• Welcome to the new COTI server. We've moved the Citizens to a new server. Please let us know in the COTI Website issue forum if you find any problems.
  • We, the systems administration staff, apologize for this unexpected outage of the boards. We have resolved the root cause of the problem and there should be no further disruptions.

Pistols, SMGs, Shotguns and the Military

Golan2072

SOC-14 1K
Admin Award
Marquis
Having no real military experience myself, I was wondering what role do pistols, SMGs and shotguns play in a modern military, and, more importantly, what role they should play in a Traveller military.

As far as I know, SMGs are quite "out of fasion" in military service except for in secial forces use and as a personal defence weapon for vehile crews (a role in which the Israeli military, for example, use M4 or Galil MAR carbine assault rifles); they were far more common in the 1950's IIRC. Shotguns... well, according to Traveller rules they have nice penetration and good range, but I don't think this is realistic - aren't shotguns close-range mass-damage weapons to be used against "soft" targets?

And pistols - many militaries issue them to officers, but IIRC many of them prefer to use normal assault rifles (or their carbine weapons) rather than pistols in real combat situation.
 
Greetings and salutations,

I have not served in the military, but I have extensive knowledge due to friends and relatives that have, research, and military games.

Pistols: They are very useful weapons to have when one is in confined quarters. This would include tank crews, tunnel rats, and/or sneaking up on a guard. Sometimes they are used when one does not need to hose the target area with an overwhelming amount of firepower. They are also useful when military personnel must be armed and carrying something heavier than a pistol is not "convenient". Sometimes a pistol is all you need. As you have mentioned, officers for prefer to use their carbines, rifles, or SMGs in a real combat situation, but their are times when one may not have one handy.

SMGs: They are great for the Special Forces and as PDW for vehicle crews, etc. Since these weapons can be silenced, it helps when someone starts shooting some place up.

Shotguns: They are very useful in hallways, opening locked doors, and jungles. The ammo is very easy to get, one can cause a lot of damage, and you get a lot of respect from whoever you point it at.

My brain is turning into mush from a lack of sleep. I hope my babbling sheds some light.
 
Pistols were generally issued to officers because they were just directing the fight, not actually charging out in front, with bayonets affixed. (But, of course, they still needed to be armed.) EDIT Modern militaries still issue the pistols to their officers, but we don't tend to have that mind-set, anymore. EDIT DONE
When I was working with the Army (I was Air Force), we could take the 9mm and we could add the M16 variant. Most of the officers didn't bother with the M16 - but I wanted to be something other than filler for a body bag, so I carried the assault carbine. It was an M16, with a short barrel and a collapsible stock, so we could easily carry it in vehicles and still get it into action in a hurry.

Mostly, SMGs have a problem with accuracy. They are great in close quarters, but suck if you have to kill someone very far away (lead-to-kill ratio). That's why they are usually only carried by special forces folks. (BTW, the US military took the fully automatic option off the M16 several years ago, and replaced it with a 3-round burst, as the fully automatic option was considered to have that high poundage of lead-to-low number of kills ratio.)

Shotguns are great, but aren't effective in combat beyond a certain range. So, again, they are used where someone thinks they will be dealing with short ranges. They also tend to not have as high a rate of fire as an automatic or semi-automatic rifle. The only folks I have seen use them officially is the poor sailors standing security around the periphery of ships since the USS Cole/9-11.
 
Oh yeah, Traveller...

Shotguns make for great shipboard weapons if YTU has nice solid bulkheads, and things like cabling/pipes/sensitive equipment are in places that won't get hit by stray shot. SMGs are good, too, IF they use low velocity rounds, as the CQB (Close Quarters Battle) folks do.

None of my merc-style characters ever brought out his pistol in a battlefield situation. That was only for carting around in "peacetime". Of course, I had a severe heavyworlder that combined the best of all worlds: a 1-pound cannon, the size of an illegaly sawed-off shotgun, with a pistol grip, and a 5-round mag (and a VERY short barrel in front of the chamber). Each round could hold the equivalent of 7+ 12ga slugs. And, he wore a kilt - simply because it started fights.
 
Ok, here are some more things to take into consideration.

Pistols: Issued to personel that are not intended to engage the enemy with direct fire personal weapons but still need to be able to defend themselves, such as...

Commanders and staff officers. They are supposed to command or do staff work.

Medics. Prohibited from engaging in offensive combat, but allowed to defend themselves and their patiants.

Primary Gunners (machine guns, artillery). Their weapon is the gun they are operating, but these are too large for personal defense, so they are issued a pistol as well.

SMGs: Originally popular for special units (Soviet SMG Battalions for example) which faught at close quarters or rode into battle and dismounted on the objective. Also popular with lower level leaders (squad leaders, senior NCOs, platoon leaders) because of their smaller size than a battle rifle. Since the 1950s and 60s the SMG has been replaced in regular military units with the assault rifle (which essentially combined the SMG with the Battle Rifle) and carbines for leaders. Still useful for special operations units (due to its smaller size) and police/SWAT units because the smaller ammunition (usually 9mm pistol ammunition) is less likely to go through walls or people (handy if you are in a hostage rescue situation or operating in an urban situation where there are lots of civilians in the general area).

Shotguns: Not generally used by the military because of Law of War concerns. Making ammunition that will pass LoW muster for a shotgun is expensive and generally not worth it since you can get the same effect with a 40mm flechette grenade round. Shotguns generally are too small for flechette rounds. Slugs can be made to meet LoW standards, but then you loose the whole benifit of the shotgun covering a large area with one shot. Some military units still use shotguns for police type operations (guard duty, riot control), but not for combat.

Hope it helps...
 
US Navy, Coast Guard, and Marines like the shotgun for boarding actions.

In Iraq, shotguns are mosly used for opening doors by blowing off the hinges (not the locks).
OTOH, the XM-25 (which was OICW) fires 25mm grenades out to 500m, but at close range will fire a shotgun-style fLechette round.

Pistols are more and more in demand by common soldiers in Iraq for use in building searches. The USMC issues special M1911A1s to it's Force Recon. The US Army is starting to look for new pistols to replace the 9mm Berrettas, and may go to .40 or .45 caliber.
http://www.tradoc.army.mil/pao/TNSarchives/January05/013505.htm
 
In the Air Force, I have been trained and carried on duty a Remington 870 12 Gauge shotgun, a Smith & Wesson 38 Special, a Beretta M9 9MM pistol, and the AR-15 and M-16.
I own a Remington 870 and did own an S&W Mod 10 38 Special (stolen during a burglary). I will not own a Beretta due to the wear factor causing it to discharge without a trigger pull.
The shotguns are used where penetration of metal bomb casings with sensitive components is very
file_28.gif
toast.gif
(BAD)!!!
toast.gif
file_28.gif

Some of the AR-15s used for training are so shot out that at 25 yards, the bullets tumble making oblong holes in the target paper. :(
I am not a gun bunny or an SP, just an old AMMO troop who has been around for a long while. The old venerable shotgun still has a respected place in the Air Force inventory.
 
Originally posted by Ranger:
Pistols: Issued to personel that are not intended to engage the enemy with direct fire personal weapons but still need to be able to defend themselves, such as...

Commanders and staff officers. They are supposed to command or do staff work.

Medics. Prohibited from engaging in offensive combat, but allowed to defend themselves and their patiants.

Primary Gunners (machine guns, artillery). Their weapon is the gun they are operating, but these are too large for personal defense, so they are issued a pistol as well.
It all boils down to tradition, in addition to tactics.
In the Israeli military, Staff officers usually carry pistols when off-duty or semi-off-duty (out of combat or in a non-dangerous situation); they usually carry carbine (shortened) M-16 variants (or TAR-21s, if they're REALLY ranking) when combat is expected. Medics carry M-16s as well; I don't think that many people in the Middle East respect the rule that "medics are non-combatants" - and some serious firepower is sometimes needed for self defence. Vehicle crews carry short carbines, such as the Galil MAR or the M-4. Pistols are just something that officers/career NCOs carry around for self defence when not geared up to combat (in combat they usually carry them too, but in addition to their carbine/rifle).

One more thing - what weapon do you think would fit a colonial militia? Sure, this is different between polities, but I was thinking about shotguns and/or semi-auto carbines, in addition to autopistols, for Triumvirate colonial police/rangers (there is also a real army contigent somewhere on the colony which will be called when heavy firepower is needed); in the Alliance, on the other hand, the Militia, in addition to serving as a police force, is the reserve for the Army (more accurately, the Army serves as a cadre for the Militia), so I was thinking more along the lines of Assault Rifles (TL7, so the guns, as well as their ammo, could be manufactured on almost any Alliance world, and decent range and penetration), especially something similar to the AK/Galil series (high durability, easy to use, easy to maintain, easy to produce, can be used as an effective club in melee - unlike M16s that tend to break in such situations, somewhat heavy, not very accurate).
 
Hi folks !

Thanks for these insights.
For the typical civilian here in Germany weapons stuff is as far away as Alpha Centauri...


Best regards,

Mert
 
I should have prefaced my comments by saying they reflect the general attitude of the US Army.

Shotguns in particular are problematic for the military. They do make great police weapons though, for the same reasons that the military finds them problematic. Shotguns (using shot ammunition) are only effective at relatively short range. That's bad for a military organization because soldiers need to be able to engage targets at a wide variety of ranges, so giving someone a weapon that only works at close range is less than optimal (which is why the US Army replace the M79 grenade launcher with the M203, which fired the same grenade, but is mounted on an M16 rifle so the soldier can still engage targets out to 300 meters). Police usually interact with people at much closer range, so there is not as much need for every cop to have a weapon that is effective out to 300 meters. Shotguns are also more likely to wound rather than kill at anything beyond point blank range. That's good for police who would generally prefer to avoid kill the people they are shooting at. Shotguns are also very effective as an intimidation weapon, reducing the chances that you will actually have to use force to resolve the situation. Shotguns are also popular with police because they are good at delivering non-lethal rounds (like bean bags) to subdue people rather than kill them.
 
Ranger opined:

Shotguns in particular are problematic for the military. They do make great police weapons though, for the same reasons that the military finds them problematic.
Yup, shotguns are problematic for the military UNLESS the military finds itself in a situation in which shotguns fit. Hence, the US Army toting shotguns in Iraq during building searches, the USN/USCG(1) using shotguns during boarding actions, and the USMC using shotguns during several landings in the Pacific War. Change the parameters and the military doesn't have any trouble with shotguns at all.

All this nonsense about LoW-legal rounds for shotgun is just that; nonsense. If the situation demands it, the tool will be used. And among the 11,000 worlds of the Imperium, the situation will occur.

We're dealing with the fictional 57th Century, we really need to think outside of our 21st Century, long range infantry combat, Fulda Gap box.


Sincerely,
Bill

1 - I, myself, although a nuc, carried a shotgun aboard USS California CGN-36 as part of the Boarding and Assistance Team. During our several visits to the Persian Gulf during the Tanker War portions of the Iran-Iraq War, I even mustered topside with said shotgun and a clapped out M1911 pistol and practiced boarding friendly vessels. There was no talk of LoW-legal rounds in those situation.

In warfare, legal is what you can get away with.
 
Originally posted by Larsen E. Whipsnade:
Ranger opined:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Shotguns in particular are problematic for the military. They do make great police weapons though, for the same reasons that the military finds them problematic.
Yup, shotguns are problematic for the military UNLESS the military finds itself in a situation in which shotguns fit. Hence, the US Army toting shotguns in Iraq during building searches, the USN/USCG(1) using shotguns during boarding actions, and the USMC using shotguns during several landings in the Pacific War. Change the parameters and the military doesn't have any trouble with shotguns at all.

All this nonsense about LoW-legal rounds for shotgun is just that; nonsense. If the situation demands it, the tool will be used. And among the 11,000 worlds of the Imperium, the situation will occur.

We're dealing with the fictional 57th Century, we really need to think outside of our 21st Century, long range infantry combat, Fulda Gap box.


Sincerely,
Bill

1 - I, myself, although a nuc, carried a shotgun aboard USS California CGN-36 as part of the Boarding and Assistance Team. During our several visits to the Persian Gulf during the Tanker War portions of the Iran-Iraq War, I even mustered topside with said shotgun and a clapped out M1911 pistol and practiced boarding friendly vessels. There was no talk of LoW-legal rounds in those situation.

In warfare, legal is what you can get away with.
</font>[/QUOTE]Two interseing issues you raise here, the legality of shotguns in combat and the degree to which LoW will impact the OTU.

The second one is really an open question that could go either way. How significant is the Solomani tradition towards war felt in the 57th Century? Are the "Genieva Convention" rules still valid or are they viewed as a quaint and romanitic anachronisim like the "Code of Chivalry"? It's an interesting question and one I don't think has been much explored.

As to the modern Law of War issues with shotguns, I would respectfully submit that they are very important, at least to modern Euro-American militaries. As I said, the US Army has shotguns and only uses them in very limited situations specifically because of LoW concerns. All but one of the situations that have been cited here fall under the catagory of what we used to call OOTWA (Operations Other Than WAr) where the line between combat and police operations is hard to define so you can use shotguns without running afoul of the LoW issues. USCG/USN boarding operations are usually law/embargo enforcement situations, and therefore LoW issues don't apply. The one example that is specifically combat related that has been mentioned is carfully constrained to legitimize the use of the shotgun as an engineering tool to demolish doors. I'm pretty sure that is because US Army lawyers have made it clear that unless the use is specified as other than combat, you can't take a shotgun into the situation.

You can even see these concerns in Traveller where shotguns are concerned. The ammunition described for shotguns in Book 1 are "shells containing either six 7mm bullets, or one hundred and thirty 3mm pellets." This first type would be legal under the LoW if the bullets were jacketted like all other military ammunition is.
 
Why would it matter if shotgun shot were jacketed? (Not that that would be likely.)

Also, what is the concern with LoW and shotguns? I seem to only remember the issue with flechettes.
 
Versions of the Hague convention which the US did not sign prohibit projectiles with exposed lead. The version we signed just prohibits weapons that cause "excessive suffering."

American legal opinion permits all-lead projectiles. The limited use of shotguns in Iraq has more to do with preferrence for the M4 carbine in CQB. Following American SWAT tactics. Not legalty,
 
Originally posted by Fritz88:
Why would it matter if shotgun shot were jacketed? (Not that that would be likely.)

Also, what is the concern with LoW and shotguns? I seem to only remember the issue with flechettes.
Actually, for shot you wouldn’t have to jacket it, you would just have to use solid hard metal ball bearings (like stainless steel). For jacketing I was referring to the 7mm bullets. The issue with shot is two fold. First, you can't use ammunition that will deform once it hits the human body (that's why military grade ammunition is jacketed). Since most large shot gun shot is relatively soft metal, it flattens out when it hits the target.

Beyond that though, even if you are using solid hard metal shot, the issue is one of lethality at effective range. Most shotgun ammunition (except slugs) isn't fatal at maximum effective range, which is a problem because you're not allowed to use ammunition that will only wound. You can use shotguns in combat if the ammunition is fatal at effective range.

Flechettes are legal because they are hard metal so they won't deform and at effective range they are still usually fatal. The same is true of Claymore mines, which use stainless steal ball bearings, but enough of them that at the designed effective range of the mine they are still fatal. Part of the reason the Army wanted a 40mm grenade flechett round was because units in Vietnam wanted to use shotguns, but the pentagon was uneasy with letting them because of the Law of War concerns.

These issues are only a concern in combat, so military units can use shotguns in any situation short of "war", and even in war, provided they are not going to be used in combat against people.

Edit to add: All this is based on conversations I've had with Army lawyers in the late 80's throuhg the mid 90s. I'm sure each branch has it's own take, and DoD probably has one as well.
 
Allow me to speak to these matters. Former infanteer, friends who are infanteers, boarding party members, ex-US SF doorkickers, Canadian SERT team, etc. (Still, doesn't make me an authority, just an informed amateur... standing in a bit for CoreJob since he usually covers off this stuff).

1. Shotgun
Uses: With buckshot, excellent hunting weapon or weapon for taking down unarmoured targets. Not a lot of overpenetration, esp if you use low power tactical loads or go to 20 ga. as some PDs do. That works well in urban terrain where you don't want to shoot through the walls. Police like that. They are also good weapons for civilian militias, because hunters will be familiar with them and a pump shotgun is fairly robust. With slug, they can do a whopping pile of damage, but again, armour is a stopper. With flechette, they'll shred armour (at least non-plated varieties). With dragonsbreath, they will literally destroy even plated armour, though I wouldn't want to fire too many shots (and talk about HIGH signature!). With Shok-Lok, they can demolish hinges very easily. General shortcoming: Short range, crappy antiarmour performance.
Good military uses: Good for fighting against poorly armoured enemies especially in close terrain. This can include urban, thickets, underground warrens, or the like. Autoshotgun makes a good 'room broom'. Good also for crowd control (police and military police), as they tend to be intimidating (something about a .75 in barrel that just says 'don't make the guy angry').
Issued to: SWAT, CT teams, boarding teams on ships, dockside security, police uniformed officers (backup to pistol), tunnel rats, soldiers doing MOUT (though you can use 40mm cannister, 25mm grenades from the OICW, hand grenades, shotshell adapters for the M16, etc). Also good for hunters, militia, and other irregulars with limited supply and maintenance.

2. Pistols
Uses: The pistol tends to fulfill several roles. Concealable weapon, final self defence weapon, weapon usable by law enforcement who don't need huge guns, symbol of authority (remember, an officer's pistol can sometimes be there to help keep *his own* men in line), self-defence versus crooks, etc. Pistols tend to fire slower and sometimes lighter bullets than rifles and the aspect ratio of a pistol bullet tends to make it blunter and less armour penetrative. (FN FiveSeven perhaps as a counter example). Pistols don't tend to shoot through walls below a certain power level, can often be silenced for sentry removal, are often concealable, can be very effective in CQB work either as a primary or secondary, are a good weapon for SWAT guys carrying the steel shield or other kit that only leaves one hand free, are usually sufficient for general duty policing, are often sufficient for self defence or as a deterent to crooks, and can be very deadly in the hands of a good shooter. I just watched a speed shooter get 8 rounds off into a target in just over 1 second (and no, it wasn't rimfire!). He also fired 2 shots into each of 4 separate targets in just over 2 seconds. And then fired 4, reloaded, fired 4 more into a single target in just over two seconds. I would not give this man any kind of trouble...

General Shortcomings: Don't often penetrate armour (this can be a plus, or not, depending). Damage is often less than a rifle (no, don't start arguing... this is a contestible point). Usually semi-auto, though some burst or FA capable pistols exist. Not much good at range.
Who uses: Officers, vehicle crews, artillery men, medics, security guys, armoured car guys, police, SWAT, detectives, private eyes, gangbangers, military police, tunnel rats, boarding parties, john Q public in some countries, SF sentry takedown "hush puppy".

3. SMGs
Note: SMGs are basically larger, burst or FA capable pistols with a stock and longer barrels. I generalize this to say that because they used to fire pistol ammo. So they tended to be so-so vs. armour (not very good). But, they had a bit more oomph than a pistol (longer barrel) and were a bit more accurate than a pistol. However, things have changed a lot in this area. First, there was the 'closed bolt' SMGs, and suddenly they got a lot more accurate to 50 or 75'. Then there were the Personal Defence Weapons (PDWs) firing very small hyper velocity rounds that *may* well penetrate armour, though their tissue damage capabilities aren't all that great. But they're not quite an SMG as I think of a classic one. At the same time, we've got the shrunk down rifles like the M4, the C8, and others that fire *rifle* bullets from shorter barrels and allow lots of add ons. They aren't an SMG either. But certainly, the shortened long-arm end of things has gotten busy.
Uses: SMGs (PDWs) are useful for those who don't expect to engage heavily armoured targets, who perhaps want to minimize overpenetration, who might need a suppressed weapon, who want more firepower than a pistol, who want a weapon that can work in closer quarters than a rifle or shotgun (but not so much as a pistol), and that can put out volume of fire or have a high capacity magazine. They are generally more accurate than the pistols they scaled up from, less accurate than a rifle or carbine, arguably more damaging than a carbine with the right type of ammo and versus unarmoured targets. They are good for people who need a weapon that can have a short barrel and often a folding stock.
Shortomings: Often can't penetrate armour,
not useful out over 100' really (well, some
might argue out to 150' or 200'... debatable), not as accurate as a rifle, etc.
Issued to: SWAT, customs officers, fisheries officers, some military and civilian security forces, CT operators, Spec Ops, vehicle crews (sometimes, though carbines and PDWs are moving in), officers (in some armies), and to Hollywood Action Heroes.


4. Rifles and Carbines
A carbine is just a shorter rifle. Rifles come in a variety of flavours from sniper to assault to hunting. They come in every mechanism from single shot bolt action to belt or cassette fed selective fire. And everywhere in between. Some are short carbines like the M4 that can take a billion different attachments (4 round pump 12 ga. shotgun, 40mm GL, various sighting systems and designators, a flashlight, a beanbag launcher, and I'm still missing others). Generally, they tend to have rounds which are somewhat effective against armour (less so against modern top of line heavy armours), which tend to be effective out to over 300m (sniper rifles out to over 2km in some cases!), and they tend to be the most accurate of the weapons so far. The trade off is generally weight and unwieldiness. And ammo weight. And overpenetration, if you are guys like the cops that worry about such (instead of guys like the military doing MOUT that thrive on it).
General shortcomings: Heavy. Unwieldy. (relatively speaking!). Not concealable. Harder to effectively suppress, though not impossible. The less complex versions are available to hunters and make good militia weapons.
Issued to: police snipers, general duty police as a backup especially rurally, hunters, military (infantry, snipers, spec ops), boarding parties, military police, prison tower gaurds, etc.

The problem with most of these generalizations about weapons is you can find cases where they are not true. The FN FiveSeven or FN90 will penetrate a PASGT kevlar helmet at 100m even though it is a PDW. A 12 ga. dragonsbreath shell will stave in and melt a standard bulletproof vest. Flechette from a shotgun or cannister shell will shred soft kevlar armour. A carbine can be very effective in close quarters if setup right. A pistol can be deadly out to 100m. So take all generalizations with a big grain of salt.

I hope this offers some sort of perspective. My friends in SF uses a kitted up M4, a pistol as a secondary, and sometimes a sniper rifle if the situation is such as to warrant that (up to and including the .50 Anti-Materiels type weapons). My friends in the infantry and who do ship boardings use the C7 (M16) and sometimes a 9mm pistol as backup.

Hope that helps a bit. Corejob will eventually find this thread and throw in his usual firearms wisdom.
 
LoW is not, and never has been a concern with US use of shotguns. A flechete APERS round was developed for the 40mm, but the buckshot APERS (basically a 12 ga shot cut in a sabot) was more common.

The US currently issue M118 ammo n 7.62 NATO for snipers and Mk262 Mod1 ammo to specops and Marines. These use "Open To Match" bullets, which is a nice way of saying "boat tailed holllowpoints". They are consifdered legal because they don't mushroom like a normal hollowpoint and the open tip is the result of manufacturing for high precision.

Shotguns don't see much use in the US Military because they lack versatility. Inside 10 meters they are extremely lethal, from 10-40m the spread makes them forgiving, but beyond 40m the pattern opens up enough that you may not get a hit. Also, beyond 40m OO buck may not penetrate deeply enough for a lethal wound.

Oh, Dragons Breath. I'v e heard that one before, still don't believe it. Shot some, not impressed. Kevlar in vests is a chemical cousin to Nomex and is very hard to melt. Maybe the nylon cover or a Vietnam-era nylon vest.
 
Well, on the dragonsbreath issue: Unfortunately, I cannot send you the reference material due to its classy nature. However, I got a look at it from a police source. I saw the before, the after, and the during pictures and the vest afterward. The plate in the vest looked like it had been hit by a steel baseball moving at very high velocity, and it had a huge dent/deformation. The vest itself was basically burn to a crisp. The firing looked like a freakin' flamethrower - it was 10m of inferno. The damage to the plate was the result of the thermal side of things, it just looked like it had been stove in with a blunt object.

So, maybe we're not talking about the same exact type of ammo from the same manufacturer. I just know what I saw and the warnings that were being circulated in our law enforcement community.

Also, your comments about shotguns range/etc. should be qualified with some sort of reflection on barrel length, choke, etc. A sawed-off full-choke (or is that no-choke?) shotgun is probably not even close to useful at 40m. (But otherwise, your comments are dead on).

Also, speculating on what LoW allow or do not is problematic in that not all countries have signed the same documents and not everyone takes the same interpretations away anyway. And realistic necessity often overrides legal niceties in the real world anyway.

I've had arguments about what the LoW allow wrt weapons with a number of people including PhD students from Royal Military College and guys who work for DND NDHQ. The range of interpretations is interesting. And US interpretations may well differ from UN and from Canadian, just as an example. And of course, who is right? That's all the territory of lawyers, politics, and who can force their view on the others (generally).

In the end analysis, we're talking about a TU. To assume that the Terran LoW of today, varied as they are, have any relevance is questionable. We have no basis to suppose they do, or do not. Truth to tell, considering the weapons out there and the wars, I'd guess not. And who knows what Vilani tradition required... you probably had to fill out a form anytime you cocked your weapon, one if you fired it, and one if you hit (a different one if you missed), and one if you wounded and another if you killed the target.

So, my answer is 'go with what suits the kind of world you want to build'. I seek just to provide some insights on how the weapons work and what they might be good for. It is up to the ref t figure out how he wishes to see them deployed in his TU.
 
I forget that not all police body armor is kevlar. Specta, and especially Zylon, come apart with a pistols muzzle blast, so Dragon's Breath would destroy it,

Body Armor Testing

Police/military shotguns spread 2-3 cm/meter, depending on gun and load. A sawed-off spreads 5-8cm per meter.
 
Back
Top