Raenir Salazar posted:

I feel like ostensibly the point of having Milsurp is that it's generally more durable and has more utility for its price than regular "planned obsolescence" civilian stuff. People walk around with Soviet gear because it's comfy why not Serbian?

I feel like there are only connotations if it was Wehrmacht gear. Soviet gear has at least the "AK-47" reputation of "durable enough for Siberia, durable enough for the US" without it being a political statement. Most people don't even know Serbia exists, so I think you're good.

david_a posted:

Now, if you had a shopworn milsurp SKS from that region of the world you might have something to worry about...

Can you tell if the bag has even been used?

chitoryu12 posted:

I have a Mosin-Nagant that was arsenal refinished and built in 1938. There's a pretty high chance that it saw front line service.

david_a posted:

That's actually one of the (many) reasons I don't own a Mosin. I would be creeped out having one in the house if (based on the dates and wear) there was a fair chance it was used to kill someone, so I completely empathize about the Serbian bag even if that's a much milder case. Didn't the Soviets shoot a lot of deserters?

I somehow feel like there's a kind of statue of limitations on that, though. I don't think having a Roman sword or whatever lying around would bother me at all.

OwlFancier posted:

As far as I know milsurp stuff isn't haunted so using it doesn't really matter unless you're worried about getting questions as to why you're wearing your SS officer cap to the beach instead of a baseball cap.

Pontius Pilate posted:

Not part of a weapon but the ticking clock broadcast during Stalingrad had to be eerie.

Koramei posted:

Well yeah protests there still get intense (for the protests against the president a few weeks ago, figures were ranging up to like 2 million on the streets) but they're generally non-violent these days, whereas a couple of decades ago that really wasn't the case.

I'm really not qualified to give an in depth account of it, I only know about it tangentially since it's kind of an essential component of modern Korean history, but essentially: up until the late 80s, South Korea was a military dictatorship, with basically the worst of what that entails- dissidents would be rounded up or abducted, interned, tortured, killed. These days Korean police try to deflate situations and minimize injuries, but back during the dictatorship it got extremely adversarial. So to combat that, protest groups and unions would organize and often train specifically for how to fight police, using bamboo pikes and fire and so on (guns are very rare there). Even into the 90s there are a bunch of videos with protesters continually chucking firebombs and using handmade flamethrowers.

Not to say it was like a constant war between protesters and police- the eventual demonstrations that would topple the dictatorship in 1987 were largely peaceful (although they were sparked by a protester having been killed, so clearly not always). But then there was also the Gwangju Uprising, when an entire city rose up and armed its self, resulting in hundreds of deaths after the army got called in.

It's not like that anymore but most Koreans alive today remember it, and union groups and so on organize in the same ways. Police there have massively curtailed power compared to what they used to though, and obviously there's no longer a dictatorship going to all kinds of lengths to silence its political enemies. Most of the recent protests I've heard about have been peaceful, although I haven't really looked hard- there is still stuff like this which looks scary as hell but it's still nothing compared to the protests a couple of decades ago.

It's also worth pointing out, there's a huge diversity of opinions there but for left wing Koreans especially, they often have a lot of pride in their tradition of protest. To them, protests gave them democracy, and were instrumental in their liberation from the Japanese. OTOH I've had a right wing Korean act totally dismayed when I asked her about the textbook protests a year back, thinking it's a national humiliation that foreigners knew about it. I had the opposite opinion but hey.

Tias posted:

press groups that kept up documentation of police brutality( and there was plenty to go around)

Tias posted:

if people weren't there, it's really hard to understand why the compulsion to fight was so strong, I guess.

Koramei posted:

OTOH I've had a right wing Korean act totally dismayed when I asked her about the textbook protests a year back, thinking it's a national humiliation that foreigners knew about it. I had the opposite opinion but hey.

Jobbo_Fett posted:

Why would a gun with an unknown past creep you out? My MG-34 has more than likely been used in anger during WW2 against someone, but its not something you dwell on. It could just as likely be a firearm used for training purposes.


Theoretically, would a Remington 700, used to kill a deer/wild game, creep you out the same as the Mosin?


I don't mean to be so inquisitive, I just find it odd to have something against a specific firearm because of something it may or may not have ever done.

OfficialGBSCaliph posted:

Would something used to kill animals bother you as much as a literal murder weapon??

Boiled Water posted:

Your phones, computers and clothes are all a product of human suffering and you argue about ghosts in guns.

Jobbo_Fett posted:

My phone and computer were built by robots, which we cannot tell if they are suffering, although it is safe to assume they are not.

Jobbo_Fett posted:

My phone and computer were built by robots, which we cannot tell if they are suffering, although it is safe to assume they are not.

Pontius Pilate posted:

My dad (here's your opportunity my dad) was in the USN for nearly 25 years and he got flags from both the Saudi navy and the Soviet navy; I have both hung up even if they're pretty questionable. So long as it isn't nazi stuff you're probably okay.

So I say to myself.

Osama Dozen-Dongs posted:

Do you guys already have plans for when police body cameras come to wide use? There was already a case in Finland where a guy with a snazzy black and red outfit got busted for fabricated police brutality with crystal clear footage of him "being beaten unconscious and getting his arm broken."

For people who don't know the case: it's entitlement. They hadn't paid the rent for the house in years and were angry the owner had sold it off.

HEY GAL posted:

tell me more about anti police pikes

anyway i slept on a milsurp folding cot all through high school

Thanqol posted:

What do you mean he 'got flags'? Did he nick them? Do naval officers award each other their flags as a sign of respect? Are they trophies of conquered foes, like the way banners are in Game of Thrones?

david_a posted:

That's actually one of the (many) reasons I don't own a Mosin. I would be creeped out having one in the house if (based on the dates and wear) there was a fair chance it was used to kill someone, so I completely empathize about the Serbian bag even if that's a much milder case. Didn't the Soviets shoot a lot of deserters?

I somehow feel like there's a kind of statue of limitations on that, though. I don't think having a Roman sword or whatever lying around would bother me at all.

Pump it up! Do it! posted:

Is there any other conflict with as many alcoholics in charge as the thirty years war? I'm reading Peter Wilson's book now and I have quite honestly lost count about how many times I have read about some general turning into a alcoholic or losing control of their troops because they were blind drunk for a couple of days.

david_a posted:

I don't really understand the question. Isn't "being imprinted in your nightmares" the answer?

I found this thing that claims most WW2 bombs whistled. The first-hand accounts there sure make it sound like it worked.

OwlFancier posted:

A bomb going off is scary, but if you hear it, it didn't hit you.

A dive bomber making a screaming noise means that a bomb is about to fall and you don't know if it's going to be on top of you or not.

You duck before the bomb hits, and you stay ducked until the siren stops.

Adding a tell to the thing that kills you with a much wider range than the thing itself lets you spread that wonderful existential terror to a lot more people.

Plan Z posted:

I sympathize with someone being uncomfortable about owning a weapon that may have killed someone. Different people can have different views, but I hope that people that feel that way can have some kind of appreciation for people who take care of such weapons to preserve them. My Enfield was the first C&R I own that certainly saw action, but when I saw the thing collecting rust in some Gomer's poorly-maintained shop, I'd rather something that was a part of history be treated with dignity and not end up in too awful shape to even display in a museum in the future.

Soviets shot deserters like anyone else, and going by records they didn't really do it more than anybody (by percentage). If you're asking about the common misconception about them having Enemy at the Gates-style blocking detachments mowing down retreating friendlies, then no that wasn't a thing.

As far as the statute of limitations goes, not a lot of people think of guns the same way they do of antique blades or bows or something. Lots of countries currently destroy relic firearms, and people who don't know what they own here in the US regularly give them away in buybacks that result in the same thing. There are varying opinions, but I'd rather see a gun deactivated and donated to a museum or educational program than have it completely scrapped. I just don't want us to be a few decades down the line and not have certain important firearms just because of political arguments of a certain window in time.

david_a posted:

My personal issues with it are more wrapped up in a strong distaste for some elements of US gun culture. I would have slight issues owning a gun specifically designed to kill humans (even if it was modern) so owning one that actually might have is obviously worse. I don't seem to be the only conflicted liberal gun owner judging by some things I've seen in TFR.

But that doesn't mean it bothers me if other people have them (unless you exclusively collect SS Mausers or something equally creepy). Also I've shot somebody else's Mosin and let's not pretend there aren't a myriad of purely objective reasons for not wanting to own one

The only reason I brought up Soviet deserters was that it might be tempting to say that a Mosin only shot Evil Germans or something.

david_a posted:

I would have slight issues owning a gun specifically designed to kill humans (even if it was modern) so owning one that actually might have is obviously worse.

chitoryu12 posted:

I think I have the same bag, based on your description. It's totally nondescript and nobody would ever pin it as a war relic unless you told them so.

bewbies posted:

Boiled Water posted:

Your phones, computers and clothes are all a product of human suffering and you argue about ghosts in guns.