But guns get misused. All I am trying to do is to agree with the "LAW" that limits the amount of ammo carried. That, alone, keeps the body count to a lower level when they ARE misused.
You have zero evidence to backup that claim.
That is logic. Let’s say I have a five shot revolver. Obviously I can’t shoot fifty people. At least not without reloading nine times.
Conversely if the revolver is a .357 Magnum, the damage done would be significantly worse than if I was using a less powerful cartridge of the type normally found in high capacity magazines.
And the damage from a .44 Magnum would be catastrophic by comparison.
That is something the focus on magazine capacity crew never understands. If High Capacity Mags are not available people will gravitate towards the more powerful cartridges again. A .308 is roughly speaking twice as powerful as a .223 and that means more damage to the person.
In fact a .30 cal rifle cartridge is probably going to be a through and through wound. In other words there is a good possibility that you will wound a second firing into a crowd.
But people don’t understand science. And ballistics as well as firearms are a science. Even pro gun people allow bias to influence them.
Which due to size of gun and cartridge size and weight limits the number of rounds available. In the Military, there is a huge size and power difference between an Assault Rifle (.556) versus a full blown Battle Rifle (7.62 or bigger). And the cost of the Battle Rifle (even in semi auto) will far exceed most fruitcake shooters pocket books. And trying to use a hunting version is just stupid.
Really? You do know with your extensive Military Experience that the 5.56 was chosen because it created “Militarily Significant Wounds” don’t you? The idea for the readers who don’t know is that one wounded soldier takes four people out of the battle. Two to carry the wounded and one to provide security, or carry excess equipment.
A dead guy takes one off the field. A wounded takes several. And the screams of the wounded demoralize the remaining soldiers. Making them less likely to be aggressive.
The other reason the 5.56 was chosen was suppression fire. Most rounds fired are meant to get the other guy to keep his head down. The 5.56 would allow the soldier to carry more ammo with the same weight.
How would the Las Vegas shooting have played out with a .308 hunting rifle? First. The slower fire would have delayed the discovery longer. Second. The numbers killed would probably have been higher. Third, by picking his shots he would have been able to hit one with a high likelihood of hitting two. I could go on.
In nearly all the mass shooting situations a different weapon would have done more damage. A shotgun in the school shootings. Two or more wounded with every trigger pull as one example.
The one thing the mass shootings have in common is the shooters use the technique of spray and pray. Random fire to maybe hit someone. By firing into crowds they increase the likelihood of hitting someone. But as statistics show roughly 10% of those hit actually die. If we are intending to save lives why do anything to increase the probability of someone dying?
A weapon is not a magic wand of death.
No it was chosen because it was a light and small round and soldiers could carry a lot of ammo.
In fact the military has long thought the 5.56 round was under powered and are currently reintroducing the 6.8 mm
www.military.com
The 6.8 can be fired from the AR. It's the same length of cartridge, just the cartridge and bullet are bigger diameter meaning a higher impact. It doesn't mean a higher velocity, in fact, it's a slight lower velocity. But the bullet throw weight is more meaning more shock.
As I said earlier. No understanding of science. Let’s talk about kinetic energy. One of the least understood types of energy. Although I doubt most people understand much about any of them.
Kinetic Energy is ruled by a math formula. Put simply. Energy is equal to 1/2 Mass times Velocity Squared. So the bigger bullet traveling slower would have less shock. Not more. It is why the .45 ACP has about the same kinetic energy of a 9MM despite weighing twice as much. The 9MM has a higher velocity.
Higher velocities also create larger temporary wound channels. In other words the tissue around the bullet hole that is stretched, bruised, and torn by the passing of high velocity materials.
This is from a Doctor who will explain it fairly well.
I know. You don’t believe the tumbling bullet. I am not going to spend the next several days educating you on science.
However. Let’s stick with bullet size and velocity.
I’d rather not be shot with either, but if I had to choose, I’d take a round from an AK-47 over the M4 any day of the week.
www.businessinsider.com
The AK fires a bigger bullet. It should create a worse wound. Logically it would right? But here is where understanding the Math is vital. Because the bullet is slower the wound is not as bad. Remember when I said the 5.56 had satisfactory wound dynamics? Past of that equation is the temporary wound cavity. The tissue around the bullet path that is damaged or destroyed.
Now a faster bullet that is larger is much worse. The .50 BMG is both heavy and fast. So the wounds are much worse from that round.
There is a lot of science behind firearms and shooting. Until you understand that math it is hard to speak either accurately or logically on the subject. That by the way is why the 6.8 isn’t going to be adapted.
military.wikia.org
