Officers sidearms

[carnivorousplant]

@Horatius

Also, there will likely be rifles lying around unused at that point, and they can always try to pick up one of those.

That is a delicate way to put it.

[carnivorousplant]

@Loach

Later I was a tanker and assigned a pistol.

I thought they gave tankers carbines. Wouldn’t it be pretty sure that if you had to leave the tank unexpectedly, someone would be shooting at you?

[Alessan]

@Horatius

But ask yourself, in a regular battle situation, what would the officer be doing? If they’re shooting a rifle, that takes up quite a lot of their time and concentration. That means they’re not doing officer-type stuff, like noticing that they’re being flanked, or that they’re moving in the wrong direction, or that they’re about to be targeted by heavy weapons, or seeing that the enemy’s positions have shifted in some important way that affects the battle plan, or any of hundreds of other things they won’t be doing because they’re busy shooting a rifle.

Field officers (brigade commander and below) also tend to be where the fighting is, so they can see what’s going on first hand and so that their orders will be followed immediately, with the order often being, “follow me”. That means that between all the observing and ordering, they’ll also find time to do some shooting - ocassionally, in my experience, they end up shooting more than the people under their command.

Plus, there’s a great deal of symbolism to carrying a rifle - it shows the men that the officer’s One of Them, a fighter. Here’s a picture from recent months of the commander in chief of the Israeli army visiting the front in Gaza, along with a major general and a full colonel in tow. Now there are probably lots of troops outside the frame maintaining a perimeter around them; the chance that they’ll actually find themselves in combat is vanishingly small. But they’re at the front, so they have to look like it. To do otherwise would lose the troops’ respect.

Plus, you never know.

[Loach]

@carnivorousplant

@Loach

Later I was a tanker and assigned a pistol.

I thought they gave tankers carbines. Wouldn’t it be pretty sure that if you had to leave the tank unexpectedly, someone would be shooting at you?

In my guard unit we still had M3 grease guns in the armory. They used to be a tankers weapon. They hadn’t been used in decades. During my time as a tanker there were no M4s so it was either M9 pistol or M16. No carbines in the inventory. We were assigned pistols. I think now tankers get M4s but not in my era.

[John_DiFool]

@Alessan

But they’re at the front, so they have to look like it. To do otherwise would lose the troops’ respect.

Or make them an obvious target for any nearby snipers.

[Alessan]

@John_DiFool

Or make them an obvious target for any nearby snipers.

Well, the snipers usually just shoot at the guy next to the guy with the antenna. The more guys with antennas he has next to him, the more important he is.

[LSLGuy]

@Loach

In my guard unit we still had M3 grease guns in the armory. They used to be a tankers weapon. They hadn’t been used in decades. During my time as a tanker there were no M4s so it was either M9 pistol or M16. No carbines in the inventory. We were assigned pistols. I think now tankers get M4s but not in my era.

This was my first job out of USAF pilot training in the early-mid 1980s. Combo of spook and amateur infantry officer. That was our issue weapon for both officers and enlisted. Pistols? We don’ need no steenkin’ pistols!!

That pic isn’t me, but sure could have been. Same era even. See CAR-15 XM177 - Wikipedia for more on the weapon.

[Bear_Nenno]

Then there’s this sidearm:

[https://youtu.be/U1SDwB8p0CI?si=YYYY4mOr8XmjHzxn]