Obama’s eye-opening order to Pentagon: Make combat weapons safer, not more lethal

As the name indicates, this is the place for gun-related political discussions. It is not open to other political topics.

Moderators: carlson1, Charles L. Cotton

Post Reply

Topic author
dhoobler
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 490
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 2:58 pm
Location: Friendswood, TX

Obama’s eye-opening order to Pentagon: Make combat weapons safer, not more lethal

#1

Post by dhoobler »

Revolver - An elegant weapon... for a more civilized age.
NRA Endowment Life Member
TSRA Life Member
User avatar

anygunanywhere
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 7877
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 9:16 am
Location: Richmond, Texas

Re: Obama’s eye-opening order to Pentagon: Make combat weapons safer, not more lethal

#2

Post by anygunanywhere »

Just when you thought you had heard everything and that the situation could not possibly get any worse……...
"When democracy turns to tyranny, the armed citizen still gets to vote." Mike Vanderboegh

"The Smallest Minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities." – Ayn Rand
User avatar

The Annoyed Man
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 26866
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 12:59 pm
Location: North Richland Hills, Texas
Contact:

Re: Obama’s eye-opening order to Pentagon: Make combat weapons safer, not more lethal

#3

Post by The Annoyed Man »

Lord how I hate the Washington Times' insistence on being click-bait. Their pages are nearly impossible to read because you're having to continually click the "X" button on ads that pop up everywhere, obscuring the text you're trying to read.

Now, that weight off my chest.......

I am unaware of attempts mentioned in the article to get the Army to adopt a "German designed" rifle as a primary small arms weapon, but the military already has extensive experience with both the 5.56 and 7.62 versions of the FN SCAR platform, which has several advantages over the AR platform (not to mention crazy-good accuracy for a semi auto battle rifle). I like ARs, own more than one, and have built several. But I also have a .308 SCAR, which I love enough that I could afford to buy another one in 5.56, I'd probably do it.

But that said, the AR is a fine platform, and the M4 version of it in particular is a great weapon for nearly any conflict that is not a large scale, WW2-style, gigantic land battle fought in open country. One can argue about the combat efficacy of the 5.56 cartridge, and maybe there are other choices that are "better", but that cartridge has killed a LOT of enemy combatants in the years since its adoption and distribution to the services. To me, it's a lot like the 9mm vs .45 ACP debate. The larger one might be a better killer (or not, depends on POV), but it is hard to argue with the sheer number of people who have been dispatched with a 9mm in the 115 years of its existence.

I think that, up to a point, combat proficiency is more important than combat arms. If the SCAR 16 (for example) is a superior weapon to the M16/M4, a better trained fighter armed with an M4 will succeed more often than not against a poorly trained fighter armed with a SCAR, or some other more advanced weapon design than the AR platform.

I don't know the exact number of AR15/M16/M4 weapons that are in the aggregate military inventory, but it has GOT to be at least several millions of them. The cost of replacing them all would be absurd, particularly for a nation that is not on a WW2-style industrial footing. Weapons like the SCAR are nice, and they had the right idea to try to retain AR ergonomics and manual of arms, while still adding features to upgrade the platform and increase accuracy, but at a price nearly double that of a AR based platform, it would be difficult to justify the cost.

Basically, and for better or for worse, I think the military is stuck with the AR platform until something new comes along that SO completely revolutionizes small arms design as to render both the AR platform and all previous attempts to redesign/upgrade/replace it completely irrelevant and not worth pursuing.

Of course, none of this has anything to do with the irredeemably stupid idea of wasting military budget on unattainable civilian safety goals.
“Hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. And, weak men create hard times.”

― G. Michael Hopf, "Those Who Remain"

#TINVOWOOT

MechAg94
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 1584
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 10:28 pm

Re: Obama’s eye-opening order to Pentagon: Make combat weapons safer, not more lethal

#4

Post by MechAg94 »

Well, people keep telling them to make the police and military use those smart guns first. Though normally in jest I think.

Sounds like he just wants the feds to research smart guns since the free market doesn't want to.

Abraham
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 8403
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 8:43 am

Re: Obama’s eye-opening order to Pentagon: Make combat weapons safer, not more lethal

#5

Post by Abraham »

Does anything this America hating self considering demi-god does really surprise anyone...?
User avatar

Pawpaw
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 6745
Joined: Sat Jun 19, 2010 11:16 am
Location: Hunt County

Re: Obama’s eye-opening order to Pentagon: Make combat weapons safer, not more lethal

#6

Post by Pawpaw »

Hopefully the military will just go through the motions while quietly thumbing their nose at him.

The first place "smart guns" should be mandatory should be the Secret Service and anyone, military or civilian, that is working with or for them on VIP protection. This should be followed closely by all bodyguards and other VIP protection organizations.

If such failure-prone technology were required to be implemented in that order, it would never get off the ground. The libtards want to shove "safety" down our throats, not their own.
Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence. - John Adams

JP171
Banned
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 1406
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2011 5:47 am
Location: San Leon Texas

Re: Obama’s eye-opening order to Pentagon: Make combat weapons safer, not more lethal

#7

Post by JP171 »

I do hope the Military industrial complex does tell Chairman Maobama to go have a serious meeting with a short distinctly wound piece of rope, however the M-16 series of battle rifle needs to go. The thing is garbage the caliber was designed to make our enemies mad as opposed to kill them and the country went down hill from there. I had to carry a bottle of CLP and a rag all through my time in beautiful welcoming middle eastern countries and use both liberally to maintain functionality. if you think different, well I seriously doubt you have been there

Nortex
Banned
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 63
Joined: Tue Feb 02, 2016 4:57 pm

Re: Obama’s eye-opening order to Pentagon: Make combat weapons safer, not more lethal

#8

Post by Nortex »

Image
User avatar

Jusme
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 5350
Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2016 4:23 pm
Location: Johnson County, Texas

Re: Obama’s eye-opening order to Pentagon: Make combat weapons safer, not more lethal

#9

Post by Jusme »

Pawpaw wrote:Hopefully the military will just go through the motions while quietly thumbing their nose at him.

The first place "smart guns" should be mandatory should be the Secret Service and anyone, military or civilian, that is working with or for them on VIP protection. This should be followed closely by all bodyguards and other VIP protection organizations.

If such failure-prone technology were required to be implemented in that order, it would never get off the ground. The libtards want to shove "safety" down our throats, not their own.

Yeah I can see it now "Just keep your head down Mr President we are still recharging the batteries in our smart guns"

"rlol"
Take away the Second first, and the First is gone in a second :rules: :patriot:
Post Reply

Return to “Gun and/or Self-Defense Related Political Issues”