Can personal firearms be used in Iraq? - Page 3

Can personal firearms be used in Iraq?

This is a discussion on Can personal firearms be used in Iraq? within the Law Enforcement, Military & Homeland Security Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Originally Posted by Daddy Warcrimes Astroglide At least they're not using any of that Kentucky Jelly....

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 53

Thread: Can personal firearms be used in Iraq?

  1. #31
    Senior Member Array Herknav's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Waypoint 0
    Posts
    986
    Quote Originally Posted by Daddy Warcrimes View Post
    Astroglide


    At least they're not using any of that Kentucky Jelly.


  2. #32
    Senior Member Array MR D's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    South Central PA
    Posts
    864
    when I was Air Crew in the Army in the 1980s my issue was a Ruger Security Six (or was it a service six?) .357

    all they issued us was .38 ball ammo...

    did I mention we were air crew? lol

    we also had 125 grn and 158 grn JHP....


    "no sir, I do not know where it came from, just hand me your weapon and I will load it for you...."

  3. #33
    Senior Member Array tanksoldier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    1,133
    Technically, yes. Regulations do not prohibit Soldiers from deploying with privately owned weapons. However, theater commanders generally forbid it and all deployment orders include a section prohibiting it.

    I know several Soldiers who bought their own ARs and pistols, passing them off as issue weapons.
    "I am a Soldier. I fight where I am told, and I win where I fight." GEN George S. Patton, Jr.

  4. #34
    VIP Member Array sass20485's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Central FL
    Posts
    2,093
    Sad that our wonderful gov'mt can't equip those who are putting their lives on the line with a decent weapon that fits them, and has " run out " of sidearms. Sure can't blame those that wish to get hold of one on their own to protect their behinds over there. I'd be doing the same.

  5. #35
    M2
    M2 is offline
    Member Array M2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    320
    Quote Originally Posted by Arisin Wind View Post
    The USAF Chief of Staff, Gen. T. Michael Moseley, testified before congress he carries a 357 in theater.

    Asked by Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., chairman of the House Appropriations defense subcommittee, what he carried in theater; Moseley said a .357.

    “Because I figure, if I have to pull a sidearm, I really don’t want to mess [around],” he said.

    I doubt it's issued.
    It's been a while since I exec'd for a GO, but about six years ago when I did there were regs allowing all USAF GOs to carry a personal firearm. I recall reading about it in the AFGOMO "handbook," and I believe the two-star I worked with got one issued to him. I don't think they were restricted to the standard-issue M9 (Beretta 92F), so there is a chance that T. Mike was "issued" the .357 or somehow got approval to carry it. Yes, even the CSAF is bounded by regulations, although I have heard much discussion about his carrying a .357 in theater.

    Honestly, I wasn't that impressed with the M9 I was issued when I deployed, but my enlisted folks would rather have that 9mm then hump a M-16. With our constant movement using vehicles and a helo support, the handguns were a much easier option to live with. However, if SHTF than I would prefer to have as many weapons and as much ammo as I can carry!

    Cheers! M2

  6. #36
    VIP Member Array BigEFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Central California
    Posts
    2,045
    Maybe someone with more knowledge than I on the M16/M4 weapons can answer this question.

    Couldn't you send her a collapsible stock that she could put on her M16. Would that fix the problem of the weapon being too long?

    Again, I have very little knowledge of the M16/M4 but the thought came to mind.
    Lex et Libertas — Semper Vigilo, Fortis, Paratus, et Fidelis!

    "Not only do the people who put their lives on the line to protect the rest of us deserve better, we all deserve better than to have our own security undermined by those who undermine law enforcement." -Thomas Sowell

  7. #37
    JD
    JD is offline
    Administrator
    Array JD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Central Iowa
    Posts
    19,285
    It could be done, but making personal mods to an issued weapon are generally a no-no, it might be possible to send one to her and have the unit armorer outfit the weapon, however, as the weapon in question is a M16, the unit armorer may not be willing to modify the weapon against it's specs in the technical manual.

  8. #38
    Distinguished Member Array Chooie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    1,870
    No chance she can exchange it for an M4, eh?

  9. #39
    Senior Member Array Skygod's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    645
    She needs to adapt to the M16. I don't want to ever be around soldiers that are not capable of improvising and adapting to mission requirements, be it with the M16 or M4.

    If's she not capable of handling the M16 proficiently, then maybe she's better off staying in the wire serving food in the chow line, or riding a desk.
    Perhaps your sole purpose in life is to serve as a warning to others.

  10. #40
    Senior Member Array Skygod's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    645
    Quote Originally Posted by OPFOR View Post
    SOF don't carry POWs (legally), but they have more options then just these. I've seen old 1911s in SF holsters, there is the M11 (Sig P228) floating around, the HK SOCOM is available (though I've never seen it actually carried), and so on.
    I've witnessed one or two SOCOM pistols(H&K Mk23) riding the thigh of SEALs in Theater. I havn't seen any widespread use of this pistol though. As one SF XO of my company said "It's a horse that a special committee made into a camel with undue influence from the Navy"

    If you've seen any 1911's carried by SF soldiers then I'm guessing it's a team or company COTS purchase. As of my last tour only the government issued Beretta M9 was carried by SF and Rangers. My entire Group carries the Beretta. We were NEVER given a choice.
    Last edited by Skygod; October 13th, 2007 at 12:01 AM.
    Perhaps your sole purpose in life is to serve as a warning to others.

  11. #41
    Senior Member Array tanksoldier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    1,133
    The SOCCOM guys have limited run weapons that were procured for "testing"... they can get issued just about anything they want... but they are issue weapons.

    The reason the AFCoS can carry a personal weapon is because he outranks the theater commander who's orders are what prohibit POWs in theater.
    "I am a Soldier. I fight where I am told, and I win where I fight." GEN George S. Patton, Jr.

  12. #42
    VIP Member
    Array OPFOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Nomad
    Posts
    4,713
    Quote Originally Posted by Skygod View Post
    I've witnessed one or two SOCOM pistols(H&K Mk23) riding the thigh of SEALs in Theater. I havn't seen any widespread use of this pistol though. As one SF XO of my company said "It's a horse that a special committee made into a camel with undue influence from the Navy"

    If you've seen any 1911's carried by SF soldiers then I'm guessing it's a team or company COTS purchase. As of my last tour only the government issued Beretta M9 was carried by SF and Rangers. My entire Group carries the Beretta. We were NEVER given a choice.
    I did see a few SOCOMs in the NAVSOF arms room once, but they weren't being used operationally. The 1911s were (as I understand it, I didn't get to dig too deep into the story) old ones pulled from mothballs. They were pretty rough looking, and they were in the holsters of some support-type guys (non-tabbed) that were in our AO hunting for Soviet tank rounds among the thousands of pounds of ordnance we had collected/captured. My guess is that they got them much more for the "cool guy" factor than for any actual operational superiority. To paraphrase Fernando - "It is better to look good, then to fight good..." (to some folks, anyway).

    Rangers are definitely using the M9, as are most of the other Army SOF guys I have seen.
    A man fires a rifle for many years, and he goes to war. And afterward he turns the rifle in at the armory, and he believes he's finished with the rifle. But no matter what else he might do with his hands - love a woman, build a house, change his son's diaper - his hands remember the rifle.

  13. #43
    Member Array ttpete's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Mich
    Posts
    333
    Quote Originally Posted by Skygod View Post
    She needs to adapt to the M16. I don't want to ever be around soldiers that are not capable of improvising and adapting to mission requirements, be it with the M16 or M4.

    If's she not capable of handling the M16 proficiently, then maybe she's better off staying in the wire serving food in the chow line, or riding a desk.
    That's a bit harsh, I think. There's nothing more miserable than a weapon that can't be shouldered quickly in an emergency. And the fact that someone is a different size certainly has no bearing upon one's fitness to engage in combat. Do I detect a bit of misogyny here??

    Are you aware that the Brits furnished buttstocks in several different lengths for their SMLE rifle, beginning with the "bantam" length? They were certainly aware that it added to the efficiency of their infantry, so much so that at the beginning of WWI, the Germans thought that every British rifle squad had at least two machine guns attached to it.

    If it was a relative of mine, I'd not only send the buttstock, I'd send the tools and instructions for changing it as well.
    NRA Benefactor member
    Michigan Antique Arms Collectors life member
    Ohio Gun Collectors member

    Opinions expressed here are based upon Michigan state law ONLY. Other state laws may differ. Know and observe your local laws.

  14. #44
    Senior Member Array Skygod's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    645
    Quote Originally Posted by ttpete View Post
    That's a bit harsh, I think. There's nothing more miserable than a weapon that can't be shouldered quickly in an emergency. And the fact that someone is a different size certainly has no bearing upon one's fitness to engage in combat. Do I detect a bit of misogyny here??

    Are you aware that the Brits furnished buttstocks in several different lengths for their SMLE rifle, beginning with the "bantam" length? They were certainly aware that it added to the efficiency of their infantry, so much so that at the beginning of WWI, the Germans thought that every British rifle squad had at least two machine guns attached to it.

    If it was a relative of mine, I'd not only send the buttstock, I'd send the tools and instructions for changing it as well.
    It's not harsh at all.

    If mission requirements are not met by any one soldier then of what use is that soldier to the team, the squad, the company or the Brigade?

    I'd much rather the soldier can make due with an beat up old M1 Garand than a soldier that complains about the stock or the barrel length of his or her weapon. She's not getting any brownie points from me if she is in fact complaining about he equipment that the government is supplying her with. It may be perfect, but good soldiers find way's to improve, overcome, adapt and meet mission requirements. Here's a question for her: If your M16 goes down during contact and there's an old beat AK lying at her feet is she prepared to pick it up and engage or break contact with it ? The answer should be obvious.

    I don't care for the standard M16 either, but I wouldn't complain if it's the only weapon available to me if my M4 should go down mid mission. I've also seem commo go down, but men with a bit of intellect and inginuity have used an old car battery, some telephone wire, and scrap metal to get commo back up and running. It's not preferred, but the mission get's completed and something new is learned each and every time.

    If she wants a collabsible butt stock, then I'm sure her CO won't give a hoot if she's sent a Mil-Spec extension, plate and castle nut, carbine buffer and spring with 6 position stock. However, is she going to take herself out of the fight until that stock kit is recieved in her APO mail box if the M16 is still the only option for her ?

    To me this more of the same. Women have a place in the military, I'm not arguing that. However, they should not have to be given "special" equipment to fit only "female" needs, aside from gyno care. If they want to play soldier than they should too realize the need to overcome certain obstacles, just as the majority of men in the Armed forces seem to be able to do. I personally know one SF soldiers that is back in the fight with a prosthetic leg. Did he complain about his AFPT scores ? No he doesn't he meets the standard and was recently the fastest guy in a timed ruck march. So what's the difference ?

    SOF Truth # 1 Personell are more important than hardware.
    Perhaps your sole purpose in life is to serve as a warning to others.

  15. #45
    JD
    JD is offline
    Administrator
    Array JD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Central Iowa
    Posts
    19,285

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. 12 Elements of Firearms Training "The dozen critical elements of modern firearms trai
    By DCJS Instructor in forum Defensive Carry & Tactical Training
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: December 4th, 2009, 03:32 PM
  2. Sale of personal firearms
    By SHOOTER13 in forum General Firearm Discussion
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: August 9th, 2009, 06:31 PM
  3. Replies: 22
    Last Post: April 20th, 2007, 04:33 PM
  4. Personal Protection, a Personal Responsibility
    By Angio333 in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: September 27th, 2006, 07:28 PM
  5. From CA but in Iraq right now
    By calvin1013 in forum New Members Introduce Yourself
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: June 20th, 2006, 10:48 AM

Search tags for this page

best contractor gear for iraq
,
can military carry personal firearms in a warzone
,
firearms in iraq
,

personal firearms in iraq

,
personal firerm iraq
Click on a term to search for related topics.