>a weapon that is designed for shooting birds that fires multiple small projectiles
>sounds like the perfect weapon to shoot at a bank robber when people are near by or to shoot at a rioter
When did American cops start using shotguns and why did they decided to use shotguns? When did they start using carbines? It seems like yuro cops or at least the gendarmerie traditionally carried carbines and SMGs. Only shitty colonial cops in places like burma and india used single shot shotguns with proprietary cartridges made on surplus rifle actions like the greener police gun or the .410 enfields, but that was just so the savages couldn't "steal" those police guns and go on to do a rebellion
The US has had a love of shotguns for a while. The Marine Corp in particular during the early American period used them a great deal, and it stuck with us culturally.
shotguns I get for legit marines in the age of sale because if you are firing from boat to boat having a spread is probably pretty based and you didn't need those frick huge round balls you needed on land because lol no horses
>the age of sale
IIIIIIIIIIII'M SALLLLLLLLLLING AWAYYYYYYYYYY
SET AN OPEN COURSE
FOR THE MERCHANT SEA
who could forget the OG army shotgun?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winchester_Model_1897
Shotguns are devastating weapons. A blast of buckshot will reduce just about any threat.
%3D
%3D
%3D
are you under the impression that police use birdshot in the US? magnum buck is the standard and ARs always get grabbed first since North Hollywood
No, OP and others brought up Birdshot. I only pointed out that even Birdshot is lethal up close.
Isn't there a shooting video, where someone eats close up birdshot and is fine?
There's also a shooting video where someone eats three rounds from a 40SW and is fine.
That's neat, but I've never seen that result with buck.
Unless your point is regular pistol rounds are inadequate for self defense because they fail more often than buckshot, it's irrelevant, unless someone said birdshot was better than buckshot.
nono you dont understand, when killing men you must use the ammo for killing small game instead of the ammo ment for big game
The concept of many little shots in one big tube is basically as old as firearms and scale from ratshot to canister.
>what is birdshot vs buckshot
motherfricker probably thinks the higher the gauge number the bigger the shell, we took the bait
>firing multiple projectiles into a crowd
Wrong board
This moron really thinks shot spreads across whole rooms.
>getting your firearm education from vidya
Far more people more familiar with the shotgun back in the day, especially in comparison to a submachine gun. They were also substantially cheaper. Whereas police in Europe, particularly gendarmerie, have always been more militarized the militarization of police in the US only happened as a result of the war on drugs. They were comparatively better funded and trained as they were an agent of the state and the state was eager to invest in them. In the American frontier a shotgun was useful for hunting and most people would be familiar with it because of that. When you are living pre WW2 America your choices are issue police with shotguns they are familiar with, submachine guns they are unfamiliar with, or full power hunting rifles they are familiar with. The shotgun is a very effective close range weapon and makes way more sense than a bolt action or whatever action right, although you did see police carrying lever action rifles in the same time. In fact I know two old timer police officers who carried Winchester .30-30s through their retirement in the mid '80s. Post WW2 there was institutional interia for the shotgun, and it worked pretty well for the handful of shootouts cops got into, until the war on drugs turned cops into soldiers.
Take a look at the guns your grandpa owned. Now ask yourself if he'd be more comfortable using a Winchester model 12 or a grease gun? Most households in America had a hunting shotgun or two, a couple .22s, and maybe a hunting rifle. If you wanted an additional gun for self defense a handgun was the first choice. In Europe hunting was a middle and upper class pass time as opposed to lower class sustenance activity, so your average cop is starting with no familiarity on any long gun.
Finally - how many cases are there of cops back in day hitting bystanders with a buckshot pellet? Largely a non issue, and certainly not a reason to give them a relatively hard to control submachine to touch a burst of with.
Forgot to mention - in the American west especially you had cops who may well deal with large wild animals more often than armed violent offenders. A shotguns versatility is nice when you're putting down a wounded moose or dealing with a mountain lion. Nonissue in the more urbanized Europe of the same era.
Not to mention the cost of a shotgun circa the early 1900's was about $15 to $20. The cost of a submachinegun was about $150 to $250. This is when the average working class annual salary was $500. You are talking about spending a weeks wages to buy a shotgun that can do a bit of everything with acceptable results, or a gun that can do one thing really well for 6 months salary.
If thompsons were only just invented and sold new today they would be retailing for something like $25,000 to $30,000. You def wouldn't find very many cops being issued them.
>Not to mention the cost of a shotgun circa the early 1900's was about $15 to $20.
for what? a single barrel or a side by side?
In catalogs from around the 1900's prices on break action shotguns ranged from $3 for single barrel trash quality models to $20 for name brand double barrel shotguns. For pump action shotguns the price ranged anywhere from $20 to $40.
The thompson submachineguns for sale in these same catalogs ranged from $200 to $250, with just the magazines being $20 for stick mags and $40 for drum mags. This is in an era when the average working class white male made $11 a week. So yeah. Anybody could afford a shotgun, but submachineguns were prohibitively expensive. This is why gangsters and feds had them and maybe a couple really big urban departments but virtually nobody else did.
OP comparing the french gendarmie to american cops is apples to oranges. The gendarmerie were not cops, so much as an elite military organization that also did policing. No shit the Gendarmerie were using cutting edge expensive tech, they were an elite military unit operating on behalf of one of the most powerful nations on earth at the time.
Asking why American police officers and sheriff's deputies didn't use machineguns in the 1900's is like asking why the sheriff's office today doesn't have bradleys and blackhawks.
>For pump action shotguns the price ranged anywhere from $20 to $40.
Pic related is from the Sears 1912 catalog. The Winchester 1897 and Stevens 520 on the bottom right are both $21 and some cents. An Auto 5 was $30.
This page has the Auto 5 and some cheaper double barrels for anyone interested. The bigger problem not mentioned by this anon:
though is ammo.
And here's the ammo page. Even if a Thompson or other submachine gun was affordable, you'd still be stuck with the reality that each each round of handgun ammo that was suitable for use in an autoloader cost as much as a shotgun shell or more, and ammo wasn't cheap back then (take any of the price in this catalog x30.80 to adjust for inflation, or x100 to adjust for income levels at the time).
The prices for 100 rounds of each for people who don't feel like scrolling around the page, conveniently also the cost of 1 round when adjusted for income levels:
>.32 ACP - $1.34
>.38 ACP - $1.80
>.45 ACP - $2.20
>.30 Luger - $1.82
>12 gauge - $1.47-$1.89 for black powder, or $1.62-$2.28 for smokeless
>The prices for 100 rounds of each for people who don't feel like scrolling around the page, conveniently also the cost of 1 round when adjusted for income levels
>even the cheapest .22 short cost 17c per round
>.22 BB cap ammo that didn't even use any powder cost 13c/round
>the cheapest centerfire ammo costs 70c per round, and centerfire ammo under $1 per round is limited to black powder loadings of .32 revolver cartridges and .38 S&W (not special)
>rifle ammo that wasn't small/weak enough to be chambered in an SAA or similar size revolver costs $2.05-$4.65 per round, with smokeless loadings starting at $2.60
if it makes you feel better, houses now cost more paychecks from the average person than they did when that ad was made
The market completely shifted, important shit like food, housing, gas, even education was cheap as shit in comparison to today, but luxury and leisurely goods were expensive as all hell.
Mass production, corner cutting, and outsourcing of labour allowed shit that once would have cost way more than your average person could really justify buying unless they really needed it to cost virtually nothing at all, an entire families collective wardrobe would have been like 1/10th the size of your average modern teenagers closet. The problem there is back then shit was made to last forever and be easily serviceable, if you were gonna spend months of your money on it you wanted it to last you a very long time, now shit is basically made to be disposable, repairing items making zero financial sense, hell, in some cases it's cheaper to throw away something away than to buy pack of batteries for it.
>gas
Actually hasn't varied that much in price historically when adjusted for inflation.
even if you think modern cars are lame, "todays" gas is cheap when you compare what you can do with a gallon of gas vs back then. for an arbitrary comparison, a model t, adjusted for inflation might of been around 27 grand. same price as a basic tier 2023 toyota camry, and the camry has literally 10 times the horsepower, is twice or more the weight and has a top speed of 120ish mph versus the model t's 42ish mph, and STILL has double the fuel mileage.
its a shame we cant look into alternate histories and see today but without all of todays forced vehicle requirements. 2023 model t's with no airbags, no safety, 800 hp motors doing 60 mpg?
>ACKshually
adjusting for inflation only is incredibly misleading, purchasing power is ~1/4th of what it was compared to the 1950s, ~1/10th of the 1900s, and people pay significantly more taxes because of their 'higher' income brackets to buy the same commodities at substantially higher prices.
>purchasing power is ~1/4th of what it was compared to the 1950s, ~1/10th of the 1900s
How the frick do you people manage to convince yourselves of this shit?
the truth is there for anyone willing to do a simple google search
though it's actually way worse than ~1/4th lol
welcome to slavery
Hold up
A 1:1000 ratio would imply that a $10 pizza would be worth 1 cent back then
Which doesn't make any sense
Or a 12 pack of coke worth $4 would be worth .4 cents
percent Black person
luxury style stuff was more expensive but you had way more purchasing power on basic needs so I think that fricks with the numbers when shit like housing was way fricking cheaper. Hell look at the twilight zone where the guy thinks its crazy a milk shake in the 30s cost 10 cents instead of a quarter.
CPI is how inflation is calculated you fricking morons. It's independent of income level, which according to the post that initially brought this up related to ammo prices in 1912 has increased significantly more than inflation since 1912:
basically all the inflation in US history occurred in the 30s when FDR sent government thugs to confiscate all the gold and then changed it so it was like $30 per lb instead of $20 per lb and then post 1970whatever when ~~*nixon*~~ took us off the gold standard
These two events did as much damage to the future of America as the civil war.
it evens out
finished goods were WAY more expensive, finished Food was WAY more expensive, equivalent services today required the use of 4 or 5 seperate fricking service vendors, even compared to the 1980s, having something as simple today as an outdated $120 cellphone is like having a 1980s BBS server, a lexis nexis terminal, a Bloomberg terminal, a reuters terminal, and an encyclopedia set
While I am sure people would b***h, objectively people would be better off with essential or primary importance goods and services being cheaper than entertainment and finished goods. Granted, a 1:1 isn't possible because of how essential a smartphone and internet is to modern existence, but the way that consoomer goods are cheaper as frick now but essential shit is sky high is absurd. Given a choice I'd rather have an affordable house than be able to swap GPUs, phones, monitors/television screens every 3 years.
>people pay significantly more taxes because of their 'higher' income brackets
>When I realized my tax rate is fricking near 25% if I am self-employed even if it's b***h-Black person 30-40 thousand a year territory because of the medicare/social security tax.
>it evens out
it doesnt.
the CPI is right there in the image.
you're just a homosexual who argues in bad faith.
>essential things getting increasingly more expensive, while vanity items and fashion accessories designed according to planned obsolescence principle are marketed as affordable.
As if someone wanted to leave the masses despondent and impoverished.
Gendarmeries are also feds, or the fed equivalent for a unitary state. So the apt comparison is the FBI rather than the 1950 LAPD.
Samegay I guess I am wrong and some cops did use 1911s judging from
. But still it'd probably go revolvers by a wide margin, then 1911s, then some bare tiny ass number using boutique European semi-autos (until the wonder 9s and Miami Vice - once again culture coming into play - changed that) because sheriff Macgurgles saw some pasta movie with a beretta 1951 and wanted his department to have them.
hi-powers existed at the time. Granted they weren't all in surplus like the 1911, .45 acp revolvers and model 10 would have been at the time so they would have been more expensive
iirc fbi hrt started out with hi powers.
The Gendarmerie are part of the armed forces, there's no equivalent in the US except for maybe the Coast Guard.
FBI is technically civvies, gendarmerie are not.
>OP comparing the french gendarmie to american cops is apples to oranges. The gendarmerie were not cops, so much as an elite military organization that also did policing. No shit the Gendarmerie were using cutting edge expensive tech, they were an elite military unit operating on behalf of one of the most powerful nations on earth at the time.
Gendarmerie in Europe varies from country to country a lot, but most of them aren't elite in anyway. In some countries they are the rural law enforcement agency, in some other countries they are the feds and in some countries they are the highway patrol. In between civilian and military roles, in lot of countries they also run border guards and coast guard. Their military role is usually being the military police, so they are glorified security guards deal with soldiers doing stupid shit and piss tests. Sure like any large law enforcement agencies there are people that can be considered elite, basically swat teams and some other specialist roles.
When it comes to guns and Gendarmerie, they usually get issued same guns as military at large, at least historically. French Gendarmerie in particular used to be one of largest users of Ruger Mini-14, they thought FAMAS looked too aggressive for rural cops. They have or still are replacing those with G36.
There's not a single gendarmerie in Europe whose military role is solely dealing with other soldiers, in fact several of those organizations don't police the rest of the armed forces at all.
>rural law enforcement
>coast guard
>border guard
These are all seen as traditional military roles in continental Europe. The French Gendarmerie are also not rural cops either, having jurisdiction on a national level.
He's assuming that just because other nations use the word gendarmerie to describe a sort of cop, they are not THE Gendarmerie. Furthermore, comparing modern gendarmerie to those of the 19th century is kinda dumb anyways. The Gendarmerie of the 19th century fought in engagements where they'd lose 20,000 men. Def weren't "just rural cops."
>This is why gangsters and feds had them and maybe a couple really big urban departments but virtually nobody else did
I live in South Dakota, after Dillinger did his thing around Sioux Falls in 1934 a bunch of police departments in the state who had banks (which there were very few) ended up ordering everything from Colt Monitors to Thompsons. Basically the entire police budget for the year was spent in Aberdeen, Lead, Pierre, and a handful of other "cities" on fancy toys which some of those cities still have in arsenal mostly for fun or ceremonial purposes. Aberdeen has the most varied of the bunch and they're the only one with Monitors on hand, the rest have Thompsons as well as weirder things such as Standard Arms repeaters or Winchester 1907s. Pretty neat, just wish there was an easy way to see them besides knowing an officer or striking a conversation with the police chief.
It's not well remembered, but Police forces rapidly modernized their armories during Prohibition and the Depression due to the rising levels of crime by heavily armed and organized criminals. Once Prohibition was repealed and the economy began recovering (and we sent all the men over to Europe/the Pacific) this stopped being a concern and departments scaled back their equipment. Once the drug war started up on earnest and we began running into the same problems of heavily armed and organized criminals once more you began to see departments moving back to semi-auto pistols and rifles.
What I'm trying to say is that it's cyclical. You're probably never getting rid of Glocks, but it's entirely possible you'll see patrol rifles get pulled out of cars only for people to run into the same problem a decade or two later.
>Take a look at the guns your grandpa owned. Now ask yourself if he'd be more comfortable using a Winchester model 12 or a grease gun?
My grandpa fought in WW2, so probably the latter.
>Take a look at the guns your grandpa owned. Now ask yourself if he'd be more comfortable using a Winchester model 12 or a grease gun?
well nether of my Grandpa's owned guns. One of them presumably was trained on using an M1 garand because he was technically in the marines during korea because he went to basic at camp lejeune, but then got assigned to doing mail for the marines because he was friends with a politician's son. I guess he technically owned what I assume was a gewehr 98 when he was a teenager, but it didn't shoot and he traded it for a helmet. My other Grandpa was a tanker between the end of the Korean war and before Vietnam, so I think he was trained on an M1 and a grease gun
Your... they.. neither of them owned a firearm? Not even a .22 ?
Anon I..
my uncle does and I do, but no one else in my family does
>he was technically in the marines during korea because he went to basic at camp lejeune
Did he get any weird ailments?
idk he died at like 82 from smoking
Until the 90s US police were hardcore "Boomer" in the sense of traditionalism. Hence revolvers predominated despite the 1911 existing for +70 years until the start of the wonder 9s in the 80s (and even then revolvers still were more common till the 90s). This despite the cult of the 1911 and muh 45 for maybe +40 years (I'm assuming it wasn't as strong prior to ww2, but then again it emerged because of the Philipino-war and 38 types not sufficing). Cowboy boomerism just proved stronger than fuddy-five lore. You also probably had poor investment/budgets for police until the war on drugs really takes off in the 80s and the increasing security-state nature of federal funding for cops in the 90s-2000s.
Don't discount the cultural component of calculuses. We are irrational creatures and culture and 'mythos' can play a big part in our decision making even when it comes to life or death matters. Why did you get this gucci-gang AR15 and fancy-ass optics setup? Because you saw SoF using it. Why did boomer sheriff go with a revolver instead of a browning HP or some 1950 beretta or a PPK? Because it worked for John Wayne and Clint Eastwood.
That's a good explanation of it, especially the financial component.
>Hence revolvers predominated despite the 1911 existing for +70 years until the start of the wonder 9s in the 80s
aren't basically all autoloders from before the mid 1980 fricking jam o matics with anything other than ball ammo? I thought hollow points in semi autos was a relatively recent invention
From my understanding, the issue wasn't necessarily hollow points in general, but rather ammo not being as standardized as what we have now. A gun might run flawlessly with one type of ammo, but jam twice in a mag with a different type. Today, we have gotten used to just about any center-fire pistol eating everything off the shelf without a problem, yet you still frequently hear the "try different types of ammo to see what your gun likes" line, because that was the truth until quite recently. I assume that FMJ .45 worked well because loads got so standardized by WWII, while hollow points took a while to be figured out in the following decades. Also, I believe this was part of the reason why 9mm took so long to get popular in the US. Whether or not your 9mm functioned depended on what ammo you could get from your LGS.
Early hollowpoints were not very reliable in terms of stopping power until the late 90's and early 00's. They weren't scientifically designed and tested to provide reliable, replicatable performance like today. The companies would just make an arbitrary sized hollow indentation in their bullets using the same metallurgy they used for everything else in their product line and call it defensive ammo. I wish I could find it, but somebody in the early 00's took a ton of defensive ammo from the 80's and 90's and did real terminal ballistic testing on ballistics gel covered with denim. They found a full 2/3rds of that era's hollowpoints got clogged with fabric and failed to expand after impact doing little more than a normal FMJ would.
Regular joes (including cops) didn't have ready access to data like today.They stuck to what had always worked until tech advanced past them and then they had to spend 2 decades playing catch up.
According to Elmer Keith in Sixguns--1961 edition--the general consensus was that automatic pistols were reliable only with round-nosed, jacketed, ammunition. And that makes sense, the modern hollowpoint hadn't been developed at that time so guns of that era were designed to fire basic round-nose ammo. Any carry pistol designed in the last few decades, however, would have been designed with hollow point ammunition in mind.
>"try different types of ammo to see what your gun likes" line, because that was the truth until quite recently.
I still hear that about rifles in terms of accuracy and .22lr in autoloaders (well .22lr in general)
There's another side to that - Cops have to >constantly< load and unload their pistols as they go on and off-duty. The old GI-spec 1911 mag springs will start to crack and wear out after a few thousand loadings. Which isn't a problem when you're issued two mags, scrounge five more, and you're shooting them in intermittent combat for a year. Nor when you're a normal recreational shooter popping a couple mags off every couple months with your old sidearm. When you're doing it a couple times a day, five days a week, that works out to five or ten years before all your mags are fricked. And when your department's ammo supply from 1920-1965 is the same rack of spam cans of dirty WWI surp, that gets a lot worse.
On the other hand a .38 Colt Police Positive is going to unload and reload with essentially zero wear and any dirty ammo you have can be bypassed with a trigger pull. The guns are a lot more comfortable to shoot, and easy to shoot instinctively. WWII and Korea sucked up pretty much all the .45 production in the US for decades, so .38 was not only very, very cheap but stayed available even when shit was going down. After Korea, again, most of the .45 anyone was buying was corrosive surplus ball ammo, and .38 Special was still an attractive alternative.
>Cops have to >constantly< load and unload their pistols as they go on and off-duty
What type of Euro bullshit is this? That's not a thing. At all.
Lol, same with the .mil, when I was working with them, me and my colleagues never unloaded our Glawks.
depends where your at. oregon, you have to unload and reload your shotgun between each shift and each officer it passes between. 3 shifts a day, so 3 times a day, or more if anything happens.
Yeah, but anon was talking about sidearms, not the patrol car long gun.
I don't know if it was cultural. I was of gun purchasing age by 1988 and yes, it was all stuff we consider boomer/fudd guns nowadays. There are 3 much more pragmatic reasons for it.
1: WW2 era surplus guns and ammo were literally everywhere, and dirt cheap.
2: The patents on newer tactical style stuff we take forgranted today were still active, thus you could only get them from one or two places, and they were incredibly expensive.
3: The AWB meant only the grandfathered stuff was even still available anyways and whoever had it could get whatever they wanted for it.
When at a gun show in 1995 your choice was to pay $1500 for a shot to shit AR-15 (about equivalent to $3500 today) that ammo was not even particularly common to find, or give some guy $500 and walk out with a CMP shooter's grade M1 garand, a bandolier full of clips, and an 800 round box of ammo.
The decision was a pretty easy one. My opinion is, these factors meant the majority of shooters had zero or very little exposure to tactical weaponry. This meant they placed an emphasis on what they had and knew. I don't think the market was the way it was because fudds made it that way. I think fudds existed because the gun market of the time made THEM that way.
>I was of gun purchasing age by 1988
why?
Because he was born in 1970 or something, anon. I am the one he replied to so I'll defer a great deal to someone's firsthand experience given they could buy a gun the year I was literally born and he lived it. Likewise,
the financial explanations you give make a lot of sense. Same reason every tom dick and harry has an AR15 instead of a Sig 550 or an AUG or whathaveyou today. It's not that we all love AR15s, it's that they are cheap as shit and accessible and the other stuff we can't get or it's prohibitively expensive. So I can see what you mean by the whole "market made fudds, fudds didn't make the market".
I am sure there was some level of a pop cultural element for some, as I heard that motivated sales of Dirty harry's revolver and even sog/advisor types in vietnam choosing WW2 weapons explicitly. But I suppose those would be a minority of cases, more often the enthusiast who really likes guns and not the 9-to-5 cop who just wants something that'll do the job.
That and
what he said.
Tactical stuff didn't really become popular until the AWB sunset, and the patents on a bunch of stuff expired more or less all at once within about a 10 year period. The flood of slavshit like SKS's and re-build AK parts kits also scared the frick outta US manufacturers. Name brand companies like colt, ruger, remington, winchester etc etc suddenly had to compete with $75 SKS's and $300 AK-47 parts kit clones.
The import ban on most slavshit and norinco the curtailed that somewhat, but it definitely forced a reckoning with the major firearms companies. They now had market pressures to make more modern guns, and do so at more affordable price points. They jumped on the slew of expiring patents like oprah on a baked ham and started cranking out huge numbers of cheap modern tactical style firearms.
This is absolutely true. But it wasn't just the patents expiring, there were also tons of people who were annoyed about the AWB and as soon as it expired they bought the cool toys they wanted before the government had a chance to ban them again.
>like oprah on a baked ham
You ever made a ham Anon? It's actually super easy you should give it a try the next time Ham shank is on sale. I made one last week, carved it up cold and stewed it in a coke and barbecue sauce for a couple hours.
>Why did boomer sheriff go with a revolver instead of a browning HP or some 1950 beretta or a PPK?
Ammo used to vary a lot more from manufacturer to manufacturer and batch to batch than it does today, and autoloaders used to be pickier about what they'd run with. It wasn't an issue for armies as they'd have an exact specification that all of their ammo would be made to, but for police and average Joes dealing with different companies who might change their loading based on whatever components were cheapest at the time it was a significant issue. You can find old forum posts online from the late 90s/early 2000s where people were still recommending to buy a whole case of whatever ammo you intended to carry, to use some for function testing and the rest so that you'd have ammo from a batch that you knew your gun ran well with to rotate through. Pages 68 and 69 in pic related has a reliability test including a couple guns from HK and FN not being able to make it through a whole box of ammo without at least 1 malfunction due to them not liking the ammo that was used.
good answer!
this post makes me want to fix my Ithaca
update: i did it 🙂
>gun that is all but guaranteed to fricking kill anybody it is pointed at with one shot
>it's incredibly easy to use (good for stressful situations)
>cheap too
>can be loaded with rounds to breach doors
I don't get what's hard to grasp.
there is no way they were using them to breech
what the actual proliferation of pump guns in the USA before the 870 and 500 came on the market? Weren't earlier pumps fairly expensive in comparison to side by side and bolt action shotguns at the time?
Breaching doors with shotguns is a well-established technique. They even have specialized breaching shells that are designed to minimize ricochet.
No it's not.
Are you saying that it wasn't at the time or that people don't breach with shotguns at all, even today?
If it's the former then fair enough, if it's the latter you're a newbie.
Also
>can be loaded with bean bags or rubber buckshot for riot control
>can be loaded with birdshot to take down drones
>gun fires a burst of 9x .33 caliber bullets every time you pull the trigger
>does it all at once so it doesn't require the extra training to control effectively like a submachine gun would
>ammo has always been cheap, costing only 2-3x as much as the cheapest pistol ammunition that you'd be burning through at a significantly higher rate to train with
>people regularly use them for hunting and recreation purposes so a lot of people will already have experience with them
>did I mention that shotgun shooting sports are the only ones where you'll see a focus on shooting moving targets rather than stationary ones?
>hurr why did people choose it?
On the same leg, why hasnt the large amount of M1 carbines spread in the police?
>On the same leg, why hasnt the large amount of M1 carbines spread in the police?
That was definitely a thing back in the 70s after they started getting surplussed on a large scale. In fact a lot of departments would buy mini-14s later specifically because they handled just like the old M1s
Lots of them were used by police but keep in mind that many departments had no use for rifles and many of them already had shotguns or lever guns to fill the role that a M1 Carbine did.
It truly was a different time
the spread is totally overstated and not anything like it is portrayed as in video games. The only time hitting bystanders with shot that misses the target is going to realistically happen is when you're out past the 25 yard mark, and that range isn't the sort that's likely to happen in a bank robbery or whatever your hypothetical scenario was. Shotguns were perfectly suited for the task that law enforcement would use them for.
American police have used shotguns since the end of the civil war, the original use case was for shooting guys on horseback and also shooting from horseback.
They switched to carbines after the north hollywood shooting where two robbers armed with romanian ak's shot numerous officers and were almost able to escape because of the firepower disparity and their sidearms being unable to penetrate the body armour that the robbers were wearing.
Keep in mind most police engagements in America would have been at pretty close ranges, and at close ranges shotguns make some pretty big holes
The majority of police engagements today still happen inside of 25 yards.
I was a cop back before everyone had AR’s and I never felt under-armed with my 14” 870. Not gonna take out some barricaded subject at 100 yards but in realistic distances it’s brutal.
My dad was a cop back when the only rifles the sheriff's office had were some M1 garands and a couple mini 14's. Everyone carried 1911's or .38 specials as side arms. The rest of the long guns were winchester pump action 12 guages. The sheriff didn't even regularly carry a gun, he had a .38 revolver he kept in his desk and if there was a dangerous call he'd just shove it in his waistband before going out.
This was also an era when a cop could tell somebody he pulled over "I forgot my ticket book, swing by the station on monday to pick up your citation" and they totally would. My dad once had about 30 or 40 hippies show up and start squatting on somebody's land so he just went to a bar down the road, temporarily deputized all the drunk rednecks inside, and set them loose on the hippies with chair legs and pool cues until they'd been chased out of the county. The town generally regarded this decision as rather clever and resourceful and generally approved of it.
It was a different societey back then.
In the 90’s the neighboring county was allowed to buy their own Colt AR-9’s (with 16” barrel) and we thought that was pretty cool. Ngl, I loved admiring the 870 in the overhead rack, when I finally got one it felt like a real cop car. If I was a cop now I’d be happy to have an AR and shotgun.
I remember a lot of 60’s and 70’s cop pics with M1 carbines with the extended mag. The stories from the old timers were classics in creative problem solving. The county had a venue that attracted huge crowds of hippies during the Dead shows.
My work truck had an old Kojak light which was used for parking.
Simpler times. Unthinkable today, though maybe thats more of a regional thing. I'm always floored when I think about shit like the weathermen and various political organizations at the time, shit like heavily armed black student groups storming a college building to protest in favor of a black studies department or some shit. What a world. I was born in 95 so I can't remember much prior to the GWOT and the domestic stuff that came along with it.
In this post BLM/Floyd age, I couldn't imagine stirring up rednecks to go beat a bunch of squatters/protestors. I wonder how things would be different without the communication and camera intensity.
The system is working as intended.
> Guys, why is a cheap, powerful, versatile, rugged, and effective weapon popular?
> It just doesn't make any sense!
Calling it now; we'll be using shotguns on Mars.
God I hope so.
This is already documented in the prophecy that is Doom.
i think itll be more like .22's and grenades. i think punching holes into airtight suits would be easier and grenades will be insane. with 1/8th the gravity or whatever it is on the moon. youll be able to toss a grenade like 2 miles or something stupid, and the fragmentation and shrapnel will travel multiple times the regular radius.
a crowd tends to be a...crowd. yeah, when your trying to stop more then one person, more then one projectile tends to be pretty useful
>.22's and grenades
What a hilarious and entirely plausible concept.
well i didnt exactly mean .22's, more like custom, tiny flechettes, but in space, you dont really need stopping power, you just need to compromise the integrity of a space suit or...whatever their jetpack system is. a pinhole on a space craft is super dangerous in the vacuum of space, so just swiss cheese them
as far as reliable? well, heres two american 180s bubba'd together. 500 rounds of .22 at 2800 rpm. imagine it in space?
>bubba'd together
They made a quad mount, surely there must be video somewhere.
>a thousand rounds at technically 5,600 rpm
contemplate the audio feedback
A salesman apparently mounted two of them under the wings of an ultra-light plane for third world nations. 12,000 rpm of .22's.
for strafing infantry?
Listen, anon, the first rule of selling to third world dictators is to not actually ask what they intend on using the product for. You offer them a toolkit and whatever they get up to with the hammer or dual quad-mounted airborne sub-machineguns is all on them.
i want to put suppressors on them and shoot them at a few hundred yards
>no audible sound
>get ripped to shreds by hundreds of little pieces of metal
>well, heres two american 180s bubba'd together
American 360, then?
is .22 even reliable enough for mars?
The obvious facts aside (shotguns are cheap, reliable, etc.) before the advent of lasers and dot sights on conventional rifles, a shotgun with a single bead front sight had a much faster target aquisition, and higher hit probability than a rifle with irons or even a pistol sometimes.
You can load a shotgun with slugs.
It's all ya need Sonny! Just racking the slide will scare most crims into surrendering.
You can use less lethal bullets
Cheap? Only God understands those Americans.
Black folk got out of control. That’s why all cops carry Black person-killing weapons now
they only got out of control because cops stopped the lynchings
Buckshot obliterates any man-sized target between 5-10 yards with minimal chance of collateral damage. It will do severe damage within 5 yards and reliably makes multiple hits out to 20. It's a perfect close range weapon when SMGs and assault rifles aren't an option. You'll never find something that incapacitates as reliably within 1 second.
subtle troll but mods won't do anything about the explicit trolls so whatever
I guess I'll just go make a LycoReco thread on PrepHole if I ever want to talk about guns
Shotguns are perfect for riots. Lots of little rubber balls versus rubber pistol or rifle rounds is ideal for shooting into crowds or making one guy look like he went 15 rounds with Ali. Also can put flares in there for signalling other cops, tear gas, or pepper balls. Makes a great club if you need one too.
Shotguns make perfect sense for cops:
-cheap
-able to fire less-lethal ammunition like tear gas, bean bags, etc.
-shot doesn't keep lethal energy very far compared to a rifle so it's less likely to cause collateral damage in an urban environment. A rifle bullet is lethal at many hundreds of yards, shot won't kill anywhere near that far.
Most common 00 buck has as much energy per pellet as 200 yards as a .25 ACP does at the muzzle. It's deadly in worst case out to 300. If we want to talk about urban environments, that provides a significant risk when you're sending 9 of them down the street spreading out to several yards in diameter. At least the rifle has an accuracy variation measured in MOA rather than degrees, so you only have to worry about what is directly in line with your bore.
Anon, you know the spread isn't that wide, right? Also shotguns have been popular in Latin American police forces as well and in European police post-WWII.
When I was a cop, I always carried a shotgun and a rifle in my car.
you should have a nice day
Too late. I'm already dead.
I'm a game warden, we mostly keep shotguns (Benelli M1) in our trucks more as animal defense than against people. We have basic b***h ARs in inventory but a bunch of sheriff's departments around my area have a tacticool mindset with nicer, suppressed guns and NODS. It's more play-things for them to spend their obscene budgets on though.
Shotguns are actually fairly accurate at a longer distance than movies or video games would have you think.
Secondly, Americans love their boom sticks.
Reddit Jesus did a video on a version of the sten that had no sights and was designed to be hip fired at looters in late-40s germany
>When did American cops start using shotguns
1881Gunfight at the O.K. Corral
>and why did they decided to use shotguns?
1968 Martian Luther King Riots
>When did they start using carbines?
1997 North Hollywood Shootout
Because they're cool
Case closed.
All bases covered.
We were taught in crowd control training (early 90’s) to skip the buckshot off the ground to take out rioter’s lower extremities. Now they don’t even let the dogs bite anyone.
Cops exist to keep the amount of degenerate violence at the highest level the average citizen will accept without staging an armed revolt.
And also keep the plebes in line with the general possibility you can get arrested for not obeying rules.
>tfw no 70's cop show police-woman gf
why even live bros?
Cop GF = either banged or at least hit on by every other cop. Inflated self value.
Badge Bunny = Probably very unstable but fun.
It's basically to put down a close range threat immediately, and take out a door if you need to. They were using .38 specials back then. Shotgun training in academy is still required in many states, though most still haven't added rifle training to the academy process at least. I actually have to do a 16 hour shotgun refresher soon. Thousands of fricking rounds of 12ga are about to rape my shoulder for 2 days straight...
Learn the push-pull method
a two foot barrel and a .35" choke would place allot of 00 Buck within a one foot radius @ 40 yards distance
the american love affair with shotguns aka muskets with buck and ball started during the french and indian wars and fully began during the revolutionary war even george washington ordered all musket cartridges to be buck and ball
All the talk of why cops used revolvers instead of semi autos overlooks a very real aspect, which was double action. Being able to draw and fire a revolver without a safety puts it over things like the 1911 or Hi Power for your standard street officer who may need to draw and fire asap. Where you see auto loaders really take over is when the ones with double action triggers become available
DA/SA was available for decades before the wondernines pushed revolvers out in the 80s. The P38 had existed since 1938, and S&W started making the Model 39 in the 50s.
yeah, but what American police department would be adopting P38s? And yeah I know the Model 39 is a thing, the Illinois State Police adopted them in the 60s. It took until the 70s for double actions to really make a splash in America. Like I have the 1975 Gun Digest here right now, and there are only 2 US double action autos, the 39 and 59, costing $137 and $165. For foreign guns, theres the P-38 which is listed at $220. A Model 10 is only $102. This isnt even counting buying spare magazines. So yes there were 9mm double action autos out there, but not in a capacity where they were economical to fit your entire police force with. By the 1985 Gun Digest, pretty much every Wonder 9 you can think of is there, and at affordable prices. Looking through publications from 75-85 really shows the transition from revolvers to autos in America, both police and civilian
If your target has no armor and is roughly man sized, one shell of 12 gauge buckshot stands a good chance at defeating it. Most criminal gunmen don't use armor, so it's a great option.
Even then aiming at belt line with 00 or slug to shoot around the armor does wonders.
And a slug hitting soft armor is still likely to cause a serious injury.
Frick off noguns
French RAID are using Keltec KSGs against rioters right now lol
> perfect for shooting birds
yeah, jail birds heh heh heh
Because a shotgun is cheap, is nearly always a one shot drop, and you can also shoot beanbags, rubber buckshot, lockbusters and tear gas out of it. There is very little training involved in using a shotgun compared to rifles and SMGs. The spread of a shotgun is negligible within 15 yards and the projectiles are low velocity and generally do not over penetrate through suspects, cars, or exterior walls. They can also dispatch large megafauna with ease. Its the perfect civilian weapon to equip an armed civilian organization en masse.
shotgun slugs can stop most car engines, breach doors, incampacitate multiple threats non-lethally or lethally, birdshot isnt really used but buckshot is quite favored as an anti-personnel round. nowadays it's mostly used as a braching tool along with other equipment by special forces
>why did they decided to use shotguns?
Simple answer. Overpenetration isn't a problem small game shotguns have when used on humans. You don't want to risk offing a civvie because some poorly trained lardass failed to check if there were people behind the target.
Carbines were adopted to defeat armor, and by that I mean things like car doors. Something pistols and the aforementioned shotguns struggle with.
Pistols still prevail because of ease of carrying. The reason smgs weren't adopted much, or dropped off, is because having a cop that can't hit his target with a normal pistol does not suddenly improve with more recoil and a higher rate of fire. Don't get confused though, some special units still use smgs, full-auto rifles, and I know my city's SWAT has a handful of Barrett .50bmg (with regular and AP rounds) for taking out vehicles or perps in cover. But street cops don't get the fun toys.