I just read the article posted on the front page of ARFCOM about the Milford Po-lice getting super-duper cuts like a hot knife through butter SIG Commando rifles.
Stepping up the stopping power

The bullshit in the article is incredable.
It's almost like the cops said" Hey reporter guy! Bend over for some "NO SHIT" info.
Are all reporters and cops that dumb?

Anyway, I couldn't resist the temptation to tell this guy why he's a hack reporter. Does anybody else ever write to these reporters that put their contact info in the paper?


Mr. Marshall,

You article appearing  in the Friday, November 21, 2003 edition of the Milford Daily News titled  “Stepping up the stopping power” ( <http://www.milforddailynews.com/news/local_regional/milf_rifles11212003.htm> )
is a good example of bad journalism. The article is rife with inaccuracies and outright misinformation.  Apparently you felt no professional responsibility to verify claims made by the various sources quoted in your article and they filled you up with myths, fables and a generous amount of B.S.

To assist you in your future forays into the world of firearms, here are some of the things in your article that just don’t pass muster.

First of all, the rifle in the article is properly known as the SIG COMMANDO, SG 552-2 P.  It is manufactured by SIGARMS, not SIG Sauer as you stated in your article. How do I know all that? I looked at their website.

“Ed Pomponio, a former U.S. Marine, is an 18-year veteran of the Milford Police Department. Known among officers as one of the better shooters, he has been trained by both military and paramilitary organizations.”   Really? What paramilitary organizations are operating in this country? Given the definition of paramilitary, it’s quite a stretch to believe police training is designed “to operate in place of or assist regular army troops.” If you are talking about FBI, CIA, DEA, Etc., I don’t believe they consider themselves “paramilitary organizations”

par·a·mil·i·tar·y   adj. Of, relating to, or being a group of civilians organized in a military fashion, especially to operate in place of or assist regular army troops.

You never did identify to your readers what super-duper cartridge the rifle in chambered in that cuts through body armor “like a hot knife through butter”. If you had, would you have told them almost all high velocity center fire rifle cartridges are capable of that feat? Would you have told them that it was the .223 Remington cartridge  (also known in the military as the 5.56mm NATO)? Would you have told them that the .223 Remington cartridge is considered too low powered to be legally used for deer hunting in most states, and considered to be a varmint cartridge suitable for shooting animals the size of coyotes and smaller?  It’s the same cartridge that has been used by our armed forces for the past 40 years in the M-16 rifle.

Sgt. John Sanchioni’s claim  that "It'll go 3 miles and still kill somebody." is patently false. According to information on the Justice Technology Information Network’s website  ( <http://www.nlectc.org/nlectcrm/maxrange.html> ) of the  National Institute of Justice,  the research and development agency of the U.S. Department of Justice, the .223 Remington cartridge traveling at 3240 FPS is only capable of a maximum range of  3875 yards. That is 2.2 miles, not 3 miles, and at a velocity 840 FPS (about  25%) faster than that of the SIG 552 rifle in your article. The difference in velocity in this case is a function of barrel length.

The maximum “effective” range of the 223 Remington cartridge is considered to be about 300 yards when fired from a rifle with a 20” barrel.  The SIGARMS COMMANDO has a considerably shorter barrel length of  8.9”, and I would surmise that its ability to accurately engage targets beyond 100 yards to be nil.

You said  “A bullet fired from the rifle travels 2,400 feet per second, and in contrast to a shotgun, does not spray.”   According to the SIG ARMS  website
(<http://www.sigarms.com/le-military/special-models.asp?product_id=154> )

“The SIG Commando 552-2 P features an ambidextrous safety lever; select fire (1-3-full);”  
Select fire weapons operating in the “Full” position are firing fully automatic with a rate of fire of several hundred rounds per minute. What is you definition of “does not spray” ?

You quoted Officer Ed Pomponio as saying  “As for the ammunition, Pomponio pointed out it is a tumbling round. Instead of piercing through a target, the bullet follows the path of what it hits. From a human standpoint it has the capability to hit a person in the shoulder and travel down the bone of the arm.”
For someone that was trained by the military and paramilitary organizations, he ought to know better than to regurgitate that old wives tale that has been disproved since the mid 1980’s. Where has Officer Pomponio been for the past 20 years? Training with the paramilitary experts? According to the Firearms Tactical Institute ( <http://www.firearmstactical.com/briefs13.htm> ),  research indicates the following:

“Exaggerated descriptions of the wounding effects of the M16 rifle bullet flourish as great works of urban lore. One fable describes a bullet that tumbles end-over-end in flight as soon as it exits the muzzle of the rifle. Another legend provides a dramatic account of an unstable, super-high velocity bullet that tumbles and chews its way through flesh like a buzz saw. Although there appears to be a tinge of half-truth behind these entertaining and awe-inspiring mythical tales, these stories do not represent an accurate description of the wounding characteristics of the M16 bullet.”

“At distances of 100 yards and under, when the bullet hits the body and yaws through 90 degrees, the stresses on the bullet cause the leading edge to flatten, extruding lead core out the open base, just before it breaks apart at the cannelure. The portion of the bullet forward of the cannelure, the nose, usually remains in one piece and retains about 60 percent of the bullet's original weight. The portion of the bullet aft of the cannelure, the base, violently disintegrates into multiple lead core and copper jacket fragments, which penetrate up to 3-inches radially outward from the wound track. The fragments perforate and weaken the surrounding tissues allowing the subsequent temporary cavity to forcibly stretch and rip open the multiple small wound tracks produced by the fragments. The resulting wound is similar to one produced by a commercial expanding bullet used for varmint hunting, however the maximum tissue damage produced by the military bullet is located at a greater penetration depth.
(The increased wounding effects produced by bullet fragmentation were not well understood until the mid-1980’s. Therefore the wounding effects of the original M16 rifle bullet were not an intentional U.S. military design characteristic.)”
Please note the footnotes for the sources of information contained on the web page.
And finally,  just what the heck are “rifle glasses”? Do I need different glasses when shooting handguns and shotguns?

[lol] Heh. Way to rub salt in the wound. Good job, [b]Rip_Roarin_Wacko[/b].

Been awhile since I've read the Laws of Armed Conflict, but I seem to recall something about shooting to wound.

Eddie

Arent certain branches of the CIA considered to be 'para-military'?

In the military a wounded enemy is just about as good as a dead one. (I would prefer dead enemies) In Law Enforcement you do in fact shoot to stop the bad guy from doing whatever he is doing that causes you to shoot him. Law Enforcement is also trained to shoot "Center Mass" which generally equals Heart/Lung, so the likelyhood that the bad guy will die is great. You still shoot to stop not kill they will likely die however if you put your rounds where you should.  

Let's see now..... FMJ ammo is dictated by the [s]Geneva[/s]Hague Convention because soft point bullets cause too tramatic wounds.
Po-lice on the other hand use hollow point ammo because it knocks BG's on their ass and they don't get up( hopefully). And why did the Po-lice abandon the 38 spl for the 357 mag, then the 9mm in favor of the .40 S&W. Oh yeah, because they shoot to stop, not to kill. LOL

Hague, dammit, its the Hague Convention. [:D]

Dammit! Now I'll have to be news paper reporter as my pentence. [BD][BD][BD]

[b]And this just in....A thought provoking response from the journalist.[/b]



[b]So I sent this to him. It's still way too long for a letter to the editor, but oh well....let's see how much of it makes it to print.[/b]

Mr. Marshall,

Thank you for your prompt reply. Here's a shortened version of the letter I
sent you. Please run this in the letters to the editor section of your
paper.  Or  better yet, run it as a guest editorial piece.

////////////////////////////////////////////////


   Mr. Marshall's article appearing  in the Friday, November 21, 2003
edition of the Milford Daily News titled  "Stepping up the stopping power"
is a good example of bad journalism. The article is rife with inaccuracies and outright misinformation.  Apparently Mr.Marshall felt no professional responsibility to verify claims made by the various sources quoted in his article, and they filled him with myths, fables and a generous amount of poppycock regarding the SIGARMS Commando rifle and firearm ballistics in general.

   Here are  some of the things in the article that just don't pass muster.

   The rifle in the article is manufactured by SIGARMS, not SIG Sauer as stated in the article.

     Ed Pomponio of the Milford Police department was credited with having been trained by both military and paramilitary organizations. Really? What paramilitary organizations are operating in this country? Given the definition of paramilitary,  it's quite a stretch to believe. Officer Pomponio goes on to say falsely claim " The military shoots to kill, police shoot to stop."  The Hague Convention specificly forbids military use of expanding softpoint or hollow point ammunition. That type of ammunition is commonly used by the police. Military ammo, on the other hand, is illegal for hunting precisely because it is not very effective at killing.

   Mr. Marshall never did identify what super-duper cartridge the rifle in chambered in that cuts through body armor "like a hot knife through butter". If he had, would he have told us almost all high velocity center fire rifle
cartridges are also capable of that feat? Would he have told  us that it was the .223 Remington cartridge  (also known in the military as the 5.56mm NATO)that is too low powered to be legally used for deer hunting in most states and considered a varmint cartridge suitable for hunting animals no larger than coyotes?

   Sgt. John Sanchioni's claim  that "It'll go 3 miles and still kill somebody." is patently false. According to the  the U.S. Department of
Justice, the .223 Remington cartridge traveling at 3240 FPS is capable of a maximum range of  3875 yards. That is 2.2 miles, not 3 miles, and at a velocity 840 FPS (about  25%) faster than that stated for the SIG Commando rifle in the article.

    The article states the SIG Commando rifle  ".... in contrast to a shotgun, does not spray."   According to the SIGARMS website the SIG Commando features select fire  (1-3-full);"    Select fire weapons operating in the "full" position are fully  automatic with a rate of fire of several hundred rounds per minute. What is Mr. Marshall's definition of
"spray"?

    Officer Ed Pomponio is quoted as saying  "As for the ammunition,Pomponio pointed out it is a tumbling round. Instead of piercing through a target,  the bullet follows the path of what it hits. From a human standpoint it has  the capability to hit a person in the shoulder and travel down the bone of the arm."   A person in Officer Pomponio's position ought to know better than to regurgitate an old wives tale that has been debunked since the mid 1980's. Research indicates when the .223 bullet hits the body it yaws through 90 degrees and fragments at the cannalure.  The portion of the bullet aft of the cannelure violently disintegrates into multiple leadcore and copper jacket fragments.

    And finally,  just what the heck are "rifle glasses"? Do I need different glasses when shooting handguns and shotguns?

   I have provided Mr. Marshall valid supporting references for all the data I presented above. Undoubtedly, he didn't ask any of the highly trained police officers quoted in his article "Oh yeah? Sez who?" when they gave him their "expert" opinions.

   I question the qualifications and motives of  reporters and editors that print articles without any research as to the veracity of the content. I also question how the interviewed police officers can be trusted with machine guns when they are so misinformed about the realities of firearms and their characteristics. If they are to be trusted to wield the power of life and death over the citizery, there is no room for their being
misinformed and believing in fairy tales.

Sincerely,
XXXX XXXXX
X00 XXX St
XXXXXX, AZ 8XXXXX
Home: XXX-XXX-XXXX
Work: XXX-XXX-XXXX

Lets see the question is why do idiots write like idiots,Got me!

Bob  [:D]