[N_Fiddledog]

andyt andyt:

These soldiers were in uniform on anti-terrorist patrol at a railway station. You think they were doing that without weapons?

One can only guess, but seeing as the reason the British police were so slow getting to their soldier who was being beheaded on a public street was because they were waiting for officers authorized to use firearms, I'd say the real question is could the French be as stupid as the British. Seeing as the French recently voted in a Socialist, my best guess would be yup.

Hey, did you hear the most read British newpaper polled it's readers a few days ago, and of the 11,000 who replied to the question "what is your most desired law change?" 83% replied they wanted their guns back.

[andyt]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

andyt andyt:

These soldiers were in uniform on anti-terrorist patrol at a railway station. You think they were doing that without weapons?

Entirely possible. It's also entirely possible that even if they were carrying weapons that they were not issued any ammunition. Meaning they were just there as some sort of security theatre...something that is quite popular in the Western world these days.

Well, Bart, you were partially right. They are issued ammunition but the guns aren't loaded. Pretty stupid. Finally found a piece in the Wall St Journal that mentioned it.

[BartSimpson]

andyt andyt:

Well, Bart, you were partially right. They are issued ammunition but the guns aren't loaded. Pretty stupid. Finally found a piece in the Wall St Journal that mentioned it.

No surprise. The US does that on occasion even in war zones. You get deployed but you're ordered not to go out with any issued ammunition.

Thus I always made sure to buy some custom rounds of my own when home so they could come with me on patrol. The orders never said anything about deploying with personal property.

[andyt]

Of course we're told that banning large ammo clips is futile because it only takes .2543 seconds to jam in a new one. Why didn't his buddies do that and spray holy hell around?

[PublicAnimalNo9]

andyt andyt:

Of course we're told that banning large ammo clips is futile because it only takes .2543 seconds to jam in a new one. Why didn't his buddies do that and spray holy hell around?

Oh for sure, hose down a railway station to get one POS in the crowd. Great idea andy.

[N_Fiddledog]

I think if you check out this vid you'll get a better idea of where this took place and what was going on.



Do those soldiers look armed to you? One maybe.

[andyt]

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

andyt andyt:

Of course we're told that banning large ammo clips is futile because it only takes .2543 seconds to jam in a new one. Why didn't his buddies do that and spray holy hell around?

Oh for sure, hose down a railway station to get one POS in the crowd. Great idea andy.

It's always more fun if somebody else makes my point for me.

[PublicAnimalNo9]

andyt andyt:

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

andyt andyt:

Of course we're told that banning large ammo clips is futile because it only takes .2543 seconds to jam in a new one. Why didn't his buddies do that and spray holy hell around?

Oh for sure, hose down a railway station to get one POS in the crowd. Great idea andy.

It's always more fun if somebody else makes my point for me.

What point? That French soldiers actually aren't a bunch of gun happy, blaze away cowboys?

[martin14]

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

It's always more fun if somebody else makes my point for me.

What point? That French soldiers actually aren't a bunch of gun happy, blaze away cowboys?[/quote]

awww, dont say that, andy will lose all his fun.

[andyt]

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

What point? That French soldiers actually aren't a bunch of gun happy, blaze away cowboys?

Close. That being such a cowboy is not a good thing, and that the soldiers being armed would not necessarily have prevented the attack nor resulted in the attacker being taken down.

[PublicAnimalNo9]

andyt andyt:

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

What point? That French soldiers actually aren't a bunch of gun happy, blaze away cowboys?

Close. That being such a cowboy is not a good thing, and that the soldiers being armed would not necessarily have prevented the attack nor resulted in the attacker being taken down.

I have ZERO idea how the hell that is relevent to this thread.
Did this suddenly become another anti-2nd amendment thread and I missed the left turn somewhere?
Let's look at your assumptions here. First off, they're rifles weren't allowed to be loaded. They were practically in Paris so one MIGHT think there really would be no need to have them loaded. However, there's a difference between firing my weapon and knowing I'm going to need a reload shortly, and standing around with an empty gun and then fishing for a mag when some piece of human excrement scurries into a crowd. So NOW, I not only have to unsling my weapon, I have to fish for a mag and then load it. Precious seconds shot to hell instead of a piece of crap.

The KGB had a neat little invention for sidearms. It was a holster that instead of pulling your gun out of the top, you pushed it down through the bottom where the holster would automatically load the weapon and have it ready to fire.
Someone well trained can unholster their weapon, load it and have lead going downrange in about the same time it takes to blink. I've seen it in action, very impressive.