Gun Trouble

[Neo]

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/01/gun-trouble/383508/

Gun Trouble The rifle that today's infantry uses is little changed since the 1960s—and it is badly flawed. Military lives depend on these cheap composites of metal and plastic. So why can't the richest country in the world give its soldiers better ones?

One afternoon just a month and a half after the Battle of Gettysburg, Christopher Spencer, the creator of a seven-shot repeating rifle, walked Abraham Lincoln out to a grassy field near where the Washington Monument now stands in order to demonstrate the amazing potential of his new gun. Lincoln had heard about the mystical powers of repeating rifles at Gettysburg and other battles where some Union troops already had them. He wanted to test them for the rest of his soldiers. The president quickly put seven rounds inside a small target 40 yards away. He was sold.


Robert H. Scales (http://www.theatlantic.com/robert-h-scales/)<time content="2014-12-28T19:44:21-05:00" itemprop="datePublished" datetime="2014-12-28T19:44:21-05:00">Dec 28 2014, 7:44 PM ET</time>

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/01/gun-trouble/383508/

Gun Trouble The rifle that today's infantry uses is little changed since the 1960s—and it is badly flawed. Military lives depend on these cheap composites of metal and plastic. So why can't the richest country in the world give its soldiers better ones?

One afternoon just a month and a half after the Battle of Gettysburg, Christopher Spencer, the creator of a seven-shot repeating rifle, walked Abraham Lincoln out to a grassy field near where the Washington Monument now stands in order to demonstrate the amazing potential of his new gun. Lincoln had heard about the mystical powers of repeating rifles at Gettysburg and other battles where some Union troops already had them. He wanted to test them for the rest of his soldiers. The president quickly put seven rounds inside a small target 40 yards away. He was sold.


Robert H. Scales (http://www.theatlantic.com/robert-h-scales/)<time content="2014-12-28T19:44:21-05:00" itemprop="datePublished" datetime="2014-12-28T19:44:21-05:00">Dec 28 2014, 7:44 PM ET</time>

I've never thought the M-14 should have been taken out of use. Maybe a modern version of that rifle needs to be created.
I know the ammo for the rifle had the killing power at long range . And the stopping power of the ammo is a primary concern..
M-14 could be fired on either semi or full auto... -Tyr

[red state]

the AK47 has changed little over the years......but I agree that it was one GREAT gun to begin with (although a tad heavy). I've shot the AK but I've never shot an m16a2 or M4. I've never shot the Barrett M82 50 cal but I would certainly like to (I believe it to be one of the BEST). I believe special law enforcement use military issue all the time but they don't have to. Some do use alternatives such as Beretta from Italy or HK from Germany. Heck, the S.E.A.L.s at one time used 40 cal HK but you still can't beat the American 1911 45 or other side arms used by the special forces. We still make darn good guns and COLT has always been a decent gun from the days of frontier West to their part in military contracts. Although FN may still have the contract for the M16 and are not American, they seem to have quickly fixed their problems from the 1960's. I'd guess that their ties or shared history with Browning qualify them as trustworthy but I would rather we used AMERICAN products for our American defense. In a way, outsourcing from FN has always made about as much sense as use China for jet fighter parts (important parts that have now been proven to be hack prone). If problems occure, it may be due to our "leaders" cheaping out on our BEST by retro-fitting or mixing guns (like the M4's being fitted on M16's). I am not an expert.....just making a point.

If the M16's are still jamming and is the reason for possibly going ALL IN with the M4's, it is simply the new American way of outsourcing. If and when outsourcing, I don't know why we simply don't outsource from Russia. Most terrorists use AK's anyway so our men would have a constant supply of ammo. Our special forces and CIA black ops use AK's anyway so why not go all out. Bottom line, I'm for "screw you" mentality when it comes to our military......meaning that our best (Browning and other American companies) should be allowed to make their own "AK's" that surpass the real AK's. Once upon a time, Browning sought to produce the BEST for our BEST but now it is a number's game. Truly, who can blame them the way our "leaders" and the left go after them. I got so mad under Bush I when our soldiers welded their own bottoms to humV's or parents of the soldiers sending their sons/daughters vests. They should have had vests, bottoms and silencers......ALL AROUND BEST of everything. Yes, I'm all for every single soldier having the same courtesy, consideration equip. and training as what our special forces use. They may not be as proficient but as a team, they all risk getting hit (except for the kicker) He's the one,bar face-mask / Air Force of the football team.

On one hand, the M16 is still to complicated (granted) and the M4 is (in my opinion) too small. For the life of me, I don't know why we can't get a dirty, low-down and mean SOB like an AK47.......lighten it down a bit (if must be but I like knock-down) and run with a bit of tweaking to perfect it while not to infringe on our dear friends the Russians. I know AMERICANS can do it.....we just need to get that American Spirit back and quite outsourcing or playing footsy with the left and MAN UP. I am glad that some Americans such as Ronald Barrett of BFM and Peter Shepley of PSE Archery, with the TAC 15 sniper crossbow (a PSE working upper and an AR15 lower) have stepped up and provided some American know-how that kicks @$$. That crossbow shoots at a whopping 400fps deadly silent and deadly accurate!!!! The TAC15 has now been discontinued and replaced but check out how well this weapon shot (as demonstrated by my friend whom I've bought bows from:



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2jv7kVexX3g

Dan is a great guy and fantastic archery buff. His organization sponsors TOYS 4 TOTS 3D shoots and a number of other good things.....so for you guys up there in Yankee Land, give Dan a visit and bring your bows.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cDQthc4jap4

I'm partial to DARTON but my son is loyal to PSE.....check out this 200 yd shot from a Marine Sniper with a regular crossbow using short bolts (unlike the FULL length arrows of the TAC15: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IlDi-5ueaVM
Point being....AMERICAN can still make the BEST for the BEST.


__________________________________________________ ________


*Sorry, must explode now just a bit (don't read unless interested)

Yep....those types, such as Lincoln I, usually are the smarter ones. They know to get the good stuff and leave the rest to whatever they can survive on. They have the mentality of Katrina or Boston officials where THEY and the criminals are the only ones to have firearms (or the superior firearms leaving the 'regular' folk to single shot muzzle loaders). I just wish we had leaders who still sought the BEST for the BEST during war. My grandfather respected the Filipino, as well as the Japaneses peoples but he talked often of how grateful he was to have had a leader willing to 'drop the bomb' and save many of whatever men he had left to lead.

Lincoln should have never needed such superiority on other States just as Jackson had no business stabbing the Cherokee in the back after they had fought with America in most conflict (just not the War Between the States) where they and others fought against an overbearing gov. on some and not others. As for slavery......YEP, it is wrong but the North had been just as wrong and increased their wrongs by drafting poor Irishmen to be slaughtered when the real reason for that awful war had to do little with slavery and more with CONTROL. The Cherokee, Scots and other mountain folk had nothing to do with slavery but they had been and continued to be treated more as slaves and less than American citizens. To an extent, this was the main reason for the great divide and we are seeing it all over again with Lincoln II.

Getting back on topic....I agree that our BEST should have the BEST but I'm not an expert on the weaponry our BEST use today. I know at one time the "NEW" vietnam weapons were inferior but I believe this was quickly corrected. Still, I'm sure that those or today's rifles are in no way compatible to the quality of the Browning automatic (BAR) or other WWII vintage weapons. I have a Jap 7.7 in VERY good condition and it has double the riflings. I even have tracers and fmj rounds from WWII. My grandfather said they were superior to what he and his men used but in most cases, it is the MAN with the weapon and not the weapon of the man that fair better in battle. I'm partial to Browning everything (even their archery equip.....although they are now PSE. This, by no means, is to say that I could out shoot some who SHOOT better than I (regardless of what I hold in my hand). Perhaps others who served will voice an opinion.

In closing, I hope this post isn't taken the wrong way. I actually like the poster whom I am responding to....just don't care for Lincoln I or II.....or Bush I or II or Slick Willie.....or....Jackson. HECK, I don't really like anybody when it comes right down to it but I did have respect for Reagan, Washington and a few other great mean with that American Spirit that founded this Nation. I tried to like Bush I and to a degree, have a lot of respect for him but that respect can't hide what I know him to be. But that is for another topic. Just know that I truly like the posts from said poster but certain topic get me worked up.....and a Lincoln or Lyndon B J or Jackson is such a topic.

I would if I could but I wish I could post more often....with less explosion all at once.