Infantry Discussion Thread part 11: Gallas Razor edition.

[Sevvania]

In all likelyhood most nations by the mid 40s to 50s face the same choice: either they split their infantry cartridges into a light intermediate "assault rifle" round and keep their existing full calibre rifle round for machine guns ie 7.92mm kurz/8mm mauser or 7.62x39mm and 7.62x54mmR or they try to make a single do it all cartridge ie .280 british (of whatever flavour) or 7.62x51mm.

Basically this.

7.62 NATO is "better" by virtue of being at least slightly more contemporary than stuff like 7.92 Mauser and .30-06, but you're still generally going to have some sort of legacy cartridge in one form or another and you're not going to suffer immensely by retaining it because full calibers are no longer The Thing™️. As long as you do have access to some sort of intermediate cartridge for general use, it doesn't really matter if your sniper rifles are in 8mm or .30-06.

[Cisairse]

I could be wrong, but wasn't the initial justification of switching to 7.62×51mm NATO that it offered similar ballistic performance to .30–06 in a smaller/lighter profile?

[Puzikas]

Ya

[The Manticoran Empire]

I could be wrong, but wasn't the initial justification of switching to 7.62×51mm NATO that it offered similar ballistic performance to .30–06 in a smaller/lighter profile?

It was primarily dictated by the US, who wanted .30 caliber rifles until the 60s.

[Purpelia]

I have a question that has been nagging me for some time now and that google has failed me on. Just what benefit is there in having the bolt on your firearm stay open when you run out of ammo? I mean what is the point? I tried searching for this but have found no real explanation. And whilst I can speculate I'd rather hear an answer from someone who has shot firearms and can tell me first hand.

[Spirit of Hope]

I have a question that has been nagging me for some time now and that google has failed me on. Just what benefit is there in having the bolt on your firearm stay open when you run out of ammo? I mean what is the point? I tried searching for this but have found no real explanation. And whilst I can speculate I'd rather hear an answer from someone who has shot firearms and can tell me first hand.

It slightly speeds up the process of reloading, especially if you place the bolt release in such a way that it can be easily hit while inserting the new magazine. Plus it serves as a visual/physical reminder that you have run out of ammo and need to reload.

[Izukyu]

I have a question that has been nagging me for some time now and that google has failed me on. Just what benefit is there in having the bolt on your firearm stay open when you run out of ammo? I mean what is the point? I tried searching for this but have found no real explanation. And whilst I can speculate I'd rather hear an answer from someone who has shot firearms and can tell me first hand.

It slightly speeds up the process of reloading, especially if you place the bolt release in such a way that it can be easily hit while inserting the new magazine. Plus it serves as a visual/physical reminder that you have run out of ammo and need to reload.

This, basically. Especially on platforms like the M4, it allows you to hit a bolt release button when you insert a new mag, which chambers the new round. Way faster than having to pull the charging handle to chamber a new round with a closed bolt.

[Champagne Socialist Sharifistan]

Do reformed juvenile delinquents make worse infantrymen?

I have read those with criminal history waivers get more medals for bravery
(Maybe due to a desire for repentance, maybe due to a risk-taking personality, who knows?) and more likely to rise up the NCO ranks but also more likely to face disciplinary action.

[Dayganistan]

Do reformed juvenile delinquents make worse infantrymen?

I have read those with criminal history waivers get more medals for bravery
(Maybe due to a desire for repentance, maybe due to a risk-taking personality, who knows?) and more likely to rise up the NCO ranks but also more likely to face disciplinary action.

How many times are you going to ask this identical question just phrased differently?

[Gallia-]

I'm not even sure it's phrased that differently.

[Champagne Socialist Sharifistan]

Do reformed juvenile delinquents make worse infantrymen?

I have read those with criminal history waivers get more medals for bravery
(Maybe due to a desire for repentance, maybe due to a risk-taking personality, who knows?) and more likely to rise up the NCO ranks but also more likely to face disciplinary action.

How many times are you going to ask this identical question just phrased differently?

Until someone Not gallia answers

[Gallia-]

At least five separate people have answered your questions now.

[Izukyu]

Do reformed juvenile delinquents make worse infantrymen?

I have read those with criminal history waivers get more medals for bravery
(Maybe due to a desire for repentance, maybe due to a risk-taking personality, who knows?) and more likely to rise up the NCO ranks but also more likely to face disciplinary action.

All sorts of people end up in the military, scumbags included. Some scumbags make really good soldiers, others continue to actively victimize their fellow soldiers and units. Then again there are people with squeeky-clean backgrounds that end up finally getting discovered as the creep/addict they are due to the increased supervision and monitoring of the military.

If you want to recruit people with criminal records, cool. But don't expect them to be some kind of magic factor that will improve your military. It's always a mixed bag.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

If you got a competent psych eval board most career criminals would fail at that point of vetting anyway.

[Champagne Socialist Sharifistan]

If you got a competent psych eval board most career criminals would fail at that point of vetting anyway.

People's minds change from their teens to their twenties.
A criminal at 15 may be law-abiding at 25.

[Champagne Socialist Sharifistan]

Do reformed juvenile delinquents make worse infantrymen?

I have read those with criminal history waivers get more medals for bravery
(Maybe due to a desire for repentance, maybe due to a risk-taking personality, who knows?) and more likely to rise up the NCO ranks but also more likely to face disciplinary action.

All sorts of people end up in the military, scumbags included. Some scumbags make really good soldiers, others continue to actively victimize their fellow soldiers and units. Then again there are people with squeeky-clean backgrounds that end up finally getting discovered as the creep/addict they are due to the increased supervision and monitoring of the military.

If you want to recruit people with criminal records, cool. But don't expect them to be some kind of magic factor that will improve your military. It's always a mixed bag.

Thanks

[Champagne Socialist Sharifistan]

If you got a competent psych eval board most career criminals would fail at that point of vetting anyway.

What about for crimes of passion? Most people are more impulsive in adolescence

[Izukyu]

If you got a competent psych eval board most career criminals would fail at that point of vetting anyway.

People's minds change from their teens to their twenties.
A criminal at 15 may be law-abiding at 25.

Depends on the crimes, depends on the person. If someone is engaging in criminality and associating with criminal influences in their formative years and doesn't have protective factors pushing them back into law-abiding behavior, the outlook probably isn't great. Generally low-level criminality carries over the arbitrary boundary of 18 and usually begins to escalate as people get older in my experience.

If you got a competent psych eval board most career criminals would fail at that point of vetting anyway.

What about for crimes of passion? Most people are more impulsive in adolescence

A psych evaluation is not necessarily going to detect people predisposed to crimes of passion, which are situational and unplanned by definition. It's more likely to flag people who think that stealing stuff that doesn't belong to them is okay and other such deviant thought processes.

[Gallia-]

The best way to keep recidivism low is to have any potential criminal marry and have a child with someone with no criminal history or predisposition to criminality (chronic lying, adultery, etc.). Preferably at a young age like 18 or 20-ish so. That, and getting a legitimate job (perhaps as a laborer in manufacturing or something that requires very few qualifications), has the best protective effects against future criminal behavior when put together, but marriage is the stronger of the two.

This is hard in cultures consumed by criminality though.

Someone who commits a crime of passion is unlikely to make a good soldier because they will make random snap judgments and expose themselves or their friends to danger. If he's willing to kill a man for sleeping with his wife, what's to stop him from killing the sergeant major because he called him an asshole? Of course, if you have a deviant or legally degenerated society which views murder as "not too bad" in the eyes of jurors or magistrates or whatever, I suppose this isn't an issue.

[Champagne Socialist Sharifistan]

The best way to keep recidivism low is to have any potential criminal marry and have a child with someone with no criminal history or predisposition to criminality (chronic lying, adultery, etc.). Preferably at a young age like 18 or 20-ish so. That, and getting a legitimate job (perhaps as a laborer in manufacturing or something that requires very few qualifications), has the best protective effects against future criminal behavior when put together, but marriage is the stronger of the two.

This is hard in cultures consumed by criminality though.

Someone who commits a crime of passion is unlikely to make a good soldier because they will make random snap judgments and expose themselves or their friends to danger. If he's willing to kill a man for sleeping with his wife, what's to stop him from killing the sergeant major because he called him an asshole? Of course, if you have a deviant or legally degenerated society which views murder as "not too bad" in the eyes of jurors or magistrates or whatever, I suppose this isn't an issue.

These are all good points.
In Sharifistan it's relatively common for members of the police and Army to be involved in fights like the book mentioned for RUC guys.
Also if he did that at 15 the parts of the brain that deal with impulse control have probably developed better.

In Sharifistan there are more women than men so despite polygyny most men eventually get married.

[Champagne Socialist Sharifistan]

The best way to keep recidivism low is to have any potential criminal marry and have a child with someone with no criminal history or predisposition to criminality (chronic lying, adultery, etc.). Preferably at a young age like 18 or 20-ish so. That, and getting a legitimate job (perhaps as a laborer in manufacturing or something that requires very few qualifications), has the best protective effects against future criminal behavior when put together, but marriage is the stronger of the two.

This is hard in cultures consumed by criminality though.

Someone who commits a crime of passion is unlikely to make a good soldier because they will make random snap judgments and expose themselves or their friends to danger. If he's willing to kill a man for sleeping with his wife, what's to stop him from killing the sergeant major because he called him an asshole? Of course, if you have a deviant or legally degenerated society which views murder as "not too bad" in the eyes of jurors or magistrates or whatever, I suppose this isn't an issue.

Just for the record when you say distribution of women you mean monogamy not rape?
Most of my nationstates nations (especially the ones that represent my views) view rape as sufficiently abhorrent it's not worth any gains from it

[Champagne Socialist Sharifistan]

The best way to keep recidivism low is to have any potential criminal marry and have a child with someone with no criminal history or predisposition to criminality (chronic lying, adultery, etc.). Preferably at a young age like 18 or 20-ish so. That, and getting a legitimate job (perhaps as a laborer in manufacturing or something that requires very few qualifications), has the best protective effects against future criminal behavior when put together, but marriage is the stronger of the two.

This is hard in cultures consumed by criminality though.

Someone who commits a crime of passion is unlikely to make a good soldier because they will make random snap judgments and expose themselves or their friends to danger. If he's willing to kill a man for sleeping with his wife, what's to stop him from killing the sergeant major because he called him an asshole? Of course, if you have a deviant or legally degenerated society which views murder as "not too bad" in the eyes of jurors or magistrates or whatever, I suppose this isn't an issue.

Also crimes of passion are treated relatively leniently by judges.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

For the love of Amaterasu LEARN TO EDIT.

[Champagne Socialist Sharifistan]

Can any find studies to show that "in polygamous societies barely any men find wives"?

Women do find rich men attractive but they also want an emotional connection and often find other qualities (such as physical strength or confidence)
attractive.
Are there any studies to suggest that most women would rather be with a rich man without an emotional connection than with a middle-class man (neither rich nor poor but in the richer half of society) who gives them an emotional connection and is also extremely strong, confident, a war hero etc.?
The only study I read showed both men and women emphasise love as the top quality but income was also important (especially for women in looking for a husband

[Dayganistan]

Can any find studies to show that "in polygamous societies barely any men find wives"?

Women do find rich men attractive but they also want an emotional connection and often find other qualities (such as physical strength or confidence)
attractive.
Are there any studies to suggest that most women would rather be with a rich man without an emotional connection than with a middle-class man (neither rich nor poor but in the richer half of society) who gives them an emotional connection and is also extremely strong, confident, a war hero etc.?
The only study I read showed both men and women emphasise love as the top quality but income was also important (especially for women in looking for a husband)

This is the INFANTRY discussion thread for discussing INFANTRY and SMALL ARMS, not this crap.