"The AR-15 assault rifle was engineered to create what one of its designers called 'maximum wound effect.' Its tiny bullets – needle-nosed and weighing less than four grams – travel nearly three times the speed of sound. As the bullet strikes the body, the payload of kinetic energy rips open a cavity inside the flesh – essentially inert space – which collapses back on itself, destroying inelastic tissue, including nerves, blood vessels and vital organs. 'It's a perfect killing machine,' says Dr. Peter Rhee, a leading trauma surgeon and retired captain with 24 years of active-duty service in the Navy. " 'A handgun [wound] is simply a stabbing with a bullet,' says Rhee. 'It goes in like a nail.' With the high-velocity rounds of the AR-15, he adds, 'its as if you shot somebody with a Coke can.' "Despite the menacing look of the weapon, Chris assures me, 'Little kids can shoot 'em – there's so little recoil.'.... "The story of how this masterpiece of war technology morphed into a billion-dollar blockbuster for domestic gun-makers lays bare both the power, and recklessness, of the gun industry.... "In 1957, the Army approached Armalite's star gun designer, Eugene Stoner, with a tall order: Produce a six-pound, high-velocity rifle, firing in semi- and full-automatic modes, with firepower capable 'of penetrating a steel helmet or standard body armor at 500 yards.' Stoner was a brilliant Marine Corps vet with no more than a high school degree from Long Beach Poly.... His answer to the Army's request was the AR-15, an exceptionally balanced gun with little recoil – meaning soldiers could more easily keep the rifle level, and on target, in a firefight.... "The AR-15 suited the 'violent short clashes at close ranges which are characteristic of guerrilla warfare in Vietnam,' ARPA reported, noting that this 'extremely mobile type of offensive warfare' had placed a 'high premium on small, lightweight weapons.'.... "But it was the killing power of the AR-15 that turned the heads of Pentagon bureaucrats and congressional appropriators alike. The battlefield testimonials included in the ARPA report are horrific: One describes an Army Ranger killing a Viet Cong soldier at about 15 meters with a three-round burst. 'One round in the head – took it completely off,' it reads. 'Another in the right arm, took it completely off, too. One round hit him in the right side, causing a hole about five inches in diameter.' Each shot was a killer: 'Any one of the three would have caused death.' " https://www.rollingstone.com/politi...became-mass-shooters-weapon-of-choice-w451452 Very interesting reading. It seems the AR-15 was optimized for the battlefield and now it is popular among mass shooters in America.
The Second Amendment is an enumerated personal civil right that has a military component. That is, in intent, the citizen is not to be barred from the right to carry a firearm that a soldier may carry in service to his country. At least one SCOTUS case regarding civilians carrying a shortened barrel shotgun was decided on whether sawed-off shotguns had any military use. Criminal acts should not be able to impact the rights of law abiding citizens. .22, .25, .32 etc calibers have been used in deadly force scenarios. These are deadly calibers too. To single out the .223 does an injustice to the effectiveness of all calibers. Statistically, In the history of mass shooters how many have used the AR-15? In how many events of murder does the shooter use an AR-15? The "morality" of a firearm is in the hand and heart of the beholder. Facts and truth must counter balance human emotion demanding someone keep me from harm if anything productive is to be put in place. Outlawing (generally or specific) firearms will not keep any student safer in a gun free zone. It is illogical to expect new gun control laws to keep anyone from choosing to act out with evil intent, if that would work it would have done so with the first gun control act. Chicago has draconian laws regarding gun control, that is where people who want to "feel" safe from "gun violence" should go. I've never held a "violent" firearm, only functional ones.
That's actually incorrect. The round/rifle combination was engineered to penetrate a US steel helmet at 500 yards while still retaining supersonic speeds and able to inflict the same or better wound ballistics than the M1/2 carbine. The original design of the M16 was set at a 1:14 barrel twist with the Vietnam era weapons changed to 1:12 to achieve the penetration and accuracy specs. It amazes me how little that libs know about terminal ballistics. What a bullet does or does not do depends upon a number of factors. This includes bullet weight/distribution, sectional density, velocity, barrel twist rate. What you're really alluding to is bullet yaw, often referred to as tumbling which does not occur. All bullets hitting any target will yaw, The more stable the bullet in flight and the higher the sectional density the less this will happen. For instance the AK bullet is highly stable, designed from the start for penetration and will generally go straight through a human target or ballistic gelatin. The vast majority of AR's have very fast barrel twists from 1:9 to 1:7. 55 grain bullets are by far the most common. These are very stable and will pass through just like the AK. It's why the military no longer uses the 55gr M193.
How does this clearly refute anything in the article? Your attempt to impress and intimidate people with your technical knowledge of the subject is underwhelming if you can't do that.
I'm calling BS on your article. Your FIRST statement was false and you said the cartridge/weapon combination was designed to inflict MAXIMAL WOUND EFFECT. It was not. Clearly a falsehood and another progressive attempt at dramatics. The cartridge is really medium powered. In fact, the military is well aware of the limits of lethality of the 5.56 and the need for a replacement.
If forced to choose, I'd get shot by a .223/5.56 over a .308 or 30.06 or even a .45 anyday. The .223/5.56 was designed to maim more than kill (at least in comparison to those rounds, which, btw, are most commonly used for hunting big game as they WERE designed to kill) Heres why: When you kill an enemy soldier, you remove one enemy from the battlefeild. When you maim an enemy soldier, you remove several; one injured and more to carry him to the hospital where he receives treatment, a bed, medicine, doctors, nurses, food etc. Resources that could support many soldiers in battle are now spent keeping one alive and away from battle. The AR is an attrition rifle. This makes the .223/5.56 a less-than-optimal choice for battle against third world collectivist or extremist factions that tend to leave their wounded lay rather than spend resources saving them. But it wasn't designed for them. It was designed for war with Russia; a 'civilized' enemy that would not be able, politically, to leave its wounded lay on the battlefeild. It would have to 'waste' (from a purely logistical perspective) resources on the wounded or suffer the morale loss of its population who would not much more suffer their abandonment than we would of our own.
From a Florida radiologist who was involved in treating the victims of the Parkland shooting: "The organ looked like an overripe melon smashed by a sledgehammer, and was bleeding extensively. How could a gunshot wound have caused this much damage? "The reaction in the emergency room was the same. One of the trauma surgeons opened a young victim in the operating room, and found only shreds of the organ that had been hit by a bullet from an AR-15, a semiautomatic rifle that delivers a devastatingly lethal, high-velocity bullet to the victim. Nothing was left to repair—and utterly, devastatingly, nothing could be done to fix the problem. The injury was fatal.... "One of my ER colleagues was waiting nervously for his own children outside the school. While the shooting was still in progress, the first responders were gathering up victims whenever they could and carrying them outside the building. Even as a physician trained in trauma situations, there was nothing he could do at the scene to help save the victims who had been shot with the AR-15. Most of them died on the spot; they had no fighting chance at life.... "As a radiologist, I have now seen high-velocity AR-15 gunshot wounds firsthand, an experience that most radiologists in our country will never have. I pray that these are the last such wounds I have to see, and that AR-15-style weapons and high-capacity magazines are banned for use by civilians in the United States, once and for all." https://www.theatlantic.com/politic...land-should-change-the-debate-on-guns/553937/
You constantly post poppycock in regards to firearms you know absolutely nothing about in your feeble attempts to nullify The Second Amendment and push your shopworn gun bans, everyone here knows you.
Exactly. The idea is to move up from 5.56 to 6.5, it also increases the catridge neck diameter, another advantage.
Agree, the Grendel is a superior cartridge in every respect, however I doubt it will be adopted because of cost in doing so.
That is what I heard. Battlefield reports I've read mainly had complaints about how easy the 5.56 was deflected by the foliage. Imagine what it would have looked like if hit by your typical deer cartridge. If you knew even a tiny bit of what you are talking about you'd know the military can not use ammo that mushrooms or fragments. They use ball ammo that drills a hole. So they are less lethal than what hunters or police use.
Wrong again. In the SS109/M855/M885A1 series of cartridges the jacket was designed to fragment at higher velocities with the penetrator continuing to go through body armor. Both the M262 and M318 are "open tip" designs ( that means HP to you) Both are currently issued. BTW just so you know, unstable rounds like the M193 in slow twist barrels, yaw and then fragment at close ranges and higher velocities. But you would have to know something about terminal ballistics, something you obviously don't.
The article cited by yourself confuses the AR-15, the rifle itself, with the ammunition that is utilized in its function. The two are entirely different components. The most commonly utilized ammunition for the AR-15 rifle, was developed long before the AR-15 ever came into production. It quite literally began its existence as a hunting cartridge for small game such as vermin.
If the AR-15 and its ammunition are so deadly, why did only fifty eight of the four hundred and twenty two individuals shot in the Las Vegas incident die? That is only a thirteen percent fatality rate. By comparison, forty nine individuals were shot during the Virginia Tech incident, yet thirty two of them died as a result. That is a sixty five percent fatality rate.
"It isn’t a hollow point. It is an Open-Tip Match round much like the M118LR. The jacket is drawn from the base (instead of the cheaper method of jacket drawn from the nose and an exposed lead base) to the tip of the bullet. The tiny little hole there is just a remnant from jacketing the bullet that way. It isn’t designed for expansion or calculated to cause unnecessary suffering, so it doesn’t violate the Hague conventions". http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2010/02/17/usmc-adopt-new-5-56mm-mk318-mod-0-ammunition/ http://www.sadefensejournal.com/wp/?p=1262
Technically true and c/w many /most match bullets. The HP is from the manufacturing process and is not designed for expansion, though at higher velocities, it will shed the jacket (front) with the attendant wound ballistics. It's certainly not "ball" ammo as our earlier poster stated that the military has to use. The M318 is designed as a penetrating round. The M262 is a bit different. It's designed to yaw and fragment at the cannelure while retaining outstanding accuracy.
Isn't every Spitzer boat-tail bullet expected to yaw? More discussion on the M262. http://www.shootingtimes.com/ammo/special-forces-to-civilians-black-hills-mk-262-mod-1-review/
Damn you should see the whole my 1918 Mauser would provide a human body at the exit wound.. I knows it's a bolt action but hell of a sniper rifle....Kaboom!!
It depends on how the bullet is designed. All bullets/projectiles will yaw eventually. You need to decide what you want, is it accuracy or is it penetration? You're generally not going to get both in equal proportions. The M262 and 318 are notable examples. The best ballistic shape will put most of the weight of a bullet to the rear.
