Virginia declares emergency Militias threaten to seize Gov.

[Tarsonis]

You should know that there are people dumb enough to actually propose Nerf battles in place of actual conflicts.

No, I don't know. Maybe I set my expectations a little too high for the people in this thread.

However, I will add that Nerf wars are pretty fun.

Simunition rounds. More fun and no honor system required

[The Emerald Legion]

WW1 tanks hull was made of essentially wet tissue paper .

Or, you know, steel. Germany didn't make the T-Gewehr just for the lulz. And my point is that WW1 era tanks don't tend to be rolling around the streets these days. They're museum pieces, or buried under some French farmer's turnips. What does it matter if a modern anti-materiel rifle could poke holes in a WW1 era tank when the Killdozer was never going to find a WW1 era tank to poke holes in?

So what you're saying is you think it would be ok for Civilians to own WW1 era tanks?

[Grinning Dragon]

No, I don't know. Maybe I set my expectations a little too high for the people in this thread.

However, I will add that Nerf wars are pretty fun.

Simunition rounds. More fun and no honor system required

They hurt like hell.

[Tarsonis]

Simunition rounds. More fun and no honor system required

They hurt like hell.

That's part of the fun

[Satuga]

WW1 tanks hull was made of essentially wet tissue paper .

Or, you know, steel. Germany didn't make the T-Gewehr just for the lulz. And my point is that WW1 era tanks don't tend to be rolling around the streets these days. They're museum pieces, or buried under some French farmer's turnips. What does it matter if a modern anti-materiel rifle could poke holes in a WW1 era tank when the Killdozer was never going to find a WW1 era tank to poke holes in?

WW1 tank hull's were rather weak, with even larger caliber arms fire being able to penetrate after some time, or with precise positioning. Something that modern tanks would shrug off. So to say the Tankdozer would be able to combat a ww1 tank isn't that much of an overstatement.

[Gormwood]

Or, you know, steel. Germany didn't make the T-Gewehr just for the lulz. And my point is that WW1 era tanks don't tend to be rolling around the streets these days. They're museum pieces, or buried under some French farmer's turnips. What does it matter if a modern anti-materiel rifle could poke holes in a WW1 era tank when the Killdozer was never going to find a WW1 era tank to poke holes in?

WW1 tank hull's were rather weak, with even larger caliber arms fire being able to penetrate after some time, or with precise positioning. Something that modern tanks would shrug off. So to say the Tankdozer would be able to combat a ww1 tank isn't that much of an overstatement.

Forgot police and National Guard are all fielding WW1 era tanks.

[Satuga]

WW1 tank hull's were rather weak, with even larger caliber arms fire being able to penetrate after some time, or with precise positioning. Something that modern tanks would shrug off. So to say the Tankdozer would be able to combat a ww1 tank isn't that much of an overstatement.

Forgot police and National Guard are all fielding WW1 era tanks.

Didn't say that gorm...

[Ifreann]

Or, you know, steel. Germany didn't make the T-Gewehr just for the lulz. And my point is that WW1 era tanks don't tend to be rolling around the streets these days. They're museum pieces, or buried under some French farmer's turnips. What does it matter if a modern anti-materiel rifle could poke holes in a WW1 era tank when the Killdozer was never going to find a WW1 era tank to poke holes in?

So what you're saying is you think it would be ok for Civilians to own WW1 era tanks?

What I'm saying is that "could take on a literal museum piece or rusted out wreck" is an pointless comparison, you may as well talk about how effectively the Killdozer could hunt dodos. But if you'd like I could reiterate my earlier point that allowing people to own literally any piece of military equipment would be pretty irrelevant given that very large numbers of people can't realistically afford much more than a cheap handgun. What does it matter if one is allowed to own a battleship if one will never have enough money to even make one payment towards it?

[Aclion]

WW1 tanks hull was made of essentially wet tissue paper .

Or, you know, steel. Germany didn't make the T-Gewehr just for the lulz. And my point is that WW1 era tanks don't tend to be rolling around the streets these days. They're museum pieces, or buried under some French farmer's turnips. What does it matter if a modern anti-materiel rifle could poke holes in a WW1 era tank when the Killdozer was never going to find a WW1 era tank to poke holes in?

Anti material rifles are still useful against light vehicles, people behind heavy cover or moose.

[Ifreann]

Or, you know, steel. Germany didn't make the T-Gewehr just for the lulz. And my point is that WW1 era tanks don't tend to be rolling around the streets these days. They're museum pieces, or buried under some French farmer's turnips. What does it matter if a modern anti-materiel rifle could poke holes in a WW1 era tank when the Killdozer was never going to find a WW1 era tank to poke holes in?

WW1 tank hull's were rather weak, with even larger caliber arms fire being able to penetrate after some time, or with precise positioning.

Tank hulls were so weak that new weapons had to be developed to deal with them.

Something that modern tanks would shrug off. So to say the Tankdozer would be able to combat a ww1 tank isn't that much of an overstatement.

What does it matter if a modern anti-materiel rifle could poke holes in a WW1 era tank when the Killdozer was never going to find a WW1 era tank to poke holes in?

[Ifreann]

Or, you know, steel. Germany didn't make the T-Gewehr just for the lulz. And my point is that WW1 era tanks don't tend to be rolling around the streets these days. They're museum pieces, or buried under some French farmer's turnips. What does it matter if a modern anti-materiel rifle could poke holes in a WW1 era tank when the Killdozer was never going to find a WW1 era tank to poke holes in?

Anti material rifles are still useful against light vehicles, people behind heavy cover or moose.

Did I say they're not useful? I don't think I said that. I think I asked what does it matter if a modern anti-materiel rifle could poke holes in a WW1 era tank when the Killdozer was never going to find a WW1 era tank to poke holes in.

[Ethel mermania]

So what you're saying is you think it would be ok for Civilians to own WW1 era tanks?

What I'm saying is that "could take on a literal museum piece or rusted out wreck" is an pointless comparison, you may as well talk about how effectively the Killdozer could hunt dodos. But if you'd like I could reiterate my earlier point that allowing people to own literally any piece of military equipment would be pretty irrelevant given that very large numbers of people can't realistically afford much more than a cheap handgun. What does it matter if one is allowed to own a battleship if one will never have enough money to even make one payment towards it?

Even with a good credit rating.

Luckily there are some reasonably priced tanks for sale to liven up the evening commute

https://militarymachine.com/military-tanks-for-sale/

[Satuga]

WW1 tank hull's were rather weak, with even larger caliber arms fire being able to penetrate after some time, or with precise positioning.

Tank hulls were so weak that new weapons had to be developed to deal with them.

Something that modern tanks would shrug off. So to say the Tankdozer would be able to combat a ww1 tank isn't that much of an overstatement.

What does it matter if a modern anti-materiel rifle could poke holes in a WW1 era tank when the Killdozer was never going to find a WW1 era tank to poke holes in?

It doesn't matter, I never said it did, just like I told Gorm. I was just making the case that the Killdozer could in fact take on a WW1 tank.
Also the .50 BMG could penetrate 19mm of steel. The Sherman tank at various areas only had a thickness of 12mm. A M2 AP round can penetrate to abou 11 thickness, so should someone get lucky and hit an already weakened portion of the tank a bullet could go through it.

[Satuga]

What I'm saying is that "could take on a literal museum piece or rusted out wreck" is an pointless comparison, you may as well talk about how effectively the Killdozer could hunt dodos. But if you'd like I could reiterate my earlier point that allowing people to own literally any piece of military equipment would be pretty irrelevant given that very large numbers of people can't realistically afford much more than a cheap handgun. What does it matter if one is allowed to own a battleship if one will never have enough money to even make one payment towards it?

Even with a good credit rating.

Luckily there are some reasonably priced tanks for sale to liven up the evening commute

https://militarymachine.com/military-tanks-for-sale/

Eh about 20 years worth of savings on a 50k budget id say not that bad tbh.

[The Emerald Legion]

So what you're saying is you think it would be ok for Civilians to own WW1 era tanks?

What I'm saying is that "could take on a literal museum piece or rusted out wreck" is an pointless comparison, you may as well talk about how effectively the Killdozer could hunt dodos. But if you'd like I could reiterate my earlier point that allowing people to own literally any piece of military equipment would be pretty irrelevant given that very large numbers of people can't realistically afford much more than a cheap handgun. What does it matter if one is allowed to own a battleship if one will never have enough money to even make one payment towards it?

It's almost like if there is a civilian market for it, people will try to make cheaper versions. Rather than the government with it's bottomless budget.

[Ifreann]

Tank hulls were so weak that new weapons had to be developed to deal with them.

What does it matter if a modern anti-materiel rifle could poke holes in a WW1 era tank when the Killdozer was never going to find a WW1 era tank to poke holes in?

It doesn't matter...

And that was my point.

---

What I'm saying is that "could take on a literal museum piece or rusted out wreck" is an pointless comparison, you may as well talk about how effectively the Killdozer could hunt dodos. But if you'd like I could reiterate my earlier point that allowing people to own literally any piece of military equipment would be pretty irrelevant given that very large numbers of people can't realistically afford much more than a cheap handgun. What does it matter if one is allowed to own a battleship if one will never have enough money to even make one payment towards it?

It's almost like if there is a civilian market for it, people will try to make cheaper versions. Rather than the government with it's bottomless budget.

As has been pointed out repeatedly, there is a civilian market for tanks. Seems like it's exclusively disarmed military surplus, though.

And what could even be done to make a tank affordable for most people instead of just being a luxury toy for the sufficiently rich? Make it smaller and cut the armour, that's a big saving, both in raw materials and in weight, so you could run it with a much smaller engine. Put it on tires rather than tracks so it's better suited to public roads. Maybe make the furnishings a bit more comfortable instead of strictly functional?

Congratulations, you just bought Tesla Cybertruck, and it's still just a luxury toy for the sufficiently rich. Watch out for billionaires throwing steel balls, that'll fuck the windows right up.

[Ors Might]

It doesn't matter...

And that was my point.

---

It's almost like if there is a civilian market for it, people will try to make cheaper versions. Rather than the government with it's bottomless budget.

As has been pointed out repeatedly, there is a civilian market for tanks. Seems like it's exclusively disarmed military surplus, though.

And what could even be done to make a tank affordable for most people instead of just being a luxury toy for the sufficiently rich? Make it smaller and cut the armour, that's a big saving, both in raw materials and in weight, so you could run it with a much smaller engine. Put it on tires rather than tracks so it's better suited to public roads. Maybe make the furnishings a bit more comfortable instead of strictly functional?

Congratulations, you just bought Tesla Cybertruck, and it's still just a luxury toy for the sufficiently rich. Watch out for billionaires throwing steel balls, that'll fuck the windows right up.

Bro, I been sayin.

Fully subsidized civilian war machines. The people’s revolution cannot be stopped It’s for Full McFreedom.

[West Leas Oros 2]

Why can't all humans come together and agree to replace firearms with Nerf guns, and use the honor system whenever hit with a dart?

Home invader? Whip out a Maverick and blast him away with 6 foamy missiles, once hit they'll recognize they got tagged and lay down until the authorities arrive.

Warfare? Equip everybody with Vulcans and have them go to town. Soldiers that get hit simply raise their gun over their head and walk back to their base, the team with the most KO's wins the battle.

Political assassination? No problem. Tag your least favorite politician with your favorite Nerf gun, and they have to step down in observation of the Nerf rules.

It's simple, effective, and fun for everybody

It's Nerf or Nothin'!

[The Emerald Legion]

It doesn't matter...

And that was my point.

---

It's almost like if there is a civilian market for it, people will try to make cheaper versions. Rather than the government with it's bottomless budget.

As has been pointed out repeatedly, there is a civilian market for tanks. Seems like it's exclusively disarmed military surplus, though.

And what could even be done to make a tank affordable for most people instead of just being a luxury toy for the sufficiently rich? Make it smaller and cut the armour, that's a big saving, both in raw materials and in weight, so you could run it with a much smaller engine. Put it on tires rather than tracks so it's better suited to public roads. Maybe make the furnishings a bit more comfortable instead of strictly functional?

Congratulations, you just bought Tesla Cybertruck, and it's still just a luxury toy for the sufficiently rich. Watch out for billionaires throwing steel balls, that'll fuck the windows right up.

Just not being exclusively the domain of the government would make it a hell of a lot cheaper.

[Ifreann]

And that was my point.

---

As has been pointed out repeatedly, there is a civilian market for tanks. Seems like it's exclusively disarmed military surplus, though.

And what could even be done to make a tank affordable for most people instead of just being a luxury toy for the sufficiently rich? Make it smaller and cut the armour, that's a big saving, both in raw materials and in weight, so you could run it with a much smaller engine. Put it on tires rather than tracks so it's better suited to public roads. Maybe make the furnishings a bit more comfortable instead of strictly functional?

Congratulations, you just bought Tesla Cybertruck, and it's still just a luxury toy for the sufficiently rich. Watch out for billionaires throwing steel balls, that'll fuck the windows right up.

Just not being exclusively the domain of the government would make it a hell of a lot cheaper.

As has been pointed out repeatedly, there is a civilian market for tanks. Seems like it's exclusively disarmed military surplus, though.

[West Leas Oros 2]

Just not being exclusively the domain of the government would make it a hell of a lot cheaper.

As has been pointed out repeatedly, there is a civilian market for tanks. Seems like it's exclusively disarmed military surplus, though.

Eh, with the right resources and skill...

[Ifreann]

As has been pointed out repeatedly, there is a civilian market for tanks. Seems like it's exclusively disarmed military surplus, though.

Eh, with the right resources and skill...

And money.

[The Emerald Legion]

Just not being exclusively the domain of the government would make it a hell of a lot cheaper.

As has been pointed out repeatedly, there is a civilian market for tanks. Seems like it's exclusively disarmed military surplus, though.

Which means....? Again. Just because you can buy disarmed military surplus doesn't mean that there are civilian production tanks.

Besides a tank needs more than one person to crew effectively. So presumably, the four or so people crewing the tank would each pitch in part of the funding.

[Dylar]

As has been pointed out repeatedly, there is a civilian market for tanks. Seems like it's exclusively disarmed military surplus, though.

Which means....? Again. Just because you can buy disarmed military surplus doesn't mean that there are civilian production tanks.

Besides a tank needs more than one person to crew effectively. So presumably, the four or so people crewing the tank would each pitch in part of the funding.

Iirc civilians can own a fully armed tank as long as they have a federal Destructive Device permit. It's a lot of money and you have to be a model citizen in order to acquire a permit, but its doable.

[Chernoslavia]

So? The Killdozer with it's Barrett .50 cal would've been able to take on actual tanks from the 1st World War and Interwar periods.

How, crashing into a museum?

Again, by using it’s .50 cal.