How many soldiers did carry handguns? - Page 2

Joe · 08-01-2001, 11:18 PM

Kyrie, your above posting is very accurate. The SS also used hand guns produced at the Radom factory in Poland. Look at a lot of the wartime action photos and see what type of pistol they most often used.

Medical personnel carried sidearms while at or near the front lines. When partisans of the occupied countries started taking "shots" at their German occupiers, all military and political personnel had to be armed for their own protection. There is a great picture in the front of Sill's book, "Imperial Lugers" that shows medical personnel in a horse drawn hospital train under attack and fighting back. There is also a posed photo of 5 medical personnel each with a Luger. I think that if medics in the Imperial German Army were armed, they were also armed after 1939.

08-02-2001, 04:27 PM

What an interesting topic - there are some great posts here, especially Kyrie's. For my 2 cents. The general rule of thumb is officers make up about 10% of an Army. The German Army has historically been a little light on officers because of its strong reliance upon NCO's. So the 25% -30% count for officers is way out of line.

Not mentioned yet is the fact that a lot of individuals carry both a pistol and another weapon. In most Armies Senior NCO's in combat usually manage to acquier both a side arm and rifle or sub-machine gun. And how many Company Commanders did you see in "Nam who carried just a .45? All of them had M-16 and most, but not all, had a pistol as well.

The point about partisans is well made. In reaction the Germans armed all their own nationals who were working in Occupied Europe with pistols - railroad workers, construction crews, etc. The question is how many pistols did these para-miltary organizations draw off?

08-02-2001, 05:10 PM

I agree, I too like this thread. Kyrie brought up some good points and stated them well. I would however like to clarify a couple of things he said. The SS did receive arms and other equipment from the the Army long before 1943, as a matter of fact some of this support started as early as the mid 30's. The point that Kyrie makes on this is valid in sense that most of this support was with older arms and forced on the Army. This is why the SS used many captured arms and WWI era arms...not until 42/43 did they get true room at the feed trough. The second thing is the losses mentioned by Kyrie...on this too I agree, except to say that with almost every pistol lost there was a soldier attached! The Russians (no western allies) were in any position before late 44 or 45 to capture LARGE stocks of un-issued weapons.

08-01-2001, 11:18 PM	#21
Joe User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Ohio Posts: 96 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Re: How many soldiers did carry handguns? Kyrie, your above posting is very accurate. The SS also used hand guns produced at the Radom factory in Poland. Look at a lot of the wartime action photos and see what type of pistol they most often used. Medical personnel carried sidearms while at or near the front lines. When partisans of the occupied countries started taking "shots" at their German occupiers, all military and political personnel had to be armed for their own protection. There is a great picture in the front of Sill's book, "Imperial Lugers" that shows medical personnel in a horse drawn hospital train under attack and fighting back. There is also a posed photo of 5 medical personnel each with a Luger. I think that if medics in the Imperial German Army were armed, they were also armed after 1939.

08-02-2001, 04:27 PM	#22
Roger Seymour Guest Posts: n/a	Re: How many soldiers did carry handguns? What an interesting topic - there are some great posts here, especially Kyrie's. For my 2 cents. The general rule of thumb is officers make up about 10% of an Army. The German Army has historically been a little light on officers because of its strong reliance upon NCO's. So the 25% -30% count for officers is way out of line. Not mentioned yet is the fact that a lot of individuals carry both a pistol and another weapon. In most Armies Senior NCO's in combat usually manage to acquier both a side arm and rifle or sub-machine gun. And how many Company Commanders did you see in "Nam who carried just a .45? All of them had M-16 and most, but not all, had a pistol as well. The point about partisans is well made. In reaction the Germans armed all their own nationals who were working in Occupied Europe with pistols - railroad workers, construction crews, etc. The question is how many pistols did these para-miltary organizations draw off?

08-02-2001, 05:10 PM	#23
BCC Guest Posts: n/a	Some other points I agree, I too like this thread. Kyrie brought up some good points and stated them well. I would however like to clarify a couple of things he said. The SS did receive arms and other equipment from the the Army long before 1943, as a matter of fact some of this support started as early as the mid 30's. The point that Kyrie makes on this is valid in sense that most of this support was with older arms and forced on the Army. This is why the SS used many captured arms and WWI era arms...not until 42/43 did they get true room at the feed trough. The second thing is the losses mentioned by Kyrie...on this too I agree, except to say that with almost every pistol lost there was a soldier attached! The Russians (no western allies) were in any position before late 44 or 45 to capture LARGE stocks of un-issued weapons.