Quote:
Originally posted by Greenhat
There have been failures to stop from the 7.62mm NATO round, the old .30-06, and even the .50 BMG.
|
Not really what I'm getting at. Knockdown is always a factor, but I'm with NDD on this point: yeah, there's a difference, but the first, second, and third factor is shot placement, shot placement, and shot placement, and then and only then knockdown. It doesn't matter how powerful the rifle you're shooting if you can't hit what you're aiming at.
I'm just advocating the point expressed to me by several friends coming back from OIF... that being, the desire for a rifle that can (accurately) cover more ground, and penetrate a bit more. I'm not a party to the Hackworth-type group bitching about the 5.56 as a 'mouse gun'... it's more than sufficient to put someone down, and keep him there. What I'm worried about is making sure our boys have what's needed to deliver sufficient foot-pounds past, say, 200m, accurately. That's where I'm hearing the most bitching, in RL and on this board, about the M4.
--Dan
Threaded Mode
