1554
Comments (101)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
2
HuggableBear 2 points ago +2 / -0

That's not really true, though. The reason 5.56 exists is primarily because its relatively low recoil allows for superb accuracy when fired in burst or full auto by infantry.

The reason AR-15's use 5.56 is because they were designed per the specifications of the military when searching for a new standard issue rifle to replace the M14, which used 7.62 and kicked like a fucking mule when fired in full auto, making shooting it in full auto pointless because you couldn't hit shit after the first round.

The fact that it has low penetration is merely a side benefit and is also pretty much irrelevant in indoor or urban setting since if you're shooting it at a human under 100 yards, it's almost certainly exiting, especially if you're using jacketed rounds. The low penetration really only applies to battlefield distances.

These idiots are protesting it because it gets used in school shootings. If you pop somebody from 20 yards, it's coming back out.

1
BigIronBigIron 1 point ago +1 / -0

The increased portability of .556 was also a strong incentive for switching from 7.62 (which weighs twice as much per round).

Do they make 10 round magazines for .950 JDJ?

2
HuggableBear 2 points ago +2 / -0

Very true also. It's always better to have more rounds downrange even if they're smaller. When someone gets hit, unless their adrenaline is flowing like crazy, they're not ignoring a gun shot of any size. You can pop someone with a .22LR and they're going to freak out the same as if you hit them with a .45-70 because all that their brain processes is "I'VE BEEN SHOT!!!". No point to using elephant rounds on humans.

1
BigIronBigIron 1 point ago +1 / -0

Only to spite the gun grabbers ;-)