Talk:Insurgency weapon

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I do not believe there is a class of weapons called 'Insurgency weapons'. Insurgents is just a class of irregular fighters. They use the same kind of weapons used by rebels, guerillas and terrorists. A better title for the article could be 'Weapons used by Insurgents' or 'Weapons used by irregular fighting forces' --DuKot 19:17, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

On the contraty, there is a special class of insurgency weapons, the most famous of which is the FP-45 Liberator pistol. This was NOT used by any regular forces; it was DESIGNED to be mass airdropped behind enemy lines and used only by insurgents. Ditto the CIA "Deer Gun", the Hillerberg Insurgency Weapons, assorted "sanitized" SMGs, etc. The Sten, while it was used by regular British forces, was designed with isurgency in mind, that's why it was made in 9mm rather than .45 (since the Brits already issued the Thompson).

The difference between an "insurgency weapon" and "an insurgent's weapon" is by design, not use. "Weapons used by insurgents" would consist mainly of the AK-47 and derivatives, smuggled to every would-be Marxist rebel in the world by the USSR and PROC, and improvised munitions, such as are in daily use in Iraq, and as typified by the Molotov Cocktail. The reason insurgency weapons are not well known is that they are hidden by the governments that make them, then smuggled into occupied territory where they are then hidden. Those examples that do survive are undesirable for civilian or regular military use, since they are cheap and inferior in function to regular civilian and military weapons, and they are often illegal for civilian possession, like the Sten SMG or any gun without a serial number. scot 19:58, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I understand the what you are saying. But still I would prefer a different title. I can't think of anything right now. --DuKot 01:19, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

OK. If you come up with something good, I'd be willing to use it as the title, but I'd like to keep "Insurgency weapon" pointed here, if for no other reason than that was the "official" designation of the Hillberg designed weapons. Those are, IMHO, the ultimate example of the class, even if they were never distributed (that we know of). A "sanitized weapon" link to here might also be appropriate; I have run across a number of references on the web other than the Yugoslav Mausers (such as some SMGs provided by the US to the Chileans in the early 1970s) but details on the weapons themselves are hard to find. If I can nail down a somewhat reputable source that has a description of those I'll add them. scot 14:00, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

It sounds like a reasonable possibility, but a reference is needed. —Michael Z. 2006-02-22 17:21 Z

I've expanded the article some, and included some links to what looks like fairly reputable sources for information on the FP-45 Liberator, the CIA Deer Gun, the Hillberg Insurgency Weapons, and the M-48BO Mauser. The Sten and Welrod articles have notes that support their inclusion--the Welrod was sanitized, the Sten was 9mm so captured ammunition could be used. I've got a friend who is a Curio and Relic collector, he's going to check for information in some print references he has to see if he can find any more information on sanitized weapons. If any of the references I added look too shady, let me know which, and I'll see what else I can dig up to supplement or replace them. scot 21:16, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] References

Thanks for the note on my talk page, Scot.

My reason for putting the "verify" notice at the top of the page wasn't so much for references about the particular weapons, but about the general classification of "insurgency weapons". Is this a particular term or general category used in writing about firearms? Are all of the weapons mentioned generally held by experts to be in this category, rather than merely happening to be weapons that are suitable for this purpose? The article implies this. Even if it's not the case, this is a good article, but then it may be worthwhile to change the sense of a few sentences in the introduction.

After rereading the current article and scanning the external links, it seems to me to likely be the case. But I'm not well read enough about the topic to know it for a fact. I would feel more comfortable if there were a reference or two to articles specifically about insurgency weapons. I'll trust your better-informed judgement though, so feel free to remove the tag from the top of the article.

Thanks for an interesting read. —Michael Z. 2006-03-15 01:36 Z

The only particular use of the term "insurgency weapon" I've found is in relation to the Hillberg design, however the term does nicely sum up the category. While there may be no standardized term for the category, the references do state that the weapons listed were to be used by "insurgents", "resistance", "partisans" or that they were "sanitized". Let me think about it for a while and I'll take a shot at rewriting the intro paragraph to cover the origin of the term. Redirects might also be in order from "sanitized weapon", as that's a fairly common term, and if I run across any others I'll redirect them as well. scot 15:12, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Okay, don't go to too much trouble, because as I said, I think it's pretty good as is. It should just be clear that this is an article about weapons intended for a certain type of use, and not about a well-defined class of weapon with specific defining characteristics (like, say, pistols, shotguns, infantry support weapons, muskets, medium machine guns). —Michael Z. 2006-03-15 18:08 Z