About Us

Califbill

F*O*A*D wrote:
On 8/31/14 12:26 PM, Califbill wrote:
F*O*A*D wrote:
On 8/31/14 11:17 AM, wrote:
On Sun, 31 Aug 2014 08:15:09 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 8/31/14 3:28 AM, Califbill wrote:
wrote:
On Sat, 30 Aug 2014 13:16:49 -0500, Harrold wrote:

On 8/30/2014 12:14 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 30 Aug 2014 12:00:44 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

Another of our weird regs concerns AR-15s. If you buy one fully
assembled, it has to be one of only a couple of HBAR models. You can,
however, buy a fully assembled lower.

I guess I just never had the "black gun" thing.
I like wood and full power 30 cal if I am buying a center fire rifle.
I understand the attraction for the military but I am not packing 600
rounds into a fire fight, nor is my intent to inflict grievous wounds

I wonder what Harry's need for or attraction to military weaponry is?
Back in the sixties when Uncle Sam would have appreciated him picking up
a gun and serving his country, Harry preferred to seek a scholars
deferment to attend a third rate school for girls in, of all places, Kansas.

My point exactly. He could have stepped up and they would have given
him a M16-A1 and let him shoot gooks with it. Now he lives that life
vicariously shooting Evian bottles.

He would have been one of two things in the service. Clerk, or paper
pusher or cannon fodder. That liberal arts degree would not get a skilled
position. Why I got to fix radar on airplanes instead of jungle fighting.
Had skills that counted.

D'oh. I felt no desire to "serve" the brutal right-wing dictatorship in
Vietnam, or the equally corrupt pols who followed in its footsteps.

I think it is nice that you and Fretwell managed to avoid the shooting
war by hiding out fixing radar and cruising on coast guard ships.
FlaJim, of course, also avoided the shooting war. Brave boys, all of your,

It wasn't because I didn't try. I volunteered twice for the river
boats, once in the navy and once in the CG. My requests were denied.

It doesn't really matter, does it? I mean, I tried to get a job as a bra
fitter at Victoria's Secret, but my requests were denied.

It's pretty easy being a mustered out soldier-sailor-marine-airman who
never saw a firefight only to play a big, brave UseNet Warrior here. Even
our resident John Bircher, Bertie Robbins, who talks about being a
Marine, never saw overseas duty and was exposed to the dangers of...paper cuts.

Big whoop.

We all got trained for that firefight! Well maybe not Al Gore.

Yeah, so big deal. I had a lot of training as a bra remover. Doesn't mean
Vicky's Secret will hire me, eh?

So you wear a bra. A fat old fart, is not the image VS wants to project.

Califbill

F*O*A*D wrote:
On 8/31/14 12:26 PM, Califbill wrote:
F*O*A*D wrote:
On 8/31/14 3:28 AM, Califbill wrote:
wrote:
On Sat, 30 Aug 2014 13:16:49 -0500, Harrold wrote:

On 8/30/2014 12:14 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 30 Aug 2014 12:00:44 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

Another of our weird regs concerns AR-15s. If you buy one fully
assembled, it has to be one of only a couple of HBAR models. You can,
however, buy a fully assembled lower.

I guess I just never had the "black gun" thing.
I like wood and full power 30 cal if I am buying a center fire rifle.
I understand the attraction for the military but I am not packing 600
rounds into a fire fight, nor is my intent to inflict grievous wounds

I wonder what Harry's need for or attraction to military weaponry is?
Back in the sixties when Uncle Sam would have appreciated him picking up
a gun and serving his country, Harry preferred to seek a scholars
deferment to attend a third rate school for girls in, of all places, Kansas.

My point exactly. He could have stepped up and they would have given
him a M16-A1 and let him shoot gooks with it. Now he lives that life
vicariously shooting Evian bottles.

He would have been one of two things in the service. Clerk, or paper
pusher or cannon fodder. That liberal arts degree would not get a skilled
position. Why I got to fix radar on airplanes instead of jungle fighting.
Had skills that counted.

D'oh. I felt no desire to "serve" the brutal right-wing dictatorship in
Vietnam, or the equally corrupt pols who followed in its footsteps.

I think it is nice that you and Fretwell managed to avoid the shooting
war by hiding out fixing radar and cruising on coast guard ships. FlaJim,
of course, also avoided the shooting war. Brave boys, all of your,

You, being a Democrat flunky, should have stepped up and supported your
party. LBJ wanted you,

That's just another in your never-ending series of really stupid remarks.

You seem to think all those Dem POTUS were great.

Califbill

F*O*A*D wrote:
On 8/31/14 12:26 PM, Califbill wrote:
F*O*A*D wrote:
On 8/31/14 3:28 AM, Califbill wrote:
wrote:
On Sat, 30 Aug 2014 13:46:34 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 8/30/14 1:14 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 30 Aug 2014 12:00:44 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

Another of our weird regs concerns AR-15s. If you buy one fully
assembled, it has to be one of only a couple of HBAR models. You can,
however, buy a fully assembled lower.

I guess I just never had the "black gun" thing.
I like wood and full power 30 cal if I am buying a center fire rifle.
I understand the attraction for the military but I am not packing 600
rounds into a fire fight, nor is my intent to inflict grievous wounds

Right, because everyone knows a 30-30 or .308 won't inflict grievous
wounds. I like the AR platform because the rifles are easy to customize
and maintain, and, for me, at least, they are accurate enough and, of
course, I only inflict "grievous wounds" on plastic and aluminum bottles
and cans and paper target. Besides, .308 ammo, American-made in brass
casings, is twice as expensive or more than brass-cased U.S.-made .223
REM ammo, and 30-30 Win is even more expensive.

You brought up 30-30 but 308/30-06 is the round of choice for snipers
who want one shot one kill. The 5.56 is designed to take the guy out
of the fight but make him a casualty who needs 2 guys to care for him.
(western European thinking)
That worked until we started fighting people who didn't give a ****
about a wounded soldier.

Price? I can get 7,.65-51 for about the same price as 5,56

The m16 was for close in work, lighter to carry, and did not climb in auto
fire. Not worth **** in open area battles. Need that 308/30.06 range and
power there.

You base this on what, your extensive experience as a Usenet Commando,
like the other mustered out soldiers here?

You never even served, and you have knowledge?

If you believe that the M16 was "not worth ****" in open area battles,
then you either read that, saw a movie about it, or were told that. Your
opinion isn't based upon experience.

Bull****. The bullet is small and lightweight. Afghanistan is long range
shooting. Is why the military is breaking out the 'm14's. Open areas not
being an opening in the wild jungle or the urban jungle. The fact the
Taliban shooter is shooting an older 30 caliber, 180 grain round at 2800
fps muzzle velocity vs. a 56 grain bullet at 3200 FPS. The Taliban shooter
is out ranging the US shooter. Shooting at 500 meters plus. An M4
carbine, just does not cut long range shooting.

F*O*A*D

On 9/1/14 1:20 AM, Califbill wrote:
F*O*A*D wrote:
On 8/31/14 12:26 PM, Califbill wrote:
F*O*A*D wrote:
On 8/31/14 3:28 AM, Califbill wrote:
wrote:
On Sat, 30 Aug 2014 13:46:34 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 8/30/14 1:14 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 30 Aug 2014 12:00:44 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

Another of our weird regs concerns AR-15s. If you buy one fully
assembled, it has to be one of only a couple of HBAR models. You can,
however, buy a fully assembled lower.

I guess I just never had the "black gun" thing.
I like wood and full power 30 cal if I am buying a center fire rifle.
I understand the attraction for the military but I am not packing 600
rounds into a fire fight, nor is my intent to inflict grievous wounds

Right, because everyone knows a 30-30 or .308 won't inflict grievous
wounds. I like the AR platform because the rifles are easy to customize
and maintain, and, for me, at least, they are accurate enough and, of
course, I only inflict "grievous wounds" on plastic and aluminum bottles
and cans and paper target. Besides, .308 ammo, American-made in brass
casings, is twice as expensive or more than brass-cased U.S.-made .223
REM ammo, and 30-30 Win is even more expensive.

You brought up 30-30 but 308/30-06 is the round of choice for snipers
who want one shot one kill. The 5.56 is designed to take the guy out
of the fight but make him a casualty who needs 2 guys to care for him.
(western European thinking)
That worked until we started fighting people who didn't give a ****
about a wounded soldier.

Price? I can get 7,.65-51 for about the same price as 5,56

The m16 was for close in work, lighter to carry, and did not climb in auto
fire. Not worth **** in open area battles. Need that 308/30.06 range and
power there.

You base this on what, your extensive experience as a Usenet Commando,
like the other mustered out soldiers here?

You never even served, and you have knowledge?

If you believe that the M16 was "not worth ****" in open area battles,
then you either read that, saw a movie about it, or were told that. Your
opinion isn't based upon experience.

Bull****. The bullet is small and lightweight. Afghanistan is long range
shooting. Is why the military is breaking out the 'm14's. Open areas not
being an opening in the wild jungle or the urban jungle. The fact the
Taliban shooter is shooting an older 30 caliber, 180 grain round at 2800
fps muzzle velocity vs. a 56 grain bullet at 3200 FPS. The Taliban shooter
is out ranging the US shooter. Shooting at 500 meters plus. An M4
carbine, just does not cut long range shooting.

Bull****? I wrote that you have no experience in open battle areas, and
that your opinion was based upon what you read, or saw a movie aboutl or
were told. Once again, Bilious, you demonstrate your inability to read
for content.

Califbill

F*O*A*D wrote:
On 9/1/14 1:20 AM, Califbill wrote:
F*O*A*D wrote:
On 8/31/14 12:26 PM, Califbill wrote:
F*O*A*D wrote:
On 8/31/14 3:28 AM, Califbill wrote:
wrote:
On Sat, 30 Aug 2014 13:46:34 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 8/30/14 1:14 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 30 Aug 2014 12:00:44 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

Another of our weird regs concerns AR-15s. If you buy one fully
assembled, it has to be one of only a couple of HBAR models. You can,
however, buy a fully assembled lower.

I guess I just never had the "black gun" thing.
I like wood and full power 30 cal if I am buying a center fire rifle.
I understand the attraction for the military but I am not packing 600
rounds into a fire fight, nor is my intent to inflict grievous wounds

Right, because everyone knows a 30-30 or .308 won't inflict grievous
wounds. I like the AR platform because the rifles are easy to customize
and maintain, and, for me, at least, they are accurate enough and, of
course, I only inflict "grievous wounds" on plastic and aluminum bottles
and cans and paper target. Besides, .308 ammo, American-made in brass
casings, is twice as expensive or more than brass-cased U.S.-made .223
REM ammo, and 30-30 Win is even more expensive.

You brought up 30-30 but 308/30-06 is the round of choice for snipers
who want one shot one kill. The 5.56 is designed to take the guy out
of the fight but make him a casualty who needs 2 guys to care for him.
(western European thinking)
That worked until we started fighting people who didn't give a ****
about a wounded soldier.

Price? I can get 7,.65-51 for about the same price as 5,56

The m16 was for close in work, lighter to carry, and did not climb in auto
fire. Not worth **** in open area battles. Need that 308/30.06 range and
power there.

You base this on what, your extensive experience as a Usenet Commando,
like the other mustered out soldiers here?

You never even served, and you have knowledge?

If you believe that the M16 was "not worth ****" in open area battles,
then you either read that, saw a movie about it, or were told that. Your
opinion isn't based upon experience.

Bull****. The bullet is small and lightweight. Afghanistan is long range
shooting. Is why the military is breaking out the 'm14's. Open areas not
being an opening in the wild jungle or the urban jungle. The fact the
Taliban shooter is shooting an older 30 caliber, 180 grain round at 2800
fps muzzle velocity vs. a 56 grain bullet at 3200 FPS. The Taliban shooter
is out ranging the US shooter. Shooting at 500 meters plus. An M4
carbine, just does not cut long range shooting.

Bull****? I wrote that you have no experience in open battle areas, and
that your opinion was based upon what you read, or saw a movie aboutl or
were told. Once again, Bilious, you demonstrate your inability to read for content.

You seem to think going to school for a Liberal Arts degree, let's you know
all. You have no experience in most of life, except screwing creditors,
etc. I can see he problems with a light weight round in long distance
battles. I have shot the M16 via the military. You?

Harrold

On 9/1/2014 12:25 PM, Califbill wrote:
F*O*A*D wrote:
On 9/1/14 1:20 AM, Califbill wrote:
F*O*A*D wrote:
On 8/31/14 12:26 PM, Califbill wrote:
F*O*A*D wrote:
On 8/31/14 3:28 AM, Califbill wrote:
wrote:
On Sat, 30 Aug 2014 13:46:34 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 8/30/14 1:14 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 30 Aug 2014 12:00:44 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

Another of our weird regs concerns AR-15s. If you buy one fully
assembled, it has to be one of only a couple of HBAR models. You can,
however, buy a fully assembled lower.

I guess I just never had the "black gun" thing.
I like wood and full power 30 cal if I am buying a center fire rifle.
I understand the attraction for the military but I am not packing 600
rounds into a fire fight, nor is my intent to inflict grievous wounds

Right, because everyone knows a 30-30 or .308 won't inflict grievous
wounds. I like the AR platform because the rifles are easy to customize
and maintain, and, for me, at least, they are accurate enough and, of
course, I only inflict "grievous wounds" on plastic and aluminum bottles
and cans and paper target. Besides, .308 ammo, American-made in brass
casings, is twice as expensive or more than brass-cased U.S.-made .223
REM ammo, and 30-30 Win is even more expensive.

You brought up 30-30 but 308/30-06 is the round of choice for snipers
who want one shot one kill. The 5.56 is designed to take the guy out
of the fight but make him a casualty who needs 2 guys to care for him.
(western European thinking)
That worked until we started fighting people who didn't give a ****
about a wounded soldier.

Price? I can get 7,.65-51 for about the same price as 5,56

The m16 was for close in work, lighter to carry, and did not climb in auto
fire. Not worth **** in open area battles. Need that 308/30.06 range and
power there.

You base this on what, your extensive experience as a Usenet Commando,
like the other mustered out soldiers here?

You never even served, and you have knowledge?

If you believe that the M16 was "not worth ****" in open area battles,
then you either read that, saw a movie about it, or were told that. Your
opinion isn't based upon experience.

Bull****. The bullet is small and lightweight. Afghanistan is long range
shooting. Is why the military is breaking out the 'm14's. Open areas not
being an opening in the wild jungle or the urban jungle. The fact the
Taliban shooter is shooting an older 30 caliber, 180 grain round at 2800
fps muzzle velocity vs. a 56 grain bullet at 3200 FPS. The Taliban shooter
is out ranging the US shooter. Shooting at 500 meters plus. An M4
carbine, just does not cut long range shooting.

Bull****? I wrote that you have no experience in open battle areas, and
that your opinion was based upon what you read, or saw a movie aboutl or
were told. Once again, Bilious, you demonstrate your inability to read for content.

You seem to think going to school for a Liberal Arts degree, let's you know
all. You have no experience in most of life, except screwing creditors,
etc. I can see he problems with a light weight round in long distance
battles. I have shot the M16 via the military. You?

99% of Harry's life experience comes from turning the pages in books.
I'm not saying that's a bad thing, but he passes his reading off as his
reality.

F*O*A*D

On 9/1/14 1:25 PM, Califbill wrote:
F*O*A*D wrote:
On 9/1/14 1:20 AM, Califbill wrote:
F*O*A*D wrote:
On 8/31/14 12:26 PM, Califbill wrote:
F*O*A*D wrote:
On 8/31/14 3:28 AM, Califbill wrote:
wrote:
On Sat, 30 Aug 2014 13:46:34 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 8/30/14 1:14 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 30 Aug 2014 12:00:44 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

Another of our weird regs concerns AR-15s. If you buy one fully
assembled, it has to be one of only a couple of HBAR models. You can,
however, buy a fully assembled lower.

I guess I just never had the "black gun" thing.
I like wood and full power 30 cal if I am buying a center fire rifle.
I understand the attraction for the military but I am not packing 600
rounds into a fire fight, nor is my intent to inflict grievous wounds

Right, because everyone knows a 30-30 or .308 won't inflict grievous
wounds. I like the AR platform because the rifles are easy to customize
and maintain, and, for me, at least, they are accurate enough and, of
course, I only inflict "grievous wounds" on plastic and aluminum bottles
and cans and paper target. Besides, .308 ammo, American-made in brass
casings, is twice as expensive or more than brass-cased U.S.-made .223
REM ammo, and 30-30 Win is even more expensive.

You brought up 30-30 but 308/30-06 is the round of choice for snipers
who want one shot one kill. The 5.56 is designed to take the guy out
of the fight but make him a casualty who needs 2 guys to care for him.
(western European thinking)
That worked until we started fighting people who didn't give a ****
about a wounded soldier.

Price? I can get 7,.65-51 for about the same price as 5,56

The m16 was for close in work, lighter to carry, and did not climb in auto
fire. Not worth **** in open area battles. Need that 308/30.06 range and
power there.

You base this on what, your extensive experience as a Usenet Commando,
like the other mustered out soldiers here?

You never even served, and you have knowledge?

If you believe that the M16 was "not worth ****" in open area battles,
then you either read that, saw a movie about it, or were told that. Your
opinion isn't based upon experience.

Bull****. The bullet is small and lightweight. Afghanistan is long range
shooting. Is why the military is breaking out the 'm14's. Open areas not
being an opening in the wild jungle or the urban jungle. The fact the
Taliban shooter is shooting an older 30 caliber, 180 grain round at 2800
fps muzzle velocity vs. a 56 grain bullet at 3200 FPS. The Taliban shooter
is out ranging the US shooter. Shooting at 500 meters plus. An M4
carbine, just does not cut long range shooting.

Bull****? I wrote that you have no experience in open battle areas, and
that your opinion was based upon what you read, or saw a movie aboutl or
were told. Once again, Bilious, you demonstrate your inability to read for content.

You seem to think going to school for a Liberal Arts degree, let's you know
all. You have no experience in most of life, except screwing creditors,
etc. I can see he problems with a light weight round in long distance
battles. I have shot the M16 via the military. You?

No, Bilious, I did not say that having liberal arts degrees "let's you
know all (sic)." What I said was that you have problems reading for
content, as evidenced by the example you provided and upon which I
commented.

Your firing an M16 "via the military" doesn't tell you anything about
having to use a light assault rifle in an "open battle area." I have a
heavy barrel Colt AR-15, and other than not having an "auto fire
capability," it is pretty much the same as the M16. Further, most of the
"enemies" our soldiers might meet on the battlefield these days are
armed with rifles we left behind *or* with variants of the AKs. Indeed,
those rifles fire a heavier round but they are less accurate over long
distances than the M16.

Harrold

On 9/1/2014 12:47 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 9/1/14 1:25 PM, Califbill wrote:
F*O*A*D wrote:
On 9/1/14 1:20 AM, Califbill wrote:
F*O*A*D wrote:
On 8/31/14 12:26 PM, Califbill wrote:
F*O*A*D wrote:
On 8/31/14 3:28 AM, Califbill wrote:
wrote:
On Sat, 30 Aug 2014 13:46:34 -0400, F*O*A*D
wrote:

On 8/30/14 1:14 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 30 Aug 2014 12:00:44 -0400, F*O*A*D
wrote:

Another of our weird regs concerns AR-15s. If you buy one fully
assembled, it has to be one of only a couple of HBAR models.
You can,
however, buy a fully assembled lower.

I guess I just never had the "black gun" thing.
I like wood and full power 30 cal if I am buying a center
fire rifle.
I understand the attraction for the military but I am not
packing 600
rounds into a fire fight, nor is my intent to inflict
grievous wounds

Right, because everyone knows a 30-30 or .308 won't inflict
grievous
wounds. I like the AR platform because the rifles are easy to
customize
and maintain, and, for me, at least, they are accurate enough
and, of
course, I only inflict "grievous wounds" on plastic and
aluminum bottles
and cans and paper target. Besides, .308 ammo, American-made
in brass
casings, is twice as expensive or more than brass-cased
U.S.-made .223
REM ammo, and 30-30 Win is even more expensive.

You brought up 30-30 but 308/30-06 is the round of choice for
snipers
who want one shot one kill. The 5.56 is designed to take the
guy out
of the fight but make him a casualty who needs 2 guys to care
for him.
(western European thinking)
That worked until we started fighting people who didn't give a
****
about a wounded soldier.

Price? I can get 7,.65-51 for about the same price as 5,56

The m16 was for close in work, lighter to carry, and did not
climb in auto
fire. Not worth **** in open area battles. Need that 308/30.06
range and
power there.

You base this on what, your extensive experience as a Usenet
Commando,
like the other mustered out soldiers here?

You never even served, and you have knowledge?

If you believe that the M16 was "not worth ****" in open area battles,
then you either read that, saw a movie about it, or were told that.
Your
opinion isn't based upon experience.

Bull****. The bullet is small and lightweight. Afghanistan is long
range
shooting. Is why the military is breaking out the 'm14's. Open
areas not
being an opening in the wild jungle or the urban jungle. The fact the
Taliban shooter is shooting an older 30 caliber, 180 grain round at
2800
fps muzzle velocity vs. a 56 grain bullet at 3200 FPS. The Taliban
shooter
is out ranging the US shooter. Shooting at 500 meters plus. An M4
carbine, just does not cut long range shooting.

Bull****? I wrote that you have no experience in open battle areas, and
that your opinion was based upon what you read, or saw a movie aboutl or
were told. Once again, Bilious, you demonstrate your inability to
read for content.

You seem to think going to school for a Liberal Arts degree, let's you
know
all. You have no experience in most of life, except screwing creditors,
etc. I can see he problems with a light weight round in long distance
battles. I have shot the M16 via the military. You?

No, Bilious, I did not say that having liberal arts degrees "let's you
know all (sic)." What I said was that you have problems reading for
content, as evidenced by the example you provided and upon which I
commented.

Your firing an M16 "via the military" doesn't tell you anything about
having to use a light assault rifle in an "open battle area." I have a
heavy barrel Colt AR-15, and other than not having an "auto fire
capability," it is pretty much the same as the M16. Further, most of the
"enemies" our soldiers might meet on the battlefield these days are
armed with rifles we left behind *or* with variants of the AKs. Indeed,
those rifles fire a heavier round but they are less accurate over long
distances than the M16.

Cite your source, please. You have no personal experience in the matters
of which you speak..............As usual.

F*O*A*D

On 9/1/14 6:00 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 01 Sep 2014 13:47:55 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

variants of the AKs. Indeed,
those rifles fire a heavier round but they are less accurate over long
distances than the M16.

That really depends a lot on which variant of the AK you are talking
about but I agree the 7.62x39 is inferior to the 7.62x51 500 yards
down range.
The russian round is closer to a 30-30 and the NATO round is more like
a 30-06

What percentage of fire fights in Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria do you
think takes place at anywhere near 500 yards?

Here's a graphic comparing the AR and the AK...you might find it
interesting:

http://tacticalgear.com/ak-47-vs-ar-15

Califbill

F*O*A*D wrote:
On 9/1/14 1:25 PM, Califbill wrote:
F*O*A*D wrote:
On 9/1/14 1:20 AM, Califbill wrote:
F*O*A*D wrote:
On 8/31/14 12:26 PM, Califbill wrote:
F*O*A*D wrote:
On 8/31/14 3:28 AM, Califbill wrote:
wrote:
On Sat, 30 Aug 2014 13:46:34 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 8/30/14 1:14 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 30 Aug 2014 12:00:44 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

Another of our weird regs concerns AR-15s. If you buy one fully
assembled, it has to be one of only a couple of HBAR models. You can,
however, buy a fully assembled lower.

I guess I just never had the "black gun" thing.
I like wood and full power 30 cal if I am buying a center fire rifle.
I understand the attraction for the military but I am not packing 600
rounds into a fire fight, nor is my intent to inflict grievous wounds

Right, because everyone knows a 30-30 or .308 won't inflict grievous
wounds. I like the AR platform because the rifles are easy to customize
and maintain, and, for me, at least, they are accurate enough and, of
course, I only inflict "grievous wounds" on plastic and aluminum bottles
and cans and paper target. Besides, .308 ammo, American-made in brass
casings, is twice as expensive or more than brass-cased U.S.-made .223
REM ammo, and 30-30 Win is even more expensive.

You brought up 30-30 but 308/30-06 is the round of choice for snipers
who want one shot one kill. The 5.56 is designed to take the guy out
of the fight but make him a casualty who needs 2 guys to care for him.
(western European thinking)
That worked until we started fighting people who didn't give a ****
about a wounded soldier.

Price? I can get 7,.65-51 for about the same price as 5,56

The m16 was for close in work, lighter to carry, and did not climb in auto
fire. Not worth **** in open area battles. Need that 308/30.06 range and
power there.

You base this on what, your extensive experience as a Usenet Commando,
like the other mustered out soldiers here?

You never even served, and you have knowledge?

If you believe that the M16 was "not worth ****" in open area battles,
then you either read that, saw a movie about it, or were told that. Your
opinion isn't based upon experience.

Bull****. The bullet is small and lightweight. Afghanistan is long range
shooting. Is why the military is breaking out the 'm14's. Open areas not
being an opening in the wild jungle or the urban jungle. The fact the
Taliban shooter is shooting an older 30 caliber, 180 grain round at 2800
fps muzzle velocity vs. a 56 grain bullet at 3200 FPS. The Taliban shooter
is out ranging the US shooter. Shooting at 500 meters plus. An M4
carbine, just does not cut long range shooting.

Bull****? I wrote that you have no experience in open battle areas, and
that your opinion was based upon what you read, or saw a movie aboutl or
were told. Once again, Bilious, you demonstrate your inability to read for content.

You seem to think going to school for a Liberal Arts degree, let's you know
all. You have no experience in most of life, except screwing creditors,
etc. I can see he problems with a light weight round in long distance
battles. I have shot the M16 via the military. You?

No, Bilious, I did not say that having liberal arts degrees "let's you
know all (sic)." What I said was that you have problems reading for
content, as evidenced by the example you provided and upon which I commented.

Your firing an M16 "via the military" doesn't tell you anything about
having to use a light assault rifle in an "open battle area." I have a
heavy barrel Colt AR-15, and other than not having an "auto fire
capability," it is pretty much the same as the M16. Further, most of the
"enemies" our soldiers might meet on the battlefield these days are armed
with rifles we left behind *or* with variants of the AKs. Indeed, those
rifles fire a heavier round but they are less accurate over long distances than the M16.

Source? I am not referring to an AK. I am referring to those in
Afghanistan that are shooting older Mauser's, old M1 and the heavier 30
caliber rounds. And those military of ours are not shooting heavy barrel
AR's. They are shooting M4 carbines. Short barrel, light weight. Those
fighters have been fighting us, Russians, and themselves for as long as
anyone can remember. Get ambushed by some dudes at 600 yards, and which
round works better? Those Rag Heads do know war.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
It's terrific!	Jim	General	5	January 17th 10 09:41 PM
This is going to be a terrific...	Boater	General	27	November 27th 08 06:02 PM
Thom's terrific!	Capt. Rob	ASA	5	January 22nd 06 03:59 PM
A terrific site	John H	General	0	May 16th 05 12:22 PM
OT--Terrific employment news again	NOYB	General	114	June 9th 04 01:04 PM

Menu

About Us