European Disdain For Combat Shotguns

[Gman]

I noted in another thread that German police look critically at the use of shotguns by police but have no issues with SMG's, similarly to how their military has perceived shotguns as "unsporting" or similar over the years. In fact I seem to recall a dim view taken of US doughboys using shotguns in WW1.

 

Why exactly is the SMG seen as a more humane weapon when the shotgun isn't ? I know the shotgun leaves a nasty mess of a person but so could an SMG at the ranges we're talking of using shotguns ?

 

Is it more a cultural aversion ?

[Marek Tucan]

Not sure if it is "aversion" or if simply SMGs are preferred as standard weapon. I know our police uses Shotguns, but more in SWAT-style units, while normal police forces have arms lockers with SMGs or assault rifles.

 

One thing might be that police recruits in Europe often came in the past from large conscript armies, so fresh policemen were often already trained on a SMG or similar weapon.

 

Another tradition would also (again in many countries) come with police having rots in gendarmerie and similar institutions, so again more military weapons bias.

 

I guess in the end it is just another ".45 vs. 9mm" issue

[JW Collins]

Didn't the Germans in WWI get so upset over the American use of shotguns they sent us a nasty note about it?

[DougRichards]

There was an instance of a British General telling off an Australian Major who was carrying a shotgun, as being unsporting.

 

wiki

 

"During the trench warfare of the Gallipoli Campaign, Major Stephen Midgley of the Australian 5th Light Horse Regiment was widely known to use a sawn-off double barrelled shotgun while leading his troops, resulting in Turkish officers complaining that it was not a 'weapon of war' under international law after Midgley took one Turkish soldier's head "clean off his shoulders". Midgley was ordered by an Australian general to cease using his shotgun and switch to a conventional rifle and bayonet, to which the Major was "bitterly peeved"."

 

If in WW1 the Germans didn't like the shotgun as not being a weapon of war, they probably should have thought more than twice about the flame thrower and poison gas.

 

==================

 

about European police use of shotguns, it may be that SMGs are considered more of an extension of a pistol: the stock and longer barrel, with greater ammunition capacity, providing more and better aimed shots over longer ranges than a pistol. The use on automatic, unless in exceptional circumstances not necessary being approved of. Maybe more of a carbine than an SMG

 

Even the H&K MP5SFA2 (ie non automatic) was first designed to an FBI contract.

 

Effective firing range of an SMG is up to 200m (usually 100m though), what is the maximum range of a shotgun using pellets or balls in a law enforcement senario?

Edited August 25, 2014 by DougRichards

[BansheeOne]

Didn't the Germans in WWI get so upset over the American use of shotguns they sent us a nasty note about it?

 

The 1918 German Protest (11)

On 19 September 1918, the Government of Switzerland, representing German interests in the United States, presented to the U.S. Secretary of State a cablegram received by the Swiss Foreign Office containing the following diplomatic protest by the Government of Germany:

The German Government protests against the use of shotguns by the American Army and calls attention to the fact that according to the law of war (Kriegsrecht) every [u.S.] prisoner [of war] found to have in his possession such guns or ammunition belonging thereto forfeits his life. This protest is based upon article 23(e) of the Hague convention [sic] respecting the laws and customs of war on land. Reply by cable is required before October 1, 1918.

The German protest was precipitated in part by the capture in the Baccarat Sector (Lorraine) of France, on 21 July 1918, of a U.S. soldier from the 307th Infantry Regiment, 154th Infantry Brigade, 77th Division, AEF, who was armed with a 12-gauge Winchester Model 97 repeating trench (shot) gun, and a second, similarly-armed AEF soldier from the 6th Infantry Regiment, 10th Infantry Brigade, 5th Division, on 11 September 1918 in the Villers-en-Haye Sector. Each presumably possessed issue ammunition, which was the Winchester "Repeater" shell, containing nine No. 00 buckshot.

The German protest was forwarded by the Department of State to the War Department, which sought the advice of The Judge Advocate General of the Army. Brigadier General Samuel T. Ansell, Acting Judge Advocate General, responded by lengthy memorandum dated 26 September 1918. Addressing the German protest, General Ansell stated:

Article 23(e) simply calls for comparison between the injury or suffering caused and the necessities of warfare. It is legitimate to kill the enemy and as many of them, and as quickly, as possible . . . . It is to be condemned only when it wounds, or does not kill immediately, in such a way as to produce suffering that has no reasonable relation to the killing or placing the man out of action for an effective period. The shotgun, although an ancient weapon, finds its class or analogy, as to purpose and effect, in many modern weapons. The dispersion of the shotgun [pellets] . . . is adapted to the necessary purpose of putting out of action more than one of the charging enemy with each shot of the gun; and in this respect it is exactly analogous to shrapnel shell discharging a multitude of small [fragments] or a machine gun discharging a spray of . . . bullets.

The diameter of the bullet is scarcely greater than that of a rifle or machine gun. The weight of it is very much less. And, in both size and weight, it is less than the . . . [fragments] of a shrapnel shell . . . . Obviously a pellet the size of a .32-caliber bullet, weighing only enough to be effective at short ranges, does not exceed the limit necessary for putting a man immediately hors de combat. The only instances even where a shotgun projectile causes more injury to any one enemy soldier than would a hit by a rifle bullet are instances where the enemy soldier has approached so close to the shooter that he is struck by more than one of the nine . . . [No. 00 buckshot projectiles] contained in the cartridge. This, like the effect of the dispersing of . . . [fragments] from a shrapnel shell, is permissible either in behalf of greater effectiveness or as an unavoidable incident of the use of small scattering projectiles for the necessary purpose of increasing [the] likelihood of killing a number of enemies.

General Ansell concluded his memorandum with the statement that "The protest is without legal merit." Acting Secretary of War Benedict Crowell endorsed General Ansell’s memorandum of law and forwarded it to the Secretary of State that same day. Secretary of State Robert Lansing provided the following reply to the Government of Germany two days later:

[T]he . . . provision of the Hague convention, cited in the protest, does not . . . forbid the use of this . . . weapon . . . . n view of the history of the shotgun as a weapon of warfare, and in view of the well-known effects of its present use, and in the light of a comparison of it with other weapons approved in warfare, the shotgun . . . cannot be the subject of legitimate or reasonable protest.

. . . .

The Government of the United States notes the threat of the German Government to execute every prisoner of war found to have in his possession shotguns or shotgun ammunition. Inasmuch as the weapon is lawful and may be rightfully used, its use will not be abandoned by the American Army . . . f the German Government should carry out its threat in a single instance, it will be the right and duty of the . . . United States to make such reprisals as will best protect the American forces, and notice is hereby given of the intention of the . . . United States to make such reprisals.

World War I ended six weeks later, without reply by Germany to the United States response. There is no record of any subsequent capture by German forces of any U.S. soldier or marine armed with a shotgun or possessing shotgun ammunition, or of Germany carrying out its threat against the U.S. soldiers it captured earlier. The position of the United States as to the legality of shotguns remains unchanged from that stated in the opinion of Brigadier General Ansell and the Secretary of State’s 28 September 1918 reply to the government of Germany.

[...]

Other Initiatives Relevant to the Question

In August 1992, the Government of Germany issued a new law of war manual.(16) Paragraph 407 of the manual states: "It is prohibited to use bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body (e.g., dum-dum bullets) (Hague Decl 1899). This also applies to the use of shotguns, since shot causes similar suffering unjustified(17) from the military point of view. . . ."(18)

The issue of whether shotgun buckshot violates the prohibition contained in the Hague Declaration Concerning Expanding Bullets of 29 July 1899(19) is addressed later in this article. Since the German manual’s objection to the shotgun relies upon the 1899 Hague Declaration Concerning Expanding Bullets, it can be assumed that the Government of Germany no longer regards the combat use of shotguns as a violation of the general prohibition of weapons causing superfluous injury, contained in Article 23(e) of the Annex to Hague Convention IV of 18 October 1907, as previously asserted in its diplomatic note of 23 September 1918.

[...]

11. See U.S. DEP’T OF STATE, PAPERS RELATING TO THE FOREIGN RELATIONS OF THE UNITED STATES, 1918, Supp. 2 (The World War), at 785-86 (1933). This summary is based upon official correspondence contained in this and related official documents.

[...]

16. HUMANITARIAN LAW IN ARMED CONFLICTS—MANUAL (DSK VV207320067) (August 1992) [hereinafter MANUAL].

17. The German manual’s use of the term unjustified suffering is not explained. It is not a standard recognized in the law of war. It also apparently is a standard with which the Government of Germany no longer agrees, given its endorsement of the legality of the Claymore mine, discussed infra, and German military possession of shotguns and Claymore mines as part of its Table of Equipment.

18. MANUAL, supra note 16.

19. The Hague Declaration Concerning Expanding Bullets, July 29, 1899, 1 A.J.I.L. 157-59 (Supp.). See also THE LAWS OF ARMED CONFLICTS 109-111 (Dietrich Schindler & Jiri Toman eds., 3d ed. 1988); DOCUMENTS ON THE LAWS OF WAR 39-42 (Adam Roberts & Richard Guelff eds., 2d ed. 1989).

[...]

 

http://olive-drab.com/archive/JSCS_DA-PAM_27-50-299_16.txt

 

I also believe that in the ACW, the Union threatened to hang any rebel caught with a shotgun, so US attitudes might have changed over time themselves.

[Chris Werb]

The ACW thing makes no sense given that one side at least used smoothbore muskets loaded with buck and ball in large numbers.

[DougRichards]

The ACW thing makes no sense given that one side at least used smoothbore muskets loaded with buck and ball in large numbers.

 

And at New Orleans in 1814 the Brits were fired on by American forces using buck and ball, so the use of buck and ball goes back a way in US history.

[Panzermann]

Remember, it is only evil if the enemy utilises it.

 

 

---

IMHO the strongest argument against shotguns in police use is colateral damage from the spread of shot, which by its very nature is anything but precise and can hit unintenionally innocent bystanders. And US law enforcement departments seem to turn more and more towards compact carbines like an M4 and other similar rifles and away from shotguns for general issue. One big issue with shotguns is that they need much training to use them to their potential, that is with fast reloads, change of ammunition according to situation etc. Which is time the average cop does not have anyway who is struggling to get more than the regular qualification as training exercise. Also the reach of a shotgun is barely longer than a pistol's and definitely shorter than a rifle's. And solid slugs pose a grave danger by easily going through dry walls. Many LEO schv loads just break up when hitting a wall or get stuck so there is much less of a penetration risk.

 

 

As a pyrotechnical door breaching tool or for less lethal ammunition projectors shotguns are in use on both sides of the pond. The shotgun has just never been the go to weapon in europe except for hunting ducks and other birds. And firearms use by police is less overall in europe so there was not much need for more fire power than a pistol.

[Archie Pellagio]

I don't know about "aversions" but an SMG is certainly more practical in a military context.

Can carry more ammo at less weight, have more loaded ammunition (ten three round bursts vs typically five shotgun shells) and given what a close quarters weapon a shotgun is, the reload time is extremely slow and fiddly in comparison.

Then there is the actual issue of range: an SMG might lose punch and accuracy a bit past 30m but can still be employed out much further, just less effectively, where as a shotgun becomes near useless at extended ranges.

 

As for police, probably just a cultural thing - they've always used SMGs and stick with it.

Plus I think the fact that most European militaries stayed with the 7.62x51 rifles with 9mm SMG combo for a considerable amount of time after the US switched to 5.56 probably played a role in that cultural thinking.

 

As for practicality in a riot setting, the ability to use beanbag rounds, fire tear gas and other less than lethal options make a strong argument for police use of shotguns though, more important than the lethality debate.

Edited August 25, 2014 by Archie Pellagio

[Dawes]

Shotgun use in the US military nowadays seems to be primarily relegated to breaching, guarding prisoners, etc. Not so much in the old "trench broom" capacity.

[baboon6]

Soldiers in one British tank regiment going to Korea were told to bring a shotgun. 'But not your best gun'. Obviously. I mean it was a war.

 

I cant help but think British Cavalrymen, from the cupola of their Centurions dispatching Chinese PLA soldiers point blank with gold plated purdeys would have been a sight worth seeing....

I think it was the 8th Hussars, mentioned in Max Hastings' book on the Korean War. Shotguns might have actually been useful in some of the very close range fighting the Hussars were to experience at the Imjin River! Don't if any of the officers actually did bring shotguns but it wouldn't surprise me.

 

British Army troops and police made quite extensive use of Browning and Greener shotguns in Malaya and Borneo in the '50s/'60s.

 

http://www.nam.ac.uk/online-collection/detail.php?acc=1983-07-38-1

 

http://firearmshistory.blogspot.com/2013/08/the-greener-police-shotgun.html

 

Later Brit forces used Remington 870s and now the Benelli M4.

 

http://www.warriortalk.com/showthread.php?57847-British-Army-Shotgun

[Marek Tucan]

 

As for practicality in a riot setting, the ability to use beanbag rounds, fire tear gas and other less than lethal options make a strong argument for police use of shotguns though, more important than the lethality debate.

 

Then again for these purposes there are various "grenade launchers" and stuff. Bigger bang for the buck and at the same time not a gun int he usual sense.

[Markus Becker]

With regard to German police and the use of shotguns/SMG one needs to remind oneself that such decisions are not taken in a rational manner. For ages our cops were using FMJ rounds in their handguns. It was known that such bullets were not very effective on the target and a danger to bystanders due to their tendency to go clean through the person who was hit.

 

Innocents did get hurt and probably killed too but what was the alternative? The use of the oh-so-evil hollowpoint bullets, that cause such nasty wounds. One can not have that!

 

 

The current version of this is the debate about drones. They are a no-no! Somehow firing guided missiles from an aircraft with a pilot onboard is all right but if the plane is remote controlled it's the next best thing to a warcrime.

 

 

My point being: When it comes to internal an external security, German decision makers are usually lacking common sense. Or the courage to articulate an opinion that is against the published mainstream:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spiral_of_silence

Edited August 25, 2014 by Markus Becker

[BansheeOne]

Innocents did get hurt and probably killed too

 

There were.

 

POLIZEI

Ein Schuß, zwei Tote

 

Montag, 07.12.1998, 00:00 · von Hans-Dieter Götz

Schutzpolizisten fordern zuverlässiger wirkende Munition, doch die Politiker scheuen eine heikle „Dumdum-Debatte"

Als ihr der Tobende im engen Flur mit erhobenem Messer entgegenkam, warnte ihn die Polizistin: „Werfen Sie das Messer weg, sonst mache ich von der Schußwaffe Gebrauch!“

Ein sinnloser Appell an die Vernunft. Robert T., ein amtsbekannter paranoid Schizophrener, war nicht zu stoppen. In Notwehr feuerte die 23jährige Einsatzleiterin und traf den 48jährigen aus kurzer Entfernung mitten in die Brust. Doch er fiel nicht.

Wie ein Zombie marschierte der Angeschossene weiter. Die Polizistin drückte noch einmal ab. Sie traf Robert T. am Unterkiefer – und mit demselben Geschoß dessen Bruder Leon, der unvermittelt hinter den Angreifer getreten war, in die rechte Schläfe. Leon T. starb sofort, der Angreifer Robert wenig später im Krankenhaus.

Die beiden Toten im Münchner Bahnhofsviertel am Morgen des 28. November brachten nicht nur die unglücklichen Umstände dieses Polizeieinsatzes in die Diskussion. Die beunruhigende Tatsache, daß selbst ein Treffer in die Brust den Angreifer nicht augenblicklich stoppte und der Nachschuß noch einen dahinter stehenden Unbeteiligten zu töten vermochte, provoziert darüber hinaus die Frage: Hat die deutsche Polizei die falsche Munition?

[...]

 

http://www.focus.de/politik/deutschland/polizei-ein-schuss-zwei-tote_aid_172401.html

 

In short: Attacker, known to be agressive paranoid-schizophrenic, walks unto police officers with knife in hand in the corridor of the flat they were called to, and naturally disregards warning. Cop fires a shot into his chest which fails to stop him. Fires another which hits him in the jaw and his brother, who has stepped behind him, in the head. Brother dies instantly, attacker later in hospital. I believe this was the incident that finally led to introduction of expanding ammunition.

[Chris Werb]

In Malaya as an antipersonnel weapon in th 50s, and later for bomb disposal use on Wheelbarrow robots in the 70s-80s, the UK used the Browning Auto 5 12 bore/gauge long-recoil operated shotgun.

[Markus Becker]

As far as the American Civil War is concerned:

 

 

U.S. Model 1842 Musket

Manufactured at the Harpers Ferry Arsenal, springfield Arsenal, and a handful of other U.S. arsenals prior to 1855, these smoothbore weapons were still in use by a number of Union regiments at Gettysburg including the 12th New Jersey Infantry, 155th PA Infantry, and the 5th and 9th PA Reserves to name a few. Beginning in 1856, many of these were converted into .69 caliber rifles and many of these were in use at Gettysburg as well. The 9th MAssachusetts Infantry had the model 42 rifled muskets in two of the regiment’s companies, the remainder being armed with the Model 42 smoothbores.

 

 

http://www.army.mil/gettysburg/weaponry/small_arms.html

 

I read the Union was still having smoothbores but didn't expect that many frontline units were still using them that late in the war.

[shep854]

ISTR that the Allies were somewhat put out by the 'sawback' bayonets used by German pioneer troops, to the extent of possible execution of prisoners found carrying one.

[BansheeOne]

I have to admit the bit I remember about shotguns in the ACW was from "North and South" (the books, not the mini-series); the hanging offense might not have been the weapons but other activities of irregulars who used them.

[DougRichards]

 

Innocents did get hurt and probably killed too

 

There were.

 

POLIZEI

Ein Schuß, zwei Tote

 

Montag, 07.12.1998, 00:00 · von Hans-Dieter Götz

Schutzpolizisten fordern zuverlässiger wirkende Munition, doch die Politiker scheuen eine heikle „Dumdum-Debatte"

Als ihr der Tobende im engen Flur mit erhobenem Messer entgegenkam, warnte ihn die Polizistin: „Werfen Sie das Messer weg, sonst mache ich von der Schußwaffe Gebrauch!“

Ein sinnloser Appell an die Vernunft. Robert T., ein amtsbekannter paranoid Schizophrener, war nicht zu stoppen. In Notwehr feuerte die 23jährige Einsatzleiterin und traf den 48jährigen aus kurzer Entfernung mitten in die Brust. Doch er fiel nicht.

Wie ein Zombie marschierte der Angeschossene weiter. Die Polizistin drückte noch einmal ab. Sie traf Robert T. am Unterkiefer – und mit demselben Geschoß dessen Bruder Leon, der unvermittelt hinter den Angreifer getreten war, in die rechte Schläfe. Leon T. starb sofort, der Angreifer Robert wenig später im Krankenhaus.

Die beiden Toten im Münchner Bahnhofsviertel am Morgen des 28. November brachten nicht nur die unglücklichen Umstände dieses Polizeieinsatzes in die Diskussion. Die beunruhigende Tatsache, daß selbst ein Treffer in die Brust den Angreifer nicht augenblicklich stoppte und der Nachschuß noch einen dahinter stehenden Unbeteiligten zu töten vermochte, provoziert darüber hinaus die Frage: Hat die deutsche Polizei die falsche Munition?

[...]

 

http://www.focus.de/politik/deutschland/polizei-ein-schuss-zwei-tote_aid_172401.html

 

In short: Attacker, known to be agressive paranoid-schizophrenic, walks unto police officers with knife in hand in the corridor of the flat they were called to, and naturally disregards warning. Cop fires a shot into his chest which fails to stop him. Fires another which hits him in the jaw and his brother, who has stepped behind him, in the head. Brother dies instantly, attacker later in hospital. I believe this was the incident that finally led to introduction of expanding ammunition.

 

 

It is important to use the right weapon and ammunition against zombies

[mnm]

I think it was the 8th Hussars, mentioned in Max Hastings' book on the Korean War.

 

 

Hussars? This is a hussar!

Edited August 25, 2014 by mnm

[Leo Niehorster]

Possibly the police in Europe consider a SMG a sort of pistol, as the name is often machine pistol and not submachine gun:

French: pistolet-mitrailleur, German: Maschinenpistole, Polish: pistolet maszynowy, Dutch: machinepistool, etc.

[Dawes]

Shotguns seem to be getting more specialized. For example, we now have this anti-zombie variant:

 

 

http://www.gunsandammo.com/reviews/zombie-ready-shotgun-cz-612-hc-p-review/

[toysoldier]

I always thought that the fact, pretty obvious in movies and TV series, of Americans loving shotguns for police and military actions, was kind of a historical legacy from centuries of militia/deputies/posses since before the independence, kept through the conquest of the West, the Civil War, the rumbling twenties and what not. Conversely, europeans more in love with SMGs, i thought it came from them doing the very best SMGs in the world. Come on, if you are the german, belgian or swiss police, why bother to use anything but HK, FN and Steyr beauties?

[John T]

 

Why exactly is the SMG seen as a more humane weapon when the shotgun isn't ? I know the shotgun leaves a nasty mess of a person but so could an SMG at the ranges we're talking of using shotguns ?

 

 

If the idea is that police are expected to bring the criminal to court,

isn't there a bigger chance the criminal survives until court with one hit from a SMG than with a shotgun wound ?

 

 

In countries where captial punishment without trial are accepted they might have a more relaxed attitude to SMG in full auto and shotguns.

 

Kind regards

/John

[baboon6]

 

Why exactly is the SMG seen as a more humane weapon when the shotgun isn't ? I know the shotgun leaves a nasty mess of a person but so could an SMG at the ranges we're talking of using shotguns ?

 

If the idea is that police are expected to bring the criminal to court,

isn't there a bigger chance the criminal survives until court with one hit from a SMG than with a shotgun wound ?

 

 

In countries where captial punishment without trial are accepted they might have a more relaxed attitude to SMG in full auto and shotguns.

 

Kind regards

/John

You never shoot to wound. Not with 9mm ball ammo anyway. And not with shotguns either unless you 're using plastic or bean bag rounds or whatever.

Edited August 25, 2014 by baboon6