Same Logic

Public opinion is against Flock and other similar camera systems.

To the point that the local sheriff canceled their contract with both Flock and Axios.

Governor DeSantis banned them from FDOT right of ways.

But the press is publishing lots of articles like the picture above.

It seems very much akin to saying that since the Nazis MUST have killed a few people who deserved it, then The Holocaust is completely justified.

Some of the nearby county's sheriffs are not getting the message the public is sending and are saying that they will continue using Flock cameras that are placed on private property.  I think some of them have been running unopposed for so long they've forgotten they're elected officials and subject to the opinions of their constituents.
 

Who Would Win

I've noticed that the Soviets had better guns and thicker armor than the NATO nations until relatively late.

NATO didn't start getting gun parity until the British 105mm L7.

NATO didn't start pulling ahead in armor until Chobham.

NATO tanks are almost always taller and heavier than their Soviet counterparts.

So, NATO was screwed before tanks like Abrams and Leopard II hit the scene?

Maybe not.

For the gun and armor to matter, you need to hit, and the Western designers put a lot of effort and thought into fire control.

The first step in accurate fire is an accurate determination of the target's range.

You'll see little bulges on the sides of US tank turrets.  These hold the objective lenses of the range finder, either coincidence or stereoscopic.

The earliest of these give the range which is called out and the appropriate stadia in the optic is aligned with the target.

The US miniaturized the mechanical fire control computers it'd been using on ships and put them in tanks.  The range obtained from the rangefinder could be input into the computer, along with wind speed and the reticle would be shifted so the gunner need only align a, relatively simple and uncluttered, crosshair on the target to hit.

This is all happening while the T-55 has no rangefinder at all and the T-62 uses stadiametric ranging.

The US then automated the process by putting a linkage between the rangefinder and fire control computer.

This was in the 90mm equipped M48A2, in 1953!

The M60A1 started with this.  Later versions got a solid state computer, laser rangefinder and sensors to compensate for wind muzzle droop and cant.

This is all in addition to stabilization that allowed for firing accurately on the move.

Of course, to effectively use all this fun technology requires some education and training that's, typically, absent from the Warsaw Pact and Soviet customers.

Israel vs et al kind of proves the thesis. 

To Be Fair

If we're going to count all the variations of the M1816 musket as a single service weapon, then we really should count all the variations of the AR-15 as a single weapon.

The M16 series (including the M4 series) is the king of service life, 1966 to 2022 or 56 years.

56 and counting since the M7 roll-out has not been smooth by any measure and many units, INFANTRY battalions, not support units, are still rocking the M4A1.

If we count each variation as its own weapon the M1865 is still the shortest in service, but the average number of years we stick to a specific design drops precipitously.

Even within some very short lived designs, like the Krag, there's several sub-versions.

Sometimes it's hard to tell how long a weapon was the primary infantry arm because they didn't replace the old ones, just stopped issuing them in favor of the new one.

This is true of the M1816 series and the Krag.  Units might have all the same gun, they might have a few of each.

Service Lives

Our first service rifle was, um, not a rifle.

It was the M1795, .69 caliber flintlock musket. (19 years)

It was replaced by the .69 caliber M1812 in 1814. (2 years)

It was replaced by the .69 caliber M1816 in 1816.  They didn't have an "A" designation so instead of M1816A1, we get M1822, M1835, M1840 and M1842.  The M1842 being the first caplock.  The Army didn't really consider them different guns, just different designations to keep track of small changes.  (39 years)

Those models were technically still front line weapons all the way to 1855 when we get the .58 caliber M1855 rifle musket in 1856.  Followed by the M1861, and M1863.  (9 years)

The first breech-loader is the M1865 chambered in .58-60-500 rimfire.  This is also the first Erskine Allin trapdoor to be type classified!  (1 year)

Then we get a trapdoor chambered in .50-70-450, the M1866.  Then The M1868 and M1870.  (7 years)

The cost of converting old caplocks turned out to be prohibitive and since they were making all new guns anyway, they decided on, yet, another chambering for the trapdoor.  The .45-70 M1873.  Then M1884, and M1888.  (19 years)

Smokeless supplanted black powder and the .30-40 Krag-Jørgensen M1892 hits the scene plus M1896 and M1898.  (11 years)

Then the M1903 Springfield in .30-03.  Then the M1903 in .30-06 in 1906.  (33 years)

The M1903 was, kind of, replaced by the "Enfield" M1917, but the M1917 was replaced by the M1903 after WW1.  The M1917 doesn't really count because it was a secondary standard.

We'd stopped using the year in the designation by 1936 when the M1 Garand is adopted.  This "gas-trap" version only lasted 4 years when it was replaced by the M1 with a drilled gas port.  (21 years)

The Garand was replaced in 1957 by the M14.  (9 years).

The M14 was replaced by the XM16E1 in 1966, M16A1 in 1969. (17 years)

The M16A1 was replaced by the M16A2 in 1983. (11 years)

The M16A2 was replaced by the M4 in 1994.  Then the M4 was changed to an M4A1 with a heavier barrel in 2014.  (28 years)

The M4A1 was officially replaced by the M7 in 2022.  (4 years)

The M7 was unofficially replaced by the XM8 in 2026. 

So the all time record for shortest service life goes to the M1855 with just one year!

The longest being the 39 years of the M1816 musket and its variations. 

¡Viva Cuba! ¡Cuba Libre!

Just for Technomad! 

Lee M1895 (6mm Lee) rifle: TL 6, Dmg 5d+2 pi, Acc 4, Range 800/5,600, Weight 8.6, RoF 1, Shots 5(3), ST 9, Bulk -5, Rcl 3, Cost $900, LC 3.

Krag-Jørgensen M1892 (.30-40) rifle: TL 6, Dmg 6d pi, Acc 5, Range 1,070/4,500, Weight 9.2/0.3, RoF 1, Shots 5+1(3i), ST 10, Bulk -6, Rcl 3, Cost $650, LC 3.

Krag-Jørgensen M1896 (.30-40) carbine: TL 6, Dmg 6d pi, Acc 5, Range 1,030/4,300, Weight 7.8/0.3, RoF 1, Shots 5+1(3i), ST 10, Bulk -5, Rcl 4, Cost $650, LC 3. 

And for fun, the Spanish Hornet!

Mauser Model 1893 (7x57mm) rifle: TL 6, Dmg 6d+1 pi, Acc 4, Range 1,150/4,800, Weight 9/0.3, Rof 1, Shots 5+1(3), ST 9, Bulk -5, Rcl 3, Cost $900, LC 3.

He's on his own to determine which is "worth it." 

GURPS will not show any of the numerous real-world foibles these three actions had.

Given the choice, I'm arming my men with Mausers; but remember that the troops with the Krags won in Cuba.