Friday, October 19, 2012

A GUN PHOTOGRAPHER OVERSTEPS HIMSELF

http://olegvolk.net/blog/2012/10/18/the-mis-directed-fetish-of-marksmanship/

The mis-directed fetish of marksmanship.


I am a great fan of armed and trained civilians. Do I detect a bias right off the bat?  But I’d like to point out that the “hundreds of thousands of deer hunters” are no military snipers and do not overmatch regular infantry. They do when they're armed with M4s!  A very well trained rifleman with a sub-MOA rifle can indeed score a first shot hit on a 500 yard foe. What happens then?

The hit may be stopped by the armor. Why you aim for the head or groin. If effective, the hit may be fatal or not: due to better emergency medicine in the army, they will save most of their non-immediate casualties. Irregulars have historically lost over half of their wounded.  Historically don't necessarily apply to the particular situation-your terrain and escape routes do.

The direction of the sniper would be indicated by the backsplatter from the wound. In case of a miss, the projectile trace in earth or trees would just about pinpoint the location of the shooter. Maybe, but more than likely not if the shooter's done his job at concealing himself.  At which point, the infantry would use smoke to obscure themselves from the shooter, unless there are other shooters flanking the gungrabbers make his egress perilous with suppressive fire waste ammo and get close enough to exact retribution. They have to get close enough to begin with.  The civilian shooter would have no land mines to disrupt their progress.  A rifle squad of 'civilians' though...

A really good shooter can make 500 yards hits on bullseye targets. Can he do as well on camouflaged foes who move, use cover and can put literally a hundred times his rate of fire with their squad MG or SAW? Not if he makes his shots count.  An individual rifleman might be limited to 300 yards BS, but a SAW with a scope fired from a bipod can reach out more than twice as far.
Assuming that the sniper can manage to retain his stand-off distance, what can he do about air or artillery response. SHOOT AND SCOOT Insurgents world-wide have to brave close combat to get away from the firepower available to the regulars with one radio call. Against well-designed sniper hides that cannot be reached by artillery or airpower, short-range rockets would be used. The hide would have to escape detection in visible, near and far infrared ranges to remain secure.  MYLAR BITCH

Multiple snipers might do better, but the regulars can just continue using smoke to remain safe from long shots while encircling the whole area and plastering it with mortars or just mining the perimeter and leaving it at that.
I am a great fan of rifle marksmanship. But we shouldn’t overestimate its value in warfare. Unsupported by regular troops, most snipers die quickly. Most hunters may be marksmen, but they aren’t even snipers — that skill set goes far beyond the basics of fieldcraft and marksmanship required to bring down deer. STICK TO TAKING PICTURES DORK.

For that reason, the reliance on armed response indicates a loss for the side forced to fight as insurgents. The kind of expedients required for a successful guerrilla campaign tend to warp all participants out of recognition as the “forces of good”. So our best bet is political proselytizing and raising the next generation to love freedom, and to respect the freedoms of others. The opium pipe dreams of the “restoration of the Republic” through another revolution are best left for those who don’t much value a connection to reality.  JUST ANOTHER ELMUR FUDD WILLING TO SELL YOU OUT AND OUR NATION SO HE CAN BE PERMITTED TO KEEP HIS.  YOU'RE ON THE LIST.

4 comments:

Arctic Patriot said...

Awesome!

So when is this guy going to stop making emotionally charged photos of would-be rape victims killing Nazis, and brave resistance fighters killing them as well?

He contradicts himself seriously here.

I notice, tellingly, that he makes no images of people fighting against the real rapists and despoilers of WW2, the Red Army.

All in all though, either Mr. Volk does not believe what he has written, or he does not believe in his photographs.

Very, very inconsistent.

Maybe the French resistance should have rolled over, right?

The Jews in the Ghetto should have given up, too, right, Volk?

Come on. Really, Volk?

Jim Barber said...

This makes no sense. So, I guess you'll piss your pants at the first sound of a SAW? Any deer rifle made can out perform a SAW at distance, round for round. Once upon a time I was a machine gunner, and I'd rather have a 30-06Winchester Model 7 any day of the week for a 600 yard shot on a man with a SAW. You did say twice the distance of 300 yards right? Heck, I'd even go down to .243 if that would make you feel better. After the first shot your SAW rounds would just be whipping up empty dust...that is if I missed.

As an insurgent or rebel, you don't fight infantry with infantry tactics. Why do you think Afghanistan has been unconquerable for the last millenia?

This post is just one big panty twist.

Jim Barber said...

....and another thing. No infantry is going to find terrain to effectively hide in on the insurgents home turf.

The only way your gun grabbing infantry is going to not get hit is by staying home. They will be outnumbered by a foe on their home turf, logistically supported by the indigenous population. Oh, and most of the insurgents are trained by the exact same people and learned the exact same war fighting doctrine, ie. ex-military.

It is far from a lost cause. Ask John Parker.

J. Croft said...

Gentlemen, thanks for the input.

There are a LOT of ways to take down a US style infantry platoon, even with full fire support, I'm certain.

Going to work up an article on Oleg DORK and him being embedded... probably in more than one way... with his superplatoon going about thugging up on riflemen. Yeah. Never did care for his work even if he did put in some bare titty now and then.