| Submit your comments on this article |
| -Short Attention Span Theater- |
| Brit paper believes naval 5-inch guns are literally 5-inch guns |
| 2016-07-31 |
| If modern day journalists knew exactly how powerful, rapid firing and accurate today's naval artillery is, they would need Depends everytime they write a story about it. A British tabloid made an embarrassing error Friday, writing a hysterical piece that incorrectly reported the Defence Ministry had paid hundreds of millions of pounds to buy a five-inch-long gun. “We just blew £183m on a five-inch gun, but it’s ‘a good value for taxpayers,’” read the outraged headline from The Daily Star. The subheadline also reinforced that the author believed the gun was literally five inches, calling it “the length of a toothbrush.” The only problem? Five-inch guns are named after their caliber, not their length. They shoot munitions that are five inches in diameter, meaning the guns themselves are necessarily huge. |
| Posted by:badanov |
| #8 Clearly victims of the 6-inch lie. |
| Posted by: Skidmark 2016-07-31 18:24 |
| #7 Given the way the militaries are being downsized. How long of a gun do you need to fire spitballs? |
| Posted by: CrazyFool 2016-07-31 16:21 |
| #6 The British MBT fires that size. Seems a bit small? |
| Posted by: Bright Pebbles 2016-07-31 14:47 |
| #5 They only buying one? |
| Posted by: AlanC 2016-07-31 13:27 |
| #4 Actually, £183m on a five-inch (125 mm) gun seems a bit much - unless we're talking development etc... |
| Posted by: g(r)omgoru 2016-07-31 12:30 |
| #3 It's either a Glock or an AK-47. Since it doesn't have a pistol grip, forestock or a magazine clip thingy with more than 10 rounds , it's not an assault weapon. |
| Posted by: AlmostAnonymous5839 2016-07-31 10:17 |
| #2 What happens when too many left-wing governments essentially ban guns. The door to a tyrannical government is opened. You can bet the thugs still have access to firearms and free fire zones. |
| Posted by: JohnQC 2016-07-31 08:04 |
| #1 Shhh! Don't confuse the reporters with facts. It just confuses and irritates them. Then they feel they have to waste even more ink reasserting their moral superiority. |
| Posted by: Nguard 2016-07-31 01:11 |