It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: 00018GE
As far as I know the .223 is used because it's a combination of power and rate of fire not because of its wounding capacity. That may be an extra benefit .
The shell is a mixture of power and size which means magazine size and how many shots available before changing.
That may not be good for the current dialogue with gun control folks
I can't believe nobody has said this already.
originally posted by: PaddyInf
a reply to: sputniksteve
Obviously 7.62mm is the more effective killer. It's simple physics that a larger, heavier bullet travelling fast is going to do more damage than a much smaller, lighter one going just a bit faster.
However anyone who says that a 5.56 doesn't do much damage obviously hasn't seen the wounds it inflicts.
5.56 gets its bad rep from users firing it from short barrels. The SS109/M855 relies on high velocity to be effective. Anything less than a 16" barrel cuts the effective range to less than 100m. The M4 has a 14.5" tube, meaning the effective range is around the 85m mark. Combine this with people who don't like to admit they may have missed a target and you suddenly have a 'rubbish round'.
Strangely enough you don't tend to get these complaints from units who use weapons with 20" barrels.
originally posted by: 00018GE
I get tired of hearing the news media talking heads saying that AR-15's are designed to kill. AR-15's and the like AND military rounds in general are designed to wound NOT kill. Wounding an enemy soldier takes more soldiers off the battlefield than killing enemy soldiers. These kinds of weapons are designed to wound. I don't understand why no one calls them on this more often.
originally posted by: darkstar57
To support the original posting, the .223 round used in Vietnam was designed to tumble in flight, making a wound similar to a hollow point, but illegal by geneva convention.
originally posted by: Bybyots
a reply to: VivreLibre
No true American is anti-gun, but any reasonable American must be against military weapons being available to civilians.
Military weapons and ammunition should be segregated from civilian life.