If the shotgun was so deadly in trench warfare that Germany protested it's use why didn't they or other militaries...

IIRC they continued to have the gaul to parrot that bullshit into WW2 because US forces continued to use shotguns.

Also since you're referring to WW1...

>deploys flamethrowers and poison gas first time
>torpedoes a ship full of women and children and makes coin gloating about it

are those supposed to be artillery guns at the front of the ship?

its use*

>Because the Germans sank, without warning, what was officially a non-military ship, many accused them of breaching the internationally recognized Cruiser Rules. It was no longer possible for submarines to give warning due to the British introduction of Q-ships in 1915 with concealed deck guns. (Lusitania had been fitted with 6-inch gun mounts in 1913, although she was unarmed at the time of her sinking.) The Germans justified treating Lusitania as a naval vessel because she was carrying hundreds of tons of war munitions, therefore making her a legitimate military target, and argued that British merchant ships had violated the Cruiser Rules from the very beginning of the war
t. Wikipedia

Wilson used this to stirr up anti-german sentiments in preparation of the US intervention into the war. But we Germans were the only hypocrites in that war.

Thanks user, I'm aware of the circumstances surrounding the sinking of the Lusitania - I was just curious if that commemorative coin was actually depicting artillery pieces (they don't look much like deck guns to me, but I can't really see) sliding off the ship for propaganda purposes.

It's quite obvious the ship was bait. The more you read about it the more you hate the UK even more

The reason Germany protested them is because it could inflict dozens of wounds with one shot that all need to be treated and Germany was in a shortage of manpower and medical supplies.

That being said they were employing poison gas. But pretty much all sides of WW1 were hypocritical

It always feels like theres something incredibly callous about the "rules of war", like these nations discussing what's fair and what isn't makes it so clear it's all a game to them. Of course im sure a soldier would rather die of a gunshot than chlorine gas, but it's ridiculous that these politicians are able to come to any agreement about the humane way for you to die but all agree that it's okay that you and your friends die. Fuck

There's nothing callous about it. Not all conflicts can be resolved by peaceful means. And if war is necessary, that is, if it's necessary that people die in war, then the least that can be done is to minimize needless suffering. War is a tragedy which sometimes cannot be avoided. What we can do is reduce its effects, if only slightly.

Because Germans are literally the most autistic retards in the history of man.

Found the jew

Yeah but it’s kinda stupid to argue if shotguns are humane in a war where chlorine gas was used regularly. It’s like two people shit in each other’s food but ones upset cause he has hair in his too.

I agree.

Serious Answer: Why the fuck would you start developing a pump-action shotgun when you have the MP-18?

SMG>Shotgun

Until recently American police tend to carry pump shotguns while Euros tend to have SMGs.

>have the gaul

It's a satirical medal you fucking idiot, it was made by some random guy, not the German government, the English made copies of them for propaganda purposes

Any idea what the captions on the medal say?

this.
soilders with mutiliated faces or gouged out eyes was something else than usual wounded

>business above all
>no spyware
>the big steamer Lusitania sunk by a German dive boat
Thanks google

Actually France was the most Anti-Semitic place at the time.

>Jews can't even tell WW1 and WW2 appart anymore

war isn't a game of rock paper scissors
shotguns can do things SMG's can't

Because you can slamfire the shotgun basically making it a short mag SMG

All you had to do was rack the shotgun and the entire trench would flee. This was seen as unsporting and against the rules of war.

What exactly is the advantage of a shotgun? Is it that you don't have to aim as much?

>"Don't be deceived goy! Germans were evil long before WW2!"

The shotguns design allows you to depress the trigger and every time you pump it it fires, this allows you to clear a trench very quickly

Spread won't be noticeable until about 75m, and at that distance it's just going to be easier to hit things. You still have to aim. At 100m, buckshot has a roughly man-sized spread, depending on the gun's barrel length and ammunition used.

The main advantage of shotguns during that era was the rate of fire you could get by slam-firing, and the fact that firing a shell of buckshot is like firing eight handguns at once. It's either gonna really fuck up one dude, hurt eight dudes, or do something anywhere in between.

I should also add that shotguns were allegedly used to shoot incoming grenades. Guys would be posted with a shotgun, watch for grenades being thrown into their trench, and shoot them whenever they saw them. Wouldn't set them off, but a hit would fuck with the grenade's fuse and prevent it from detonating. There's a citation for it on the wikipedia entry on the Winchester 1897 shotgun. Feel free to go hunting that source down to verify it, it's good enough for me.

youtu.be/_DvEW-ZdoM8?t=1m30s

>shotguns were allegedly used to shoot incoming grenades

That doesn't seem possible. Maybe if you somehow knew a few seconds in advance that the enemy was about to throw a grenade, but how could you possibly know what?

Any idea what number shot she was using? I'm assuming 00Buck, but I thought it had tighter groupings than that.

Trap shooting experience? I mean it's possible but most probably not at all a common occurrence

The ROF of a pump-action shotgun isn't really that much higher than what a competent riflemen could achieve with a bolt-action rifle. Aside from that, the capacity of the shotgun is 6+1, but unlike a bolt-action rifle of the period, you wouldn't be able to reload quickly using clips. I'm sorry, but I still don't see any significant advantage.

>Swinging a bolt action around in a trench

The way I understand it it was more the idea that German soldiers were being killed by what was perceived (by Europeans in general - there was even a French article decrying their use) as being a "sporting" weapon; the implication there being that German soldiers were being killed/wounded in an undignified fashion.

Lethality was never brought up; it was thought to be insulting that proud German soldiers were dying to the likes of men who were treating war as if it were a bird hunt.

But that complaint was made like two weeks before the war ended and was laughed at by pretty much everyone, so does it really matter?

I can understand your skepticism. It seems a little doubtful to me as well.

Hitting the grenade if you know it's incoming isn't unfeasible at all. It's pretty much skeet shooting or bird hunting at that point, and there'd be no shortage of good ol' boys capable of doing it.

Knowing the grenades are coming in seems a little iffy, but I don't think the Krauts would just throw one grenade ever hour. I know fuck all about trench warfare, but I'd reckon if you were lobbing grenades you'd be lobbing a good amount of them all at once in a concentrated effort to do harm, as opposed to just being a dick. Alternatively, you're doing it to soften up a position before you assault. In either case, anti-grenade shotgunners could be a reactive defense rather than a proactive one.

Having Cleetus stand watch for hours on end for incoming grenades sounds a little ridiculous, but I'm sure if you had a bunch of guys and took shifts it could be managed.

Possible? Most definitely. Feasible? Maybe not everywhere, all the time. I don't doubt at all that some shotgunner clipped an incoming grenade a few times, but I do doubt that US Doctrine hinged on having watchmen with shotguns doing anti-grenade duty.

Never fucked around with a bolt-action, but I have handled pump shotguns plenty (I own a semi-auto myself for skeet, and never saw fit to buy a pump, even if they are dirt cheap and plenty fun) and I doubt that statement. Working the bolt on a rifle requires you to remove your trigger hand, then return it to position. Slam-firing a shotgun only requires you hold the trigger and work the pump back and forth, which can be done without removing your steadying hand or shooting hand. There's vastly less steps in slam firing a shotgun than their are working a BA rifle.

Wouldn't an M1897 and Springfield (M1907?) have comparable OAL?

The barrel of the trench gun is 20 inches, the barrel of a springfield rifle is 24 inches. So I guess the trench gun is more compact, but only slightly. The difference is a 16.7% decrease in barrel length. That might be significant, I guess.

>Hitting the grenade if you know it's incoming isn't unfeasible at all.

The problem here is knowing that it is coming. How could you possibly know? If you're sheet shooting, you know that the target is coming, it isn't a surprise. The only way you could know that a grenade is coming is if you actually see the guy pull it out and get ready to throw it. And if you have a direct line of sight, why would you wait for him to try and throw it just so you can try to shoot the grenade? Just shoot the fucker before he throws the grenade.

A pump scattergat is a lot easier to operate in close confines. No having to lower the rifle and take your hand off the trigger to werk da bolt, just rack and shoot.

Only real disadvantage is the tube magazine.

An 1897 is about 5" shorter than an M1903, and 7" shorter than an M1917.

But the reality is that shotguns were more commonly issued to POW camp guards and MPs than anyone else.

Maybe he's in cover, and lobs the grenade up and over, into LOS? If you already have the gun leveled in the general direction it only takes good reflexes to nip it, which aren't impossible to cultivate. Besides, if you have a whole bunch of guys laying down fire, it may be a better use of the shotgunner's time/ammunition to simply watch high, and react to incoming grenades.

I'm just playing devil's advocate here to be honest with you user. I'm skeptical on the claim of dedicated anti-grenade shotgunners as well.

Like what? Because in WW1, you were only issued 00 buckshot with a cylinder bore shotgun. The MP18 is better in every regard for trench warfare, and I say that as a shotgunfag.

>Only real disadvantage is the tube magazine.

Oh, and the fact that you had to go through and make sure every single shotshell would actually chamber. The army just bought a shitload of commerical paper hulled ammo, and it tended to swell up once in-theater. They eventually ordered brass-hulled ammo to remedy this issue, but it only showed up after the war was over.

>The MP18 is better in every regard for trench warfare

This is undeniably true.

But it's also undeniably true that the US has a long and storied history of making poor choices in small arms acquisition and development.

But nobody can say we didn't make an attempt at something similar - even if it got cock blocked by the armistice.

I suppose you're right. I think that a bolt-action could be fired as fast as a pump-action (or close enough that the difference would not be relevant), but it would require more focus and concentration on the part of the user, and that's something you might not have much time for in combat.

The wounds created by shotguns are harder to treat and they thought that it was in line with the conventions they had at the time.

Pump-actions can also be pretty fiddly in the heat of the moment. Especially when you're shooting ammo that likes to stick in the chamber when you go to eject a spent cartridge.

Assuming the same skill level, I think you're right.
youtube.com/watch?v=Sljg40DgQbs
youtube.com/watch?v=xvv9Z7RuLn8

The shotgun is clearly faster, but not by an awful lot. I think the major thing to consider, though, is how easy it is to slamfire a shotgun versus how easy it is to rapid-fire a bolt rifle. Slam-firing takes an awful lot less dexterity, which is good if you're gonna attempt it in combat.

Also, check out this fucking freak of nature
youtube.com/watch?v=x_a7pXWi6xo

Is on to something, though, especially if what said is true.

MP18 is a better gun, M1897 is a better waifu. FACT.

>No quip about getting pegged by her massive bayonet

I'll admit, I am somewhat disappointed.

>Is on to something, though, especially if what (You) said is true.

I'll follow up and also mention that getting a stiff round to eject out of a pump is also really simple to fix; you've just got to slam the butt on the ground with your hand gripping the slide and it should pop right open.

But that may also give Fritz the microsecond he needs to put an 8mm slug in your face, so...

as opposed to wounded with shellshock, missing limbs, and disfigured heads from a facefull of shrapnel? its war and war is suffering

I doubt it was a common thing. It probably happened once when all the variables just happened to be right and became a meme as it got spread around the trenches..

>First hand: "Holy shit, did you see that Pvt. Bob just a grenade out of the air, what a shot!"
>Second hand: "Hey, did you hear the guys over in the 117th are using their shotguns to shoot German grenades?"
>Third hand: "Sacre bleu, ze Americans have found a way to perfectly defend themselves from attack by grenades!"
>....
>Kaiser Bill: "Verdammte amerikanische Schrotflinten! Das ist ein Kriegsverbrechen!!

Nice meme. The Holocaust never happened jew.

okay, I'll give you that. It's the only classic pump I've never owned, but is always on my list to buy even if the M12 is better.

>>>/reddit/

Cute. were talking ww1 here, where a lot of german jews fought and died for germany. fuckface.

Btw france was insanely antisemitic at the time compared to the other european forces.

While you have caught onto the death cannon meme you still fail to grasp exactly how shotgun external ballistics work.
At 75m spread will be SIGNIFICANT. I would peg 40m to 50m as ideal range for standard shotgun with 00buck, at 100m 00buck has greater than man spread and rapidly decreasing energy ( it will still fuck you up but it may not fuck up your skellington).
While it would seem odd from a military context the best guides you can find for employment of these weapons is in civilian guides on hunting and accounts from sporting journals.

It was in the last months of WW1, the Germans were saying and doing anything to try to win back some ground. Yanks like to talk about it as its a WW1 fact they know that involves them, but its literally one of the last desperate attempts of a losing side to push back using any means. It just isnt important.

do you even /shotgun/ bro?

A basic bitch cylinder bore (ie every military shotgun) spread will be noticeable at

Buckshot kills quick, pump-actions are quick, trench fighting is very close combat, it can also accept a bayonet, and most pre-war Americans had grown up on shotguns.

Americans and Germans had the same idea (ie lottsa lead on target quick), but from the polar opposites with pump shotgun and SMG.

It's why Americans can't into SMGs and Euros can't into pump-actions.

Benelli's are perfectly fine and that's a wog gun

>Germans have the Gaul
A shame they lost it

By the time Germans were fighting Americans on a regular basis they were having a hard enough time feeding workers and soldiers, introducing a new class of small arm probably was much more difficult at that point.

...

Gas was used to deter attacks and force the enemies to flee. Shotguns were used to blow someone to bits

I love my M97

This, because of the "inhumane ammo"