PDA

View Full Version : Why did U.S. Soldiers use 03A3s in 1947?



Deaf Smith
10-19-2009, 10:31 PM
This photo here shows Emperor Showa (Hirohito) visiting Kobe, Japan, 11 Jun 1947. And these U.S. Soldiers sure are not packing Garands!

http://ww2db.com/image.php?image_id=8920

Nickdfresh
10-20-2009, 08:44 AM
This photo here shows Emperor Showa (Hirohito) visiting Kobe, Japan, 11 Jun 1947. And these U.S. Soldiers sure are not packing Garands!

http://ww2db.com/image.php?image_id=8920


I believe US Military Police were armed primarily with Springfields during WWII (initially at least) in order to spare the Garands for the frontline troops. Those are probably just leftovers. They may also have served a semi-ceremonial function...

Rising Sun*
10-20-2009, 09:05 AM
Those are probably just leftovers. They may also have served a semi-ceremonial function...

Which?

The weapons, or the MPs? ;)

herman2
10-20-2009, 10:10 AM
Is it really necessary for the MP's to wear helmets? I mean the war is yrs over and there not in the jungle so i wonder why they are still wearing battle hemets. Just seems a bit strange to me, and boy they look young!

Rising Sun*
10-20-2009, 10:34 AM
Is it really necessary for the MP's to wear helmets? I mean the war is yrs over and there not in the jungle so i wonder why they are still wearing battle hemets. Just seems a bit strange to me, and boy they look young!

If you'd had anything to do with MPs, you'd know why they need to wear helmets when everyone else isn't.

Because they're arseholes who call fire in on their own heads when they could readily avoid it.

However, RPs (Regimental Police) are closer to the men in the unit and generally don't have those problems.

Nickdfresh
10-20-2009, 02:09 PM
Which?

The weapons, or the MPs? ;)


Well, the way they fought in Korea, I'd say mostly the MPs!

Nickdfresh
10-20-2009, 02:12 PM
:lol:

To answer Herman's question, I'm guessing under 1940s era regs that the MPs were "under arms" and were required to wear helmets. When I was in, most just wore a "soft cap" in garrison, even when they had Beretta sidearms with them...

Rising Sun*
10-21-2009, 09:23 AM
In fairness to MPs, it should be noted that some of them did great and brave work in the field, notably being the poor bastards who had to direct traffic at crossroads and other transport points targeted by enemy artillery. Or at least the Western Allied MPs did. Don't know about the Soviets or Axis, but I expect someone there had to perform the same function.

Not a great job being required to perform all the time under enemy artillery fire with no chance of firing back against the unseen and distant enemy while you're directing blokes to the front who often treated you like a cowardly arsehole.

Nickdfresh
10-21-2009, 09:37 AM
I don't know much about the Axis either, but I do keep reading of the German military police, Feldgendarmerie (http://home.mweb.co.za/re/redcap/germany.htm), as being particularly ruthless and feared by the average Heer and even SS soldier. And that this was something that long predated WWII...

Rising Sun*
10-21-2009, 10:10 AM
I don't know much about the Axis either, but I do keep reading of the German military police, Feldgendarmerie (http://home.mweb.co.za/re/redcap/germany.htm), as being particularly ruthless and feared by the average Heer and even SS soldier.

Certainly by the last year or two of the war, when they applied field executions on their own initiative and without benefit of any reasonable trial process on anyone they suspected of being a deserter or just heading in what they thought was the wrong direction.

herman2
10-21-2009, 10:29 AM
In relation to military police, in times of war, would they have more power over local police?

Rising Sun*
10-22-2009, 09:19 AM
In relation to military police, in times of war, would they have more power over local police?

Depends upon the nation and the type of 'military' police.

Also depends whether they're 'military' police in their own or an occupied country.

The troops, MPs or otherwise, of an occupying force have as much practical power over everything they want to exercise it over, regardless of international or other law. The legal power of the MPs is determined by the occupying force's command.

So far as power within their own country, 'military' police can extend to secret and security police, both of which often have greater power than civil police in societies which have secret and security police, as distinct from secret and security agencies which are not police forces.

In English-speaking countries in WWII I think that the general position was that MPs, i.e. military police (being army, navy and air force troops assigned to police duties in their own forces) had jurisdiction over their own service and everyone on their own bases, but not over civilians or over civilian police off their bases.

This could be complicated by MPs being sworn in as civil police, which then gave them civilian jurisdiction off their bases.

It could also be complicated by informal cooperation, regardless of strict legal powers, between MPs and civil police in areas with large troop populations, so that any service's MPs or civil police might exercise powers over any serviceman.


Off topic, but a long time ago I worked with a bloke who'd been an Australian MP in Vietnam, courtesy of the Army rewarding him for having passed a couple of law subjects before being conscripted. He tried to arrest an Aussie soldier in Saigon or somewhere after the Aussie had done a fair job of demolishing some establishment of the brothel or bar, or both, kind as well as demolishing a good number of its inhabitants. Things weren't going well, as the MP was getting the shit kicked out of him as the errant soldier belted and kicked him down a long staircase.

This was observed by the MP's regular (i.e not conscript) army partner, who did nothing. Ultimately the MP had a very large bit of luck and managed to subdue the offending digger. Whereupon the battered and exhausted conscript MP said to his regular army partner something along the lines of

"Why the **** didn't you help me, you lazy, useless ****?"

His partner replied "I thought you were doing alright."

The conscript MP had an abidiing loathing for regular army MPs ever after.

Nickdfresh
10-22-2009, 10:03 AM
As far as US Military Police, they are forbidden to enforce the law anywhere but on US federal military reservations by the Posse Comitatus act of 1877. Unless of course martial law is declared...

Rising Sun*
10-22-2009, 10:06 AM
As far as US Military Police, they are forbidden to enforce the law anywhere but on US federal military reservations by the Posse Comitatus act of 1877. Unless of course martial law is declared...

But don't they exercise jurisdiction over troops in civilian areas?

Nickdfresh
10-22-2009, 10:13 AM
But don't they exercise jurisdiction over troops in civilian areas?

I'm not sure, that's quite a gray area as most troops in civilian areas will have civilian police in those areas and I suppose it could happen that they'd be called out if there were some huge altercation involving military personnel...

Incidentally, MPs CAN issue traffic tickets and arrest civilian law-breakers on federal military land. However, since 9/11 closed up most US military reservations, this is probably much less common now. When I was in though, MPs caught civilians who thought they were immune to their on-post speed traps all of the time. :D

Rising Sun*
10-24-2009, 08:01 AM
I'm not sure, that's quite a gray area as most troops in civilian areas will have civilian police in those areas and I suppose it could happen that they'd be called out if there were some huge altercation involving military personnel...

Maybe in the US, but outside it, in WWII at least, my understanding was that US MPs had jurisdiction over their own troops anywhere, as I think did other allied nations over their own troops.

Here is one account of a huge altercation involving military personnel and US MPs in an off-base city in Australia, and a great piece of Aussie MP work (i.e. removing their arm bands and joining the fray on the Aussie side against the Yank MPs), which was all hushed up during the war. http://home.st.net.au/~dunn/ozatwar/bob.htm

Rising Sun*
10-24-2009, 08:17 AM
Maybe it's just me, but don't you reckon the smug non-military stance and attitude of these MPs is just inviting someone to smack them in the head?



http://home.st.net.au/~dunn/ozatwar/bob06.jpg

boyne_water
10-24-2009, 09:49 AM
I'm not sure, that's quite a gray area as most troops in civilian areas will have civilian police in those areas and I suppose it could happen that they'd be called out if there were some huge altercation involving military personnel...

Incidentally, MPs CAN issue traffic tickets and arrest civilian law-breakers on federal military land. However, since 9/11 closed up most US military reservations, this is probably much less common now. When I was in though, MPs caught civilians who thought they were immune to their on-post speed traps all of the time. :D

I was caught speeding in Faslane base by RN police when i was working there.Thankfully Dumbarton council hated the nuclear base on their doorstep and never prosecuted anyone reported by the Navy.

Firefly
10-27-2009, 06:32 PM
In actual fact and in my limited 25 year military experience, MP's are the dregs of the earth that would crap on their own friends to get a promotion.

Maybe Im being a little biased though.

downwithpeace
10-27-2009, 08:17 PM
Could the rifles have been apart of the MP dress weapons rather than a practical war weapon.

Rising Sun*
10-28-2009, 06:42 AM
In actual fact and in my limited 25 year military experience, MP's are the dregs of the earth that would crap on their own friends to get a promotion.

Why don't you tell us what you really think about MPs? ;) :D

Anyway, what makes you think MPs have friends?

Nickdfresh
10-28-2009, 09:06 AM
When I was in, I recall an ragging to me how he could easily drive drunk because the guys at the front gate would never bust a fellow MP. I doubt they can get away with that many places anymore, because now most US installations actually have civilian federally contracted security guards manning the gates...

Rising Sun*
10-28-2009, 09:18 AM
I doubt they can get away with that many places anymore, because now most US installations actually have civilian federally contracted security guards manning the gates...

We've gone for this cheap solution in various government areas, but I don't know that the private guards are invested with the necessary powers of those in real uniforms as distinct from the bullshit wannabe cop uniforms they wear. Generally I doubt that they have any more power than other wannabe fat-gutted, moustachioed, mirror sunglass, shave headed, door bitch type who is at best a gatekeeper. They'd need to take the oath etc to be military. And they sure as hell ain't military, the dumb fat *****s.

Nickdfresh
10-28-2009, 09:30 AM
We've gone for this cheap solution in various government areas, but I don't know that the private guards are invested with the necessary powers of those in real uniforms as distinct from the bullshit wannabe cop uniforms they wear. Generally I doubt that they have any more power than other wannabe fat-gutted, moustachioed, mirror sunglass, shave headed, door bitch type who is at best a gatekeeper. They'd need to take the oath etc to be military. And they sure as hell ain't military, the dumb fat *****s.

I dunno, but their Glock 9mm's seem powerful enough. :D I think they're meant to be a "trip wire" in a real incident where they'll call the MPs or local police...

Rising Sun*
10-28-2009, 10:00 AM
I dunno, but their Glock 9mm's seem powerful enough. :D I think they're meant to be a "trip wire" in a real incident where they'll call the MPs or local police...

You mean you arm those *****s?

We may be stupid, but we're not suicidal.

Our civilian fat controllers aren't armed.

Why would they be? We don't even arm our soldiers on the gates, and with very good reason.

herman2
10-28-2009, 10:09 AM
When I was in, I recall an ragging to me how he could easily drive drunk because the guys at the front gate would never bust a fellow MP. I doubt they can get away with that many places anymore, because now most US installations actually have civilian federally contracted security guards manning the gates...

If your caught driving an army vehicle drunk, would you be suspended or kicked out or would your driving license be suspended when you come back to America and your insurance rates go up?Or would the army just say don't do it again and thats that?

Nickdfresh
10-28-2009, 12:03 PM
You mean you arm those *****s?

We may be stupid, but we're not suicidal.

Our civilian fat controllers aren't armed.

Why would they be? We don't even arm our soldiers on the gates, and with very good reason.

The simple answer is--"9/11"...

Most of the guards are military vets and there's usually a whole gaggle of them. But I think times are again changing and some US military installations are "open"(ing up) again, which means little security during the day...

Nickdfresh
10-28-2009, 12:04 PM
If your caught driving an army vehicle drunk, would you be suspended or kicked out or would your driving license be suspended when you come back to America and your insurance rates go up?Or would the army just say don't do it again and thats that?

I imagine one would be courts martialed and jailed for being drunk, let alone driving drunk, while on duty. I was talking after duty hours....

Nickdfresh
10-28-2009, 12:09 PM
Could the rifles have been apart of the MP dress weapons rather than a practical war weapon.

I doubt it. Many MPs, especially those in the Far East, were issued the Springfield 1903 since they were deemed less likely to face frontline combat, and the Springfield was actually still very effective and numbers were produced well into the War since most of their opponents would also have had bolt action rifles. I doubt anyone thought them important enough on occupation duty to reequip with M-1 Garands. But it is perhaps possible that some also felt that MPs would be more judicious and less potentially trigger-happy around large crowds with a bolt-action rifles if some incident did take place...

SonOfWWIIVet
06-13-2010, 01:53 PM
I believe US Military Police were armed primarily with Springfields during WWII (initially at least) in order to spare the Garands for the frontline troops. Those are probably just leftovers. They may also have served a semi-ceremonial function...

Remember that there were about 1 million '03A3s manufactured by Remington Arms and Smith-Corona from 1942 to 1944. They were considered "substitute-standard issue" to the "standard issue" M1 Garand service rifle. M1 Garand production was just barely meeting minimum demand and target production of that rifle was not met until after the war. Most of the '03-A3s never left the US, but some did. After the war they were used to stock National Guard armories just as the M1 Garands later did during the '60s and early '70s. As for the photo, these guys have fixed bayonets and look as if they are being used for crowd control or personal security for the emperor.

Nickdfresh
06-13-2010, 04:50 PM
Remember that there were about 1 million '03A3s manufactured by Remington Arms and Smith-Corona from 1942 to 1944. They were considered "substitute-standard issue" to the "standard issue" M1 Garand service rifle. M1 Garand production was just barely meeting minimum demand and target production of that rifle was not met until after the war. Most of the '03-A3s never left the US, but some did. After the war they were used to stock National Guard armories just as the M1 Garands later did during the '60s and early '70s. As for the photo, these guys have fixed bayonets and look as if they are being used for crowd control or personal security for the emperor.

Numbers of 03's did see front line service with the Marines early on, especially on Guadalcanal, where marines would often salivate when they saw numbers Army-National Guardsmen armed with Garands...

SonOfWWIIVet
06-13-2010, 05:23 PM
Numbers of 03's did see front line service with the Marines early on, especially on Guadalcanal, where marines would often salivate when they saw numbers Army-National Guardsmen armed with Garands...

Roger that. The Battle of Guadalcanal was the first big Pacific War battle/campaign and the Marines did arrive with "earlier" '03s. My father was a Lebanese-born American citizen who had his Army recruit training next to a British camp in Palestine. The American recruits (all foreign born) trained with early '03 Springfields. My dad spoke highly of the '03 though he eventually carried a .30 carbine and a beautifully finished .38-200 Smith & Wesson (Lend-Lease) service revolver during the North African campaign and until the end of the war which included Italy, Austria and a couple of convoys to the Soviet-Persian border via Trans-Jordan and western Iraq and Iran. I remember the revolver when I was a boy back in the 60s. He carried it with him when he made bank deposits from his businesses. I guess that can be another thread though.