If you port a canoe, drilling holes is not what you want. 
I’m Canadian. We “portage” our canoes. 
I prefer drinking port in a canoe.
Vintage, or just any port in a storm?
Stock pointing upward while wearing the gun on your back lets you think you can pull cool moves by smoothly drawing the gun over your head like in Army of Darkness or Blackthorne: Blackthorne - ProJared - YouTube
Little shits like this have the intelligence and maturity level of pubescent boys. They harbor fantasies of playing Fallout for real, seeing themselves as the protagonist while they would actually be the Fiends.
I think “barrel up” causes problems with muzzle awareness. It’s behind your head, invisible to you. It’s also harder to adjust on the fly because the bulk of the weapon is on your upper back. “Barrel down” is visible behind your right hip, and it’s easily adjustable in that location without contorting yourself to reach your shoulder blades. You can slide it forward or back to keep the muzzle out of the dirt or keep from pointing it at people behind you.
It’s also a lot more comfortable and convenient to carry them barrel down on your back. We carried our weapons any time we weren’t sleeping or actively turning wrenches. For a year straight (sometimes more).
It’s been over a decade, but I don’t think barrel down was required. The only requirement was to have your weapon within arm’s reach at all times (if you were in the barracks area, that requirement was a little more relaxed – I remember playing basketball or working on humvees with our weapons leaning on a nearby wall). I think in the beginning, 2003, it was required to be slung barrel up, but they quickly changed their minds and let us sling them barrel down.
Here’s a couple illustrative pictures from Iraq that I got off Google. This is how most people carried on post, on or off duty. On guard duty or outside the wire it was at the ready with a magazine inserted.
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/39203124/iraq-burger-king.0.jpg){kind=link}
The 1st and 2nd pics, the soldiers don’t have magazines in the weapon. The clown in Walmart did. If he has a round chambered, he’s sweeping the store every time he changes position. There’s also all sorts of random people in a Walmart, any one of which could decide to “play a prank”.
Cool, thanks, DrCube. As it relates to the OP–and correct me if this seems wrong–backslung is probably more pose than ready? “Hey, I look just like the guys in the desert” even though the guys in the desert only look that way when they’re doing anything apart from being ready to fight.
That may be what they taught you in your army, but it’s also possible to do the exact opposite.–muzzle down, facing forward.
Since our resident Israeli military expert Alessan is apparently on vacation, I’ll step in to show you how the Israeli army carries its rifles.
Here’s a pic of an Israeli soldier off duty, casually walking around in a shopping mall.
The rifle is slung cross-body, i.e. the strap is on the opposite side of the neck.(to prevent someone from stealing it by coming up from behind, grabbing the rifle and running off.)
The ammunition clip is inserted, but there is no bullet in the barrel. To verify this, there is a red plastic bullet-shaped “plug” inserted in the firing chamber which obviously must be removed before firing.(The plug is barely visible in the photo as a small red spot.)
This is standard procedure for all Israeli soldiers.
That is, in fact, the way I was taught to carry my weapon. It’s secure, lets you use both your hands, and all ot takes is a quick twist of the waist and shoulder - a motion we practiced a lot - to get it ready to fire.
Of course, that’s only if there’s no round chambered. If there is, your right hand is holding the pistol grip.
I can’t say I know much about guns, but I notice that your Israeli soldier has his magazine downwards , while the fella in the OP’s video has it upwards. I imagine that the one needs to have the use of his weapon on demand, while the other is, perhaps, simply aiming to make a point (for whatever reason) about his right to carry a loaded firearm around a department store, and might have chosen that orientation to demonstrate that he was not actually anticipating having to open fire at a moments notice in the toiletries aisle.
I appreciate that I may be giving him more credit than he deserves, but, being fortunate enough to live in a country where people can shop for their entire lives without having to consider a body-count, I don’t feel it’s fair to judge.
One of the justifications I heard given was, you might be surprised, safety. A muzzle strike to the face when someone stumbles or gets inadvertently pushed while in close quarters seems unpleasant. In something like a DFAC, where the weapons has been cleared at the door, after probably being cleared multiple times since last there was a magazine inserted, that’s a more likely threat than a negligent discharge. Being a couple inches taller than average I personally appreciated when the Army changed it’s thinking from an old muzzles always up except in the rain approach. Flagging my legs freaked me out a lot less than a sea of muzzles in my face.
A more important driver IMO was a change in slings. The two point slings that became common issue fit looser than the old webbing belt you are probably thinking of. They were meant to be used tactically when the weapon was in front. When slung over the back they just weren’t going to keep the muzzle reliably above shoulder level with the weapon snug to the body. Things were going to shift unless you were constantly adjusting. The bright side is that mitigated a lot of the muzzle strike to the face safety issues. The down side is a lot of muzzles riding down below shoulder level closer to even average height people’s face level. Another plus side of muzzle down with those slings is it was relatively easy to reach back and grab the barrel to redirect things closer to straight down when you were in tight quarters…if you were maintaining muzzle awareness.
I personally give a lot more credence to the change in slings as a driving force for the change in how the Army did business. Things most certainly did change during my time in uniform though.
I have to concur with this. Everyone on base wore it muzzle-down, just like these pictures show. I can’t think of anyone who wore them up. It’s just more comfortable that way, I guess.
BTW, is that the McDonalds at Al Assad Air Base, north of Ramadi? I ate there once.
When I carry my hunting rifle the way the OP suggests, it keeps sliding off my shoulder as I walk. When I do it as the Israeli soldier does in the mall, it stays and is quicker to bring to the ready. I just need to be more mindful of brush and stuff grabbing at it. For then I’ll put my hand over the trigger guard to steer the muzzle.
Also if a gun fires up, the load needs to land somewhere. If it points down, it travels 2-3 feet and stops. Assuming the angle doesn’t allow for a ricochet.
Examples of Sling Carry options.
The gentleman in the video is using Rear Sweep.
There’s an old saying: just because you can doesn’t necessarily mean you should.
This is just flat-out stupidity.
Different kind. That kind is often at the muzzle, attempted by unqualified people, and way overdone IMHO.
Wait…people DO that? I suppose you could fit more wine in the barrel that way, but it seems like it would otherwise be useless at predictably containing firing pressures.
You should clarify that.
Is it “stupidity” as standard infantry practice in professional military settings? Or just stupid when a civilian does it? And if the latter, is it stupid simply because it’s a civilian that you don’t think should have the weapon in the first place? Because if it’s that, we can just disregard the whole issue of how the weapon is being ported and boil it down to “guns are scary and evil.”
Pretty sure Chlothahump was referring to openly carrying an assault rifle many thousands of miles away from a combat zone. Nimrod in the video has the right to do so, but that doesn’t mean it’s necessarily a constructive thing to do.