Re: Guns: H&K, G3, 7.62 v 5.56 [Guns]

Tim May <tcmay@got net> continues the sniping discussion:

>I haven't seen Jim's reaction to my point about bolt-action rifles still
>being far and away the favored weapon for sniping. Neither an AR-15 variant
>nor an HK variant are advised for long-range shots (though either will of
>course be capable of such shots...it's just that one wants the absolute
>best precsion, and cycling rate is largely immaterial).

In a rich target environment where you're firing from concealment, I think it 
is better to have a semiauto 7.62mmN rifle such as an accurized  HK91 or a 
national match M1A, assuming the enemy has snipers or long-range antisniper
weaponry.  Why?

1) It is likely to be a target rich environment.  USMC sniper doctrine is
mainly single target single kill attacks from outside 600 yards.  Former
Soviet and US Army snipers mainly engaged multiple targets inside that
range for tactical support.  Defending against a raid is primarily
tactical support sniping, killing the vice president of a country other than
the US is primarily USMC style scout/sniping.

Thus, in defending against a raid, Soviet-style weapons are probably better.
7.62x54R Dra----v rifles are probably a good model -- iirc (I've never
fired one), they're semi auto bullpups.  [eeek, www.guns.ru is selling them
with bayonets!  tactical close range sniping, aye!].  Or the SEAL sniper
weapon -- an accurized M14, which is basically an M1A.  With a good scope
and better trigger, an M14/M1A can be 1 MOA, and it's a real battle rifle,
with the ability to engage multiple targets quickly due to the semi-auto
action.

Also, when you're operating without a spotter/security man, it's nice to
have the ability to quickly kill anyone in close.  With an M1A, you just move
from your concealment, kill, and return, wasting a minimum of time.  I guess
in a home you could just keep an AR-15 next to you for such close-in dealings,
though.

2) In my (somewhat limited) experience, many field-improvised concealment
locations are great during firing, but when you move to cycle the action
on a bolt action rifle, you make the concealment shake or otherwise reveal
yourself.  Against a force with sniper/antisniper weaponry, that will likely
bring down a hail of fire, which is suboptimal at best.  USMC snipers generally
solve this by firing once and leaving, since it's confusing and hard to
localize on a single gunshot, but in a target rich environment, you might
not be able to move.  And they may have you surrounded, so it's hard
to move without being seen.

3) A semi-auto is generally more useful for non-sniping tasks.  I can barely
carry an M1A, spare ammo, supplies, etc. for a couple days without being
annoyed at the weight -- I sure wouldn't want to add a SMG or assault carbine
to that.  I would not have a problem with using a battle rifle/sniper rifle
against a force armed with assault carbines and SMGs, though.

True, this may be less of an issue inside a house, since you could just leave
all your supplies cached throughout.  I still thing you need to remain 
concealed and hopefully in cover, and if they bring heavy weapons to bear,
you are going to have to move around the house, at least.  A PSG-1 ends
up being cheaper than 10 match-grade Remington 700s -- besides, the scope
is much more expensive than the gun anyway (perhaps I just like overly
expensive scopes)


All that being said, for field use and home defense, if I'm alone, I'd
take a barrett .50 browning for long-range USMC-style scout-sniping, or
antimateriel sniping, and either a PSG-1 if money is no object (it's not
*that* expensive, if you actually use it), or the German Army sniping
system (or my^H^Ha national match M1A or M14) if money is only somewhat
an object, or a Dragunov if money is a limiting factor, for anti-sniping
or support sniping.  And I strongly feel anti-raid sniping is of the
latter category.

(True, your gun is the best 7.62 USMC-style rifle other than the PSG-1..)

Even better than that would be the addition of a spotter/security person
with an M16 :)  And some nice *cover* for where you fire from, in the form
of earth, concrete, sandbags, or Spectra.  And if the sky is the limit,
something to engage light armor, like a 20mm rifle or tactical air support :)



*ObCrypto!*:
The choice of cryptographic tools is somewhat like the choice of sniper
weaponry.

A OTP is remarkably like a bolt-action rifle of infinite accuracy.  Say, a 
USAF prototype 20mm laser guided sniper rifle.  Use it twice in the
same place, and get slagged in automatic cannon fire.  However, it is ideal
for "one shot one kill" perfect secrecy.

A steganographically-protected data stream is much like a silenced
subsonic carbine.

A remailer network is much like a remote electrically-fired weapon (someone
at a pistol match tried this with a free pistol, won, and the technique
was banned the next year :)

PGP is the PSS -- pretty [good] sniping system, pretty good precision.  
Useful for a lot of things, and since it's one of the better tools, it 
gets used for a lot of things where another solution might be better. :)

Of course, I'd be kind of biased to call a working Eternity implementation
and/or working and distributed digital cash system the PSG-1.
-- 
Ryan Lackey
rdl@mit.edu
http://mit.edu/rdl/

An interesting message (well, interesting to me and perhaps to some others).


At 10:47 AM -0800 1/1/98, Ryan Lackey wrote:


>Thus, in defending against a raid, Soviet-style weapons are probably better.
>7.62x54R Dra----v rifles are probably a good model -- iirc (I've never
>fired one), they're semi auto bullpups.  [eeek, www.guns.ru is selling them
>with bayonets!  tactical close range sniping, aye!].  Or the SEAL sniper

I've read some reviews of the Dragunov which are very unflattering. The
scope on standard USSR-used rifles was terrible. I could doublecheck what
Plaster says about them, but I haven't seen anyone advocating that
Americans use them. Maybe they'll become the wave of the future...

>weapon -- an accurized M14, which is basically an M1A.  With a good scope
>and better trigger, an M14/M1A can be 1 MOA, and it's a real battle rifle,
>with the ability to engage multiple targets quickly due to the semi-auto
>action.

Actually, I figure that if I'm ever in a situation where I have to engage
multiple targets quickly, I'm probably a goner. If nothing else, they'll
roll an armored vehicle in (and more and more SWAT teams have them) and
burn me out, Waco-style.

("We had to burn the children in order to save the children. Save them from
what? Well, we had reports of something....")

>Also, when you're operating without a spotter/security man, it's nice to
>have the ability to quickly kill anyone in close.  With an M1A, you just move
>from your concealment, kill, and return, wasting a minimum of time.  I guess
>in a home you could just keep an AR-15 next to you for such close-in dealings,
>though.

Yeah, I think an AR-15 (or variant, of course) makes more sense for the
average person than anything else (incl. shotgun) for home defense.
Opinions vary on this, but this is my conclusion.


>you are going to have to move around the house, at least.  A PSG-1 ends
>up being cheaper than 10 match-grade Remington 700s -- besides, the scope
>is much more expensive than the gun anyway (perhaps I just like overly
>expensive scopes)

Well, I could justify buying _one_ Remington 700, for $600, plus another
$400 or so for the Leupold scope (not bought yet). But I sure as hell
couldn't justify buying a $10K PSG-1!!!

>*ObCrypto!*:
>The choice of cryptographic tools is somewhat like the choice of sniper
>weaponry.

...

Nice parallels, though I tend to argue for crypto in terms of speech and
First Amendment grounds, and avoid the (obvious, but dangerous) comparisons
of crypto to firearms.

Dangerous because one immediately runs into the "But we regulate machine
guns, so if crypto is like a machine gun, why shouldn't it be regulated?"
And "We don't let citizens have nuclear weapons, so why let them have
military-grade unbreakable ciphers?"

The speech issues and prior restraint issues are much cleaner.

--Tim May

The Feds have shown their hand: they want a ban on domestic cryptography
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
Timothy C. May              | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
ComSec 3DES:   408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA  | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
Higher Power: 2^2,976,221   | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

Tim May wrote:
> >Thus, in defending against a raid, Soviet-style weapons are probably better.
> >7.62x54R Dra----v rifles are probably a good model -- iirc (I've never
> >fired one), they're semi auto bullpups.  [eeek, www.guns.ru is selling them
> >with bayonets!  tactical close range sniping, aye!].  Or the SEAL sniper
> 
> I've read some reviews of the Dragunov which are very unflattering. The
> scope on standard USSR-used rifles was terrible. I could doublecheck what
> Plaster says about them, but I haven't seen anyone advocating that
> Americans use them. Maybe they'll become the wave of the future...

First of all, the standard Dragunov scopes use weird Russian batteries
that are hard to find here. (the batteries are only used to light the
crosshairs). Also, I have been told that Dragunovs are not as accurate as
M1As (2MOA or so).

What I do like about SVD is their mean looks. Maybe it is my Soviet taste.

	- Igor.