|
|
 |
| from Guns & Ammo August 2006 |
Thoughts From the Gunner's Guru -- August 2006
The Guru discusses self-protection, the wonderful power of the .50-caliber BMG, Barrtt Tillman's pacific War studies, the difference between a sidearm and small arm, the media, national anthem and more
By Col. (Ret.) Jeff Cooper
We are annoyed by the assumption on the part of certain public figures that the citizen should be able to prove the need for the citizen to acquire a means of protecting himself. The citizen's personal needs are no business of the state. Liberty, when in place, grants the right of the citizen to do what he chooses, as long as he does not stamp on the rights of others. Nobody needs caviar, or a pleasure boat or opera tickets. Whether he wants these things is no business of the state. On this side of the prayer rug, the Jihadis do not see it that way. That seems to be the main reason they have declared war upon us.
We fortunately obtained a tape from the Marianas Turkey Shoot that gave us a marvelous picture of the wonderful power of the great .50-caliber BMG cartridge. In the great days of propeller-driven aircraft, both the Germans and the Japanese favored acquiring a target by the use of rifle-caliber tracers, then delivering a knock-out blow with a heavier cartridge. This system works, but it does waste time--especially when employed by a master fighter pilot. Joe Foss, for example, favored opening fire with four of his .50s--while reserving two guns--for his opening heavy blow, as well as providing reserves to handle both intruders and malfunctions. For the big guns did malfunction when subjected to side-loads, and it was nice to have two guns available for unforeseen circumstance.
Most of the aerial killing in the piston days was carried out by a few of the very best practitioners. Those were good men to have on our side, and as the war continued, we had more of them on our side all the time.
In looking further into colleague Barrett Tillman's studies of the Pacific War, we are staggered by the achievements of our carrier battle groups. The agglomeration of technical excellence, marvelous equipment, literally incredible expertise, all the way from the admiral commanding to the hook runner, is astounding. Getting those fleets into position and then getting their deadly weaponry into position, then using it with consummate skill, is hard to believe. Those men who performed these exploits are nearly all gone now. It is their grandsons, rather than their sons, who are properly to render "glory and love to the men of old."
People who have trouble with semantics cannot separate a small arm from a sidearm. A sidearm is a weapon that may be carried on the belt ready for immediate defensive use by the wearer alone. A small arm, on the other hand, is usually a crew-served weapon that may be operated by one man but is normally operated by a small crew. Sidearms are immediate defensive instruments. Small arms may be put to complete combat use by teams with several men operating the gun and others dividing ammunition and mounting systems. The 1911 and the wheelgun are sidearms. A light machine gun is a small arm.
In the great days of propeller-driven aircraft, both the Germans and the Japanese favored acquiring a target by the use of rifle-caliber tracers, then delivering a knock-out blow with a heavier cartridge
| |
It is irritating to note that the press, in general, cannot seem to differentiate the cartridge from the weapon that fires it. Continuously, we hear of "the .45," as if that signifies only a weapon made to take that cartridge. This is as if the carrier could handle only one type of aircraft. There are good pistols that take only inferior cartridges, and there are good cartridges that are only available in inferior launchers. I suppose expecting technical competence from journalists is too much to hope for, but a bit of study helps us to straighten this out.
It does seem to us that there should be some sort of penalty for mangling the national anthem. We have seen various celebrations on the tube in which some sort of pop singer was given the job of rendering the Star Spangled Banner for the multitude. It would appear that many of these people do not only have poor voices but are unable to carry a tune. This hurts my feelings. Possibly, my feelings are too easily hurt.
Is it that the pronoun "whom" has been abandoned? Perhaps it is that the English language is too ornate for the common people.
|
