Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'The Club House' started by Evil_Angel, May 2, 2013.
Which do you think is a more versatile gun, usefull in more situations that the other?
When you put it that way.
Shotgun, can take squirrels, rabbits, fowl, deer, feral swine, etc.
Also good medicine for bears, varmints, predators, goblins and zombies.
Goblins and zombies?
For all around social work, I prefer a modern sporting rifle such as the "assault rifle" derivatives available today.
That is my primary focus.. in a pinch i can hunt with them too.
Shotgun! For 4 legged critters, a rifle and a shotgun are equals in many cases, 2 legged, 2 winged critters offer challenges that only the very best riflemen can be successful harvesting!
Versatility is a modern pump or semi-auto shotguns forte!
And if a shotgun is 'best' why don't the US military as well as IDF, and others use them as their main battle weapon?
Soooo, best for what?
He said as far as versatility.
I agree shotguns are more versatile, due to variety of loads available. It's nothing to sneeze at that you can take on just about anything >100yrds with a shotgun.
rifles are designed to engage the enemy way before they are upon you. rifles can blast thru buildings and armor. they can shoot planes with them. rifles are designed for all phases of war.
shotguns are for in close and personal.
shotguns can shoot bullets.
"why dont the u.s military"........what a riot. the military has every weapon know to man! and they have something you dont.
they have 1 million men and women to man each one. so it doesnt matter if they dont issue one to every soldier or sailor. if and when they need them, all they need to do is order them in, and the service member comes with them.
Best all around. Whatever you get more use out of.
And they don't use shotguns 'cuz they have little range.
Oh but they do use them, just not in large numbers.
They ain't worth a damn for nailing that sniper 300 yds. out.
Odd tell that to the Marines that served on my ship, they carried shotguns when we were doing missile moves to the boomers.
Shotgun I suppose. If I had to have one or the other for everything I guess that would be best. I like to have both though I know that.
That sounds a little dangerous, don't it? Get one retard playing around and he could kill everyone.
Nah the Marines on most submarine tenders understood the risks, the missile containers were less likely to be damaged by a shotgun than a M16, to be honest I was more afraid of the swinging dick Bosun Mates that were running the cranes, they pulled one guy out of his crane when they found him smoking pot during a missile evolution.
A modern sporting rifle is more versatile. It is still good at close range ( tho not as good as a shot gun at extreme short range.. but misses in thos esituations anyway?) and excels at longer ranges.
The current magazine fed, modern issue rifle is the distillations of generations of hard won combat experience.
So if conflict is the primary conern you want somehting that resembles general issue as close as possible.
Shot gun do have a good number of niche applications in the military as well such as onboard ships where over penetration is a huuuge concern and due to the restricted nature of the beast close quarters is your only concern.
But that does not detract from the modern rifle.
Oh... did he get the crap beat out of em?
He may have fallen down several ladders on his way to our ship's brig, last I heard (mind you this was 30 years ago), he was doing some time in the brig at Norfolk (I think).
Retards go into politics, the smart ones join the military.