# Who uses the C8?



## JFM (13 Apr 2013)

Unlike the U.S Army, we still use the M16/C7 as our main service rifle. This leads me to wonder who uses the C8? Officers? Special forces?


----------



## Fishbone Jones (13 Apr 2013)

JFM said:
			
		

> Unlike the U.S Army, we still use the M16/C7 as our main service rifle. This leads me to wonder who uses the C8? Officers? Special forces?



op:


----------



## MikeL (13 Apr 2013)

If you rank up enough times you can unlock the C8....


I think this topic has been done before

C8s are used by both Officers and NCMs;  from Private and up.  All depends on what is available to the organization and how they want to distribute.  You will see them being used by some Soldiers who are Infantry, Armour, Artillery,  Medic, Signals, etc.  As well as CANSOFCOM and Close Protection.


----------



## Sf2 (13 Apr 2013)

As well as Griffon aircrew as C8's are easier to stow in the cabin.


----------



## marshall sl (13 Apr 2013)

And the Correctional Service of Canada is now using C8s


----------



## my72jeep (13 Apr 2013)

The OPP ues the C8.


----------



## MilEME09 (13 Apr 2013)

RCMP, Calgary police's Tactical unit, within the CF aircrews, tankers, think navy boarding parties use them along with the MP5, though not sure on this one, Special forces. I don't know why service battalions don't use them as we are traditionally mounted, and would take less space that we need.


----------



## pross182 (13 Apr 2013)

From what I've seen they're primarily used by trades wherein the usual length of the C7 is a hindrance Ex// Tankers whose positions in the vehicle are pretty cramped.


----------



## Jammer (13 Apr 2013)

There is no set rule as to who uses them. It's conditions based. 

For example...My section traded our C7s for C8s based on our tasks on my last tour.


----------



## brihard (13 Apr 2013)

Infantry who can count higher than the rest.


----------



## Jester_TG (13 Apr 2013)

Brihard said:
			
		

> Infantry who can count higher than the rest.



Who get's the C9 then?  ;D


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (13 Apr 2013)

MilEME09 said:
			
		

> RCMP, Calgary police's Tactical unit, within the CF aircrews, tankers, think navy boarding parties use them along with the MP5, though not sure on this one, Special forces. I don't know why service battalions don't use them as we are traditionally mounted, and would take less space that we need.



We have a few on ships used for the NBP and Force Protection.


----------



## brihard (13 Apr 2013)

Jester_TG said:
			
		

> Who get's the C9 then?  ;D



Guys who by all rights should have been too smart to join the infantry but did anyway. They just never did quite make it to '10'.

I can only feel sorry for the C6 gunners...


----------



## JFM (14 Apr 2013)

Someone told me that most infantry officers carry the C8. Is that true?


----------



## SupersonicMax (14 Apr 2013)

JFM said:
			
		

> Someone told me that most infantry officers carry the C8. Is that true?



Did you even read this thread??


----------



## Fishbone Jones (14 Apr 2013)

JFM said:
			
		

> Someone told me that most infantry officers carry the C8. Is that true?



Please don't tell me that you are trying to join as an Infantry Officer, however your decision rests partly on whether you get to carry a C8 or not?  :facepalm:


----------



## Canadian.Trucker (14 Apr 2013)

recceguy said:
			
		

> Please don't tell me that you are trying to join as an Infantry Officer, however your decision rests partly on whether you get to carry a C8 or not?  :facepalm:


Why not?  Someones decision on whether or not to join a certain trade should always rest on the equipment they are going to be able to use right?
/sarcasm


----------



## JFM (14 Apr 2013)

recceguy said:
			
		

> Please don't tell me that you are trying to join as an Infantry Officer, however your decision rests partly on whether you get to carry a C8 or not?  :facepalm:



I'm simply asking a question about the equipment used in the forces. It has nothing to do with childish preferences in weapon systems. Considering you have posted over 13 000 times on this forum, I would have thought that you'd be a little more respectful and less ignorant. I'm sorry if my lack of knowledge "offended" you.


----------



## cupper (14 Apr 2013)

Oh No he didn't!


----------



## brihard (14 Apr 2013)

Well, this'll be good...


----------



## my72jeep (14 Apr 2013)

Wow the Kid just pissed on the Godfathers shoes. :trainwreck:
op:


----------



## Fishbone Jones (14 Apr 2013)

JFM said:
			
		

> I'm simply asking a question about the equipment used in the forces. It has nothing to do with childish preferences in weapon systems. Considering you have posted over 13 000 times on this forum, I would have thought that you'd be a little more respectful and less ignorant. I'm sorry if my lack of knowledge "offended" you.



I don't get offended. At least not as easily as you try to imply in an adolescent attempt to create a problem where none really exists.

It's precisely the fact that I've been here as long as I have and posted as much as I have, that I had to ask the question.

The amount of dweebs, donkeys and teenagenintendonijnasniperjtf types that post here, asking exactly your type of questions, for exactly the reason I stated is phenomenal and somewhat overwhelming.

I've become jaded and fickle to these types, as have many others here. My spidey senses flare up when someone asks exactly your type of question.

I simply asked you a question to clarify, before the thread turned into a circular vortex of fluid rotating around the circumference of the commode.

You're ignorance of the subject is not the problem. 

Your lack of respect and the fact that you simply can't seem to read the previous responses of the people that posted to try expand the grey matter in your cranium is the problem.

Filling out your profile, giving us some idea of your circumstances would also likely help, but I've already passed out twice by holding my breathe waiting for that to happen.

Hope that clarifies things for you.

Oh, by the by, go read the Guidelines. You obviously missed the step about searching.

BTW, the M16 is not part of our inventory, to correct you in your initial query.


----------



## IRepoCans (14 Apr 2013)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CWsJcg-g1pg

Fitting no?

op:


----------



## JFM (15 Apr 2013)

recceguy said:
			
		

> I don't get offended. At least not as easily as you try to imply in an adolescent attempt to create a problem where none really exists.
> 
> It's precisely the fact that I've been here as long as I have and posted as much as I have, that I had to ask the question.
> 
> ...



I'm sorry, but this is just rich. You're talking to me about lack of respect when I simply asked a question that you may have found ignorant. Furthermore, you glorify yourself by claiming you really were just trying to help ("I simply asked you a question to clarify") which is utter nonsense because you had the full intent to ridicule me from the get go. Moreover, I did infact read the replies people gave me, and I greatly appreciated it. My response was simply a step deeper into the question for a more precise/refined answer. You took it as an opportunity to mock and attack me. I may be ignorant, but keep in mind I'm a high school student. My views aren't as matured as yours, and I respect that. The least you could do is act your rank/age and be the better man and not laugh at my ignorance.

P.S. I am aware that the M16 is not used by our military. I simply used it because I had used the U.S Army as an example (hence the M16 [SLASH] C7)


----------



## REDinstaller (15 Apr 2013)

You just might want to quit while you're ahead, otherwise it'll be off to the naughty list right away.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (15 Apr 2013)

JFM said:
			
		

> I'm sorry, but this is just rich. You're talking to me about lack of respect when I simply asked a question that you may have found ignorant. Furthermore, you glorify yourself by claiming you really were just trying to help ("I simply asked you a question to clarify") which is utter nonsense because you had the full intent to ridicule me from the get go. Moreover, I did infact read the replies people gave me, and I greatly appreciated it. My response was simply a step deeper into the question for a more precise/refined answer. You took it as an opportunity to mock and attack me. I may be ignorant, but keep in mind I'm a high school student. My views aren't as matured as yours, and I respect that. The least you could do is act your rank/age and be the better man and not laugh at my ignorance.
> 
> P.S. I am aware that the M16 is not used by our military. I simply used it because I had used the U.S Army as an example (hence the M16 [SLASH] C7)



Consensus doesn't seem to be with you young padawan.

If you can't take a hint, I'll suggest that you quit trying to dictate what my intentions were. At least your own skewed version.

If I'd wanted to ridicule you, you provided more of a target rich environment than I could have ever hoped for, but that wasn't my intent.

Take it for what it's worth, but you've already ruined your own thread. It's now become useless to your intent.

Once again, I'll suggest you go read the guidelines and besides the search function previously mentioned, you can read the rest about trolling, intent, respect and the consequences of ignoring the same.


----------



## muskrat89 (15 Apr 2013)

> I'll suggest you go read the guidelines and besides the search function previously mentioned, you can read the rest about trolling, intent, respect and the consequences of ignoring the same.



This.

What you carry is, for the most part irrelevant and also - may be changed by the time you get there. I think for the most part your question has been answered. 

Locked.

Army.ca Staff


----------

