I haven't seen this, but i'm Pretty Sure many of y'all here have seen and read this one guys view about the M1 Garand. I REALLY like some of the 79 Replies about his view of the M1 Garand.
A very young writer, made obvious by the preface references to video games, not particularly old games either.
I find the assessment of the rifle to be rather juvenile as well, comparisons drawn against very dis-similar items.
However I am of mixed opinion of the M1 Garand, as a rifle design. I have never owned or fired one, which doesn't lend my opinions a lot of credit. However I have owned an M14 (Norinco M305/M-14S) and fired a high dollar Smith Enterprise build. Between them all I have a couple thousand rounds.
While different from the M1, and M14 is operationally very similar.
My main issues with the M14 platform where weight, generally average accuracy, and the violence with which the mechanism operates under recoil. Everything just gets crashed around, and I didn't care for it. By contrast my SVT-40 is a smooth shooting pussycat that is easy to hold on target for rapid follow-up shots.
The M14 is the only rifle to leave my collection, it just didn't capture my interest.
Now that I have some other firearms in the collection I am thinking about revisiting the M1/M14 platform in the way of an M1 Garand.
As a soldier's rifle in the time it was developed, I won't deny it was effective and by all reports quite reliable. Is it over-rated? That could be argued from a lot of angles without resolution.
- Darren 1 PL West Nova Scotia Regiment 2000-2003
1 BN Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry 2003-2013
Apparently the author doesn't know about the MG 42. As machine guns go I was under the impression they were the best, and more experienced members than me can say for sure, but I still haven't figured out how you get M1 thumb loading the rifle.
Wow, not being as enlightened so much as the respondents to the spurious case made by the writer,{the very young one} Im still trying to figure out how to make all those violent actions occur at the same time; with every firearm I own. I guess I better get with it. Even though this seems like an obvious attempt to create controversy, and being successful in that respect, I bet the most dangerous thing some of the commentators ever came nearest to was a overheated game boy screen let alone being behind any of the weapons that were discussed. However the slow -mo that accompanied the link was very interesting to me though. Thanks for putting that one up, there are some useful/beneficial things to be discerned there.
clearly he is ill informed - you can't get M1 thumb while loading unless it is a single round or an empty rifle.
He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose
There are no great men, only great challenges that ordinary men are forced by circumstances to meet.
This has to be one of the most bizarre, off-the-wall stories I've ever read. There is absolutely no logic underpinning the story -- no comparisons with other weapons (except the M1 Carbine) , no critiques of the times, and not any evidence to back up the facts. The comment comparing the rifle to the carbine's effectiveness has no basis in fact -- if the rifle had no advantages over the carbine, they would not have produced 4 million rifles and it would have been reviled by both the Army and the Marines. The M1 Rifle received very few criticisms in post WWII and Korean analysis of the weapon. Yes, it did need to be kept clean, but, compared to other weapons of the time, it rated quite favorably by infantrymen in both the European and Pacific theatres. The author is just another poorly informed writers who needed to fill up space.
That was a poorly written article, devoid of much in the way of facts , and one that if this guy ever becomes a famous writer I am sure he will regret. His knowledge of firearms and their history was appalling. If bolt actions were so obsolete by 1916, why did they last as the basic issue weapon for almost very Army for another 50 years? he simply knows nothing about the developmental history of the service rifle. I doubt he has ever really shot many of these arms, his knowledge likely coming from watching reruns of "combat" or perhaps in heavy combat of airsoft replicas.
His failure to acknowledge the No4 MK I or the K31 as particular shows a rather shallow knowledge base.
I would like to see this fellow write about civil war rifles. I expect he would say they all sucked because they were not bolt action rifles.
A complete failure to appreciate the M1 was the first really usable self-loading rifle in its 1940 form, and had a longer service career in both the US and one of two primary NATO issue rifles until around 1960. Pretty impressive.
I suppose we all have moments of stupidity in print that we later regret.
In my opinion, this, my friends, is a classic example of the progressive philosophy at work. I say this a-politically. Let me explain.
The primary premise of the progressive philosophy, as an outlook in general, is, "Things and people are getting better." That is the fundamental thought underpinning the outlook. It is sacred and central. History is a hill that we are pushing mankind up. We must take the steps to see to it that the future is better than the past. The present is, and must be, better than the past. The problem is, when carried to its extreme, this thought process simply doesn't conform to reality. There is good and bad in most ages of man. So, what do you do when confronted with things or people in the past who aren't worse than, and perhaps are better than, those of the present, and thus don't conform to your foundational idea that everything today is better than it was in the past? Unless you are really honest, you begin trying to find ways to tear down those things of the past so that they can be worse than what we have today and prove your philosophy.
And this is what you see repeatedly in progressive historians: a philosophically-driven need to do whatever is necessary to drive history forward and up, even if it means shoving the past down.
Bob
"It is said, 'Go not to the elves for counsel for they will say both no and yes.' "
Frodo Baggins to Gildor Inglorion, The Fellowship of the Ring
Garand. I REALLY like some of the 79 Replies about his view of the M1 Garand.
PM
Originally Posted by Doco overboard
