Because the object of shooting an enemy (in warfare) isn’t to kill target, but to wound it. A wounded soldier is supposed to tie up 4-5 other soldiers, medics, etc.
Doesn’t work when dealing with terrorists, of course. They don’t have the same support requirements real armies do.
Also, the 7.62mm NATO is uncomfortable for some smaller soldiers. And you can carry more ammo.
I never heard that before. It’s not very comforting.
Helped sponsor a hog hunt, for the “Wounded Warriors” last year. My group was 5 men who had been wounded in Afghanistan and Iraq. While sitting around the camp fire one night discussing combat rifles, calibers and cold beer, i asked them what would be their rifle of choice. Their reply was unanimous, the M-14. The inability of the 5.56 to penetrate even the thinnest of mud or brick walls was the reason. One commented he could make his own door with a 7.62.
I wonder who started this myth. I've heard it so many times over the past 17 years from differing sources. This supposed rationale will never die, it seems.
The object of shooting any assailant is to effectively stop them. The same holds true for self-defense. Stop, not necessarily kill, although in war I'll take the stop/kill.
The 5.56Nato was desirable because a soldier could handle a weapon so chambered when the selector switch is set to full-auto, which was untrue for the M14 (7.62Nato) which tended to walk-away. Also some of the first reported terminal ballistics were impressive--a barely stablized 55gr projectile in a 1/14 rate-of-twist barrel--ripping limbs off. We messed this up by improving the rifles "long range" performance by going to a 1/12 and then subsequently to a heavier/longer projectile(62gr M855/SS109) in a 1;/7 twist to improve penetration on helmets at 300 meters. After 75 yards the bullet became a drill losing its "explosive" terminal performance. (see Gabriel Suarez' "Tactical Rifle")
One can never carry too much ammo, even 5.56 Nato. But can you carry 2x or 3x's as much 5.56Nato to achieve the same results of the 7.62Nato? No. And only hits count. For stopping effectiveness we should adopt a projectile with a longer/heavier softnose design OR neck the existing case up to 6mm (80/85/90 gr) which are adequate for smaller spieces of deer and presumably two-legged game.
The 6.8SPC effort seems the right way to go, but it requires more mods to the underlying platform: new upper/barrel, new follower, new magazines. With the 6mm upgrade, only new barrel is needed. Of course this is a nighmare waiting to happen: chambering 6mm projectiles in your 5.56 chamber. It probably wont go into battery and will create weapon-neutralizing jam.
The opposition leaves their own bleeding on the ground for US to take care of, or puts a round in their heads if they suspect that leaving one of their own is a danger to their opsec
I've heard that several times.
I never wanted to wound anybody. ever...
In fact I wanted to turn anybody that shot at me into mist. I'd worry about the 4-5 other guys later.
Then I'd try to kill all of them also. Especially if they were shooting or talking or looking or breathing....
I've been told that and might have heard talk among men who shot or were about to shoot men, and not one time did I ever hear, "That mother-f#cker over there with his head up...yeah, that f#cker.... wound him, so that 4-5 other guys will have to take care of him."
From what I may recall, it went more like "Over there, yeah you dumba@@...over to your left... see where the tree and that bush are... yeah, yeah, yeah..." then about 4 or 10 bursts and some grenades if you've got them... you go poking around and sure enough, you got one or two or even if you're lucky 3 guys in the process of dying or holding their breath forever.
Now I'm not saying that wounding a guy isn't a bad thing. But I can pretty much bet you several rounds of Shiner Bock that there isn't one Marine that I know of that's been in a firefight of any length.... 10 seconds to several hours that wanted to wound somebody.
My favorite weapon you ask. A radio and maybe a laser. Cause I can't carry 500lbs of explosive to wound anybody...hahahahahahahaha...just kidding.
Up close a shotgun is real nice. Farther away I like something with a scope and night vision.... up close a .45 and then a real sharp knife when all else fails.
Oh yeah... my elbows, knees, feet and hands if I really screw up and can't find a big piece of wood or steel.
This is only my opinion and I could be wrong.
It's meant to be uncomfortable when it enters the body. ;-)