Firearm Forums - Arms Locker banner

1 - 12 of 12 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,117 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
fire. Little children can't tell the diff between want to and have to. Adults are SUPPOSED to know the diff. Clowns don't qualify as adults. That's why you THINK that a bolt action will suffice, why you THINK that you wont need a suppressor, and why you THINK a 308 auto has more range than a 223 auto has, etc.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,805 Posts
"That's why you THINK that a bolt action will suffice"

Remember Cpl Alvin York? He took out two sections of belt fed machine guns with a bolt action .30-06. Perhaps they are good weapons afterall.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,648 Posts
I find it very interesting that ANYONE would claim that a .308 doesn't have a greater range than a .223.

But for whatever reason, the .223 is not showing up at the 1,000 yd line, so I have to wonder.

If you don't have to fire, and you choose not to, then your weapon is of no consequence. In other words, the decision to shoot or not to shoot has ZERO to do with what weapon you have in your hands.

The weapon you have may define at what point you can make that determination.

For an example, a pistol pretty much limits the decision to very close range. A 50 caliber might make the decision possible at a half mile or more, and may force the decision before they are within 100 yds.

Personally, I'd the like the ability to make that determination at as great a distance as possible. (but am not likely to choose a .50, for a bunch of reasons.)

This is called tactics.

If the determination has been made that it is necessary to shoot. (remember, no defined scenario has been presented, so any insults or name calling are just a waste of bandwidth) And we have not defined what factors are involved in making that determination.

The farther out you can engage the enemy effectively, the more time and room you have to manuever, scoot, recover from an OH SH!T, etc.

If you wait until they are very close, you run out of options.

Now, that does not say that there aren't times when you let them get very close. You may hope that you are hidden and they will pass you by.

But, YOU should decide the terms of the engagement, not them. That way they are reacting to you and hopefully having an OH SH!T moment. Otherwise you are reacting to them and are not dictating the terms of the engagement.

Tactics are far more important than which caliber or action your weapon uses.

My two cents.

:devil:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,648 Posts
Oh, and let me state for the record, I'm not a combat vet and may be off base, but this is advice I have gotten from those that have been there, done that.

:devil:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
549 Posts
I am not a soldier, but I watch a guy who plays one on Mail Call. How many of you guys caught the special on the US Army sniper program. Those guys were belly down with bolt guns in .308 caliber. What did that Hathcock guy use in Vietnam? Seems like a Winchester Model 70. Was it an '06 or a .308?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
160 Posts
The problem with this BS is that the only way to know for certain that you had to fire is when it's too late to do anything about it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,277 Posts
They sure didn't use POS 11" CARs for sniping. Only a wannbe with no miltary experience could be so enamored with a weapon that makes the 30/30 look good.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,648 Posts
polesmoker said:
The problem with this BS is that the only way to know for certain that you had to fire is when it's too late to do anything about it.
Thats the issue. It's never been established what the scenario is, or what constitutes "having to shoot".

which pretty much makes it pointless. I offered advice, but hopefully acknowledged the lack of any meaningful parameters to the excercise.

I've asked him, many times in the past, to frame the scenario so that it at least makes sense. But given the communication skills required to do so, I guess I shouldn't hold my breath.

:devil:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,524 Posts
I find it very interesting that ANYONE would claim that a .308 doesn't have a greater range than a .223.

But for whatever reason, the .223 is not showing up at the 1,000 yd line, so I have to wonder.

If you don't have to fire, and you choose not to, then your weapon is of no consequence. In other words, the decision to shoot or not to shoot has ZERO to do with what weapon you have in your hands.

The weapon you have may define at what point you can make that determination.

For an example, a pistol pretty much limits the decision to very close range. A 50 caliber might make the decision possible at a half mile or more, and may force the decision before they are within 100 yds.

Personally, I'd the like the ability to make that determination at as great a distance as possible. (but am not likely to choose a .50, for a bunch of reasons.)

This is called tactics.

If the determination has been made that it is necessary to shoot. (remember, no defined scenario has been presented, so any insults or name calling are just a waste of bandwidth) And we have not defined what factors are involved in making that determination.

The farther out you can engage the enemy effectively, the more time and room you have to manuever, scoot, recover from an OH SH!T, etc.

If you wait until they are very close, you run out of options.

Now, that does not say that there aren't times when you let them get very close. You may hope that you are hidden and they will pass you by.

But, YOU should decide the terms of the engagement, not them. That way they are reacting to you and hopefully having an OH SH!T moment. Otherwise you are reacting to them and are not dictating the terms of the engagement.

Tactics are far more important than which caliber or action your weapon uses.

My two cents.

:devil:
Actually they ARE showing up at the 1K yard line - but none of them are shorty CARs using the GI round.

But there is a huge difference between shooting a target and shooting someone that is shooting back. Little holes in paper are just that, little holes in paper.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,524 Posts
fire. Little children can't tell the diff between want to and have to. Adults are SUPPOSED to know the diff. Clowns don't qualify as adults. That's why you THINK that a bolt action will suffice, why you THINK that you wont need a suppressor, and why you THINK a 308 auto has more range than a 223 auto has, etc.
and only a child thinks their way is the only way, and that anyone that disagrees with them is a clown or a stupe, or whatever. You are a master at projection.

Why not lay out the scenario, in detail, so we can understand why a bolt action won't work, or why crippling your fighting rifle with a .22 unit is a good idea. You like to fling crap like a drunken monkey, but you have never bothered to explain the scenario even a little bit.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,703 Posts
Melvin, skill, knowledge, preparation & planning are going to save an individual if your WROL scenario ever happens. Reality matters, fantasy doesn't. Possession of a firearm or even multiple firearms are important. Different geographical locations, annual temperature fluctuations play a big part in to what is required and what is not. While your shorty AR 15 might work really well, maybe there are different requirements for those 60 miles south of the arctic circle.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dorobuta and BigEd
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
Top