6 Stupid Gun Myths Everyone Believes (Thanks to Movies)

[a_majoor]

Not really a myth, but I always hated the plastic magazines that were issued with the C7. The damed things would either not feed (lips would crack and split on the magazines), or the bottoms would fall off, or shatter in cold weather if you hit the ground too hard when pepperpotting. You always wondered how anyone could see something so obviously deficient yet still approve it for use...

 

[medicineman]

You always wondered how anyone could see something so obviously deficient yet still approve it for use...

Someone who's life never depended on them working.

MM

 

[OldSolduer]

Someone who's life never depended on them working.

MM

Or maybe had other interests .....

 

[medicineman]

Or maybe had other interests .....

That too...

 

[Fishbone Jones]

They modded the SMG after that

No they didn't. Do not post unqualified information.

Quite simply, if the Sterling SMG was not on 'Safe', the bolt was not locked.

If the weapons had a sudden jolt to the buttstock, like jumping off the back of a truck and hitting it on the ground while it's pointed at your face, the bolt could ride back a few inches.

This was enough travel to pick up a round, chamber it and fire it with the fixed firing pin.

The same problem existed with the Sten, however, the bolt was locked, in the forward position, in a different manner. The cocking handle could be pushed through to engage a hole in the body on the other side. Something that was taught as SOP for normal carry.

Having been issued both, I'm more than familiar with them. The Sterling SMG has a very robust trigger mech and will hold the bolt back should it travel under power from firing, unless something interferes with the travel. You'd be lotto lucky to get it to fire once, let alone more than twice by throwing it.

Ditto for the Sten. Once the first round fires, and the bolt travels fully to the rear, it will be engaged and locked by the sear, unless interfered with.

Throwing it into a room just gives your enemy another weapon with a full thirty round mag.

People here are getting confused with the term SMG, so far as Sten and Sterling. They are both, invariably, SMGs.

However, in the Canadian military context:

When we had both in stores, a Sten was called a Sten. The Sterling seldom went by it's manufactured moniker and was the weapon we typically called the SMG. We seldom, if ever, used the terms Sten and SMG in the same sentence, unless talking about both.

 

[q_1966]

No they didn't. Do not post unqualified information.

Quite simply, if the Sterling SMG was not on 'Safe', the bolt was not locked.

If the weapons had a sudden jolt to the buttstock, like jumping off the back of a truck and hitting it on the ground while it's pointed at your face, the bolt could ride back a few inches.

This was enough travel to pick up a round, chamber it and fire it with the fixed firing pin.

The same problem existed with the Sten, however, the bolt was locked, in the forward position, in a different manner. The cocking handle could be pushed through to engage a hole in the body on the other side. Something that was taught as SOP for normal carry.

Having been issued both, I'm more than familiar with them. The Sterling SMG has a very robust trigger mech and will hold the bolt back should it travel under power from firing, unless something interferes with the travel. You'd be lotto lucky to get it to fire once, let alone more than twice by throwing it.

Ditto for the Sten. Once the first round fires, and the bolt travels fully to the rear, it will be engaged and locked by the sear, unless interfered with.

Throwing it into a room just gives your enemy another weapon with a full thirty round mag.

People here are getting confused with the term SMG, so far as Sten and Sterling. They are both, invariably, SMGs.

However, in the Canadian military context:

When we had both in stores, a Sten was called a Sten. The Sterling seldom went by it's manufactured moniker and was the weapon we typically called the SMG. We seldom, if ever, used the terms Sten and SMG in the same sentence, unless talking about both.

In World War II, early versions of the British Sten gun were notorious for accidentally discharging when dropped. While dropping any long gun with loaded chamber can be dangerous, the use of a soft bronze bolt in early Stens—allowing the sear contact area to wear down quickly—made ADs even more likely.

As the early Sten gun illustrates, "poor design," including the specification of unsuitable component materials, is sometimes cited as a cause for some firearms being "unsafe." Surely, any firearm that can discharge by itself when loaded is unsafe, and no user would want to handle a firearm that has a high likelihood of accidental discharge when employed for its intended use. But, firearm designs incorporating fewer safeties are not intrinsically unsafe—see discussion of long-guns above—even if they do require competence and proper training for safe use.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accidental_discharge
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negligent_discharge

The Sten underwent various design improvements over the course of the war. For example, the Mark 4 cocking handle and corresponding hole drilled in the receiver were created to lock the bolt in the closed position to reduce the likelihood of accidental discharges inherent in the design.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sten_Gun

Weren't a lot of people unofficially drilling holes in the receiver prior to it being an official modification?