• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Most useless weapons ever made.

LaMidRighter said:
If it's all you have at the time it has to do, but that is one anemic round.
Click to expand...

Don't get me wrong, it ain't a go to gun, but for up close and personal, ( @ 25yrds was just to see if I could do it) you don't want to go too much more...
 
Springfield 1873 "Trapdoor" Rifle

Terry1.jpg

While the rifle itself was a fine weapon it came along at a time when Winchester and Henry were putting out their lever action repeaters. While the Springfield was definitely more accurate and utilized the devastatingly powerful .45-70 round the other rifles could simply put more lead down range faster. The difference became eminently clear to the men of the 7th Cav at Little Bighorn.
 
Here you go, this is the most impotent weapon in US History

5.jpg
 
LaMidRighter said:
If it's all you have at the time it has to do, but that is one anemic round.
Click to expand...

Statistically it takes 59ft/lbs of force to punch thru the human sternum. The .25acp leaves the barrel with 61.
 
tech30528 said:
Statistically it takes 59ft/lbs of force to punch thru the human sternum. The .25acp leaves the barrel with 61.
Click to expand...

Hence Jimmy Cirillo's comment about where to aim
 
These are as worthless as tits on a boar

pb1-0ss.jpg
 
"Useless" is a bit subjective but I'd nominate the Boys Anti-Tank Rifle. It weighed like 35 - 40lbs, was over 5 feet long, and fired .55 rounds. It was obsolete by the time the Panzers came around in WWII. Talk about obsolete and useless. Picture is below.

atr_boys1.jpg
 
The atomic mortar.

image.php
 
Black Manta said:
This is not really gun control related but since all the gun people pro and anti are here, why not?

My submission is the .50 BMG 3 shot revolver...

View attachment 67154256

Why in the name of all that is holy would anyone want this...this... thing?
Click to expand...

Same reason people buy gigantic diesel trucks they don't need.
 
Lutherf said:
Nock Volley Gun

View attachment 67154270

A flintlock with 7 barrels bored at .50 caliber. The center barrel received the initial charge and the other barrels were ported to ignite off that one. The result.....7 rounds of .50 cal ball all going off more or less at the same time. It would have sucked almost as much to be behind it as in front of it.
Click to expand...



That's what Sharp's Sergeant carried in Sharp's Rifles, I think. :)
 
tech30528 said:
Statistically it takes 59ft/lbs of force to punch thru the human sternum. The .25acp leaves the barrel with 61.
Click to expand...

Hopefully the threat you'd be trying to stop would be in his 80s, only 2 feet away and not wearing a shirt.
 
Risky Thicket said:
Hopefully the threat you'd be trying to stop would be in his 80s, only 2 feet away and not wearing a shirt.
Click to expand...

The .25 would certainly do the trick up under the ribs but I'd rather not be that close. That being said the one I carry the most is a 32acp.
 
Black Manta said:
This is not really gun control related but since all the gun people pro and anti are here, why not?

My submission is the .50 BMG 3 shot revolver...

View attachment 67154256

Why in the name of all that is holy would anyone want this...this... thing?
Click to expand...

Maybe elderly people want them? 1 shot 1 kill
 
Lutherf said:
Nock Volley Gun

View attachment 67154270

A flintlock with 7 barrels bored at .50 caliber. The center barrel received the initial charge and the other barrels were ported to ignite off that one. The result.....7 rounds of .50 cal ball all going off more or less at the same time. It would have sucked almost as much to be behind it as in front of it.
Click to expand...

No, it would have less recoil than a 12 gauge shotgun. I have fired lots of large bore black powder, and it does not kick anything like modern smokeless powder.
 
tech30528 said:
The .25 would certainly do the trick up under the ribs but I'd rather not be that close. That being said the one I carry the most is a 32acp.
Click to expand...

the advantage of the 25 is it was reliable in terms of rim fires and-back when it came out, allowed the smallest semi autos available. its pretty much obsolete now that you have micro 380s which are far far more formidable. those little SIG 380s and the more reliable but harder to shoot well SW Bodyguards aren't much bigger than the raven which was probably the king of the cheap but reliable 25

Ravens were made out of zinc and generally were sold with a ski mask or half a pair of pantyhose but they worked. Lots of cops used to carry them in the 80s as backups. you could buy one for 65 bucks back when i first started buying pistols (Circa 1982 or so)
 
Black Manta said:
In the case of elderly people one shot, one broken arm maybe.
Click to expand...

Yeah probably... I just imagine an old guy drop shotting a mugger lol but in all seriousness I would use it but the recoil must be a motha
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom