i love the fact that we can still use mines but ppl say a 50 cal is inhumane it realy makes me laugh
Poll
Should using .50 Caliber weapons against humans be illegal
| Yes | 21% | 21% - 81 | ||||
| No | 78% | 78% - 296 | ||||
| Total: 377 | ||||||
maby so i only know cause ppl said it was against the geneva convention to use bullets designed to cause injury's lol now isnt that a contradictionrdx-fx wrote:
hmm.. interesting.scouseclarky wrote:
i cant tell u y it does it i just know that even if a 5.56 mm round fire from a brand new SA-80 hits flesh it will tumble and tear trough flesh rather than punch through
Perhaps the 5.56mm tumblers are back in service with the UK.
Would just be a matter of barrel twist versus bullet weight/length/velocity.
I do know that tumbling is not designed into the performace of the M16A2+M855 ammo equation,
Nor the previous standard M193+M16A1.
[really, I'll post something on-topic here "soon©"]
i say we drop a huge cloud of CS gas on top of Iraq, put our promasks on and start zip tying the bad guys.rdx-fx wrote:
.
On another tangent;
NBC (Nuclear, Biological, Chemical) weapons shouldn't be used in general warfare. They're too imprecise, designed to be used against civilians more than military targets, and the lingering horrific casualties are.. well, horrific. NBC capability is best suited to use as a 'big stick' deterrent, to deter enemies from too eagerly pursuing a military course of action.
NBC shouldn't be used, in the same way that terrorist tactics shouldn't be used - 'proper, civilized warfare' shouldn't aspire to inflict terror in the civilian population. Leave the fear and dying to the soldiers - that's what we're paid for
You do know that fps is "Feet per Second".scouseclarky wrote:
o yeah i nearly forgot to mention that 5.56 ammo does not leave the muzzle of a rifle at 2500+ fps the SA80 has a muzzle velocity of 956 fps the lsw or light support weapon ( basically a longer version of the SA80 has a mv of 980 fps i would like to see a 5.56 mm rifle with a muzzle velocity as high as u described it it would break most of the record for rifles and probably your shoulder with the recoil it would have
The 5.56mm round is the same round as the .223 round.
Major Spittle's 2500 fps was an understatement if you ask me. A 40 grain Hornaday Vmax .223 has a muzzle velocity of 3800 fps and still has 2424 fps at 300 yards.
Source is www.gunsandammomag.com/ballistics/
Last edited by JG1567JG (2006-06-01 13:02:22)
thats why we got the sandbags....j/krdx-fx wrote:
Hrm. 120 degrees, in chem suits and pro-masks. wrestling 1000's of puking, snot smeared, sweaty Jihadis into zip ties.GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
i say we drop a huge cloud of CS gas on top of Iraq, put our promasks on and start zip tying the bad guys.rdx-fx wrote:
.
On another tangent;
NBC (Nuclear, Biological, Chemical) weapons shouldn't be used in general warfare. They're too imprecise, designed to be used against civilians more than military targets, and the lingering horrific casualties are.. well, horrific. NBC capability is best suited to use as a 'big stick' deterrent, to deter enemies from too eagerly pursuing a military course of action.
NBC shouldn't be used, in the same way that terrorist tactics shouldn't be used - 'proper, civilized warfare' shouldn't aspire to inflict terror in the civilian population. Leave the fear and dying to the soldiers - that's what we're paid for
oh fun
Haji told one of our guys that he believed we were robots; He said no live person could be out in 148 degrees doing a mission while wearing all that crap!
haha serious though, they thought the OTV was a god damn AC unit. I dont know, i tried to make it a point whenever I was driving a track, whenever I opened up my hatch and haji was there looking at me i wanted to let him know that I was sucking.whittsend wrote:
Haji told one of our guys that he believed we were robots; He said no live person could be out in 148 degrees doing a mission while wearing all that crap!
those chinooks are a wild ride, i would have loved to be the gunner sitting over the open bay.
i believe the IRA used M82s against the British Army.JG1567JG wrote:
What I can't figure out is why California wants to ban a gun that has never been used or associated
with any crime. These .50 cal rifles are not cheep and they are huge. It is not a gun that a gang banger is going to be lugging around the streets.
Last edited by tahadar (2006-06-01 13:35:36)
Second time I was on a bird in Iraq the flares went off. Scared the piss out of me...you can't even shoot back when you are a passenger, sucks. At least crew gets to man a weapon system and feel like they are doing something.
But you are right man, in the middle of the summer you can go as fast as you like, it's just like facing into a hair dryer on 'hi'.
But you are right man, in the middle of the summer you can go as fast as you like, it's just like facing into a hair dryer on 'hi'.
yeah i know i fucked up i already corrected that in another postJG1567JG wrote:
You do know that fps is "Feet per Second".scouseclarky wrote:
o yeah i nearly forgot to mention that 5.56 ammo does not leave the muzzle of a rifle at 2500+ fps the SA80 has a muzzle velocity of 956 fps the lsw or light support weapon ( basically a longer version of the SA80 has a mv of 980 fps i would like to see a 5.56 mm rifle with a muzzle velocity as high as u described it it would break most of the record for rifles and probably your shoulder with the recoil it would have
The 5.56mm round is the same round as the .223 round.
Major Spittle's 2500 fps was an understatement if you ask me. A 40 grain Hornaday Vmax .223 has a muzzle velocity of 3800 fps and still has 2424 fps at 300 yards.
Source is www.gunsandammomag.com/ballistics/
yeah they did twice once the missed the second time they did'nt it went straight through the lads body armour through the car he was checking throgh a wall and stopped 20 meters away in another walltahadar wrote:
i believe the IRA used M82s against the British Army.JG1567JG wrote:
What I can't figure out is why California wants to ban a gun that has never been used or associated
with any crime. These .50 cal rifles are not cheep and they are huge. It is not a gun that a gang banger is going to be lugging around the streets.
2nd'edunnamednewbie13 wrote:
"Just a damn minute, Lootenant! That's an on-foot A-rab, not a veeyickle! Put that rifle away and get out a smaller one...quick, buhfore he disappears!"mikkel wrote:
For regular law enforcement and military use, I would have to say yes. I don't see why anyone need to blow holes in people. That being said, I don't have anything against it being used to penetrate light armour to get to targets (Armour-plated cars, APCs, tactical shields, ect. - Not body armour).
Don't see that happening anytime soon...
I suppose an instant-kill .50 to the torso is alot more inhumane than a small-caliber, fatal sucking wound. Really, all that matters is the sensibilities of those who have to see the resultant corpses, right? The dead don't matter, is that it?
Where's all the complaints about explosives and even larger projectiles killing people in war? Why all this hubub about .50's?
And for "private" use? Who can afford that shit anyway. An average criminal Joe looking to shoot up a 7-11 isn't going to bring in a $5000+ rifle for the job. If he had one, he'd sell it. I always dream of owning large-caliber rifles for collector's sake, but I have satisfy myself with an SKS-45 once I skim through the price sheets.
if, in the off chance, they could afford to buy a .50 with ease -- they dont need a damn permission slip - if they wanna buy something like that, they can get if off the black market.
The use of .50 cal guns is a great thing, a all round reliable weapon, good penetration on soft skinned vehicles and the effects on the human body speak for themselves body armour or not...... in BF2 i can sometimes jump around in front of someone shooting me with the .50cal.............WTF??????
Bring on greater damage in BF2 what do u think?
Bring on greater damage in BF2 what do u think?
if they can use IEDs we can use .50s
Money is not realy an issue with the insurgent, mobility is his pride and joy.
A browning 50 cal with ammo is around 100 pounds, and you have to mount it on a vehicle or stand, for what to be blown to the moon by a M1a2 or other armour.
The beaty of a cheap RPG is that is it not only a armour piercing weaping but the grenade has a good blast radius with tons of shrapnel.
A wounded soldier is better then a dead soldier becouse the wounded soldier needs help from atleast 2 other soldiers. and those 2 can also can be the next target.
I see nothing wrong with 50 cal being used.......
the .223 is a much smaller round but it is highly instable, shoot someone in the leg and the bullet might exit in the chest, not humane either....
A browning 50 cal with ammo is around 100 pounds, and you have to mount it on a vehicle or stand, for what to be blown to the moon by a M1a2 or other armour.
The beaty of a cheap RPG is that is it not only a armour piercing weaping but the grenade has a good blast radius with tons of shrapnel.
A wounded soldier is better then a dead soldier becouse the wounded soldier needs help from atleast 2 other soldiers. and those 2 can also can be the next target.
I see nothing wrong with 50 cal being used.......
the .223 is a much smaller round but it is highly instable, shoot someone in the leg and the bullet might exit in the chest, not humane either....
A .50 Cal gun, as much as i dont like it, is needed.By the armed forces. Its a needed weapon when fighting an foe. It is part of the over all fighting equipment. it will send the enemy to cover, allowing the men on the ground to out manouver then and reduce the amount of men you lose. Its a powerful weapon and i dont want to see anyone get hit by it, well maybe any singer of Hip hop.
Its needed... and if i could get one...it would be mounted to my car, so come rush hour...no problems
Its needed... and if i could get one...it would be mounted to my car, so come rush hour...no problems
Water p0wnsorizes supersonic bullets, not sure what depth thoughJG1567JG wrote:
When the shit hits the fan you will use whatever gun you can.
What I can't figure out is why California wants to ban a gun that has never been used or associated
with any crime. These .50 cal rifles are not cheep and they are huge. It is not a gun that a gang banger is going to be lugging around the streets.
As far as the .50 cal being able to defeat all body armor is true but to the best of my knowledge any high powered rifle (i.e .308, .223, 7.62) will defeat regular law enforcement bullet proof vests. I dont know about the military body armor but I think the only way to stop a high powered rifle round is to use a ceramic plate in the vests.
roughly 4 ft give or take faster the bullet less penitration on low velo ammo (pistol, shotgun slug)Sarrk wrote:
Water p0wnsorizes supersonic bullets, not sure what depth thoughJG1567JG wrote:
When the shit hits the fan you will use whatever gun you can.
What I can't figure out is why California wants to ban a gun that has never been used or associated
with any crime. These .50 cal rifles are not cheep and they are huge. It is not a gun that a gang banger is going to be lugging around the streets.
As far as the .50 cal being able to defeat all body armor is true but to the best of my knowledge any high powered rifle (i.e .308, .223, 7.62) will defeat regular law enforcement bullet proof vests. I dont know about the military body armor but I think the only way to stop a high powered rifle round is to use a ceramic plate in the vests.
and if you want inhumain i got one word for ya.......... flachett you shoot a guy in leg and he is spiting them out and you really don't wanna survive after that cause they gotta "dig" to get em all out
Last edited by manitobapaintballa (2006-06-14 15:39:17)
look who says yes, it should be illegal. lol
"lupia"-christ scouseclarky, do you have any idea of what you'r talking about. it's lapua. the .50", whether a machine gun or sniper rifle, is as much a psychological weapon as a destructive weapon. the .50, being fired out of anything, is extremely destructive, loud, and disorienting. you wanna destroy unexploded ordinance, disable vehicles, tear down small buildings, grab the .50. you want to eliminate any hostile soldier, guaranteed, with one shot, get the .50, oh wait, that would be mean spirited and brutal. since when is war not brutal? a 5.56 or 7.62 does a lot of damage, but I guess not an obscene amount of damage. we drop bombs that literally pick up the earth below enemy soldier's feet and burry them. we use anti-personel mines that are designed to eviscerate limbs. gimme a break, we aren't releasing mustard gas or nerve agents. it's war we're talking about. the shittiest things human beings can do to each other. and besides, any nation that would follow these rules, we would never fight against. show me the enforced rule against IED's and we can start talking about restrictions on weapons. and what would you do to a person who violated a .50cal rule? punish him for killing enemy combatants? punish him for using a bullet .192 inches larger than the standard sniper round?
i live in cali and some people out here are cra-z and want to ban all weapons... soon we will be as bad as england (where they are trying to ban steak-knives cuz the losers there got all tha guns banned and are bored)yerded wrote:
American "authorities", especially in California, want to ban 50 cal weapons because their behavior is such that they know they should get whacked, and 50 calibre weapons defeat all body armor.GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
no conventional weapon should be illegal when it comes to war.
.50 cal is not inhumane... it puts those damn jihads out of their misery quicker
yes u moron thanx for pointing out that i cant spell but i do know what im talking about im not a retard i belive it or not am ex army and i dont disagree with the use of a .50 cal as a tactical weapon or any other weapon that would keep me or my former comerades alive what i was saying is how is a .50 cal any more inhumane than any other type shape or diameter of ammo used by the armed forces today. god it pisses me off when ppl start to rant without reading all the posts properly. go read all the ones i have posted then u might be educated as to what i was sayingReciprocity wrote:
"lupia"-christ scouseclarky, do you have any idea of what you'r talking about. it's lapua. the .50", whether a machine gun or sniper rifle, is as much a psychological weapon as a destructive weapon. the .50, being fired out of anything, is extremely destructive, loud, and disorienting. you wanna destroy unexploded ordinance, disable vehicles, tear down small buildings, grab the .50. you want to eliminate any hostile soldier, guaranteed, with one shot, get the .50, oh wait, that would be mean spirited and brutal. since when is war not brutal? a 5.56 or 7.62 does a lot of damage, but I guess not an obscene amount of damage. we drop bombs that literally pick up the earth below enemy soldier's feet and burry them. we use anti-personel mines that are designed to eviscerate limbs. gimme a break, we aren't releasing mustard gas or nerve agents. it's war we're talking about. the shittiest things human beings can do to each other. and besides, any nation that would follow these rules, we would never fight against. show me the enforced rule against IED's and we can start talking about restrictions on weapons. and what would you do to a person who violated a .50cal rule? punish him for killing enemy combatants? punish him for using a bullet .192 inches larger than the standard sniper round?
.50 cal INJURIES? OK man....98% of the people who get hit with these die. The others wish they were dead.mikkel wrote:
Just to clarify again, I'm not all for hugs and kisses, but some of those .50cal injuries you see are horrific.
DEAD IS DEAD! If they die, in war, does it really matter WHAT killed them? Whether it was .50cal or 9mm, they're still dead. Taking the .50cal away from our armed forces doesn't mean that the terrorists that already have one are going to give theirs up too.