quote:

Originally posted by OKCGene:
Hello Tac, what is a baton round launcher? Thank you, Gene

they make a 40mm single shot gun that will launch any of various types from anti personnel, to tear gas to "baton" rounds...which is just a short length of wood in the grenade cartridge shell that is fired into groups of people causing troubles...we have them her in the USA too...most large city police departments have some type of riot gear weapon that will do the same thing, some come in 40mm and some in 38mm (so as to preclude accidently using a real live anti-personnel grenade)

They have shotgun rounds that do the same thing..wooden baton, lead dust in a sock, rubber buckshot, rubber 12 ga solid baton....

quote:

Originally posted by bigdeal:
Tacfoley....All joking and insinuations aside, is there anything that would move at least a majority of the British population to take matters into their own hands, break current law, and seek to start addressing the problem themselves? From what I've read of your previous postings, I'm thinking that the British population and government will do nothing more than continue to complain about the problem, while doing nothing, right up through their extinction. Please dear god, tell me I'm reading this situation totally wrong.

The Ulster Defence Association (UDA) was formed in response to the Irish Republican Army (IRA).

If a government can not (or will not) protect its own subjects, they will eventually organize to protect themselves.

The UDA/UFF weren't killing foreign invaders, Fenris - as I bet you know, they (and the IRA for that matter) were largely killing other Irish and largely innocent civilians who happened to be caught in the crossfire of their own mini US Civil War like disagreement.

Beyond a very superficial ideological sense, neither party in that period of violence is a good example for much of anything, and both groups share more in common with the Muslim extremists we hate than us - all of them notorious for killing innocents, over and over.

Collateral Damage wasn't the exception, it was the rule, for both sides.

quote:

Originally posted by 46and2:
The UDA/UFF weren't killing foreign invaders, Fenris - as I bet you know, they (and the IRA for that matter) were largely killing other Irish and largely innocent civilians who happened to be caught in the crossfire of their own mini US Civil War like disagreement.

Beyond a very superficial ideological sense, neither party in that period of violence is a good example for much of anything, and both groups share more in common with the Muslim extremists we hate than us - all of them notorious for killing innocents, over and over.

Collateral Damage wasn't the exception, it was the rule, for both sides.

History doesn't repeat, but it does rhyme.

Yes, there are differences. I was using the Troubles as an example of self-organizing "self-defense" forces when there is perceived failure on the part of government to protect. Both the IRA and ISIS in Europe both target civilians. The UDA also targeted civilians in retaliation. It was a total shit sandwich.

Will the English Defence League (EDL) or similar group grow and use similar terrorist tactics? While perhaps improbable, to say it is impossible ignores history and human nature. But the perception of governmental impotence/incompetence increases the chances. And that is not good for anyone.

quote:

Originally posted by OKCGene:
Hello Tac, what is a baton round launcher? Thank you, Gene

M79 grenade launcher - also fires CS and fragmentation [but not in Northern Ireland]. The baton round is what WE call a rubber/plastic bullet. Loaded correctly, and braced against a handy wall, you can put one of the old style, bullet-shaped rounds clear through a bus below the window line.

Do not ask me how I know this.

tac

quote:

Originally posted by MikeinNC:

quote:

Originally posted by OKCGene:
Hello Tac, what is a baton round launcher? Thank you, Gene

they make a 40mm single shot gun that will launch any of various types from anti personnel, to tear gas to "baton" rounds...which is just a short length of wood in the grenade cartridge shell that is fired into groups of people causing troubles...we have them her in the USA too...most large city police departments have some type of riot gear weapon that will do the same thing, some come in 40mm and some in 38mm (so as to preclude accidently using a real live anti-personnel grenade)

They have shotgun rounds that do the same thing..wooden baton, lead dust in a sock, rubber buckshot, rubber 12 ga solid baton....

See my post above. The baton is not made of wood, but of structural nylon. Earlier version looked just like a large rubber bullet, hence the name, 'rubber bullet'. The newer round has a low rim around the exposed end, and the idea is NOT to shoot it directly at any particular person, although this has undoubtedly happened many times, but to land short of the target and ricochet off the ground to arrive spinning. It can be lethal if fired directly, or cause horrendous and life-changing injuries, but then so can catching a pint of burning petrol and washing powder mixed up to make HMN - home-made 'napalm'.

tac

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Fenris:The question is an extension of the logic that (I understand from one of your previous posts) you can not carry anything that you intend to be able to use for self-defense due to premeditation issues. But martial arts training is arguably intended to be used for self defense. Could it not be argued that this is premeditation as well?


Nope, martial arts of all kinds are internationally supported sporting activities. I also made the point about archery, maybe I should have included shooting, too. They are also international sports that can be applied with lethal effect. As, of course, can baseball, golf, mountaineering.

Mountaineering?

Yup, just take a look at that lethal ice pick and tell me that could not be construed as a weapon.

No offense intended.

None taken.

So if I have this correct, nothing can legally be carried for the purpose of aiding in one's self-defense.

Correct.

However, USING something that you are carrying for another reason - eg., your daily-carry Leatherman [like I do] may be found as acceptable to the jury at your trial - because there WILL be a trial, especially if the BG snuffs it.

tac

quote:

Originally posted by tacfoley:


See my post above. The baton is not made of wood, but of structural nylon. Earlier version looked just like a large rubber bullet, hence the name, 'rubber bullet'. The newer round has a low rim around the exposed end, and the idea is NOT to shoot it directly at any particular person, although this has undoubtedly happened many times, but to land short of the target and ricochet off the ground to arrive spinning. It can be lethal if fired directly, or cause horrendous and life-changing injuries, but then so can catching a pint of burning petrol and washing powder mixed up to make HMN - home-made 'napalm'.

tac

Nice, we actually have a wooden baton round, and a rubber one...back in 2003 I was part of a team to decide which type of Less than Lethal the USCG was gonna use....

once I bounced a (wooden) baton from a 12ga into the concrete deck and into a group of targets, the powers that bee saw the wooden baton break into pieces and they put the Kibosh on the wooden baton. We did get the rubber fin stabilized round into service because of the wooden baton breaking and doing more damage than intended..