MCHammah96 has been banned for offensive language and inability to have a civil discussion.
I hope he takes the carbine to a forum that specializes in these weapons such as Gunboards, Surplus Rifle Forum, or the Military Rifle forum.
I am positive he will receive the same answer as he was presented here on Comando Supremo. I hope he handles it better.
To address his critique in his last post. He can complain about me in a different forum (the life of a moderator).
1. No SS in A.S. If 5-6 individuals can be stated as having SS present in the A.S. theater of operations, then any office with one individual anywhere in at the world means that nationality or group fought in that theater. The inability of MCHammah96 to deal with the reality that for all intents and purpose, there weren't any SS operations of any real scale in A.S. Tunisia was a separate theater and is so treated by the Italian military. A visit to Tobruk in 1942 doesn't traslate to a fact that the SS were in A.S.
2. No 7.35 in A.S. One can't prove a negative. If 7.35 were in A.S. in any numbers, then it is up to MCHammah96 to offer the evidence. Again it is a question of scale. While it is certainly possible that one 7.35mm rifles were used in A.S., they were not in any numbers to be significant.
As important, so what? If there were M38 series weapons in A.S., that doesn't prove that this specific carbine was in A.S. It is a false argument.
3. Who owns the rifle? It didn't matter for this discussion. MCHammah96 was the one trying to establish a provenance for the weapon. MCHammah96 intentionally keep the ownership and location of the weapon to himself. There is nothing wrong in doing that. Since I was discussing the weapon with him, trying to use the third person was a waste of time.
It is always possible an individual brought an unusual weapons into a theater of war. What that requires is the owner (or presenter in this case) to present research that demonstrate that was the case. That never happened. All that was offered was speculation. You can't disprove speculation (the 'anything can happen' argument can't be disproven), so the burden of proof is on the one who is making the claim.
That never happened.
Lets look at the weapon itself.
-If an SS officer wanted to equip himself or his troops with a sniper rifle, why select a Carcano that didn't have a factory developed and tested sniper configuration? Wouldn't a SS officer just tell Sergeant Fritz to go to the armory and pick-up a few 98K with a Zeiss Zielvier 4× (ZF39) telescopic sight, one of the best sniper rifles available?
-Why scope a carbine? This seriously doesn't pass the smell test.
-It is a carbine of a caliber that the Italian military abandoned in 1940. The argument is that the weapon was used in A.S. in mid-late 1942, when 7.35mm weapons were most certainly been out of the inventory if any were present in in 1940 (wear and tear, battle losses, these rifles weren't being replaced, etc).. Is the 7.35mm better than the 7.92mm, especially when fired from a 16"carbine barrel? Again, doesn't pass the smell test.
-The scope. It is big and bulky, and the carbine is likely awkward to fire. If the carbine was selected because it is easier to handle than a full length rifle, why the big, heavy, clumsy scope? Again a serious logic problem.
-The scope has not been identified. MCHammah96 stated an airplane sight. Really? In 1942 the German Army, no excuse me, the SS, are forced to use an airplane sight as a rifle scope?
-The mounts. With the scope off the carbine, those mounts are dangerous when handling the weapon. They can't be removed, and they stick-out with straight and pointed edges. It doesn't make sense. Look at other scoped rifles and how the mounts are attached to the weapon.
-The SS markings. This is know ruse to get the uninformed to buy a weapon at higher prices. No legitimate SS marked Carcano are known. The placement of the SS runes is wrong. As a property mark, they are placed where they can be seen without disassembling the rifle.
Nothing about this carbine makes sense unless bubba decided to do something weird and had these items lying around. That makes sense. Whether bubba was someone after the war or some SS officer that had a few days to kill is unknown.
I am more than happy to be proven wrong. To force me to disprove speculation is not the way to do it. Present the facts, provide the cites, present the research. Posting pictures from Osprey books that make claims but doesn't offer the source of the information is also not the way to do it. Osprey books are well known for their errors. Some authors do some excellent research, but they are not a definitive source by any standard.
The fact that MCHammah96 never offered significant cites is always an indicator that no real research exists. He posted pictures of books, but no page numbers or quotes (Osprey excepted).
He came to CS to fish for validation from individuals he believe would be gullible and want to fawn over a 'rare' rifle.
I haven't locked this thread. If anyone wishes to offer evidence in support of this carbine, please do. MCHammah96 has lost the right to post because of personal attacks.
Pista! Jeff
