[Sooth2222]

".223 is devastating, as opposed to all the others? Please."

I think the reason the 5.56mm AR is so popular with farmers and ranchers for varmint control is that it's much easier to carry and shoot than a 7.62mm and more effective than the .22LR. It has been a matter of debate since the AR15 was introduced in Vietnam if the 5.56 NATO round is even powerful enough.

[PapaBear3625]

I think the reason the 5.56mm AR is so popular with farmers and ranchers for varmint control is that it's much easier to carry and shoot than a 7.62mm and more effective than the .22LR. It has been a matter of debate since the AR15 was introduced in Vietnam if the 5.56 NATO round is even powerful enough.

.223 has over twice the muzzle energy of a .45, which is described as a very effective man stopper. The problem is the use of full-metal-jacket bullets in high-twist-rate barrels. They just go in one side, out the other, and don't dump that much of their energy into creating a big wound.

The original Stoner model WAS "devastating". It used a "1 in 14 twist" barrel, whose rifling would just barely stabilize the bullet in flight. When it hit, the bullet would tumble and create a big wound channel.

Hollow-points and blended-metal (fragmenting) .223 bullets WILL produce "devastating" damage.