pic related
Yes, you shoot to neutralize and the most surefire way of neutralizing your enemy is killing them.
Usually you just try to dump bullets in the general direction of the guys shooting at you.
Kill, kill, kill...blood makes the grass grow
Army soldiers are trained to shoot only the parts of the body that can incapacitate, but not kill, the enemy. They only aim for the head, torso, arms, legs, stomach, dick, face, feet, hands, back, ass, or ears.
>>28256956
Can somebody help me figure out why his stock is over his shoulder?
What benefits does this bring?
>>28257013
>shoot for the head
Eh, he didn't need all that brain matter anyhow.
AT least for western forces, if friendlies get wounded they can be more of a burden to you than if they had died outright. You aren't supposed to stop to treat the wounded until you've won the fight but of course that doesn't happen, so you lose even more men treating the wounded while the fight continues.
>>28257020
I assume he's bringing the sight closer to get a better view of things. He probably doesn't have any binoculars so he's making do with the magnification on his gun
>>28256956
yeah the 5.56 NATO round used in the M16 was designed to wound, not kill
>>28257020
he is shooting over a tall wall that's why the stock is on his shoulder
>>28257035
The retarded A2 length full stock and body armor combined with the Inch and a half of eye relief for the ACOG leads to the necessity of short stocking.
It's a shitty meme. Literally every organization that actually shoots for a living trains to aim center of mass, because it's the only chance you have of actually hitting someone in a strenuous situation.
Furthermore, the vast, vast majority of combat shooting is dumping magazines in the general direction of something and pinning it down until artillery, air support, mortars, etc. get on line and do the actual killing.
The role a rifle plays is vastly over rated by civilians.
>>28257020
He's got a stupid fucking rifle (M16A4) with a stupid fucking stock (Born from the fact that the military is obsessed with pretending war is a target range) that is too long for most people without body armor. It's a halfass solution so he can still use the ACOG with the A2 stock. It was a solution a lot of guys used, especially for close in shooting, before the M4 was pushed out to all combat arms units.
>>28257052
Not it's not. They use it because a 5.56 weapon is smaller, lighter and can be brought to bear quicker while still retaining decent ballistics.
>>28257064
you're an idiot. in vietnam it only wounded the enemies. as the saying goes: if you kill a enemy, you remove one from the battle field. if you wound an enemy, it takes two of his comrades to carry him away, so you remove three from the battlefield
>>28257113
only a standing army cares about wounded.
>>28257113
What it did is irrelevant, 5.56 was not made specifically to wound, that is meme. It was introduced for the reasons I listed.
>>28257056
I don't see a fucking wall in the picture besides the one to his left
>>28257180
there's definitely a wall there u faget
>>28257208
yes but it does not require to hold the weapon like this as he would be unable to fire effectively
the only logical conclusion is that he was actually just scouting with the goddamn scope so you are a retard and the other guy who cant find a goddamn wall is retarded too
>>28257113
>Has never seen what a 5.56 does to a person, thinks his bullshit opinions based off the History Channel and that fat, fake 'veteran' at a gun show said are relevant.
>>28257227
>>28257113
ITT:
hurr durr all 5.56 ammo is the same
>>28257113
Citation faggot. Unless you are talking about keyhole hits from obstruction, m193 ball was fine following the initial rollout of the m16.
>>28257129
You have not been in A-stan I guess.
Infantry are trained to aim for the centre of the seen mass.
This gives the greatest chance of a hit.
The desired outcome in that the target can no longer threaten the mission.
A byproduct is forcing the enemy to consume resources in treating the injured, transporting and protecting the injured.
In western style forces, one litter patent will take an entire fire team out of the battle. Plus a hell crew.
Simple states.
Two to carry the casualty. Two to protect the litter carriers. Medic who will use three kilos of supplies in treating the casualty, supplies that have to be replaced. Hello crew for evac. 500 pounds of fuel. Helo parts and maintenance tools. Helo maintenance crew. Engineers to prep the hospital site. Doctor/surgeon two nurses, some one to run the life support and monitoring equipment. 110 litres of water per patent per day. Water rations and laundry for the medical staff. Fifty kilos of medical supplies per patent per day.
Unless you are fighting on your own back yard everything has to be sipped it flown in.
>>28257250
>>hurr durr all 5.56 ammo is
Hurr durr I don't realize even FMJ 5.56 (Such as M193 and M855) can create horrific wounds.
No military cartridge has ever has been "designed to wound," you moron.
If you injure 1 enemy, in theory 2 would be removed from the fight to carry him away. Is this true?
>>28257405
In theory, problem is a lot of shithole fighters don't care / don't have the means or knowledge to help their buddy anyway, and any capable military understands you keep fighting until the enemy is defeated or significantly pushed back to where you can retrieve the casualty safely.
>>28257388
>No military cartridge has ever has been "designed to wound," you moron.
>>28257260
>Citation faggot. Unless you are talking about keyhole hits from obstruction, m193 ball was fine following the initial rollout of the m16.
One of the reason the .223 cartridge was chosen over other similar sized calibres, was its ability to fragment when impacting a target at a high velocity, when using standard ball ammunition.
Under the Hague convention, anti-personnel ammunition can not be DESIGNED to fragment, explode or expand - they got around this by using ammunition that fragmented without being designed to.
The Hague convention doesn't prevent yawing bullets, which is the route the Soviets took and it's why 5.45 will fuck you up like nobody's business.
>>28257519
>>28257519
>they got around this by using ammunition that fragmented without being designed to
I am tired and i don't get this part. Care to exzplain?
>>28257519
Also, the USA never signed Hague.
>>28257587
Load of bullshit, US never agreed to it. We can and have used hollow points and expanding ammunition.
>small arms
>killing anyone
You shoot to scare and then call in an airstrike
>>28257528
>7.62x54 Russian
REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
>>28257588
Why do people repeat this stupidity?
The US signed and ratified the majority of the Hague Conventions of 1907 in 1909. The Hague Conventions of 1899 were signed 1900/1902.
They also signed the Geneva Conventions.
>>28257519
not that the US ever actually signed the Hague. We can use all the HP ammo we want, we just don't so as to avoid pissing people off
>>28257587
.223 existed for a LONG time before it was used the US military - the original designers had not developed it to fragment, but it was an unintentional function.
The US military used this to get around the Hague convention which prevented munitions that were DESIGNED to fragment, expand or explode being used explicitly for anti-personnel reasons.
>>28257588
>>28257606
>>28257654
See
>>28257632
Also, you don't have to sign it to be charged by it:
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/imt/judlawre.asp
>After World War II, the judges of the military tribunal of the Trial of German Major War Criminals at Nuremberg Trials found that by 1939, the rules laid down in the 1907 Hague Convention were recognised by all civilised nations and were regarded as declaratory of the laws and customs of war. Under this post-war decision, a country did not have to have ratified the 1907 Hague Convention in order to be bound by them.
>>28257528
I want to see the profile for a jacketed hollow point 7.62x39. I'm imagining it'll be like the JSP but much more damaging
>>28257671
>The US military used this to get around the Hague convention which prevented munitions that were DESIGNED to fragment, expand or explode being used explicitly for anti-personnel reasons.
Cite it.
>>28257671
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hague_Conventions_of_1899_and_1907
Declaration concerning the Prohibition of the Use of Bullets which can Easily Expand or Change their Form inside the Human Body such as Bullets with a Hard Covering which does not Completely Cover the Core, or containing Indentations
This declaration states that, in any war between signatory powers, the parties will abstain from using "bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body." This directly banned "soft-nosed" bullets (which had a partial metal jacket and an exposed tip) and "cross-tipped" bullets (which had a cross-shaped incision in their tip to aid in expansion, nicknamed "Dum Dums" from the Dum Dum Arsenal in India). It was ratified by all major powers, except the United States.[15]
>except the United States
absolutely BTFO
>>28257689
Can't find source now (it exists, but my google fu is weak), but it stands to reason.
Why did the most powerful nation on Earth just simply use an existing varmint cartridge, rather than designing a new, purpose built cartridge?
>>28257699
See
>>28257671 (again)
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/imt/judlawre.asp
>After World War II, the judges of the military tribunal of the Trial of German Major War Criminals at Nuremberg Trials found that by 1939, the rules laid down in the 1907 Hague Convention were recognised by all civilised nations and were regarded as declaratory of the laws and customs of war. Under this post-war decision, a country did not have to have ratified the 1907 Hague Convention in order to be bound by them.
You don't have to sign it for it to apply to you.
>>28257718
>a country is legally bound by an international agreement that it did not sign
yeah, okay
>>28257699
The US is sigantory to both Hague Convention 1899 II and 1907 IV
Article 23
>Besides the prohibitions provided by special Conventions, it is especially prohibited:--
>To employ arms, projectiles, or material of a nature to cause superfluous injury;
It usually considered that hollow point and expanding ammo also falls under this since it causes much more injury than FMJ ammo.
Other than being flat wrong, what is the point of this meme, what are they actually getting at?
>>28257756
to troll
>>28257731
>>a country is legally bound by an international agreement that it did not sign
>yeah, okay
That is the legal ruling, yes.
You have not signed an agreement not to curb stomp a child, but it still applies to you.
>>28257731
I always kind of thought of the Hague convention, in practice, as being more like guidelines than actual rules.
>>28257765
of course it's different for the relationship between a citizen and his government, but it's completely different for relationships between countries. it's like if the EU got together and decided that burning coal is illegal and that the rest of the world is breaking the law
>>28257731
it does if the country you're referring to happened to be part of the panel that made that decision, and also happens to have the power to enforce that decision on other nations. welcome to international 'law', and welcome to the permenant members of the security council who effectively act as the ultimate arbiter of that 'law'.
>>28257781
>>28257780
It's part of the DeFacto rules of war.
>>28257780
i laughed at this reference
>>28257718
>Can't find source now (it exists, but my google fu is weak)
Sure it does, next time don't spew bullshit please.
The field tests SURPRISED the military, and were one of the major reasons that swayed the full power vs intermediate debate in the intermediate favor. They never adopted it to get around anything.
>>28257020
Shoulder mounted recoil-less rifle.
>>28257373
Underrated.
This kills the conventional army.
>>28257781
The main problem with internatinal laws falling under this category (observed but not actually signed) is that they could be used to completely subvert the domestic democratic process of individual states. For example, back during the Iran deal controversy, the Iranians argued that under international law the US Congress essentially had no say on what Iran considered to be a treaty, but what the US congress considered to be an executive agreement.
>>28257718
People like you exist only to spread fucking lies in the firearm community.
>>28256956
What would antman say to this?
>>28256956
This is the type of stuff I would put in my sworn statements after firefights (12-13 in afghanistan so everything had to be PC retarded)
>At 1300 on XYZ 2012 while taking contact from a 5 story building during a complex ambush I was maneuvering with my team to the rooftop of compound X, in the process of rounding a corner a man came out the door of an adjacent building 5 feet away with an AK 47 raised pointing at my team. I was in fear for my life and the lives of my men. I fired an unknown number of rounds at the threat until it was neutralized, assessed the situation, and continued movement to the roof.
Dude popped out with gun pointed at us FUUUUUUUUCK BLAM BLAM BLAM BLAM BLAM BLAM BLAM BLAM , check and make sure all fingers and toes working. Was my first time so cut me some slack .webm was pretty much our reaction.
>>28256988
My actual experience, never actually 100% PID anytime. they were legitimate, questioned by by CID more than once and was always cleared. More than that, we kept good largely with the locals.
>>28257405
Depends on the level of continued TIC, but mostly yes. When a unit takes casualties, all professional and personal mindsets largely go towards the care of the casualty. Alive or dead, admitted or not. Hate them or don't know them.
TCCC which has replaced CLS (you look up the acronyms, i'm drunk) emphasizes neutralizes the threat before administering treatment to any wounded for this very reason you post.
>>28257062
>>28257020
Pick up a rifle with an A2 stock. Note how its fucklong for any remotely normal human.
Now put on like 8 t-shirts and try to shoulder it.
Didn't fucking work too good did it? That's what an A2 stock is like with armor on. Goodbye proper eye position unless you have giraffe neck.
>>28258026
Nigga he has like fucking 6 T marks left before he has issues reaching the charging handle. He could.. I dunno... move the fucking optic.
>>28258020
Yep this dude is right, the first step is always neutralize the threat, and they make you feel retarded if you say or suggest anything else.
Grunt from 08-12. We were trained to put two in the chest and one in the head
>>28256979
Basically this. It's the same thing with defensive gun use, you shoot at dudes until you're certain they won't be shooting you.
If they're dead, they won't be shooting, if they're horribly wounded, they won't be shooting.
Just so happens, shooting unarmored dudes in the chest tends to result in one of those two things.
>>28256956
>implying infantry does anything other than get killed than give the position for the AF to bomb/attack
The man who runs away will fight again
- Menander
>>28258036
Maybe he's just short. I'm 5"7' and I find myself doing that more often than you think. The eye relief on an acog is like half an inch. Also, if you're not engaging anything, I find it more comfortable holding it that way
>>28261072
I have marked two positions on my M16A2 for the ACOG, one clean skin and one with all my shit on.
I only use the forward Mark during small arms matches where the shooters do not need to wear body armour.
With the length of the rail, any one can get the correct eye relief.
>>28256956
>>28256979
was thinking why not make a weapon that makes people sick not permenatly but for a year or so
that way the people fighting won't die this won't piss people off and it will keep people out of fighting it also makes the opossion feed and keep the people who can't fight alive hence costing them
>>28257224
Suppressive fire need not be accurately effective. Plus it's a duck ton more effective then shooting straight into a wall
>>28263166
because that's a fucking stupid idea
just because you are sick doesnt mean you can't fire a rifle or go out back into your goat pen and toss off a few mortar rounds when your buddy danny durka-durka watching on the hill calls you up for a strike.
and besides, getting them sick won't remove their desire to make you dead
>>28261840
That's true, but for some reason, most of us have detachable irons that we're not allowed to take off, making us placing the acog even further. This is also really stupid because most of us don't even know how to use irons nor do we ever train shooting with them up
>>28256956
You shoot to injure. A wounded soldier has to be taken care of, it will be a burden to the nation economically. It can take up to 4 soldiers to carry a badly wounded soldier out. You'll need medics, perhaps a QRF.
And of course, let's not forget a wounded soldier is good bait for a marksman or any soldier in general.
