Come on guys, we're better than this...
I see a lot of pontificating, pissing, bitching, and dick measuring about weapon choice, action type, caliber, and controls of various weapons here and feel that many of us are missing some important points.
Familiarity, personal style (technique and temperament), and intended use are sometimes touched upon but don't seem to get the respect they need. I personally would rather have someone who has thought out their own use and has high personal skill with an old 94 lever action and a ratty but functional smith model 10 than the person who has a nice shiny new aug and 5.7 sidearm but has given little thought in their choice and the use of those weapons nor the capabilities of themselves or their weapon. There's some arguing going on here about weapon safeties of all things [img]http://www.arrse.co.uk/at.
Run what you brung and run it well are my only considerations.
If someone worthwhile shows up at my door with a semi 1919A6 and are skilled enough and bad ass enough to effectively carry and employ it, have at it buddy. Your eyes and ears and your personal choice of boomsticks can only help me. I would of course expect him to be the go to guy for roadblocks but if he can hump that beast thru the woods and put out effective fire he's welcome to come along. Same goes for a .22 rifle and pistol armed buddy, more points of effective fire and good tactics can only help. It all comes down to skill. As far as practice or amount of rounds put down range training, I have seen people burn pounds of ammo "sighting in a rifle" to little effect and some people who learn and improve noticeably with one 20 round box of ammo.
You all want examples, just take a look at some of the equipment used against "superior" armies historically and give careful consideration to the tactics, training, and attitudes that increased its effectiveness.
