General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThe .223 A Very Deadly Bullet
This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by SunsetDreams (a host of the General Discussion forum).
I know many people know how deadly the .223 round from an M-16 is or AR 15. For those people who do not know. Here is what I discovered my first days in Vietnam.
My first day in the field our squad leader shot two VC in a brief skirmish. They were left behind to harass our company when we were searching an enemy camp. I came up on the scene less than a minute after these two enemy were hit. There was not a mark on them except a couple of very small holes similar to a 22 caliber rifle. Yet they were done for because the bullet traveled all over their body. Even if you were hit in an extremity it could very well amputate that part of the body.
There was good reason why you never locked and loaded any M-16 unless you were ready for immediate action. It was simply too dangerous a weapon to be even shot by accident.
The .223 was designed to have only just enough rotation that when it strikes an object it acts like a dud and has the stopping action of a 50 caliber weapon. What makes it so bad is that the bullet is meant to travel throughout the target it hits and then fragment. The lethality of this kind of weapon is so severe that it should not be on the streets of this country.
There is no earthly reason to have such an assault weapon available to the general public. It is a murder and killing weapon.
And forget what you see in the movies. High velocity assault weapons will go through two car doors and still do damage. The only place safe in a firefight is behind the engine block.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
SoutherDem
(2,307 posts)Let me get his right to hunt deer some people need 100 rounds of this ammo?
backscatter712
(26,357 posts)Deer hunters commonly use the 30-30, which is even bigger and more powerful than the .223.
If you're hunting, you want "stopping power" - to strip away the euphemism, that means a bullet with enough kinetic energy to sufficiently damage a deer's vital organs such as heart, lungs, etc. so as to ensure he doesn't run off, and drops to the ground and dies quickly.
ProgressiveProfessor
(22,144 posts)Originally developed by the Russians, it was used in the SKS and later the AK-47. Cheap and plentiful as well
SoutherDem
(2,307 posts)how many does it takes to do the job? Doesn't the mag that comes with 30-30s have 5 rounds, 6 if you chamber one? Don't some game laws limit the number you are allowed to use?
jmowreader
(53,190 posts)The ammo makers have worked hard to create .223 rounds that can humanely kill a whitetail out to around 200 yards. And the nice thing about the .223 is its low recoil makes it easy to build "brush guns"--small, lightweight guns that are easy to crawl through underbrush with.
Put the two together, and you'll see guys carrying .223s (usually Ruger Mini-14s; AR-15s are too fucking expensive) on deer hunts. Yes, you're more likely to see a .270, 7mm, .30-30 or .30-06 on the shoulder of a deer hunter because those rifles will also take elk, and most deer hunters in Idaho are also elk hunters. But .223s are not uncommon here.
bayareaboy
(793 posts)Antelope as well, so hunters of the from Idaho to over to Central Oregon and Nevada use them a lot.
I could never hunt antelope, they are too pretty, so my hunting used to be Mendocino Pigs. Lots of folks used 7mmx39, but I liked a .44 magnum.
backwoodsbob
(6,001 posts)it's underpowered.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)... and has plenty of power to kill a deer. I've killed several with a 30-30 myself.
IADEMO2004
(6,423 posts)cwydro
(51,308 posts)Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)
hobbit709
(41,694 posts)the only people I know that have high capacity magazines are the wannabe militia types-not hunters. There is a difference
enough
(13,759 posts)"No earthly reason..."??? Reason??? Our American right to have whatever weapon we want far surpasses anything as weak and irrelevant as reason.
k&r
Edweird
(8,570 posts)because it's so anemic. The DOD tried all kinds ways to compensate for the .223's issues. Drywall, twigs, car doors all cause the round to deflect and take unpredictable paths. It's accurate as hell, but that's about all it's got going for it. .30 caliber is where it's at.
ileus
(15,396 posts)Using proper HP or SP ammo.
I coyote and deer hunt with my current AR's, accurate and light. Some don't like hunting med sized game like deer with a little 223 but it's works good with proper shot placement and proper bullets.
panader0
(25,816 posts)I assume you hunt deer for meat, why do you hunt coyote? There are many here where I live. I think of them as smart
and beautiful dogs. They sing in the twilight when they gather and at dawn when they part. When there is good rain, and hence, many rabbits or small critters, the coyotes have fine coats. Do you eat them? Or toss them?
rl6214
(8,142 posts)sometimes it is a neccessary evil to hunt them.
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)Sometimes there's even a bounty.
panader0
(25,816 posts)I have had chickens here. In a coyote proof enclosure. I think they are cool and smart as hell.
Doremus
(7,273 posts)They whose businesses consume a large portion of this planet's resources, returning as little as they can get away with, all while suckling at the government's teat of subsidies.
Millions of greedy, mean coyotes will kill all the cattle if we don't get out there and shoot them! Hurry and shoot them! They are taking profit that belongs to the defenseless billionaire government-subsidized 'ranchers'!
Response to rl6214 (Reply #41)
HangOnKids This message was self-deleted by its author.
Response to HangOnKids (Reply #45)
Post removed
Response to Post removed (Reply #47)
rl6214 This message was self-deleted by its author.
rl6214
(8,142 posts)Response to rl6214 (Reply #62)
HangOnKids This message was self-deleted by its author.
sav99
(16 posts)I hear people described as this often. But what exactly constitutes a "gun nut"? Is it a just a person who owns a firearm? My grand mother has a deer rifle, but she hasn't shot it in 30 years. I hope she isn't a gun nut. I have more than one firearm, am I one of those gun nuts too? What about policemen? A Lot of those guys like guns and own several non duty weapons. I hope a cops are not gun nuts. I just didn't know if there is a particular number of weapons a person has to have or if it was more about attitude. If it's just about point of view on the subject, then a guy who owns no guns at all but still believes a certain way about ownership could be considered a gun nut. A non gun owning gun nut if you will.
Could someone give me a clear definition of the term so that I can know if I am one, and also know what one is describing when I hear the term applied to someone else. Thanks in advance.
LastDemocratInSC
(4,242 posts)A gun owner is a person like your grandmother - he/she owns an object that has utility in certain situations. A gun nut is one who owns a gun but includes guns in his/her self definition, just as there are sports nuts, car nuts and gardening nuts.
In any of these cases - guns, sports, cars or gardens - the person partially defines himself by the thing they have and how they use that thing. They evaluate others by how they have or use the same items.
I know several gun nuts. In every instance, my friends with guns are afraid of assaults of some kind, although none has a reason to think that might happen, and each is also ready to go on the offensive with a gun should a situation arise that would warrant that. Again, none of these friends can define what such a situation might be.
Defining oneself by one's possessions, and how one might use those possessions, is a slippery slope. Being define by external things is bad enough, but when those things can murder others, and one considers such use as a possibility, a line has been crossed.
Nobody has ever been killed by a gardening nut wielding a carrot.
sav99
(16 posts)You made a fine point about a possession or passion defining a person. That certainly isn't the best way to center ones identity. I disagree though, that I believe a person should be willing to defend themselves and/or loved ones should a situation arise that would warrant that. And that would include meeting lethal force with lethal force if the situation deemed it necessary. The victims at that movie theater had no reason to think that shooting might happen that night. But despite their expectations it did still happen.
I live in a nice sub urban middle class neighborhood. Break ins are not at all common here. Yet I still have a home security system. It wasn't real expensive to have installed, and only $45 a month. I have no reason to think that a break in might happen, but I do get peace of mind knowing that in the unlikely event that someone should try to break in, my alarm will sound and call the police.
Again, I do like your point about sport nuts and such defining themselves in terms of their particular passion or possessions. I have met people like that. Hippies come to mind. Unfortunately gangsters do the same thing. You made a good observation that I'll enjoy to ponder.
Doremus
(7,273 posts)From my food to my clothing to everything in between.
The thought of an animal being put to death on my account sickens me.
The knowledge that some people find it entertaining to kill, maim and torture animals both makes me ill and makes my blood boil.
Anything else you'd like to know?
uppityperson
(116,020 posts)but I guess since the coyotes are "wild" that makes my cat fine to be eaten. Or my dog to be attacked. Or the chickens I keep for eggs, and to turn garden scraps into manure are lesser creatures.
Doremus
(7,273 posts)Why would you expect a coyote to care more about your cats than you do?
That's rhetorical, no need to answer.
uppityperson
(116,020 posts)sit in the sun and hunt mice and rats outside. I notice you didn't mention my dog or my chickens. You don't care about them? Or were you hoping I wouldn't notice you pick and choosing what to reply to?
Doremus
(7,273 posts)i.e. not caged or otherwise confined to a protected area and can walk where they want to, they are indeed "roaming wild."
Like your cats, your dog should not be allowed to roam wild either. Knowing you have coyotes in the area I should think you would have enough concern for your pets to provide them with an appropriate safe environment. Your failure to provide such, and instead give lip service and concoct pleasant-sounding rationale, tells me all I need to know about your concern for your pets.
As for your chickens, farmers have been protecting their flocks for centuries with fences and other structures to deter wild animals. A simple google search will provide a plethora of information. Not as satisfying perhaps as a good pity party, but much more productive.
Response to Doremus (Reply #116)
uppityperson This message was self-deleted by its author.
uppityperson
(116,020 posts)to do that now. Bye.
tru
(237 posts)they decimate the songbird population and their own life expectancy is cut by about 80%.
Dogs should not be outside unattended.
As to the chickens, improve the enclosure.
uppityperson
(116,020 posts)improved ours several times.
Dog isn't unattended of course.
Our cats have died of varied cancers and kidney failure around 18 yrs old. They do eat mice and rats and occasionally do catch a bird, but mostly rodents. I know there are people who think keeping all cats inside in all situations is right, but it might be good in many situations, but not all. If I lived in town, or near a road, I'd consider it. But in our situation, being outside during the day works.
Doremus
(7,273 posts)"Watching a coyote blithly carry off another of my cats"
or
"Being outside during the day works" ?
uppityperson
(116,020 posts)Best wishes to you and yours.
Doremus
(7,273 posts)But, whatever.
I'll just take the opportunity to repeat that responsible cat owners do not allow their precious furbabies to roam outdoors. Not only because the odds are high they will become another animal's lunch, but because there are many other hazards awaiting them including traffic, pathogens and territorial disputes.
Our pets depend on us to do what's right for them. They deserve no less.
rl6214
(8,142 posts)I respect your point of view and would never try to change it, that's your choice. I hope you will be respectfull of anothers decision in how they run their lives.
I have no problems with people that own cattle, chickens, hunt for food, not for fun. I think trophy hunters are disgusting.
JoeyT
(6,785 posts)I spent most of yesterday fencing off fields with electric fence because the coyotes were eating watermelons.
Only a few got eaten so far, but once they learn where it is they'll be back. I've seen watermelon and corn fields that a pack had demolished overnight.
The fence is an attempt to get rid of them without killing them, and it may well not work.
Doremus
(7,273 posts)Most people would relish the opportunity to shoot at living targets. I give you a great deal of credit for trying to find an alternative.
Thank you.
JoeyT
(6,785 posts)I actually wired in line resistors in to cut the shock down. I'd much prefer scare them off with mild but temporary pain > real pain that's still temporary > having to kill one. I won't even kill them when I catch them in live traps, I just take them into our land further out in the woods that doesn't have houses around.
They're too necessary to the local ecosystem for me to shoot one unless it's absolutely necessary.
obamanut2012
(29,367 posts)And will also attack humans. I have been stalked by coyotes while running.
A wild dog is dangerous.
handmade34
(24,017 posts)much more common is domestic dogs gone wild (free-ranging /feral)... now they scare me
"...coyote attacks could be reduced or prevented through modification of human behavior
and public education designed to prevent the habituation of coyotes..."
http://urbancoyoteresearch.com/WhiteandGehrt_CoyoteAttacks.pdf
obamanut2012
(29,367 posts)And, I have been stalked by some while running, and I'm not the only one. I also have a friend in California whose husband was stalked by some on a remote trail very recently. He was basically saved by some mountain bikers he ran into. And, they are livestock's main predator.
Feral pigs, on the other hand, LOVE to attack humans.
handmade34
(24,017 posts)is what we call them in Vermont... they can be very nasty!
obamanut2012
(29,367 posts)proudgunowner
(2 posts)...So I spent a couple night's and shoot 5 of them. I don't have time in my busy day to build special fences to keep them out. If they are destroying my lively hood they will die.
tularetom
(23,664 posts)And every year we lost lambs to coyotes.
It was sort of an economical thing for us to have to control the coyotes.
Trunk Monkey
(950 posts)They attack pets and children frequently
belcffub
(595 posts)from the Ammo Oracle
The importance of rate of twist in wounding is a frequent subject of what we politely call "ballistic myth." Any projectile that has a "center of pressure" forward of the center of gravity will tend to tumble. You can illustrate this to yourself by trying to balance a pencil on your fingertip. Spin, given to the projectile by barrel twist, puts a projectile into a state described as "gyroscopically stable." The projectile might be momentarily disturbed but will return to nose-forward flight quickly. To describe how stable a given projectile is we use the gyroscopic stability factor (Sg). Generally you want a factor of 1.3 or greater for rifle rounds. 1.5-2.0 is a generally accepted value for 5.56 rounds.
For M193 the following variables apply:
axial moment of inertia (A) = 11.82 gm/mm2
transverse moment of inertia (B) = 77.45 gm/mm2
mass (m) = 3.53 grams
reference diameter (d) = 5.69 mm
Using the gyroscopic stability formula: Sg = A2 p2 / (4 B Ma) and assuming sea level we use an air density of 1.2250 kg/m^3 and discover that this this projectile will need on the order of 236,000 rpm for good stability (Sg > 1.3).
At 3200 fps M193 is typically spun up to more like 256,000 (1 : 9" twist) to 330,000 rpm (1 : 7"so that Sg approaches 1.9 or 2.0. 1 : 12" rifles will spin rounds at around 192,000 rpm and 1:14" rifles around 165,000 rpm. You can see why 1 : 14" rifles might have had trouble stabilizing M193 rounds.
Clever math types will see that density of the medium traversed (air in this case) has a dramatic effect on the spin required to maintain the Sg (density being in the first term's divisor). This is why cold conditions tend to dip "barely stable" rounds below the stability threshold. Without doing too much calculus it will be seen that an increase of three orders of magnitude (1000) in this variable will be a dramatic one for spin requirements. To balance things spin must be increased to compensate.
Through human flesh (which varies from 980 - 1100 kg/m^3 or about 1000 times the density of air) something on the order of 95,000,000 - 100,000,000 rpm is required to stabilize a projectile at speed. Given these differences it will be seen that the difference between a 1 : 12 or 1 : 14" twist when it hits flesh and a projectile launched from a 1 : 9 or 1 : 7" weapon is so small as to be beyond measuring. But the game isn't over yet.
Gyroscopic stability of 2.0 or so is sufficient for a M193 projectile to recover from an upset quickly, return to nose-forward flight and not be over stabilized. To prevent the upset in the first place, particularly when a sudden and very extreme change in density (and therefore drag and pressure applied to the center of pressure) requires FAR more stability. To grant enough stability force to prevent the upset of a M193 projectile encountering a sudden 1000 fold increase in density a factor of as much as 10 to 50 times (speaking VERY conservatively) the required gyroscopic stability for a steady state flight through a medium of that density would be required. In other words, unless the projectile is spinning at nearly a BILLION rpm it is going to be upset by such a transition. Even at this rpm it is like to be upset somewhat.
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).
ProgressiveProfessor
(22,144 posts)No sure what comic book you got that "information" from, but it does not correlate with the real world.
The .223 is chambered in many rifles outside of the M-16/AR-15 kind of rifles. It is a medium cartridge, not high power. If it did what you claim, why is it used for hunting and found in bolt action rifles.
It has nowhere near the stopping power or penetration of a 50BMG round. Basic physics will tell you that. So will the ballistic tables.
Fact are good to know. Come back when you find some
Jeff In Milwaukee
(13,992 posts)I'm not a ballistics expert, but if I had to choose between the two, I'd rather be shot by a .223 round.
obamanut2012
(29,367 posts)That's where that round and .22 are deadly.
Marinedem
(373 posts)The story gives me serious pause. I do not believe that a real infantryman would ever "not have a weapon locked and loaded" out of fear of it. Anyone that has ever been in the infantry in a time of war knows how stupid that sounds. Anyone can claim to be a veteran online. Don't get me wrong, I realize I'm in question too by that standard. I'm just saying that the blatantly false claims made in that post combined with what smell like BS claims make the entire post suspect.
A Simple Game
(9,214 posts)The enemy is hampered more by having to care for a wounded soldier than by a dead soldier.
That is what I understand to be the reason to go to the .223 instead of the .30 they used to use.
bluedigger
(17,437 posts)When the US adopted the M-16 it was the first time the common infantryman had an automatic weapon issued to him. There is a significant weight advantage in the .223 over .30 caliber rounds, which allowed them to carry, and shoot, more ammo.
Johnny Rico
(1,438 posts)The .223 is so "powerful" it's used for hunting prairie dogs. It's not even considered sufficient for deer. Saying it has the stopping power of a .50 BMG is the height of absurdity.
dionysus
(26,467 posts)
Ptah
(34,121 posts)
rl6214
(8,142 posts)I have often heard the .223 is designed to incapacitate if not a direct kill shot to the heart of head. That would require the opposing army to tie up a couple of soldiers to aide the one that is hit. The .223 is NOT a high powered kill everything the instant it hits it bullet. Thank you for your service in Vietnam but you are wrong on this one.
jmowreader
(53,190 posts)The biggest selling point to the 5.56 NATO round is its very low recoil, which makes it easy to take a guy off the street who'd never shot before and teach him marksmanship. The 7.62mm NATO round has quite a bit of recoil, and it was hard to get draftees who hadn't shot before past that.
The Wizard
(13,735 posts)The 14 was more accurate on semi auto but hard to carry all day. The 16 has lighter ammo and you can carry more rounds. The 14 is damn near impossible to control on full auto while the 16 is more accurate on full auto.
I prefer the 16 for all around use. The 14 with a scope is a good sniper rifle.
Go Vols
(5,902 posts)years ago here for hunting here.I still have my Browning .243 that I hunted with prior.
Drahthaardogs
(6,843 posts)The .223 is a varmit rifle not legal for big game hunting in most western states, because it lacks the power to take down big game. Factory loads pushing a 55-grain bullet in excess of 3000 feet per second are available. At the muzzle, it generates around 1,200 ft. pounds.
In contrast, my Alaskan rifle, a .338 Remington Ultra Mag, pushes a 250 grain bullet (5 times as heavy) about 2900 feet per second, but has a muzzle energy of around 4,200 ft lbs of energy.
A .50 cal BMG generates about 13,000 ft. lbs of energy.
The .223 is a cheap round, has been militarized, and is fairly accurate. It is no way, shape, or form will compare ballistically to a .50 BMG or even a .338.
The problem here is the high capacity magazines.
obamanut2012
(29,367 posts)As per my CCW instructors. That starts with the 9mm. I do have a .22LR, but rarely carry it, and when I do, it's for running when I don't have my Camelbak (weight issue).
JeepJK556
(56 posts).223 is NOT a high powered round. Not even close.
It's intermediate in power at best. Comparing it to .50 cal is hilarious.
glowing
(12,233 posts)Well, I guess on leave for vacation with the family... And they don't carry around 100 rnds because it's heavy. Most don't want them kept around their families at all and they are trained. He def didnt thing it should be around for the general public to purchase so easily.
If u want a shoot em up experience, go on a vacation package for the ability to shoot weapons like that... He said he feels safer deployed overs seas in Afghanistan or Itaq than he does here at times.
krispos42
(49,445 posts)I've fired .223 Rem from both a bolt-action and a semi-automatic.
Second off, what you used in Vietnam is different from military-spec ammo used to day, and very different from commercial ammunition available on the gun store shelves.
This guy could have been using thin-walled expanding varmint ammo, thicker-walled expanding medium-game ammo, premium self-defense ammo... almost anything.
Finally, the .223 is small potatoes on the rifle ammunition scale. There are a bunch of cartridges available for the AR platform that are far more effective for short to medium range use.
Jackpine Radical
(45,274 posts)The advantage, besides the light recoil (which makes it more suitable for auto fire), is that the ammo is much lighter than the 7.62 Nato round (known as the .308 in civilian use). The bullet is a dinky little 43 grains iirc, as opposed to 150 grains for the 7.62 military load.
A lot of GI's believed this myth about hitting someone in the finger & blowing his arm off. Not true. It's just a .22 bullet with a muzzle velocity of about 3200 fps. Compare that to, say, the .220 Swift, which fires that same bullet at about 3800 fps muzzle.
The .308 fires its 150-grain bullet at about 2700 fps at the muzzle by way of comparison. A .30-30 fires that .30-cal 150 gr. bullet at about 1900 fps, iirc.
For deer, gimme a .30-06 or .308 any day.
All figures are from memory & only as accurate as my incipient dementia will permit.
SlimJimmy
(3,251 posts)Agree. Take an M-14 to the field and you have a perfect deer rifle.
rrneck
(17,671 posts)There is no such thing as a benign bullet.
AnotherMcIntosh
(11,064 posts)As explained by Wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dud
In the military, whether referring to ammunition or something else (or even a person), isn't a "dud" something that doesn't work?
Kennah
(14,578 posts)
Serve The Servants
(328 posts)I wonder how long it's going to be before a lurker from AR15.com gets a hold of this one and they shit all over it. (Sorry, but rightly so, if you ask me.)
On another note, I'm still trying to figure out how this kid was able to afford thousands of dollars in guns, ammo, body armor and tactical gear - plus pay the rent on time... Not to mention how in the Hell does a civilian get fucking TEAR GAS!?!
bluedigger
(17,437 posts)Isn't med school expensive and time consuming? 
As far as the gas goes, we don't know what it was (pepper spray?), but he had the knowledge and ability to make his own it appears, based on the apparent IED's he set up in his apartment and his educational background.
Response to TheMastersNemesis (Original post)
D23MIURG23 This message was self-deleted by its author.
EpsilonZer0
(4 posts)If you were REALLY in vietnam you would know that every GI that landed in that hell hole dropped their m16 in favor of an ak47 when they found one or wished that they could. This was because the m16 just wasnt as lethal as the ak47 in most combat situations.
Secondly the .223 WAS NOT IN VIETNAM! It was the 5.56x45mm which is very simmilar but the cases are thicker and the leade from the mouth of the cartridge to where the rifling meets it. .223 is not fully compatable with 5.56 rifles unless the rifle was made so.
And fragment my ass. In vietnam we were shooting mostly full metal jackets which make very clean holes buddy.
Hell, most States DO NOT ALLOW the use of .223 rifles for any kind of deer or large game hunting even with hollow-point bullets because its just not lethal enough to take them down.
Go through 2 car doors??? A .223 will not go through 2 car doors even at 50 yards. Get an ak47 for that.
Any gun can kill someone at near point blank range and aimed at vital areas but your argument that the .223 or 5.56 is more lethal than other types of firearms is full of holes and disinformation.
Selatius
(20,441 posts)Granted, AK-47s were less accurate at longer ranges and harder to control on full-auto, but the VC and the NVA responded by engaging American forces up close, so close it really didn't matter if you could hit a target at 200 yards better with an M-16 when the dude trying to kill you was literally 20 yards away seeing you through the dense brush, and you're still trying to find him. My parents grew up in Viet Nam during that war. They said it was far more dependable in that environment than any M-16s they encountered. The AK was so simple to maintain and so easy to operate that children could be taught how to use them, and they did. They suggested to American servicemen who were footing through the area that if they could get their hands on AK-47s, use them instead.
lapislzi
(5,762 posts)I lived in South Africa for many years. I've seen AKs that had been put together with bits of pipe when spare parts were unavailable. You can assemble/disassemble that thing in a matter of seconds.
It was the weapon of choice for the ANC during the armed struggle, with Uzis coming in second. Women tended to prefer Uzis because they are lighter and easier to handle.
I wish I didn't know some of the stuff I know.
CbtEngr01
(16 posts)calling BS on that guy
TheMastersNemesis
(10,602 posts)What ever the case assault weapons of any variety or any gun for that matter is devastating. The military picked the M-16 for a good reason. Once the early jamming problems were fixed the M-16 seemed to stop the enemy well enough. From what I remember in training we were told that the M-16 had the stopping power of a larger weapon. Perhaps that was just bull to make you feel better. We were thoroughly trained in the capabilities of the M-16. Some of it may have ben over emphasized at the time.
In this case one poster was right in that larger magazines were the most damaging. Doesn't really matter because people are still gone and still wounded badly in some cases.
And there are two more worrying aspects to this case. What if this guy somehow got a fully automatic weapon? The other question is what if his diversion at his apartment had worked? If the police had gone out to investigate the loud music and his bomb would have blown, would that have diverted enough police to let him go on as long as he probably planned?
The carnage was bad enough. It looks like it really could have been really bad.
These shooting have become far to common. And we must decide as a nation if their is anything that can be done to minimize them. Somehow arming everyone seems like a very poor choice.
Trunk Monkey
(950 posts)As in you never set a fucking foot in Viet Nam?
Would you care to address that ?
cliffordu
(30,994 posts)but most of it is bogus. As in crapola.
Read the missives above for enlightenment.
slackmaster
(60,567 posts)
CbtEngr01
(16 posts)"The .223 was designed to have only just enough rotation -WHAT THE HELL DOES ROTATION HAVE TO DO WITH ANYTHING? AS LONG AS THE TWIST RATE IS ADEQUATE TO STABILIZE THE BULLET THEN 'ROTATION' HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH IT-that
when it strikes an object it acts
like a dud-A DUD? PLEASE EXPLAIN THIS- and has the stopping
action of a 50 caliber weapon.-REALLY? WHAT 50 CALIBER WEAPON? A MUZZEL LOADER? EVER COMPARED ENERGY LEVELS BETWEEN THE 50BMG AND THE 223/5.56?-
What makes it so bad is that the bullet is meant to travel
throughout the target it hits and
then fragment."-WHAT? ONLY BULLETS DESIGNED TO FRAGMENT WILL FRAGMENT. THE FAMOUS FULL METAL JACKET WILL NOT FRAGMENT.
I suggest you educate yourself on external and terminal ballistics before you go spewing false information to everyone
ellisonz
(27,776 posts)
JoeyT
(6,785 posts)I don't care about tone, accurate statements are more important.
I wasn't made screaming angry by the OP, I was baffled.
2nd bullet from the right is what was claimed is as powerful as the bullet on the left.
ellisonz
(27,776 posts)...yet. I understood the gist of what the OP was trying to express. Both are really fucking deadly. That the gun nuts are unable to appreciate such an opinion (one above even questions the OP's integrity) shows what self-obsessed fools they are and the terror they enable to be wrought upon civil society. Get over it.
JoeyT
(6,785 posts)There is no "gist".
"The .223 was designed to have only just enough rotation that when it strikes an object it acts like a dud and has the stopping action of a 50 caliber weapon." Is 100% false. Except the "dud" part, and absolutely no one understands what the hell that's even supposed to mean. Presumably he meant "dumdum", and that's wrong too.
Y'all sound like the anti-choicers shrieking about how abortion should be banned because it causes breast cancer. "All guns should be banned" is a respectable argument. If you feel that way, then make your case. Using hyperbole, distortion, or lies to do it completely destroys your own points.
This is why I keep saying the prohibitionists are just as much to blame as the NRA for the weak gun laws. No one takes you seriously because you're mostly arguing from positions of extreme ignorance and you get a sad when called on it.
Clames
(2,038 posts)Let him wallow in his ignorance on this subject. He's stated before he doesn't care about the technicalities.
dionysus
(26,467 posts) 
freshwest
(53,661 posts)
Came to read a thread about Aurora, and what did we get?
EOM...
warrprayer
(4,734 posts)of the magic .223 is false. There was WW2 ammo made with a "boattail" shape that was meant to make the bullet tumble end over end, causing it to "keyhole" on entry/exit. JFK was shot with such a round, thus explaining the odd entry/exit path. .223 is pretty straightforward. A varmit round, extreme high velocity - accuracy. A .22 will kill you as dead as a .44 does, if it hits you the right way. The WW2 booattail ammo was designed to circumvent Geneva convention rules against "dumdum rounds.
oneshooter
(8,614 posts)creates as it travels through the air. This allows the projectile to maintain supersonic speed over a longer distance, which increases accuracy at those longer distances.
"The WW2 booattail ammo was designed to circumvent Geneva convention rules against "dumdum rounds."
"Dum-Dum" rounds were first developed at the Dum-Dum Arsenal in India. They were first made illegal by the Hague Convention.
All US military ammo since M1895 Lee rifle has been full metal jacketed.
Oneshooter
warrprayer
(4,734 posts)"Wounding effectsEarly ballistics tests done demonstrated a pronounced tumbling effect with high speed cameras.[4] Some Western authorities believed this bullet was designed to tumble in flesh to increase wounding potential. At the time, it was believed that yawing and cavitation of projectiles was primarily responsible for tissue damage. Martin Fackler conducted a study with an AK-74 assault rifle using live pigs and ballistic gelatin demonstrating that the 5.45×39mm round does not reliably fragment or cause unusual amounts of tissue disruption.[5] Most organs and tissue were too flexible to be severely damaged by the temporary cavity effect caused by yaw and cavitation of a projectile. With the 5.45 mm bullet, tumbling produced a temporary cavity twice, at depths of 100 and 350 mm. This is comparable to modern 7.62×39mm ammunition and to (non-fragmenting) 5.56 mm ammunition."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5.45%C3%9739mm
RegieRocker
(4,226 posts)warrprayer
(4,734 posts)link not work
obamanut2012
(29,367 posts)I do hope I am never shot.
I know enough about firearms, especially smaller-caliber rounds, to know the OP is a bit... ridiculous. This is a "varmit" or "plinkster" round, and it's a disgrace, imo, our military weren't given better.
RegieRocker
(4,226 posts)Last edited Sat Jul 21, 2012, 02:10 PM - Edit history (1)
in regards to the AR 15 however.....
Many standard rifles that are not labeled as assault weapons are also very lethal. The term assault weapon is and should be used only for those that are fully automatic. Fully automatic weapons are illegal and will get your ass thrown in jail immediately if discovered you own one. The other thing is that the AR 15 is basically a .22 rifle caliber bullet. It is the spinning action and the velocity that makes it so deadly. There are many standard rifles with high velocities that will kill you non the less.
As far as the two car doors. Many standard rifles, shot guns (slugs) will go through the same amount of steel. The .44 magnum will go through an engine block.
Edweird
(8,570 posts)A .44 won't pierce and engine block. Funny how the people most against guns don't know anything about them.
RegieRocker
(4,226 posts)the 44 magnum engine block thing was a hook
now that you've bitten, back up the claim that the rest is fact free.
Edweird
(8,570 posts)AnotherMcIntosh
(11,064 posts)
Edweird
(8,570 posts)
RegieRocker
(4,226 posts)it was a fact free post. You were wrong and not man enough to admit it.
Edweird
(8,570 posts)False
in regards to the AR 15 however.....
Ok, that's true.
False
False
A high velocity .22 True
It is the spinning action and the velocity that makes it so deadly.
False.
True
As far as the two car doors.
False
False
Fully automatic weapons are illegal and will get your ass thrown in jail immediately if discovered you own one.
Without a permit and getting a permit to own one is very difficult. True
The other thing is that the AR 15 is basically a .22 rifle caliber bullet. True it is a .22 caliber bullet load is not part of the statement.
It is the spinning action and the velocity that makes it so deadly. True best read this and scroll down http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_the_AK-47_and_M16
Many standard rifles, shot guns (slugs) will go through the same amount of steel. True have you tried it?
So it comes down to
legality of fully automatic weapons. We differ on this one. They are illegal without a permit and they are very expensive and very hard to get.
.44 mag
that was a hook anyway.
Edweird
(8,570 posts)Many standard rifles, shot guns (slugs) will go through the same amount of steel.
is absolutely false.
RegieRocker
(4,226 posts)High velocity assault weapons will go through two car doors
I have personally tested this
Edweird
(8,570 posts)A .308 will penetrate a thicker piece of steel than a .223. That is a fact. You are wrong.
By your logic I could say a #2 pencil has the exact same penetration as a .50 BMG since I witnessed them both got through not one, but TWO sheets of notebook paper. It's ridiculous.
-Standard M193/M855 5.56mm ball ammo will penetrate 1/4" mild steel plate reliably from 100 yards when fired from 20-24" barrels. The AP stuff will go better than 3/8".
-7.62mm NATO M59 ball will pass through 3/8" plate with no trouble; M61 AP rounds will slice through 3/4" mild plate.
-.50 BMG M2 AP will penetrate well over 1" of mild plate at 200 yards reliably.
RegieRocker
(4,226 posts)Do they both go through two car doors and will still kill you? That is all that matters if you're in the path of the bullet next to second door. Damn. Notebook paper. ROFLMAO
Edweird
(8,570 posts)Fully automatic weapons are illegal and will get your ass thrown in jail immediately if discovered you own one.
Is false. Permits are obtainable. If your statement was 'unregistered' then it would be true. But it does not say that.
RegieRocker
(4,226 posts)then I will accept it is false
Edweird
(8,570 posts)I can get one if I want but I don't at this time. I travel too much and everything is in storage.
It is possible and you didn't phrase the question that way.
Edweird
(8,570 posts)It is the spinning action and the velocity that makes it so deadly.
Um, it's not particularly deadly. You can't even hunt deer with it in a lot of places because it isn't capable of a clean kill. As far as 'tumbling' goes, the .223 isn't unique. Even the AK47 bullet tumbles.
False.
PS - the .223 relies on frangibility.
RegieRocker
(4,226 posts)http://www.huntingclub.com/magazine/articles/articletype/articleview/articleid/13457/is-the-223-rem-deadly-for-deer
slackmaster
(60,567 posts)And "Mattel made M16 rifles during the Vietnam War."
2 out of 10 possible points. Lame attempt at a recycled bullshit rant.
Please entertain us with more tales of your adventures in 'Nam.
dionysus
(26,467 posts)it was FMJ so there was no lead slug to expand and tumble through a body. the drawback of the 16 was lack of stopping power, compared to an AK. it's widely known
i call bullshit.
RegieRocker
(4,226 posts)effect in person. On flat and 3d targets. It is you who is full of it.
GarroHorus
(1,055 posts)RegieRocker
(4,226 posts)GarroHorus
(1,055 posts)Really?
Really?
RegieRocker
(4,226 posts)Not sure about the .50 thing or fragmentation. Everything else is accurate. I saw it first hand. Now naturally the load behind the bullet changes things dramatically. He was however talking about a round the military used in Vietnam.
GarroHorus
(1,055 posts)oneshooter
(8,614 posts)"The .223 was designed to have only just enough rotation that when it strikes an object it acts like a dud and has the stopping action of a 50 caliber"
The 223 caliber was designed to have a barely stabilized bullet, so the when it struck a target the bullet destabilized immediately. This created a large area of hydrostatic shock( wound cavity). A 22cal long rifles rimfire, a much less powerful round, has a tendency to travel away from the trajectory it started with, and will "travel" within the body.
"There was good reason why you never locked and loaded any M-16 unless you were ready for immediate action. It was simply too dangerous a weapon "
As a Marine Squad Leader I can truly say "BULLSHIT"to this. On every one of my many patrols in the RVN, we NEVER left base without L&L. The bush started beyond the wire, and it was "Indian Country" from the gates till we returned to base. NOT having your weapon armed can get you very dead, very fast.
Oneshooter
RegieRocker
(4,226 posts)now is now.
"There was good reason why you never locked and loaded any M-16 unless you were ready for immediate action. It was simply too dangerous a weapon "
Marengo
(3,477 posts)Unless RVN means something other than Republic of Vietnam
RegieRocker
(4,226 posts)Need to read.
pwb
(12,660 posts)What makes it so deadly is when it strikes flesh it tumbles through the body. Small entry wound large exit wound.
RegieRocker
(4,226 posts)yes it was high velocity but it also tumbled after hitting something. I personally saw side ways entry holes on flat targets.
pwb
(12,660 posts)wiki is bullshit, all the real veterans here know what mean.
lib2DaBone
(8,124 posts)He did not save his pennies and go out and purchase this stuff on his own.. he had "Mentors".. helpers....
This guy was another Mancurian Candidate..
I know, I know.. it has been hashed to death.... Timothy McVie, Columbine, Jared Loughner, virginia tech shooter, Korean Medical College shooter..
All these guys have the SAME exact stare.. same M.O. I know.. tin foil stuff....but it's true.
Trunk Monkey
(950 posts)There has been much criticism of the poor performance of the bullet on target, especially the first-shot kill rate when the muzzle velocity of the firearms used and the downrange bullet deceleration do not achieve the minimally required terminal velocity at the target to cause fragmentation.[16] This wounding problem has been cited in incidents beginning in the first Gulf war, Somalia, and in the current conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan. In recent lab testing of M855, it has been shown that the bullets do not fragment reliably or consistently from round-to-round,
Combat operations the past few months have again highlighted terminal performance deficiencies with 5.56×45mm 62 gr. M855 FMJ. These problems have primarily been manifested as inadequate incapacitation of enemy forces despite them being hit multiple times by M855 bullets. These failures appear to be associated with the bullets exiting the body of the enemy soldier without yawing or fragmenting.
I have too many friends that have come home from Iraq? Afghanistan w/ the same complaint (IE the 5.56 round will not reliably put the enemy down)
Rex
(65,616 posts)as I see already some are furious with the OP and some are agreeing. The truth is that the military .223 is NOT made to fragment inside the body. It travels at around 3000 feet per second. THAT is why the AR-15 is so dangerous. It creates about 50k psi which is enough pressure to go through you and your friends and his friend and then the wall behind them.
SunsetDreams
(8,571 posts)Locking
Discuss politics, issues, and current events. No posts about Israel/Palestine, religion, guns, showbiz, or sports unless there is really big news. No conspiracy theories. No whining about DU.
Please consider posting in Gun Control & RKBA group.
Thanks for your understanding
SunsetDreams
GD Host
FYI Skinner announcement to hosts this morning.
You can once again enforce the prohibition against gun threads in GD.
I think it is clear that members' interest in discussing Guns has died down, and we are now focusing on other issues. (Thanks, Mitt!) So you can once again start enforcing the prohibition against gun threads in GD.
Of course, if you do want to lock any threads about guns, you should probably discuss it in here before you do.
FWIW, my personal opinion is that some narrowly-targeted discussion of the tragedy in Colorado might still be on-topic for GD. But we no longer need to provide an open environment in GD for all gun discussion.