Posted on 01/08/2013 11:27:35 AM PST by PilotDave
Retired Gen. Stanley McChrystal called for “serious” gun control measures on Tuesday, saying the weapons used by his troops in Afghanistan don’t belong on the streets of America. McChrystal said the M4 Carbine he often carried in the military held a .223 caliber round capable of doing “devastating” damage to a human body.
“It’s designed to do that, and that’s what our soldiers ought to carry,” McChrystal said on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” Tuesday morning. “I personally don’t think there’s any need for that kind of weaponry on the streets and particularly around the schools in America."
(Excerpt) Read more at nydailynews.com ...
My .300 Win Mag would really give him the heebie geebies. I am spot on with my 165 and 180 grain bullets out to 800-1000 yards.
You will find that ALL “Modern” General and Flag Officers(O-7 and up) and MOST “Modern” Senior NCO/Petty Officers(E-7 and up) are SERIOUS Gun Grabbers and NOT to be trusted.
We all know that the 5.56 round was designed by Geneva Conventions to have a higher survivability than the previous rounds.
These rounds were approved in warfare because of their ballistics properties.
Places like CT still ban the AK-47, in favor of the 5.45 AK74. They think it’s a “less lethal” round - but they couldn’t be farther from the truth. One of these rounds will pierce a TREE. When used in a combat situation, the bullet always goes through the target into the targets behind it. It’s highly lethal round.
But it’s a feel-good legislation.
I have a lot of conversations where I will present the rather devasting round that I carry (any +P .45 in hollowpoint or hydra-shock) and I compare it with a 5.7 195 round. Just about everyone out there doesn’t believe me that a thick down coat is reasonably protective against the .45, and that the .45 is a more humane round (situationally) than the 5.7.
When we talk to people, we need to cover these bases. You will never turn a gun-hater around to our viewpoint on the second amendment. They aren’t an undecided voter in that regard. What you CAN turn them around to is the technical aspects of a gun.
Point out that the previous attempts at ammo regulation have bred designs and ballistics that are more dangerous outside of the combat zone. Teach them that the 5.56/.223 round is what it is, and teach them the difference between the AK47 and AK74 regulation designs. Also, bring up the ballistics charts or facts between the .17HMR, 22 Mag, and 5.7 rounds.
Teach them what the hollowpoints that the DHS and IRS (and others) have ordered actually DO, and why they too should be frightened by the concept.
Keep the conversation off of the second amendment. If they are against it, they are against it. There is no conversion before a civil war. They have chosen sides already.
Another officer reveals himself as a moron.
And now tell me about how the Military would never turn their guns on U.S. citizens.
A former friend of my son is a National Guard Colonel. I asked him if he would follow orders issued by Obama to fire on U.S. citizens under a Martial Law situation.
He replied he could envision NO circumstance in which he would not.
he is thinking of us vs them were “them” is the citizens. He is not thinking “rights edowed upon by their creator...”
beltway disease has set in.
Well, let me say that “military-style” [snark] generals should not be on the airwaves of America.
The General can relax. Weapons such as the M4 that he carried are select fire and are prohibitively expensive to own. Additionally, M855A1 ammunition is impossible to find and even if anyone could it would also be cost prohibitive.
Reprehensible, despicable, blatant BS.
Does McChrystal really believe the AR-15s, etc., purchased by U.S. civilians, are capable of fully-automatic fire?
Is possible that he could that ignorant?
Is he completely unaware of the National Firearms Act of 1934, as well as the so-called "Firearm Owners Protection Act" of 1986, and the onerous restrictions they placed on ownership of automatic weapons?
I loathe and detest people like McChrystal.
He is, at best, so incredibly ignorant about firearms and firearms laws, it boggles the mind. Yet he doesn't let his staggering ignorance deter him from running off at the mouth, as though he's some kind of expert.
Nice to know there is at least one wanna be dictator around to take over once the statists completely tank the economy...
Translate please...
Too many negatives for this old brain to decide whither he would or wouldn’t.
How about homicidal maniacs and psychotics? They are the real problem, general!
The General is NOT an authority on the Constitution or the Second Ammendment.
His opinion on what “should” or “shouldn’t” be is irrelevent.
We must continue to make clear that the Second Ammendment is a protection agains tyranny!
That is what a lot of Red Coats said on the return to Boston on April 19th, 1775...
For the lurkers. The .223 round that the general is saying is so powerful is really a squirrel gun. It was chosen by the modern military for 2 reasons. 1. It’s cheap. 2. In a war situation it’s often better to wound an enemy than kill them. That way the other soldiers must care for the wounded, instead of fighting.
Both the .308 (primary ww2 rifle cartridge) and the 30-06 (ww1) are roughly twice as powerful as the .223 in terms of ft. pounds of energy at the muzzle. Both of those rounds are also MUCH more effective as the range increases out beyond 300 yards. NO military sniper uses a .223.
I think most patriots already recognize who the enemy will be in a martial law situation.
FR readers, if you respect your constitutional rights, do not enable fools such as Retired Gen. Stanley McChrystal by buying his stinking book.
“He voted for Obama at least once.”
Not only that, he neutered Spec Ops missions in Iraq, and that’s why he was appointed by Odumbo.
Stay retired. What an illiterate asshole.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.