Quote:
But I feel that it should be a rifle, not a military style arm, especially one using a small caliber high speed bullet!
After making some very good points, this summary sounds a lot like Brady talking points. We routinely object to Brady claims revolving around the appearance of weapons ("And it isn't military looking."), as well as ballistic differences between different rounds (.223 with 1282 ft.lbs. at 3240 fps is apparently an objectionalbe "small caliber high speed bullet" but 30-06 with 2976 ft.lbs. at 3020 fps is "a fine choice").
|
I don't object to the appearance of the AR/M16 rifles, as such, but I think the PR people working in MA might. No, the reason I object to the M16 class of carbines is the 5.56mm round used. The small caliber high speed bullet is apparently working well enough in combat (although there are still opinions to the contrary), but other than the fact that shooting people is involved, the police do not engage in combat.
Modern combat is about firepower, throwing large amounts of flying metal in the direction of the enemy. Full auto fire, belt fed weapons, artillery and airstrikes. This is
not something our police should be emulating, in whole or part. The military's concept of collateral damage is slightly different that what should be in use on our streets.
A .30-30, .30-06, or even larger caliber round (I like the .45-70) have long proven record of delivering stopping power that the .22 cal lacks. Police shoot to stop, not kill. Or they should. Larger caliber rounds tend to stop determined people better than smaller ones. Its that simple.
While adequate for war, I feel the small bore round (5.56mm) will prove less than optimum for a police (or self defense) situation. This isn't meant to imply that it won't work, just that overall, as my sig line says....