Three Kings
 

I was wondering if the creator of the Three Kings page could edit the "Kevlar" section at the bottom of the page.
During Gulf War I troops were supplied PASGT vests or soft armour. It is designed to stop debris/frags and some pistol rounds. It would not stop a 7.62mm round from an AK variant especially a steel core one.
The current Interceptor Body Armor is capable of stopping an AK round.

By the way keep up the good work on the site I like it.

All soft body armor doesn't stop rifle bullets, that include Kevlar. However in Hollywood they do.

GW1 troops did use hard body armor but it was mostly limited to Special Force.

Wearing over 25lbs of hard body armor isn't fun if you asks me.

which would still be incorrect in the movie since Marky mark's character wasn't spec ops

From the screenshot he was wearing soft body armor.

Sorry about that, he said in the movie that he was "wearing fashionable kevlar", but i didnt think about it. And if theres a problem, go ahead and change it, you dont have to ask for permission.

-edit: I'm almost done with the Peacemaker page actually, i just need to upload everything. Soon, though.

I have problems with the page
 

Someone's pulling a GM45 moment on this page. (apologies :D He is WAAAAAYYYY better nowadays and should be praised for his restraint) The Clooney's finger section seems ridiculous. I don't want to see other users posting more 'viscera' special effects shots of bullet wounds from shows like CSI or NCIS or (you get the picture). Sections for AKMs, M16s and now CLOONEY'S FINGER?

If it is NOT pertinent MOVIE TRIVIA then don't put it in there. There are OTHER movies that are 'accurate' when it comes to warfare (not many but there are). I myself have put trivia special sections on pages but it's usually a quick note addressing common misconceptions about a film, but you're straying way too far off the focus of GUNS/MOVIES/MOVIE TRIVIA.

gotcha boss, so should i delete it or put it under trivia?

I try but I sometimes bend the rules ;).

I added "Smith's Hand" to the Shoot 'Em Up page, because he actually used his hand to fire bullets, is that fair game?

I remember a test where they put 300 win mag on a heat plate and covered it by a box, and the rounds cooking off didnt pierce the box. The casing actually is more dangerous than the bullet that case, and only if it hits you in the eye while its hot. Youre right, one of the dumbest movie ideas eevr. never saw this one but my friend told me the whole thing is a joke

Am not having a go at you mate just trying to make it correct. I don't know how to edit pages.
Also even if Archie was in Delta or not doesn't mean he is carrying a .45 all of the time. It is mission specific.

It didn't pieced the box because it has to follow Newton's Third Law.

When the bullet is not contain like inside a barrel, the gas will escape in all direction. This limit the bullet velocity. In other words it doesn't have the speed to do any meaning full penetration.

If you go to a rural outdoor gun range in the winter time they might have an oil drum full of trash that is burning. The duds are thrown into the open fire and you might be able the hear the pop if customers stop shooting.

Yes people warm themselves when the ammo goes off inside the drum.

i was thinking about that. He's with three reservists so 9 mils are everywhere, but i know of a man who was Delta for a time (he now works at the JFK Center for Unconventional Warfare) and i always asked questions that he couldnt answer, but he did say that they always had their .45s.

A typical GI can carry any personnal sidearm they like (mostly 9mm or 45ACP) as long as they have permission from their CO. However the vast majority do not asks because the typical reply from their CO is "no".

You can't bring your personnel sidearms from the States to another country. You have to buy the firearm from the country you are stationed and that can be very expensive. You can't bring the sidearm back to the States so you have to sell it before moving back.

You standout from the rest of the troops if you carry a personal firearms. Which can translate to more people wanting to kill you.

Special Force more or less can use any weapons that they are certified.

Well on the plus side, you'll have a better gun to fight back. :D

I forgot to point this out.

Unless you're an Officer, the guy that is dragging the machinegun, MP, manning/operating vehicles (pilots, tankers, etc), SF, or isn't issued a rifle you won't be carrying a pistol.

Pistol are defensive weapons. In the military pistols are issue to personnel that needs a weapon to defend themselves. Machinegun like the SAW are heavy, hard to maneuver, and jam often. They are issue a pistol for personnel defense. Pistols are issues to pilots and tankers because there is no room to store the rifles in the vehicle.

I have biten my tongue for two long and I don't know where Jdun is getting his information from.

"You can't bring your personnel sidearms from the States to another country. You have to buy the firearm from the country you are stationed and that can be very expensive. You can't bring the sidearm back to the States so you have to sell it before moving back."

That is a load of crap.

"You standout from the rest of the troops if you carry a personal firearms. Which can translate to more people wanting to kill you.
Special Force more or less can use any weapons that they are certified."

More crap.

"Unless you're an Officer, the guy that is dragging the machinegun, MP, manning/operating vehicles (pilots, tankers, etc), SF, or isn't issued a rifle you won't be carrying a pistol."

It all depends on what type of unit you are in and what the mission is.

"Pistol are defensive weapons. In the military pistols are issue to personnel that needs a weapon to defend themselves. Machinegun like the SAW are heavy, hard to maneuver, and jam often. They are issue a pistol for personnel defense. Pistols are issues to pilots and tankers because there is no room to store the rifles in the vehicle."

Again crap. Pistols in the military aren't just defensive. Many rear-echelon guys carry M16s in the supply trucks. Also pilots can be issued with SMGs and sometimes carbines not just pistols.

You can't bring a personal weapon back because it is a federal law. You have to imported it back to the state and that require a lot of work. You can't export firearms to another country unless you have permission. That's not going to happen.

You also are aware of General Order #1.

You do stand out if you carry a pistol. They will think you're an Officer. You stand out even more if you carry a pistol other then a M9.

Pistol are defensive weapon period. You don't go to war with a pistol. That's only works in the movie. Pistol are there to help you get to a rifle. Rifle are offensive weapons. You carry a pistol to defend yourself when your primary weapon is absent.

This isn't blackhawk down movie. Lets take Apache, Cobras, Fighters (F16, F22, etc), Armors, etc. Do you think that they have enough room to store a submachine gun? No they don't. They are issued pistols for survival.

I don't think the US Military use sub-machineguns anymore. I know NAVY SEALS member are not certified/trained (MP5) to use sub-machineguns.

Yes some rear-echelon are issued with pistol like military polices and guards but the majority don't that include front line troops.

Pistols are not high priorities in the military.

The US Marines do train everyone to us a pistol, but I don't think any of the non officers get to carry them, special forces get to have pistols as sidearms, backup weapons in the event their primary fails. Sub machine guns are assigned to rear behind the line troops, tank operators, supply convoys, those who aren't at the front. Helicopter pilots also have sub machine guns as well, at least compact ones like the MP5K.

Yes Army and Marines are certified to use pistols but it doesn't means they are issued with one. The majority don't.

The Mk 18 Mod. 0 and its variants more or less made sub-machine guns a thing of the past in the US military. I know for a fact that NAVY SEAL are not train to use sub-machineguns like the MP5 for sometime now. However, I'm sure there are elements in the US military that are train to use submachine-guns.

I do get a laugh when people thinks that pistol are offensive weapons. I mean movies do a good job at convincing people that pistol beat rifle 10 out of 10 times. If this were the case why carry a rifle when clearly in the movies a guy using a pistol killed 50 rifleman. Or the first chance the hero gets he ditch his rifle and go medieval with his pistol. Bring a pistol where everyone has rifles is like bring a knife to a gun fight in real life that is.

If you mean black hawk pilots. No they are not issue sub-machine guns like MP5 unless it's Special Operation but I doubt that too (probably Mk 18 variant by now). Normal Black Hawk pilots are issue with M9 pistol. Keep in mind the Somalia Operation (Black Hawk Down) were almost exclusively SPECOPS missions.

Ask A Soldier. Official Army Board.
https://forums.goarmy.com/forums/thr...5478&tstart=15

I end up posting instead of editing my previous post. Sorry.

the air force also standard issues a Beretta to pilots and flight crews

All my friends in the miulitary have pistols, just standard berettas. Where are you getting this "most troops dont carry pistols cause theyll think your an officer" crap?

Pistols also are a defensive weapon, there used to get you to a better weapon if something happens to your primary. Nobody will take on a squad of trops with a handgun. As for SMGs, usually only special ops use them due to them being easier to silence

I mean, I know the regular British army don't issue pistols or train their infantry how to use a submachine gun

The british police dont even carry handguns though.

The U.S. military issues berettas to everyone, you can get permission to carry a sig p228 for certain reasons. Some people with smaller hands cant grip the m9 well and use the sig. 1911s are used by some soldiers, but most have trouble getting permission since the ability to share mags is an issue I guess. A pistol is a secondary weapon and I dont see how mag compatibilty is an issue on them.

My coast guard sevice weapon is a Sig p229 DAK .40 with speer gold dots. The beretta left in 2006:D

Although I must say the beretta trigger is way better, I just don't like 9mm.

That's a common misconception. I talked to a Brit who corrected me on this issue, since 9/11, police in the UK use guns. There was a time when they couldn't though.

He also gave me a long list of guns you can and can't own. Apparently semi-autos aren't allowed, so some people owned semi-autos with "neutered" systems so you'd need to cock the action every time like a bolt action. He said he had an AR in this configuration.

As for sidearms, I used to talk to a guy on another forum who serves "over there" as a sniper, and he carried a SIG P228 as his sidearm. He took some pictures of it, but they are too hard to find in the forum history (and I rarely visit there anymore).

My friends dad was a gunenrs mate in the Navy and said some pilots carry the p228 due to its compact size. They also used m16a3s when he was rangemaster for the seebees. I also heard the Brits have guns, buit not on their person, there left in the car and have way more restrictions on use.

Wel the brits took too long to even get semi auto guns as a standard in their military. They had a lot of issues when dealing with politics of how to arm their troops.

And they still use bullpups.....seriously

Hey bullpups arent really a bad thing. It just needs to be perfected that's all.

I hate bullpups, they dont work for me. They may be good for close range LE stuff but for any range it doesn't. Ive even seen bullpup bolt actions, how do you exactly cycle the bolt on that? And who cares if a snip[er rifle is compact? Not that youd room clear with a bolt gun. Bullpups are slow to reload, clear a jam and triggers universally suck.

Well bullpup has the same barrel length as a full length assault rifle, so range isn't the problem. Most people just have problems with how to reload.

And awful trigger pulls.

I re-affirm what GM45 wrote here.
Ah yes, those poor UNARMED British Police. Walking around with those airsoft guns! :D

http://www.imfdb.org/images/4/4c/BritishPolice.jpg

I'd love to patrol around with MP5s

They HATE every single second of it though. :D

Most troops aren't issue a pistol. It isn't my opinion it is a fact. Period. If you don't believe me go to any military board and ask. Pistols aren't priority in the military.

You can go to militaryvideos.net and check out todays pics threads. You will notice that most military personnel does not carry a pistol.

I'm sure that most operators has move away from SMG since the mid 1990s. There might be elements in the US military that are trained in the use of SMG but those are rare case.

BTW SMGLEE got a chance to take pictures inside SEAL ARMORY. They did have MP5SD but he pointed out that SEAL aren't trained to use it.

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums...d.php?t=140311

While I'm not an expert of UK police armament. From what I understand in order for an UK police to be armed he/she has to be trained and in a special unit. Someone has posted on another forum that the MP5 that most polices carry are semi-auto version.

the first couple times I flew to Europe they had men armed with SMG's walking the airports in both Madrid and Manchester. Basically they were a deturant to anyone starting anything hostile in the airports which are normally very easy targets from a security standpoint.

Last time I was in England the only time I saw armed British Police/Soldiers was when I was around any of the Royal Residences. Many years back I had a relative on active duty in London. What they were doing not only in london but armed I can't say but I have my suspisions. Lets just say that they were playing gameskeeper and they kept the wolves from bothering the sheep. Trust me when I say that I prefer the british cops with just a nightstick.

The military does issue pistols, they are small and not a burden to carry, more useful to have one, and if most dont carry them, why is beretta getting huge contracts? They just recently got contracted for 400,000 more.

Well the Marines are getting an XD in .45 ACP with a thumb safety on theirs

It not a burden to carry but pistols has always been a low priority in military around the world. Traditionally pistols are expensive. A pistol cost almost the same as a rifle. IIRC a plain Colt M4 cost around $500 each. So funding has always been toward rifles and machineguns. You'll get better bang for the buck.

Beretta has a large contract to replace the worn out ones that have been in the military for over 20 years. The M9 is that old believe it or not.

I have not heard of Marines getting XD pistols. The US military tends to stay away from plastic frames because they are expected to take a lot of abuse for a long time.