When and on what rifles do bayonets stop being important?
>Repeaters like the 1960 henry, spencer and bolt actions because they have more than 1 shot (or WWI era bolt actions because the machine gun ends the cavalry and bayonet charges)
>Clip fed semi auto rifles like the M1 Garand and SKS
>detachable box mag fed rifles like the STG44, AK, FAL, G3 and AR?
>When and on what rifles do bayonets stop being important?
All of them after 1884
since when bolt action ceased to be default weapon due to smg and semiauto.
at close range you still can't dodge bullets, but you have good chance to dodge the line of aim of a long ass, slow to reload bolt action (in the trench warfare, city rubble meaning and not gunjutsu ninja meaning)
yeah
The kiwis' had LMT put the bayonet mount at the three o'clock so that it wouldn't interfere with a mounted grenade launcher.
I dont really get the point of a bayonet on a detachable box fed semi auto for the purpose of anything other than riot/crowd control. And even then I'd like to see if someone actually did a study to prove that rioters are more compliant when they are afraid of getting stabbed vs shot.
Like the whole afgans/iraqis are afraid of handguns urban myth because they see people with rifles all the time, but assume anyone with a handgun is there to do war crimes
Yes, riot and crowd control is very useful. People as a rule don't like being stabbed or shot, but a stray gunshot could rapidly escalate a situation from angry confrontation to full out massacre.
>I dont really get the point of a bayonet on a detachable box fed semi auto for the purpose of anything other than riot/crowd control.
The point is to always have a weapon. Obviously bayonet charges are essentially non-existent in modern warfare, but in the event a force has no ammunition, no chance of resupply or reinforcement, and no desire to surrender they will still have bayonets.
Militaries still train hand-to-hand combat even though it isn't a planned part of any tactic. Would you rather have to choke someone to death who may or may not be physically stronger than you, or just stab them from 3 feet away with a pointy stick?
fighting with no ammo using bayonets instead of surrendering is moronic
And surrender is for homosexuals. If I'm ever sent to war and my comrade in arms even so much as suggests surrender I'm killing him before he finishes his sentence. If my government chooses to capitulate I'm going to kill them first before restarting the war with whatever country they gave up to
How to tell everyone you've never served without saying that you've never served.
Yeah because the army is full of gays that believe in the notion of "surrender" and "war crimes" and thinks collecting guns off my fallen enemies is "amoral" and using my canned farts as a weapon is "against the Geneva convention". I cannot understand how anyone could serve in such a circus
Depends entirely on who you are surrending too
Did you not the see the video of the ukie that got his balls cut off? That’s what happens when you surrender.
The British carried out Bayonet charges and Iraq and Afghanistan and either killed or made the enemy forces retreat. And barely took any casualties doing it. So its not moronic
>believing britbong propaganda
Post GoPro video or didn't happen.
If you have an L85A1 a bayonet, albeit a rubbish bayonet, is a good thing to have.
Wee Jimmy with a gopro was probably too busy to film it that day.
>*gets burn alive in POV camp a month later*
Being able to poke the front man in an angry crowd with your bayonet is useful. It is the military stopgap between harsh words and gunfire.
Boomer's fudd.
No riot police uses sharp weapons and there is hugw reason for this.
Idiot boomer officer trying to crowd control with bayones is setting up huge disaster for his soldiers. Point is bayonet use is deadly force it is on the same force escalation scale as shooting. Only shooting overmatches protesting crowd when employment of pointy sticks crowd can easily match with their own pointy sticks. So soldiers can easily be defeated, beaten and killed when using their bayones. Also these bayonets are mounted on the guns, and guns can get in the hands of the crowd and be used to shoot back.
>reee fudd (???)
>the crowd will just take your service rifle even though it's secured to your body
>your fellow men holding loaded rifles will surely not just slot the moron struggling to grab a rifle while being stabbed
Never reply to me again. Dumb piece of shit.
>>No riot police uses sharp weapons and there is hugw reason for this.
Riot police tends to have lots of less lethal options, from batons to tear gas grenades to cs filled paintballs to bean bag rounds for shotguns and so on. Infantry as rule of thumb doesn't usually carry that kind of kit around.
That is point riot police can have everything. They could equip themselves with pikes and zweihanders if they could useful. But they absolutely not.
Because there is 2 possibilities
1. You have no authorisation for deadly force, then sending troops with sharp deadly weapons is essentially sending them unarmed and sending them to be beaten. Or they may stab and kill someone that is direct violation if the order. Lose lose for soldiers l. Though boomer officer can escape responsibility "it's me troops fault I didn't ordered killings hurr Durr".
2. You have authorisation for deadly force. Then you just shoot people. And this is much safer for troops and can he employed in controled fashion (you shoot couple people for starters, others dispersed and you can stop killing immediately). When melee brawl with stabbings and casualties is chaos and not easily contrled. Also God forbid among crowd there are terrorists more prepared with guns who are waiting to shoot your troops when they come close to crowd with bayonets.
>people talking about bayonets
>hurr durr civilian riot police
>Crowd control
You got it! Bayonets are great at this. Nobody wants to be inadvertently pushed onto a bayonet because the crowd behind them surges not knowing the situation right up front. It keeps crowds somewhat opened up right in front of the cordon.
what is the point of the cover on the acog, to reduce the light going into the fiber optic?
bongs did a bayonet charge in iraq 2
bongs are moronic
he who fights and runs away lives to fight another day
I guess there is that
That's a shitty line made up by pussies that ran. Cowards die a thousand times but the brave only die once
That's only true for asymmetrical warfare otherwise you're a traitorous b***h
And you can't kill anyone if you surrender moron. How many POW camp guards can you kill as a POW versus taking all the pervatin and activating rage mode?
pows get liberated and large scale pow breaks place a significant strain on enemy resources
I just don't get the meme. WWI happened. We know commanders were moronic and fell for shit memes. We know people died for no reason other than memes.
Bayonets were probably never (post-1900) actually good. For every example of a bayonet kill you see a hundred deaths from the exact same meme. Using knives without the constraint of mounting is just better.
>Using knives without the constraint of mounting is just better.
Are you moronic? The entire reason that rifles were so long leading into WW1 was because generals were still extremely concerned about the reach of a bayonet. A long pointy stick is much better than a short pointy stick, especially when the other guy has a long pointy stick as well. hand to hand combat in war isn't a street fight where you just knock the other guy out then go home. It's quite literally a fight for survival between two desperate animals. You are much better off stabbing someone before they touch you than wrestling them to the ground in a knife fight.
>The entire reason that rifles were so long leading into WW1 was because generals were still extremely concerned about the reach of a bayonet.
Wrong.
It's is because rifle fire ruled battlefield and rifle range was its most important characteristic. There was rifle range arms race.
even by napolian and the civil war by the absolute latest bayonets were basically never used to cause casualties, they basically were used to capture ground because most enemies routed when faced with a bayonet charge rather than trying to get in a medieval style pike match
Washington and Lafayette literally won the revolution because they were good at running away and denying the bongs decisive victory.
Well I guess Washington was. Lafayette was just based because the bongs wanted to ransom him off for a fortune in France so they would often leave the main American force alone to retreat just to go chase after Lafayette who would just have his troops shoot and scoot over and over
yeah, but you still reload via charger/enbloc clip and they are arguably a generation between the mauser/lee enfield and FAL/AK/AR
>Using knives without the constraint of mounting is just better.
Never fought with a bayonet, or a bayonet-like weapon.
The M1 Garand and SKS are still magazine fed you dummy.
What about CQB rated flash suppressors, like the Phantom Flash hider? Meme or just useful for breaking glass panels?
Never, humanity will never stop stabbing each other. Long after the last gun is shot and misslie launched we'll still be using sharp bits of rock and wood to kill each other. Bayonets objectively improve your ability to stab so therefore they will never be worthless
Bayonets are useless until they're not, then they become absolutely invaluable, being able to break the will of combat veterans and cause surrender or rout. While most fighters can rationalize gunfire or shell fire, a screaming madman with a sharpened bit of metal about to ram it through your body until you stop breathing. Bullets or frag have a 80% survival rate, bayonets? Less than 1%. Even fighters who view death in battle as the highest honor, the thought of being impaled over and over while you flail and wail completely destroys any honorable death.
>mareen who has killed with a bayonet
I had to dead check fighters in Fallujah, and I found a survivor, it took 5 thrusts to his chest to make him stop screaming and 2 more to his neck to finally kill him. I can sometimes hear his screams when my kids scream in pain or fear, and I got to separate myself for awhile.
>worst ways to die
Burning, bayonet, and beating. I've seen them all.
>I had to dead check fighters in Fallujah, and I found a survivor, it took 5 thrusts to his chest to make him stop screaming and 2 more to his neck to finally kill him. I can sometimes hear his screams when my kids scream in pain or fear, and I got to separate myself for awhile.
I hope you at least get 100% from the VA for that lol
70. And I had to fight like a motherfricker for that.
>what is the reason for your affliction?
Try being #1 or #2 on a stack for a week straight because we lost nearly a dozen guys.
>what is reading comprehension
>Marine incompetence
>Army was in charge
moron.
I didn't read your post because it was moronic schizo writing that I dont care about
>moronic schizo writing
moron.
even back during Napoleon bayonets accounted for a negligible number of deaths in combat
How do you read apostthat starts with "bayonets are useless until there not" and reply with "b-b-but they caused very few deaths" does your brain have latency?
I read the first few words, decided it was written by a moron and then replied. Do you really expect me to read his entire moronic post?
What's moronic about it also your one to talk mang u seem like the slow one here.
its boring and is written by a brain damaged schizo
OK but you do realize you are complaining about having to read his post but when u said that dumb ass shit u had to have read his first sentence which was "bayonets are useless till there not" I won't reply again cus I can feel the braincells depleting
I didn't read his post because it is gay and moronic. cope
I said I wasn't gonna reply again but holy fricking shit your stupid. Brain dead bozo
if it makes you feel better, I didn't read your post either, because it is gay shit
Did your master not teach you how to read? Go back to the woodpile nig
I don't have a master, I just dont read homosexuals
your statistics are bullshit and fallujah went sideways because of marine incompetence
>When and on what rifles do bayonets stop being important?
When a soldier could just shoot a second bullet
bayonets stopped being important way before ww1. their purpose was always as an anti-cavalry weapon, a cost effective replacement for pikemen.
but since knives are still useful and probably always will be, there is little reason not to make your knife double as a bayonet, which is why they persist to this day. and a knife on a stick has more uses than just stabbing people. bayonets can be used as a demining tool when other tools are unavailable for whatever reason.
bayonets were important because firearms were unreliable and slow and logistics were an afterthought or at best hindrance to operations
They used bayonets on D day
you're a fat kyke and I hate you bayonet chads ftw