Regarding the availability of guns, here's maybe an educative scenario that'd be more understandable to the inhabitants of planet USA... 
So 2 Russians, a Chinese and a French appear near New Reno, California to conduct some bizzare investigation on behalf of some obscure UN agency, brandishing assault rifles and bazookas. Do you really think the US govt and local law enforcement would approve of it unless said obscure agency had a great deal of influence?
Eduluacative to the knuckle-dragging Burgergarians of 'murrica land.
I understand more and better than you could believe, D.
You have to consider that most of this is happening out in the boonies so any police response is delayed long enough for the police to be irrellevant. You know when second count the police are minutes away...
Besides, it isn't a true investigation we experience as players, that happens "off screen" the tactical combat happens "on screen", otherwise how would our agents know where to locate the critters/bad guys exactly? Because, the investigation is
already done. I would hope that the agents would be couth enough to keep the visible killing hardware out of sight when talking to a yak farmer in outer Mongolia, but who knows. Not to mention when police hear large amounts of gunfire the first thing the do is wait for it to stop before investigating.
You would never get prior authorization to openly perform any operation like this with ANY guns from, or in ANY sovereignty.... With exception if that agent was authorized to do so by his home country previously... So like if Xcom recruited a former FBI agent that was authorized to carry anywhere, then that would not be invalidated and thus could carry in the U.S. with no issues. Also maybe if Xcom was also registered as a private "security" contractors... but that is a whole nother deal that is relevant, but I don't want to post about it now.
However, extreme exceptions aside... No , and mean I mean like no country would allow foreign nationals in with firearms of ANY sort in a police capacity without a resolution and express invitation, and what developed country would do that? uhhhh NONE! There is NO such thing as a secret UN resolution.
There would never be such authorization which is literally why I was like "lol wut"? The agents are already crossing into a foreign country that may or may not be a member of the UN and kill the absolute dogshit out of citizens of some country or another (cultists). Can you say multiple human rights violations? I can list at least 10 without even sweating. I mean seriously, the half measure ideology is actually so backwards it makes sense...If you have ever worked in any screwed up bureaucracy as I have.
.... I digress, moving on!
Xcom could not have enemies on the council for this to really work because this would be such a political hot potato that it wouldn't fly otherwise. Xcom would have to have the support of the council for the overall mission of the project because wrench, revolver, or rifle, you have personnel executing, kidnapping, interrogating, depriving of property, and denying religion of these
poor cultists....to say the least.
The UN / Council's mental dichotomy is insane, "Yes, violate the shit out of international law and the sovereignty of member nations wholesale. No, you can't have tools to help be sure you don't get caught and by extension prevent me/us from being caught". WTF?!!? Did they have a brain aneurysm before or after their crack binge?
The whole paranoia of "looking for any excuse shut X-Com down" is laughable, because the shooting of a religious extremist coming to public attention is the kiss of death for anyone's diplomatic career (sometimes)....Unless you are uhh Russian, Chinese, or in parts of South America or Africa or 'Murrica
...but yeah! I bet they don't talk about Waco or Ruby Ridge in Poland
The tldr is that the Feds came in and killed the shit out basically everyone without talking to local law enforcement. These examples are applicable in that an armed group can and will do what it feels that it should and worry about the consequences later....which there were none really for the officers involved. So in Xcom's case the UN or council could not admit prior knowledge of Xcom's "illegal" activity without exposing themselves, and admitting that there was a secret UN taskforce that violated the law equally endangers the council for the same reason. Catch-22.
Because It would be that way, I hope that those council / UN members involved recognize the damage of public scrutiny. I would hope they realized that they need to take every step to be sure that there are no surviving enemy combatants, which minimizes witnesses; which means having the tools to get the job done and leaving behind the strangest cases of mass suicide.
Also, so what if they are exposed? Big. fucking. deal. The scandal would blow over rather quickly and be credited to rouge elements within the organization and not the totality of the organization itself whereupon the organization would be renamed and continue operations more carefully. Have you ever watched CNN?
Anyways, my point is this. If they have already made the decision to risk it all, why would they bother with arbitrary limitations that increases the chances of them being caught in a scandal? We can think this out a few ways.
1. There is no risk of exposure, then authorization is meaningless. AKs and RPGs for everyone!!!
2. There is some risk of exposure; It is necessary to maximize success and thus control the number of witnesses. AKs and RPGs for everyone!!!
3. The organization is publicly exposed; There is no need to be politically sensitive now; rename the organization and see 2. AKs and RPGs for everyone!!!
4. The organization is operating secretly with complete UN / Council authorization; call Izmash; AKs and RPGs for everyone!!!
5. The organization is secret with backers being scared of exposure and won't stop you, but won't help you either. Call Izmash. AKs and RPGs for everyone!!!
6. The organization is fucking around trying to appease idiotic jackasses who don't realize their idiocy. Ignore them and call Izmash. AKs and RPGs for everyone!
Now, that being said known violations from one country to another that could be potentially embarrassing are often glossed over... I'll give you a few examples Like the form 60, Aralsk-7 incident... The U.S. ignored it; knowing it was a massive bio-weapons treaty violation. Also, The UN didn't talk too much about the fact that literal tons of weaponized anthrax that sat literally without so much as a fence for almost 20 years before they did something about it. It wasn't a secret, but no one really talked about it in public.
Or the fact that Russia could read EVERY U.S. confidential cable transmission and electronic diplomatic transmission and knew about the drug smuggling operations for funding South American friends of the CIA, where known CIA handlers where present and involved and where drugs were sold on America's streets. This could of easily embarrassed the U.S., but Russia remained quiet about it.
In short. It's silly to not have access to common weapons and equipment from the beginning stemming from arguments about authorization or availability.
Do you understand? Do I make my arguments clear? You can wholeheartedly disagree and have ultimate power, but it is important that I be clear.
btw Poland is gorgeous.
-HH
edited because I am a knuckle-dragging burgergarian.
