ADVERTISEMENT

AR-15 - designed for Vietnam; expanding bullets are a war crime

Why would they? Some people refuse to be responsible, refuse to admit the truth or admit they are wrong, even partially, refuse to see how pwned they’ve been by a tyrannical violence obsessed military-industrial-congressional and libertarian corporate-fascist complex that benefits from the dismantling of the USA and the destruction of democracy itself. Fascists and fundamentalists hate complexity, hate diversity, love the “purity” of violence, yearn for an apocalyptic war led by their god.

the banality of evil means the people who do the most evil deeply believe in their own goodness and the ends-justify-means goodness of their god-given mission.
Crack kills bro.


Pee is Q, Q is pee.
 
Yupp Riley, that's what happened. It clearly wasn't you who original brought vehicles into this.
Again, WTF? You're the one who said "It isn't the ammos fault it got fired at a child.". JFC - that's the dumbest argument you've made yet. I merely used another absurd comparison to demonstrate how dumb it is.

You are the spin master. LOL.
 
AK-47s shoot 7.62x39 ammo. A 30-06 with a hollow point would do much much more damage. Ar15 ammo also doesnt tumble. If it did, it would be incredibly innacurate.
The tumble occurs in the body, not in the air.

We were always taught that the goal was to just hit the enemy. Hit them in the leg and the bullet may actually tumble and bounce off other bones and exit, say, the shoulder. I always just assumed they knew what they were talking about. Battlefield wounds (only from talking to other members that had been deployed, because I never was) would suggest that they weren't wrong.
 
Again, WTF? You're the one who said "It isn't the ammos fault it got fired at a child.". JFC - that's the dumbest argument you've made yet. I merely used another absurd comparison to demonstrate how dumb it is.

You are the spin master. LOL.
And that was in response to your question about one specific type of bullet. See how that worked?
 
The tumble occurs in the body, not in the air.

We were always taught that the goal was to just hit the enemy. Hit them in the leg and the bullet may actually tumble and bounce off other bones and exit, say, the shoulder. I always just assumed they knew what they were talking about. Battlefield wounds (only from talking to other members that had been deployed, because I never was) would suggest that they weren't wrong.
It's a bullet.


From the perspective of destruction inside the 223 is a pretty weak rifle round. To put this into perspective at 100 yards the 223 has roughly 980-1000 foot pounds of energy. A 30-06, the round from the M1 Garand has roughly 2500. At 300 yards the 223 is somewhere around 550 ft/lbs the 30-06 is 1925-1950, the heavier bullet carries the energy that much better.
 
Last edited:
  • Haha
Reactions: RileyHawk
And that was in response to your question about one specific type of bullet. See how that worked?
Nope. You're making less sense than usual. But I recognize this portion of the discussion with you - you're flailing and will do anything to keep the discussion going without admitting your foolishness. It's classic. So with that, I am out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HawkNester
It's a bullet.


From the perspective of destruction inside the 223 is a pretty weak rifle round.
All you are saying is that there are other rounds that have even more destructive power. No one is disputing that.
How much damage has to be done before you call for regulation?
 
Shock words Riley. There is not an "explosion" it breaks apart quickly upon impact because that small of a bullet can't handle the energy. When you use the word "tumble" for people that speak firearms, that means it's ability to hit something and continue moving forward generally the ground and bounce. 223s dont "tumble" they break apart very rapidly after impact and lose energy fast.
were you in the military?

I'm assuming you were

why would the military, during training, tell us they "tumble" if they don't "tumble"?
 
  • Like
Reactions: RileyHawk
were you in the military?

I'm assuming you were

why would the military, during training, tell us they "tumble" if they don't "tumble"?
I was not.


No bullet just stops. I believe you would have been using 62 grain "green tips" which are a hardened tip designed to hold itself together better. You have heard a bullet ricochet right? When firearms people talk about a bullet tumbling they are talking about 1 of two things. The bullets ability to hit something and bounce or roll in an uncontrollable manor after that(think of a connon ball) . Which makes certain rounds much more dangerous for hunting. Or, you can actually load a round with to much powder and the mass of the bullet isn't enough to hold the energy and the bullet will start tumbling in the are making it incredibly inaccurate.
 
Last edited:
were you in the military?

I'm assuming you were

why would the military, during training, tell us they "tumble" if they don't "tumble"?
The difference is in the different type of projectile used. A 62 grain full metal jacket fired from an AR15 would tumble inside the body, a hollow point will fragment. The military can not use hollow points,( see Geneva Convention).
 
It's a bullet.


From the perspective of destruction inside the 223 is a pretty weak rifle round. To put this into perspective at 100 yards the 223 has roughly 980-1000 foot pounds of energy. A 30-06, the round from the M1 Garand has roughly 2500. At 300 yards the 223 is somewhere around 550 ft/lbs the 30-06 is 1925-1950, the heavier bullet carries the energy that much better.
I agree, but what is the reason the 223 does so much damage?

I was always told it was the "Tumble" that was caused once the bullet hit bone....again, the most common analogy was that it hit a solider in the hip, and "rolled" down the leg, coming out the ankle. This was common training knowledge spouted by every soldier I ever heard talk about battlefield injuries and triage.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RileyHawk
I was not.


No bullet just stops. I believe you would have been using 62 grain "green tips" which are a hardened tip designed to hold itself together better. You have heard a bullet ricochet right? When firearms people talk about a bullet tumbling they are talking about 1 of two things. The bullets ability to hit something and bounce or roll in an uncontrollable manor after that(the ricochet) . Which makes certain rounds much more dangerous for hunting. Or, you can actually load a round with to much powder and the mass of the bullet isn't enough to hold the energy and the bullet will start tumbling in the are making it incredibly inaccurate.
Green tips for sure.

So, you agree that some types of 223 rounds will "tumble", "ricochet" or "Roll", once they come in contact with something as hard as a bone, right?
 
I agree, but what is the reason the 223 does so much damage?

I was always told it was the "Tumble" that was caused once the bullet hit bone....again, the most common analogy was that it hit a solider in the hip, and "rolled" down the leg, coming out the ankle. This was common training knowledge spouted by every soldier I ever heard talk about battlefield injuries and triage.
It's a bullet thing not a 223 specific thing. You were likely using a type of bullet (known as "green tips" a 62grain hardened nose bullet that performs very well in the 1:7 twist barrel) that certainly would have held itself together, and held more energy, than anything soft tipped)
 
Green tips for sure.

So, you agree that some types of 223 rounds will "tumble", "ricochet" or "Roll", once they come in contact with something as hard as a bone, right?
Green tips are 100% designed to do it the best a 223 is capable of doing it yes. In rifle terms though a 223 isn't good at carrying that energy, because of mass.
 
The difference is in the different type of projectile used. A 62 grain full metal jacket fired from an AR15 would tumble inside the body, a hollow point will fragment. The military can not use hollow points,( see Geneva Convention).
Yes, 62 grain.......

And yes, I'm familiar with hollow points and how and what they do on impact and exit.

I did not know that the military couldn't use hollow points. Guessing some militaries do it anyway.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gimmered
It's a bullet thing not a 223 specific thing. You were likely using a type of bullet (known as "green tips" a 62grain hardened nose bullet that performs very well in the 1:7 twist barrel) that certainly would have held itself together, and held more energy, than anything soft tipped)
So you're in favor of regulating those 223 that do the damage we're talking about?
 
So you're in favor of regulating those 223 that do the damage we're talking about?
No. Because I'm smart enough to know 22-250, 243, 25-06, 270, 6.5 grendal, and a shit ton of other short chamber cartridges exist and your grasping for bullshit without identifying the actual problem. That and its a nato round so your up shits creek there.
 
Many hunters feel it's unethical to hunt with a 223 because they've seen so many deer run off to never be found. Lots of guys try to start their kids on a .223 when they start deer hunting because there's pretty much nothing smaller that's legal. Inevitably, they switch to something with a little more punch. Those are the facts, so, if your position is that there is no place for something as powerful as a 223, that means you pretty much want to ban all center-fire rifle rounds. That's not happening so there's no reason to get your blood pressure up over it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NCHawk5
We're talking about the destructive nature of AR-15 ammo and you're referencing walls and concrete blocks.
5.56x45 and 7.62x39 will both do terrible things to human bodies.
You can hide behind many walls and just about any concrete from 5.56, much less so 7.62.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HawkinK.C.1
No. Because I'm smart enough to know 22-250, 243, 25-06, 270, 6.5 grendal, and a shit ton of other short chamber cartridges exist and your grasping for bullshit without identifying the actual problem. That and its a nato round so your up shits creek there.
Lol. Figures. All talk and no action republican.

NATO round? GTFOWTS.
 
Many hunters feel it's unethical to hunt with a 223 because they've seen so many deer run off to never be found. Lots of guys try to start their kids on a .223 when they start deer hunting because there's pretty much nothing smaller that's legal. Inevitably, they switch to something with a little more punch. Those are the facts, so, if your position is that there is no place for something as powerful as a 223, that means you pretty much want to ban all center-fire rifle rounds. That's not happening so there's no reason to get your blood pressure up over it.
Banning isn't suggested. Regulation is.
 
It's a bullet.


From the perspective of destruction inside the 223 is a pretty weak rifle round. To put this into perspective at 100 yards the 223 has roughly 980-1000 foot pounds of energy. A 30-06, the round from the M1 Garand has roughly 2500. At 300 yards the 223 is somewhere around 550 ft/lbs the 30-06 is 1925-1950, the heavier bullet carries the energy that much better.

How many shots are you going to pump out of that M1 Garand vs an AR-15? Would you rather carry an M1 or AR-15 into combat? Context would be that you had to kill a bunch of people in a short period of time.

M1
22-1105_1K__93432.1580159390.jpg


AR-15

maxresdefault.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: RileyHawk
ADVERTISEMENT