Posted on 06/26/2008 6:52:28 PM PDT by LSUfan
Absolutely. The M14 has its place, but it's nowhere near the proper weapon for widespread use in predominantly urban terrain. We had two M14s per PLT during my Iraq tour, and we used them in security positions fairly infrequently. Generally the areas are so tight (especially in Sadr City as you mentioned) that an M4 is all you need.
Plus, unless you have one of the new-fangled M14s with the rail systems, you won't be able to use any of the IR sights with it, making it next to useless at night.
Better idea:
Have the BATF pull targets for the civilians at Camp Perry.
How about having them hold the targets.
Here's the a$$hole responsible:
My father always hated Robert Mcnamara and his "whiz kid" bean counters. They got a lot of folks killed with their stupid decisions that were always based on the bottom line.
We'll be making popcorn when this rat bastard finally takes his dirt nap! (He's gotta be at least 90, so it won't be much longer.)
His birthday was June 9th. He’s 92.
....the M-14 was remarkedly accurate....you could take a trainee with no prior firearms experiance and teach him to hit silhouette targets at 400 yards using nothing more than a peep sight....I know.....I lost a battalion shoot off by one target to a pacifist from San Francisco....and I had been shooting since I was six.
....I always believed that part of the reason the M16 was adopted was with an eye towards international arms sales....many foreign soldiers are of smaller stature than Americans and the M16 is easier to carry and handle....not to mention the weight reduction of the ammo.
Actually the Russians used the PPsh submachine gun first.
It can be argued that the .30 Carbine round was one of the first assault-type medium cartridge, but in reality it was closer to a pistol cartridge than rifle cartridge in performance.
Howerver, the M1 Carbine that fired it was incapapble of full-auto fire. The selective fire M2 was not introduced until 1944, around the same time at the STg.
Therefore, in my mind at least, it was not the first assault rifle.
The PPsh fires the 7.62x25 round. Is this not a pistol cartridge?
If so, then this puts the PPsh in the submachine gun category along with the Thomson and the
German MP38 and MP40, and therefore clearly not an ‘assault rifle.’
The SCAR is impressive. Notice that it isn’t chambered in some fancy new oddball cartridge? 556 or 308. There’s nothing wrong with those two rounds. I’d like to have a scar heavy myself. Those advocating something between a 556 and a 308 are off on the wrong track, imo.
The nice thing about the m16 though is how slim and slender and easy to tote around it is. Especially the carbon 15 series from bushmaster.
See post # 91.
Certainly not, but it certainly had a role in the development of the concept and design, especially on the US side of the house. German tactical doctrine made much more extensive use of the submachine gun (MP38/40) and the desire was for a similar weapon with a cartridge falling somewhere between a pistol abnd a primary battle rifle.
The U.S. on the other hand, was not looking at a primarily offensive round, but something for logistics and rear area soldiers which was not as cumbersome as a Springfield or Garand, but had substantially more range than a 1911. In some ways, the .30 carbine was actually the Pederson Device brought forward by about 20 years, and which had been designed for front-line infantry.
I personally like this poster which shows the M1A1, not in the primary lineage of the modern assualt rifle, but in a "weird uncle" kind of role that can not be entirely excluded, either.
Latest episode of future weapons, Mack fired a M-4 chambered with 6.5mm Grendel. It was awesome!!!!!!!
It's a neat little round, with the big plus of being a ready-fit for the M16/Mk4 family of weapons. Having said that, I've long thought the venerable .250 Savage, which has been around since 1915, would be an incredibly capable military round, expecially if stoked up with modern brass, powders and bullets. For a round with nearly a century behind it, it's ballistics compare quite favorably with the little Grendel.
The Second Amendment is in place in case the politicians ignore the others.
thx...
I forgot about that. They were against it because it was also going to make it cost a little more too. Then after they finally chromed the chamber, most of the jamming problems mysteriously went away.
I bet Mcnamara sleeps like a baby.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.