Are Submachine Guns Obsolete?

That is the question recently posed by The Firearms Blog. The author, Alex C., wrote:

This is a topic I was pondering the other day. I thought to myself “is there any one role where a submachine gun stands out among the rest as the best firearm for any given situation?”

And I couldn’t think of one. Not one. They are much bigger than a pistol, and thus too big to conceal yet they use the same ammunition. [This is not completely true--most countries that widely used submachine guns used much more powerful rounds for submachine guns than would typically be used in a handgun of the same caliber, which should be kept in mind if buying old surplus 9 mm.] The barrel lengths are often comparable as well so the performance increase of the round from an SMG is negligible (in most cases). They do not have the effective range of an assault rifle, and their cyclic rate is comparable. I believe they are not as efficient as a shotgun in close quarters for some type of entry type situation either, albeit I guess this is somewhat debatable.

For some reason, it reminded me of this statement from Roger Ford in his book, The World's Great Handguns--From 1450 to the Present Day: "As the twentieth century draws to a close, the days of the handgun as a military weapon seem to be numbered--though we would probably do well to remember that no less a soldier than Wellington himself suggested the same, well over a 150 years ago." (p. 174). Of course, handguns remain important as military weapons, but even more important as civilian weapons.

I'll be upfront and say that I have no practical experience with a submachine gun--I don't own one and have never fired one. However, it is possible to reason out the role where a submachine gun stands out.

The problem with Alex C.'s analysis is the narrow focus. Alex C. provided a good, albeit short, history of the development of the submachine gun and its influence in the development of the modern assault rifle. Basically, as he relates, the submachine gun was developed in an era where the standard military sidearm was a bolt-action rifle shooting a high-power rifle, and its purpose was to provide soldiers automatic fire at close range engagements, such as the trenches of WWI and, later, the hedgerows and urban combat of WWII. He also correctly notes that it was the convergence of the larger rifles with the smaller submachine gun that produced the assault rifle; and that it was the failure of the West to adopt an intermediate rifle cartridge that resulted in the Western European nations retaining the submachine gun well into the 1960s and 1970s, when they finally adopted the 5.56 cartridge. (The U.S. similarly continued using the M-1 carbine until the adoption of the M-16).

The focus on the military role of the submachine as the measure of whether there is any reason or role for it is as shortsighted, however, as considering the demise of the handgun as a calvary arm a sign that there is (or would be) no role for the handgun in the future. Of course, if it were not for the Federal restrictions on the purchase of submachine guns, and prohibition on the manufacture of new submachine guns for civilian sales, this would probably not be an issue because the submachine gun would have continued down the path of its natural evolution.

It is somewhat helpful to see the trend in submachine gun development to see where it is going (or might have gone). The first generation of submachine guns (the WWI to 1930's) were large, heavy, carefully machined weapons that generally weighed as much or more than a bolt-action military rifle, but were significantly more expensive to manufacture. Examples are the famous Thompson submachine gun, the Lanchester in England, and the Finnish Suomi. Notably, these weapons all fired from open bolts--i.e., pulling the trigger released the bolt to go forward, pick up a cartridge, chamber the cartridge, and fire the weapon. Besides being simpler to manufacture, this design also reduced the occurrence of "cook-offs" from excessive heat from intense period of firing. (Many machine guns employ an open bolt design for the same reason). Unfortunately, this type of action also jars the weapon, reducing potential accuracy (although the Finnish Suomi was capable of accurate fire out to 300 yards).

During the interwar period, in which the submachine gun saw increased popularity due to conflicts such as the Spanish Civil War and wars in China, two important developments took place. The first, which we will get back to, was the production of the first true machine pistols--handguns (such as the Mauser broomhandle and its copycats) that were capable of full automatic fire. The second, starting in Germany, was the first submachine guns using stampings, which made them both lighter and cheaper to manufacture.

WWII and the 1950's saw the widespread manufacture and adoption of these second generation cheap and light submachine guns, such as the Sten and the Sterling by the British Commonwealth countries, the MP 40 in Germany, the PPS 43 in the Soviet Union and its allies, and the U.S. M-3 "grease gun." The pinnacle of this generation of submachine guns was probably the Uzi, which was the first such design in the West to incorporate and use a "wrap-around" bolt design making the weapons smaller and shorter. Similar to the first generation of weapons, these military weapons continued to use an open-bolt design.

But WWII also saw the development of the assault rifle shooting an intermediate power cartridge (the German Stg 44 and AK-47, although I also consider the U.S. M-1 Carbine to be of the same category), seemingly eliminating the need for submachine guns (although is notable that the Soviet Union and Russia continued continued to develop and use submachine guns). And this is where Alex C.'s argument stops. He doesn't see anything the large first and second generation submachine guns can do that an assault rifle can't do better.

But in the meantime, something else was happening with the submachine gun. First, in Europe and other countries, particularly as its size diminished, the submachine gun began to be adopted as a police weapon. Second, additional machine pistols (such as the VZ 61 Scorpion  the Mini- and Micro-Uzi, and Mac 10 and 11) were invented and manufactured. Today, the Glock 18 and the HK VP 70 offer automatic fire from a package that is the same size and configuration as a typical combat pistol.

Another important development occurred. That was the introduction of the HK MP 5, which fired from a closed bolt. Firing from a closed bolt, like a conventional rifle or handgun, increased the accuracy. Since the police (at least theoretically) would not be laying down as large of volumes of fire as soldiers, "cook offs" were not a problem. The MP 5 and its variants became immensely popular with police special tactics units, and military hostage rescue and special forces. The MP 5 and similarly small sized, closed-bolt submachine guns and machine pistols are what I refer to as third generation.

(We are probably now entering a fourth generation--the Personal Defense Weapon (PDW)--falling somewhere between a submachine gun and an assault rifle).

So, we have now arrived at a weapon that, without a stock, is the same size or slightly larger than a full-sized handgun, yet capable of at least firing bursts of automatic fire--but is still smaller than even the short-barreled assault rifles such as the Russian AK-74U or U.S. M-4 carbines.

What to do with such a weapon? Timothy J. Mullin, in his book, The Fighting Submachine Gun, Machine Pistol, and Shotgun, makes the following observations as to the use of the machine pistol:

The key to effectively using the machine pistol is to first understand what it is. This means you understand how it is to be used tactically. Failure to understand this will result in the weapon's being misused and the shooter's losing a very valuable tool. The machine pistol should be viewed as a small hand-held shotgun firing projectiles that are more deadly than any found in a shotgun because of their weight and caliber. It is designed to allow the shooter to saturate a target with missiles at close range in a very short period of time, much like a sawed off shotgun. As with the shotgun, the projectiles are scattered over the target area, thereby improving the chances of hitting a major organ as well as inflicting the maximum amount of shock because a large number of wounds are being inflicted almost at the same time. Viewed as a hand-held, concealable, sawed-off shotgun, the machine pistol becomes the most deadly hand-held weapon available at close ranges (under 20-feet), if used correctly. Unlike the sawed-off 12-gauge shotgun, it can be fired a number of times in 3- to 5- round bursts, its projectiles are bigger with a greater ballistic coefficient than the shotgun cartridge contains, and it can be reloaded more rapidly. Additionally, if a more distinct target is present, it allows long-range, pinpoint accuracy. For example, I can hit a man target at 200 yards with a Glock M18 on semiautomatic--try that with your sawed-off 12-gauge loaded with heavy shot!

(p. 12). The same holds true for the modern submachine gun, except that the ability to deliver accurate fire at longer distances is increased because of the ability to add a stock or use a sling.

In short, if you focus only on military uses, Alex C. is probably correct. But the modern submachine gun represents an ideal home- or personal-defense weapon. In defending your home, whether now or after a hypothetical SHTF event, you are most likely to do so inside the home, or the immediate vicinity of the home (such as if you have a ranch or farm or other large rural property), and would probably not need the greater range of a rifle. The submachine gun would fulfill the same role as a tactical shotgun, except providing more effective fire in a smaller, lighter, lower-recoil package. And, for the ranges we are interested in, it provides many of the same advantages as a tactical rifle would, but, again, in a smaller, lighter package.

In reality, the question is, but for restrictive gun laws, whether the shotgun would be obsolete as a defensive or military weapon?