New member introductions thread ......

Greetings and Happy New Year to everyone. Casual shooter, but have owned a firearm of one type or another since I was about 12.

Hello to all:
This is my first post to the public forum, so I thought I'd submit a controversial post.

When I was in the Seabees in 1965, during my rifle training with the M14, we were taught NOT to shoot to kill, but rather to shoot at the belt buckle of the enemy soldiers in order to severely WOUND them.

The theory behind this was that a dead enemy was simply one less enemy combatant, while a severely wounded enemy took at least one OTHER enemy soldier out of the fight to care for his wounded comrade. Also, large numbers of enemy wounded was a drain on their medical supplies and medical personnel as well as contributing to lowered morale and dissatisfaction with continued fighting.

I've spoken to other veterans who never heard of this.
How about it, were any other vets that were taught to shoot to wound rather than shoot to kill?

Greetings and happy new year i'm new at military suplus collector game like any gun from any time. Collector of pistols and now a new owner of a beligum fn fal. Tool and die maker by trade and custom knife make hobbist.

Just signed up on Milsurps.com as it appears this forum will provide alot of information. I've been collecting and working on many military rifles over the years and am anxious to gather info from this site. I'm fond of Mausers, Krags, Springfields, and Martini's. Best, Dan

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Longhoffer

Hello to all:
This is my first post to the public forum, so I thought I'd submit a controversial post.

When I was in the Seabees in 1965, during my rifle training with the M14, we were taught NOT to shoot to kill, but rather to shoot at the belt buckle of the enemy soldiers in order to severely WOUND them.

The theory behind this was that a dead enemy was simply one less enemy combatant, while a severely wounded enemy took at least one OTHER enemy soldier out of the fight to care for his wounded comrade. Also, large numbers of enemy wounded was a drain on their medical supplies and medical personnel as well as contributing to lowered morale and dissatisfaction with continued fighting.

I've spoken to other veterans who never heard of this.
How about it, were any other vets that were taught to shoot to wound rather than shoot to kill?

---

not really the correct place for this post but yes it does make more military strategy to wound.

Hi ALL I'M new here! :dancingbanana:

Hi everyone
i just want everyone to know i love the old wood and metal guns from the ww2 years.
Marc

Hello from Michigan. I am International Harvester Collector Association of Michigan founding member #9 (my farm tractor collection Is Graced with an M52A2 military tractor truck made by International Harvester in 1962). I am the proud husband to a devoted wife and Father of 9, children not tractors. I am owner to way more military surplus"junk" than my wife likes, same as most of you I "reckon". I have held the same job for 27 years, helps pay the bills...but there's never enough! Now if only all this surplus junk brought in dollars instead of costing them ! Never seems to work out that way ! :wave:

New to the forum but have gotten a tremendous amount of info from reading the threads.

Hello everyone.
I have acquired a Webley mk1 revolver that is missing a few parts, I was wondering if anyone has a technical drawing or exploded view of the guns workings. There is very little info about them and any help would be great. Thanks