[locutus]

Jon, shooters are usually a conservative lot. some fanatically so.

When the army adopted the .30-40 Krag, the "old timers" on the ordnance board said it would not kill a dog, much less a man. Our soldiers were going to die in droves, being killed by enemies who had been shot numerous times with these pathetic little .30 caliber bullets. And besides, if you gave a soldier a repeating rifle, you would never be able to supply him with ammunition. (remember that ridiculous "magazine cut off switch" on the Krag and the 1903 Springfield?)

Over two world wars, the "Pathetic little 30 caliber" proved itself in battle.

During the 60s and 70s, we were told the same thing about the 5.56; Even today, some will still cling to the mistaken notion that the battle proven 5.56 is not effective. Some folks just cannot and will not let go of the past.

Same with the battle proven 9MM. It's sent thousands of diaper-heads to the land of 72 virgins, but many still refuse to accept it.

Navy SEAL Marcus Luttrell, in his book "Lone Survivor" tells of all of the men on his team carrying the 5.56 and 9MM. And these SEALs had access to .30 cals and .45s, or anything else they wanted to carry. they chose to carry 5.56 AR platform, and the 9mm Beretta M-9.

There are always anecdotes of things like "My sister-in-law used to date a mechanic that was good buddies with a Ranger, and she said he told her the Rangers wouldn't use M-16s........... "War stories" are everywhere, usually told by folks that were never in the military.

As you said, anecdotes, related by 18 year olds, not empirical evidence, drive these arguments.

And you simply cannot use logic or evidence to argue against emotionally based beliefs.

 

[locutus]

The cutoff was for volley fire purposes. It allowed troops to fire in formation without depleting the magazine by single loading. When the call to fire at will as the germans got inside 100yards came every soldier had a full magazine. HUGE tactical advantage over the k98 and arisaka

One of the articles that I read in American Rifleman many years ago, quoted an army general that was the head of the odrnance board.

" Trained soldiers are supposed to load and fire their rifles one shot at a time.. Marksmanship skills will be destroyed if a soldier is given a rifle with a magazine."

Don't know if my memory provided the exact word for word quote, but it's close.

The same argument was used against the full auto functions of both the M-14 and M-16.

And, IIRC, George Patton used a very similar argument against the "rapid fire" 1911 pistol.

 

[locutus]

Major Nidal Hassan sure killed a lot of people with one at Fort hood.

I don't know were this expensive ammo is. I pay $23-$25 per box of 50 for FNH premium ammo.

That's far cheaper than premium grade 9MM, 40 or .45