Mark F. Cook · 30 August 1990
In message 1502 [email removed] (Brent L. Woods) writes:
.
.
.
> After reading Adrian's last reply, I was going to send him some
>private mail suggesting that we "agree to disagree." However, the
>(most recent) quoted material "gave me furiously to think." ;-)
>
> I've reached the conclusion that we (Adrian and I) were both
>"right." More on that later...
Yah. I think so too. It seems a little like arguing apples and oranges,
but I just can't imagine a high-TL laser pistol having "iron sights".
This would be analogous to a modern fighter pilot having to aim all of
his on-board weapons just by looking out the window (without the HUD).
.
.
.
>> ...You could treat a .22 cal. rifle and pistol as being
>>comparable to firing a laser weapon, since they have virtually zero
>>recoil.
>
> I agree with this. I shoot competition, so I have quite a bit of
>experience with .22 rifles and pistols (caveat: I don't fire "off the
>shelf" weapons; I use match weapons, which are slightly different).
>>People who've fired .22 semi-auto pistols may disagree with this
>>statement, but 95% of the recoil that you feel with a small caliber
>>pistol is the bolt being thrown, and not the recoil of the slug
>>itself.
>
> Depends on the pistol. My match pistol has no perceptible recoil,
>but it's very massive, compared to other .22 automatics.
So naturally, the overall weight of the weapon tends to damp the slide
recoil out of existance. However, for standard "plinking" pistols, the
slide recoil is more apparent (but then, I'm sure you know this already).
>>>I maintain that unless an advanced sighting mechanism (which includes
>>>some sort of automatic stabilization) is used, firing a laser pistol
>>>will be as different from firing a laser rifle, as a slug-throwing
>>>handgun would be from a rifle of the same caliber.
>
> Here's where my disagreement makes itself felt. I just don't see
>that much difference between using my rifles and pistol. The rifles
>are heavier, and touch my shoulder, but that's about it. I'm strange,
>though. I don't use the sights. I just hold the weapon until it feels
>right, and then fire. I'm a pretty good marksman, too, if I do say so
>myself... :-)
I, too, think of myself as "a pretty good marksman" (even though I haven't
shot competition in many years). However, I still need the dovetail/scope
when I hunt. I think this is true for most people, especially your
standard ground-pounder. You know how infantrymen are issued rifles while
their officers carry sidearms. Most enlisted types can't hit the broad
side of a barn with a pistol, even after marksman training (with the rifle),
unless they already have some pistol experience, prior to entering the
service. Any target over 50 feet away is probably safe from harm. This
is why magazines like "Gun & Ammo" still recommend a high-powered handgun,
over a short shotgun, for purposes of home defense. Most home defense
shots are at targets within 20 feet and at that range, a shotgun won't
have started to spread out appreciably yet. With a handgun at 20 feet,
(particularly, a semi-auto handgun) you don't aim, you just point in the
general direction and start squeezing the trigger as fast as you can.
(There's also the fact that a handgun is easier to maneuver indoors, but
that's another story.) Once you get the bad guy outside, I'll go for a
long arm every time.
Again, all of this is moot if you assume a sophisticated, gyro-stabilized
sighting system associated with the pistol (which we do).
> >Personally, my feeling is that by the time laser weapons come into
> >wide use as individual defense weapons, they will include advanced
> >aiming devices (i.e. gyro-stablized scopes with electronically
> >enhanced imaging capablities). Once this happens, then there WILL be
> >no different between aiming a pistol vs. a rifle. IMPORTANT NOTE: if
> >you assume that this IS, in fact, the way lasers are rigged, then
> >Brent is right and Adrian is wrong.
>
> I do, in fact, make that assumption (no surprise, right?).
Me too. In fact, I have a general gripe about the breakdown of personal
weapon skills in MT anyway. I plan to post something in a few days.
This particular discussion is going to be a great lead-in to that
topic.
>>Most of these observations are based on a lifetime of hunting (since
>>age 12), plus a stint in the U.S. Marines. I've had the opportunity
>>to use most major types of civilian-available firearms, plus my fair
>>share of auto-fire weapons and other nasty explosive sundries whilst
>>in the service.
>
> Jarhead training, eh? ;-) ;-)
As a former member of an Elite Fighting Force, consisting mostly of
highly-trained, knuckle-dragging men with no neck and one eye-brow,
I feel I must warn you that ANY derogatory or disparraging remarks
you make, containing words of more than one syllable, will almost
certainly be mis-understood :-).
Later,
Mark F. Cook
USMail: User Interface Technical Support
Hewlett-Packard - Interface Technology Operation
[address removed]
INTERNET: [email removed]
UUCP: {cmcl2, harpo, hplabs, rice, tektronix}!hp-pcd!markc