Isn't this pretty impractical?
>>65172276No it's awsome
>>65172276Switching to your primary is faster than switching to your secondary
I can't tell if this is real or a shitpost.
>>65172276Imagine zeroing this.
>>65172319Imagine being too retarded to zero this
>>65172276Those glawks are boyfriends! Boyfriends!Cute!!!!!
>>65172276that front one would be an SBR
>>65172346It's okay, they're working on making almost everybody as poor as you are.
>>65172276They should go one further and have that over/under arrangement but fired by a single trigger with a selector for dual fire and alternating fire.
>>65172319imagine hitting anything past 25 yards
>>65172319They have the same trajectory, why wouldn't you just set them parallel?
>>65172299>I can't tell if this is real or a shitpost
>>65172323Imaging being too zero to be this retarded.
>>65172319>2 swiched (because otherwise whats the fucking point) glocks held together in a shitty plastic frameYeah, don't bother.
>>65172276Very impractical. In case you haven't figured this out yet, all the good gun ideas came about nearly a century ago. We're on the downhill side of the tech curve now. There is no more low-hanging fruit, there is only enshittification and bad ideas.>>65173785>They have the same trajectoryIn a perfect computer simulation, sure. In the real world the two barrels will shoot to different points of impact due to manufacturing tolerances. This is why double rifles and quality double shotguns are so expensive--it takes a huge amount of labor to make sure that both barrels shoot to the same point of impact.
>>65173803>In case you haven't figured this out yet, all the good gun ideas came about nearly a century ago. We're on the downhill side of the tech curve now.With that attitude, you're right.
>>65173807I'd love for you to prove me wrong, but I'm not holding my breath.
>>65173803>allPathetically uninspired. Is the Northrop Grumman chain gun a century old?
>>65174244Eh, there are some new ideas but they are so few and far between they might as well not exist.
>>65172346Not if they aren't attached to each other, just have a non locking slide mechanism, that would just be dual wielding using one to support the other.
>>65172276I presume their idea was something like so:>hold one gun in each hand>when one is empty, there's no delay drawing a sidearm (which a hypothetical enemy could exploit) because you're already holding it>you can let go of the empty gun to grab/load a fresh mag, while the other hand on the other gun simultaneously keeps your backup trained on target and holds the empty gun steady for you to load
