4 ms·

It is intentional. Automatic rifle toting soldiers in public places (eg: downtown Paris) are generally threatening, so, to emphasize their intention to operate

by ihsw 10y ago

It is intentional. Automatic rifle toting soldiers in public places (eg: downtown Paris) are generally threatening, so, to emphasize their intention to operate those weapons only as self-defense, they remain unloaded until necessary. Loaded cartridges are stored on their person though, just in case.

jessaustin 10y ago
Then why is he clutching the grip rather than leaving the rifle slung over his shoulder with an empty chamber? That would be less "threatening", and certainly more sensible. It would also be more responsive, as the magazine could be loaded all the time, and on the rare occasion shooting is required, shooting could take place without fumbling with a seldom-used, packed-away magazine. Perhaps this is a cultural thing, but I've used firearms all my life, and this posture signifies, "We menace the public with 'assault rifles', but we hire amateurs for the menacing so after three old ladies got clipped we took away their bullets." That is, if one harbored ill intent, the presence of this sort of "security" would encourage rather than discourage one's nefarious plans.
- ihsw 10y ago
  Your interpretation is correct, the intent is that they operate on a purely reactive basis. But it's a show of strength to assuage the public rather than actual security -- if there was an actual security risk then you would most definitely see their rifles loaded properly and the area would be closed off to the public (especially to ambitious photographers). As for him clutching the grip instead of slung over -- he is probably posing for the picture and he's clearly displaying appropriate trigger discipline, so I wouldn't be concerned.
- fredophile 10y ago
  I can probably load and ready an empty rifle that's in my hands faster than I can move a slung, loaded rifle from my back into my hands. That's using a proper sling and not the improvised sling shown in the picture. It's also significantly safer to have the rifle in his hands than loaded on his back. It wouldn't be that hard for the trigger to catch on something and fire a round while the rifle is still slung. Carrying an unloaded weapon, with proper trigger and muzzle discipline, is perfectly safe.
  - jessaustin 10y ago
    I specifically noted that the chamber should be empty. There's nothing that can happen accidentally to a slung rifle that will chamber a round. Keeping one's finger on the trigger guard while standing around is not proper trigger discipline. It's appropriate in an active, attentive situation, and perhaps photography is such a situation, but ISTM this person is allowing his habit of always being unloaded to foster some bad habits.
    - fredophile 10y ago
      Mistakes happen. Once you put a magazine on a weapon it's pretty easy to ready it. Think about how many people die every year because someone was cleaning a gun they thought was unloaded but wasn't. What about keeping your finger on the trigger guard do you have a problem with? Where do you think his finger should be when he's carrying his rifle?
      - jessaustin 10y ago
        Yes that's why experienced gun users regularly bump back the slide/open the breech a crack/otherwise check the chamber when handling firearms. I've seen firearm instructors who could perform that action in tenths of a second with their favorite semiautomatic pistols. In a variety of situations, it's just as important to be able to confirm that a chamber is loaded as it is to be able to confirm the converse. You do know that a missing magazine is no proof of an empty chamber, right? My "problem" is experience. An acquaintance who was a little too fond of the "commando" trigger finger posture inadvertently fired a shot in my presence. The firearm was properly pointed at the ground so tragedy did not ensue, but this person was soon convinced to leave his fingers on the grip where they belong, until such time as he is sighting his intended target. For rifles without pistol grips, it's fine to wrap one's hand around the neck of the stock. [EDIT:] I wonder whether my difficulties in this thread stem mostly from cultural differences? In every nation in which I've encountered soldiers holding their rifles in this posture in public spaces, including to my chagrin USA, their presence has made me feel less safe. I don't assume that they know what they're doing, nor that their commanding officers do. I am not comforted when it's pointed out that their firearms have been somehow neutered, as if that were possible. A firearm has one valid purpose. If it's not time to kill someone, it's not time to handle firearms. Leave it holstered, leave it slung, leave it racked. Go to the range often enough to be comfortable handling your firearm safely, and other than that don't handle it until lives are threatened. Firearms are not suitable tools for rhetoric or ceremony or morale or intimidation, and the growing number of third-world-attitude governments (like that of USA) who see them that way are a blight upon humanity.

by ihsw 10y ago

jessaustin 10y ago

Then why is he clutching the grip rather than leaving the rifle slung over his shoulder with an empty chamber? That would be less "threatening", and certainly more sensible. It would also be more responsive, as the magazine could be loaded all the time, and on the rare occasion shooting is required, shooting could take place without fumbling with a seldom-used, packed-away magazine. Perhaps this is a cultural thing, but I've used firearms all my life, and this posture signifies, "We menace the public with 'assault rifles', but we hire amateurs for the menacing so after three old ladies got clipped we took away their bullets." That is, if one harbored ill intent, the presence of this sort of "security" would encourage rather than discourage one's nefarious plans.

ihsw 10y ago
Your interpretation is correct, the intent is that they operate on a purely reactive basis. But it's a show of strength to assuage the public rather than actual security -- if there was an actual security risk then you would most definitely see their rifles loaded properly and the area would be closed off to the public (especially to ambitious photographers). As for him clutching the grip instead of slung over -- he is probably posing for the picture and he's clearly displaying appropriate trigger discipline, so I wouldn't be concerned.
fredophile 10y ago
I can probably load and ready an empty rifle that's in my hands faster than I can move a slung, loaded rifle from my back into my hands. That's using a proper sling and not the improvised sling shown in the picture. It's also significantly safer to have the rifle in his hands than loaded on his back. It wouldn't be that hard for the trigger to catch on something and fire a round while the rifle is still slung. Carrying an unloaded weapon, with proper trigger and muzzle discipline, is perfectly safe.
- jessaustin 10y ago
  I specifically noted that the chamber should be empty. There's nothing that can happen accidentally to a slung rifle that will chamber a round. Keeping one's finger on the trigger guard while standing around is not proper trigger discipline. It's appropriate in an active, attentive situation, and perhaps photography is such a situation, but ISTM this person is allowing his habit of always being unloaded to foster some bad habits.
  - fredophile 10y ago
    Mistakes happen. Once you put a magazine on a weapon it's pretty easy to ready it. Think about how many people die every year because someone was cleaning a gun they thought was unloaded but wasn't. What about keeping your finger on the trigger guard do you have a problem with? Where do you think his finger should be when he's carrying his rifle?
    - jessaustin 10y ago
      Yes that's why experienced gun users regularly bump back the slide/open the breech a crack/otherwise check the chamber when handling firearms. I've seen firearm instructors who could perform that action in tenths of a second with their favorite semiautomatic pistols. In a variety of situations, it's just as important to be able to confirm that a chamber is loaded as it is to be able to confirm the converse. You do know that a missing magazine is no proof of an empty chamber, right? My "problem" is experience. An acquaintance who was a little too fond of the "commando" trigger finger posture inadvertently fired a shot in my presence. The firearm was properly pointed at the ground so tragedy did not ensue, but this person was soon convinced to leave his fingers on the grip where they belong, until such time as he is sighting his intended target. For rifles without pistol grips, it's fine to wrap one's hand around the neck of the stock. [EDIT:] I wonder whether my difficulties in this thread stem mostly from cultural differences? In every nation in which I've encountered soldiers holding their rifles in this posture in public spaces, including to my chagrin USA, their presence has made me feel less safe. I don't assume that they know what they're doing, nor that their commanding officers do. I am not comforted when it's pointed out that their firearms have been somehow neutered, as if that were possible. A firearm has one valid purpose. If it's not time to kill someone, it's not time to handle firearms. Leave it holstered, leave it slung, leave it racked. Go to the range often enough to be comfortable handling your firearm safely, and other than that don't handle it until lives are threatened. Firearms are not suitable tools for rhetoric or ceremony or morale or intimidation, and the growing number of third-world-attitude governments (like that of USA) who see them that way are a blight upon humanity.