tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6557458849091969678.post4388636863257886389..comments2023-06-15T09:13:45.467-04:00Comments on Liberty's Torch: Quickies: Correcting The Record On The RightFrancis W. Porrettohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05862584203772592282noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6557458849091969678.post-5356429625004061922018-03-10T19:13:50.354-05:002018-03-10T19:13:50.354-05:00My understanding is that heavier bullets, 77 grain...My understanding is that heavier bullets, 77 grains, or others in the 70-grain range, are preferred now. Not only do they retain more velocity at long range than the lighter bullets, they are less stable, i.e. more likely to tumble, with the resulting higher lethality, when they strike a target.daniel_dayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18399665251275194585noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6557458849091969678.post-7375890440640507652018-03-10T17:13:58.306-05:002018-03-10T17:13:58.306-05:00Just as an aside - as noted above, the original AR...Just as an aside - as noted above, the original AR-15/M-16 design involved a 55gr flat bottom bullet loaded to move at 3200 fps out of a 20 inch barrel with a 1 twist in 14 inch rifle pattern<br /><br />The current M-4/M16 and most common civilian AR-15 designs have 1 twist in 7 inch rifle patterns, and the most common AR-15 designs purchased are carbine models which have a barrel and fixed flash guard total length of 16.5 inches, meaning the barrel itself is shorter<br /><br />The above results in both a much more stable round and significantly lower muzzle velocity, and a consequent significant reduction in round terminal affects<br /><br />Moreover, almost all 223/5.56 ammo is boat-tailed, resulting in additional stability and lower propensity to tumble <br /><br />What all of this means is that current AR-15 (and M-16/M-4) designs are generally less lethal (sometimes significantly so) than the original design, at least without specially designed ammo<br /><br />Of course, all of this is moot, since a civilian can purchase soft point or hollow point ammo that is far more lethal than military loads. Ammo which, of course, can be fired out of ANY rifle chambered for 223/5.56 (e.g. Ruger Mini 14)<br /><br /> Moreover, most VERY common hunting rifle and shotgun models and associated loads (30-30, 357 magnum, 12 gauge, etc.) are significantly more lethal (particularly at closer ranges) than 223/5.56, rendering the entire discussion of the uniquely murderous AR-15 just a bit ridiculousjscd3https://www.blogger.com/profile/01505056289091726700noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6557458849091969678.post-82113675856405990752018-03-10T10:59:04.634-05:002018-03-10T10:59:04.634-05:00Now, that makes some sense from a physics standpoi...Now, that makes some sense from a physics standpoint. I'd been wondering why the bullets caused so much damage, and the explanations didn't make sense.Linda Foxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15024201252345608291noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6557458849091969678.post-71735645420608502082018-03-09T17:34:54.993-05:002018-03-09T17:34:54.993-05:00CHUCK: I was quoting the designer's intentions...<b><i>CHUCK:</i></b> I was quoting the designer's intentions for the gun, and for the round <b><i>as fired from the AR-15 as he designed it.</i></b> It doesn't matter what the state of Georgia has to say about it; Gene Stoner had specific intentions, which were met <b><i>in the AR-15 as he designed it:</i></b><br />-- Lightweight, high velocity bullet;<br />-- Reduced twist rate in the barrel from 1 per 12 per inches to 1 per 14 inches,<br />-- Nitrocellulose propellant (a.k.a. guncotton) in the shell.<br /><br />The Army, whose Ordnance Corps disliked the AR-15 because it came from an outside designer, then "militarized" the gun into the M-16:<br />-- Added a manual bolt closure, which Stoner said was unnecessary;<br />-- Increased the twist rate back to 1 per 12 inches;<br />-- Loaded its shells with ball powder instead of nitrocellulose.<br /><br />There's a lot of history on the AR-15 / M-16 controversy, and the many soldiers whose M-16s failed on them during combat. It pays to be conversant with it.Francis W. Porrettohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05862584203772592282noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6557458849091969678.post-51175713112395077112018-03-09T16:59:05.763-05:002018-03-09T16:59:05.763-05:00While I understand the history of the 5.56MM round...While I understand the history of the 5.56MM round and its terminal ballistics, I must disagree with the idea that it is more lethal because of it. You are quoting the testimony of the designer who had a financial stake in it being adopted. Rep. Icord's statement is pure anecdote, not evidence. There are verified stories of men being shot in the head with a .45 ACP and surviving but I wouldn't bet that way.<br /><br />A better sense of the lethality of the round is found in the fact that it is considered under-powered and in many states illegal to use for hunting deer because it is likely to wound instead of cleanly kill. In my state of Georgia where the deer run from 100-200 pounds and a 25 caliber or higher bullet is required by law to ensure clean harvesting. If a cartridge an't be counted on to cleanly kill man-sized animals, it can't be considered "super-duper" lethal on men.Chuckhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02850408609043177929noreply@blogger.com