User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 9/3/2004 3:00:17 PM EDT
[#1]
I wouldn't either, instinctivly.  But if I was proving a point that I could not be killed by either, I may be willing to if I was so inclined to prove the point.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/3/2004 3:07:05 PM EDT
[#2]
For the same reason that he doesn't like anything else that he did not use in his prime. Col. Cooper is a man of his time and doesn't trust anything that wasn't popular in use when he himself was learning the craft.
I repsect his opinions on societal issues and his weapon techniques were revolutionary in there time. His opinions of weapon systems, calibers, and ammuntion are, however, about 40 years outdated. His theory that the M1 Garand is better suited to modern warfare than the M16/M4 is absurd in the extreme. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/3/2004 3:08:16 PM EDT
[#3]
When G&A did there thing on 45s a while back they had his BIO. It says he was on ships company (meaning no close combat) and in the 1950s in Quantico, it does specifically say though he did "Covert work" |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 9/3/2004 3:13:02 PM EDT
[#4]
I'm pretty sure at this point that everyone realizes you can kill with 5.56. The issue is the rounds ability to rapidly incapacitate. Most people here realize it is better in this respect than, say, 7.62x39, but a lot of people of Cooper's generation don't know that. The interesting thing is that, back in the 60s and 70s high velocity was the hot thing with many hip shooters. Cooper and others were more conservative, and they preferred wider and deeper wound channels and didn't care for velocity or energy as an asnwer in and of itself. Our modern ideas have basically been proving Cooper and his fellow conservatives correct. But they missed some things, like the value of fragmenting bullets, which can make small bullets into large wound channels. So while Cooper may not be on top of things now, his basic ideas in many ways remain valid. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/3/2004 3:15:18 PM EDT
[#5]
No, Lumpy's right. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/3/2004 3:20:15 PM EDT
[#6]
They previously did a more through bio on him. The previous bio mentioned his shooting of the two Japanese. Cooper also mentioned all three of his personal shootings in at least one of his books, but didn't credit them to himself (he indicated that they occured to a Marine, but not specifically to him). A G&A bio also mentioned the same incidents, and siad that Cooper was the Marine. Back in the 80s in Soldier of Fortune, Cooper mentioned that someone wrote and asked which direction someone falls when they are shot--towards you or away. He replied "of the last three men I shot, two fell one way and one the other". Of course, he's only shot three men, but his reply might lead you to think otherwise. Charles Askins, on the other hand, bragged about killing men. He claimed something like 17. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/3/2004 3:25:14 PM EDT
[#7]
With age comes wisdom. 
|
||
|
|
|
Posted: 9/3/2004 3:28:55 PM EDT
[#8]
tagged
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/3/2004 3:31:45 PM EDT
[#9]
Don
I think you and I have discussed this before. I may be the only one, but I am bit skeptical. When ever I hear "covert" and "secret missions" in someone's bio I wonder. Do any of his books mention units he was in? I know that in the one Bio I read it named the cruiser he was on. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/3/2004 3:38:41 PM EDT
[#10]
This would have been about the same time period the Cooper was working up what would be the 9X23, correct? As I recall, he was not satisfied with the velocity of the hotrod 38Sups of the day and using some ideas from the 9mm Mauser, Karamojo and MMC chopped down a .223 case to give us the "Super Cooper" 9mm pistol cartridge with 2000 FPS velocity -- 1973, right? Now this was pre IPSC rage, and granted the round was thought of a "high performance round"... but I would argue that Cooper had no regard for these early Squirt Guns? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/3/2004 3:42:43 PM EDT
[#11]
Who gives two shits what he thinks ? 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/3/2004 3:48:34 PM EDT
[#12]
A lot more, and better, people than those who give a shit about what YOU think. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 9/3/2004 3:51:21 PM EDT
[#13]
His books didn't even clearly indicate that he was the Marine doing the shooting in the three incidents. I think he mentioned the cruiser, as he did mention, IIRC, watching tanks in battle ashore from his vantage point on the deck. Cooper also clearly indicates that he didn't see much personal fighting during WW2. Keep in mind, I had a friend who was on some Navy support ship. He went ashore several times, armed with 1903s and 1911s for defense. He wasn't at all combat infantry, but he certainly was at risk of a personal fight with Japanese. I was of the understanding that Cooper was assigned to the cruiser, but went ashore on several circumstances. But I could be wrong. His books don't cover him in detail. One of his daughters wrote his biography. It should fully explain his WW2 experience, perhaps someoen here has read it . . . |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/3/2004 3:57:27 PM EDT
[#14]
Because he is nuts? You cannot kill a kudu with it?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/3/2004 4:39:47 PM EDT
[#15]
Calling Eugene Stoner's invention a "mousegun" and "poodle shooter" does not inspire much respect. He can be the best thing to happen to battle rifles in the twentieth century and still be a smart-assed shithead. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 9/3/2004 4:46:37 PM EDT
[#16]
 |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/3/2004 4:52:01 PM EDT
[#17]
So I guess you rode your horse to work today, right? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/3/2004 4:59:01 PM EDT
[#18]
I've always enjoyed Col. Coopers writings in the back of every G&A mag over the years. That is one of my favorite parts after the "how much is it worth?" section.
I was just wondering is all. Wasn't he the father of the 10mm round? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/3/2004 5:00:09 PM EDT
[#19]
So he'd fit right in here at Arfcom eh?  Excepting the Poodle Shooter stuff (typed as I have my poodle sitting on my lap), Cooper's right on in my book. |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 9/3/2004 5:03:05 PM EDT
[#20]
So ya' got a "poodle shooter", swap uppers and get a 6.8Rem.SPC or .300Fireball, then ya' can hunt deer with it instead of poodles,LOL
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/3/2004 5:06:24 PM EDT
[#21]
People around here like Fackler. Remember, Fackler good, Marshall & Sanow bad. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/3/2004 5:09:37 PM EDT
[#22]
Here's a better one-"Remember, aimed fire that hits a vital spot=good, spray and pray=bad." Doesn't matter what ya' shoot, ya' got to put the bullet where it'll do the most damage. Nuff said. 
|
||
|
|
|
Posted: 9/3/2004 5:15:08 PM EDT
[#23]
The argument that .223 is unsuited to modern warfare has some merit. Look at how the Iraqi army, equiped with 7.62x39 rifles, handed our ass to us. It was a total rout! Hell, I was watching the news, I heard what Baghdad Bob had to say!
 .223 is a great round, with all due respects to Mr.Cooper. (Seriously, no disrespect meant.) I would like to see more AR-10's put into the rifle squads, to give us a better mix, but if I had to pick one, the light, accurate, and deadly .223 would be it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/3/2004 5:17:30 PM EDT
[#24]
The good Colonel preaches what he knows for a fact works, plain and simple.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/3/2004 5:28:43 PM EDT
[#25]
To be fair, I don't think that it would make one whit of difference if our boys were using garands, 03's and Thompsons in Iraq...
The gun is the man. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/3/2004 5:47:12 PM EDT
[#26]
Definately top rate Arfcom material. The military turns out geniuses like the Col. in a mutlitude of fields, opinionated grumpy old farts that they are. |
||||
|
|
|
Posted: 9/3/2004 6:04:23 PM EDT
[#27]
Some of you are misreading and misinterpreting what he says. You guys need to read more before you hit the keyboard. LTC Cooper called the 5.56mm round “efficient” in a review in the early ‘70s. He also said he does not have much use for it “himself.” He classifies it as a “carbine” round, not a “rifle” round. Think now, think. What is he saying? In the ‘80s he set up the first “Practical Carbine” courses at Gunsite to run along with the “Practical Rifle” courses previously setup. He did for AR15 shooting what he did for the 1911. You owe it all to him. Read up on it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/3/2004 6:23:17 PM EDT
[#28]
No. That would probably be Whit Collins. He did 10mm experiments with Browning Hi Powers in the early ‘70s. But even he did not “invent” the final round that came to be know as the 10mm auto. The Bren Ten was an concept Cooper liked, offered his opinions on, but he had no financial interest in it. Two gunsmiths named Dornus and Dixon designed the pistol and the round for it, based on Coopers writings and ideas. Somewhere along the line the velocity of the 10mm skyrocketed, Chuck Taylor says WTF, but Cooper thinks why not, so it stayed high. The Bren Ten is a improved CZ-75, another pistol Cooper was fond of. I’m not sure if he liked it or the HK P7 more. |
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
