Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Straw Man

(6,782 posts)
73. "Adapted" or "adopted"?
Sun Aug 7, 2016, 12:30 PM
Aug 2016
Why has NATO and our own Pentagon adapted the 5.56

as the ammunition of choice if it is so puny?

Because the "assault rifle" concept requires a high rate of fire in order to provide battlefield suppression, meaning that it is important for each soldier to be able to carry a large volume of ammunition and fire it controllably in full-auto. High-powered rifle rounds like the .30-06 and .308 fail on both counts That's why the M14 -- essentially a full-auto Garand -- was so quickly and unceremoniously dumped by the military and replaced with the .223 of the M16.

The "assault rifle" is meant to be a compromise between a high-powered battle rifle and a pistol-caliber submachine gun. Realize that fact and you might begin to understand.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Let's call them what they are: [View all] The Green Manalishi Jul 2016 OP
I can appreciate your thoughts on these matters. But this is a culture war... Eleanors38 Jul 2016 #1
Ditto... virginia mountainman Jul 2016 #2
My pony real point is that language should serve to clarify The Green Manalishi Jul 2016 #3
I agree, and "assault weapons" was purposefully used to obfuscate. Eleanors38 Jul 2016 #10
Thanx for the graphics. Eleanors38 Jul 2016 #9
the big idea discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 #4
But mass killing is already as illegal as anything could be. The Green Manalishi Jul 2016 #5
basic answers discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 #6
I'm jonseing for a Henry Big Boy in ..357 The Green Manalishi Jul 2016 #7
Sounds pretty nice discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 #8
I prefer to think of it as a firearm who appreciates craftsmanship and gejohnston Jul 2016 #13
How many rounds does the .357 magazine hold? Maybe 1 more with .38 sp? aikoaiko Aug 2016 #15
Usually 1 fewer .357 than .38 Spl, at least in my Uberti lever action '92 DonP Aug 2016 #16
So, 103 people shot in an Orlando night club with an AR 15 derivative. flamin lib Jul 2016 #11
Wrong again. Straw Man Jul 2016 #12
Not to mention the military went away from full auto Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #14
Nope. The Green Manalishi Aug 2016 #18
Really? God that's pathetic. How far will gun people go to defend their fetish. flamin lib Aug 2016 #19
I agree discntnt_irny_srcsm Aug 2016 #21
Facts, please. Straw Man Aug 2016 #25
10 rounds? Didn't you claim to have more knowledge about guns... Marengo Aug 2016 #30
See 24. nt flamin lib Aug 2016 #36
If you are talking about cyclic rate, you're not talking about an AR. benEzra Aug 2016 #35
You are wrong, I've done it flamin lib Aug 2016 #37
Even bump-firing, an AR-15 can't touch the cyclic rate of an M16 benEzra Aug 2016 #42
No. You have not done it. Straw Man Aug 2016 #55
This message was self-deleted by its author pablo_marmol Aug 2016 #61
Pardon my intrusion discntnt_irny_srcsm Aug 2016 #56
Jerry Miculek, a professional athlete widely regarded as the fastest shooter in the world, benEzra Aug 2016 #76
Now, wanna' call me a liar? Puha Ekapi Aug 2016 #75
This message was self-deleted by its author pablo_marmol Aug 2016 #59
Why do you considdr the M1 as "the last trench gun"? Marengo Aug 2016 #87
Trench warfare was a thing of the past by the time the M1 was developed (late 1930's) friendly_iconoclast Aug 2016 #94
That's what I was wondering. By the time the M1 was adopted, the Army was concentrating... Marengo Aug 2016 #95
"trench gun": discntnt_irny_srcsm Aug 2016 #96
I've only seen the term used to describe combat shotguns. I'd like to understand the context... Marengo Aug 2016 #97
AFAIK "trench gun" never refers to a rifle discntnt_irny_srcsm Aug 2016 #98
This message was self-deleted by its author jmg257 Aug 2016 #20
ballistic damage from .30-06 in CQ... discntnt_irny_srcsm Aug 2016 #22
Yeah, 8 vs 10 rounds per clip. Was mixing Enfield with Garand. Thanks for the correction. nt flamin lib Aug 2016 #24
The M1 is clip fed, whereas the Enfield is magazine fed. There really isn't any excuse... Marengo Aug 2016 #31
"I daresay that I know more about guns...than most gun nuts here on DU" friendly_iconoclast Aug 2016 #34
I daresay that is a dubious claim. Marengo Aug 2016 #47
This message was self-deleted by its author pablo_marmol Aug 2016 #60
Only for bonefide gun nutz. The clip on the M1 is a box loaded outside the rifle. flamin lib Aug 2016 #38
No, this is basic technical terminology which someone of your supposed expertise... Marengo Aug 2016 #46
No, Marengo, this deflection over minutia and an attempt to ad honemiem flamin lib Aug 2016 #48
What "losing argument"? Correcting your erroneous terminology? It's extremely difficult for me... Marengo Aug 2016 #49
You're still deflecting and attacking me instead of addressing the basic premise. nt flamin lib Aug 2016 #65
I'm addressing your self professed status as someone highly knowledgeable of firearms... Marengo Aug 2016 #85
"If YOU don't understand the internal mechanisms of assault weapons I suggest that you are... friendly_iconoclast Aug 2016 #67
Why do you refer to the M1 as a trench gun? Marengo Aug 2016 #70
No shit. Puha Ekapi Aug 2016 #78
In that particular venue, the Orlando shooter could have shot 103 people with a full-sized pistol, benEzra Aug 2016 #79
Still wondering why you refer to the M1 as a "trench gun"? Marengo Aug 2016 #140
I wouldn't be holding your breathe discntnt_irny_srcsm Aug 2016 #141
You're likely right, but I am genuinely curious having owned several M1s over the years... Marengo Aug 2016 #142
Because it's an "Evil Scary Gun Term", and "assault weapon" was already taken.... benEzra Aug 2016 #143
If only the control types could... discntnt_irny_srcsm Aug 2016 #144
I beg to differ. Straw Man Aug 2016 #50
I really want to say thanks for this OP... discntnt_irny_srcsm Aug 2016 #17
You're welcome The Green Manalishi Aug 2016 #23
recoil is the rub jimmy the one Aug 2016 #26
addendum on recoil jimmy the one Aug 2016 #27
Dihydrogen monoxide hand-waving... benEzra Aug 2016 #32
Double baloney on you and throw in a nany nany booboo too. flamin lib Aug 2016 #39
No, the MA AG didn't touch function at all. benEzra Aug 2016 #45
Eh? Straw Man Aug 2016 #51
Interesting. A good step in making conversation more concrete... The Green Manalishi Aug 2016 #88
For me that would mean flamin lib Aug 2016 #90
Which not even Canada, continental Europe, or the UK bans. benEzra Aug 2016 #138
addendum 2 jimmy the one Aug 2016 #28
A very intelligent post (well, series of them) The Green Manalishi Aug 2016 #29
155gr .30-06 is still trading velocity for long range and penetration. Try 110gr. benEzra Aug 2016 #33
Worked okay in Sandy Hook, Dallas, San Bernadino and on and on and on. nt flamin lib Aug 2016 #41
6mm Remington "worked OK" (in your words) at U Texas. 9mm "worked OK" (again your words) at VT. benEzra Aug 2016 #43
Why has NATO and our own Pentagon adapted the 5.56 flamin lib Aug 2016 #71
Just a guess discntnt_irny_srcsm Aug 2016 #72
"Adapted" or "adopted"? Straw Man Aug 2016 #73
Because they were spec'ing it for use in automatic weapons. benEzra Aug 2016 #74
I have... Puha Ekapi Aug 2016 #93
Mainly weight Duckhunter935 Aug 2016 #77
Weight is a big issue now, but that was less of an criterion before body armor was general-issue. benEzra Aug 2016 #81
Thanks Duckhunter935 Aug 2016 #82
And who says ... Straw Man Aug 2016 #53
Now that we have finished the big dick contest of who knows how much flamin lib Aug 2016 #40
For short range, how about a Garand scaled down for a less powerful cartridge. benEzra Aug 2016 #44
Address the fucking question. Stop with the red herring and deflection. nt flamin lib Aug 2016 #66
The red herrings and deflection in this thread are not coming from your interlocutors: friendly_iconoclast Aug 2016 #68
My, my. Straw Man Aug 2016 #52
Everyone has them. beevul Aug 2016 #99
The type of gun is not the problem... Sancho Aug 2016 #54
I have many questions for you discntnt_irny_srcsm Aug 2016 #57
Because it's a waste of time to "define" the type of guns... Sancho Aug 2016 #62
More of my many questions discntnt_irny_srcsm Aug 2016 #63
I have been very careful to suggest that nothing is 100% foolproof... Sancho Aug 2016 #64
More discntnt_irny_srcsm Aug 2016 #69
License a right? beevul Aug 2016 #100
Nothing unconstitutional...carry permits are legal. Sancho Aug 2016 #101
"At a time of increasing gun violence in America" Gun crime has decreased markedly in the US friendly_iconoclast Aug 2016 #106
Nothing to do with crime...gun VIOLENCE... Sancho Aug 2016 #107
How can gun violence not be a crime, unless one counts paper targets, clay pigeons... friendly_iconoclast Aug 2016 #108
Many examples...here's one.... Sancho Aug 2016 #109
The *number of media accounts* is on the rise, not the rate. That is what is declining. friendly_iconoclast Aug 2016 #111
that has been dropping too. gejohnston Aug 2016 #112
I would like to address this but... discntnt_irny_srcsm Aug 2016 #110
You were talking about a license to own, not a license to carry. Big difference. beevul Aug 2016 #113
Nope...I never mentioned a license to own.... Sancho Aug 2016 #114
Possession and use is an extension of ownership. beevul Aug 2016 #116
The book is by a legal scholar...here's some more...there are many cases...it's legal. Sancho Aug 2016 #117
So what? beevul Aug 2016 #118
You make my point... Sancho Aug 2016 #119
Not so much. beevul Aug 2016 #120
Again, you make my point... Sancho Aug 2016 #121
No, I really don't. beevul Aug 2016 #123
So disagree with carry permits? Sancho Aug 2016 #124
Not desiring prior restraint on an enumerated right =/= "(a) desire to allow dangerous people... friendly_iconoclast Aug 2016 #126
Carry permits are prior restraint... Sancho Aug 2016 #128
I have no problem with carry permits so long as they are given on an objective basis... friendly_iconoclast Aug 2016 #130
A license is a version of a carry permit... Sancho Aug 2016 #131
Your licensing proposal is flawed, IMO, because of the idea "you can have one IF... friendly_iconoclast Aug 2016 #134
Newsflash... beevul Aug 2016 #135
Red herring. beevul Aug 2016 #133
How would you get the gun control lobby to sign up to that, or be constrained by it? benEzra Aug 2016 #137
Acknowledging your rudeness but asserting a basic right discntnt_irny_srcsm Aug 2016 #122
This message was self-deleted by its author pablo_marmol Aug 2016 #58
The big question, does it have the ability to kill a lot of people?????? Motley13 Aug 2016 #80
All civilian repeating firearms have the ability to kill a lot of people if misused. benEzra Aug 2016 #83
There should be no civilian repeating firearms mwrguy Aug 2016 #84
Then don't own any. benEzra Aug 2016 #86
Do you expect anyone to take that seriously? Straw Man Aug 2016 #89
And with one sentence........ pablo_marmol Aug 2016 #91
There should be no repeating... discntnt_irny_srcsm Aug 2016 #92
And these "violent idiots", as you term them: guillaumeb Aug 2016 #102
Hunting? Straw Man Aug 2016 #103
Hunting and self defense are the prime reasons that I have seen cited guillaumeb Aug 2016 #104
True but irrelevant. Straw Man Aug 2016 #105
Then maybe... beevul Aug 2016 #115
Responding tp your signature line rather than your post: guillaumeb Aug 2016 #125
Although major cities have had plenty of success identifying the small percent responsible jmg257 Aug 2016 #127
I added a bit to your response. guillaumeb Aug 2016 #129
I thought there were like 8-10,000 gun homicides a year? jmg257 Aug 2016 #132
Around 75%-90% of murderers have prior arrest records, benEzra Aug 2016 #139
Imagine that. N/T beevul Aug 2016 #136
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Gun Control & RKBA»Let's call them what they...»Reply #73