imfdb.org  

Go Back   imfdb.org > The Forum > Just Guns

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 06-13-2012, 11:00 PM
Spartan198's Avatar
Spartan198 Spartan198 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: The scorched state of California
Posts: 2,305
Default Interesting sight in A-stan

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2...in-afganistan/

Wonder how he managed that. I thought there was some kind of ban on personal weapons in the field.
__________________
"Everything is impossible until somebody does it - Batman

RIP Kevin Conroy, the one true Batman
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 06-13-2012, 11:58 PM
commando552 commando552 is offline
IMFDB Admin
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: England
Posts: 547
Default

I think the way it is technically defined by the US Army is that the "weapon" is just the lower, and there is not all encompassing rule about not being able to swap the upper. I think he is actually breaking more rules by wearing those gloves rather than the issue ones than by using that gun. A few years ago I met a US Marine who told me that they were unofficially approved to take a personal pistol to Afghanistan. Where this gets tricky, is that I don't believe there would be a legal way to get the gun back into the US, so if you take it you are likely to end up loosing it unless you smuggle it out (which is not really that difficult but is highly illegal) which is what this guy ended up doing. Not sure if this problem would exist in this case as it would just be an upper, but I know I wouldn't want to risk loosing my own personnel weapon.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 06-14-2012, 12:36 AM
Excalibur's Avatar
Excalibur Excalibur is offline
IMFDB Admin
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 3,842
Send a message via AIM to Excalibur Send a message via MSN to Excalibur Send a message via Yahoo to Excalibur
Default

The rules are for all the armed forces is that yes there is a limit on personalization for issued weapons. Recently, they've been doing a lot of aftermarket parts on issued weapons like Magpul stocks, sights and mags. Eotechs and ACOGs are also widely used
__________________

"There's a fine line between not listening and not caring...I like to think I walk that line everyday of my life."

Blessed be the LORD, my rock, Who trains my hands for war, And my fingers for battle
Psalm 144:1

“It is always wrong to use force, unless it is more wrong not to.”
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 06-14-2012, 01:04 AM
Spartan198's Avatar
Spartan198 Spartan198 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: The scorched state of California
Posts: 2,305
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Excalibur View Post
The rules are for all the armed forces is that yes there is a limit on personalization for issued weapons. Recently, they've been doing a lot of aftermarket parts on issued weapons like Magpul stocks, sights and mags. Eotechs and ACOGs are also widely used
Buttstocks, magazines, and optics are one thing. I'd think an entire upper receiver--especially the BEAR which uses a very non-standard bolt carrier--would be a bit of a different story.

If this is true and using your own upper is allowed, it makes me think that the so-called deficiencies of the M4 are being far more exaggerated than I initially thought since we aren't seeing a whole lot--if any--aftermarket piston uppers in use by regular troops (or NG, in this case). Or maybe soldiers simply don't think their lives are worth it, an idea which I find quite a difficult pill to swallow.
__________________
"Everything is impossible until somebody does it - Batman

RIP Kevin Conroy, the one true Batman
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 06-14-2012, 02:50 AM
Excalibur's Avatar
Excalibur Excalibur is offline
IMFDB Admin
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 3,842
Send a message via AIM to Excalibur Send a message via MSN to Excalibur Send a message via Yahoo to Excalibur
Default

Maybe this is a recent trend in the military. Like it is unofficially allowed in combat situations. I heard stories of Marines sneaking in hollow points and non standard ammunition when going down range and switching them back on base.
__________________

"There's a fine line between not listening and not caring...I like to think I walk that line everyday of my life."

Blessed be the LORD, my rock, Who trains my hands for war, And my fingers for battle
Psalm 144:1

“It is always wrong to use force, unless it is more wrong not to.”
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 06-21-2012, 02:17 AM
AdAstra2009's Avatar
AdAstra2009 AdAstra2009 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Maryland
Posts: 1,067
Default

They aren't even allowed to use personal magazines anymore.

http://www.military.com/daily-news/2...ifle-mags.html
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 06-21-2012, 02:38 AM
Excalibur's Avatar
Excalibur Excalibur is offline
IMFDB Admin
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 3,842
Send a message via AIM to Excalibur Send a message via MSN to Excalibur Send a message via Yahoo to Excalibur
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AdAstra2009 View Post
They aren't even allowed to use personal magazines anymore.

http://www.military.com/daily-news/2...ifle-mags.html
That's old news. I heard the Army has now reversed that order.
__________________

"There's a fine line between not listening and not caring...I like to think I walk that line everyday of my life."

Blessed be the LORD, my rock, Who trains my hands for war, And my fingers for battle
Psalm 144:1

“It is always wrong to use force, unless it is more wrong not to.”
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 06-21-2012, 09:08 AM
commando552 commando552 is offline
IMFDB Admin
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: England
Posts: 547
Default

They haven't actually reversed it, as it was never a rule in the first place. The original "ban" was from a Maintenance Information Message issued by TACOM. These are permissive, not an order or directive, so in other words they are optional. I think the only purpose of the message was to try and get people to use the new metal enhanced M4 mag with a new follower which they have just spent over $10 million on.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 06-21-2012, 12:13 PM
Excalibur's Avatar
Excalibur Excalibur is offline
IMFDB Admin
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 3,842
Send a message via AIM to Excalibur Send a message via MSN to Excalibur Send a message via Yahoo to Excalibur
Default

http://www.military.com/daily-news/2...tml?ESRC=eb.nl
__________________

"There's a fine line between not listening and not caring...I like to think I walk that line everyday of my life."

Blessed be the LORD, my rock, Who trains my hands for war, And my fingers for battle
Psalm 144:1

“It is always wrong to use force, unless it is more wrong not to.”
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 06-22-2012, 02:23 AM
AdAstra2009's Avatar
AdAstra2009 AdAstra2009 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Maryland
Posts: 1,067
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by commando552 View Post
They haven't actually reversed it, as it was never a rule in the first place. The original "ban" was from a Maintenance Information Message issued by TACOM. These are permissive, not an order or directive, so in other words they are optional. I think the only purpose of the message was to try and get people to use the new metal enhanced M4 mag with a new follower which they have just spent over $10 million on.
The new metal enhanced magazines are actually really good. They actually run through the M249 flawlessly unlike the old magazines with the green followers where they would jam up after a couple rounds and you would have to apply pressure to the magazine. The new metal magazines we could run them endlessly without any stoppages at all.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:25 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.