European Disdain For Combat Shotguns

[DougRichards]

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/

 

Do they made ammunition with silver pellets in case you have to deal with a werewolf?

[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

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.

 

 

Tell that to Swedish law enforcement, and I suppose it's valid for many European police forces.

 

kind regards

/John

[snafu_72]

One other point is that many American citizens grow up in a culture where the shotgun is a primary weapon to take game birds, or whitetail deer. Many people who enter the military or civilian police forces have been brought up on the use, cleaning, and safe handling of the shotgun. It would be a rare few who had access to a SMG unless they had prior military training, which not all law enforcement officers necessarily receive before taking the field.

[Chris Werb]

Have a read of this please John.

 

http://www.pfoa.co.uk/110/shooting-to-wound

[lastdingo]

The German police uses SMGs much because these are H&K MP5.

The advantages of this weapon are

* hardly any training needed for policemen because they were trained with H&K G3 as conscripts up to the 90's

* accurate enough to 100 m

* pistol ammunition

 

The American LE did reject SMGs much for a long time because Thompson SMGs were strongly associated with organised crime. This opinion formed when SMGs were almost without exception open bolt operation weapons and really only good for spray & pray at not much better combat distances than aimed pistol shots.

American LE kept using revolvers (6 rounds) long after many European countries had their police equipped with pistols (~8 rounds), so there wasn't even an ammunition commonality with SMGs in many LE agencies in the U.S..

[Colin]

Open bolt Sterling is quite capable of shots out to 100m and regularly we trained out to that.

[lastdingo]

Open bolt Sterling is quite capable of shots out to 100m and regularly we trained out to that.

 

Not in a LE context.

[Archie Pellagio]

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.

I know it's more or less fiction, but I remember in all quiet on the western front there is a part where they're about to do a patrol and some lid gets a worn bayonet that has become notched like a saw and they pull it away from him saying that if the tommies catch him with that they'll cut off his nose and leave him to die because it is cruel or some such.

[nigelfe]

Shotguns have a place in armies, but not as a routinely used weapon. Specialist weapon in theatres that require it. SMGs are much the same, basically a self-defence weapon where short range is acceptable or the need for something compact dominates other issues.

[ABNredleg]

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.

 

Many soldiers believed that smoothbore muskets with buck and ball were more effect at close range than rifled muskets.

 

 

The Irish Brigade distinguished itself from the rest of the Army of the Potomac by Meagher's insistence on arming the 8 line companies of each NY regiment with Model 1842 smoothbore muskets, an obsolete weapon that was largely phased out during 1862, because he wanted his men to be able to fire buck-and-ball shot (a .69 caliber musket ball with four smaller balls), which produced a shotgun effect in close-range combat and could not be used with rifles. The three original New York regiments carried Model 1842 muskets all through the AoP's campaigns and battles in 1862-63, using buck-and-ball shot with deadly effect in the Wheatfield on July 2 at Gettysburg. The 2 Light companies of each NY regiment were issued with either Springfield or Enfield rifles and with these sniped at Pettigrew's command during Pickett's Charge. The 28th Massachusetts (which joined in October 1862) had Enfield rifles and were with the 6 company NY "light Battalion" often detailed for skirmishing duty.

Meagher assumed his brigade would perform most fighting at close range where smoothbores were effective, and his officers generally agreed. The majority of the soldiers continued to use their Model 1842s through the Overland Campaign until the depleted outfit was temporarily broken up in June 1864. The 116th Pennsylvania was separated from its fellow regiments and finally got Model 1861 Springfield rifles. Ordnance records also indicate that the New York regiments received the newer weapons as well. In any case, by 1864, officers had at last realized the power of rifles and firing was now typically being done from distances of up to 200 yards. There are relatively few complaints on record from the enlisted men about their outdated muskets, although one veteran of the 88th New York recalled that "we were sometimes at a disadvantage because of the short range", and that he had to pick up a discarded rifle from the field at Antietam to deal with Confederate skirmishers.^[5]

Edited August 26, 2014 by ABNredleg

[tankerwanabe]

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?

 

A shotgun's most effective range for 00 buck is about 7-40 meters. Under 7, you really need to aim it. Over 40 and you get a doughnut spread, which results in wounding instead of killing. This is the most common shotgun ammo for defensive work. It's is great for city or night fights. With slugs, you can extend the range to 100 m. But in reality, few carry slugs because the reality is that shotgun ammo is heavy.

 

IMHO, it's really a cultural thing. American kids often grew up with a shotgun in the house particularly if they're not from the big city. Shooting cans off of the fence is as common as going fishing. A shotgun is often considered a hunting tool

[EchoFiveMike]

As I've described before, SG's are secondary weapons, which is fine if you don't have to carry it far. I assigned SG's to my turret gunners, with trap loads in the chamber and buck/slugs following. We had no "less lethal" in 2004, and in the context of cars, birdshot is less lethal(and also decent for breaching). Most Iraqis were simply incompetent drivers, rather than malevolent, so if we could avoid killing them, probably a better outcome. S/F....Ken M

[Phil]

We were issued automatic shotguns in 2010. At first, the carriers of said shotguns represented a type of Lord of the Flies pecking order with the most vocal, psychotic and hardest blokes wanting to have them.

 

After about a week it was the other way around, and not long afterwards even the crows got bored of them.

[EchoFiveMike]

Interesting. In my units, troops carried what their NCO's told them to carry That said, I personally left quite a bit of leeway with the team leaders, as long as there was nothing obviously stupid. S/F....Ken M

[Phil]

They werent being told to carry them - they just weren't that useful. Everyone was all over them at first because they were tacti-cool with their holographic sights etc but the novelty wore off and they dropped through the food chain.

 

Personally I don't see a use for them over an assault rifle set on auto with a bayonet. At least if the rifle jams you can follow it up with some steel at close range.

[Dawes]

Well, if you absolutely must have a bayonet on your shottie, the M590A1 will fill the bill:

 

 

[Yama]

Shotguns have a place in armies, but not as a routinely used weapon. Specialist weapon in theatres that require it. SMGs are much the same, basically a self-defence weapon where short range is acceptable or the need for something compact dominates other issues.

In WW2 setting, SMG was much more useful weapon overall as it could partly replace rifle. Some European armies had assault companies - sometimes battalions - armed with all submachine guns. By contrast, having shotgun replace rifle unit-wide is quite absurd idea.

 

Cultural issues may have been part of it - as said, in US the SMG was seen as weapon of the criminals, in Europe shotgun was seen as weapon for civilians. However, bigger factors undoubtely were that 1. Americans, with plentiful amount of semi-auto rifles and carbines, had less need for SMG and 2. US submachine guns were terrible.

[Olof Larsson]

 

Shotguns have a place in armies, but not as a routinely used weapon. Specialist weapon in theatres that require it. SMGs are much the same, basically a self-defence weapon where short range is acceptable or the need for something compact dominates other issues.

In WW2 setting, SMG was much more useful weapon overall as it could partly replace rifle. Some European armies had assault companies - sometimes battalions - armed with all submachine guns. By contrast, having shotgun replace rifle unit-wide is quite absurd idea.

 

Cultural issues may have been part of it - as said, in US the SMG was seen as weapon of the criminals, in Europe shotgun was seen as weapon for civilians. However, bigger factors undoubtely were that 1. Americans, with plentiful amount of semi-auto rifles and carbines, had less need for SMG and 2. US submachine guns were terrible.

 

 

and 3. The US had far better shotguns (for combat).

[DougRichards]

 

Shotguns have a place in armies, but not as a routinely used weapon. Specialist weapon in theatres that require it. SMGs are much the same, basically a self-defence weapon where short range is acceptable or the need for something compact dominates other issues.

In WW2 setting, SMG was much more useful weapon overall as it could partly replace rifle. Some European armies had assault companies - sometimes battalions - armed with all submachine guns. By contrast, having shotgun replace rifle unit-wide is quite absurd idea.

 

Cultural issues may have been part of it - as said, in US the SMG was seen as weapon of the criminals, in Europe shotgun was seen as weapon for civilians. However, bigger factors undoubtely were that 1. Americans, with plentiful amount of semi-auto rifles and carbines, had less need for SMG and 2. US submachine guns were terrible.

 

 

I cannot find the reference, but there was one island action where a USMC Battalion was issued with every shotgun that the Division could lay its hands on. The reason was that the unit was going into action in close proximity to other USMC units and there was a desire to reduce the possibility of rifle fire 'overshooting' into other Marine units. A specialised use, yes, and a practical one given the short range of combat in dense undergrowth and the desire to limit casualties from friendly fire.

[BLAH]

00 buckshot is pretty damn good out to 100 yards when all you care about is a hit, and when you've only got a second to throw lead at someone out of cover, it's probably better to throw the 00 buckshot than a single round from a rifle/SMG at that range.

 

3.5" magnum being the best due to twice as many balls, and you're probably guranteed to get some on a human target at 100 yards.

 

The big drawback is poor amor penetration, but if we're dealing with modern body armor, that might not matter when your rifle won't get through the torso anyway.

[Leo Niehorster]

Seem to remember from the Vietnam days that shotguns were considered next to worthless in the jungle environment. Should apply for medium to dense brush.

[Simon Tan]

Der Luftwaffe had shotguns!

[DougRichards]

Seem to remember from the Vietnam days that shotguns were considered next to worthless in the jungle environment. Should apply for medium to dense brush.

 

A couple of my teachers at high school were Vietnam vets (on the Australian side - you never can tell THESE days). Anyway these guys were officers for the cadets. They related that a standard infantry section patrol had the two scouts one of which was armed with a shotgun. When contact was made the scouts simply blasted away with whatever they had - shotgun / F1 SMG - towards the contact whilst taking cover.

 

The blasts themselves initiated the rest of the section to do what they were trained to do in drill. The shotguns kept the enemies heads down for a vital few seconds, even if they did little damage in themselves.

 

Shotguns were not used by other members of the section.

[BLAH]

Seem to remember from the Vietnam days that shotguns were considered next to worthless in the jungle environment. Should apply for medium to dense brush.

 

I've shot 00 buckshot plenty of times in the bush. It's no problem through grass and leaves/twigs/vines.

 

Though I was thinking about typical urban areas and trenches/fighting holes, but the bush wouldn't pose anything more difficult.

 

It won't punch through a decent log/tree, but neither will a SMG or 5.56mm.

[Yama]

00 buckshot is pretty damn good out to 100 yards when all you care about is a hit, and when you've only got a second to throw lead at someone out of cover, it's probably better to throw the 00 buckshot than a single round from a rifle/SMG at that range.

Difference is that SMG is good for 200 (sometimes 300) metres...

Big downside of the shotguns was (and is) slow reload.