Soldiers Want Bigger Bullets

[Chairboy]

I say just keep the troops out and napalm the snot outta the place... But when the boots hit the ground to finish off survivors, thompsons and M-14s for everyone!

When you advocate killing all the non-combatants in the area, is it because you don't feel they're fully human for some racial or religious reason?  Or is it because you hold them responsible for the actions of the soldiers/terrorists/guerillas/whatever you're fighting?

[wrongwayric]

Texasmom i asked the same question you asked when i was going through bootcamp. Why not shoot to kill rather than wound? We were taught to aim center of mass, as in the belly to the neck, as this would definately wound and take down the guy. Every soldier you take out of combat, which the theory is that at least 1 or 2 would stop to help the wounded 1, is 1 less you have to fight up close and personal. Actually the primary goal isn't really to kill, but to disable the enemies ability or will to kill you.

[Dune]

Did anyone mention that it seemed like only 80% wanted a different caliber?

[Dune]

PS: Some interesting info on ballistics, etc.

http://ammo.ar15.com/Self_Defense_Ammo_FAQ/index.htm

[SteveBailey]

The M14 was, and still is the answer.  There was no reason to replace it in the first place.

[Mr No Name]

But then you, sir, are a nutter.

Nope, I just want to win, Period.

[Xargos]

Nothing wrong with an M3 Grease gun for close combat.

[texasmom]

That seems like a terribly inefficient strategy. A wounded enemy can still be a threat. Just kill the guy & move on to the next target.  Moral will be low if their comrades are dead... not just wounded ~ and it's one less each time shooting back.

[Saxman]

I thought the point of training to aim center of mass was because it means you're going for a target that's easier to hit?

Y'know if you're going to reissue the Thompson, bring back the Model 1911. Didn't they both use the same .45cal ACP round?

[Barnes828]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FN_SCAR

7.62 version and problem solved.

[lasersailor184]

That seems like a terribly inefficient strategy. A wounded enemy can still be a threat. Just kill the guy & move on to the next target.  Moral will be low if their comrades are dead... not just wounded ~ and it's one less each time shooting back.

I've argued this many times on the internet.

While a 5.56 round may have a very low survivability rate, it also has a very low incapacitation rate.  That means that while the target will die, for a little while he's still able to shoot back.

And the point made about the types of people we are fighting is also a good one.  It is a very good assumption that 1 wounded soldier also takes out 2 healthy soldiers to take care of him, at least for a little while.  This assumption stands IF (AND ONLY IF) we are fighting a First World Country.  That is, a place that values life.  We haven't fought a First World Country since Germany (and arguably, Japan wasn't a first either).


Now, as to the solution?  Then we venture into personal opinion.  Many people thought that the goal was to find a common weapon for every soldier.  But to give everyone an average weapon was an epic failure that we have seen.

I believe the solution is to go back to specialized weapons for each soldier.  I.E. Large caliber battle rifles for most, large caliber SMG's for some, and then large caliber MG's for a couple.  While it does bring with it supply issues both for parts and ammo, it puts specialized weapons that are able to be used for when specialized situations arise.

[Maverick]

Now, as to the solution?  Then we venture into personal opinion.  Many people thought that the goal was to find a common weapon for every soldier.  But to give everyone an average weapon was an epic failure that we have seen.

I believe the solution is to go back to specialized weapons for each soldier.  I.E. Large caliber battle rifles for most, large caliber SMG's for some, and then large caliber MG's for a couple.  While it does bring with it supply issues both for parts and ammo, it puts specialized weapons that are able to be used for when specialized situations arise.

Exactly how far down the line of combat units do you figure this thing would go?  Are you implying that every unit have a multitude of shoulder arms just in case they might find a use for a specialty weapon???

[Ironblade]

Salute all
The m14 is an excellant weapon carried today by alot of special operators but the problems it is having in Iraq is head spacing issues and the new school army armourers arent trained to fix!! there is also the weight issue I humped the m16 with extra ammo for 5 years in light infantry ! the larger caliber means larger weight . They are looking at the 6.5 grendal and probably should look at the ar10 308cal. for the familiarty of the weapon to the 16! But for close quaters nothing beats a 12ga.. and im agreed with the return of the 1911 45acp ..

[SkyRock]

no, they just need one of these:

http://www.youtube.com/v/p4ebtj1jR7c&hl=en

[TwentyFo]

The host of Future Weapons is a tool. Can't stand him and his whispering.