9mm / .223 / 7.62x39 (AK) were designed to maim and wound and have 2

[ca2pa]

Now i dont necessarily disagree with this statement, but we were discussing 9mm effieciency and this came about. whats your take on this?

[XD45]

can you tell me any caliber that can be carried and used in CQC that will cause instant death when hit somewhere besides the CNS....

[ca2pa]

hmm..no, not instant, maybe a rifle round, but you wouldnt use that in CQC but if hollowpoint, can cause death due to loss of blood without touching CNS!! my 7mm rem mag. LOL but of course my handgun doesnt take that round.lol

[XD45]

hmm..no, not instant, maybe a rifle round, but you wouldnt use that in CQC but if hollowpoint, can cause death due to loss of blood without touching CNS!! my 7mm rem mag. LOL but of course my handgun doesnt take that round.lol

bleeding out takes time, and all they need to do is have the strength to squeeze that trigger one time...

i think .308 is what the soldiers should be using for longarm, and 5.7x28mm if the enemy has body armor, 10mm if they dont have armor.....

[Kenshin]

There are so many reasons why they switched over and why these calibers are used. The primary reasons are $$$$$ and availability. Mainly its because NATO said they were adopting it and thats how it went. All the reasons why NATO did it I don't remember off the top of my head.

[Pa. Patriot]

"...designed to maim and wound "

Common misinformation.
Probably due to someones misunderstanding of the word "wound" when it comes to terminal ballistics. IOW, taken out of context.
Think of of this way, "wounding" is what causes incapacitation and death.

[Hawk]

I too have read that the reason for the 223 was 3 fold.

1. Less $$ per round
2. Better to take enemy out of the action and keep him alive to use up enemy resources. Fellow soldiers are affected differently psychologically when a buddy is wounded rather than killed.
3. Soldiers can carry more ammo with less weight with 223


Just what I have
read.

Hawk,

[righteousbarbarian]

a 7.62x39 will go through a cinder block...

[camery]

I too have read that the reason for the 223 was 3 fold.

1. Less $$ per round
2. Better to take enemy out of the action and keep him alive to use up enemy resources. Fellow soldiers are affected differently psychologically when a buddy is wounded rather than killed.
3. Soldiers can carry more ammo with less weight with 223


Just what I have
read.

Hawk,

Don't forget more manageable recoil. You can shoot far more accurately in full auto or now with 3 round bursts of .223 than something high powered.

[daschnoz]

Don't forget more manageable recoil. You can shoot far more accurately in full auto or now with 3 round bursts of .223 than something high powered.

BUT...

If you have a cartridge that actually has some down range power (7.62x51), you only need 1 round - not a 3 round burst.