General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: I am sincerely perplexed by the "it's not an assault rifle" meme... [View all]pasto76
(1,589 posts)the second weapons is in fact, much better suited to conduct....an assault.
Increased magazine capacity> I can fire more rounds downrange before reloading. It is actually US doctrine to carry more loaded magazines than the enemy (soviets), each one carrying more rounds than the other guy's clip.
Vertical foregrip pistol grip and telescoping stock mean I can go from firing in the open, or from a deliberate position, and then go _quickly_ to a shorter weapon for CQB.
Vertical foregrip and pistol grip make shouldering the weapon, acquiring the target and squeezing off rounds (thanks again to that pistol grip)
Oh, and that buffer in the AR style weapons, means a hell of a lot less recoil...meaning I can more quickly re-acquire a target, or a different target.
There are very specific features that makes a weapon suitable for combat. The top rifle has few of them, the bottom has almost all of them.
Consider this dude has a 90 round magazine. In a stand up fight, I would have to stop firing, Take cover and change magazines TWICE to equal his firepower.
I also didnt carry a sidearm in Iraq - most troops arent authorized sidearms. And a shotgun? fuggedaboutit. Would liked to have had one, but no. Shotties are extremely powerful. If anybody is unwilling to acknowledge that this guy had more firepower than most troops in iraq and afghanistan, they are plainly lying to themselves.
SGT PASTO