind on the subject of firearms as you seem to being that you have been elitist about damn near every post I make, not just pointing out error but being down right an ass..

I am not sure how long you have been retired, but most major training facilities don’t follow your line of thought anymore. If you’re so set in your ways fine, but you should take the time to research the new information.

As for the AR mall ninjas. I agree. I am not a huge friend of the AR, but you can’t beat the AR for modifications, rail systems for lights, and compactness for CQB. Luckily they came out with the 6.8, which seems to be very promising. They also have modified the uppers of the AR to be piston operated like the AK, or HK G36. A piston operated 6.8 would be my preferred weapon at this point.

I personally think the AK can be used as well with the new rails and modifications but Suarez is the only major player these days that deals with large caliber rifles and non AR carbines. Like I said his training is sometimes unorthodox, but the rest of stuff has been given good reviews by most students. The down range thing is for returning students who know each other etc.

I like the HK91 friend has one, but it really is pretty long for CQB, and I hate it only has two stock positions.

knowledgehungry January 14th, 2007, 01:42 AM InfernoMDM, it certainly appears that you are being argumentative for the sake of being argumentative. You obviously have a good background in weapons and tactics, but there is no point in trying to prove it by arguing with an administrator here(especially NBK).

I agree that you CAN develop skill while shooting on the run and that it is good to practice such if you MUST shoot on the run. The point that you are failing to get and ignoring so you can argue is that shooting on the run is inherently less accurate and makes you more vulnerable than shooting from cover, and while it is good to be prepared to shoot on the run the best method of gunfighting is to shoot from a stable position with time to aim.

I don't know if it is too late to save yourself from a banning but if I were you I would stop trying to argue for the sake of arguing and drop this.

nbk2000 January 14th, 2007, 02:38 AM Gee, it's been so long since I've only been referred to as an ass, and not an asshole, I must be getting soft in my dottage.

The reason why many people don’t teach what you perceive as the best idea for combat, is because only a handful of professionals can shoot well at distance, and provide one shot kills with out a scoped weapon. There are a handful of individuals that are as skilled as you claim to be under combat and that’s why the masses are now taught what I was discussing.

They can't really be called professionals if they can't do what generations of shooters did before the invention of rifle scopes, now can they?

This goes back to the 'out of date' philosophy of mastering your tools and your trade, not flitting about like a butterfly in search of the newest flower (or gimmick/rail widget/tacti-k3wL tactic).

You say the advice of the gunfighters is obsolete?

Well then, lets change the weapons from guns to swords, for comparision of relevance.

Is the advice of Medieval knights and Italian renaissance fencing masters who lived and died by their skills to be dismissed as 'out of date' because some modern idiots who call themselves masters are waving around swords in gymnasiums?

No.

The advice to take the time to make the shot is counterpointed by the fact that in the time it takes you to miss with your first shot and bring the sight back on me to take a second, I'll have already nailed you with my first AIMED shot. A quarter seconds worth of patience pays dividends. ;)

As for stealing that’s why I started participating, and posting threads about things I know and may interest the people on here. If you call that stealing, please divulge all of your worldly knowledge as well.

How oddly similiar to what I've been doing here for the last seven years. :rolleyes:

Please by all means debate me if you are wrong, ... I will atempt to keep my calm. This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter Debate you if I'm wrong?

Wouldn't that automatically mean that you are right? :mad:

And if you are convinced you are right, than nothing, no proof, would be able to sway your beliefs...much like a religious heretic who has blind obedience to his incorrect faith.

But when finally you surrender to us, it must be of your own free will.

I do not destroy the heretic because he resists us: so long as he resists us I never destroy him.

We convert him, we capture his inner mind, we reshape him. We burn all evil and all illusion out of him; we bring him over to our side, not in appearance, but genuinely, heart and soul.

We make him one of ourselves before I kill him.

InfernoMDM January 14th, 2007, 04:13 AM They can't really be called professionals if they can't do what generations of shooters did before the invention of rifle scopes, now can they?

No.

How oddly similiar to what I've been doing here for the last seven years. :rolleyes:

Debate you if I'm wrong?

Sorry I really fucked up on that one statement. It was supposed to be "Debate me if you think I am wrong"

Hickock was a great shot. He also had his target sitting at 75 yards not moving. How would he have reacted if he was being shot at say 25 yards repeatedly by a moving target? Would he have been able to stand still and aim? Maybe but the question is can you, or others?

The "mall ninja" you were blasting earlier use to have pistol competitions in excess of 125 yards with other top shooters. Can you? Are you that skilled? They can do what other generations did, but the tactics have changed greatly in the last 20 years, obviously beyond your realm of thinking.

However the style of fighting is different today on both sides.

Lastly if I can make 3 shots to your center mass in the time it takes you to sight in, where do you stand? Can you really risk taking the time to get into a proper shooting stance and aim in on a target in a build, or out on a road at 10, 20, 30 feet?

Do you think your bullet every time will hit its target just right that you will get that one Central Nervous Hit? There are cops that have shot people 10-12 times in the head at point blank ranges and the guy survived for many reasons. One guy actually snotted out the 45 ACP round that logged in his sinus cavity. Will you take that shot and then stand there to see if your target is dead, or are you sure by the great being in the sky not to miss? Thats why others take multiple shots.

If you can more power to you, but you know in the end 95% of shooters cant because they don't train every day.

PS If you are a cop why can't you talk about what you did? I have never heard of that before from any LE.

Docca January 14th, 2007, 09:34 AM Oh for god's sake, just ban the moron!

This is the k3wlist topic / discussion in the last six months.

BTW, who told you SS109 was tungsten cored? I'm sure they were k3wl. I'll let you figure that one out for yourselves, remember, Google is your friend.

Just quit regurgitating k3wlness, PLEASE...

InfernoMDM January 14th, 2007, 03:22 PM Oh for god's sake, just ban the moron!

This is the k3wlist topic / discussion in the last six months.

BTW, who told you SS109 was tungsten cored? I'm sure they were k3wl. I'll let you figure that one out for yourselves, remember, Google is your friend.

Just quit regurgitating k3wlness, PLEASE...

Your right the SS109/M855 have steel tips with lead cores.

The M995 have a tungsten core. This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

The military was going to switch to the tungsten core for environmental reasons.

I see your knowledge is based on google, so you must be a expert as well right?

Docca January 14th, 2007, 06:43 PM One shouldn't need Google than to know that buckshot beats pistols, but no one here has been able to get that into your thick skull.

Honestly, it's like three pages of watching a cat play with a wounded mouse.

And regarding the LA bank robbers - I'm sure they would have greatly enjoyed this little conversation, had they survived. If they hadn't been so wrapped up in k3wlish little projects like converting AKs to full auto and wrapping themselves in body armor... They're a good example of how the spray + pray / mall ninja mentality works in the real world.

InfernoMDM January 14th, 2007, 07:11 PM One shouldn't need Google than to know that buckshot beats pistols, but no one here has been able to get that into your thick skull.

Honestly, it's like three pages of watching a cat play with a wounded mouse.

You honestly have no idea of even semi modern tactics do you? Neither NBK or myself have brought up a spray and pray concept.

Also as for buckshot the advantage of buckshot over a standard pistols is the quantity of projectiles hitting your target giving you a bette r chance of the guy bleed ing ou t, or maybe even hitting the CNS. I do nt kno w if ea ch pellet is identical in its grains, but the diameter of 00 buckshot is that of a 32 ACP. Even if you get 2 pellets in the body chances are you wont have a one shot one kill fro m a CNS h it, and bleed ing ou t wont be fast. I love shotguns, but I dont think the exotic chok e is necessary.

Which makes me wonder with all the slanderous comments of me trying to be cool, why none of you pointed fingers at the choke.

Just FYI but, I b elieve the wound studies say for a good p robability of destroying a m ajor organ you need 11-13 penetration in to ballistics gel. That is supposed to represent going through heavy clothes and bone. However that is a different topic entirely.

Docca January 14th, 2007, 09:31 PM Neither NBK or myself have brought up a spray and pray concept.

Which makes me wonder with all the slanderous comments of me trying to be cool, why none of you pointed fingers at the choke.

NBK brought up the L.A. bank robbers and the stunning success rate of their tactic (spray + pray).

Regarding the choke = Fair is fair, I have to agree with you there. As long as I'm at it, you've made some other good observations (a few). I guess that's why you're still here, because I really only made it to the third page looking to see:

A- if anyone here knew what SS109 cores were made out of (apparently not).

B- if you had gotten banned yet (obviously not).;)

nbk2000 January 14th, 2007, 10:53 PM I've seen both tungsten carbide, and steel, being mentioned as penetrator cores for the SS109 round, depending on who's making it and when.

InfernoMDM January 14th, 2007, 11:28 PM I've seen both tungsten carbide, and steel, being mentioned as penetrator cores for the SS109 round, depending on who's making it and when.

Thats what I thought as well, but I couldn't find that info when I did a quick search at work.

Docca January 15th, 2007, 01:21 AM Thats what I thought as well...

You're both missing my point.

First, anyone else who didn't know wasn't the one giving a dissertation on the external ballistics properties of the SS109 projectile. That would be InfernoMDM.

Second, I don't really care if there ever was a tungsten core equipped SS109 - It's obvious that the commonly available projectile doesn't contain any tungsten. Even if it does (pay attention MDM) I'm not going to spend the next three pages trying to convince the staff and anyone else who happens along that my understanding of the subject matter is inherently superior. This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

Now, just to show I'm not playing favorites:

The duckbill choke IMHO is just as much a gadget as the red dot sight on the AK, maybe worse since it's going to prevent you from using slugs in that weapon (if you value your weapon or your undamaged body parts). That said (pay attention MDM) if you think a gadget is the answer to some of your problems, more power to you.

InfernoMDM January 15th, 2007, 03:27 AM Docca - It's very difficult to sit down and listen to people make the mistakes that I once did. I at one time thought very much like NBK2000 does. It had to be big bullets, and precise controlled shots at 100 yards using iron sites. I started competing in small bore rifle competitions my freshman year of high school. I read everything on the net I could, from the older members of competition teams, and sites like www.thehighroad.org. I came to the same conclusions NBK has said.

Finally just before and after Iraq I went to classes, and talked to people who had seen much more combat then I probably ever will. The things I took as truth, I was told were not as effective as once believed. NBK even blurted out the Matell toy line that I loved to use so much. Granted I think the diameter of the round is still very important. However after getting an AR working with them I learned the advantages, and disadvantages I see why its so popular over battle rifles. I went to training events and learned from people that had been there and done that.

You know in the end the reason I fight so hard is because I think people should be informed of both opinions not just one. I don't like people writing off things because they just think its wrong. Many people did, or repeated exactly what NBK said out of hand. They did this in a community that I am willing to bet doesn't research the topic much at all. As a example, even though I think Yeager is a dick he still knows a lot and has seen a good bit of Law Enforcement and combat, so I try to take what I can from him. I think the same should be done with the forum members here.

Self Defense isn't a science, and it isn't a art. You can create a chemical that will do the same thing every time in a lab, but in Self Defense situations, that are very similar, you can have different outcomes.

If you can shoot a man at 75 yards with a revolver once and kill him do so. The average shooter with the basic training can't. Even more advanced shooters have a hard time with what NBK is talking about. For instance a officer shot a guy on drugs 5 times in the chest and the guy didn't die. However that guy shot twice, missing once and another went in his armpit and killed him. No matter how good you are sometimes its all about ballistics, and very small differences that choose life or death.

For a place of knowledge and facts, most here ignored all the links I pointed out where people far more knowledgeable then myself state nearly the same thing I was. When relevant and logical information was presented by me I was ignored. When short clips of training were shown, they were picked apart as if they were a whole class. Hell even you did it initially.

I am not looking for your respect, or for you to change your minds, just to open some eyes to other possibilities. The key to survival isn't a rigid plan or solid unwavering rules, such as run to cover. Its flexibility. Am I near cover? can I hit my target? Will I get pinned down if I move to certain cover?

Thats why shooting on the move is taught. If you can shoot and hit your target on the move you open up more options then you would just moving to cover very quickly.

Does that make sense?

Gunjack January 15th, 2007, 04:25 PM I'll try to add some info here concerning penetration.

I have been witness to a test: a bolt-action rifle in caliber .300Winchester Magnum shooting a steel block (ST37 steel) at a distance of 50 meters with Remington hunting ammo(Core-Locked?)

The hole was 46 mm deep.

defiant January 20th, 2007, 12:00 AM Inferno wrote:

The key to survival isn't a rigid plan or solid unwavering rules, such as run to cover. Its flexibility. Am I near cover? can I hit my target? Will I get pinned down if I move to certain cover?

That's sound advice - so why'd you disagree when NBK and I said the same thing a couple of pages back.:p

Gunjack:

How thick was that steel block?

nbk2000 January 20th, 2007, 02:02 AM If you have a bolt-action, if you have a revolver, if you have any semi-automatic with limited ammo...the whole 'Shoot on the Move' theory falls apart.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

To me, a professional is someone who can get the job despite the lack of HS/LD tools.

And professionals practice their trade daily, or close to it.

I practice stalking and sniping on animals everyday with a break action pellet rifle (Gamo), as you only get one shot before they split, which emphasizes the need for accuracy.

A couple of days ago, I shot a hummingbird out of the air in mid-flight. I'd shoot more of them if there were any around here to be shot. This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

I guess having two grandfathers, both of whom were gun nuts, expert hunters, with one a soldier/career cop, kind of gave me a different outlook on the value of making your shots count and not making a target of yourself by running around in the open.

As for the idea of a "bug-out bag": http://www.alpharubicon.com/prepinfo/backpackfever.htm

Jacks Complete January 20th, 2007, 08:46 PM Wow, epic.

I know that those who have been on site and read my posts are aware that I generally know what I'm talking about, otherwise I don't write it.

Everyone on this thread is right, for a given definition of right. The one who walks away at the end is the winner. That's all that comes out as important at the end of the day.

A SAK is better than a scapel, unless you want to cut someone open and remove a tumour. If you train well and can keep your wits about you, you will do well. Don't expect pros to go to bits if you start shooting at them. The firearms cops around here are trained well and dumb enough to start with that they will revert to that training. How much training like that do you do? Will you have three mates who are well trained behind you if the door caves in? Who won't bottle it and run? Or even if they were there, would they shake so bad they shoot you in the back of the head by accident?

Yes, you can move and shoot at the same time. It will upset your accuracy. Practise to reduce this effect. You will improve. Practise getting jumped by a battle squad lying in ambush. Learn what adrenal shock feels like, and what to do. Realise your limits.

You cannot run and shoot at the same time. Running involves using your arms, and so stops your effective use of a gun. You can't jog and shoot effectively, since by definition you will be jogging your gun too. You can walk and even walk fast while firing effectively (depending on firearm, training, terrain underfoot (don't fall down!) and your physical condition, plus other things like lighting, wind, where your glasses are, and more) once you get the hang of it.

I personally know a man who can take his pistol and shoot a target of a man in the head at 25 yards from behind his back. It took a lot of practise, and a lot of rounds, even for this man who has shot for at least 15 years (half his life) both as a keen amateur and, later, for a time, as a professional.

You can do it. But you have to train at it. And there are limits. But the more you train, the more you can push the limits.

I much prefer the stalking role. However, CQB is a different ball game entirely. There is a place for both. Train for both.

As regards the duckbill choke, in a CQB scenario, I'd pick a short barrelled auto shotgun with that choke and heavy shot over most things. At classic CQB ranges, indoor, you are looking at 20 yards absolute max. My house, you are looking at 7m tops, most likely under 4! Heck, a sawn-off would be great. A flamethrower would probably be better.

Of course, I'd be up against at least 2 cops with pistols or MP5 carbines, first response, wearing level 2 vests or better, plus helmets. First sign of trouble, it would be essentially a full on SWAT team. Hard to win then, even if armed.

nbk2000 February 1st, 2007, 02:47 PM Here's a non-duckbill scattergun. Note the barrel on the left. :)

http://www.housegun.com/images/barrel1.gif

http://www.housegun.com/

Jacks Complete February 2nd, 2007, 07:42 AM As a final note, with a shotgun certificate, in the UK, that would be legal if you had a final muzzle below 2" across, and a barrel a shade over 24". :-)

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Tactics, Training, Defense, and Safety > Plausible deniability.

Chemdabbler October 19th, 2007, 04:16 AM I've created this thread to discuss options, weapons and tactics which would seem to be a diversion from the "Easy ways to harm attackers" thread, which seems to be mostly about deadly uber-weapons and bloody revenge scenarios.

I'm interested in what sort of methods people here use, in daily life to defend themselves, their loved ones, and their property. I highlight daily life to make a point about realism. Any complicated, inconvenient or illegal self defense system is likely to be so much of a hassle over any conceivable period of time that one would end up ignoring it and most likely fail to have it on hand when they do need it. Anything too illegal is likely to get me into more trouble than it gets me out of. If i accustom myself to carrying a can of Easy-off or a home-made pen gun around, and actually DO manage to have it on hand all the time, how likely is it it'll accidentally get it discovered by the pigs?

And then there's the issue of outcome if you actually DO have to use it. I mean this is fucking Canada, it's only barely legal to defend yourself with a firearm at all, much less with some homemade concealed one. Sure, you can plan to use it and run, but that plan kind of depends on the criminals only attacking you when there aren't any witnesses about. Imagine you fail to escape, how on EARTH are you going to explain to the police why you had a big-hollow-spike tire deflater in your pocket coming out of a nightclub with your girlfriend when some lowlife tried to jump you?

What i've developed is a combination of situational awareness techniques, physical fitness and preparation, and simple, solidly built, DENIABLE weapons. There were fantastic examples of these posted back in the original thread, the flashlight attached by a solid metal ring to a bunch of keys, a heavy belt buckle on a sturdy belt.

My personal defensive kit, some or the other of which i usually carry with me, is the following: Innova X5T flashlight - I carry this if I'm walking at night, and from practice with friends, it makes an effective fist load, and a fucking devastating hammer-punch to bone areas.

CRKT M16 Pocketknife - My job is blue-collar enough that having one of these in my pocket or on my belt is natural enough, and it's both of high enough quality that I'll trust it not to fold up on me, and cheap enough that i won't have a second's thought about chucking it down a storm drain if it gets ... compromised.

Wallet - My wallet is nothing special, but because i tend to be absent minded, I've attached it to my car keys with some quality chain, a solid stainless ring, and a quarter-pound antique iron padlock. Should i be suddenly attacked, it would be natural of me to flail randomly about with the heavy-thing-on-a-chain. Without the keys attached, this thing will pulverise cinder block.

Others - Just about anything can be used to hurt someone, if you've a mind to and the will to. A cup of coffee can scald and shock if it's hot enough, which it probably isn't, but will certainly distract someone long enough for you to move in on them or attempt something like a disarm/weapon destruction type attack. A bag of groceries can distract and disorient if thrown with conviction to the head. If you're lucky enough to have bought canned goods, an effective one-or-two shot club can be arranged. You can jab with long umbrellas, strike with canes, either roll up and strike with or throw clouds of newspaper, etc... you probably shouldn't be carrying something any distance if you can't think of someway you can either hurt someone with it or distract them long enough to hurt them.

Anyway, I've written enough. If there's enough interest to sustain a discussion on reasonable, deniable weapons, let's have one. But let's keep the pocket-nukes and waterpipe artillery out of it.

ChippedHammer October 19th, 2007, 06:40 AM A sock and $5 in change?

Ive got a nice Cree LED light with one of those attack heads on it, police have them and they are used as a last ditch weapon. Very nasty, would easily cut open someones face and take out a eye.

http://www.dealextreme.com/details.dx/sku.1318

nbk2000 October 19th, 2007, 07:06 AM The thing I hate about discussions about weapons is the "I'm limiting myself to * because *".

In this case "I'm limiting myself to WEAK WEAPONS because I LIVE IN THE PEOPLES DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF SNOW (CANADA) AND FEAR GETTING CAUGHT WITH A REAL WEAPON."

Deniable for carry? Great. But if it's not effective, why even bother?

Either carry the most lethal weapon you can, or have balls enough to stand on your own strength, and not futz around with luke-warm security blanket 'weapons'.

Vitalis October 19th, 2007, 10:28 AM A sturdy screwdriver could do some serious damage, especially a sharp flat head one. Jam it in the attacker (preferably the throat) and twist several times.

If the Police ask you why you had a screwdriver with you, lie and say you just had to repair your car or were doing work with it earlier and forgot you were still carrying it.

Charles Owlen Picket October 19th, 2007, 10:53 AM Jesus Harold Christ, there are many like minded people here :-) Screwdrivers are a wonderfully effective thing. But really I This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter wouldn't think a damn thing about throwing something away just because it cost $1000. ANY legal bills are going to be high: what the fuck is a $1000?

The actual "doing" is of MUCH less consequence then the aftermath, the disposal & excuse or whatever. Taking care of what needs to be done is not the thing I think needs emphasis but the issues involved in the "after the fact" agenda.

A fucking rock or a screwdriver is just fine....but then what? IMO, that's what needs attention for a long, healthy, fun filled life.

-=edit=- Hell, I had to come back to this as it occurred to me that a good pair a boots is really all you need if you man-up to it and step on the shithead's foot and push him on his ass and kick the fuck out of his head when he falls on his ass. Even at my age it's not a big issue to hold you hands up palms away from you like you are backing down and do the deed. Your hands are in position for a fast push and stepping on his foot is simple enough. Steel-toes work well on heads. Young people could do that in a few seconds, right?

sobreroHWE October 19th, 2007, 03:29 PM When I find a need to travel to Methville or "Se habla" town, I will carry my small .22 cal automatic. Despite the fact that it is a firearm, with gloves and no serial numbers (etched, then punched), it would be very easy for me to "plausibly deny" having ever seen such a felonious device. (as I throw it on a roof, or bury it in a trash can.) A small, easily detachable, silencer fits in my pocket (adding another Federal charge here in the U.S) but reducing the chances of witnesses. I admit, getting caught with it could be some serious time, but getting stabbed by some toothless drunk street trash is decidedly worse IMHO.

I agree with NBK, either carry something serious enough to stop someone cold, or learn Kung-Fu.

Toggle October 19th, 2007, 04:51 PM The sad fact is that you will likely have to defeat any attacker twice. Once in the street, and once in court. It's sick and twisted, but that's the way it is.

For walking my dog along the railroad tracks outside of the city I carry a sjambok. It's effective and doesn't attract much notice. YMMV. If I'm ever questioned I intend to call it a "switch" for vicious dogs. Well that is what it is, even though it works on those 2-legged vicious dogs too. ;)

Hirudinea October 19th, 2007, 07:15 PM A good sturdy cane, you can cave in a skull with it and its totally inocuous on the street. "Officer I have a bad knee."

Vitalis October 19th, 2007, 07:27 PM The sad fact is that you will likely have to defeat any attacker twice. Once in the street, and once in court. It's sick and twisted, but that's the way it is.

You won't have to finish him off in court if you dispose of him in the street. As for any "grieving family" that may take you to court, you can be sure the punk had a history of violence and he WAS trying to kill you, so, there you have it.

Toggle October 19th, 2007, 08:57 PM You won't have to finish him off in court if you dispose of him in the street.

It depends if he had a deadly weapon or not. Even if he did have one the prosecutor may go after you anyway.

http://www.defendu.com/gun_fistfight.htm

It's best to plan on winning *BOTH* fights. And if you never get hauled into court, so much the better.

barbwir3 October 19th, 2007, 11:28 PM Back in my hay-day of being a dumb youth I used to carry a .25 pocket pistol. It found its untimely end in a dumpster after the slide cracked while I was shooting in the woods. Then I carried brass knuckles, for all they'er cracked up to be they're practically knuckle crackers if you don't land your punch correctly. And they are extremely illegal just about everywhere, then again I did have that pistol and my switchblade.

Now I carry an assortment of weapons that I have trained with and feel safe and content to use in a "fight situation." My normal everyday load out: Knives. ColdSteel TI-Lite 4", always in my right front pocket "pocket draw" Kershaw "Blurr", in my back pocket next to my wallet. or in my right pocket imitation buck knife, tucked in my back pocket, or in my boot.

Others. carabiner, used like a single brass knuckle fat part down pointed end out. steel toed boots,I can kick over my head and harder then I can punch.

I have taken judo, muy thai, kick boxing, and us military training. I have competed in MMA, Professional wrestling (I know its fake but still fun). I love a good scrap and I am not afraid of anyone. But my philosophy is to avoid a fight unless absolutely necessary. This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter totenkov October 20th, 2007, 12:30 AM Something good that needs to be pointed out:

If you happen to be walking around on the rough side of town and your body language is radiating nervousness, you are going to attract trouble like shit to a blanket.

People that walk on the balls of their toes constantly watching their back are prime targets for muggers or people that are looking for trouble. Act like you normally would without drawing attention to yourself and remain passive, yet firm if you are confronted.

On my person I always carry my knife (small fast open unit with half the blade serrated) a Southord 14 piece pick set (I know some on the forum think this is a bad idea, yet they have become a great friend over the years and have served me incredibly well) some bills (about 50 bucks, wallets are to easy to rip off), phone and ipod. I don't often frequent areas were you will run into problems but when I do I always leave valuables at home.

Dress appropriately to fit in. There is no need to stand out more than necessary. Worst comes to worst, fight like crazy, don't hold back, in my experiences your own knife can be often turned against you, leave it in your pocket. If you know some moves you can become quite dangerous to enemies.

(its clear NBK lives nowhere in the upper US/Canada because if he did, he would know that its only the prairies that get the snow and the whatever territories, the rest of us get 2 weeks of white, thats it :)) (I did however get a good laugh out of that!)

hatal October 20th, 2007, 02:34 PM Rocks. After we nuke ourselfs back to the stoneage or get extremely retarded (with the help of TV and genetic degradation) the weapon of choice for Average Joe will be, ROCKS. Either that or big shiney bones...

panzerkampfwagen October 21st, 2007, 09:05 PM I would think that, although hard to find and a little pricey, fountain pens would make an ideal weapon. They are not suspicious, the tips are sharp and made out of osmium, and they can easily be used either as a lethal weapon or to just inflict alot of pain, depending on how hard you push. USE I am sure that ink does not do to well in your veins, in any case. The cartridges could easily emptied and replaced with whatever nasty chemical you could come up with, though I would suggest lye or bleach. It is incredibly painful, and unlike most toxic (lethal) chemicals, it acts instantly, which is important. PARAGRAPH If you want to get really complicated, you could probably fit a 9 mil or at least a .22 bullet inside of one, and there is already a pin on the inside that could be used as a firing pin. Leave it loose and it could be triggered like a boomstick. BREAKS I highly doubt that as long as you haven't killed anyone that the police would ever think to search the contents of a fountain pen (although they may make fun of you for carrying one).

totenkov October 21st, 2007, 09:56 PM Not a very good weapon, maybe in the movies (Indiana Jones and the last Crusade) ;). Also it is a very expensive weapon!

Not very reliable or effective in the real world. It would be a last resort, first I would use my shoe laces hang him, or a paper clip to poke him in the eye ;).

*I also still laugh really hard when I think about NBK's idea about using a giant black dildo to beat the shit out of someone :D:D

panzerkampfwagen October 22nd, 2007, 11:51 PM I actually forgot that that was in Indiana Jones. I still think that there is a reason why the government consistantly uses pens as a model for concealed weapons. Come to think of it, it would probably be rather simple to use a pen to conceal a syringe. Especially a retractable pen. They have considerable internal volume, so you could use just about anything if you really want to. For a real fun time, inject melted butter into their arteries and give them a heart-attack. Maple syrup might also be rather amusing.

Alexires October 23rd, 2007, 12:47 AM If you happen to ride a motorbike (or push bike) everywhere, carrying a small can of (flammable) chain lube or all purpose lubricant wouldn't be a bad idea.... Of course, you smoke as well, and need to carry a lighter around.

On that idea, why not carry around a zippo and some lighter fluid? When confronted, hose the fucker down then stand there holding your lit zippo.

Otherwise, forget stylish, and bring back the old "brick" mobile phone. I bet that fucker would hurt if someone smashed you in the face with that.

Can't remember where I read it, but I have a feeling that NBK posted it. Go for that "post apocalyptic" look with steel caps, trench coats with metal plates secured to the outside and some big nasty looking rings on your fingers. Not only will you be making a fashion statement, but you will be armed and armoured for a possible attack.

I know a lot of goths around here have something like looks like plate mail on their fingers (look up "finger armor" in google images). While the commercially available ones are made of crap metal, you could always make your own. The piggery has done nothing about it where I live.

Chemdabbler October 25th, 2007, 02:58 AM Yeah, in my goth-y youth, I wore more than merely decorative armour. I spent a lot of time in metal shop, and the teacher was more into weapons than I was, so long as I wasn't making actual blades, he didn't care what i did with the sheet metal. This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter Unfortunately, I'm in my mid twenties, and the kind of fashion that cut it in my teens doesn't work any more.

I have to differ with Totenkov regarding fountain pens, though. Anything strong, well made, and with which you can make a fist, preferably with a sharp metal end, is better than bare hands.

What i was trying to get away from with this thread, though, was the "Make item more lethal by adding napalm/nerve gas/ machine gun" school of self defense. If i have to actually stab someone with a fountain pen, the chance must always exist that I'm going to have to explain myself to some civil servant with a badge. It's going to be really hard to explain how i just happened to have a pen that writes in pressurized lye. Now, the idea of squirting lye into some scumbag makes me smile, but the potential consequences for me or any other decent human being who does it doesn't.

NBK: Yes, in a perfect world, i could take my C7 along when i jog in the evenings, and ideally I'd also be more than a match in hand-to-hand combat with any street punk who might try his luck. But neither of these are the case. Especially in this country, carrying individual small arms is officially a no-no, and it doesn't matter WHAT justification you have, using them in self defense is going to get you into shit. So far as having the balls, I'm more capable than average of defending myself, but I'd be a fucking idiot not to carry anything that's going to give me even one iota of edge. It's just a question of balancing risk vs. reward.

What i don't want is to have to make heat of combat decisions about which level of force is appropriate, which i WILL have to do if I'm carrying obvious 'weapons' around. If i use a flamethrower watch or magic poison-crossbow to take out some mugger armed with a broken coffee mug, I'm going to be in a worse position than if i just let him have my wallet. I want to only carry things i can use in ANY situation, hoping that if i have to defend it, i can say that the item was innocently carried, and only used out of panic. Toggle's defendu link made the point far better and far more eloquently than i could, and it just referred to legally carried, legally owned firearms. God only knows what would have happened to those people if they'd had illicit or homemade armament on them.

LibertyOrDeath October 25th, 2007, 07:40 AM Although I'm a strong advocate of flouting illegitimate authority, including all laws that forbid you to carry weapons to protect yourself (while the state's enforcer pigs can walk around with guns), it's true that there are those who have children or other dependents and therefore can't flip off the "law" as comfortably as I do.

At the same time, related to what NBK was saying, one shouldn't put too much faith in inferior weapons. Even shooting someone several times with a handgun isn't guaranteed to stop his attack, so it's clear that stabbing someone with an ice pick or hitting him with a blunt object can't be relied upon to stop a fight. Any weapon is better than none, but before relying on a second- or third-rate weapon I would be very sure that my empty-hand fighting skills were quite formidable.

As for specific ideas, several good ones have already been given. I personally like the idea of using a relatively heavy "designer" pen made of metal as a kubaton. Holding such a pen in your fist with the tapered end extending from the bottom of your fist allows you to hammer the tapered end repeatedly into a person's skull, pressure points, etc.

If your opponent has a knife and you don't, you're in trouble. You're even in trouble if you DO have a knife in that situation, as I can't imagine anyone in a knife fight not getting cut at least once. For that situation, some kind of "stand-off" weapon like a cane (already mentioned) is necessary.

Maybe a sturdy umbrella could possibly be used as a kind of spear if it has a fairly sharp metal tip? True, sharpening the tip to a razor point would harm the "plausible deniability" aspect here, but maybe it's possible to buy one that's already sufficiently pointed to be usable as a stabbing weapon.

And then there are tools. Screwdrivers have already been mentioned, but really just about any hardened steel tool could be used as a weapon. Remember how the Virginia Tech shooter (Cho) was posing in that picture with a hammer? :p Of course most people aren't going to be inclined to carry a heavy toolbox around with them, but if you can think of an excuse for carrying a medium-sized hammer, large screwdriver, or even a pair of barber's scissors around with you, then you won't be unarmed.

Charles Owlen Picket October 25th, 2007, 10:36 AM This whole issue is about a state of mind more than anything else. Everyone has sat in a room for whatever reason and looked around them at all the things that COULD be used as weapons.....That's just natural with this mind-set; most people do that (at least on occasion).

So it really doesn't matter if you think a hunting knife in a folded newspaper is better than a machete under the car seat. It all comes down to motivation vs situational awareness & gut-level desire.

njohnson1941 October 25th, 2007, 05:18 PM http://www.canemasters.com/ I have traveled Europe and Asia with one and been through high-level US security, all post-911, never been questioned.

Hirudinea October 25th, 2007, 05:39 PM Maybe a sturdy umbrella could possibly be used as a kind of spear if it has a fairly sharp metal tip? True, sharpening the tip to a razor point would harm the "plausible deniability" aspect here, but maybe it's possible to buy one that's already sufficiently pointed to be usable as a stabbing weapon.

No umbrella I've ever seen has a shaft strong enough to use as a weapon, spear or otherwise, but if you replaced the shaft with a piece of steel bar it could be effective, and if thrust with enough force even a fairly dull point can penetrate a persons body.

Kaydon November 14th, 2007, 03:20 PM .45

It does the job. This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter Alexires November 14th, 2007, 10:30 PM Kaydon - Riiiiight. And where is the plausible deniability in that?

"Honestly officer! I was carrying it because the shoe on my right leg is lighter than the one on the left, and the .45 counteracts it! It WASN'T premeditated!

nbk2000 November 15th, 2007, 02:58 AM Some people are just unclear on the concept. ;)

teshilo November 15th, 2007, 12:08 PM Optional is dog chain with lead weight as you belt...Sleeve dagger like Delta dart desighn from Cold steel on the neck..

Toggle November 16th, 2007, 01:46 AM No umbrella I've ever seen has a shaft strong enough to use as a weapon, spear or otherwise, ...

If you are able-bodied and live in an area it rains, an umbrella attracts less notice that a cane or walking stick. I came across this one that's made for self defense. I like it. Now if I only lived where it rained enough to carry one. The Unbreakable Walking-Stick Umbrella http://www.real-self-defense.com/umbrella.html

The Canemasters name is well known. Even (especially?) by cops. I had a catalog where you could request that the Canemasters logo be omitted from the cane when you ordered one. You might save yourself some hassles if you carry a plain cane instead of an *evil* Canemasters cane.

Here's how to Koppo wrap a flashlight. Nice, but I don't think that the resulting 'Koppo stick' would be deniable. http://www.themartialist.com/pecom/koppowrap.htm

The list of things that can be used as a Yawara stick is huge. Cold Steel is selling a "Sharkie". It's a reinforced permanent marker that's made for hitting things. But the all time deniable Yawara has to be the rawhide dog-chew. Just find one that fits your hand and carry it in a pocket. It does help your story if you have a dog!:) http://www.donrearic.com/yawara.html

WMD November 16th, 2007, 04:19 PM Optional is dog chain with lead weight as you belt...Sleeve dagger like Delta dart desighn from Cold steel on the neck..

Not very deniable. The point about plausible deniability is that you won't look bad if it's found on your person. Plastic knives eg are very suspicious, even carrying a normal knive would look better.

robinhood1532 November 17th, 2007, 07:40 PM Should the secret be found, it wouldn't be very deniable, but I have just come up with an idea concerning umbrellas. It has undoubtably been thought of before -- disguising a slender machete as an umbrella. I have yet to try this idea, but I suspect that the handle and center rod would have to be removed, leaving the thinner supporting rods to preserve the bulk of a normal umbrella. The machete (along with a satisfactory sheath of heavy paper) can then be inserted. Depending on the handle of the machete, there would be little out of the ordinary at first glance. (Providing that it is a rainy day)

Then again, there is the compressed air, poisoned pellet umbrella: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulgarian_umbrella

Alexires November 18th, 2007, 09:56 PM I like the dog chain idea. Pity that if you have a dog chain, you have a dog, and probably wont need to use the chain.

But that got me thinking post-apocalyptic (how I love it). Wallets attached to your belt or belt holes with chains. Belts made of chains, or just heavy belts.

I have an old belt from my Mc. Donalds days that has a kind of quick release mechanism (used to great advantage with the assistant manager at times in the back room *wink*). While not heavy duty, other belts could be found or made to be the same, with a quick release mechanism. Get the belt off in under a second, and time counts when in those situations.

Otherwise, you could ride a push bike everywhere and carry one of those combination plastic coated chain locks around. That would make a brutal weapon in a hurry.

While getting a little iffy, business cards can be thrown as a distraction, and contrary to popular opinion, can be throw quite hard. It might just give you that second or 2 to get your belt off, or get a running head start, or even the first punch.

A pocket full of keys on a chain could almost be used as a flail, and would be quite painful as well if struck by it.

jlwilliams October 15th, 2008, 06:57 AM I'd like to add a historical note. The Okinawan Karate (Kobudo) weapons we are familiar with today, and which are illegal to carry in most any place, were at one time developed with a similar goal to what we are discussing. The nunchuk, the sai and the tonfa and others are adaptations of agricultural implements in common use then and there. Using them as self defense weapons worked out well because the user didn't have to carry an illegal weapon (swords were off limits to the civilian population) and you were likely to have these tools around you. By practicing with what was at hand anyway, they made themselver safer without placing themselves in legal risk.

The position made in favor of carrying an illegal weapon and being big enought to face the consequences is short sighted. The point of being armed is to protect yourself and your loved ones. If you get caught with a weapon that is a legal problem by itself. you will first have it taken away then be put into an environment where violence is a when not an iff. Stay out of jail and your chances of violent confrontation are small, go to jail and you WILL need to defend yourself. When you are in jail, who This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter feeds your family? Who 'takes care of ' your wife? Carrying a gun with a destroyed number (and posting that on the internet) puts you into more risk than it gets you out of. Think it through and carry something legally defensable.

Last point, I promise. What you can get away with varries dramaticly depending where you live. I have a permit so I carry a pistol, not an option for the OP. Find out what you CAN have. What's the max blade length on a knife? Pepper spray an option? How about a taser? Walking stick? Once you know the maximim legal armament in your jurisdiction, arm up. More importantly, take the lesson of the Okinawan peasantry and practice your martial way with what you have at hand. Fighting with a weapon is like fighting with your hands, with a weapon in them.

Korimyr the Rat November 13th, 2008, 07:00 AM If you're any good with your fists at all, a roll of quarters is an excellent force multiplier. They're also a practical necessity for anyone who doesn't own his own clothes washer & dryer.

You can buy a handful of spare keys at most hardware stores, and if you put them on several keyrings it's not difficult to hold the rings in your palm with the keys sticking out between your fingers-- you only really need one or two, and you can practice grabbing them quickly. Even unsharpened, a quick punch to the face or body can put them through skin and convince your attacker you're wielding a knife.

I've never had a police officer pay too much attention to my keys, so if you sharpen them, sharpen the faces instead of the sides. If you artificially tarnish them and add some nicks and dings, they'll look more battered than deliberately modified.

Alexires November 13th, 2008, 08:57 PM Korimyr the Rat - I believe the key idea has been talked about before. It would be quite painful for you to punch anything holding keys between your fingers. If you sharpened them, suddenly you do not have plausible deniability.

Korimyr the Rat November 14th, 2008, 04:04 AM Korimyr the Rat - I believe the key idea has been talked about before. It would be quite painful for you to punch anything holding keys between your fingers. If you sharpened them, suddenly you do not have plausible deniability.

It is painful, but bearable. I have done this before.

And as I pointed out in my earlier post, it's highly unlikely that the keys will ever be examined that closely-- and artificially "aging" them will make any sharpening appear to be natural wear.

But I apologize for having made a suggestion which has already been discussed.

Jacks Complete November 15th, 2008, 03:16 PM Anything used as a weapon will be scrutinised. Use your brain.

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Tactics, Training, Defense, and Safety > Titanium armor

ChippedHammer March 13th, 2008, 06:18 AM Has anyone tested the bullet resistive properties of sheet titanium? Titanium is fairly cheap and easy to com e by in 6Al-4V form and would be idea for arm or plating things (blast shields, traum a plates, cars etc), its light weight and not too hard to m achine.

I did find this, its a pretty bad scan but from what I can tell it only relates to the .50bmg

http://handle.dtic.mil/100.2/ADA800063

Anyone have any personal experience? I have som e 3m m sheet here but nothing to shoot it with.

Cheers

iHME March 13th, 2008, 09:14 AM I don't have personal experience but doesn't som e russian flack/bullet resistant vests use titanium instead of kevlar? As far as I know they m ade some vests with tita nium inserts. I will probably buy one some day.

krysthegreek March 13th, 2008, 08:22 PM I'm pretty su re that the reasoning behind using Kevlar is that it distributes the im pact force of the bullet, dispersing the energy and gradually slowing the projectile down. Titan ium , as a hard, brittle me tal, is more liable to crack or shatter, producing potential shrapnel that could be worse than just the original bullet.

neetje March 14th, 2008, 01:53 PM I thought that inserts were there to protect vital organs (heart, lungs etc.) from blunt force traum a of a bullet im pacting on the armor, but they still used kevlar/aram ide to stop the bullets them selves.

This is the first docum ent I've seen that is about the arm or being som ething of o nly titanium. Goo d find ;)

Arcticpheonix March 17th, 2008, 04:23 PM I'm pretty su re that the reasoning behind using Kevlar is that it distributes the im pact force of the bullet, dispersing the energy and gradually slowing the projectile down. Titan ium , as a hard, brittle me tal, is more liable to crack or shatter, producing potential shrapnel that could be worse than just the original bullet.

I believe the other reason behind this, is that unlike Titanium, Kevlar is very flexible and therefore m uch m ore comfortable to wear.

In regards to a titanium plate however (instead of the current steel) I think you're right about shra pnel. It would really suck if your "bulletproof" vest was what ended up killing you.

Demolition Man March 28th, 2008, 06:42 PM ts light weight and no t too hard to m achine.

Debatable, from my personal experience it is brittle and warps a nd blues fairly easily under m achines, but thicker item s can be m etal braked easily, and you can english wheel it for curves...so lid m achining tho ugh? hard and can easily damage the m etal.

Of course, you could always try a couple of plates out, not just different thicknesses, but different alloys too. And since they would be inserts, around 4x5 sizes or so, http://www.sm allparts.com / this site should help you out with that. I use them for tubing, but they sell sheet and plate m etals there too.

Jacks Complete March 30th, 2008, 10:22 AM Dam n, lost that post...

To recap, titanium is used in the CRISAT soviet body arm our. From the top of m y head, it is 2mm Ti plate, and 20 layers of Kevlar weave . The standard 9m m fails to penetrate at 10ft. The new range of high penetration, low impulse cartridges rip clean through it at 200m.

Armour theory says you want a very hard surface to "break" or otherwise disrupt the projectile. W ith steel armour, you are best to have a very hard face, then a ductile, shatter-resistant back. W ith a composite armour, your backer is generally Kevlar, Goldflex or Nomex or some other aram id fibre. Of course, you are generally trying to stop a hardened steel projectile at sm all-arm s levels. Hence, using steel will often give little advantage, plus it is heavy. This is why we see ceram ics used for the plates, and, som etimes (in, for exam ple, the RAFOSS) ceram ic pen etrators. (An additional advantage is that ceram ics are brittle. W hen they shatter, they take energy from the projectile as well as disrup t it)

Titanium has advantages over steel in two regards for this application. One, it is half the weight of steel for the sam e streng th. This m eans that, roughly, you should need 1Kg of Ti where you would ne ed 2Kg of steel. However, as it is 1/4 the m ass, your 1m m steel plate needs to be a 2m m thick Ti plate. Secondly, TiN is very m uch harder than steel, and even plain Ti can be m ade as hard, if not slightly harder, than steel. W ith a coating of Titanium Nitride, yo ur plate will be significantly harder than any steel and slightly harder than m ost ceram ic penetrators. (O f course, you can also TiN coat steel!)

If your plate punches through, the bits will be stopped by the Ke vlar behind. However, I don't know the results of any research into whether the expansion of the hole as it peels open has a negative effect on the aram id behind. Personally, I would suspect that two thinner plates of ultra-hardened steel or titanium over Kevlar would have a significantly greater effect than a single, double thickness plate. This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter Anyone else have any experience with this stuff?

sfc1620 October 21st, 2008, 05:44 AM Titanium + C eram ics for the win.

http://www.youtube.com /watch?v=KS0pSwdQfbY

Jome skanish October 28th, 2008, 07:08 PM Perhaps com bining it with liquid armor would prove its worth as a backing m aterial. SiC particles in polyisobutylene goop, saturated just to the point where it is rheopectic [hardens if mechanically stressed]

A bit O T, but I wonder how strong would hom emade SiC/polymer plates would be. SiC is found in various grades as a grinding m aterial used to polish stones in those ball-m ill things.

iHME October 29th, 2008, 03:50 PM How fast is the rheopectic effe ct with SiC? But if it is backed by som e Ti plate it could be a sweet thing to own. As a curiosity atleast.

Jacks Complete Novem ber 16th, 2008, 07:38 AM Just to add something I found the other day.

The Indian (or Pakistani, 100% unsure which) army has cheap sets of body armour. These are not titanium , but steel. They are simply steel RHA plates about a fo ot square, front and back, with two holes in each and two shoulder straps! They stop a 7.62 and a 5.56 without any issue.

Obviously inflexible, very heavy, but will save your life from alm ost any im pact, blade or g unshot. And seriously cheap!

iHME Novem ber 16th, 2008, 08:33 AM I'd suspect India, the y have so m uch people and men that getting kevlar & ceram ic body arm or for them would brake the bank. But m aking a sim ple steel plate body arm or would be fun, sure it would not stop proper AP am mo but soft bullets would probably be stopped. Remember that police and other sim ilar entities use JHP and hollow points to have the least penetration possible to avoid shooting through m ultiple buildings.

Building a steel one would be cheap to say at least. And who would not want to own one?

Also what about a "lam inated" armor from sheet steel and titanium ?

Jome skanish Novem ber 16th, 2008, 07:22 PM That'd make it both heavy AND expensive.

Then again, the price issue with titanium is mostly related to the difficulty in machining the stuff. 6.5$/kg a in't that m uch by itself com pared to m ost m ilita ry gear.

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Tactics, Training, Defense, and Safety > Long Range Rifle shooting: Sniper shooting

billo March 23rd, 2008, 02:42 AM To learn Long range shooting the stuff available in reading order is 1) FM 23-10 Sniper training Field m anual. after digesting it completely m ove ahe ad to 2) Maj John L. Plaster Ultimate Sniper m ovie (2CD) then read the book 3) by Maj John L. Plaster Ultim ate Sniper then see 4) the DVD Advanced Ultim ate Sniper. then at last comes the final book. 5) the Complete .50 Caliber course: Hard Target Interdiction by Dean Michealis. (in fact I don't have it, if there is som eone who can give m e a co py of it, I would be very grateful)

one more reading that is im portant is 6) shooting at 1000 yards I don't think that any one would need to learn m ore in normal circumstances than what is in these six pieces unless he is a (Marine Sniper or Al-Qaeda Sniper) wanting to shoot the m oon down. ;)

There are three sites that m y be of great help too and it is preferable to visit them . 1) www.sniperworld.com (http://www.sniperworld.com) (all sniper related sites and inform ation) 2) www.snipercentral.com (http://www.snipercentral.com ) 3) www.snipercountry.com

LibertyOrDeath June 4th, 2008, 11:10 PM Those are good recomm endations. To them I'd like to add:

The Military and Police Sniper by Mike Lau -- This book is roughly the size of Plaster's The Ultim ate Sniper but doesn't overlap completely in content. It has some annoying gramm atical and spelling m istakes (i.e., replacing its with it's) but is otherwise a fine book.

Illustrated Manual of Sniper Skills by Mark Spicer -- This is a m uch sm aller book than the others mentioned, but it has som e very unique content, such as how to disable tank optics and naval ships with rifle fire!

I'll try to scan/FTP these at so me point, but I'm so dam n busy nowadays that I barely even have time to visit this board anym ore. :( That will change sooner or later, though.

Charles Owlen Picket June 5th, 2008, 10:45 AM I enjoyed fair to mid-range stuff for some many m oons now with NATO and win-m ag calibers as we have our own 1000m range to play with on a neig hbor's property and the BEST stuff I could find on port long range target material was the Cam p Perry guid es published back in the 1960's -early 70's. If anyone has any of those that are in scan-able condition; they won't be disappointed. but the y usually cam e on pulp paper and had a different subject each issue (like wind doping or tem perature behaviour). You could also get them a long tim e back from the DC M outlet in your comm unity if you had an NRA/DCM fund raiser or sell off.

W e know the re is a BIG difference between a (m ilitary) sniper, a (law enforcement) m arksm an, and a hobbyist & m any of us are just too old to lay on an anthill for 36 hours while shitting and urinating on ourselves just to ge t that single shot: I know I am... but I love to se e the lim its of a weapon's design and Cam p Perry shoots were the class act of the days before too m any nut-balls in camo made life m iserable for the sportsman.

billo June 8th, 2008, 07:50 AM There are a lot of books that are badly needed by this comm unity, especially by those who cannot get hold of them even through ama zon due to restrictions for use of Credit cards and p ostage departme nt problems. There are m any ways to disab le the warfare m achines. for e.g. shooting the IVS and radar capabilities of choppers doing recon this will considerably slow the offensive attack. There are a lot of spots that can be used to destroy the larger weapons. In Afghanistan it was reported that a b ig bunch of people shot down one cruise m issle with Ak-47 fire, though i seriously doubt that it is ever possible but it p rooves o ne thing. weapons are still made up of metal and plastics. So Hard target interdiction is what a mem ber <> is pointing towards. The book about 50 cal hard target interdiction is all abo ut it. The sniper shooting being pra ctised by U.S military and the Canadian forces is at its best; purely because of the technological advanced m aterials a vailable at all tim e. Som e nice things have comeup such as the scopes from horus vision for e.g. H25 reticle scopes H 37 Reticles which sim ply m ake the m ildot (military dot for m ost of the people) and MO A (Military O ptical Accessory)become alm ost redundant. I got these definitions from a site which was posting the jokes from field traning. All the books have been written so long back that they are almost redundant when compared to what the new things are coming up, as these scopes m ake the norm al reticular shooting from 1500 yards cross over to 2500 yards and that too without touching the knobs. THAT is technological break very well thought about. Isn't there any one who could scan and post these two books on The Forum ???

1) shooting at 1000 yards BY Dave Brennan. 2) the Complete .50 Calber course: Hard Target Interdiction by Dean Michealis.

Joxer June 15th, 2008, 11:10 AM One thing that I have not seen in m anuals (not that I have read them all) is using tires as a suppressor.

Line up 7 or so tires. Shooting thru the tires "baffles" greatly reduces muzzle blast. It does come in handy at a personal shooting range, and it gives possibilities when sniping from indo ors.

If you forget to wear ear protection, yo u will regret it, that I prom ise you. This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

Hitech_Hillbilly June 24th, 2008, 12:58 PM This m ay seem sort of redundant and com mon sense, but it rea lly deserves stating. The m ost im portant part in being able to shoot consistently accurate, is practice. You need to pick your rifle that you are going to shoot with, and shoot so much it seems like you have an obsession. And when you aren't actually shooting, you are holding your rifle and pretending to shoo t (by getting into your proper positions). You need to shoot betwe en 3000 and 8000 rounds properly to be able to do it without consciously thinking about it (m uscle mem ory or coordinative training, which ever term you prefer), so practice, practice, practice.

Winter Wolf June 29th, 2008, 01:48 AM One thing that I have not seen in m anuals (not that I have read them all) is using tires as a suppressor.

Line up 7 or so tires. Shooting thru the tires "baffles" greatly reduces muzzle blast. It does come in handy at a personal shooting range

Usin g tires as baffles will help reduce the noise to a socially acceptable level if you make the tire suppressor correctly, and if you use it correctly. The further the barrel of the weapon inside the tire tunnel the better suppressive effect you will achieve. Also the suppressive effect will be greatest on the sides of the tire construction rather than the direction the projectile will be m oving.

Another factor to consider is that all supersonic rounds will make the distinctive crack soun d of the sonic boom as th e projectile passes through the atm osphe re. There is nothing you can do about that so long as you are firing supersonic rounds. The main thing to keep in mind regarding the sonic boom is that the sound will follow the projectile througho ut the length of its path therefore the shorter the distance the projectile travels the less noise it will generate.

The tire suppressor can be handy on a personal range in a sem i-rural area to keep the neighbors happy, but as far as a tactical application I'm afraid it would be too unwieldy. In order to engage multiple targets from different directions you would have to be able to move the suppressor in line from target to ta rget. It would just not be practical as a tactical device.

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Tactics, Training, Defense, and Safety > Pistol shooting: through videos

billo March 23rd, 2008, 02:53 AM Som e of the forum m ember m ust be going to shooting ranges. I also so metim es go there for the fun of it. the sad thing is that there is no one who really wants to teach a fresh guy to sho ot straight. anyways there are m ore things on the internet that would help out astoundingly. such as

1) Thunder Ranch-Ha ngun tactics 2) Thunder Ranch-De fensive Tactics 3) Fighting Pistol thre e disk set 4) Fighting R ifle three disk set 5) Palading Press- Close Range gunfighting. 6) tactical high risk entry by chuck Hab erm ehl. 7) Valhalla Traning center- DVD- Com bat shooting 8) Valhalla- shooting in realistic environm ent.

there are a lot of other things available but this and the

IPSC-Mattburkett- how to shoot faster.avi

is m ore than enough for one person to digest for "norm al tactical" use.

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Tactics, Training, Defense, and Safety > SHTF Scenario - What would your tactics be

Hitech_Hillbilly March 24th, 2008, 05:18 PM I've been thinking about this for a long time, and would like to get other's opinions. Many of us have read the Turner Diaries (and other similar works of fiction) in which our governments turn on the populace; the populace then fights back (to greatly paraphrase). For those that haven't read anything like this, here's the scenario:

It's sometime in the future. After years of gradually usurping and limiting the rights of the citizens, the government has taken the next step; armed crackdown. You are now living in a police state that is very proud of that fact. You, and others like you, have decided to fight back.

Given the above scenario, what tactics and strategies would you use? By this, I'm not talking about backpack survivalists, I'm talking about full on, armed insurrection. And remember, this is all fiction. The scenario is happening in the country of Libertania, which has a population of about 250 million, has wide sea access, is bounded by three other countries by land, large rural tracts of land, but also a large, diverse urban population.

Now, I can see a grass roots type of strategy, where the local police stations and county court houses are targeted in the rural areas. This should be quick and decisive hits using squad type tactics. But here is the kicker in that plan; Libertanian Reserve forces are interspersed throughout the populace, with bases in the local communities. They will be able to mobilize quickly, and will out gun you with true military hardware, including air support. The urban police stations will also be harder to take with a blitzing type of attack due to more officers and better organization.

So, the question becomes, how do you hold the rural areas long enough for the urban areas to dissolve into chaos (or will they). How do you win over support to your cause? How do you communicate effectively and securely? What would your strategies and tactics be to return Libertania to democratic and/or republic rule?

Hitech_Hillbilly

a3990918 March 24th, 2008, 06:50 PM SWIM would probably try to work out a strike force on 2 fronts operating simultaneously,. The first's main objective would be the immobolization of the local Police & Sheriffs Depts thru the destruction of communications and transportation through black ops with little to no confrontation.

The 2nd force and the larger more heavily armed would strike at local Nat. Guard/Reserve base. Usually just a few armed guards not expecting an attacking force with intent on overtaking the base. Once the 2nd objective is met and SWIMs forces are in control of the weapons, I feel sure the Police would soon fold under threat of over-powering forces.

P.S. Loved the "Turner Diaries"

-=HeX=- March 24th, 2008, 09:57 PM In a national insurrection my strategy would be fairly simple. Many independant resistance groups around the country spend a few months arming, making improvised explosive devices (Like the paint can mine, of which I will post schematics later) and Rockets, hell, if hamas can do it we can!

Then, when ready, the groups around the country would autonomously strike the national guard bases and pig stations with truck bombs followed up by shock troops.

The towns and cities would then be mined, fortified, and declared free. Using such tactics the local problems are dealt with.

Then the resistance groups would amalgamate to strike the larger targets. Soon the whole damn country would be declared free.

The resistance against counter attack would be a cross between guerilla warfare and MOUT tactics with mines, telesnipers, PIR triggered EFP's and hit and run attacks on tanks with anti tank weapons to draw then into the line of fire of a paint can mine.

Shadowmartyr March 25th, 2008, 09:04 PM I think you are missing something.

First off, there would be no point in killing a bunch of lightly armed national guardsmen, what kind of advantage would this have in the long run? Surely these centers are monitored and routinely checked by higher authorities; my point is, your victory would be futile and it would just attract even more of a military presence in the area.

The point of guerrilla warfare is to use unconventional tactics, terrorism/propaganda/improvised weaponry; no such resistance would last long at all if it just decided to randomly attack an enemy outpost with guns blazing all the while expecting to "liberate" it, how often does this work for insurgents in Iraq? It doesn't, they do more of a hit and run type of attack.

So, unless there is a key influential target at this "outpost" or data that could be retrieved and used, there would be no point in attacking it conventionally like that. To conclude this, unless you just really want the place to be wiped off the map or weakened use the same tactics they do in the real world. First the target is hit with a massive explosive, perhaps a truck bomb, not seconds after different cells will launch mortar and rocket attacks, and then they scatter and leave. After the abrupt end, several snipers will be used to pluck off the first idiots that walk outside and assume its safe, then they leave.

To do any kind of damage without loss of life, these kind of tactics would have to be used.

What makes you think you could coordinate such an effort with that kind of time frame and communicate effectively to boot? If you are up against any kind if superior force, once they know where you are, it will be a simple cleanup, thats why you must This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter attack and leave/hit and run.

You gain support with your cause through propaganda, throw out fliers while nobody is around explaining your cause, leave graffiti, record your attacks on your enemies with a camera and then release it to the public.

Your campaign would continue and repeat from there.

neetje March 26th, 2008, 09:24 AM There are several different ways to engage in succesful guerilla warfare. You can ambush the enemy in territories you know better than them, using the terrain to full advantage.

Another way would be to jam every signal passed from high command to the foot soldiers, making them practically blind and easy to ambush.

I'm assuming only the government has heavy weaponry like tanks, planes and helicopters. Destroy whatever oil supply you are able to destroy trying to cripple them, destroy power plants so there is less production of armaments etc. But NEVER try destroying anything which is too heavily guarded.

I think what Sun Tzu said, The enemy may never know our positions, so they have to defend multiple hardpoints etc etc. Keep a low profile, if they don't find you, they will be less concentrated, therefore, much more vulnrable for attack ;)

Rbick March 26th, 2008, 03:34 PM The idea of facing an enemy with air superiority is a scary thought. I know this because I have seen it first hand. We were being pinned down by heavy fire from a woodline in Iraq. After returning fire for a few minutes, the two AH-6 "Little Bird" helicopters did a gun run on the tree line w/ dual mounted M-134 miniguns and hellfire rockets. Then the AC-130 gunship opened up with 105mm Howitzers and 40mm cannon fire. No one was left alive, obviously, and it was quite a spectacular firework show. Just a quick search on youtube will show you footage like this from the pilots view. They have infared vision! There is basically no way to hide.

If someone did manage to make it to a building to hide, the building was flattened by the AC-130s, or F-16s if they were available.

With this said, it would be important to limit the time spent fighting and being in the open. Setting mines and traps would be your best bet, and quick but effective ambushes and sabotage operations would probably work. Trying to openly engage a force like that of the US in conventional warfare would be suicidal.

Here is a good video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G9JANxFOP2Q) to illustrate my point.

Hitech_Hillbilly March 26th, 2008, 08:14 PM All good points. So, hit and run tactics seem like the majority opinion. So, how would you win popular opinion of the populace to your side? How do you get the soldiers to not attack it's own populace?

Hitech_Hillbilly

mike-hunt March 27th, 2008, 02:29 AM First of would be preparation the first thing a government would do is to disarm its citizens so large stockpiles of stored weapons would be invaluable.

Hit and run gorilla tactics and sabotage from within by infiltrating government troupes or turning there members to your side would be the best use of resources.

Also proper gander. An underground web site or newspaper could spread stories about how the gorilla forces are helping the local communities by supplying them which medicines food ect. You need the public on your side to hide you in the cites and to recruit from.

neetje March 27th, 2008, 11:28 AM First of would be preparation the first thing a government would do is to disarm its citizens so large stockpiles of stored weapons would be invaluable.

I for one know that most countries that disarm their subject usually don't store the weapons, but destroy them. This costs less money than storage, maintenance etc. I doubt that stealing these weapons would be an option...

Winning the popular opinion will be a problem, because people tend to believe whatever the (by then probably controlled) media tells them. The Germans during the end of the second world war, before d-day, still thought they were winning the war because every battle they won had a total news coverage, and the losses were never mentioned or had just a few lines in the papers.

After d-day, they couldn't deny losing any more...

Underground papers are a good way, but you can't go advertising them so they will only reach a select audience...

pirate radio and tv are also possibilities, but again, probably very local and a bit harder to keep underground.

A war against the government is usually a war against the government and their propaganda enslaved subjects. So don't care too much about those subjects, they will only give you trouble.

Cho! March 27th, 2008, 04:38 PM I don't think he meant raiding govt stockpiles of seized weapons, but rather hidden stashes belonging to citizens. This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

Hirudinea March 27th, 2008, 05:27 PM If someone did manage to make it to a building to hide, the building was flattened by the AC-130s, or F-16s if they were available.

Actually that can be used to gurrellias advantage, if you pin down a small enemy party in a crowded neighbourhood, the enemy would call in overwhelming firepower on you, but they would probably kill dozens of civilians in the process, and there's no better way to get people pissed off at the government that to have them kill your friends and family, people hate that.

Rbick March 27th, 2008, 08:42 PM Yeah they do hate that. But the part where I die along with the poor citizens is where I start to lose interest :D

If you could get access to a Stinger Missile, you could at least try and take out the helicopters. A RPG, AT4, LAW, or 84mm recoiless rifle might work too, but you'd have to be a pretty damn good shot. LOL I can imagine shooting down an apache with an 84mm flachette round :eek:

As for trying to get at the AC-130s, you're pretty much screwed...

Hitech_Hillbilly March 28th, 2008, 06:46 PM But the part where I die along with the poor citizens is where I start to lose interest :D

Excellent point, Rbick. That is part of the reason behind my original post. My death is not something I would be looking to run headlong into. I am trying to figure out a better way (truthfully, in theory) of resisting the goons of a police state.

The guerrilla tactics being used in Iraq, etc, are not being entirely successful. Yes, they are a pain in the ass to the American forces, and they will eventually get what they want. But where do the the police state forces have to go? They are already in their home country.

So, take what's good from those tactics and discard the rest. Is there any other ways to win over the general population?

As far as communications, I have heard that microSD cards have been used. People buy small cheap ones, then pass encrypted files by hand. The extremely small size is apparently the main advantage.

Hitech_Hillbilly

Hirudinea March 28th, 2008, 09:04 PM But the part where I die along with the poor citizens is where I start to lose interest

Excellent point, Rbick. That is part of the reason behind my original post. My death is not something I would be looking to run headlong into.

You don't have to be in the area when its wrecked, the Israelies will destory a neighbourhood when its used as a "base" for terrorist attacks, some remote controled mortors in a neighbourhood could be enough to get the government to level the place, and you don't get hurt.

Is there any other ways to win over the general population?

Hamas gets good results by setting up soup kitchens, schools and other welfare style programmes in poorer neighbourhoods, the black panthers did as well, so if you have the money try using it to buy the support of the poor, hey they can be taught to shoot guns.

As far as communications, I have heard that microSD cards have been used. People buy small cheap ones, then pass encrypted files by hand. The extremely small size is apparently the main advantage.

Yea, a female agent could transport one in a tampon, what federal agent would want to search through that!? (No I'm serious!)

mike-hunt March 28th, 2008, 10:39 PM Gust to clarify an earlier point I made about weapons stockpiles I was talking of stockpiles gathered in advance of any civil unrest by various survivalist and religious groups or individuals fearing the government seizure of there guns. Most of these groups will be already on your side.The combining of these smaller groups is how an army can be formed. As for spreading proper gander don't over look the power of gossip and rumor if underground media reaches gust 1% of the population rumor will spread it to the rest properly exaggerating the truth along the way.

Hitech_Hillbilly April 1st, 2008, 03:10 PM Let's go back to Air Power. Would you just resign yourself to being bombed back into the stone age, or would you attempt to counter the air support? If you decide to attempt to counter their air support, how would you do it?

TreverSlyFox April 2nd, 2008, 04:38 AM Let's go back to Air Power. Would you just resign yourself to being bombed back into the stone age, or would you attempt to counter the air support? If you decide to attempt to counter their air support, how would you do it?

You counter Air Support the same way you counter Armor and Artillery support, you attack the personnel in their off time and disrupt supply sources. You always have to remember is takes 12+ REMF people to support 1 person in the field. Air power without one of the critical three, Pilots, Fuel or Armaments is just a pile of junk sitting on a runway. It's the same with Armor or Artillery, take away the ability to move the equipment, re-arm the equipment or man the equipment and it's just junk sitting This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter there.

Tanks, Bradley IFV, Strikers, Jets and Helicopters are big time fuel hogs, fuel is flammable and transported in big, easy to identify trucks that don't like fire or explosives. They need crews that need rest, food and need to take a leak every few hours and require maintenance crews to keep them running.

Modern Armies and LEO depend on power and communications to operate, without electricity they are blind and dumb. Again their fuel supply is the target along with any support personnel and supplies.

Trying to go toe-to-toe with any modern force larger than a squad will get you killed. IED's, Sabotage, Booby Traps and quick Hit and Run attacks will keep you alive. Killing the guy with the gun isn't always the best move, killing the Cook, Supply Sgt or Mechanic may accomplish a lot more in the long run.

neetje April 2nd, 2008, 02:26 PM I think that in the beginning it would be easy to destroy the fuel supply of an army. But if it's your main target for a couple of days, those trucks will become part of armed convoys and therefor harder targets.

An IED with a remote control would be effective. just wait for the truck :)

Hitech_Hillbilly April 2nd, 2008, 02:40 PM Both excellent points. How would you keep separate the fuel and power supplies of the military and LEO from the civilian supplies? If you would attack both, how would that effect your campaign to win over the civilian populace to your side (so that you can stay hidden)?

Rbick April 2nd, 2008, 03:57 PM This is where the stupid ass insurgents in Iraq are messing up. They keep killing Iraqi civilians and destroying peoples property, hence the civilians now refusing to help the insurgents. The only thing you can really do, and its pretty simple, is to make sure your targets are strictly military and to make no mistakes. This would require more patience and planning, but would be worth it in the end. I think this would be particularly easy since the military/police likes to role around in camo colored vehicles and uniforms.

Hirudinea April 2nd, 2008, 07:15 PM How would you keep separate the fuel and power supplies of the military and LEO from the civilian supplies? If you would attack both, how would that effect your campaign to win over the civilian populace to your side (so that you can stay hidden)?

It depends on how you spin it, people love their soft lifestyle, and if you can convince them that its the governments responsibility to keep the lights on then they will blame them when they go off, but the government will be blaming you.

bobo April 5th, 2008, 02:34 PM countering air power... military engagements... firepower... thats what you do in a more or less equal conflict. In the case of a government against its people, there is one side with overwhelming firepower but a lack of information, against resistance fighters operating in the shadows.

Direct confrontations is what the military is good at, playing their favorite game against them doesn't seem terribly smart to me. If you believe that a bunch of toughs with rifles will be successful against a trained military unit in a direct confrontation, even in an ambush on a convoy with no immediate air support, then you really need to study the current ops in afghanistan and iraq some more.

Perhaps killing key people and blowing up key structures is better than to try and outgun the grunts because they, after all, are nothing but disposables to the evil government anyway.

tiac03 April 5th, 2008, 06:22 PM I remember watching a good video on the British resistance that was formed in case England was invaded by the Germans. I wish I could find the video so I could post it for everyone to see. (It was on stage 6 before it closed).

Anyways what struck me was that they were expected to only survive for about 2 weeks, and hopefully in that time what remained of the regular army could push the Germans off the Island again.

Now your only hope as a resistance element is that some other country finds what you are doing right and they decide that your gov't should be stopped. Now without the aid of another Government you cannot change much. Sure you might piss em off quite a bit but they will remedy the situation if no one steps in to help.

Iraq is a great example. Sure they kill some troops and cause instability, but the US just keeps going. How many insurgents have died at this point in the "War" and how much of an effect have they had? If you do start to resist a gov't the chances are that you and many others will die or be imprisoned.

Unless you have a good way to keep the Gov't at your level you have no chance. And to do this is very difficult.

One's best bet is to assassinate the Leaders of the hypothetical government and hope their replacements decide that the leader was wrong. There are always others that oppose the "leaders".

Look back in history and ask yourself: If Hitler and a few others were assassinated when they got into power would it have changed anything?

Obviously it is difficult to do but if everyone planned on that rather than trying to make plans for destroying everything else wouldn't it be better?

Easier to take out 1-10 heavily guarded people than a whole army no? This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter Alexires April 5th, 2008, 11:15 PM Hmm. Certainly a few very good points in this thread. I think the main point here is that there is no way some kind of resistance force is going to last without the support of the citizens.

If the citizens of this hypothetical country Libertania are completely brainwashed and dependant on the government, the resistance's job is going to be all that much harder. It will be like 1984 mixed with Equilibrium and given half a tonne of speed and steroids. I urge people to investigate the alternate reality "Year Zero" game (have a look at wikipedia with the search "Year Zero (game)").

I believe that, although a game, it has pertinence to this discussion. The need to have the citizens blame the government would be a necessity.

Graffiti, posters pasted on walls, pirate television and radio would certainly be the way to go. Disrupting the government controlled TV stations and broadcasting on that same channel for perhaps only a minute or two while the government station is down.

Any instances where the government has had civilian "collateral damage" while trying to catch the resistance and covering it up would need to be exposed during these pirate broadcasts. Targeting universities which is a typical place for dissidents to breed (Tiananmen Square anyone?) would certainly be an option to explore.

Targeting the military outright would be a stupid thing to do. Hitting the support mechanisms would be the way to go. Disrupt power, fuel and food to the military. If they can't eat, they can't fight. Hijacking ammunition transport might be a tactic as well.

Perhaps a general plan would look something like this.

1. Integrate into society - Look just like the rest of the sheeple. No point in being on the red flag list from the beginning, because you will be the first sent toe "re-education camps".

2. Start to plan activities in small cells, independent of one another. Perhaps 1 cell per city/region/state, whatever. That way, if one cell falls, the resistance isn't risked.

3. Said activities would consist of small scale attacks/disruptions/sabotage of soft targets such as television stations, radio stations, power stations. This step would include pirate radio/tv broadcasts during those disruptions. Perhaps by targeting all stations bar one, the populace would watch that one more so that when a crucial message needs to be gotten out, that one could be targeted. Start to get the populace on side. This is an on going theme through this plan. At any stage, this is probably one of the highest priorities.

4.As the military/police (there won't be much of a difference at this point) start to respond to these attacks as well as their normal actions of rounding up "dissidents", "free-thinkers", "gun nuts" and other social eccentric, the resistance would attempt to disrupt these activities as much as possible. Disrupting communications, or listening to them so that those people being rounded up suddenly "disappear" before the police get there and can be coerced into working for the resistance (they will be thankful, of course).

5. Start to scale up to major hits against "half cooked" targets (targets that aren't hardened, but aren't soft either). These kind of things would include fuel/ammunition transport to military/police bases, the smaller rural police stations and also military/police communications.

6. Major disruption against television and radio stations. Of course, this would depend upon how the people are. If they are pissed off because their Saturday night football game is ruined, and they blame you, perhaps it isn't such a good thing. Yet, if their children are searching for the resistance members, trying to support them and are causing disruptions of their own, perhaps it is worth it.

7. Start to target higher up government officials. Cut the head off without direct confrontation with the body. Perhaps some kind of hostage situations with the officials families (while treating them with the utmost courtesy) and causing disruptions to government operations whilst gaining a reputation as being fair.

Perhaps this point needs explaining. If you take the ZOG Officials family, tell him to give you a million then kill them anyway, you have just made an enemy that will stop at nothing to get you. In a way, this can be useful, but most times, it isn't. Where as if you silently hold his family, treating them like kings and tell him to do something small. Perhaps hand over his password to the computer systems, or where this months attacks on dissidents will be, and return his family promptly, you will gain a reputation for keeping your word, being fair, and also not asking for much. People will be more inclined to do what you ask them, because they will be more inclined to believe you will return their family to them.

Black mail also comes in here, and it will be a very useful tool. Again, one must be "fair" and "reasonable".

8. The turning point. By this point, one would hope that the military/police would be ineffective, making mistakes, and generally pissing the populace off. The government would be in shambles, still maintaining everything is fine, where everyone can see the rot inside, and the populace will be actively supporting the resistance. From this point, the populace will do the work. They will protest, they will blame the government, and the government doesn't have THAT MANY troops to deal with the population.

I think that in such a situation, it would be a battle for the people, not ground, resources, oil, money, or any other such commodities. The good will of the people will be the goal. With them, we can do everything, without them, we will be useless.

LibertyOrDeath April 8th, 2008, 05:05 AM Lots of good points have already been made, but I'll add my two cents.

As Rbick said, fighting openly against a conventional military would be suicide. Hit-and-run would be the only way to go. You want to strike when they're not expecting it. Assuming Libertania is as large as the United States, there is NO WAY Libertania's government can keep it all under a high-security lockdown. Even a nation the size of Vietnam, Iraq, or Afghanistan is very hard to dominate.

My way of resisting would likely be based on a lone-wolf approach, although I'd work with someone else if I could find someone I trusted enough. My main methods would probably be This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter (1) sniping at targets of opportunity from at least 400 yards with a high-powered, scoped, bolt-action rifle, using armor- piercing bullets if needed (see this thread (http://www.roguesci.org/theforum/showthread.php?p=102527)). Make one or two shots, then disappear before aircraft or reinforcements can arrive. For more on sniping, I highly recommend the book The Ultimate Sniper by Maj. John Plaster. Also, we should make a note of the tactics used by the "Beltway Snipers," though of course we wouldn't kill innocent people.

A lot of people are really into rapid-fire "mouse guns" like the AR-15 and AK. I like these weapons too, and they have their place. But do you really want to be fighting "up close and personal" when you're outnumbered and can be surrounded by reinforcements at any time? Especially when the System's goons will be wearing body armor that makes torso shots by all except the most powerful rifles ineffective? Not me. I'd rather pick one off with a head shot when he and his buddies are standing around and not expecting anything.

(2) IEDs and arson, though I would be careful not to harm innocent people. The problem with IEDs is getting enough explosives or raw materials to make them. Some people have access to a lot of ammonium nitrate or KNO3 fertilizer, which gives them a big advantage here.

(3) If cornered and there were no way out, I'd just try to take a few of the System's enforcers with me. That would be better than being tortured for the rest of my life in some hellhole.

Charles Owlen Picket April 8th, 2008, 10:20 AM A friend and I have lasered a little range ourselves on another friend's property (actually it's State Leased land) and have our own rifle range. I go each week and play out there and frankly 400 yds is a really close piece. I believe that most people who are competent with a bolt gun can do silhouettes of the human form at 600 with continual hit /kill probability: perhaps no real group for awhile but certainly a center of mass shot(s).

I don't really enjoy talking about distance shooting because it's so damn opinionated but if you can dope wind and have a reasonably good understanding of ballistics, I believe most folks can shoot competently at 600 and over.

I have the chance to play around with 600 - 1000 and at that point it get tough to range estimate (EVEN when you know what the the thing is SUPPOSED to be). I have a floated Krieger barreled action with a Timney trigger (system) that will push a 7.62 NATO round (168gr bthp match) sufficiently to make a body shot at 1000 but so many little things play a role. HOWEVER....if those ranges were in an urban setting those malevolencies may be much less or not exist at all.

Barnacles April 8th, 2008, 05:47 PM I have spent a great deal of time thinking about a situation like this. That is why I pay very close attention to the Iraq war. It shows you how a bunch of ragtag goat farmers can tie up the worlds most powerful military for years and cost the economy 2 trillion$.

Roadside bombs, roadside bombs, roadside bombs. sniper sniper sniper lol. To counter air superiority you need spotters or a shit tonne of SAM. A typical fighter jet can pick and choose bomb targets from 15 km away horizontally this does not include height. Anyway. I figure lets say you are doing an attack on troops in downtown. You have spotters at the outer city limits assuming you guys saw no air support close by before the attack. These guys would be 15-30 km away from the battle at polar points away, and use listening devices and looking devices to spot incoming air support and warn of 2 minutes or whatever is there response. and that is how long you have to pull out of battle. If you got lots of sam rockets, your chances of hitting an advanced fighter or bomber I would assume is pretty low, but if every time a attack chopper or fighter flew over a certain town or city, they had 15 SAM's launched at them you are bound to hit some or just make them think twice or be very careful with air support.

For arty, you set up remote rockets to shoot at a base, and have a camera set up to watch the response, it typically take 3-11 (usually higher end) minutes in Iraq for a Artillery response, learn this and use this. The military finds you by following the phosphor trails or smoke trails to the rocket launch site. Personally I find those long range rockets would be better suited to fire out of a window of a residence into a passing light armoured vehicle. Or out of the ground to fire into the belly of a vehicle.

For my IEDS when not to close to civilian populace. I would use "dirty" bombs. Not the typical radioactive although I would if I could. I would put stuff like asbestos and cancer causing chemicals, powdered glass, nails, shit dirt, everything you can to make the bombs scarier to the troops. If troops are of fear that every roadside bomb that goes off will be toxic they will not only fear the explosion but the dust itself, if you can convince the army that you are giving cancer , or rendering them infertile. , or possibly blinding them with glass dust or just anything scary, they will be scared everywhere they go, and youllcatch them holding their breath after detonations which would be a good time to start a gunfight...

I would also spend a great deal of time rigging cars to drive remotely. Al-qaeda has used a few of these in Iraq and the mythbusters have used them in a few episodes. Also armoring the engine and tires so it could not be disabled easily by small arms fire...This way you have the ability to deliver large ordinance on target without a jet plane, or losing a fighter to a suicide bombing.

Tunneling would also be very important. Tunneling under outposts to plant very large charges would be pretty good strategy also. I have seen this tactic used very succesfully a few times, in hezbollah and iraqi insurgent videos.

Just use every weapon available, insects, chemicals, chemical weapons, swords, bows, animals. disease. and FEAR.

When I have more time I will try to write some more tactics in detail. This is all hypothetical of course.

Charles Owlen Picket April 9th, 2008, 11:30 AM There is a unique balance between power to disperse a material and the breakdown of that material to a point of uselessness. If a material is to be dispersed over a wide area, it must be proportional to the strength of the energetic dispersing it, else it will be made dust & in an open area like the desert, become much less effective.

There is a very specific science to area weapons that is unlike many others. I found that what was needed (was) to not only understand a great deal more of higher mathematics but bring together several physics elements to lend effectiveness to the weapon. Just my opinion here but there is a Hell of a lot involved in area weapons outside of the simple geometry of dropping on target.

The reason that the old MKII was re-designed to the M26 (grenade) is an encapsulation of many of these issues. What's more the story of the Mortar as one of the oldest area weapons in history [and perhaps one of the most unique; bringing together This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter concepts that blossom beyond the superficial] is a wonderful thing.... mortars hold a special fascination to me.

Barnacles April 10th, 2008, 07:16 PM I was wondering do you know of any literature you can point me to that further elaborates on this subject.

I understand what you are saying, most of my ideas involving area weapons are more based on causing fear and disruption, while forcing troops to undergo further preventative measures in frivolous protection. While I would not put to much thought or time into the weapons( obvioulsy I will do some work to improve design, I wouldnt be spending countless hours or $ to do so) but the cost to enemy to protect against simple things like that. While taking me or the bomb/weapons maker a few extra seconds to prepare the bomb, adds another whole dimension of tactics/fear to the battle.

I have some drawings of some of my ideas, I actually sent to mega,as I requested that we have a section devoted to guerilla warfare tactics and methods of producing weapons to use in such war. I am not sure but I believe that putting a hollow layer of 1 inch to several inches around the charge to give room between the charge and the powder or whatever you wish to disperse. I cant think of a way to describe it other than this poor description for now. Imagine a blassing cap of 10 grams maybe thats long and thin like a pencil, suspended in the middle of a two litre pop bottle, on the outside of the bottle there could be a layer of whatever.

I think tactics like this could breed dissent amongst the troops, I mean who wants to go into cancer causing clouds or be rendered infertile. It may not work effectively. You may see troops refusing to go on patrols , lowered recruiting numbers, could force occupying force to leave altogether or force them to conscript if they are not already. Causing further problems at the homeland abroad on top of the battle zone.

Charles Owlen Picket April 11th, 2008, 10:52 AM OH boy, do I ever have literature directives on that subject! But I don't know your background so I will be general in my suggestion with material discussing area weaponry and related agenda. Keeping in mind that there are aspects of geometry, trigonometry, physics & energetic materials science interwoven in all of this, where you want to start are places like Westpoint War college libraries or related military schools. [Concepts in Area Weaponry, Dawn M.F. 1968, Applied Science of the Mortar, DelViechio Univ Press, 1949] Those two are VERY math oriented.

You can find some of this material online. you want to get into the Military School's war fighting library and they will have everything from the basics to the most highly advanced studies of area weaponry. You are looking to fully understand what it takes to make area weaponry effective. Simple as that. The texts will take you through a "what happens when" flow chart of sorts that will illustrate the variables. then you simply extrapolates what you need to learn more of or what "trips your trigger".

If you've gotten to trig in school I could make some suggestions, but if not, just use the above generalities to find what you need.

Joxer April 15th, 2008, 01:56 PM (2) IEDs and arson, though I would be careful not to harm innocent people.

You may not harm innocent people, but you can bet that the .gov would, and blame you for it.

I wouldn't exactly die of shock if I learned that is what was happening in Iraq.

-=HeX=- April 15th, 2008, 02:12 PM The gov are just like hitler. He burned down the reichstag and blamed it on the communists. The gov will slaughter a few sheeple and say that you did it. No qualms.

I also reckon that the sheep will only hear of the govs victories over the rebel terrorists and not how the insurgents have beat them... Just like in hitlers time...

Now is the time. Here is the place. The crackdown is occuring as I type. Scary but true.

Charles, do you know of any good websites with data on mortars and the math behind them? I need a good resource for the mortar section of my .pdf file. I also find mortars a fascinating weapon.

Rbick April 15th, 2008, 02:50 PM I wouldn't exactly die of shock if I learned that is what was happening in Iraq.

No this isn't what is happening in Iraq. I've been there and I was the ".gov" you're speaking of. Civilian lives were important to us and we made sure not to harm innocent people. We handed out candy to kids and all that crap. Civil affairs was and still is a BIG deal. What I did observe while in Iraq was the number of civilians killed by militants who didn't like each other because they believe in Allah differently. This is the reason many Iraqi civilians are now going against the Insurgents and joining the US, as they [the insurgents] are killing innocent people. The soldiers over there are not part of some big conspiracy against humanity, despite what many hippies believe. They are just regular guys doing their job, like I was. They arn't killers murdering innocent people and then pointing a finger at the insurgents. The insurgents ARE killing innocent people and we are trying to stop it, because its retarded.

Yes, sometimes civilians are caught in crossfire. It is accidental, and anyone who knows anything about war knows that civilians will always get hurt. I remember giving medical aid to a small girl who ended up too close to a breaching charge because her dad was trying to kill us. I felt horrible. Its good to see the people over there put their families before anything else (sarcasm). This kind of crap happens, especially when their dumb fuck father puts them in the middle of a gun fight because he thinks Allah will protect him.

Now that we have that cleared up...

I also reckon that the sheep will only hear of the govs victories over the rebel terrorists and not how the insurgents have beat them... Just like in hitlers time...

This is what Saddam did when the US was invading. It worked for the most part, until M1 Abrams tanks rolled into Baghdad. This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The way to get that cleared up is doing things that can't be covered up, like blowing up an important landmark or building, or destroying telecommunications.

Hitech_Hillbilly April 15th, 2008, 04:59 PM Another point (or question) to think about. How many of the Libertanian soldiers/LEO would continue to "just do their job" and how many would go Awol before attacking their family and friends?

Unlike Iraq, etc. this would be on their own home soil. This is something to keep in perspective. I still believe some soldiers/ LEO do their jobs because they believe that what they are doing is morally just or in the greater service to the laws governing their country. During a crackdown, many will not agree with the regimen taking power, and may refuse to assist.

neetje April 16th, 2008, 11:19 AM Another point (or question) to think about. How many of the Libertanian soldiers/LEO would continue to "just do their job" and how many would go Awol before attacking their family and friends?

I think you are asking this question a bit wrong. I think the question is not 'how many go awol' but 'how to get them in MY army'. They go awol, and therefore will go to military prison (probably a modern version of Hitler's Death Camps) if caught.

Getting these men into your army would be a very important objective. These men are trained, they know the tactics of the enemy, maybe they can steal some weaponry for you before going awol and who knows what they can do more. Another quality of these men is that they are being hunted, and therefore highly motivated.

The other side would be that it will be easy for the government to infiltrate. All they have to do is 'pretend' a soldier going awol and then inserting him into your army.

Anybody got any thoughts about this? Because I'm pretty sure I'm forgetting something important ;)

Joxer April 16th, 2008, 02:25 PM RBick

They are just regular guys doing their job, like I was. They arn't killers murdering innocent people and then pointing a finger at the insurgents.

Then where are all of the Abu Ghraib pics and other kinds of videos coming from? See the one where they teased kids with bottled water? How about the one where they threw grenades into a herd of sheep? There are plenty of videos SOLDIERS recorded that show things like this, and worse.

http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/multimedia/2008/02/gallery_abu_ghraib http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article19536.htm http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/09/world/middleeast/09iraq.html?_r=4&hp&oref=slogin&oref=slogin&oref=slogin&oref=slogin http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1198517327913&pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull http://www.militarytimes.com/news/2008/01/ap_randomfire_080109/

Those are just a few links I have on my site. I can post many more.

Not that you participated in any of this. I dont know you and I certainly wont accuse you of this. But some sure as fuck did, and they had the gall to document it for all to see. I wonder why. They certainly didnt fear their COs' wrath. I guess that means their commanders approved of this.

Now when it comes to false flag operations, like these bombings might be, who gains? It's ceratinly not the insurgency.

If we were invaded like Iraq was, we'd fight back too. That is a common shtf scenario.

Who do we trust? Some of us don't trust soldiers or LEO, and it doesn't matter if they are the Good Guys or not. It's hard to tell someones loyalties by how they dress, and its better to be safe than sorry, imo.

Hinckleyforpresident April 17th, 2008, 12:48 PM A bit off topic, but here is an tactic which I feel is very relevant to a post SHTF world:

A surprisingly successful, yet terribly funded, revolutionary group currently in existence is the EZLN (Ejército Zapatista de Liberación Nacional). Now, when the Zapatistas were more active they didn't have enough money to stock their troops with guns and ammo. So they faked it.

The simply made wood cutouts which resembled guns at a medium distance. They then would surround an enemy (Mexican Army) patrol in the jungle and disarm them. Now they had real guns! Using 1/2 fake and 1/2 real guns in such raids they successfully stocked their weapons supply.

I very much doubt that any freedom fighting group in a post-SHTF world would have the kind of money/resources to supply their troops all too well. So trickery like this would be a must.

Barnacles April 18th, 2008, 06:56 PM Hinckley this reminds me of a tactic used in WW2 by the allies right before DDAY. They built the worlds largest fake army and posted it at some other far point in england, to be purposely spotted, this way the germans would think the invasion was coming from somewhere else than it really was to be. They had tanks planes everything, but they were all painted inflateable ballons that would even fool those standing beside one. I saw a video of some guys standing beside a tank, they than went and flipped it over with there bare hands... This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter megalomania April 18th, 2008, 10:23 PM Now the question you have to ask yourself is "did he shoot all six bullets, or only five?" Do you feel lucky punk, well, do ya? :)

The tactic of surrounding an enemy without shooting can be even more effective if it works. Soldiers tend to start shooting when they are being shot at, if they are surrounded and outnumber they are going to die anyway, so they shoot back. When the enemy does not shoot, the soldier can logically conclude they are going to be spared. This is one of those standoff situations, you try and fight, you will die.

This is also like the mugger with something pointy in his jacket pocket. Is it a gun, or just his finger? Do you want to find out the hard way?

The WWII deceptions were designed to fool aerial surveillance, not troops on the ground. The Germans only thought Patton was mobilizing an attack in one direction so the attack could take them by surprise in another. It would be very difficult to use this trick to fool aerial surveillance today, what with thermal imagine systems and ground penetrating radar. However, throw up some camo netting and use IR smokescreens, and the enemy will wonder what the hell you are up too. What they can't see will make them nervous.

nmp2 April 22nd, 2008, 09:05 PM To free Libertania is a long term goal, and to free it from an entrenched, well armed and motivated political structure cannot be done by small scale armed insurrection. You would be just giving them a target to aim at. Large scale armed revolt would fare just as badly. In order to give a large, well equiped enemy fits, never give them anyything solid to shoot at. (Vietnam, Iraq, Bosnia...) Rather, fight them slowly, (your goal is worth the wait, right?) from the ground up. Fight with customized religion. Teach the children in drips and draps, make the common man your friend in basic theology, and add a bit to that strategy slowly. Eventually, a generation or so, every single heart within the borders of Libertania will beat for release. Unstoppable.

BTW Hinkley - The Soviets used to claim that they had seven working space shuttles back when we had two. They had them rolled out on the tarmac daily so we could spot them from sat. Closer observation revealed that at a 4 pm flyby, these shuttles cast shadows no longer than 5 or 6 inches. Plywood.

-=HeX=- April 24th, 2008, 07:06 AM The space shuttle comment reminded of of a IRA trick from the troubles. It went like this. They would get a corpse, and put make up on it to make it look alive. They would tape a fake gun into its hands and pros it up. They would then rig the body with explosives and hide nearby with a detonater. When a soldier shot the corpse it would be knocked over and the stupid squaddie would in over to check... Then boom!

That is how we reuse dead people :D

nmp2 April 24th, 2008, 08:17 PM In this time of global warming/impending ice age, we must recycle as we can...

To be forewarned is to have four arms.

-=HeX=- April 29th, 2008, 03:14 PM Good one nmp2! It also means that fallen comrades can still kill enemies when dead. I would use telesnipers and claymores to hold buildings. Imagine clearing a room then the room go boom... :)

I believe defeating infrared vision has been discussed here a while back. Really though, kill the REMFs and the pilots and planes are moot. Kill a pilot and you have cost them a few million in training. Kill a tank and the tank regiments morale will drop. Go for their morale.

Alexires April 29th, 2008, 10:39 PM Speaking of telesnipers, I was looking at a magazine last night, and they were advertising basically a sentry gun. A remote controlled turret that you can attach various rifles too. Probably a result from Iraq. Think kind of Aliens style. At least we know they are out there now *laugh*.

On destroying tanks.... Obviously I can't go into too much detail, but if something like an 84mm anti armour weapon won't take out a modern tank (like the US use) I don't know how well an IED would go.

Unless it can penetrate OVER 400mmish of homogeneous armour, it is only going to piss them off. Unless you hit the tracks or something like that, then it will stop it, but that doesn't stop them from blowing the shit out of everything.

Charles Owlen Picket April 30th, 2008, 10:53 AM The "telesnipers" was actually up and running in the very early 1980's. - locally. There was a big deal about the Ransom Rest for rifles and someone put together a solenoid unit for the trigger to pull human error out of the equation when testing one of the original Jewell dual stage triggers.....I actually, personally, remember people buying those rests who were REALLY into Varminting. These are some of the stories you can relate when you measure activities by decades....

Redfield (the scope company) was history from it's original owner/developer and the older Redfields were highly prized (still are!): dropped in Leupold low level mounts put the smaller 37mm Redfield bell very close to the barrel: some said too close as the bullet whip would eventually result in scope-edge contact.....So they tested it with no human hand touching the thing.

Eventually when someone go the idea to use his son's RC airplane or car.....a star was born. That was several decades back. And if we had the idea.....then it was pretty damn popular because we are not the most original, free, & independent thinkers in this neck of the woods. This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

Just as an aside; the 3 states to see good gun shows are Montana, Arizona, & Wyoming. - Used to be Idaho and the Dakotas too, but Idaho became stupid and everyone moved out of the Dakotas.....Those were states where folks prized their independence and their toys.

BlackFalcoN April 30th, 2008, 11:32 AM I would use telesnipers and claymores to hold buildings. Imagine clearing a room then the room go boom... :)

How realistic is that idea ?

You are not going to hold any ground for a long time in such a conflict and unless you have actively developed and tested your telesniper device BEFORE a SHTF-situation, you are not going to fabricate one during a true crisis situation where everything will be monitored and locked down; everything else is just fantasy speaking. :p.

Anyway, I think much can be learned from past & current modern conflicts, starting from the SS Werwolf activities during and after WWII, Vietcong tactics in the Vietnam war, Ireland, Bosnia, Chechnya, Afghanistan and Iraq.

Boobytraps, sniper attacks, IEDs, mortar attacks, hit&run assassinations, night-time raids, sabotage of infrastructure, etc carried out by only a few people. The idea is to create as much distance between you and a vastly superiour enemy force, since you don't stand a chance in a direct confrontation with a professional, well trained army, no matter how good you think you are. (Note: egos will get you killed ;))

Staying alive, motivated and dedicated to the cause is your biggest concern. Better to retreat and fight another day, than to go down in a hail of bullets, no matter how heroic it may sound. You are only a small force that is inferiour in size and equipment, so be mobile and on your feet to avoid a confrontation with the enemy.

Fight your battles in the urban environment, where long range enemy engagements are harder than out in the open, tanks are having great troubles moving around and crew served support weapons can't reach without creating a LOT of collateral damage. Also, their airforce capabilities will be more limited that way. Luring the enemy into built-up areas offers a much bigger tactical advantage and will result into larger enemy casualties while minimizing your own. Also, your enemies MOUT doctrine against guerrilla forces has had less time to be tried & proven during history, whereas conventional battles in rural settings are pretty much mastered.

Unconventional warfare is just another word for conducting warfare that does not follow the enemies conventions; be ruthless, take no prisoners, fuck the Geneva convention, shoot them in the back, create terror, be dishonorful to your enemy. There is little chance you will be able to turn enemy defectors, since a big media campain will be launched against you; propaganda emphesizing the big differences between OUR people and THEIR people. Very little chance in turning a professional army against their original masters, since military discipline & group feeling are instilled in recruits from day one they enter the army. No matter how just and honorful your actions are, the'll paint you off as a "terrorist" anyway. (Especially when combating Libertania forces, since that has been their favourite means of justification for more than 6 decades: " Remember; Libertania is 'democratizing' the baby-eating, freedom hating terrorists, communists & insurgents; NOT KILLING civilians & those who resist to be dominated by a foreign force or who like to have another world view than we do" :rolleyes:)

Every form of organization above squad level is vulnerable to infiltration by the enemy and a direct threat to OPSEC. Lone wolf tactics & leaderless resistance is the way to go in my oppinion, it is the only proven tactic that has worked over and over again around the world in many conflicts.

-=HeX=- April 30th, 2008, 01:35 PM Blackfalcon: I meant that the telesniper was to be constructed now, before the SHTF. And yes, I agree, lone wolf is the way to go. I would not, however, learn from the ira because they have failed miserably. Trust me on that! I live there (Ireland) and pretty much everyone has a dislike of them.

In the magicians arsenal book it shows how to make a remote control gun. Now read '101 spy gadgets for the evil genius' (I will put it on rapidshit later) and consider the camera gunsight idea... Now merge the two... Both are fairly simple ideas. And viola! Telesniper! (Well use a sniper shelf instead of the pistol used.)

The idea in the thread 'Taplight landmines' is also a weapon that can be used. 'Ballistic smokes' from magicians arsenal could be left pointing at where soldiers will be. Those would cause complete panic due to fears of an assassain or gun man.

Panic and fear are your allies. Maybe I will start a thread on survival?

BlackFalcoN April 30th, 2008, 02:07 PM In the magicians arsenal book it shows how to make a remote control gun. Now read '101 spy gadgets for the evil genius' and consider the camera gunsight idea... Now merge the two... Both are fairly simple ideas. And viola! Telesniper! (Well use a sniper shelf instead of the pistol used.)

A remotely monitored firing gun is a great idea, but just strapping a camera to a remotely fired rifle, does not qualify it as a 'sniper' weapon in my oppinion.

I was thinking you were refering to a high precision, long range 'sniper' platform setup, which would not be feasable for the average tinkerer to construct during conflicts, since it requires a lot of fine tuning, testing and materials/money to make it operational and requires very precise material tolerances & advanced ballistic calculations to hit a target.

I agree that the IRA has lost their war on winning the public oppinion, but there are valuable lessons to be learned from their tactics, be it for the better or worse.

Fear is the mind killer; it triggers the unconcious human fight or flight response and can turn sensible adult males into fleeing crybabies OR it could make them more determined in crushing their enemy by using exuberant force and commiting atrocities. (Like employing nuclear smartbombs on a large population in order to destroy that what makes them fear ;)) This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter -=HeX=- May 3rd, 2008, 10:09 AM I just came back from my grandmothers house (She is really old, 102 years old and still alive) and she told me a few interesting things. In the irish war of independance her mother blew up a bridge to stop the british black and tans from advancing. Her son died in the blast. He was seen as a martyr. If you study the war of independance a great many things can be learned. After all, we did win (Partly)! First and foremost: assassaination was a very important part, as was execution of spies and informers. Just watch the film 'The wind that shakes the barley'.

She also told me that they used scare crows with hurleys in their 'hands' as diversions so the troops would be looking the wrong way when they opened fire. A hurley looks a bit like a rifle. Another trick was to break into the barracks and steal all the guns. Maybe in todays world we would replace the bullet with detcord.

One man with an EFP can kill a tank. 10 with rifles cant.

London_Dungeon May 14th, 2008, 09:09 PM On destroying tanks.... Obviously I can't go into too much detail, but if something like an 84mm anti armour weapon won't take out a modern tank (like the US use) I don't know how well an IED would go.

According to Ragnar's Action Encyclopedia Vol. 2, there are a few ways to take out tanks. IEDs can be used on treads (18 lbs. C-4), or on the undercarriage (45 lbs C-4), given they are on a hard surface.

The engine can be attacked with thermite, or suffocated by throwing a few molotovs at the air intake. Throwing a tire on top would probably help. Supposedly the freedom fighter is helped in this by the fact that tanks can only see forward. One can also try thermite on the ammo supply.

Due to the heat and lack of vision, many times tank commanders will ride sitting out of the entry hatch when not engaged. This is the time to snipe, throw molotovs, grenades, etc.

There is also a story of WWII soldiers hiding construction vehicles out of sight, then riding up to tanks and simply tiping them over.

I am not famliar with tanks, however, so I take Ragnar's advice with skepticism.

akinrog May 17th, 2008, 08:37 AM I am not famliar with tanks, however, so I take Ragnar's advice with skepticism.

I believe, you should. Today's tanks are much more sophisticated than those of WWII even those of two decades ago.

Sneaking upon a tank is very difficult (even when immobilized) since now electronic gadgets are being used for monitoring activities.

RPGs which effectively killed any tank a few decades ago now only scratch the surface of the armor. :p

The best shot is what Iraqis are doing, using brute force (i.e. a lot of explosives hidden in the roadside) to destroy (or immobilize) it then continue attacking to kill it together with the crew.

Timing is crucial since if insurgents are delayed then air back up (mostly assault helicopters) shall kill them all. Regards.

Jacks Complete May 17th, 2008, 12:28 PM Yes, Ragnar's advice is crap these days.

The US are routinely strapping claymore mines around their tanks to frag anyone running in with a handheld weapon. The guys inside don't care about the noise. As regards telesnipers and the like, where do you think they first existed? It's on armoured vehicles, so the crew can sit inside and shoot you from perfect cover.

Likewise, you'd be lucky to see an unbuttoned tank in Iraq. Why would you let the flies, smoke and sand inside with the heat, when you have perfectly nice filtered (to NBC levels) air-con, as well as a scope that can see 10 times better than your eyes can? Even if there were no bad guys, you'd be daft to sit up top and get bitten by a malarial mosquito.

As for sticking stuff into the tracks or tipping a tank over... Well, I'll watch from CCTV from a bunker, thanks all the same. Those are tanks, not light armoured cars, or even a tank on it's own. It is *tanks* plural. While you try to get your forklift or digger up close, the tank behind is putting a 105mm round through you at Mach 6.5, or a burst from a .50BMG.

Woland_91 May 17th, 2008, 12:51 PM It is true that IED's can easily penetrate a tank's underside armor. The copper slug formed from the explosion would rip through it, and, if lady luck shines on you, it will hit a shell, causing a huge explosion...But, if I am not mistaken, modern tanks and APCs all come equipped with radio interference equipment. The brave guerrilla fighter would be at his position, hidden from enemy sight, waiting for the big, bulky prey to approach the trap...He would then press the remote control and...nothing. The tank simply rolls by, and your IED sits there:eek:.

As to the "dirty" bomb, a few points should be considered. First of all, where are you going to get the radioactive material in a country where you aren't even allowed a pocket knife? Also, the "dirty" bomb doesn't really do much; it's only a conventional bomb with some decaying element strapped on it. The real power of the such a bomb lies in the fear it causes amongst the people, not the radioactive power. Yes, it will cause cancer. Maybe in 50 years. But by then, everything else will have caused cancer:rolleyes:.

Personally, I discourage hit&run tactics, sniping soldiers and planting bombs in public areas. This isn't your neighbour invading you with evil, foreign soldiers who, according to your propaganda, will murder, rape, loot. This is a family squabble. Those soldiers you talk about blowing to pieces have families and friends. Killing them doesn't make the population happy. It would only fuel the lies the government spreads about you. Remember that, we are not trying to drive anyone away. In an invasion, that would be the case. But in this scenario, the best solution would be the government's armed forces themselves revolting and overthrowing such an evil dictatorship to restore democracy, peace and love to the world. That is, if the army doesn't start another dictatorship:p. This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

Barnacles May 17th, 2008, 07:18 PM Likewise, you'd be lucky to see an unbuttoned tank in Iraq. Why would you let the flies, smoke and sand inside with the heat, when you have perfectly nice filtered (to NBC levels) air-con, as well as a scope that can see 10 times better than your eyes can? Even if there were no bad guys, you'd be daft to sit up top and get bitten by a malarial mosquito.

While this may seem logical , it is hardly what you see there. I have about 500 Iraqi insurgent videos of sniper's IED, car bombs attacks and the like. You would be surprised at how many videos I see of US army guys sticking out of the top of the tank like they got nothing to fear, while in the middle of Iraqi streets. I probably have 10-20 videos of guys getting there heads shot while the top half of their body is out of the hatch, seemingly just relaxing in the open air.. It seems that while they are parked they prefer to be outside and look. While the optics are very good they are rather limited in the width that they see. No monitor can reproduce the peripheral view of your owns eyes in the open...

I have another video of an insurgent sneeking underneath a bradley 3x to put arty shells underneath it. The guy actually had the gall to go back 2 more times to put a total of 3 shells under it, which was then detonated after he left. It was a very balsy operation, looked like it was right beside a small base , and there appeared to be US snipers all around. Just one sneaky mofo.

I collect IED videos and the like...

Edit I guess a bomb like this would do it... while it may seem like an impossible task around 200 abrams have been taken out in Iraq so far...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=swnO1a38ryo

Jacks Complete May 18th, 2008, 07:06 AM Another point (or question) to think about. How many of the Libertanian soldiers/LEO would continue to "just do their job" and how many would go Awol before attacking their family and friends?

Just to jump back a bit in the thread, I just re-read this, and it occurred to me no-one has mentioned Tiananmen Square in China. When the tanks first rolled in, the tanks stopped when the protesters stood up to them. The commander on point wasn't prepared to just squash the man stood in front of him.

When they rolled in again, a few days later, the Chinese government sent a bunch of troops from a thousand miles away, who didn't even speak the same language dialect. They simply rolled over them.

Having the first bunch of tank commanders on side didn't do a fat lot of good.

During the UK Miner's Strike (which pretty much crippled the country) the local police forces wouldn't do a fat lot against the local miners. However, they soon worked out that by shipping in bus loads of police from hundreds of miles away, they could get them to happily beat the shit out of the miners, even if they were just standing and singing songs.

It's a bit like having UN troops from Nigeria "keeping peace" - they won't hesitate to shoo or shoot the white English speakers, because they aren't what they can relate to. They would probably shoot the black English speakers, too, because of the funny accent. Mind you, you read about how they treat those from their own countries, and it really doesn't fill me with hope for mankind...

And who can forget that the First World armies have spent billions ensuring that the soldiers they pay will carry out whatever orders they are given, on whoever they are given about. And the police? Well, they love to kick in the locals heads sometimes, just for fun on a cold night.

Any argument is going to be hard.

Barnacles, yes, some of those videos are amazingly brave. But for every one that gets there, there are probably 5 that don't get recorded, and another 5 where the guy gets machinegunned. It was interesting to see the fake ones that have been put on YouTube from video games, though. Give it ten years and it won't be possible to tell the difference, I reckon, between the real and the fake videos.

I just watched one where a Bradley drives across a main road, and hits a car, then backs up and buggers off, and the two humvees follow on too. And the Americans wonder why they aren't winning hearts and minds over there?

London_Dungeon May 18th, 2008, 10:17 PM The US are routinely strapping claymore mines around their tanks to frag anyone running in with a handheld weapon.

If you wouldn't mind, could you please source that? It seems like a spectacular waste of money compared to tanks which have ports on the side which could be slid open for firing a pistol/shortened rifle.

I know this is Uncle Sugar we're talking about, but the Military prefers using bullets over explosives whenever reasonably possible. Missles sure are nice for taking out LAVs, but it's even nicer to use bullets and keep the change. "Sometimes the old methods work best."

Not that what you're saying would completely floor me if it's true... ;)

file May 19th, 2008, 12:55 AM As said before, it's a good idea to avoid attacking the front lines. Instead, since there is no "front", in such a scenario, it is a very good idea to attack the logistics. This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

A modern army marches on diesel and gasoline. It marches on food. It relies on advanced commo.

Tanks that have no fuel don't move. Aircraft can't attack if they never get the orders. Soldiers are not likely to be as alert if they're hungry and cold as if they're well fed.

One would target commo first. Keep them from organizing. Taking out the communications of a modern army leaves it "blind, deaf and dumb". In any given area of operations, there should be jamming of all radio frequencies. This gives you an edge.

Another aspect of that is that there is a large power draw in any organized area. Cut power and you make it hard for them to do anything.

From there it depends on the theater of operations, because tactics are very dependent on the environment.

Hitech_Hillbilly May 19th, 2008, 02:35 PM File, your strategy is concise and to the point. Not disagreeing, but requesting more info. The Libertainian military is one of the most technologically advanced in the world. Can you go into specifics on how you would take out the communications? How about the fuel? Same with the food?

Also, how would you do this without prejudicing the general population against your cause? Would you only take out military supplies, or supplies in general? Same with communications (since during Grenada, the US had a SEAL unit that used the civilian phone lines to call in an air strike).

Like I said, not disagreeing, just requesting insight into your thoughts on the specifics (and why you choose those specifics).

Jacks, very good points. I do believe you hit the nail on the head there. With control of information, they will be able to hide the fact that while soldiers from one area are beating the crap out of civilians in another area, soldiers from elsewhere are likewise stomping the shit out of their relatives back home. And it could be that with the increase and consolidation of the national, regional, and local police forces, it may be the non-military forces to be the initial spearhead of any crackdown.

file May 20th, 2008, 07:28 AM Hitech, I don't know the exact details of what would be employed where, because that is very dependent on what they are using.

Simple brute force and getting a very high wattage transmitter(that can transmit on .mil freuencies) and blasting white noise on all bands would work in some scenarios(like creating a localized blackout on communications in a given area while getting your boys out of there). It would have to hit all the bands though, even those of sat phones and cell phones.

If I may make a reference to a video game(not reality, I know), such a thing would be like the "Gap Generator" from RA2. A localized area that would hamper the manner in which units coordinate. A tank wouldn't be able to talk to it's infantry escort without unbuttoning(whereupon the TC can be shot). Troops wouldn't be able to organize well.

But such a method would be very limited in it's effectiveness and they can overpower you if they have a big enough transmitter. It also pinpoints where you've been pretty well(because you're sending a signal). As such, it'd be best suited to exfil or assaults on supply depots.

There are high tension power lines all over Libertania. While targeting them wouldn't do much to a military target, it would aid in "blacking out" an area even further. Cutting cable and phone would do it even further.

Like you said, the Libertanian military are highly advanced. That is their weak point. They are not going to be able to coordinate well without radio and without power, phone and cable lines they are completely in the dark and alone.

Not only that, but if you knew the codes you could transmit false data and misdirect the enemy. You create a fake threat and they waste resources and weaken their position some. Get enough of their troops out and you can capture a small base with minimal casualties and then make use of it as needed.You could also use such a plan to maximize their casualties by leading them into ambushes.

There is also possibility of using their networks and media ability to hijack a channel and broadcast footage of "enemy" forces(really your own, but dressed as the enemy and using enemy weapons and such) attacking civilians.

As far as dealing with civilian populations, it is to be assumed that they are hostile(at least in the beginning). It is important that they find no enemies in the cause, but rather never even know we were in the area until you have left. If you must get civilian supplies, you buy them fair and legal(although under assumed identities). Most of the supplies must come from the military or from legal purchase, if not all of them. That way the civilians don't directly feel that we are harming them, but rather that the military is.

At all times the forces of revolution should strive to make themselves appear to the people as good and that the enemy is evil. Guerrilla war is PR war. You have to get the populace to think you are the "good guys". That means no looting, killing, stealing etc. unless disguised as enemy.

So far I've only talked about commo. That's because that's the first issue to overcome. With that under control, you can accomplish other things.

Fuel comes in big, obvious trucks. So do supplies. The best bet would be to simply make sure that it never gets there. Truckers must take rest stops. A trucker who takes a bullet in the brain pan can be replaced by one of our own. He then drives the truck further long the line to a designated point, where the fuel/supplies are emptied from the truck and used for our own purposes. The truck is then discarded. It's simple, allows for lots of flexibility and leaves little that can be linked to any side.

Overall, what is important is that the plans stay fluid. Not all situations allow for complete blackouts, truck hijacking or other methods. Instead any individual situation must be looked at for it's unique solution. This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

Hirudinea May 21st, 2008, 07:42 PM Simple brute force and getting a very high wattage transmitter(that can transmit on .mil freuencies) and blasting white noise on all bands would work in some scenarios(like creating a localized blackout on communications in a given area while getting your boys out of there). It would have to hit all the bands though, even those of sat phones and cell phones.

If I may make a reference to a video game(not reality, I know), such a thing would be like the "Gap Generator" from RA2. A localized area that would hamper the manner in which units coordinate.

Sounds like your talking about a Spark Gap transmitter, they were the first type of transmitters used in radio, but they have been pretty much outlawed because they blanket the entire spectrum with radio noise. There are instructions on making a spark gap transmitter on the net (google it), and one could play hell with communications.

file May 21st, 2008, 07:51 PM That's exactly what I was talking about. Hit all of the radio spectrum and hit it hard. Won't work for long range, mind you, but it is enough to blanket an area. Cut cable and telephone wires as well and you have blackout.

neetje May 27th, 2008, 07:39 AM So we have a solution for communications breakdown. That still leaves you with several problems:

- Soldiers don't want to die. They will fight anything that threatens them when they are cut off from the rest of the world. You have to be sure you can overpower them or you're only making a trap for yourself, because you will be blind too . - Using those transmitters to black out radio wil make you vulnerable for airstrikes, because your emitter can easily be picked up. The moment the commander finds out he's missing part of his army and there is a blackout in any given part he will launch artillery/airstrikes or whatever will be possible to save his troops.

I'm not much of a military strategist, but using these kind of weapons cannot be to your advantage. If you fight a bigger, better army you must pick the fights you can win. These weapons help by blinding anybody within range, but everybody beyond that range will have a very clear target to bomb...

My only advice here is, use these Gap generators only if you know you have the upperhand, the enemy commanders have a bigger fight elsewhere and you know it won't take long to overpower your target so there is no time to call in an airstrike.

file May 27th, 2008, 10:30 AM 1. Soldiers don't want to die: Why are you shooting at soldiers anyway? You should avoid fighting front line troops as much as possible anyway. You want to be targeting things like transport trucks, airfields(black out communications and those planes won't get wind of your coming to blow them up while they're on the ground) and other behind the lines areas. You aren't targeting masses of troops, you are targeting areas which are not very heavily guarded.

2. Without special equipment, you won't be able to pinpoint where that emitter is. You'll just know that you're in an area of "darkness". Finding a powerful spark gap emitter in a large area(say a few city blocks) without special equipment is finding a needle in a haystack. That alone gives you time.

In short, the idea is not to have a permanent blackout, but rather a temporary cloak of invisibility that lets you accomplish your objective and keep other bases/units from knowing until it's too late.

Also, after further looking it appears that a spark gap only works with the AM bands, which are mostly obsolete. Most of the radio wave transmissions are FM. However FM can be jammed with an unmodulated carrier wave due to the capture effect.

barrettm203 June 8th, 2008, 11:24 PM I preface this post as an American SPECWAR technician responding to what may be inevitable in our nation. I respect all other members in other nations and suggest some of this may apply in those nations as well.

Insurrection is a limited response to a much more complex issue as a government takeover or oppression. I believe that complacency an d igno rance on the part o f the populace is more dange rous than the govern ments a ctions. C ase in point LOOK AT T HE THREE MONKEYS WE HAVE AS PRESIDENTIAL CANIDATES TODAY! So political involveme nt is important to a void this instrumentalist failure of self-governance and FREEDOM. Having said this however, we move to the next phase.

When all else fails we need to look at the takeover of a state via infiltration of the political process and a political victories. Montana and Texas are excellent candidates for this action as they have the right of succession. All states are to be autonomous but these two state s have not lost site o f this. Disclaimer I am in Arizona A succession wou ld allow a build up of recognized militia. More importantly it identifies the enemy more easily as well as establishing a centralizing point for those of like mind patriots. Military victories are accomplished by the decima tion of the ene my civilians are no exception. Guerrilla warfare would break out on there own but without any structure or coordination will be futile in the US. Unless we have a nationwide launch guerrilla cells would easily vanquished.

There is much more detail I would like to share however; I would like to here some feedback on the preceding as well as if there is a desire to here more on this strategy.

Rbick June 10th, 2008, 11:47 AM You bring up some good points. Guerrilla cells would probably get squashed quickly and easily. People tend to forget that if there is a revolution, they could be dealing with people such as the SEALs, Combat Applications Group (Delta Force), Rangers, ect. As an ex Army Ranger, I can say that you would not want to fuck with that. Spec Ops soldiers fully equipped would monkey stomp a bunch of civilians with some shotguns and rifles. People can argue with me as much as they want, but when you watch Delta actually operate, you'll know what I mean.

Of course this is not to say that parts of the military would not also join in on the revolution. Anyway, after this whole ordeal in the mid east has calmed down, I think it will be time where we will need to start concentrating on the nations interior, as it isn't looking to well. If it results in revolution is dependent on a great number of variables, too many to count really. We'll see... This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

file June 10th, 2008, 08:03 PM I agree with Rbick on the issue of Spec Ops. Now, regardless of if any are on our side, they are a serious threat. Spec Ops units excel in squashing guerrilla forces, because they have the advantages of both guerrilla and conventional forces. And by serious threat, I mean deadly serious.

However, by trying to tackle variables one at a time things like Spec Ops units can be dealt with. One way of dealing with them(and the best way) is to avoid them. Stay very mobile. Another thing is to shorten or eliminate our supply line. If our (hypothetical) forces have a non-existent supply line it will hamper enemy guerrillas actions against us. Cutting/jamming commo keeps them from getting further backup. No radio means no AC-130 Spooky and it's deadly fire. Faked communications could mean said AC-130 laying fire right on their own men.

The idea is to reduce the number of variables as best as possible so that our (hypothetical) side has less of a chance of encountering Delta, Rangers, Seals, etc. and stands as good a chance against them as possible.

Something else to consider(thank you, barrettM203 for bringing this up) is that getting men on the inside of their system is a very important thing. A friendly Mayor would create a "safe haven" and a possible source of supplies. A friendly person of even higher political standing would be even better. At higher positions, it would be less of a "safe haven" and more of a monkey wrench in their operations. Hindering things to any extent. A friendly supply officer or two in the armed forces could get supplies. A friendly person involved in communications could give intel to us, false directions to the enemy or inhibit enemy commo.

In short, inside men are important.

Jome skanish June 11th, 2008, 07:03 PM One important factor that cannot be mentioned to much: Money.

What is the difference between a modern army and a guerilla force? Equipment, communication and supplies. Keeping a fully equipped soldier in the field is expensive as hell. Kill him, and the cost is reduced. Maim him, and the cost is increased. Always think "costs". That is the main advantage in an assymetric struggle, the ability to cause your enemy losses that costs hundreds or thousands of times the money the attack cost for you.

What is needed to operate a successfull guerilla force?

1. External support. The LTTE are supported by exile tamils, FARC is supported by drug-cartels, UNITA was sponsored by south Africa.

Mention one sucessfull guerilla force that is not supported by an external power! Exiled citizens, refugees from the regime and other nations wishing to mess things up is a necessary lifeline, providing supplies and weapons. So, contact 'Mericans in exile. Infiltrate and corrupt the system, divering money and resources to the struggle. Take over the criminal underworld...

One example of a "failed cause" is Swedish nazi morons turning to rob banks to fund their struggle since no one supports them. At least here, the average bank hit provides less money than the same group of people cound earn in honest work. Imagine then dishonest work...

2. Pick your fights. Bleeding the most expensive units (Spec. ops) of the regime military by an endless stream of traps and IEDs is doable, fighting them in the open is suicide. Hit infrastructure to stop industry and trade, these things mean money, and money is what buys the gear that makes the other guy almost invincible. The only way to win is to gradually make sure that one day they can no longer afford eyes in the sky nor juice in their cars.

Always remember: "There are no human achievements that cannot be brought back to stone age by ancient, blunt violence" - Herman Hedning.

file June 11th, 2008, 10:46 PM "2. Pick your fights. Bleeding the most expensive units (Spec. ops) of the regime military by an endless stream of traps and IEDs is doable, fighting them in the open is suicide. Hit infrastructure to stop industry and trade, these things mean money, and money is what buys the gear that makes the other guy almost invincible. The only way to win is to gradually make sure that one day they can no longer afford eyes in the sky nor juice in their cars. "

Bleed them. You must also cut them and can profit off of their own disaster. Hijacking a fuel truck(and stealing it's fuel, then blowing it) could ground enemy aircraft or halt enemy tanks, at least for a little while. Not only does it hurt them and buy you time, it gives you resources. Bleeding them, not only financially but in raw resources is the way to go.

Alexires June 12th, 2008, 02:15 AM Following on from what Jome and file said. One would need a way to force cooperation from the insider. Sure some might help out of genuine sympathy, but I would rather have an enemy working for me because I will kill his family, than a friend that is doing it out of the goodness of their heart.

48 LoP comes into play here.

-=HeX=- June 12th, 2008, 06:00 PM Chemical weapons. I believe that chemical weapons have a huge potential place in an uprising. This is for the following three reasons:

They are silent killers. A few DCM/HCN/phosgene (mixed together, DCM knocks you out, HCN kills you, phosgene irritates, see the mcx triple threat thread started by nbk) gas grenades thrown into a camp or base of sleeping troops would lead to high amounts of dead troops, wounded troops (poisoned but not dead yet) and the possible contamination caused would pretty much wipe out an enemy camp. This if done a few times, at night, could silently kill many enemy.

The second reason is how it would affect surviving troops. After a large amount of enemy troops are eliminated or wounded This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter (blister agents, also fills up their hospitals, puts more strain on them to protect their wounded) in gas or poison attacks, the enemy will be forced to wear Full NBC kit. NBC kit has a well known effect of slowing down a soldiers movement and reactions. I doubt even the navy seals or delta force could fight as well when slowed down. And a slow soldier is a sitting duck. For the troops not wearing kit, even a kewl chlorine gas bomb would lead to panic and chaos.

The third reason is to enhance existing combat systems. Imagine how the troops would feel if they realized that the shrapnel from that improvised explosive device was coated in ricin or something worse? If the shotgun shells and buckshot were filled with cyanide? Imagine if even the lightly wounded troops began to fall over dead. Their morale and willingness to fight would plummet and their combat efficiency would suffer as a result. They would wear bigger protection slowing them down even more. This big armor means less ammo can be carried and their efficiency and lethality falls further...

There are more applications for chemical weapons, and biological weapons would be invaluable. Nbk'S thread on long term area denial using a battery powered air freshener comes to mind. Troops would capture a building only for it to fill with HCN.

The gap generator could be used in large quantities to wipe out entire sectors of communications. Now if they try to bomb a gap generator they would end up killing their own men. You could place the gap generator near enemy bases To cut them off then the area commander bombs his own men. As a result morale would plummet further. Men would defect.

When you ambush an enemy supply line you are probably attacking a lightly protected thing. A thing that moves quite slowly. Now I have noticed that armies need something called oil. Oil just happens to be expensive, in demand, and flammable. So when you burn it, you cost them money, destroy a resource they need, and piss them off. The fire also will do other damage too.

Therefore you blow up the oil tankers or steal them. What you cant steal you blow up or otherwise destroy. You could kill the crew, rig it with explosives, pretend to be a crewmember and call for help. When help comes, boom.

Now you have attacked the supply lines so the enemy sends troops from the front lines to protect them. This means there are less guys now available to kill you on the front lines. So you use remote control claymores and telesnipers to pick off the guards and vehicles on supply lines, and explosively fired projectiles to penetrate the oil tankers, and incendiary rounds fired from remove control mortars to ignite the oil. You continue your bombardment for a while and leg it.

As for blowing up bridges, you should do as my great grandmother did in the war of independance here. She waited. She waited until the enemy soldiers were on the bridge, then blew it sky high. Not only did she stop the enemy from crossing and advancing, she scored bonus points by killing them too. Now try that on a big bridge with tons of army tanks and trucks crossing. Boom. They go for a swim, they cant advance on you, and some will die.

Improvised 'Fire ant' devices As well as our own improvised 'Eyes in the sky' armed with explosives can help remotely blow up expensive stuff from far away. You cant kill a jet in the sky but it cant get up there with a hole in its wing That the fire ant EFP made :D

I also hear that jet fuel, avgas, should not be set on fire. Well, what would happen if someone were to accidentally throw a thermite grenade at a tank of avgas? Think destructive thoughts.

file June 13th, 2008, 02:55 PM Don't forget that you can roll into a base to the rear that has been decimated by chemical weapons, mop it up and then take their weaponry. Maybe you find a "little bird" or a HMMWV. Maybe you hit a refit center for tanks(the places in the US where they patch up tanks that were blown all to hell). Jackpot! You don't just want to steal their disposable things(fuel, oil, etc.), you want to loot their vehicles, aircraft and equipment too.

There was a lot more to this post, but it disappeared. Most of it was just elaborating on Hex's ideas for chemical weapons, especially focused on Mustard agents. Not really adding much.

Mr Science July 17th, 2008, 05:21 PM This hasn't been mentioned yet, but I think one of the most important things that can be done now is the distribution of information (essentially everything in Roguesci and our FTP). I am sure most of us have this information stored away, but asides from the members here, how many other people outside of Rogue Science would like this information, not to mention the countless other people who will need this information after the shit finally hits the fan?

Asides from myself, I only know of a few other people who put our files and information up on torrents. But it only takes a few people doing to make a massive difference. Currently, nearly everyone is able to use P2P services without much of a (legal) risk. Now is the time to take full advantage of this, before it inevitably becomes too late.

Setharier July 21st, 2008, 09:02 AM One must remember internet and global networks. They aren't stright controlled by any state and can be networked by quite simple and undetectable antenna stuff and link around to underground network. That network is as well accessable to all the "normal" people who wants to do something even for a little to have access to the internet. Propaganda messaging can be easily and nearly globally done.

Heavy antennas can also be set on the border nation. There was such an event during the cold war when Soviets had control over Estonia; Finlandians had purposely but not officially set their antenna transmitters so strong estonians could easily watch their transmissions about real free western goodness.

As well all the data transferring concerning about advanced army. In theory, they could set up huge amount of small household antennas spreading "trash signal" at all frequencies to deny the messaging.

Future civil war and war as a common concept could very likely be significantly a proxy war. The Big Brother doesn't have at all so big control over all the people because of the web. Telecommunication satellites can be readed with nearly any antenna device and many commercial satellite, globally. Armies do work and will work via electronic network at electromagnetic frequencies.

Conventional man vs man or unit vs unit - battles are history. Future war WILL BE more and more unfair and most probably therefore very boring. Civilization 1 and 2 are in underground bunkers and launch missiles and KE weapons to the others and shoot them down as best as they can, just waiting when one of heads will penetrate the defence systems.. This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter As said, everybody must now copy-paste all articles related to "denied" stuff like explosives, chemicals and other stuff and synthesis and put them between a book which has some pages cut off to fit USB card between it well. When Big Brother decides to cut down all stuff like this, you will be prepared for it. Then, just copy and spread the instructions all around, but be careful! Printers have tracking codes visible in UV light printed in them, and BB could technically track you down by date and time, product number from factory and therefore in which product series it belongs and where this series has delivered and which time sold by bonus card registers of minimall and what do you look like by cameras walking with box of printer, and so on..

London_Dungeon July 23rd, 2008, 10:40 PM This hasn't been mentioned yet, but I think one of the most important things that can be done now is the distribution of information (essentially everything in Roguesci and our FTP).

A few months ago I was thinking the exact same thing.

My plan is to burn every book and article worth reading which is relevent to warfare, revolution, and pretty much anything else "They" don't want you to know onto CDs, and leave them on buses, in parks.. pretty much any place a random person can pick it up. Sew the seeds of revolution. Perfectly subversive and perfectly legal.

I live five minutes away (walking) from a high school with outdoor lockers, so filling them up with my little presents should be fun at least.

Alexires July 24th, 2008, 12:21 AM I live five minutes away (walking) from a high school with outdoor lockers, so filling them up with my little presents should be fun at least.

I'd love to see some peoples reactions to that. Funny as hell. It would be interesting to include an email address (that cannot be linked to you in anyway) for further information. Then again, that is VERY dangerous, and I wouldn't do it myself.

London_Dungeon July 24th, 2008, 12:57 PM If anything interesting happens of it, I'll let you know. With the city I live in I and the school I'm targeting I wouldn't be surprised if it made the news. They actually had a kid arrested once for talking about Columbine.

Fun fun fun!

Hirudinea July 25th, 2008, 06:59 PM I'd love to see some peoples reactions to that. Funny as hell. It would be interesting to include an email address (that cannot be linked to you in anyway) for further information. Then again, that is VERY dangerous, and I wouldn't do it myself.

Just use the classical techniques, put your pamphlets in library books and free newspapers. Oh and print all your stuff yourself, home printing is so easy there's no reason to use commerical printers.

Alexires July 27th, 2008, 02:31 AM Hirudinea - I more meant that including an email address could be dangerous. I think leaving "subversive" material is amusing at the very least and I certainly await the results eagerly.

Hirudinea July 27th, 2008, 07:44 PM Hirudinea - I more meant that including an email address could be dangerous.

Oh I agree, never leave anything that can be traced back to you, hell I'ed even wear gloves when handling the leaflets.

I think leaving "subversive" material is amusing at the very least and I certainly await the results eagerly.

Well its worked since the invention of the printing press.

Hitech_Hillbilly July 28th, 2008, 02:58 PM print all your stuff yourself, home printing is so easy there's no reason to use commerical printers.

You want to be very careful there. All modern printers supposedly print a microscopic identifier on each page. This supposedly can be traced back to the original purchaser.

Hirudinea July 28th, 2008, 07:52 PM You want to be very careful there. All modern printers supposedly print a microscopic identifier on each page. This supposedly can be traced back to the original purchaser.

True, but if your going to be printing "subversive" information you should take the precaution of using either an older printer, made before identifer technology, or buy a used printer from the goodwill, so they can't trace the printer back to you. (Hell if your really paranoid buy a used printer at goodwill, with cash, use it once and junk it.)

festergrump July 28th, 2008, 08:35 PM (Hell if your really paranoid buy a used printer at goodwill, with cash, use it once and junk it.)

I think that'd be the way to go since they really only can nab you for printing the subversive material if they find you own (or had recent access to) the printer. Mailing in your warranty card or registering your printer online when you buy it probably does not identify the papers printed from your device. But if they don't now, they probably will in the future. This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

Goodwill has a store not far from me has some unbelievable stuff for ultra cheap. I once bought a brand spanking new sleeper sofa there for $2 when I was first married. :cool: Tons of obsolete computer stuff there on the cheap, too.

I'd also like to be a fly on the wall when they see what's in their lockers. :)

Better, I'd like to see the shock turn to frowns on the faces of the high school's administrators when they see that "their kids" (subjects :rolleyes:) now have "terroristic" information at their disposal. :eek:

The horror... the horror... the horror... [/ Apocalypse Now / Brando voice]

Bugger July 28th, 2008, 09:01 PM I buy all my printers - including even some very recent-model ones which originally cost thousands of $s - at local auctions.

-=HeX=- July 29th, 2008, 01:10 PM Here is some thaughts on the combat aspect I had during my holidays in france.

I have been reading the archives that I saved on my phone while on holidays in france, and I prepared some posts while I was there. Nows time to post them. I hope they are typo free, seeing as my phones text editor is bollocks.

Anyways, I read a interesting thread about 'Scabbling' in the demolition section. This method of using high explosives fascinated me, and my evil mind quickly came up with how the rebels could use it during the SHTF scenario.

The ideas outlined included painting a road with the explosive stuff. That is a brilliant idea. They cant see it, the mine detectors Cant detect it (Plastic cased detonator) and its in intimate contact with soldiers feet. When the explosive goes off, the ground becomes shrapnel. This shrapnel tends to injure people. The soldiers legs will be right beside the explosive, which will be flinging shrapnel at them, and turning their leg bones into shrapnel to kill other soldiers.

In MOUT Combat, the Scabbling explosive can be painted onto windows, and when troops pass, the window glass becomes shrapnel. Rooms can be painted with the explosive. And a PIR Detector is the initiator. It becomes a horrible booby trap. The room bomb.

The Scabbling can be painted on supply routes to flatten tires on supply vehicles... The supply lines will be 'Ground to a halt'. Just think of all the places where explosive paint could easily be applied in traps...

Also, the other thing still on my mind is chemical warfare. Explosively dispersed MCX in shells fired from remote controlled mortar batteries that are already sighted into their targets. Once the enemy is seen in the target area, the mortars fire, firing half of their ammo. When help comes, the rest fire. Then later on someone reloads the mortars and the process starts again.

Eye in the sky devices armed with chemical weapon payloads or explosively fired projectiles could be used to destroy valuable targets from afar. I probably said that before though in a earlier post.

Scabbling could be secretly placed on runways, and set off when jets and taking off. That would probably FUBAR the jet. It would at least FUBAR the wheels (then the jet would crash and burn on take off or landing). Scabbling could be painted on the enemy tankers when they are empty. When filled, the Scabbling paint would be set off, blowing up the fuel. Maybe even igniting it. That could also destroy expensive filling equipment.

Hit the fuckers in the pockets, and hit them hard. Once they go broke, they cant pay soldiers to kill you. Every time you damage something, you cost them money. A injured soldier can cost far more than a dead one, because medical care is expensive too. The main annoyance to you will be tanks and air attacks. The tanks can be killed with massive, heavy, ANFO charges on roadsides. Planes and helos should be killed on the ground before they can kill you. A jet aint worth jack shit if it cant fly.

Rear echelon motherfuckers are also valuable. Annihilate them wholesale. Gas and mortars. They die, Nobody can fly. Simple as that. REMF's, Fuel, food, supplies like ammo and ordinance, and morale are needed by the enemy to fight efficiently. If they dont have REMF's, their planes cant fly. If they dont have fuel, that tank is a hunk of steel. A gun is just a club without bullets. A man you fight well on a empty stomach. A man wont fight well if he is scared shitless with low general morale. Remove those and the enemy cant fight very well at all.

Learn from history too. In the irish war of independance, the irish were getting amazingly low fatalities amongst their ranks, and were killing Plenty of british troops, and generally were taking very few losses. Then devalera came back and ordered michael collins to fight fair and capture the customs house. In one day we lost 70 or so men, more than we would lose in a week. We also lost loads of ammo and guns, all to no gain. Stick to guerilla warfare, only 'Capturing' targets when there is no enemy for like 20 miles around it. Even so, capturing a target just paints a big bullseye on it for enemy artillery and bombing! That however can be exploited... Pretend to be somewhere, and let them waste ammo and time bombing it into dust!

Another thing that caught my eye is some of the slightly older threads in improvised weapons and battlefield chemistry nbk started. Now I really dont want to round like I am sucking up to the man but some of those ideas are brilliant. I would use the BB machine gun thing to non lethally prevent lightly armored troops entering rooms, or just to antagonise them a bit more. His spigot grenade/ mine would be good for area denial. Trinades would be excellent in MOUT Combat. The polymeric foam could be used both as a persisting thing for nerve agents, or to contain an acetylene/ oxygen mix as a foam explosive. These new tactics and arms Force the enemy to drastically change their tactics. They could even be used as traps. Big pile of foam in a bath. Soldier storms into bathroom, bathroom goes boom. Foamy suds and bubbles seem so household and innocent that soldiers will have a awful time trying to discern between someones washing and a bomb or nerve gas.

The infrastructure of built up areas can also be used against the opposing forces. Fire hydrants can be used to flood buildings and streets. Gas lines can be diverted to fill streets and buildings with flammable gas, and because the enemy will be wearing NBC gear they wont Smell it. Then one spark... And kaboom. They will be in NBC gear because you earlier used chemical weapons against them... Remember?

Sewers can both be used as an escape route (See Nbks .pdf) or they can be filled with flammable gas or explosives to take out whole streets. Manholes can have a drum of ANFO under them to attack tanks that may drive over them. The sewer bombs will destabilize the streets if detonated and tanks will fall into the premade tank traps... Trash cans can have claymores or mini-mores placed in them with infra red triplines to be booby traps. Soldiers wont search every Single bin in the city...

The improvised Telesnipers and remote controlled explosively fired penetrators/ projectiles can be used to cause fear. They This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter fire at their attacker but the attacker cant die... Tripline activated machine guns or pipe shotguns placed absolutely everywhere will make them feel surrounded in a city even if your men arent even in a 10 mile radius... Abandoned cars can be filled with ANFO and have a passive infra red detector placed on them so if a soldier or tank approaches them they blow up, causing casualties. This will also demoralize and frighten soldiers, seeing as they Are completely random and unpredictable. They will soon be afraid to take cover behind a car in case it explodes when they get too close!

Smoke bombs even of the potassium nitrate and sugar type cause loads of smoke and make visibility poor. If you were to incorporate them into a booby trap attack on some soldiers they will be even more frightened. Many remote controlled or tripline activated guns firing at them all at once, cars and other cover randomly blowing up, bins blowing up, smoke everywhere, remote controlled mortars pounding the area, a telesniper with a thermal imager decimating the Ranks...

Is the smoke just smoke or is it something worse? Is that shrapnel coated in ricin or cyanide or is it just metal? Why wont the shooters die when I shoot them even in the head? (you place dummies beside the guns to freak out the soldiers a bit more) who is consistantly taking headshots at my friends with unerring accuracy? Will the car I hide behind be a bomb? The squaddies will be fucking terrified. They will probably defect or surrender (To a enemy that is not even human and has no mercy) they will probably shit themselves and panic under the stress and become complete cannon fodder.

When their backup arrives they will find a area full of dead comrades and mangled surroundings with no cover... They are sitting ducks for the claymores hidden in reserve... They may be freaked out enough to remove their gas masks and breath in the MCX or phosgene in the air... (they will be all sweaty and may need to vomit at the sight of the carnage) and you dont lose even one man.

Then, when the enemy gets worried about the backup and sends in a large force, the whole street suddenly explodes, thanks to the huge ANFO charges and rerouted natural gas in the sewers... After that capturing there Is utterly pointless to the enemy because nothing can move or hide in the ruins left behind. In fact, they will probably bomb the place to dust to try to spite you. Well that is just a expensive waste of their aviation fuel, which thanks to your efforts is becoming in short supply :D :D they dont have a unlimited amount of it you know...

The main aim is to cost them so much money and put such a drain on their resources that they cannot sustain the 'War' against you for long enough to do too much damage to you. You can also cost them manpower by terrifying their troops to the point where they Simply cannot fight, and without the cannon fodder they cannot kill you and therefore you can win.

festergrump July 30th, 2008, 02:40 AM Sounds like a great novel, Hex. When will you be writing this? Has it got zombies in it? :) :p

I can't help but to ask that if you were serious about these ideas... and will you be funding this?

"Massive, heavy ANFO charges", "Manholes can have a drum of ANFO", polymeric acetylene/ oxygen foam to blow up the bathroom troopers...

Sounds awesome, dude. If you buy, I'll fly.

How about just getting a couple of good rifles and maybe a pistol or two with no less than 1000 rounds for each, start stockpiling FOOD and clean water, some bleach (for purifying water), a small still for purifying ground or river/lake/pond water, a really decent knife and whet stone, plenty of first aid stuff and medicines from your local feed store (I'm not kidding), growing some vegetables (and maybe some of them left-handed cigarettes for trading?), and making sure you can look out for you and yours?

That's a good start, IMHO. That's what I would start with, anyway.

Fuel might be needed to be stored in bulk. In that case I'd keep a couple of gallons of kerosene to use as a fuel stabilizer in leiu of Stabil, too. Same dif.

Fortifying your home with sandbags may not be a bad idea if you expect to run off armed invaders. I'd keep the supplies on the ready if you expect such a thing.

P.S. Hex, I really like your sig line. I laugh every time I read it! :)

fluoroantimonic August 1st, 2008, 05:35 AM Festergrump, how long are you planning on keeping that bleach? You might be a bit disappointed when you go down with giardia or cholera from drinking water you purified with your old bleach. :P If it where me, I would stockpile TCCA and salt, allowing you to make chlorine, which does a better job and the precoursers keep well. Plus it is good for other things. :)

Fortifying your home with sandbags

If you are expecting anything more than a thug or two, I would think this would cause more problems than it would solve, making you an obvious sitting target. After all, if you have a good defense you must have something good to defend. This would probably be an attraction to any group that thought they could overpower you.

Hex I like your ideas, they look pretty good in theory at least. A major flaw I see in your ideas is the availability of materials. Sure you might be able to make barrels of ANFO now, but in a full on civil war type situation (that is what you're talking about right?) it will become unavailable (or extremely expensive) very quickly. As soon as you use anything against them they will immediately shut down all supplies of it. Say bye-bye to any nitrate, acid, toxin, explosive, etc. Fortunately not everything can be regulated. H2SO4 is still needed for lead acid batteries, so that will at least be available from scavenging them. Think your acetylene and oxygen will still be available in any quantity? No way. This will require the clandestine production of almost anything that you need in large quantities.

Fortunately a few things would be actually easier to get than they are now. Like RDX and DBSP :P. Assuming you can successfully decommission a few supply trucks without blowing them to hell, you should have an ample supply of a few things that are commonly used like diesel, gunpowder, etc. And don't forget that all that gunpowder in those big arty shells will detonate happily with a booster! Sadly the gov't will quickly figure out that you're using these things against them and make provisions to stop it. So eventually you will have to rely on the things they can't regulate. And there aren't too many :(

Also say goodbye to any radio, phone, or internet communication, those will all be shut down or jammed. Any remote detonation device will have to be hard wired, timed, or possible IR initiated. This presents big problems. This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter With powerful satellite technology in hand, you think they're going to let you waltz around painting explosives on things? You'd have to be realll sneaky. And even then, with dogs and/or electronic noses to detect explosive residue, I doubt they would fall for such things very many times. It would still be a hindrance to them though. The point of all that ranting I just spewed was that I think you are underestimating the military's power to cut off your supplies and communication. Of course it all depends on the situation.

All of the above is assuming that your guerrilla movement is deemed enough of a threat to warrant inconveniencing the sheeple with such restrictions.

A few ideas of my own:

When acetylene becomes unavailable, manufacture (or hijack) your own ethylene oxide, mix that with air or better O2 in a polymer foam and detonate it with a little high explosive. It will knock the shit out of personnel and save your high explosives for those big shaped charges. I'm pretty sure it would work just as well or better than acetylene. Fortunately it can be manufactured with relatively little trouble, ethanol and a little sulfuric acid being the only consumed raw materials. It is toxic as hell, but that could be good!

If you had the materials available, I think an very powerful personnel deterrent would be a bursting charge of any decent explosive inside of a canister of SO3 (or oleum). That would seriously fuck up anything nearby, destroying lungs, burning through NBC suits and skin, starting fires, and best of all creating a hugggge cloud of toxic carcinogenic smoke. I think this would be just as effective and terrifying as white phosphorus, and probably easier to make. Not practical in large numbers, just a few well placed ones might have a substantial effect on morale of the enemy. See SMDB for production of SO3.

Use crude launchers that use a hydrocarbon-air mix deflagrated in a chamber to propel things descent distances. Akin to a potato gun. It could launch things like explosives, incendiaries, chemical agents, messages, whatever. But the launchers would be simple and reliable, using virtually any fuel available and being fairly quiet.

Drilling out the back of the bullet in any larger caliber ammunition and filling it with a mixture to make incendiary/tracer rounds that would be effective at igniting flammables and fuel tanks from long distances. Suitable mixtures are listed in many patents.

Stocking up on tetrachloroethylene brake cleaner that can be used to manufacture tetrachlorodinitroethane by sealing it into a steel tube with some NO2 and heating for a while. Very powerful irritant, persistent and solid, would force NBC suits. They say 8 times the power of chloropicrin. And its even quite soluble in chloropicrin! There is also bromobenzyl cyanide, much more powerful and long lasting that even tetrachlorodinitroethane. Also a bit harder to synthesize.

Just my $0.02.

-=HeX=- August 1st, 2008, 08:00 AM Festergrump: its the plotline for half life 3! Lol but in, all seriousness, my tactics are using every weapon we can get in large scale destruction. Its where we lure them in and kill them from very far away. Most of the remote guns are just bullets in a pipe with the primer replaced with a ematch. The ematch goes to a simple sensor firing circuit. ANFO is no problem for me at all because there is 2 tons of ammonium nitrate 500 meters away from me right now. For the oxy acetylene search for the thread made by noltair. For MCX search, its OTC and the DCM can be made into phosgene.

Flouroantimonic: the SO3 could be used as a irritant and as area denial. Is the Propylene oxide that easy to make? I think this lab is going to have a lot of fun soon!

festergrump August 1st, 2008, 09:01 AM Two tons?! I'm envious, Hex... :)

About the sandbag fortification: The idea is to line the outer walls of your house with them on the INSIDE to about waist level (or higher if at all possible). The house appears to be normal from the outside, but is fairly bullet resistant if the thugs decide that what you have got in the way of food and supplies would better serve them instead of you and yours.

I didn't realize that the bleach would go bad so quickly. It's something I see written about all over in just about every survival forum on the net. Oh, well. The reflux still would be handy for water purification anyway, and make a dandy neutral spirit if pressed into service for such. ;)

Intrinsic August 1st, 2008, 12:08 PM I believe chlorine isn't very effective at killing Giardia. Iodine can also be used for water purification, but it has it's disadvantages too.

The most effective method of purifying your water is by simply boiling it.

-=HeX=- August 1st, 2008, 02:16 PM Festergrump: yes, a whole 2 tons. Its a very agricultural area I live in, out in the sticks. Thats where I get my ammonium nitrate for nitrations ;)

I understand your point about just looking out for oneself but personally I would be spending at least half my time disrupting the soldiers of the NWO to help the rebellion. The rest of the time I would be looking out for those who I care about.

For purifying water I find that when camping a solar still makes fairly potable water but to make sure I add potassium Permanganate. that helps keep the nasties down :D

For area denial miniature (or full size) claymores would be just the stuff. Linked with detcord in parallel, with interlocking fields of fire, they would be a formidable defence. If the same Firing circuit was to ignite several calcium sulfate and aluminum castable incendiaries surrounded by candles a few seconds later to mop up... And maybe a few other area denial devices could be placed to keep people off your doorstep.

Bugger August 1st, 2008, 08:14 PM This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter 2 tons of NH4NO3 only 500 meters from you? I am sure the IRA would have liked to get their hands on that, if they were still at war! I hope it is well-secured.

Alexires August 2nd, 2008, 02:58 AM Hex - *cough* Yeah, while a whole bunch of claymores and detcord would be the way to go, it isn't exactly lying around. Making your own wouldn't be that hard, but then again, if you are working alone (which you probably would want to for safety) it might be difficult to get out and start getting all that stuff yourself.

Remember the RTPB KISS principle. NBK's area denial weapon using a normal room deodoriser would probably be a better way to go than to use something that an army trains against (such as claymores).

Things such as Scabbling is a sexy idea. I love it. You might want to even enhance it by placing charges below the level of the road so the initial Scabbling charge shatters the surface, and then when support comes in later, you hit them with that. Problem with Scabbling is that the explosive force is down, so it would crack the concrete but I would imagine there would be very little airborne shrapnel. Small lifter chargers underneath would change that.

Could even combine it with existing infrastructure (water, gas and electricity). A unit is moving along a perfectly normal road one minute, and the next it turns into a hell of shrapnel, fire, choking gasses and electricity.

Also, I would wait for a bit after the SHTF to make sure I had all my shit together (basics out of the way) and then deal with whatever the proverbial shit is. That way, you have the element of surprise and you keep your head down when they would originally be looking for "dissidents".

Fester - Take it even further. Look at NBK's Security Architecture and expand. Sure, have stuff inside as well, but it wouldn't be so hard to mask sandbags on the outside with a nice little garden. Trees as bollards, some nifty metallic foil on the inside of the walls to defeat IR (not to mention keeping your house warm in the winter). Perhaps some power lines (fake ofcourse) that run over the top of your house to prevent those pesky flying pigs (oh the irony).

Cultivate liking for wild berries (blackberries and other thorny varieties) and perhaps some wicked thorny climbing roses on your walls (helps to cover the glass on the top of the walls).

Of course, you don't want your house to look too much like a fortress because the anti-bikie legislators would be down on you faster than you can say "Patriot Act".

For those of you that don't know, with the ongoing "War against Drugs" and "War against Bikies" have lead to legislation being enacted in some states of Australia that allow police to tell you to pull down "fortifications" on your property in case you are an outlaw bikie.

-=HeX=- August 2nd, 2008, 08:20 AM Bugger: the shed only has a measly shite padlock on it which only takes a measly bit of picking to bypass. so its my personal ammonium nitrate stash now! The IRA Did not operate in this area but there are a few ex bomb makers that I know. Mostly these fellas used Semtex and potassium chlorate based explosives.

Alexires: detcord only offer a air blower and aquarium pipe and a explosive to make, so ETN detcord Shouldnt take too long to make. And we can use the claymores that we prepared in advence for just such a eventuality. We DID prepare, didnt we? The air blower chemical weapon thingy is what I suggested earlier for area denial. It should work but for pikeys we need something that goes bang, so survivors will not come back.

James August 11th, 2008, 04:29 PM IANAE but I think some people have been watchiing to many Rambo films and Army recruitment videos while playing video games. I suspect the best way to strike at an oppressive regime would be to eliminate their forces top down. You have esentially three types outlooks I think, the roughly patriots (who would be your friend, fighting for the nation not the government), the career guy (who will follow whoever is in command) and the opressor (who wants to squash all thought). get rid of the opressors and I think the situation will start to rectify itself. The human element is probably the most susceptible to attack if you're inisistant on taking on the military/agents of evil, If parole (in the mideval sense were adhered to it would about as good as wounding the. A previous poster (on page 1 IIRC) suggested using sappers, which would only really work if you had lotsa manpower or some equipment. (stuff)

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Tactics, Training, Defense, and Safety > Pre-SHTF Tactics

Mr Science July 20th, 2008, 06:17 PM I feel this topic deserves its own thread. We have already thoroughly discussed what to do in a SHTF scenario, but what I think what is just as important, if not more, is what could be done before this hypothetical event takes place. Without preparation of any sort, it is fair to say the resistance would be a less formidable enemy.

So this thread will discuss how one could prepare themselves, winning the minds of the masses, or otherwise serve as a catalyst for this event to come.

This was one of my posts from the original SHTF thread I am in the process of moving here:

This hasn't been mentioned yet, but I think one of the most important things that can be done now is the distribution of information (essentially everything in Roguesci and our FTP). I am sure most of us have this information stored away, but asides from the members here, how many other people outside of Rogue Science would like this information, not to mention the countless other people who will need this information after the shit finally hits the fan?

shady mutha July 21st, 2008, 04:20 AM I would say there would be no 'resistance' at all.

You cant win shit unless you have money and a army, if you don't have that your on your own, surviving at best.

Screw the masses, if the shit goes down its gonna me every man for him self.

Like they say 'its not what you know its who you know'.

Mr Science July 22nd, 2008, 02:03 AM I am not saying to necessarily to be a huge influence on the populace, but simply to make the conditions more favorable for the fighters in this hypothetical situation.

Alexires July 22nd, 2008, 02:22 AM Shady - I blatantly disagree with you for reasons fairly obvious. If anyone wants me to elaborate, I will, but such a "lie down and die" argument needs little rebuttal in my opinion.

Mr Science - I think it is important to take a selfish approach at first. Imagine a pebble dropped in a pond. At the beginning, the only thing you should be worrying about is yourself and you IMMEDIATE family (those that live with you). It could be argued by some that you figure fuck them, but then again, what point is there in living if that which you live for isn't around?

Immediate SHTF personal safety (including those you have with you)

Naturally, a person considering pre-SHTF tactics would need to think generally about what SHTF may involve. As I see it (and I think most would agree) the first thing that must be considered is a direct attack on yourself, or your immediate family.

-Secure room -Secure house -Secure yard

Thus, first of all, I would like to direct attention to NBK's Security Architecture PDF that may be found in /upload/festergrump on the FTP. I think this is a very important document dealing with how one would go about protecting oneself and family against a SHTF scenario.

Also see the thread of IR reflectors enhancing IR dependent night vision, and also there is a thread/post/pdf about a kind of personal safe that sits under your bed that is easy to just roll of the bed, into where weapons/ammo and fire holes are prepared.

By combining these and applying to yourself and your family, the personal danger when the SHTF is reduced right off.

Hence, a pre-SHTF tactic would be to start to augment your room/house/yard to make it more "SHTF friendly"

Next off is the worry about whether you leave town or stay.

Leave/Stay.

If the SHTF scenario requires you to leave town for whatever reason, you need to have either a mobile shelter or a safe house prepared.

The pre-SHTF tactic here is to procure mobile shelter, learn how to use it effectively or to buy a safe house/piece of land that cultivate it so that if you have to move on short notice, you can survive for a while

If Leave then

Shelter/Water/Food

If you don't need/want to leave town (a rare scenario), then basic life essentials come next. You need to secure a supply of water/food for yourself and those you choose to keep with you. Thus, the next step is perhaps weapons and armour, as well as transport.

With the growing fuel crisis, you might want to think of procuring extra fuel for your vehicle. I would suggest a vehicle fitted to run on LPG as well as petrol and to have a long range petrol tank as well as a few LPG tanks on board. LPG will not go "off" like petrol will if it is left for a while, and while offering less range, means you are ready to go immediately.

If Stay then

Water/Food

etc.

The list goes on and on really. I would suggest that the best thing that can be done is to try and guess what the SHTF scenario will be. By keeping an eye on various news services (both national and international), one will have an idea about what the SHTF scenario is, and hence how to react. The only SHTF scenario that you will not be able to predict is something that happens within the space of a day. Hence, JBT's at your door, nuclear attack, etc. This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

Thus, for these ones, an escape route as well as the security box talked about above.

Cultivating friends of power. As Shady said, it isn't what you know, it's who you know. If you cultivate friends in high places, then you might get a whiff of what is to come that they don't want to media to know about. Thus, knowing politicians (most easy to get access to) and others in power (business moguls, oil barons, real estate jugglers, etc).

Obviously, that isn't exactly a walk in the park, but every little bit helps. Even if you know that a few politicians have suddenly up and left country for no reason might be enough of a hint.

Some things to think about might be:

While camouflage might look cool in your opinion, it stands out like dogs balls when not being used. You might be prepared, have your bug out bag all ready, but you are going to look like a mighty idiot walking down the middle of street in the city because you have decided to leave before everyone else and you have a cam pack.

Get something dark coloured, get rid of the reflectors they insist on putting on it, and as well as having it all ready to go, perhaps have a set of clothes ready to go as well. Look the part of a back packer, and no one will look at your twice, where as you will probably be picked up for questioning if you are wearing cams and looking ready to kick ass.

Hunting rifles, and assault rifles may look manly, but they aren't exactly the most concealable of weapons. Invest in a handgun as well as a set of bow and arrows. While you won't fight off the army with your bow and arrows, you will know how to use one if you ever have to make on in the bush, and they are legal to carry around (here anyway).

A lot of your pre-SHTF tactics will be plainly obvious when you get out of the mindset of a sheeple. When you expect the SHTF any day then that is the most important preparation tactic I can think of.

If you want to get people of like mind together, talk stuff over, perhaps do some training, don't label it a "SHTF seminar" or start talking like a survivalist, even if we all are one. Personally, I prefer the guise of a Zombie Outbreak. While sounding insane, it sounds TOO insane, and therein lies its beauty. You get together people that are generally more intelligent than your average person, have an imagination, are at least thinking about survival. As one person has said, if you can survive a zombocalypse, you can survive anything.

There are various groups out there, such as the Zombie Squad that are actually a survivalist group under the guise of zombie hunters.

It may help for you to write a kind of flowchart like the one I have above, taking into account any scenario that could be labelled SHTF. Zombies, JBT, aliens, take it all into account. As well as being entertaining, it also gets you to think outside the square and you might catch stuff that you would miss if you were just thinking about global economic collapse.

Edit: As with most long posts, the conversation proceeds as you write it.

Some of the books that NBK gets into may be of use to know before the SHTF. Getting hold of things such as "The Spider and the Starfish", "48 Law's of Power", NBK's own "RTPB" as well as "Propaganda and the Art of the Spin" may be an idea. Looking at past conflicts where the hearts and minds part has been almost as important as the battle itself (Iraq and Afghanistan immediately spring to mind). Look at historical conflicts where entire nations have been conquered and the conquerors either had some serious problems with constant uprisings, or they managed to placate the populace. Either will tell you a great deal. Some classical books such as "The Prince" as well as "The Art of War", while being old, give great insight into the human psyche and will be invaluable when the SHTF.

mike-hunt July 22nd, 2008, 09:49 PM When the shit comes down what will be the next new currency ? All that cash burred in our backyards will suddenly be worthless .Historically the biggest cause of death in wartime is not bullets or bombs but disease and infection . We should be stockpiling antibiotics vaccines, morphine ect, now. An investment in a few hundred dollars of penicillin now could be worth enough to feed an army in the future.

billo August 6th, 2008, 06:08 AM NBK2000 had put up a list on the stuff that is required for an all out war scenario. He is a magician who thought about the todays world, 20 years ago. A list needs to be prepared according to the city/ town a person lives in, with the temperature bearings, seasons and the terrain being a counting factor. There are a lot of places which can be purchased which are out of the town areas and SAFE from the CROWDS wanting to plunder every possible thing even if they dont want it. I had read a book named "Build a safe and smart home", with a home made partially inside the ground; 65% underground with FOUR strong rooms a/w bathrooms and their septic tanks. Four common living rooms with AIR passage built in such a manner that air can be taken in from various places placed well hidden. It is a long lecture book BUT with EVERY line of book with some information in it. it is pretty hard to digest in first reading and is only for those who are planning and working on constructing such a home. Unfortunately I had to format the HDD and lost the book, and havent been able to find it anywhere. If anyone could find it please do so. the 1165 pages are well worth a reading.

______Never argue with an IDIOT, he will drag you to his level and beat you with his experience.

Alexires August 7th, 2008, 01:27 AM I can not find any mention of that book on google. Are you sure that is the name of the book?

Can't find any mention of the book at all, anywhere. Sounds like it has the stuff you need to know in it.

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Tactics, Training, Defense, and Safety > Judo or JiuJitsu

Red Beret August 5th, 2008, 12:59 AM I have the option of training in Judo or Will Macahdo Jiujitsu, which is basically Brazillian Jiujitsu.

If you have experience in either of these for street tactics, putting people down for good, please advise as to which is better.

I have done a little of the jiujitsu class, but it is ALL ground work, with the option of going to a third class to do some Muai thai and wrestling.

Should I do Judo twice a week and do a bit of jijitsu on the side? Or is judo mor suited to street fighting? Obviously there are things in bothe styles you wouldn't do on the street, such as leg locks and such, unless you knew the attcker had no back up around.

Jiujitsu is good in UFC and the like, but on the hard ground on the street, you may find it difficult to perform some of the groundwork which is comfortable on the "soft" floor of the ring.

I want to commit to a real world situation syle so I'm not wasting time and money.

Thanks.

phrankinsteyn August 5th, 2008, 02:40 AM I would practice both if I had the opportunity. Judo will help with your strength and endurance. Jiu Jitsu will help with joint locks and if you ever want to do a little security work: i.e. bouncer in a bar/pub it will come in handy, especially if you have "back up" someone to hold him/her as you do a little joint manipulation. :) I believe they would complement each other. I would also suggest a striking art, boxing, or any other type that you enjoy, because judo and jiu jitsu do not have many striking techniques. I believe it is strikes that count (real world) and the rest is icing on the cake. :) I believe Muai thai (striking) and wrestling would complement each other also; but I do not have any personal experience with Muai thai, only what I have seen on TV.

Always try to strike before attempting most flipping or joint locking techniques. Practice both (judo, jiu jitsu) as many times a week as you can. It is like anything else the more you practice the better you become.

hickey August 5th, 2008, 09:18 AM Judo and jujitsu may have become spectator sports due to proliferation of UFC type martial arts competition where there is much ground fighting. This leaves a bad impression to people whose only purpose of learning martial arts is for self defense and not for competition purposes.:(

Although there are some good jujitsu fighters really,, but they are well skilled in their craft and have stronger bodies . I have seen a few neophyte judo /jujitsu practitioners ( small body frame)being beaten down by big bodied muggers.. Do you want that to happen to you? If you can hit the guy at his vulnerable points from a distance then why waste time with full body contact action.You will never know that there are bad guys that have a smattering of ground fighting skill and you will be at a loss if you are cocky enough to tangle with then as they are likely huge and strong .:rolleyes:

Always keep in mind the rule: The shortest distance between two points is a straight line.Hitting your assailant hard on his sensitive points is more valuable than trying to wrestle and grapple with him :cool:

Besides in real life combat situation, instincts counts more than well thought action, if you are trained in grappling, then your instincts will be on that kind of combat; if you are trained in hitting your opponent then that will be your instantaneous action. There is less energy used in hitting an opponent (than grappling) to disable him. Besides if your able to throw your opponent in the ground do you think in all likelihood that they will not get up? Someone will as I have proven in the past by being gentle on some asshole :(

To end the combat immediately and not waste my time and strength;as he tried to lunge at me again I simultaneously broke his kneecap with sharp side kick and his nose with a straight punch. Just two strikes in a split second (which brought him down to the ground permanently), which is quicker than trying to throw him to the ground again!:cool:

If you are just impressed with these UFC type grappling; then go for it, practice jujitsu or judo or even wrestling then possibly train for the Olympics !:D

jd6p182 August 5th, 2008, 01:51 PM I was a tall lanky kid in high school, judo helped me put some meat on my skinny frame and keep my head up when other kids tried to intimidate me. Some tried to push me around but that did not last long because I would , without effort, make them fall on the ground.:D

I have been working as a correctional officer for the last 19 years, and I have had my share of fights. judo has helped me a lot to keep me on my two feet.

Last year I started aiki-jujitsu (Takeda lineage) to better my understanding of standing joint locks.

Whatever you chose HAVE FUN;) and concentrate on one sport the first few years. You better be good in one art than 50% good in two martial arts.

3287 October 10th, 2008, 09:20 AM You've probably already chosen by now, but if not I'd say - whichever is cheaper. They're both great. Judo would be better, I think, as a primary art, since in any sort of fighting situation you're better off throwing your opponent and getting the fuck out than grappling too extensively - you end up spending way more time in one spot than you want to and there's no plausible deniability when you very precisely snap both your opponent's arms. However, I'm a BJJ man myself, and I don't regret focusing on that first.

jlwilliams October 12th, 2008, 08:32 PM This is something I have some experience in. I have practised Karate for most of my life and cross trained with a bit of Judo, Jiu Jitsu, Boxing and whatever else anybody wanted to show me. Though there have been some valid points made about striking, grappling, sport verses street and so forth. I want to bring up something that is of paramount importance. The most important thing you need to consider when choosing the Judo or the JiuJitsu training is the people you will be learning from and practicing with. The people and their approach to training is more important than the 'style' they teach. Take time to talk to them, talk about what you want to get out of it. Are their goals in line with yours? I have been to dojos where they are wholly focused on Judo for competition, and street survival mindsets and techniques are a waste of their time and a route to disqualification from matches. I have also been to Judo clubs where they are wholly focused on hard core ass whoopin' and don't bother wasting time on tournament rule following that would get them killed when fighting without rules. Same 'style', different people with different goals.

A couple of years ago I was involved with some great fighters who had a Jiu Jitsu club that incorporated striking and grappling and were safe and effective in their training. The two guys who ran the school also run the State Police Academy combatives program. Great guys, great coaches and we had some solid training untill we lost the space we were using when the building sold. If you want to be truly ready to protect yourself and yours, you need to grapple, strike, and use weapons from clubs to edged and firearms. As already pointed out, get a good foundation with either one of these groups you are considering (again, choose the group, 'style' is an illusory word) then maybe branch out into some boxing, Mui Tai or whatever. Join a gun club and learn to shoot, or practice if you already know how. Consider a Kali or Escrima class or seminar with some of your dojo buddies so you have people to practice with. Just go for it. Have fun and please let us know what you choose.

Hitech_Hillbilly October 14th, 2008, 11:46 PM Study both. Knowing how to handle yourself on the ground is essential. Knowing how to not end up there is even more important.

mrtnira October 16th, 2008, 01:51 PM I've done a lot of home work on both systems. My degree is in Asian history. And, I spent three years in Japan. Over the past 30 years, I've had a lot of opportunity to research the history of many systems. Judo was a pacified version of Jiu Jitsu (ju jutsu). This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter In a nut shell -- the really short version:

After the end of the Samuari period (end 1868), a lot of "martial arts" (traditional military skills) either had to change with the times or perish, or end up a minority school practiced by a handful of holdouts devoted to tradition. Many clan based schools simply faded into history. They no longer had dependable sponsorship by what formerly constituted the state (the defunct Tokugawa government).

In Judo's case, a guy named Kano changed Jiu Jitsu into a martial way (life practice for personal development). So, gone from judo are bone breaking joint locks of jiu jitsu. Gone are the punches. Gone are the open hand blows to the throat and other weak areas. Gone are the solid kicks. Gone are the nerve point strikes.

What remains is a physically challenging grappling system. Kano expected that practicing judo would help the judo man become a more moral human being, just the way some people think playing sports helps develop character.

Combat for the Samurai was ruthless and historical jiu jitsu reflects this. However, in today's society, you cannot role play a 19th Century samurai and expect the legal system to understand and grant you acceptance for your actions. Whatever responses you give to a confrontation must match the circumstance.

Fortunately, the military dictatorship of Japan (1945 end) slowed the decline of Japanese martial arts. Several highly trained classical fighters ended up in Europe in the 1920s, and they kept on there until the 1950s, training some Europeans in very historically accurate Jiu Jitsu. I believe Roland Hernaez was one of these fortunate people.

I recommend books by Roland Hernaez. His website is http://www.nihon-tai-jitsu.com/ It is in French, unfortunately. He's one of the old guys who had access to some classically trained Japanese.

Lastly, what is taught today in Jiu Jitsu is also minus the collateral weapons, short staff, rope work (for binding prisoners), etc. Most of us only have time for the basics. Trying to recreate the level of teaching that someone growing up in a military family would have experienced in Japan before 1868 is not realistic.

Neville November 27th, 2008, 03:46 AM Take the ability to fall to ground safely from judo and then go straight to BJJ. It rules MMA fights for a reason.

XnbX December 1st, 2008, 05:54 PM Take the ability to fall to ground safely from judo and then go straight to BJJ. It rules MMA fights for a reason.

The reason BJJ rules MMA is because the BJJ fighters are lethal when they are on the ground. But BJJ is AFAIK not like normal/traditional Jiu-Jitsu which does unlike BJJ include (more) stand-up. Judo is the derived from Jiu-jitsu, so i suggest to find a sport like Jiu-Jitsu with both stand-up and ground techniques.

Cuauhtemoc December 2nd, 2008, 09:52 PM Judo and Machado jiu jitsu(brazilian jiu jitsu) are basically the same thing,theoretically. You will learn the same techniques in both arts. But in jiu jitsu your focus will be on ground fighting while in judo you will focus more on stand-up throws.But you will also learn throws in bjj and ground fighting in judo. Considering that it's hard to choose which art is better, but I personally prefer Brazilian Jiu Jitsu because I believe ground fighting is more important than elaborated throws. I mean, I know how to double-leg and do some simple judo throws like the osoto gari and I think that's enough, judo will put emphasis on a lot of throws that will be useful only in a tournament.

About street fighting, it may seem weird to use ground techniques on the concrete, but if you fight better than your opponent you will probably have the upper position(the mount preferably) and your enemy will be the only one felling the hard concrete while you ground and pound him.Also if he knows ground fighting and tackles you down it's important to know how to maintain the "guard" or else you will certainly get a good beating.

The Explosives and Weapons Forum > Military Science > Tactics, Training, Defense, and Safety > Sniper Training Sim ulator

SeethingPanda Novem ber 20th, 2008, 12:37 AM If any of you are interested I have a long range shooting simulator, it's pretty decent, if a nybody wants it let m e know and I'll put it on a file hosting place for you to downloa d, it's an .iso im age of my cd and it's only 30 som e Mb.:D

*************************

If you are going to start a thread for a downloa d link, then post the download link instead of teasing us with it.

-Hinckleyforpresident

486 Novem ber 20th, 2008, 11:04 PM "Sniper elite" is a pretty realistic one, it has bullet drop, I think it might have wind too, with the torrent link I posted you don't even need to install the gam e to play it. A "simulator" won't train you at all, actually getting behind a rifle and pra ctice is the only thing that will m ake you better, accu racy is all in stuff like breath control, and p ulling the trigger... I believe that everyone here is fine with file sharing. http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/3672648/%5BPC%5D_Sniper_Elite_%5BRIP%5D_%5Bdopem an%5D