View Single Post
Old March 31, 2013, 04:26 PM   #23
manta49
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 15, 2011
Location: N Ireland. UK.
Posts: 1,295
Quote:
One of the arguments frequently fielded by people with an anti gun rights agenda is that "One of the arguments frequently fielded by people with an anti gun rights agenda is that "assault weapons" were designed to bring about maximum carnage in the least amount of time possible
I will start by saying that in have firearms and am pro gun. But in my opinion assault rifles were designed to be reliable shoot auto and semi auto etc. And yes kill as many soldiers (people) as quickly and as efficiently as possible. That's not to say civilians should not have them but they are what they are and were designed to Quote. assault weapons" were designed to bring about maximum carnage in the least amount of time possible. I don't see the point in denying that.

Quote:
were taught to "shoot to wound" or cause the enemy in combat to tie up 3 soldiers on the "battlefield"( the wounded enemy + 2 "battle buddies").
This seemed hard to swallow way back then & even today in the GWOT it's even more difficult to understand.
I have heard and being told that to me its rubbish. If you shoot a enemy soldier you shoot to kill. That way he won't shoot back and kill you or one of your comrades.

Last edited by manta49; March 31, 2013 at 04:34 PM.
manta49 is offline  
 
Page generated in 0.04099 seconds with 7 queries