William Tell, the legacy lives...

I thought this thread involved apples and arrows ! L:O:L
I commend any people who keep their populace alert and practiced without being paranoid about it .
I don,t condone mandatory militairy service , just that people be ready willing and able . Like I told my daughter . You don,t have to hunt . You just have to know how to hunt . Of course practice makes perfect . At least she won,t be starting from zero !
 
[/ “Radical pacifists would probably rather miss out on the Knabenschiessen,” warns an internet site on upcoming Zurich events, but adds “don’t be afraid of armed teenagers” and come and see “a good chunk of Swiss tradition.” For the official site, visit http://www.knabenschiessen.ch, and treat yourself the QUOTE]

don’t be afraid of armed teenagers????????
:eek: :eek: :confused:
Click to expand...
 
Before World War I, a German general observing Swiss military maneuvers asked a Swiss militiaman what would the Swiss do if a German army, twice the size of the Swiss militia, invaded. The militiaman responded, “Shoot twice and go home.”
Click to expand...

a lesson sadly lost on our sheeple govt. there is a reason the swiss have managed to stay out of two world wars in spite of being surrounded by some of the largest and most terrifying armies, and this is part of it.
 
If sex education is supposed to stop unsafe sex, wouldn't gun education help stop unsafe gun use?

:D

Tom
 
The Swiss have strict family values and the teenagers have self discipline. Thats the reason there is no need to fear armed teenagers. I taught my daughter to shoot as soon as she came to live with me and she has always had the combination to the gun safe because she is responsible, conscientious and safe. Too bad we can't have a schutzenfest here in the US like the Swiss have.

Ice
 
In Swiss shooting culture, a few accurate hits are superior to lots of “spray and pray” shots. Before World War I, a German general observing Swiss military maneuvers asked a Swiss militiaman what would the Swiss do if a German army, twice the size of the Swiss militia, invaded. The militiaman responded, “Shoot twice and go home.”

That's too cool!:thumbup:
 
The Swiss were busy storing stolen Jewish gold for the Nazis; no need for the Germans to invade. HOWever- what we are saying about a healthy society is absolutely true. My son can't carry the pocket knife I gave him to school. We have more restrictions, less 'freedom' and responsibility, and more violence than we had 40 years ago, when our own society was more cohesive.


munk
 
I kind of like the way they do it - five rounds, 300 yards, no sighters, sights mechanically zeroed from the armory. After all, if you just grabbed a rifle off the rack, would the bad guys give you a few minutes and a few boxes of ammo to sight the thing in before hostilities commenced?

It seems to me that a certain amount of luck would be needed here in addition to marksmanship. Cool.
 
Dave Rishar said:
I kind of like the way they do it - five rounds, 300 yards, no sighters, sights mechanically zeroed from the armory. After all, if you just grabbed a rifle off the rack, would the bad guys give you a few minutes and a few boxes of ammo to sight the thing in before hostilities commenced?

It seems to me that a certain amount of luck would be needed here in addition to marksmanship. Cool.
Click to expand...

I,ve only sighted in rifles for a few clients and honestly in half the cases it wouldn,t do them any good anyway !

By this I mean that even though it was reasonably well sighted in the shooter was not . They just were not interested in practicing .

Lets go the other way . Say you had a populace that was top to bottom , front to back interested (can we say dedicated ?) to home defense . Would that not lead to a tight and workable system of marksmanship from armoury to shooter ? I,m not proficient enough with firearms to say for sure . I have found that most quality firearms are made with such tight tolerances and precision that as long as sighting in was made by an equally dedicated and skilled staff that everyone would have a similar chance to a well tuned rifle . I know that a good work ethic in oneself demands more of those around you . If that is not forthcoming then changes would be made . It sounds like these guys have got the balance between mandatory and necessary down cold .
 
I'm sure that they have a good system. My point is tolerance stacking. On a rifle with a barrel mounted front sight and a receiver mounted rear sight, mechanical zero does not necessarily equate to true zero. (In fact, it almost never does, in my experience.) Assuming that the sights are mounted perfectly (they're not), and that the barrel is timed perfectly (it's not), there's still going to be a small but necessary amount of slop between the barrel and the receiver. Any of these areas will have tolerances involved with them to make sure that Part A from Rifle A will fit Rifle B with no modifications. Murphy's Law dictates that tolerances will stack in the worst possible way more often than not.

Now, assuming that our armorer is on the ball and sights in the rifle perfectly (he won't, on account of being human, but he may very well do an excellent job of it), do I use the same hold and sight picture that he does? Do I shoulder the rifle at the same point, with the same amount of firmness? Do apply the same amount of pressure to the fore end? Am I going to be using ammunition from the same lot that he did when sighting it in? Of course not. All of this will make a difference on the target - less of a difference than a poor hold or failure to dope the wind will, but a difference nonetheless.

That's what I find interesting about it this match. You have what you're given and it's up to you to make it work when it needs to. Some of the matches that I've witnessed had more in common with benchrest than actual practical marksmanship. This method seems to go in the other direction. I like that, but I still think that a certain amount of luck would be involved. If Shooter A and Shooter B are equally skilled, but Shooter B's rifle shoots 2 clicks to the left and the wind is picking up when it's his turn on the line, he will indeed need to be lucky to keep up with Shooter A. Just my opinion.

I agree with your first statement entirely, though. If Shooter A can't shoot in the first place it really won't make a difference anyway.
 
I was wondering if someone was going to bring up how different the sight picture is to each of us.
Dave Rishar to the rescue!
munk
 
What a great story. Wish we had those same values here.

Gravertom, thanks. And BTW, your icon picture- I saw the original- when it is seen much larger, that old Swiss gent is shooting a K31! At least it has the same cocking ring- might be older. Neat.



Mike
 
Bench rest ? Bench rest ! Are these people shooting from bench rests ?
Sir, I am appalled . When I can afford to have a butler trotting along behind me while I traipse through the woods with a bench rest for me to rest my weary head I will consider bench rest shooting of value ! L:O:L

Well, got that out of the way ! All vented now. No need for a colonic! L:O:L

Dave , with respect to your attention to detail and I do appreciate someone who takes the time to do things well, there are enough subjective terms in your description of the armoury staff and weapon producers abilities to produce a suitable result to make a technicaly minded person cringe thirteen degrees to the left ! L:O:L

I will agree with you that all rifles will not be tuned to the same standard and even more so that we all see things differently . I am left eye dominant and my right eye fights for dominance . Proabably why I don,t use sights !
I think its a matter of degree over which we disagree . I guess it depends on what is being accomplished . I would like to hone my skills on a bench rest though I rarely have the opportunity . Its been two years now . I,m the kinda guy who would rather bang off half a box in someones field .
 
Mike,

Pretty sure the Swiss gent is shooting a 1911 or 96/11 long rifle. When the K31 first came out, many of the older fellows preferred the lobg rifles. Better triggers, longer sight radius, I suppose.

I like the older ones better too! Truly Schmidt Rubins, whereas the k31 technically is not. Still love the K31 , don't get me wrong!

I am still trying to get a hat that looks like the one in the Pic.

I have a good bit of grey in my beard, but, ahem, "special circumstances" prevent me form having such a long beard at this time...

Tom

:o
 
If you look right in front of the trigger guard, you will not see the magazine. The receiver of the k31 is shorter than the earlier rifles, and the mag on the K31 is right to the front of the TG. The shooters hand is probably hiding the magazine from our view. That is right where it would be. The reciever and bolt have the rounder look of the older rifles, too.

Tom
 
Dave , after reading your post for the third time I,m gonna reverse my position . Seeing as I,m a backyard banger as opposed to a techniclly minded shooter there is too much I don,t know about sighting in a rifle . The most I ever did was get rich mens rifles on the map (Literally)and try to insist that they shoot the rifle themselves .We are almost talking apples and oranges here . Sometimes I am more passionate than precise .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top