Why aren't theses standard?
>>29804026
Defeats the purpose of sidearms
>>29804026
I don't have the time or crayons to explain it to you
>>29804026
Geneva convention outlawed them
>>29804517
knife guns, or trench knives?
>>29804517
>Geneva convention
Every time.
Literally no fun allowed convention.
I bet when we get cool giant robots they will do the same shit. Fucking faggots.
>>29805160
You're probably right.
Except it would be called the "Convention on Common Sense. And Also Physics. "
>>29804026
Because in general combination weapons like that aren't known for being very good at any of the stuff
that they try to replace, i.e. jack of all trades master of none. Imagine trying to hold that bastard
to fire a bullet out of it, not to mention those hot topic spikes on the hand guard are more likely to
injure the user over the person they're intended for. Super cool, but not all that practical.
And like everyone else mentioned, geneva convention.
>>29804026
Unnecessary weight and complexity for a weapon that won't even be used most of the time because the soldier already has an automatic rifle.
It's much more useful to have a knife that's functional as a tool first and a backup weapon incidentally than the other way around. Soldiers spend most of their time not fighting, and a knife that can open cans and fillet trout is going to be appreciated a lot more.
>>29804056
kekkekekekkekekles m'shekels.
