Posted on 04/20/2008 1:10:11 PM PDT by kellynla
No need to confirm. I know it’s pretty standard for the military to demand some domestic production for things like this.
ping
Dead enemies are just dead. Wounded enemies are a burden on their comrades and make much better intelligence sources when captured.
I take it that you have never had someone shoot at you with the sincere intent of killing you. I have and when I fired back I was damn glad that I had an M-14 because I had zero intention of providing Intel with a better intelligence source if and when the sob was ever captured. I did feel good about supplying Intel with an almost complete corpse to photograph, measure, weigh, strip naked or do whatever else they do with enemy corpses.
Dead enemies are not just dead. They can be permanently scratched off the list of deadly threats. That’s a good feeling.
Shooting to wound is one of those stupid things that have us using a squirrel round in a military rifle. You shoot to kill the guy who is trying like heck to kill you.
Shoot to incapacitate. Whether he's dead or just out, he's still no more danger. I understand the reasons for both sides, and both types of rounds have their purpose. It's just kind of hard to be clearing a building with a rifle holding a small number of 30.06 rounds instead of a lot of lighter, smaller rounds. Out in the wide open like Afghanistan, definitely larger rounds. You still want it to have the energy to kill/incapacitate at 300+ meters.
Not with little hand-held guns.
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.