Go Back   Professional Soldiers ® > Special Forces Weapons > Ammo Talk

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-09-2008, 10:53   #16
incommin
Quiet Professional
 
incommin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: South Georiga
Posts: 797
[QUOTE=JJ_BPK;220141]I don't suppose that it would make much difference to the anti-gun peace-niks,,

Muskets at that time used round lead balls,, the caliber??

.62 to .75 inch bore, equivalent to the modern 16 & 12 Ga shotgun??? Which we still carry in combat.

The reason, Black Powder is a slow burning propellant, so to do any damage you needed a large projectile.


Ever see the damage .31 to .44 caliber lead balls do? There were firearms of smaller caliber during the period you speak of. You needed large calibers to do damage at longer ranges........ not because the smaller calibers didn't do any damage.


Jim
__________________
Breaking a law or violation of a regulation is not a mistake. It is willful misconduct.

"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen." [Samuel Adams]


Jim
incommin is offline  
Old 08-09-2008, 11:19   #17
JJ_BPK
Quiet Professional
 
JJ_BPK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: NOVA
Posts: 10,196
Quote:
Ever see the damage .31 to .44 caliber lead balls do?, Jim
Agreed,, I carry a 1860 Colt Navy, repro, .44 or a Lyman Plains Pistol in .54, for black power season, as back-up. Up close they are fine weapons.

The thread talked about "are .50 cal rounds legal". I just wanted to make a point that the USA and the rest of the World have been using large caliber rifle rounds forever and are un-likely to stop..

Neither will I,, as my BP rifle is an old TC Renegade, also in .54 cal. Stuff it with 120 gr of FF and she can kick some butt,, does a good job on my shoulder, too..

Keep your powder dry...
__________________
Go raibh tú leathuair ar Neamh sula mbeadh a fhios ag an diabhal go bhfuil tú marbh

"May you be a half hour in heaven before the devil knows you’re dead"
JJ_BPK is offline  
Old 08-09-2008, 14:59   #18
Air.177
Quiet Professional
 
Air.177's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Central TX
Posts: 1,390
While I find the historical information interesting, I *believe* that it doesn't really factor all that heavily into the topic at hand, as I believe that the ".50 caliber" in question would be the .50 BMG cartridge. My (admittedly minimal) understanding of this topic leads me to believe that the argument against the use of the .50 BMG round in an antipersonnel role stems from it's original designation as an "anti-tank" weapon. This early designation, which was obsolete even at the time of the Battlefield Debut of the M2 HMG, would appear to classify the .50 with the likes of the RPG, M72 LAW, AT4, Dragon, Tow, Javelin, etc. which are generally not likely to be misconstrued as anti-personnel weapons by any reasonably knowledgeable and prudent individual. (Not to say it hasn't/won't happen, but this is not their intended use)

In the big scheme of things, I really don't see these "laws of war" or the violation thereof having any actual bearing on treatment of personnel captured by the savages with whom we are currently at war. The Geneva Convention didnt have a "Don't cut off the heads of noncombatant prisoners in front of a global internet audience" clause, so the only thing these antiquated documents are realistically going to do is provide ammunition to anti-war Journalists and other Miscreants wishing to do harm to the American soldier and his appearance to the global audience.

These are just a few of my Uneducated civilian thoughts on the matter, take em or leave em.

Good times,
blake
Air.177 is offline  
Old 08-09-2008, 17:45   #19
incommin
Quiet Professional
 
incommin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: South Georiga
Posts: 797
[QUOTE=Air.177;220194]While I find the historical information interesting, I *believe* that it doesn't really factor all that heavily into the topic at hand, as I believe that the ".50 caliber" in question would be the .50 BMG cartridge. My (admittedly minimal) understanding of this topic leads me to believe that the argument against the use of the .50 BMG round in an antipersonnel role stems from it's original designation as an "anti-tank" weapon. This early designation, which was obsolete even at the time of the Battlefield Debut of the M2 HMG, would appear to classify the .50 with the likes of the RPG, M72 LAW, AT4, Dragon, Tow, Javelin, etc. which are generally not likely to be misconstrued as anti-personnel weapons by any reasonably knowledgeable and prudent individual. (Not to say it hasn't/won't happen, but this is not their intended use)

You're correct the thread was about the .50 BMG. Referencing older weapons in larger calibers that have been in use for a long time does have some bearing on the discussion. As far as weapons designed to take care of vehicles and armor being used against troops, I've seen RPG's and the 90 and 106 recoil-less used against individuals. A weapons role is to kill the other SOB. You use what you got!
__________________
Breaking a law or violation of a regulation is not a mistake. It is willful misconduct.

"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen." [Samuel Adams]


Jim
incommin is offline  
Old 08-09-2008, 18:05   #20
Air.177
Quiet Professional
 
Air.177's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Central TX
Posts: 1,390
Quote:
Originally Posted by incommin View Post

You're correct the thread was about the .50 BMG. Referencing older weapons in larger calibers that have been in use for a long time does have some bearing on the discussion. As far as weapons designed to take care of vehicles and armor being used against troops, I've seen RPG's and the 90 and 106 recoil-less used against individuals. A weapons role is to kill the other SOB. You use what you got!

Absolutely sir, Nor was I implying otherwise, just trying to illustrate the thought processes that may have lead to such discussions as these on the .50 BMG and it's "legal role on the battlefield".

Good times,
Blake
Air.177 is offline  
Old 11-20-2008, 21:52   #21
Lmmsoat
Asset
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 42
You still need to be on the look out for the un-informed. I have been correcting this myth for 7 years. Little story. I was working with some marines in the past. The Marine task force's commanding general was convoying to Ramahdi. The enemy sprung an ambush on the convoy, initiating with an IED. When the ambush line began to engage the convoy, one of the marine NCO's on the CG's vehicle began to engage them with his M-2. A col. in the back yanked him out of the turret. He screamed at the NCO telling him "that gun was not for personnel". To which the NCO promptly responded, "Why the **** do I have it then". Afterwards I had to have a discussion with this col. about the laws of land warefare.

Officially coming from a JAG officer who has had time at both the pentagon and 18th Abn Corps, the .50 cal is safe. Matter of fact if it is in the ASP it is good for all uses. Just like you can shoot down a plane with an M-4, you can kill a human with a rocket. Before any munitions in the military inventory are approved for use, they are put through a review board. This approval process certifies it in accordance with all conventions. This goes for everything from SAMs to bullets.
Lmmsoat is offline  
Old 11-21-2008, 13:53   #22
ODA572
Quiet Professional
 
ODA572's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Cincinnati
Posts: 38
I heard that one before also.

I recall hearing that old saw about not using Ma Deuce on people. I was an 11B in Basic Training at Ft. Benning in 1978. My "almost fresh from Viet Nam" drill instructor told me that one.

Then he followed it up with this: " Don't shoot at the soldier, but do try to hit his canteens, helmet, or buttons on his shirt". I thought that was good advice.
ODA572 is offline  
Old 01-05-2009, 01:03   #23
6.8SPC_DUMP
BANNED USER
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: New York
Posts: 353
I agree with everything you guys said here.

But, I PRAY that no one is killed domestically with a .50 cal, even if the shooter is justified.

The anti-gun groups would love the death of someone by .50 cal to push legislation limiting our options of bullet. A .50 cal vs. .338 Lupa or .50 cal vs. .44 Mag death would be the difference in a lot of media coverage and uneducated public outcry.

Just not worth it when there are comparable, if not better, options available for the home front.
6.8SPC_DUMP is offline  
Old 01-05-2009, 15:13   #24
Warrior-Mentor
Quiet Professional
 
Warrior-Mentor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: America, the Beautiful
Posts: 3,193
Quote:
Originally Posted by Team Sergeant View Post
"use of silenced weapons."

Whew, well thats a relief!!
Why'd you show us a picture of a Navy SEAL wearing chocolate chips?
Warrior-Mentor is offline  
Old 01-05-2009, 15:29   #25
Team Sergeant
Quiet Professional
 
Team Sergeant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 20,927
Quote:
Originally Posted by Warrior-Mentor View Post
Why'd you show us a picture of a Navy SEAL wearing chocolate chips?
Talk about necro posts!!!

You ain't going to see/find any SEAL Trident on that uniform.......
__________________
"The Spartans do not ask how many are the enemy, but where they are."
Team Sergeant is offline  
Old 01-07-2009, 07:54   #26
emoore
Auxiliary
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Georgia
Posts: 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by ODA572 View Post
" Don't shoot at the soldier, but do try to hit his canteens, helmet, or buttons on his shirt". I thought that was good advice.
I had always heard it was for shooting at equipment – but my old First Sergeant who was also a Vietnam vet clarified it for us. “Just shoot his web gear.”

I don’t see what difference it makes in war if you kill someone with a slingshot or a .50 cal as long as you kill them. Someone will have to explain to me one day why it’s inhumane.
emoore is offline  
Old 01-07-2009, 18:18   #27
7624U
Quiet Professional
 
7624U's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Jasper Tennessee
Posts: 927
Flamethrower if you want it done right and painful
7624U is offline  
Old 01-08-2009, 09:21   #28
SRGross
Auxiliary
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: NC
Posts: 81
as a former .50 cal gunner, the rules for us where 2.
1. An item on them is equipment, .50 cal are used to disable equipment or destroy it. tell them you was aiming at the rifle he was caring.
2. As a .50 cal gunner it is your primary weapon of defense, you are allowed to defend yourself and also those in harms way.

That was the end of the question asked for the JAG in 1987 Rules of Engagement.
__________________
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing
97B
SRGross is offline  
Old 01-08-2009, 10:27   #29
JimP
Quiet Professional
 
JimP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: State of confusion
Posts: 1,196
Please put this "equipment" issue to rest: the answer has been previously posted - there's NOTHING wrong/illegal/immoral with lighting up some knucklehead with a .50 cal!!!! There's some stupid JAG's out there that know NOTHING about engagement dynamics or the ROE/LOW. Some of the most insane lunatics I've heard running around spouting off as "experts" have been JAG's. A little knowledge is dangerous.

You can pop "skinny" with a tank round of that is what's convenient - it's fun to watch, besides...the kids LOVE it.
JimP is offline  
Old 01-08-2009, 10:28   #30
Team Sergeant
Quiet Professional
 
Team Sergeant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 20,927
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimP View Post
Please put this "equipment" issue to rest: the answer has been previously posted - there's NOTHING wrong/illegal/immoral with lighting up some knucklehead with a .50 cal!!!!
Good idea.

Done!

This thread is closed.

TS
__________________
"The Spartans do not ask how many are the enemy, but where they are."
Team Sergeant is offline  
Closed Thread


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Rumsfeld Targets 'Future Threats' Valhal The Early Bird 0 02-25-2004 23:28



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:56.



Copyright 2004-2019 by Professional Soldiers ®
Site Designed, Maintained, & Hosted by Hilliker Technologies