What would you carry?

[Alpo]

Hypothetical.

 

You are in Vietnam. Someone has sent you a package. In this package with a 357 and a holster and 100 rounds of 158 grain jacketed soft point 357.

 

Using soft point ammunition is against US rules of War.

 

Would you carry this gun with the 357s in it, or would you somehow get up with a chopper pilot or an APe, and finagle some military issue hardball 38 Special?

[Loophole LaRue, SASS #51438]

Somehow, I seriously doubt that Rules of War would be my major concern.

 

LL

[Dirty Dan Dawkins]

Not in Viet-damn-nam.

[Pat Riot]

I would carry it. 

[Cheyenne Ranger, 48747L]

let's see--I was humping all my gear + a canteen or two of extra water for the platoon through tangle-foot, muddy streams and uneven terrain. 

there was my ruck with a couple of days of food and water

M-16 and the basic load of 20+ mags

half-dozen or so of frags with the handles taped down--a story for another time

LAW when we were in Cambodia

 

If my platoon and I couldn't eliminate the threat I doubt another 6 rounds would do much good--not to mention the weight of the gun and ammo

 

as my brother would say, "Hard pass"

 

[Alpo]

Well, actually the gentleman who told the story about his father sending him the gun was Air Force. So I sort of doubt he was out humping in the bush with a ruck and an M16 and all that other crap. Most probably he was an remf. He said he served his entire term there with the six rounds in the cylinder, and when his time was up and they sent him to Germany he gave the ammo to another Air Force guy.

 

This guy's father did not send him any ammunition with the gun, so he scammed six rounds of 38 hardball out of an APe.

 

But, as happens so often with me, I started thinking WHAT IF, INSTEAD OF WHAT REALLY HAPPENED,  THIS HAPPENED?

 

In this case it was WHAT IF DADDY HAD SENT AMMUNITION WITH THE GUN.

[Forty Rod SASS 3935]

3 hours ago, Loophole LaRue, SASS #51438 said:

Somehow, I seriously doubt that Rules of War would be my major concern.

 

LL

I carried a half dozen non-issue guns in 'Nam..... .45 Colt, 9mm, .38 special.....and never even gave a thought to the ammo. I ordered Winchester Silvertips (the "go to ammo" at the time) from my Dad who put it in normal mail

[ORNERY OAF]

Is there no 1911 available? 

[Sgt. C.J. Sabre, SASS #46770]

22 minutes ago, ORNERY OAF said:

Is there no 1911 available? 

Issue pistols would have been for Staff NCOs and Officers. I'm making an assumption, (and all that that implies), that this pistol was sent to an Enlisted Infantryman. Completely Off Book and unauthorized. 

If it were me, I'd carry the .357 ammo. If I ran out of that, and couldn't get more, I'd scam some .38 ammo. 

In my misspent youth, as a Young Marine I managed to get my superiors to allow me to store my Colt Python in the Battalion Armory. I had a Gunnery Sgt. that I worked for that got me written authorization to take it on deployment. While I never took it to the field on that deployment, if the SHTF, I've no doubt that I could have. 

Just for the heck of it, I had a Issue 1911 holster that I modified to carry it in on my Cartridge Belt. (I did actually carry it in the field on Camp Lejune. Almost got a deer one time too.  

[PowderRiverCowboy]

Here lies my issue with the "Law of War" Why do we abide when the enemy does not?

 

 Iraq we eliminated a vehicle  threat that had a baby gutted and stuffed with explosives  that was aimed at a checkpoint . I have zero feelings for someone like that  so I dont care what ammo you use. And never take a Inbed reporter in a combat zone thats just asking for issues.

[Alpo]

1 hour ago, Sgt. C.J. Sabre, SASS #46770 said:

I'm making an assumption, (and all that that implies), that this pistol was sent to an Enlisted Infantryman.

As I said earlier, he was Air Force. He signed the article SMSgt (senior master sergeant?), so enlisted yes but infantryman no.

 

https://americanhandgunner.com/handguns/a-vietnam-trooper/

[Sgt. C.J. Sabre, SASS #46770]

7 hours ago, Alpo said:

Hypothetical.

 

You are in Vietnam. Someone has sent you a package. In this package with a 357 and a holster and 100 rounds of 158 grain jacketed soft point 357.

 

Using soft point ammunition is against US rules of War.

 

Would you carry this gun with the 357s in it, or would you somehow get up with a chopper pilot or an APe, and finagle some military issue hardball 38 Special?

 

30 minutes ago, Alpo said:

As I said earlier, he was Air Force. He signed the article SMSgt (senior master sergeant?), so enlisted yes but infantryman no.

 

https://americanhandgunner.com/handguns/a-vietnam-trooper/

I was answering the hypothetical question that you asked, and said that I was making an assumption. And you DID say, "WHAT IF, INSTEAD OF WHAT REALLY HAPPENED,  THIS HAPPENED?"

As a SMSgt in the Air Farce, I doubt that he ever even saw the jungle, mostly the inside of his air conditioned office, E-Club, and quarters. If he carried this pistol, he probably did so just to show off at the E-Club.  

Edited March 6 by Sgt. C.J. Sabre, SASS #46770

[Pat Riot]

I knew a number of enlisted Vietnam Vets that carried handguns given to them or sent to them when they were in Vietnam. None of them ever mentioned what ammo they had, but I did find it interesting that nearly every one of them received a .38 Special revolver. 
I knew a Navy Corpsman that had been attached to a company of Marines. When he was headed over his Dad offered him a .357 S&W snub nose. If he mentioned the model I don’t recall it. 
Anyway he declined because Corpsmen weren’t supposed to carry weapons. After his first patrol with his company he wrote his Dad and told him to send it “with plenty of ammo.” 
When I knew him it was aboard ship. He said he still had that revolver at home in a gun safe. He never mentioned if he ever used it in Vietnam and I didn’t ask. 

[Sixgun Sheridan]

I never understood how blowing someone up, crisping them with a flamethrower or running over them with a tank was okay, but shooting them with soft-point ammo wasn't.

[Buckshot Bear]

2 minutes ago, Sixgun Sheridan said:

I never understood how blowing someone up, crisping them with a flamethrower or running over them with a tank was okay, but shooting them with soft-point ammo wasn't.

 

Me either, the oft said reason its takes more manpower for a wounded soldier than a dead soldier. 

 

I wonder what it was like to be caught by the Germans in the trenches in WWI with one of these?

 

[watab kid]

"....Well, actually the gentleman who told the story about his father sending him the gun was Air Force. So I sort of doubt he was out humping in the bush with a ruck and an M16 and all that other crap. ....' 

 

that does make a difference , but id not have given any rules much thought , a great friend [that i lost last fall] bought such a revolver over there from someone shipping home , then sold it to another when he came home , marine - air based 

[Sixgun Sheridan]

Well the Germans did protest over our use of the 1897 Winchester shotgun, calling it inhumane and threatening to execute any US soldier captured with one. When we threatened to do the same to any German caught with a flamethrower they backed down.

[Rip Snorter]

1 minute ago, Sixgun Sheridan said:

Well the Germans did protest over our use of the 1897 Winchester shotgun, calling it inhumane and threatening to execute any US soldier captured with one. When we threatened to do the same to any German caught with a flamethrower they backed down.

Actually, my recollection is that it was a sawback engineer Mauser bayonet.  We certainly used flamethrowers through WWII and i think, Viet Nam.

[Forty Rod SASS 3935]

1 hour ago, Pat Riot said:

I knew a number of enlisted Vietnam Vets that carried handguns given to them or sent to them when they were in Vietnam. None of them ever mentioned what ammo they had, but I did find it interesting that nearly every one of them received a .38 Special revolver. 
I knew a Navy Corpsman that had been attached to a company of Marines. When he was headed over his Dad offered him a .357 S&W snub nose. If he mentioned the model I don’t recall it. 
Anyway he declined because Corpsmen weren’t supposed to carry weapons. After his first patrol with his company he wrote his Dad and told him to send it “with plenty of ammo.” 
When I knew him it was aboard ship. He said he still had that revolver at home in a gun safe. He never mentioned if he ever used it in Vietnam and I didn’t ask. 

 

I was an Army Ordnance Captain, Battalion Staff Supply Officer:  my office oversaw all captured or abandoned weapons brought in from II Corps South.  I saw or used all manner of military stuff and a lot of civilian guns.  I had two guns assigned to me, an M-14 and a 1911.  On occassion I'd take a 870 shotgun along and we had 1919A6 Browning LMGs.

 

I brought a SAA 5 1/2" .45 Colt with me and bought a BrowningHigh Power at the PX.  I carried at one time or another M-1 and M-2 carbines. M-3A1 smgs, SKS, AK 47 and 74 rifles, a MAT-49 French POS, Swedish Karl Gustavs, a Madsen smg, S&W Models 10 and a Model 60 stainless, a Russian PPSH-41 and a PPSH 43 and half a dozen various pistols.  I ended up carrying a M-1A1 Thompson submachine gun.  Heavy and not terribly accurate much beyond a hundred yards, but I loved that gun.

 

 

[watab kid]

war is not humain , there are things i consider war crimes , the use of any arm against a deadly force seems justified and outside any rule i would apply , just my 2 bits in the end , 

 

anybody carry the S&W M39 - thats one of my favorites , 

[Cold Lake Kid, SASS # 51474]

Don't know about RVN, but an Uncle, in the GGFGs,* was a tanker in WWII and carried a S&W Victory Model chambered for .38 (Not .38 SPL) 

They were issued 6 rounds at a time, lead bullets only.

They always came back and filed a LOB** report.

 

* Governor General's Foot Guards

** Lost on Battlefield

 

 

 

 

 

 

[watab kid]

those would have been in 38 S&W , they preceded the later victory models in 38spcl , i have both of that vintage in my accumulation 

[Forty Rod SASS 3935]

On 3/6/2024 at 10:53 PM, watab kid said:

war is not humain , there are things i consider war crimes , the use of any arm against a deadly force seems justified and outside any rule i would apply , just my 2 bits in the end , 

 

anybody carry the S&W M39 - thats one of my favorites , 

Our XO carried a M-39 in a shoulder holster and a 1911 on his hip.

 

CO had a S&W M-19

[Alpo]

Read a magazine article some years back. The guy had taken a 1911 in 38 Super to Vietnam, along with a Bianchi X15 Shadow and several hundred rounds of ammunition. He said in the article that the holster saved his life - that he would have never been able to get the gun out of a GI holster fast enough to shoot little brown brother.

 

He also said he carried the pieces to convert the 1911 to 45 - an entire top half and an ejector - for when he ran out of 38 Super ammo. Then he could use standard GI 45 magazines and ball.

 

Well I could probably think of guns that would, in my opinion, be better guns, in better chamberings - I believe if I were going to carry a personally owned weapon in a US military area, it would either be a 38 or 357 revolver, or a 45 or 9 mm automatic. And if a rifle it would either be 5.56 or 308. Because that ammunition is available. In Vietnam, I would probably choose a Browning Hi Power as the 9 mm. They did have Smith 39s over there, but it seems like they were kept close to the Navy SEALs. Might be difficult to get spare magazines or parts.

[Crooked River Pete, SASS 43485]

On 3/6/2024 at 8:56 AM, Alpo said:

Using soft point ammunition is against US rules of War

Are you sure? I thought it was some treaty or other for rules of war, since that was not a declared war it didn't count and we didn't sign it anyway.

[watab kid]

7 hours ago, Forty Rod SASS 3935 said:

Our XO carried a M-39 in a shoulder holster and a 1911 on his hip.

 

CO had a S&W M-19

i have an M-39 and its one of my favorites as well , i have the M-39 shoulder holster as well , but ive only carried it in a strong side belt holster , 

[Alpo]

16 minutes ago, Crooked River Pete, SASS 43485 said:

Are you sure? I thought it was some treaty or other for rules of war, since that was not a declared war it didn't count and we didn't sign it anyway.

You are thinking about the Hague convention. Actually conventions - there were several over the years.

 

They only apply if both sides are signatories. So England could not shoot Germans with soft point ammunition because England and Germany had both signed. But they could legally shoot Japanese with soft points  because the Japanese never did. Theoretically we can shoot haji with anything we want to because A, this is not an actual war and B, haji et al has never signed.

 

But that's irrelevant. It does not matter what the Hague says or does not say. We - the United States of America - have decided this is how we're going to do it. And we - the US of A - do not use soft point ammunition in warfare. It is against OUR rules.

[Irish Pat]

i have one old Green Beret friend that told me one of his last tours in Viet nam he shot a ignorant lieutenant in the leg with a 38 then knocked him out with morphine and saved their unit from being wiped out. he told me the officer was brand new hiding behind a tree and screwing up fire support. the officer got evacuated and a medal. the friend telling me this gets a huge VA check has wound scars all over.  this guy had served in Cambodia wore black PJs used foreign weapons, been in biker gangs. I always did whatever he wanted when he came in the bank

 

[Pat Riot]

1 hour ago, Alpo said:

But that's irrelevant. It does not matter what the Hague says or does not say. We - the United States of America - have decided this is how we're going to do it. And we - the US of A - do not use soft point ammunition in warfare. It is against OUR rules.

Yes, we wouldn’t want to kill off the enemy too quickly. There is much money to be made by prolonging war or military conflicts. 

[Crooked River Pete, SASS 43485]

12 hours ago, Alpo said:

But that's irrelevant. It does not matter what the Hague says or does not say. We - the United States of America - have decided this is how we're going to do it. And we - the US of A - do not use soft point ammunition in warfare. It is against OUR rules.

You sure?

https://www.thetrace.org/2015/07/hollow-point-ammunition-us-army/

[Alpo]

Did you read your link?

 

They are considering it. They are thinking about it. That means they haven't done it yet. Which means US policy is still no soft points. It may change. But it has not yet.

[Rooster Ron Wayne]

It's War ! 

I don't get it's against the rules of war ? 

Your trying to kill people who are trying to kill you. 

What's the difference in killing them with a hollowpoint or a round ball ? 

Dead is dead .

Fight with what you have I say .

Rooster 

[DeaconKC]

G.W. Bush allowed Special Forces operating against terrorists to use hollowpoints, as they are not regular military forces and not recognized under the Hague Accords.

[Capt. James H. Callahan]

On 3/6/2024 at 7:15 PM, Rip Snorter said:

Actually, my recollection is that it was a sawback engineer Mauser bayonet.  We certainly used flamethrowers through WWII and i think, Viet Nam.

Some moons ago I went with my Dad to some army reunions. His outfit fought in the South Pacific WWII. One of the guys once had a photo album from Iwo Jima. Japs all blown apart and some BBQed by flame throwers. Pretty gruesome stuff. My dad an many others were standing by to invade Japan when we dropped the atomic bombs and ended the war. Invading Japan would have been a nasty piece of business. I believe it was Yamamoto who said if we invade the US there will be a rifle behind every blade of grass. Invading Japan wouldn't have been much fun either.

JHC