Ban the .223?

[SharonAnne]

will we ban ugly people next?

[SHOOTALL]

will we ban ugly people next?

only at the fancy night clubs

[SharonAnne]

whew, ok then, I am safe. for now

[SharonAnne]

since MIV has remained silent I think another leftist provocateur has been exposed and has left (pun intended) the field.

[Mike in Virginia]

Sharon, you stab me through the heart.  "A leftist provocateur"?  Be ashamed.  I was only helping Dee understand he ain't everyone's hero because he knows someone in the military who likes the .223.  I personally don't care for round or the weapons that shoot that particular round.  It's weak except for close up work such as in school shootings.  At 500 yards, it's very, very weak compared to the energy carried by an M1 or M14.  Why is it the best snyper weapon to date is .50 caliber.  I don't hear of many sissies using .308, .30-06, or .50 on the military snyper teams.  Maybe such sissies could be used as a spotter if they had time to hold their ears before the gun was fired.     
If I'm a leftist provocateur, what leftist did I provoke.  Was it Dee?  You're saying Dee is a leftist?  Lordy.  I knew he has some issues, but I would have not thought he was a leftist.   
Mainly, just wanted you to know I'm still here and still stirring up conversations, which without my expert input would be as dry as Iraq sand.  I know you're all thankful for my inelligence and my unlimited and seemingly magical talent of spotting those here whose opinions are always right until they hear mine, because mine are absolutely correct, as solid as fact, as certain as taxes, as aggravating as Obama. 
BTW, I've been away a little while, but you can all be thankful that I'm back.  Me, I'm thankful that you have me.  You are so fortunate in that regard.  Any individual on this site who can admit they would like to be like me, I can send you a brochure, but it's only a start.  It takes years of perfection before you can not only know as much as me, but be able to pass it on as a gift to those more ignorant, which takes in everyone.     
 

[SharonAnne]

well MIV, you apparently skipped a few posts. As you know I like to know what opinions are based on. Yes the 7.62N has more power. That is not the question. Where does YOUR opinion on the combat effectiveness of the 5.56N come from?  Comparisons to the 7.62N need not apply.

PS, read my last comment re: McChrystal

[Mike in Virginia]

Hey, no fair!  Comparisons to the 7.62 need not apply!  Seriously? 
But you have a point.  My experience with the .223 is next to nothing.  I have a Ruger Mini 14 and a Savage bolt action in that caliber.  The Mini is (or mine was) nearly useless.  I understand they've corrected the over heating problem, but mine wouldn't group at all after it was hot.  I don't imagine the AR's have that problem.  Anyway, the Savage was super accurate, and I had no doubt it would kill the long range turkeys I bought it to kill.  It always performed with minimal damage to the bird using ball ammo. 
But from all the stuff I've read (translate that into no experience), even after the early bugs were fixed to where the ugly thing still functioned, it was much more likely for an enemy to crawl away after being shot with a .223, which is a good thing, because he's out of action.  But the big guns, .the 7.62 I'm not allowed to mention, took them to Hell immediately.  Again, that's what I've read and heard and been taught by the military channel. 
I suppose it's all a trade off.  Anyway, you forgot to be nice and to remind me how good lookin' I am. 
 

[mechanic]

The 762x39 has also been described as too weak.  Those body bags coming back in plane loads in the late 60's and early 70's say otherwise.
 
When one of our tactical squads engage the enemy nowadays, armed mostly with M4's, it's the enemy who suffers most by far...because our guys are well trained and disciplined.  They also carry other weapons to call upon as needed.
 
The .223 has sent many a man..and deer to the grave and within it's design limitations, is an extremely effective round.
 
Ben

[Dee]

There ya go Ben. A THP officer friend of mine, took on a guy on armed with a shotgun back in the mid 80s, with the not yet improved Mini14 that the Texas Dept of Public Saftey issued. He popped him twice before he could fall, and was DRT. I could name several incidents of 223 stoppin fights on the street.
In the two shootings I was in 1977, and 1978, I was wishin I had my Mini, it would have worked FASTER than what I was usin both times. But back to the AR15.
Over 19 years as an Instructor, and SWAT team Instructor and leader, I never saw a properly maintained AR malfunction. In bad weather or conditions, we trained to keep the port door closed, and it kept the crap out. There has been many a malfunction in the old M1 Grand, and the M14, but few articles on them.
Are there some bad experiences out there concerning the AR. Of course, but I hear most of the noise from GUN MAGAZINE EXPERTS, that "read" everything they spue out. I call'em "Combat Queens". They know everything about fightin weapons, except what it's like to have to use'em. They believe everything they read.

[Mike in Virginia]

No M1 or M14 has ever failed.  No shot was ever taken with either weapon that the intended target didn't die immediately.  No one, except the sissies, ever missed with either weapon.  I researched it on my web site, Mikeknowseverything.com.   Every single miss or alleged malfunction was found to be the fault of the sissy who needed an AR, a gun she could actually lift to her shoulder.  Most of them were of the "don't ask don't tell" variety.  Not that there's anything wrong with that.  I once saw two fellows holding hands on the range and the instructor took their M14's away and gave them each a brand new AR.  Last I heard of them they lived in one of those New England states that allow you-know-what. 

[reliquary]

MIV:  it sounds like you need to consume fewer psychotropic compounds.
 
Any poorly maintained weapon will malfunction, including the beloved Garand and the revered M14.  There are a few WWII and Korean Conflict vets around...since your experience consists solely of reading about weapon use in combat, maybe you should go ask someone who knows.  Instead of getting your talking points from the fantasy world you seem to live in.

[SharonAnne]

as I said, leftist provocateur.  All talk.  read it here, read it there. read this is better than that, blah, blah, blah.  MIV on ignore.

[Dee]

More along the lines of a "Combat Queen Troll". If you ignore'em long enough you stop noticing the smell.

[SharonAnne]

promise?

[SHOOTALL]

I base my opinion on what those who carried weapons in battle have told me . With the M16 and A4 there is a mix. A gentalman who I work with said the sand would work on the A-4 and it was hard to keep it clean on patrol. It also suffered with prolong fireing and he said that he had seen marines with him oiling their guns in a fight to keep it going. He also noted it was an OK weapon and he picked up an AR on return home. He said the Mossburg shotgun was better for entry which his unit was involved in alot. He noted that it was effective in stopping people but he had seen it fail also in stopping people. His AR is in 6.8 spc.(so he can hunt with it ) I don't think he was in any way cutting the rifle down just stating the facts as they applied to him on his two tours . I also worked with VN vets that had used both the M14 and M16 they also had mixed feelings . Most liked it when it worked but there were issues back then. They all said it was easier to shoot which I tend to agree with as I have shot an M1A and AR both . The guys I know/knew from WW2 almost always say the M1 was good and most don't cut down the Carbine like the guys from Korea do sometimes. I think differen't conditions breed different conclusions . As for breaking or in the field problems comming up . They all had them from poor sights to bayonet attachment to poor ammo etc. I know an old marine who ran one of the ranges at the camp Perry shoot. His belt is from a M1 that he was shooting , the bolt and slide came back and off hitting him in the head knocking him out . He woke up in the hospital. The sling was all that was left that was useable so he made a belt out of it. He said it was not unsual for such to happen .
 I like to shoot the M1A alot and it shoots well out to 500 yards t came with NM bbl and sights . I have owned two match HB AR's nither shot all that well over 300 yards both were late 80's early 90's with 1 in 12 or 1 in 10 twist bbls. As for tight groups at 100 yards both are ok maybe better than the average for production rifles . Note I have not shot a purpose build long range AR past 300 yards yet. I have shot some standard rifles with 1 in 9 twist that were very accurate.
 So my very limited take is this the M1A is more powerful but also kicks more . If shooting at distance it would be a great choice . For up close to moderate range the AR seems to be a good choice . The M1A also can go thru. walls etc and would be a bad choice in a urban setting for personal defense but in the country or where large critters might need shooting it would be a great choice . The Ar is a good city gun . I had a friend who is a sniper for a local police dept. He has never mentioned any shot he has taken and there are some he or others have taken . He said the average shot is between 50 and 80 yards and a few closer. He uses a 223 for such work.
 Now I admit I was not a fan of the AR because of experinces I had back with the two match HB's I tried. But after some warm debate with a few here and some reading and dicussion with folks who used them I tried them once more and they have improved alot . They are very accurate now and work as well as any self loader. I tried hunting with one and it works ok ( I grew up hunting with shotguns and rifles of a more conventional style and still like them best for hunting , no cut to the rifle ). The M1A also works but it is a bear to tote , maybe in a stand  .
 Before you condem the 556 in the A4  consider the ammo used in it can be 10000 psi hotter than the 223 we buy for AR's it might make a difference , I tried it and it's noticeable.
 Oh well a worthless 2 cents worth.

[Mike in Virginia]

I'm upset. 

[SHOOTALL]

Why ?

[SharonAnne]

Why what?

[SHOOTALL]

why is mike upset ?

[SharonAnne]

I do not know. I have him on ignore.

[reliquary]

Shootall: very good analysis and presentation.  Having fired the Garand quite a bit for fun, the M14 extensively in training and for fun, and the M16 because I had to, I agree with everything you said.  The M16 and its kin were designed for  different purposes....which didn't include combat at anything over about 200-250 yards and/or in the desert.  I'm surprised that it performs as well as it does.
 
The problems with the M1 carbine in Korea have been pretty well documented but no one definitive reason was ever identified.  It seemed to take several solid upper-body hits from the cabine to knock down some of the Chinese and North Koreans...among the reported causes were the thickly padded uniforms they wore, drugs & alcohol, and the intense cold hampering hydrostatic shock (admittedly not much of that from the round).  Anecdotes indicate that they overcame the problem by going for head shots...
 
MIV: I, for one, am sorry that you're upset. Quit posting drivel and we'll take your comments a lot more seriously.
 
 
 
 

[SharonAnne]

reliQ, re MIV; well said

[Mike in Virginia]

I'm feeling a little better today, thanks.