Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: mhking
Too simple. Needs to be bulkier and more complicated.
13 posted on 07/26/2002 9:06:27 PM PDT by Ben Hecks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Ben Hecks
Too simple. Needs to be bulkier and more complicated.

You can bet that if this weapons System is half as effective as it sounds, the U.S Army Non-Combatants will have it modified until it is much less effective or NOT effective at all. I’m thinking of the Stoner 63 system (the basis of the AR-15, M-16, etc) of the early-mid ‘60s. Privately invented and developed and effective. Then modified, re-modified, re-re-modified, etc. by the Army to meet this spec, then that spec, and yet this other remote spec. Today, the M-16 is a nice weapon, but it didn’t need all the tampering and modifications.

42 posted on 07/27/2002 6:26:49 AM PDT by bimbo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson