Terrs hit America: LE or Military Response?

[GoodOlBoy]

PS I did read the above links. What's your point?

I can post links to every side of the argument on that round and that is the problem. The point is the 5.56 is a mediocre round at best when used in a ar/m16 platform on full tilt. For a precission platform (ie a bolt gun) in the hands of the right person it is a dirty deadly nasty little bugger. But spray and pray is no substitute and far to often LE and military don't have time or don't take time to stand around for slow single shots. In a situation where you are firing multiple rounds on the two way range, hoping to penetrate barrier/armor/camel dung you need a round that will effectively do the job and still have overkill on the other side. And then you get to longer range shots out of the same platform. Again you are not going to shoot 600 yards with a 5.56 and kill the target very danged often with a ar/m16 platform. You can do it with a BAR (30-06) or an M1Garand (30-06 or 308 version). There are even those who can do it with an AR-10 in 308.

The 5.56 has outlived its military assault rifle usefullness. We are not on a peacekeeping mission we are at war. We cannot guarentee that the bad guys are always going to be in the sweet spot of the 5.56s range. Replace it. Use a 6mm, or a 308, or a 30-06, or a 458 socom, or a 50 beowulf, or a heatseaking slaggergag or whatever. But for the love of all that is good and holy don't hold on to it out of stubborness when there are better options for our boys and girls.

GoodOlBoy

[Skinny Shooter]

I'll have to agree to disagree with you on a number of points.
I would invite you to post those opinions on Ar15.com or M4carbine.net.
There are folks there that have been there and done it that can give you much better info than I can on how they feel about the 5.56 in combat.
I don't have the time or inclination to debate this. This debate has been going on for many years now and my input isn't going to make a difference.

Allen

[GoodOlBoy]

Yea that would be the place to debate it a board dedicated to fanatics of the gun type. After that I can go to potheads.com and argue why pot should be illegal.

Anyway.

GoodOlBoy

[GoodOlBoy]

Facts aside everybody wants a link. Growing up in a military family with half a dozen vets apparently counts for nothing so here we go. I will post them as I dig them back up. i don't keep them bookmarked because I don't care to.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...t/1986/MVT.htm
7.62mm vs 5.56mm

After that go spend some time at snipercentral, then at urbansniper, then do a search of each of the calibers independantly and compare. Then go get a few rifles of both and see what you get. There is a reason why 223s (or yes even 5.56) go tink on a free swinging 1" steel plate, and 308 or 30-06 damage the plate with a CLANG when you shoot it. Even the 7.62x39 makes a heck of a dent at 150 yards in the steel. Which is probably why you can get ARs chambered in 7.62x39 now as well.

Everybody can also take up a collection and send me enough money to buy an AR-15 and AR-10 a BAR, and a Garand in 308 and I will do the tests myself, video tape it, and post the results if you want. If so I will show the results on steel at 50, 100, 200, 300, 500, 600, 800, and 1000 yards from the different calibers. In fact for that matter I will do the same shots and tests on plywood, car doors, geletin, whatever you want.

Our boys and girls should never carry a rifle not capable of kills out to 600 yards from a single bullet fired prone without ten grand worth of electronics and gear. The marines used to train at 1000 yards without all the extra BS. Someday some terrorist is going to find a way to throw a EMP blanket over an area and our people are gonna get geeked because they depend on electronics WAY to much.

Anyway.

GoodOlBoy

[GoodOlBoy]

Alrighty first of all let me appologize for my tone yesterday. I realize now that it was more than a bit harsh, chalk it up to the migrain I had all day long (had the lights off in my office because it was so bad).

Now let me approach this from another direction. Within its limitations the 5.56/223 in the AR/M16/M4 platform is a great round. The whole setup however is a MEDIUM range setup compared to cartridges of the past. It doesn't mean the caliber nor the platform is junk thats NOT what I am saying. It means that I think the usefulness of a medium range assault rifle setup is in just that. . . . a MEDIUM range ASSAULT rifle setup. FAR too many organizations are trying to use this platform and setup for a long range solution, and while yes there are people who can make the shots at long range even with this setup this is not what it was designed for and not where it shines. Let me give an example below.

We have a local on campus building that is 16 stories tall with an additional 12 feet over the center columned elevator bank. Should a shooter with a 30-06 manage to take a stand on top of that bank all the buildings within 2000 yards except for two at approximately 900 yards that are side by side are 5 stories or less in height. AND there is NO other buildings withing 150 yards of the base of this tower. East of the building is clear nothing for 240+ yards then there are a few single story buildings. North of it are two dorms at 4 stories tall at approximately 150 yards out. North of those at approx 900 yards from the base of the tower are two 14 story towers that are 45 yards apart along an east west axis. West of the tower there are a few 4 to 5 story buildings approximately 400-500 yards out and further. South of the building there is nothing for maybe 700 yards before you get to parking lots, tennis courts, etc. There are no cover places on top of most of those buildings, AND the roof entrance to the tower is on the north face of the elevator shaft he would be setting on. IF a shooter with a 30-06 deer rifle who knows ANYTHING about shooting gets up there you are in SERIOUS trouble since ALL local law enforcement are equiped with ONLY ARs in 223, and I MEAN 223 they are not using 5.56. I am not saying we should dump ALL AR and M16 platforms. I am saying I have seen these guys shoot and a couple of them could probably drive home, get a deer rifle and make a pretty fair attempt at a shot, but the danged sure can't do it with the ARs they are issued. If there were even a SINGLE shooters armed with a 308 bolt gun or an AR-10 there are a FEW (not alot but a few) places they could take a shot from. Myself I wouldn't want to do it with anything less than a 308 bolt gun. I would be willing to attempt it with a 270, 25-06, or 30-06 bolt gun from any of those places.

Thats the Scenerio that got the local law enforcement the ARs in the first place. As I said. It was a BAD choice in my opinion on the part of BEAN COUNTERS to buy JUST the ARs. The local town PD wanted additional budget for four 308 caliber bolt guns and training for four shooters for the guns. The bean counters decided that money was excessive, and cut the budget.

THATS what has me ticked off. SO please stop sending me arse chewings via phone and email.

Thanks

GoodOlBoy

[Skinny Shooter]

Originally posted by GoodOlBoy
Thats the Scenerio that got the local law enforcement the ARs in the first place. As I said. It was a BAD choice in my opinion on the part of BEAN COUNTERS to buy JUST the ARs. The local town PD wanted additional budget for four 308 caliber bolt guns and training for four shooters for the guns. The bean counters decided that money was excessive, and cut the budget.

THATS what has me ticked off. SO please stop sending me arse chewings via phone and email.

Thanks

GoodOlBoy

Anyone that feels the need to chastise GOB thru email or phone, please reconsider doing that and let it be.

Sorry I didn't get back on here since yesterday.
Yesterday we had an emergency call that went awhile, then we had our monthly meeting and got home at midnight.

GOB, you and I are still Buds and this discussion is no different than two folks with differing opinions around a campfire. I value your input here and I'm sure others do too.

I agree about having access to a bolt rifle in a heavier caliber for that application. Maybe the folks holding the budget strings will see the light eventually.
Allen

[GoodOlBoy]

Yep we are. I am not about to let a little disagreement stop that. I understand about emergencies, I am just now gettting back to my desk, about the time I hit submit eariler we had a vehicle do some acrobatics and land in trees a few blocks away because it is raining and apparently you should drive faster in the rain.

ANYWAY back to the ORIGINAL point of the thread since I hung my behind out there like I did.

I think it will wind up being taken on by a mix of LE, Feds, and military even though it shouldn't be touched by military inside the US.

GoodOlBoy

[DON WALKUP]

i sincerely doubt LE, and i know military, would not allow civilian 'assistance' when it comes to firearms and related operations...they, for the biggest part, look down their noses at our (civilan public) being able to use a firearm.

GW bush summed it up when he said "we do not approve of vigilante activities" without really understanding, or acknowledging, the meaning of "vigilante"...when he was asked about the minutemen along the mexican border.

i once asked an LEO what he thought of having 'assistance' from a "civilian" and he replied, "i shutter at the thought of it..."

i, for one, have little faith in LE/civilan cooperation being sucessfull.

the average civilian shows up at a 'hotspot' armed and ready to assist, would more than likely, be arrested.

i don't know what the answer is...but i suspect you cannot look to LE to allow you to help even if they needed it.

and...yes...i knew many guys that dumped the m16 and picked up VC/NVA weapons.

the 5.56 as a combat cartridge debate continues...talk to a recent vet and he'll more than likley bow to the altar of the 5.56...guys in my era...vietnam...more than likely the .30 cal...we used the 30-06 M1 garand and the M14 in 7.62...walked many patrols with either...now, the M4 laden with all the gadgets, is around the 10 lb level...why not have a cartridge to make it worth carrying?

[Mil Dot]

Just in reading the original question it seems dependent on the scope of the attack and duration. I mean that the 1st responder may be the armed citizen with a CCW at the scene who may be able to take a couple bad guys out prior to LEO's arrival. Your LEO is going to be the initial official response because of 911 calls to any incident and until they know it's an organized terrorist event(s) they'll continue to respond to multiple sites till the light comes on. Unless you, as a American citizen, are ready to have LEOs or Military walking the streets, airports, etc with automatic weapons as you see in countries outside the US you will be the first response to any incident because you're there. I feel the circumstances would play out similar to 9/11. Who were the 1st responders who actually "took it to the terrorists" citizens on flight 93. When faced with certain death or fighting to live they made a decision which undoubtably saved lives at the target that wasn't hit. Unfortunately, in a terrorism scenario, the terrorists have already done all their planning and are executing while LE, FBI and Military will all be starting at zero. By the time these orgs figure out the program the terrorists will be bunkered up and you'll need a JDAM to get them out or the damage will have already been done. 20,000 troops in Texas don't do you a bit of good if they hit 20 different cities across the country on the same day. Sort of like having a pistol in your pants and the bullets in the trunk.

[GoodOlBoy]

Good point MD.

GoodOlBoy

[8X56MS]

So far Bush has kept us safe. The ball is in hussein's court now. I fully expect his foreign and domestic policies to allow another attack.
LE or military response is fine. Just as long as they kill a lot of the ones that would have been responsible. That means both here, and where they came from.

[44mag]

i am no expert, having no
experience with most of the
platforms being argued.

friends that i know ( a little
older than me, as i was too
young for 'nam) who were
in vietnam preferred the
m-14; lacking that, many did
pick up ak's to replace their
m-16's.

i understand that there were
problems originally with the
m-16, many of which i'm sure
have been fixed, as it has
been around awhile now.

the friends i mention all have
ak's, ar-15's, m-1 garands, etc..
they like all of them, but if you
gave them a choice of weapon
for war today, they would
still pick the ak over the m-16.

[Larryjk]

Looking at the different posts I am not sure what to actually respond to! Looks like it has degenerated to an argument over the .223 vs .308.
First, I had an opportunity to spend an hour with a US special operations soldier from Afganistan. The local LE are the ones who are fighting the terrorists. The local military are the ones watching the border and trying to keep terrorists out. The US military is mainly involved with the local LE and receiving great help from Predator strikes. She said there were about 6000 US troops in the southern aea where she is involved. The additional 30,000 troops we hear are going to be moved from Iraq to Afgan duty will really be a great addition. She is involved with the training of the local LE types and trying to stop some of the local crime. (Acid strikes on female students).
.223 vs .308. The marines in Iraq were looking for M14s so they would have a weapon capable of killing a target at 800 yards instead of just wounding. They said the .223 just didn't have the energy at the longer range. Special operations riflemen (Marine snipers) will use just about any bolt action .30 caliber they can get their hands on. The involved marine I know said he used a model 70 Winchester in 30-06 in the "pacification" of Fallugia.