Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
Posted: 5/10/2004 6:21:56 AM EST
have any of you ever emailed Mail Call with a question which was used on air?

Link Posted: 5/10/2004 6:26:56 AM EST
[Last Edit: 5/10/2004 6:27:16 AM EST by DriftPunch]
That show is so riddled with errors that it's more entertainment than documentary. The problem is, that many think his words are gospel, and perpetuate the mistakes...
Link Posted: 5/10/2004 6:29:36 AM EST

Originally Posted By DriftPunch:
That show is so riddled with errors that it's more entertainment than documentary. The problem is, that many think his words are gospel, and perpetuate the mistakes...




example?
Link Posted: 5/10/2004 6:36:59 AM EST
Link Posted: 5/10/2004 6:42:23 AM EST

Originally Posted By blackrifle51:

Originally Posted By DriftPunch:
That show is so riddled with errors that it's more entertainment than documentary. The problem is, that many think his words are gospel, and perpetuate the mistakes...




example?


Did you catch the piece on the MP 44? He stated that the MP44 was the "Father" of the SKS, and that the AK47 was then based on the SKS. The fact that the SKS was a scaled down SVT 40 action, which itself was a scaled down 1930s era PTRS anti tank rifle seems to make little difference to the writers. For the record, Simonov (SKS) and Kalashnikov (AK) were competing during the same time frame so one couldn't develop into the other. It keeps with the longstanding mistaken idea that the Soviets couldn't come up with a decent idea on their own.

Of course, some will say that the Gunnys statements are correct, because the Germans were first into the field with the intermediate cartridge. That is true, but that doesn't mean that the designs are related. If that amount of connection were allowed, then it could be said that the Garand was nothing more than an improvement on the French RSC 1917-18 (the 1st succesfull full power self loading combat rifle).

I don't expect much detail in a half hour show, but I do expect what they say to be repeatably accurate.
Link Posted: 5/10/2004 6:43:45 AM EST
It is a TV show, I think it is more of a comedy than it is historical show.
Link Posted: 5/10/2004 6:58:08 AM EST
Keep in mind, it is intended to be viewed by the totally clueless. A few historical inaccuracies aren't a big problem when the audience knows absolutely nothing about the subject matter. Still, I kinda like the show!
Link Posted: 5/10/2004 7:00:04 AM EST
you guys are being overly critical.
It is not a "graduate" level course.
It's more like a Freshman level "introductory" course.
Link Posted: 5/10/2004 7:04:15 AM EST

Originally Posted By Leisure_Shoot:
you guys are being overly critical.
It is not a "graduate" level course.
It's more like a Freshman level "introductory" course.



Exactly, thats why the questions are so "entry level".
Link Posted: 5/10/2004 7:16:21 AM EST

Originally Posted By thebeekeeper1:
I like the Gunny, but I cringe every time he shoots without eye/ear protection.



He uses brass for hearing protection. Watch the next time he demonstrates a weapon.
Link Posted: 5/10/2004 4:46:58 PM EST
Give me some specific examples like the one above, and I'll pass them on to the Gunny's staff. Please keep in mind that the Gunny's personal staff does not have a lot of pull with The History Channel, and that The History Channel is solely responsible for content and editing of Mail Call and the Mail Call website.

Unfortunately, the Gunny doesn't participate much at all on www.rleeermey.org, but he has been known to respond to emails, time permitting. I haven't spoken with him personally, but have exchanged email. FYI, I am the Commandant over at the .org site, but still answer to Gunny's staff.

I'm sure that the Gunny would prefer that anything that comes out of his mouth be the truth.
Link Posted: 5/10/2004 4:50:31 PM EST
I haven't seen many inaccuracies, adn I'm HARDLY part of the unwashed masses.

DO we gotta tear down EVERYTHING???

Link Posted: 5/10/2004 5:01:54 PM EST
At least the show is not a liberal one like so many on tv these days. I actually enjoy watching him go around with the guys in uniform and learn how things are done. That really is a morale boost when you get a visit from someone that everyone in the military recognizes and you get a chance to be on tv.
Link Posted: 5/10/2004 5:16:24 PM EST
I love how the enemy watermelons are always sneaking up on the Gunny.
Link Posted: 5/10/2004 5:31:17 PM EST
I like when he blew up the watermelons with Claymores
Link Posted: 5/10/2004 5:36:00 PM EST
That show is totally bogus! He never addressed the hundreds of emails asking about the secret bomb sniffing cats that the military has been using for the last few years. You'd think something as significant as that would merit a whole show of it's own.
Link Posted: 5/10/2004 5:49:16 PM EST

Originally Posted By Pangea:
That show is totally bogus! He never addressed the hundreds of emails asking about the secret bomb sniffing cats that the military has been using for the last few years. You'd think something as significant as that would merit a whole show of it's own.




Damned Right!

KPEL_308, ya better get on the stick here!
Link Posted: 5/10/2004 5:49:28 PM EST
lately he's been wearing ear plugs


Originally Posted By thebeekeeper1:
I like the Gunny, but I cringe every time he shoots without eye/ear protection.

Link Posted: 5/10/2004 6:15:33 PM EST
[Last Edit: 5/10/2004 6:17:17 PM EST by Rabid_Coyote]
I remember the episode with the MP44/ SKS/ AK47 comments. I remember thinking that they weren't quite right.

BUT..... It's a friggin' show that offers five minute explanations of complicated stuff. When the average bonehead started watching that episode he had no clue about the origin of assault rifles, at the end of the bit the average viewer had some basic idea of the history of assault rifles and knew a little about the MP44 and its capabilities. Plus the Gunny gets excited about rifles and has fun shooting, which probably interests some viewers in learning to shoot.

It's pretty damn entertaining. I like it, it's fun. Average Joe-Q Public learns alot seeing that show, and the show gives a positive view of the guys in the military.

Hell, if the Gunny's show helps one Joe or Jarhead get laid because it showed the military in a good light I'm all for it.

Some of you pedantic bastards could use a special "Nit Picking" network.

Link Posted: 5/10/2004 6:18:55 PM EST
Link Posted: 5/10/2004 6:32:29 PM EST
Basically, it's a pretty good show. The explanations of how certain military things got their names sometimes has me scratching my head wondering if the stories behind them are really true, but I basically believe that they must research them, so the stories must be right. They don't have a lot of time to go into real detail sometimes, but I suppose they have to keep it interesting for everybody, and have a little variety in each show.
Link Posted: 5/11/2004 1:32:18 AM EST
I would have liked them to show a better example of M1 thumb. You know, the tip of the thumb just dangling and blood dripping all over the place.
Link Posted: 5/11/2004 2:01:12 AM EST

Originally Posted By Rabid_Coyote:


Some of you pedantic bastards could use a special "Nit Picking" network.




You couldn't be more right !
Link Posted: 5/11/2004 2:14:37 AM EST

Originally Posted By thebeekeeper1:
I like the Gunny, but I cringe every time he shoots without eye/ear protection.



I feel ya
Link Posted: 5/11/2004 4:59:21 AM EST
It's not the MP44. It's the STG44 (Sturmgewehr [assault rifle] introduced in 1944). MP means Maschinepistolen (or Machine pistol [subgun]). And it could be seen as the father of the AK47, not in design, but in function. Calm down, haters of the Gunny. This man is the hero of many on these pages. Maybe even me...

"Oh, I like you. I'm gonna let you come to my house and f**k my sister!"
Link Posted: 5/11/2004 5:25:46 AM EST

Originally Posted By Beleg:
It's not the MP44. It's the STG44 (Sturmgewehr [assault rifle] introduced in 1944). !"




Gee, I wonder if the dufus criticizing Gunny for getting it wrong about the "MP44" [sic] feels like an ass now.



Link Posted: 5/11/2004 5:37:18 AM EST

Originally Posted By garandman:

Originally Posted By Beleg:
It's not the MP44. It's the STG44 (Sturmgewehr [assault rifle] introduced in 1944). !"




Gee, I wonder if the dufus criticizing Gunny for getting it wrong about the "MP44" [sic] feels like an ass now.






My bad, I unfortunately sometimes call it the MP44, because that was its original designation when the development program was still being masked as development of a submachine gun? But you are correct, STG44 is the post acceptance name. I don't get mad if I am in need of correcting. Correction is crucial to the evolution of knowledge.

The shows concept is decent, but I don't understand why you accuse me and others of nitpicking. If the show is a Q&A format, I expect the As to be correct. Some things are black and white, some things are grey. That example is black and white.

You guys go apeshit when the media calls an SKS, an AK47, yet give the gunny a pass on his mistakes because he was close enough?
Link Posted: 5/11/2004 6:00:17 AM EST

Originally Posted By DriftPunch:

You guys go apeshit when the media calls an SKS, an AK47, yet give the gunny a pass on his mistakes because he was close enough?



YES.

Because he's on OUR side.

I don't expect sinless perfection. And I don't criticize the media for the occasional inaccuracy - I do so for their blatant bias.

Christians have the unseemly distinction of being the only army to shoot their own wounded, and it galls me.

Sucks to see gun owners do the same.
Link Posted: 5/11/2004 6:23:04 AM EST
[Last Edit: 5/11/2004 6:23:25 AM EST by DriftPunch]

Originally Posted By garandman:

Originally Posted By DriftPunch:

You guys go apeshit when the media calls an SKS, an AK47, yet give the gunny a pass on his mistakes because he was close enough?



YES.

Because he's on OUR side.

I don't expect sinless perfection. And I don't criticize the media for the occasional inaccuracy - I do so for their blatant bias.

Christians have the unseemly distinction of being the only army to shoot their own wounded, and it galls me.

Sucks to see gun owners do the same.



Yes, I'm shooting the wounded because I 'nitpicked' an obvious error on a half hour entertainment show on cable TV.

What you seem to be saying is that you are such an ideologue, that your standards are lower for those who believe as you do, and your politial opponents can't do anything right (even if what they did was a good thing). Note that our favorite whipping boy, Bill Clinton, demilled the GPS signal (a good thing). IMO, this political stance is dangerous, and unfortunately all to common todays environment of 'you're either with us, or against us'. Look at the Democrats, and how the flat tire they got on the way to work was Bush's fault. Such blindly ideological behavior on our own side is nothing more than a shield from criticisim, and is not to my liking... Elected officals (and others), are accountable to the public, the public should not suffer from the peer pressure to never appear critial of the leaders they support.

I support Bush, but he has doen much that leaves him legitimately open to criticisim. This does not make me a bad supporter of Bush, but rather one who desires to see improvement of my chosen leader. My eye is on the fact that he may get to nominate 2 SCOTUS judges.
Link Posted: 5/11/2004 6:43:22 AM EST
[Last Edit: 5/11/2004 6:46:53 AM EST by garandman]

Originally Posted By DriftPunch:

What you seem to be saying is that you are such an ideologue, that your standards are lower for those who believe as you do, and your politial opponents can't do anything right (even if what they did was a good thing).



I have NO idea where you get that from.

I said I hold the liberal media and the Gunny to the SAME standard - occasional inaccuracy is understandable.

I said I hold up to intense scrutiny those with obvious bias.

THAT is what I said.

The REAONS I don't screw people to the wall fror an occasional inaccuracy is because I'm likely to make an occasional inaccuracy - like calling an STG44 an MP44. Know what I mean, dude??

Stones and glass houses and all.


Don't you get the irony? I'm applying the SAME standard to you you held the gunny to. AND YER WHINING THAT I'M DOING IT. People who screw up (you, MP44) criticizing others for screwing up(the Gunny) can expect to get some of their own.


I support Bush, but he has doen much that leaves him legitimately open to criticisim.


No disagreement there.

Link Posted: 5/11/2004 7:45:48 AM EST

Originally Posted By garandman:

I have NO idea where you get that from.



How about from your prior post where you said:

Christians have the unseemly distinction of being the only army to shoot their own wounded, and it galls me.

Sucks to see gun owners do the same.
Perhaps this is an obscure reference that I don't get, but it seems to indicate that you don't like to see internal strife when there are external battles to be fought. Ergo, you'd give allies a 'pass' on certain things.


The REAONS I don't screw people to the wall fror an occasional inaccuracy is because I'm likely to make an occasional inaccuracy - like calling an STG44 an MP44.
Neither you or I are on a 'factual' TV show either. Besides, you really should have read my prior post. MP44 was the original designation for the thing, and STG came out later. None the less, STG44 is the final designation, and I acknowledged that is the proper final designation. This is where your criticisim fails. I admit to using an improper term, whereas the others in this post (you included) are willing to let it pass. Thus, the error doesn't propogate. This is the failure that I see in the show, which was the basis of the post in the fist place.

The only irony to be had, is that the same people resistant to criticizing Mail Call, are quick to jump on yours truly. Guess what, you are RIGHT to jump on me, and you should have jumped on the Gunny as well.

Below is the history specific to the "STG44":
On April 6, 1944, Hitler issued the following decree:


a) The former MG42 is to retain the same designation
b) The former self-loading rifle, known as the Gewehr 43, shall receive the designation Karabiner 43 (K43).
c) The former new MP, known as the MP43, shall receive the designation MP44.

In July 1944 at a meeting of the various army heads about the eastern front, the universal answer to "what do you need" was "more of the new rifles". This caused some confusion, but once Hitler realized what was going on he agreed to allow its full production. Seeing the possibility of a propaganda win, the rifle was again renamed as the StG44, to highlight the new class of weapon it represented, literally "assault rifle, model 1944", thereby introducing the term.

Link Posted: 5/11/2004 8:05:09 AM EST
[Last Edit: 5/11/2004 8:07:22 AM EST by garandman]

Originally Posted By DriftPunch:
Perhaps this is an obscure reference that I don't get, but it seems to indicate that you don't like to see internal strife when there are external battles to be fought. Ergo, you'd give allies a 'pass' on certain things.





You may be the FIRST person in this forum to EVER claim I don't like internal strife.

I guess my point is summarized in your choice of the word "battles."

ABSOLUTELY I'll raise disagreement with those I disagree with. But if we are on the "same side" I don't conduct myself in "battle." I conduct myself in discussion and education. I "battle" with those opposed to truth - NOT with those who accidentally misstate truth.

It seemed to me you were engaging in battle with Ermy and Mail Call - in short, overkill.

Tell me this - if you felt it SO all fire important to come into this thread, and criticize the programs accuracy, HAVE YOU EMAILED THEM OFFERRING YOUR ASSISTANCE IN A CONSTRUCTIVE MANNER?

If you answer "No" then that sums up my point. Sometime "battle" ain't the right means to accomplish the purpose.

Depending on what EXACTLY your purpose is.

Beyond this, I'll overstate my point. Feel free to respond, but I've said my piece on this.

Link Posted: 5/11/2004 8:10:48 AM EST
I enjoy the show. Full stop. Yes, I did notice the MP-44 ans St-44 bit, but then I also knew about the subterfuge involved in getting the weapon past Hitler's decree, so it didn't stick out too much to me. I was surprised that the Gunny seemed to be placing his thumb in harm's way with his loading technique - I block the charging handle with the heel of my hand and I figure that's one good reason why I haven't had to dance around with a large piece of wood and metal attached to my thumb. He has his way, I have mine.
Link Posted: 5/11/2004 8:53:49 AM EST
[Last Edit: 5/11/2004 8:56:50 AM EST by thelastgunslinger]

Originally Posted By DriftPunch:

Originally Posted By blackrifle51:

Originally Posted By DriftPunch:
That show is so riddled with errors that it's more entertainment than documentary. The problem is, that many think his words are gospel, and perpetuate the mistakes...




example?


Did you catch the piece on the MP 44? He stated that the MP44 was the "Father" of the SKS, and that the AK47 was then based on the SKS. The fact that the SKS was a scaled down SVT 40 action, which itself was a scaled down 1930s era PTRS anti tank rifle seems to make little difference to the writers. For the record, Simonov (SKS) and Kalashnikov (AK) were competing during the same time frame so one couldn't develop into the other. It keeps with the longstanding mistaken idea that the Soviets couldn't come up with a decent idea on their own.

Of course, some will say that the Gunnys statements are correct, because the Germans were first into the field with the intermediate cartridge. That is true, but that doesn't mean that the designs are related. If that amount of connection were allowed, then it could be said that the Garand was nothing more than an improvement on the French RSC 1917-18 (the 1st succesfull full power self loading combat rifle).

I don't expect much detail in a half hour show, but I do expect what they say to be repeatably accurate.


As has been mentioned, it was the STG44 which really is the same as a MP43. And I very clearly remember the gunny saying that while the STG44 resembles an AK, that they are not related at all. He then did go on to say that the SKS was based on the MP43/STG44. While I cannot comment about whether one rifle actually led to another, it is known that the 7.92x33 round developed for the MP43/STG44 was the inspiration for the 7.62x39 cartridge that Simonov developed for the SKS. This is probably the relationship that the gunny was talking about.
Top Top