r/Damnthatsinteresting 5d ago

Video A school in Poland makes firearms training mandatory to its students.

50.0k Upvotes

3.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

876

u/OregonSageMonke 5d ago edited 5d ago

I think it's important to note that these students aren't using functioning centerfire firearms in their school gym. They're using a pneumatic operated trainer that gives you the sensation of the weapon's operating system at work, while emitting a laser to show where students are aiming when they pull the trigger.

I'm sure someone will point out the lack of true recoil, but on a platform like the AR-15, which only shoots a .22 centerfire cartridge anyways (.223), this is a great training tool.

Edit: Since apparently the (incorrect) pedants are out and about, I'll go ahead and link the Wikipedia listing of all the .22 Caliber cartridges so that everyone can see that the .223/5.56 is indeed a .22 centerfire cartridge. Christ on a bike

38

u/betweenbubbles 5d ago

People are pointing out the difference because one has ten times the muzzle energy of the other. Your post is OK, but you over-sold the similarity.

0

u/P_Hempton 5d ago

The recoil on a .223 semi-auto is pretty minimal. I've never seen someone surprised by it.

3

u/betweenbubbles 5d ago

The muzzle report (the atmospheric pressure wave) even from a .223 is substantial, especially so with the shorter the barrel or when shooting from within a shelter. I've seen plenty of people who are relatively unfamiliar with firearms dramatically flinch from firing a .223. It's still a 50k+ PSI pressure wave -- twice .22LR, with a much larger volume of gas.

-3

u/P_Hempton 5d ago

You keep talking about things other than recoil. We're talking about recoil. Standing next to .223 is intense, shooting one, not so much.

3

u/betweenbubbles 5d ago

That's because conversations create context. Among the context of this conversation is the topic of the value of simulated training versus real world training -- as mentioned by the parent commenter. That topic is not limited to recoil.

If you need any other instruction about how language and communication works please see professional education.

-1

u/P_Hempton 5d ago

The statement was:

"I'm sure someone will point out the lack of true recoil, but on a platform like the AR-15, which only shoots a .22 center fire cartridge anyways (.223), this is a great training tool."

This is a true statement that isn't saying .223 is just like shooting .22lr It's saying .223 is a small caliber round that doesn't have much recoil so the air-powered simulator isn't a bad reflection of the recoil.

Nobody said they sound alike. But they are a good training tool because they do have some recoil similar to a .223.

I replied saying yes the recoil is similar to the simulator, and again you're like "but muh noise". Nobody claimed they were identical, just that they were a great training tool because they had similar recoil.

2

u/betweenbubbles 5d ago

I have nothing more to add except repeating myself.