Saturday, January 26, 2013 3:47:14 AM
markust: Well I can assure you that military tactics now are not 'spray and pray`. Our military is trained to be accurate and disciplined under fire, not only for tactical reasons but to minimize any collateral damage and loss of innocent life.
Sure, there are times Full-Auto might be the necessary setting on an M-4/M-16 in battle, but as a general rule it is not.
Friday, January 25, 2013 11:58:13 AM
"Tactics have changed a lot since WWII, both Korea and Vietnam taught us many tactical lessons."
I am sure many tactics have changed a lot since WWII. Not sure what has changed with a moving target. They are still hard to hit. And it is probably still true that soldiers are more likely to fire a rapid fire weapon in battle. Even when trained to kill I bet it is hard for some people to aim a gun at someone. Being able to spray bullets takes away some of that stigma. I bet the same thing can be said for mass shootings. Really not sure what your point is. The report was used as research for the project to create the M16. This was looking forward not backwards. They were applying lessons of WWII for future battles.
Thursday, January 24, 2013 11:40:24 PM
markust: In 1948 the main single-man automatic rifles were the BAR and the Thompson Sub-Machine Gun. Neither were built to be accurate to 100 yards or more. Back then spray and pray was the norm, that is no longer the case.
Tactics have changed a lot since WWII, both Korea and Vietnam taught us many tactical lessons.
One of which is that you don't gamble with a Sicilian when death is on the line.