Quoted: Maybe you misunderstood my question... My cousin heard on the history channel that the M16 was created and designed to wound, not kill...

No, I didn't misunderstand anything.  I hear on the news that homosexuality is a social norm, that doesnt make it true.  The difference is that other peoples homosexuality wont KILL me, your cousin that heard on the idiot box that his new EBR was only designed to WOUND, might kill me.  

It scares me that he requires proof handed to him, for him to believe his new rifle is VERY deadly...

Quoted: Quoted: Maybe you misunderstood my question... My cousin heard on the history channel that the M16 was created and designed to wound, not kill... No, I didn't misunderstand anything.  I hear on the news that homosexuality is a social norm, that doesnt make it true.  The difference is that other peoples homosexuality wont KILL me, your cousin that heard on the idiot box that his new EBR was only designed to WOUND, might kill me.   It scares me that he requires proof handed to him, for him to believe his new rifle is VERY deadly...

Oh really?

No it's true. Nobody ever died in Vietnam.

Quoted: Quoted: The difference is that other peoples homosexuality wont KILL me Oh really?

Umm, yeah, I'm not gay.  Married with one daughter and one due July 11.  

Please explain, within bounds of reason, how someone elses homosexuality might kill me...

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Send him to me and I'll slap him around until he realizes he's wrong. I get him next. Pass me the sign-up list when you're done, would ya?

Damn, why didn't somebody tell me, I just got here and look at the line.

There are designed to wound your fucking head clean off!

Quoted: No it's true. Nobody ever died in Vietnam.

rofl

+ = T-stox everytime he reads these stupid posts. Military weapons are meant to wound IF POSSABLE but not always so. You have to look at the history of weapons and the philosophy of strategy in the late 19th century. Also read tha ammo oracles section by Dr fackler about the lethality of the AK round (which also covers all .30 FMJ as well). As early as the first man who ever chucked a stone men in organised combat have had medical units in them to attend to the wounded. The Romans hed em the English had'em, we have them Etc etc. This nonsense that they did'nt is historical inaccuracy. In fact the word "hospital" comes from the Roman millitary model. But noone until 1875 thought about "wounding potential" you just had a lead ball bullet and you shot it, period. In 1875 (around there abouts) Military minds started to think about how you could "strain the system" of the oppoesing army By wounding as many as possable rather than killing them outright. This would time up money time resources and men in the field and be demoralising. The soldier would still be neutralised and in most cases would be unfit to return to duty  anyway. But this thinking did'nt apply to bullets only to landmines, morter shells, grenades etc. at this time the rifle bullet was quite lethal, it was long and heavy and deformed easily on impact. But it was slow and had short range. Then some genius decided to wrap the thing in a silver-nickel jacket or a copper jacket. Now it had Greater range and higher velocity, and better accuracy, hence a better bullet. But it was dicovered that it killed a lot less people then the old school version. So a battle of ideas happened where some advocated the older design while some advocated the new FMJ design. The full metal jacket design won out in the end. One of the reasons why was the "theory" that more wounding potential would be better and also increase range and what not.
                          Now heres a story that illustrates the point. IN 1898 the south African colonists known as the Boers declared war on the English Empire. Initially the Boers did well despite the fact that they were just really militias. They were armed with the new Mauser rifle while the English still had single shot Martinis. The order came down that they were not to be captured or wounded but killed outright simply because they had no medical system to strain as they were not a proper army, so the word "dum-dum" bullet came into exsistance. The english took FMJ and exposed the nose turning it into soft point. That way  they had the velocity and accuracy of FMJ but the killing power of the old pure lead bullets.  They were quite effective. But what was considered standard practice only 20 years before (lead bullets) was now considered inhumane. And ther was an international outcry against the use of "dum-dum"s. Also most of the brass wanted the FMJ design to fight "proper armies" anyway. So the Hague convention outlawed the use of so called soft point or expanding bullets. America has stuck to that convention as have all other armies to this day. Then the 5.56 mm was born. At first the wounding from it fragmenting was quite unintentional but later figured to increase wounding. A lot of countries tried to say it went against the Hague convention to use a fragmenting bullet, but since it did not fit the wording of the treaty, people ignored that and still use the bullet. But to make a quick summary, yes the 5.56 as are all FMJ bullets meant to wound if possable rather than kill. But a 5.56 in sp or other expanding versions are meant to kill.

Quoted: + = T-stox everytime he reads these stupid posts. Military weapons are meant to wound IF POSSABLE but not always so. You have to look at the history of weapons and the philosophy of strategy in the late 19th century. Also read tha ammo oracles section by Dr fackler about the lethality of the AK round (which also covers all .30 FMJ as well). As early as the first man who ever chucked a stone men in organised combat have had medical units in them to attend to the wounded. The Romans hed em the English had'em, we have them Etc etc.         This nonsense that they did'nt is historical inaccuracy. In fact the word "hospital" comes from the Roman millitary model. But noone until 1875 thought about "wounding potential" you just had a lead ball bullet and you shot it, period. In 1875 (around there abouts) Military minds started to think about how you could "strain the system" of the oppoesing army By wounding as many as possable rather than killing them outright. This would time up money time resources and men in the field and be demoralising. The soldier would still be neutralised and in most cases would be unfit to return to duty  anyway.           But this thinking did'nt apply to bullets only to landmines, morter shells, grenades etc. at this time the rifle bullet was quite lethal, it was long and heavy and deformed easily on impact. But it was slow and had short range. Then some genius decided to wrap the thing in a silver-nickel jacket or a copper jacket. Now it had Greater range and higher velocity, and better accuracy, hence a better bullet. But it was dicovered that it killed a lot less people then the old school version. So a battle of ideas happened where some advocated the older design while some advocated the new FMJ design. The full metal jacket design won out in the end. One of the reasons why was the "theory" that more wounding potential would be better and also increase range and what not.            Now heres a story that illustrates the point. IN 1898 the south African colonists known as the Boers declared war on the English Empire. Initially the Boers did well despite the fact that they were just really militias. They were armed with the new Mauser rifle while the English still had single shot Martinis. The order came down that they were not to be captured or wounded but killed outright simply because they had no medical system to strain as they were not a proper army, so the word "dum-dum" bullet came into exsistance. The english took FMJ and exposed the nose turning it into soft point. That way you the velocity and accuracy of FMJ but the killing power of the old pure lead bullets.  They were quite effective.      But what was considered standard practice only 20 years before (lead bullets) was now considered inhumane. And ther was an international outcry against the use of "dum-dum"s. Also most of the brass wanted the FMJ design to fight "proper armies" anyway. So the Hague convention outlawed the use of so called soft point or expanding bullets. America has stuck to that convention as have all other armies to this day. Then the 5.56 mm was born.       At first the wounding from it fragmenting was quite unintentional but later figured to increase wounding. A lot of countries tried to say it went against the Hague convention to use a fragmenting bullet, but since it did not fit the wording of the treaty, people ignored that and still use the bullet. But to make a quick summary, yes the 5.56 as are all FMJ bullets meant to wound if possable rather than kill. But a 5.56 in sp or other expanding versions are meant to kill.

Paragraphs are your friend!!!

hey you wanna be my editor?? i pay 1 cent a hour. IM me if you're interested.

Quoted: Quoted: Wrong! The weapons ARE DESIGNED TO KILL!!! The AMMUNITION IS DESIGNED TO WOUND!! Fireguy3 is designed to make moronic posts!

Thats a good one.

here is how to solve the situation.

fill a gym sock with .223 ammo. smack him in the face with it and ask him to repeat himself.

I am sorry I cannot remember the stuff I read 30+ years ago.
There was a Idea that a wounded soldier was more of a burden to opposing troops then a kill.
There were many articles published about the wounds produced by the "tumbling bullits" of the M16 and then the AK 74.
I have seen the BS of this first hand.
A .22LR is a much harder wound to handle.

Quoted: hey you wanna be my editor?? i pay 1 cent a hour. IM me if you're interested.

I'll be your TECHNICAL editor at that rate.

Originally, dum-dum referred to a new type of ammunition produced in the early 1890s at the Dum-dum arsenal near Calcutta in India.

So your Boer relevance is WRONG.  I worked 1.0 x 10^8 hours on that.  Now where is my million dollars, BEYOTCH!

When did everyone get the idea that the 223 was this awesome round that was somehow way more powerful and deadly than a 30-06 or 308?



The ar15 was orginally considered as a replacement for the M1 carbine.

The 223 is in use because it kicks way less and weighs less.  In general, more bullets = more hits.

The first time they tried the ar15 in combat in VN it blew a guys arm clean off and killed another guy by hitting him in the calf.  The newpapers reported that the round had a deadly "buzz saw" effect, and that was that.  The amazing miracle 223 round was born.

The FMJ 223 rounds do in fact swap ends and occassionally split in half at the cannelure when they enter human flesh.  The end swapping thing is a result of simple physics.  That's where the tumbling bullet BS comes from.

All of the above can be easily verified as fact.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quoted:


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quoted:


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quoted:
Don't forget the legendary "Tumbling" .223. Goes in your eye and comes out your butt. Funny how 5 30rnd mags 0f my bullets at 200 yrds tumble just perfect as to make tiny holes with no yawn.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------




ALL elongated bullets that are rifling stabilized WILL tumble upon traveling through a media with greater density than air. Normal expansive hunting bullets shift their CG forward upon expanding, limiting tumbling.

The tumbling rate is based on the length of the bullet or transverse moment of inertia. Very long bullets may not tumble when encountering a human target but shorter bullets like that in a US M855 round will.

Its all physics. To prevent yaw when shooting through water, a bullet would have to be spinning in the range of 6 turns per inch. Roughly 42 times faster than the standard M4/M16A2. But that is IMPOSSIBLE.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------




Nice post.

And on a related note, that yaw puts a lot of stress on the projectile and if the velocity is high enough the projectile will break apart.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Are any of you familiar with Winchester 45 grain "Varmit Load" that comes in the 20 round boxes?  the bullit appears as though the outer shell of brass has been pinched or crimped instead of a solid coating.  Available at most sporting good stores

I have a newer bought a Sabre for Talon Arms with a 16 inch barrel and I believe 1.6 twist on it (Don't quote me, I will double check the twist).  My question is, and spare me the smart assery as I am a young newbie, will that lighter grain weight cause it to "tumble?" I ask because I put the round in question into a 35 lbs +/- feral hoglet las night (my favorite size to smoke)  There was hardly any penetration and lots of surface damage.  So, I am wondering if it is because of the expansive nature of the round or if the bullet is unstable at lighter grain weights or both.  Impact was 85-100 yards off the muzzle (At night, best guess).  Would love to know what IMALEGEND and Keith_J think as they seem to be ballistically educated.  Does anyone else have any experience with these rounds?

Of course the M16 / 5.56 system is designed to wound.  It was designed to produce a wound that would incapacitate an opposing soldier, just like any other decent combat weapon before or since.  

Quoted: Military weapons are meant to wound IF POSSABLE but not always so.

A dead soldier can not shoot back.  Military weapons are designed to kill.    The Viet Cong were first on the receiving end of the M16.  The M16 was brought into service specifically for the jungle warfare at the time.  Viet Cong do not care about their wounded.  They will not send in 2 men to care for one.  Casualties are acceptable and expected.  If you send in a wall of men, some are bound to get through.    
Americans are weak in this sense and the Viet Cong knew it.  We get all woozie at the thought of our men dying and a wounded man laying out by himself without help.  We are the ones who will send in others to help.    The Viet Cong set toe popper and punji stick traps.  
Americans value life.  Americans fight for their fellow troups.   The Viet Cong in the past and the Muslims in modern day are fighting for something they see as greater than themselves and they feel that they are expendable.    The M16 is meant to kill.

Quoted: Quoted: Military weapons are meant to wound IF POSSABLE but not always so.   A dead soldier can not shoot back.  Military weapons are designed to kill.    The Viet Cong were first on the receiving end of the M16.  The M16 was brought into service specifically for the jungle warfare at the time.  Viet Cong do not care about their wounded.  They will not send in 2 men to care for one.  Casualties are acceptable and expected.  If you send in a wall of men, some are bound to get through.     Americans are weak in this sense and the Viet Cong knew it.  We get all woozie at the thought of our men dying and a wounded man laying out by himself without help.  We are the ones who will send in others to help.    The Viet Cong set toe popper and punji stick traps.   Americans value life.  Americans fight for their fellow troups.   The Viet Cong in the past and the Muslims in modern day are fighting for something they see as greater than themselves and they feel that they are expendable.    The M16 is meant to kill.

Good post.

A wounded man can probably still shoot and kill you. A dead man can't.

Quoted: Quoted: Military weapons are meant to wound IF POSSABLE but not always so.   A dead soldier can not shoot back.  Military weapons are designed to kill.    The Viet Cong were first on the receiving end of the M16.  The M16 was brought into service specifically for the jungle warfare at the time.  Viet Cong do not care about their wounded.  They will not send in 2 men to care for one.  Casualties are acceptable and expected.  If you send in a wall of men, some are bound to get through.     Americans are weak in this sense and the Viet Cong knew it.  We get all woozie at the thought of our men dying and a wounded man laying out by himself without help.  We are the ones who will send in others to help.    The Viet Cong set toe popper and punji stick traps.   Americans value life.  Americans fight for their fellow troups.   The Viet Cong in the past and the Muslims in modern day are fighting for something they see as greater than themselves and they feel that they are expendable.    The M16 is meant to kill.

Exactly.."Wound em all and let Allah(or Marx) administer band-aids" just doesnt have the same ring to it. And please tell if they are only to wound then why is R&D developing LESS LETHAL weapons? Ya know like "beanbag rounds, rubber bullets, the suntan and sound LL weapon".

Another source of info for those interested: 5.56 and 7.62 info

www.inetres.com/gp/military/infantry/rifle/556mm_ammo.html

www.inetres.com/gp/military/infantry/rifle/762mm_ammo.html

This could work out well for both of you.  You can teach him about the M16, and he can teach you about integrity.

Quoted: I'm having a hard time convincing my cousin that everything that he hears on the history channel is not true... Could you all provide a source that I can print out and hand it to him? I'll be building his first AR-15 soon and he is extremely new to shooting...

Ok tell him a combat vet of three times in Iraq said that the 5.56 is made just to wound people. If you want a source tell him to read "BlackHawk down" I can also give him an email of a Marine who shoot a person in the head 3 times and he was still alive(Mind you he was still breathing but the was brain dead NOT A CLEAN KILL.)

If you want a killing for a man round try 7.62x51 or 308win

If the M16 is not designed to kill what is the point of less lethal rounds for other weapons.  If the M16 is designed to wound, there should be no reason for less lethal rounds for other weapons because the M16 is so ubiquitous.  

Quoted: Ok tell him a combat vet of three times in Iraq said that the 5.56 is made just to wound people. If you want a source tell him to read "BlackHawk down" I can also give him an email of a Marine who shoot a person in the head 3 times and he was still alive(Mind you he was still breathing but the was brain dead NOT A CLEAN KILL.) If you want a killing for a man round try 7.62x51 or 308win

Blackhawk Down was in Somalia, not Iraq.....
There are stories of the VERY thin DRUGGED UP Somalis being hit multiple times with .308 and not going down right away either, or going down and getting back up.    Shot placement is important whether you are making .22 or .30 cal holes thru someone.       I have seen a cow shot in the head with a .357 magnum still breathing.   I have seen a deer shot in the head with a .30-06 still breathing.    
In Iraq, the .223 is killing.  

This thread is dumb.

It's a fucking rifle, people.

i had the same problem w/ an older USAF bet in one of my war classes...i respected the guy and he always gave out personal/life expierence stories and lessons, so i did not argue w/ him

5.56 was NOT designed to wound

while we are at it, might as well believe that we adopted the 5.56 so the USSR would change thier caliber to 5.45

Quoted: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ... Are any of you familiar with Winchester 45 grain "Varmit Load" that comes in the 20 round boxes?  the bullit appears as though the outer shell of brass has been pinched or crimped instead of a solid coating.  Available at most sporting good stores I have a newer bought a Sabre for Talon Arms with a 16 inch barrel and I believe 1.6 twist on it (Don't quote me, I will double check the twist).  My question is, and spare me the smart assery as I am a young newbie, will that lighter grain weight cause it to "tumble?" I ask because I put the round in question into a 35 lbs +/- feral hoglet las night (my favorite size to smoke)  There was hardly any penetration and lots of surface damage.  So, I am wondering if it is because of the expansive nature of the round or if the bullet is unstable at lighter grain weights or both.  Impact was 85-100 yards off the muzzle (At night, best guess).  Would love to know what IMALEGEND and Keith_J think as they seem to be ballistically educated.  Does anyone else have any experience with these rounds?

WWB 45 gr. HP.  Used MANY of these in my ARs, including a Pac Nor 1:6.5 (match barrel for 90 grain HP Match bullets).  That is about TWICE the rifling rate required for that bullet and the accuracy was still sub MOA.  

On game, they are downright explosive, doing at least 3400 FPS from the nominal 20" barrel.  If you hit that shoat under 100 yards distance, that bullet might penetrate about 4" at the most.  The wound would be near spherical, about the size of a softball.  Stability is not an issue due to the weak nature of the bullet.

Yes, these bullets expand very rapidly.  For a shoat, they are a bit too damaging unless you focus on head shots only.  But even then the little pig heads make excellent tamales.

I have loaded some 30 grain HPs in my AR.  From a 20" barrel, they do an honest 4000 FPS.  Since they are expansive HPs, they penetrate even less, about 3".

If 5.56 doesn't kill, WTF is John Murtha bitching about?  You know, those Marines who are supposedly killing all those innocent Iraqis?  Since when are the USMC using Garands in general issue?  Or M14s?  I sure haven't seen any other than special units.

Quoted: The first time they tried the ar15 in combat in VN it blew a guys arm clean off and killed another guy by hitting him in the calf.  The newpapers reported that the round had a deadly "buzz saw" effect, and that was that.  The amazing miracle 223 round was born. The FMJ 223 rounds do in fact swap ends and occassionally split in half at the cannelure when they enter human flesh.  The end swapping thing is a result of simple physics.  That's where the tumbling bullet BS comes from. All of the above can be easily verified as fact.

From what I remember reading about the mystical "Tumbling" bullet, the story goes something like this:
Early AR-15 designs were made with barrels with 1:14 and later 1:12 twist rates.
These riflings were not fast enough to stabilize the round in flight; thus the round would "wobble" along the flight path (not necessarily cartwheel)....on paper targets, this would produce the keyhole pattern.
Due to this imperfect linear flight path, the bullet was already in a destabilizing mode. So when it hit the target (enemy body appendage) , the bullet violently fragmented at a much shorter distance (0-6") rather than the 9-12" of penetration of today's 1:7 rifled barrels.
This caused the bullet's energy to be expended within the target, leading to some gruesome wound channels...rather than passing thru or only beginning to yaw near the exit point of the target.

Feel free to correct my above post as necessary.

Personally , I've never understood why we HAVE to limit the soldier to FMJ rounds , but can use all the cluster bombs, FAE's we want .
Imagine the "One shot, One Kill" ratio we'd have on doped-up skinnyMinnie Somali's or bedsheet-clad Jihadist's if the troops were issued 60gr V-Max's.

A military round has got to have penetration capability to and that is missing in the varmint rounds, they're only effective at soft targets.
You're gonna have a very hard time stopping a suicide car bomber with a 5.56 V-max round.

Quoted: Quoted: The first time they tried the ar15 in combat in VN it blew a guys arm clean off and killed another guy by hitting him in the calf.  The newpapers reported that the round had a deadly "buzz saw" effect, and that was that.  The amazing miracle 223 round was born. The FMJ 223 rounds do in fact swap ends and occassionally split in half at the cannelure when they enter human flesh.  The end swapping thing is a result of simple physics.  That's where the tumbling bullet BS comes from. All of the above can be easily verified as fact. From what I remember reading about the mystical "Tumbling" bullet, the story goes something like this: Early AR-15 designs were made with barrels with 1:14 and later 1:12 twist rates. These riflings were not fast enough to stabilize the round in flight; thus the round would "wobble" along the flight path (not necessarily cartwheel)....on paper targets, this would produce the keyhole pattern. Due to this imperfect linear flight path, the bullet was already in a destabilizing mode. So when it hit the target (enemy body appendage) , the bullet violently fragmented at a much shorter distance (0-6") rather than the 9-12" of penetration of today's 1:7 rifled barrels. This caused the bullet's energy to be expended within the target, leading to some gruesome wound channels...rather than passing thru or only beginning to yaw near the exit point of the target. Feel free to correct my above post as necessary. Personally , I've never understood why we HAVE to limit the soldier to FMJ rounds , but can use all the cluster bombs, FAE's we want . Imagine the "One shot, One Kill" ratio we'd have on doped-up skinnyMinnie Somali's or bedsheet-clad Jihadist's if the troops were issued 60gr V-Max's.

Pure hyperbole.  The 1:14 twist rate changed to 1:12 after artic testing showed instability.  Instability in AIR because of the increased density at the sub-zero temperatures.

The M855 bullet (SS109) was designed to provide better penetration at extended range from construction and ballistics.  Its comparison tracer round, the M856, required the 1:7 twist because to make the tracer give a dim trace to 200 meters with a bright trace past 800 meters, it had to be over an inch long.  The M855 bullet requires only a 1:9 twist rate.  Regardless of the 1:7 twist rate of the A2/M4 etc, the M855 WILL TUMBLE IN AN ENEMY BODY.

There is NO WAY to make a bullet stable when traveling through animate targets with densities much greater than air.  NO WAY to spin a bullet about 6 turns PER INCH.  

The only reason M855 and M193 bullets tumble IN a body is due to their relatively short length and resultant low overturning moment of inertia.  ALL FMJ bullets WILL yaw if given enough depth of penetration.  And some FMJ bullets WILL fragment with such yawing.  Earlier bullets like the flat-based M2 (.30 caliber 1906 150 grain FMJ) would completely penetrate an enemy long before any appreciable yawing had occurred.

Quoted: Quoted: The first time they tried the ar15 in combat in VN it blew a guys arm clean off and killed another guy by hitting him in the calf.  The newpapers reported that the round had a deadly "buzz saw" effect, and that was that.  The amazing miracle 223 round was born. The FMJ 223 rounds do in fact swap ends and occassionally split in half at the cannelure when they enter human flesh.  The end swapping thing is a result of simple physics.  That's where the tumbling bullet BS comes from. All of the above can be easily verified as fact. From what I remember reading about the mystical "Tumbling" bullet, the story goes something like this: Early AR-15 designs were made with barrels with 1:14 and later 1:12 twist rates. These riflings were not fast enough to stabilize the round in flight; thus the round would "wobble" along the flight path (not necessarily cartwheel)....on paper targets, this would produce the keyhole pattern. Due to this imperfect linear flight path, the bullet was already in a destabilizing mode. So when it hit the target (enemy body appendage) , the bullet violently fragmented at a much shorter distance (0-6") rather than the 9-12" of penetration of today's 1:7 rifled barrels. This caused the bullet's energy to be expended within the target, leading to some gruesome wound channels...rather than passing thru or only beginning to yaw near the exit point of the target. Feel free to correct my above post as necessary. Personally , I've never understood why we HAVE to limit the soldier to FMJ rounds , but can use all the cluster bombs, FAE's we want . Imagine the "One shot, One Kill" ratio we'd have on doped-up skinnyMinnie Somali's or bedsheet-clad Jihadist's if the troops were issued 60gr V-Max's.

That was the "Story"...Here's the Answer: (From Ammo-Oracle)
In summary, and to take the most extreme case, a M193 projectile spinning at 350,000 rpm (from a 1:7" rifle) is going to upset in flesh (yaw) exactly as fast as one spinning at 150,000 rpm (from a 1:14" rifle). Claiming that twist rate has any impact on the speed of yaw and therefore terminal performance is just not in line with the laws of physics.

I still think that ballistic tips could have a role in our arsenal.

Quoted: Quoted: I'm having a hard time convincing my cousin that everything that he hears on the history channel is not true... Could you all provide a source that I can print out and hand it to him? I'll be building his first AR-15 soon and he is extremely new to shooting... Ok tell him a combat vet of three times in Iraq said that the 5.56 is made just to wound people. If you want a source tell him to read "BlackHawk down" I can also give him an email of a Marine who shoot a person in the head 3 times and he was still alive(Mind you he was still breathing but the was brain dead NOT A CLEAN KILL.) If you want a killing for a man round try 7.62x51 or 308win

Since we're adding stories ....

There's a guy in my unit who deployed as a forward observer for a MEDEVAC unit.  He personally witnessed a girl (probably 9-12 years old) whose head had been canoed by a .50 cal round.  She was walking.  Not talking, but walking around, still alive.  Head shot with a .50 cal.

So, to extend your assumption, nothing smaller than a .50 cal is sufficient, and your wimpy .308s are included in that.  You've got to go with 20mm or something, I guess, 'cause not even head-shots with .50 cals will kill.


Or, to make it intelligible for thinking individuals, there will be freak situations where normally lethal rounds are ineffective, but quite typically even a .223rem is sufficiently lethal.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I'm having a hard time convincing my cousin that everything that he hears on the history channel is not true... Could you all provide a source that I can print out and hand it to him? I'll be building his first AR-15 soon and he is extremely new to shooting... Ok tell him a combat vet of three times in Iraq said that the 5.56 is made just to wound people. If you want a source tell him to read "BlackHawk down" I can also give him an email of a Marine who shoot a person in the head 3 times and he was still alive(Mind you he was still breathing but the was brain dead NOT A CLEAN KILL.) If you want a killing for a man round try 7.62x51 or 308win Since we're adding stories .... There's a guy in my unit who deployed as a forward observer for a MEDEVAC unit.  He personally witnessed a girl (probably 9-12 years old) whose head had been canoed by a .50 cal round.  She was walking.  Not talking, but walking around, still alive.  Head shot with a .50 cal. So, to extend your assumption, nothing smaller than a .50 cal is sufficient, and your wimpy .308s are included in that.  You've got to go with 20mm or something, I guess, 'cause not even head-shots with .50 cals will kill. Or, to make it intelligible for thinking individuals, there will be freak situations where normally lethal rounds are ineffective, but quite typically even a .223rem is sufficiently lethal.

How is that possible?

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I'm having a hard time convincing my cousin that everything that he hears on the history channel is not true... Could you all provide a source that I can print out and hand it to him? I'll be building his first AR-15 soon and he is extremely new to shooting... Ok tell him a combat vet of three times in Iraq said that the 5.56 is made just to wound people. If you want a source tell him to read "BlackHawk down" I can also give him an email of a Marine who shoot a person in the head 3 times and he was still alive(Mind you he was still breathing but the was brain dead NOT A CLEAN KILL.) If you want a killing for a man round try 7.62x51 or 308win Since we're adding stories .... There's a guy in my unit who deployed as a forward observer for a MEDEVAC unit.  He personally witnessed a girl (probably 9-12 years old) whose head had been canoed by a .50 cal round.  She was walking.  Not talking, but walking around, still alive.  Head shot with a .50 cal. So, to extend your assumption, nothing smaller than a .50 cal is sufficient, and your wimpy .308s are included in that.  You've got to go with 20mm or something, I guess, 'cause not even head-shots with .50 cals will kill. Or, to make it intelligible for thinking individuals, there will be freak situations where normally lethal rounds are ineffective, but quite typically even a .223rem is sufficiently lethal. How is that possible?

Yeah.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Send him to me and I'll slap him around until he realizes he's wrong. I get him next. Pass me the sign-up list when you're done, would ya?

Why am I starting to get a flashback to the movie Airplane , when everyone lines up to " CALM DOWN " the crazy lady ?

Quoted: How is that possible?

I believe it.  We stopped a car one time, a women took 3 rounds out of the 240G to the head.  3 7.62 rounds in her head, and she was still alive.  She wasnt looking too good, and was literally coughing up her own brains, but she survived long enough for us to medivac her.  Weird things happen.

Quoted: How is that possible?

By some miracle it didn't destroy the portion of her brain that controlled her physically standing and moving, and organs and stuff.  Kinda like a chicken with its head cut off, I suppose.

Now, she didn't live long, I understand, but she did survive for a bit. It's not like she's still a productive member of society.

Quoted: Quoted: How is that possible? By some miracle it didn't destroy the portion of her brain that controlled her physically standing and moving, and organs and stuff.  Kinda like a chicken with its head cut off, I suppose. Now, she didn't live long, I understand, but she did survive for a bit. It's not like she's still a productive member of society.

Damn .50 cal was too lethal...  Damn it.

Should have used the 5.56, she surely would have survived a head shot then,

I've said it before and I'll say it again.

ANYTHING that fires a projectile is potentially deadly.

Anything that fires a METAL BULLET IS DEADLY.  


This topic should have been gone a while ago...  We have now seen that the MOAB (Mother of all bullets) is not 100% 1 shot stop.  I guess that means the .50 cal was designed to wound.  Maybe we should dig up ol' JMB and ask him?