Here's one of my favorite Bill Mauldin cartoons.
Posted on 05/26/2008 5:13:56 AM PDT by Flavius
>>It’s probably not what you want in your hands if you’re clearing a building.<<
Well, except that the M14 will take down the building, not just make mouse holes.
If you miss them ENTIRELY because you’re just throwing lead out there, though, it’s sort of a wash.
If you ask any of the men carrying the extra weight, they will tell you that they don’t mind. These are boys in their prime, with lots of kick and energy, an extra 150 or 200 rounds of weight is not what they worry about. Staying alive is.
By the way AnAmericanMother, Bill Mauldin (Willie & Joe) once had Thanksgiving dinner with us. He was my Dad’s first cousin.
In fairness to the M-1 carbine, it was not designed for the infantry. It was designed to be carried by soldiers that were not likely to be in direct contact, such as the artillery and anti-aircraft units.
My great uncle loved the carbine for standing sentry because it was so light, but when it came to combat in the jungle he wanted a shotgun or 1903 Springfield, as both went bang when you pulled the trigger.
All debate aside I am of the opinion that all combat calibers should be accurate. I have seen humans hit with 12 gauge 00 buck, 5.56 & 7.62 NATO and Sino Soviet 7.62X39, 9mm and 45 Auto get up and continue too “try” and fight so “stopping” rounds are mythical at best IMO.
I’ll take accuracy and ability too punch the target hard enough too hurt it and hopefully kill it. Everything is moot if the launcher and the BB it spews are not compatible and accurate.
Just my opinion of course........
Respects today and everyday too all my fellow servicemen and women and their family, friends and members of their communities who supported them then and now !
As well eternal gratitude too those that made the ultimate sacrifice for their families, friends and their country. Honor their memory regardless of what you may think of the conflict they fought in.
Stay safe !
I see you can not buy an M-14 at the armories any more. I am told they are going to the Marines in Afganistan. i trained on both in the 60s. If you have to reach out and touch someone the M-14 is the way to go.
i dont blame ya
It's a stoopid article full of opinions and anecdote and short on facts. Some of the scant facts don't necessarily support the "thesis", whatever it is:
In 2006, the Army asked a private research organization to survey 2,600 soldiers who had served in Iraq and Afghanistan. Nearly one-fifth of those who used the M4 and M16 rifles wanted larger caliber bullets.
What did the other more than 4/5 think? Does it matter? While valuable, the "user population" may not be aware of all the issues or trades. Field reports are only one set of facts used in making decisions. Regardless, the author owes it the reader to at least convey some inkling of what more than 80% of the respondents thought.
Guess what? Virtually every decision is a trade off of conflicting demands. If the Army went back to the M-1 Garand, the author would find fault with that.
This is a very, very poorly written story if one wants to understand the issues and the decision making process. If, otoh, one wants to smugly pronounce at cocktail parties in London, Paris or Moscow that those boneheads over at the Pentagon screwed up again, it goes a long way towards accomplishing that.
Then again, maybe I am being unduly critical and should have considered the author's decision making process. He could have written an informative and thought provoking article about the difficulties of trading off competing demands, of a bureaucracy changing gears and trying to adopt to new contingencies. That story might discomfort his editors and the readers who subscribe to the IHT in order to sustain that invaluable aura of smugness that is essential to their self image. (If Al Gore/John Kerry was president, the Army would be routing Al Queda out of caves in Pakistan with light sabers, after all.)
Faced with these competing demands, the author chose a facile and market proven intellectual dishonesty that is the hallmark of the LSM.
I agree. However, the troops in the field have been in both situations, as well as shooting at buildings with fairly light construction which a .223 will not penetrate, but a 30.06 turns into swiss cheese.
It is possible to turn out a modern rifle chambered for 30 cal. whatever that is much, much lighter than the M-14 or M-1.
I think we should train and equip the troops with both, and they carry the appropriate piece for the anticipated situation. Our logistics train can handle the extra load.
My dad loved Mauldin's cartoons, they used to look for Stars and Stripes to come out just to see what he'd come up with this time. Dad served in the same theater (Italian campaign) and he always said that everything in the cartoons was true!
When Mauldin was so sick at the end of his life, a reporter for the Orange County Calif. paper put out the word that the only thing that gave him pleasure was to hear from his fellow soldiers. My dad and his Army buddy, who went through basic together and are now retired and living 5 miles apart, sent him a card and the good word from the 34th Infantry Division.
Speaking of jungles, the British cut down the SMLE to something they called the "jungle carbine" or No. 5 rifle. Despite their expertise, they never managed to repeal the laws of physics, and that darned thing kicks like a mule! The 'recoil concentrator' on the butt doesn't help either. I have one, but I shoot it very seldom, I'm not a masochist.
From what I’ve read, the problem is the barrel length.
The SS109, 62gr. steel penetrator round will break into 3 parts if it hits above around 2800 fps.
The short 14 “ barrels on the M4 just don’t generate the velocity to get that except at point blank ranges.
The 20” barrel gets 3000+ fps though.
Wasn’t the 55gr. round used in ‘Nam a much more unstable, tumbling round?
> I’ll take accuracy and ability too punch the target hard enough too hurt it and hopefully kill it.
I’ve been through 8 or 9 fire fights, only 2 were in the daylight. Accuracy doesn’t matter at night, just stopping power and noise.
And that, my friends, is all a journalist needs to spit out copy.
Here's one of my favorite Bill Mauldin cartoons.
An old saying from years ago - We know how many rounds it takes to kill a guy, but we don’t know how many it takes to scare him to death.
In an urban environment, I'd much prefer to carry 150 rounds of a cartridge that can reliably punch through a car door or windshield and reliably kill the person on the other side, than 300 rounds that can't.
A 30-06 AP round can penetrate a 7" thick concrete wall, a 5.56 can only penetrate 1.4"
A bad guy can hide behind a tree that will stop a 5.56, but which a 7.62 will go right through
That only works against First World armies that give a damn about their wounded. What if the enemy simply leaves their wounded for US to care for, knowing that we will have to? Every wounded enemy would be a drain on us
I was in boot in ‘73 and we were trained and had to qualify with the M 14. Later in ITS we trained with the M 16.
Hubby was in at exactly the same time, same thing. They took his M14 away and he was NOT happy!
Bingo. I'll take an M4 over an M1A or M14 in that application every time.
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.