Civilian defense against armored vehicles

Status
Not open for further replies.
Nectaris said:
People seriously need to stop suggesting running up to a bearcat and hooking a cable to it or smearing stuff on windows etc. They are not going anyplace without additional police backup which means you get shot before you get to it.
Click to expand...


In that case scatter fresh donuts to distract the cops and then go after the armor.
 
crazymjb said:
Anecodotal evidence isn't data.

As far as the military is concerned... we are specifically allowed to disobey an unlawful order... in fact that is our duty.

Mike
Click to expand...

Who was court-martialed for unlawfully confiscating guns in Katrina? Were the order givers? Were the order obeyers?

Would have a member of the reserve refused that order, they would have been (at best) discharged and have their "career" ruined, and then would have had to wait 10 years for the ruling that it was indeed unconstitutional and then fight the military's disciplinary action against them on that basis.

Yeah, that's what they're going to do.

Oh wait. They didn't. :-D

I don't doubt that when an order to shoot happens that there will be a few who won't. They'll be eliminated from the force one way or another. In my opinion.
 
mav said:
You know what tends to wash out Thermal Imagers and create problems for NVD's? Fire... lots of fire. I suggest when the SHTF, everyone become a damn pyromaniac. If I'm not running NVD's, then I'm setting lots of damn fires to negate the tactical advantages of my adversaries using NVD's/Thermal Imagers.
Click to expand...

Save your tires when you get them replaced. I honestly wished I saved them every time. I would probably have close to 50 or so tires on my property (in a barn).

Great for signaling, roadblocking, or interfering with FLIR and NV devices. :)
 
StevieP said:
I'm still gonna start digging a moat.

Nobody's suggested anything better. The dirt removed from the moat will make a nice berm, too, from which "high ground" would provide a good vantage point.
Click to expand...

I thought about installing quarter and half-ton boulders to surround the property on the street edge that abuts our dwelling. But then I thought it would actually serve as fantastic cover for anybody on the street side.

[grin]
 
StevieP said:
I'm still gonna start digging a moat.

Nobody's suggested anything better. The dirt removed from the moat will make a nice berm, too, from which "high ground" would provide a good vantage point.
Click to expand...
Yeah, high ground,bitches. A very valid strategy, until someone came up with the idea of a helicopter.
 
frenchman said:
Yeah, high ground,bitches. A very valid strategy, until someone came up with the idea of a helicopter.
Click to expand...

Barrett .50BMG makes short work of helos who stray too close to the ground... unless it's a Hind E or Apache. Then you better have a couple of Stingers.

Still think this is the baddest thing to ever fly with a rotor...
Trumpeter-Mil-Mi-24-Hind-040.JPG
 
Last edited:
mav said:
Barrett .50BMG makes short work of helos who stray too close to the ground... unless it's a Hind E or Apache. Then you better have a couple of Stingers.
Click to expand...
yeah well, my bad. It's not like you'd be somehow busy shooting at all those MRAPs already. I don't know where this notion of fighting in open terrain comes from. And it's not like the coppers couldn't launch smoke and tear gas to take your vision. I see, I am dealing with real Pattons and Bonapartes here. Yay for tactics!
 
When your out of Panzerfoust's get mans best friend

Stalin style

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...talins-dogs-war-explosives-strapped-them.html

article-2517413-19CF745800000578-11_634x450.jpg
 
crazymjb said:
Oh have you shot at a helicopter with a .50

Mike
Click to expand...

Nope... just ground targets. But I've flown in plenty of Blackhawks and Chinooks and you know what my take away was? I was about one well-placed shot away from being charred meat in some wreckage. BTW, not sure if you're aware of this, but the M2 was used extensively in WWII against low-flying aerial targets... and those Messerschmitts and Stukas flew a bit faster than most of today's helos.

And of course, we have Police and Coast Guard Snipers in helos today... I guess those .308 and .338 rifles they are using from the helo are useless for shooting targets on the ground, right? Right? Or maybe there is some law of physics that I'm not aware of that prevents someone on the ground from shooting at something that is hovering in the air... because that has never happened in the history of helicoptors.

frenchman said:
yeah well, my bad. It's not like you'd be somehow busy shooting at all those MRAPs already. I don't know where this notion of fighting in open terrain comes from. And it's not like the coppers couldn't launch smoke and tear gas to take your vision. I see, I am dealing with real Pattons and Bonapartes here. Yay for tactics!
Click to expand...

I don't disagree with whatever your saying. In fact, I'd rather not defend a static position against superior forces. Mobility is the key. However, I view helicopters with more disdain than I do armorerd vehicles. The damn things are flying disasters and very vulnerable to ground fire.
 
Last edited:
Yeah an M2 has a much higher rate of fire than a Barrett...

MAYBE against a troop transport if it's close enough, but you are going to be grossly out gunned with any rocket or flir/optic assisted gun on a helicopter. Honestly if you are that close you'd probably be better off doing mag dumps with something in 7.62...

Mike
 
crazymjb said:
As someone who is wrapping up their 6th year in the Marine Corps as a grunt and squad leader... yea

Mike
Click to expand...

Unless you had an air defense MOS and some exposure to Stingers, the only time (friendly) helos came up was when they played a part of your movement OP Order. I'm not advocating going RAMBO on an attack chopper. Just pointing out that most military helos and all LEO helos are unarmored and vulnerable to small arms.
 
Last edited:
I was referring to knowing more about military and obeying lawful, unlawful orders. Culture in the military with regard to the constitution. Etc, etc, etc.

As far as air defenses... I know that Afghans are relatively unsuccessful bringing down aircraft with small arms. Stingers with the Russians, and RPGs yea... All the dustoff/pedro pickups we had... none took fire, even in the situation where their was enemy known to be in the vicinity that had just lit up the platoon in question with a PKM.

It's not smart, when there are gunships around, to start taking pot shots at them.

Mike
 
crazymjb said:
I was referring to knowing more about military and obeying lawful, unlawful orders. Culture in the military with regard to the constitution. Etc, etc, etc.

As far as air defenses... I know that Afghans are relatively unsuccessful bringing down aircraft with small arms. Stingers with the Russians, and RPGs yea... All the dustoff/pedro pickups we had... none took fire, even in the situation where their was enemy known to be in the vicinity that had just lit up the platoon in question with a PKM.

It's not smart, when there are gunships around, to start taking pot shots at them.

Mike
Click to expand...

I agree... whether it's gunships or indirect fire support, surprise and mobility are the key because once your enemy knows your location they will bring the full amount of force to bear on you, and in the case of the US military, that is quite a bit of force. This is where having the initiative and being able to choose your battleground comes into play. Fight where the enemy has difficulty bringing it's force to bear and you have many ways to break contact... in heavily forested/mountainous or urban environment. I was light infantry. Open ground made me nervous and with reason. Lot's of things to kill me in open ground.
 
crazymjb said:
As someone who is wrapping up their 6th year in the Marine Corps as a grunt and squad leader... yea

Mike
Click to expand...

As someone who is considerably older than 25 and whose very close relation was the highest ranking enlisted Marine on a very large base, I disagree.

So there. :p
 
mav said:
This is where having the initiative and being able to choose your battleground comes into play. Fight where the enemy has difficulty bringing it's force to bear and you have many ways to break contact... in heavily forested/mountainous or urban environment. I was light infantry. Open ground made me nervous and with reason. Lot's of things to kill me in open ground.
Click to expand...
Tadaaa! We are getting there. The cities are your best bet. So many buildings, so many corners, so many windows, so many non-combatants that could be collateral damage, so little use for helis and thermal vision... But then, what do I know?
 
I have a solution to this situation. It involves being prepared and knowing the potential threat.

You'll have to bear with me while I finish the rest of the thread though. I'm on page 23, 10 posts per page format.
 
Last edited:
FLIR/Thermal equipped cops/troops/air support is certainly not the bear to be poking more than once and definitely not in open terrain. That's pretty much a 100% death sentence. I agree cities are your friend in those kinds of battles.

Also a good note is that plain old plate glass is a great cover from heat signature. There's a great mythbusters episode showing this.

Shooting at air cover is, needless to say unwise.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Red Raven Defense
Replies
19
Views
603
RPLHVAC
R
Turkish M1911A1's for the Civilian Marksmanship Program
2
Replies
31
Views
880
Dench
Dench
Californians Arming Up for Self-Defense as Illegals Flood into Cities
Replies
23
Views
522
mothybee
mothybee
Yesterday Was The 10 Year Anniversary Of The Bundy Family Cattle Ranch Standoff Against The BLM
Replies
4
Views
276
Matt_SERE
Matt_SERE
‘Unconstitutional’: DOJ Announces Red Flag Center For Gun-Grab Operation Against Americans
Replies
16
Views
665
Nick Fury
Nick Fury
Back
Top Bottom