Is there still a place in the civilian world for "battle rifles"??

[itgoesboom]

Not that I think we need to justify out decisions to purchase or own certain types of rifles, but I am curious.

When I first got into firearms, I was intrested in bolt action rifles and pump shotguns. Then I got into pistols, and lastly, I moved into semi-auto rifles.

The common knowledge seemed to be 5.56 was/is a poodle shooter, and anything under a .30 is a waste. So right now, I have two rifles, an SKS in 7.62x39 and a CETME in .308 (lucky me, I got a good one). Both run great. The CETME is much more accurate than the SKS, but that is probably to be expected. I think my decision to purchase both was based somewhat on that perception.

I don't expect to ever encounter armed combat, since I am neither a LEO or in the Military, and I live in a nice middle class suburb. I don't expect zombies to roam the earth, and I have yet to see any blue helmets or black helicopters. My home protection firearms are pistols and my shotguns. No need for a CQB rifle for my situation. IMHO at least.

But I still have felt the need to have some sort of "combat rifles" in my home. Maybe my kids or grandkids will need it. Who knows. So I have my two "combat" style rifles.

But now I seem to see a much greater acceptance of 5.56 as the ideal civilian (as well as Law Enforcment) defense round. I see talk on the forums by people in the know about these things, and most seem to be recommending platforms shooting 5.56 (atleast until 6.8 is more common). I can understand many of the reasons for this; less recoil, lighter ammo, more compact carbine design possibilities, reduced risk of overpenetration in certain situations, etc.

So my (longwinded) question is:

For the civilian, has the era of the full size battle rifle in .30 caliber ended? Is there still a good reason for us to have HK91s, CETMEs, FALs, M1As and AR10s? Or is it really time for everyone to convert over to 5.56? Like I said before, I am not recommending the banning or any other limitation of this type of rifle, I am just curious if it has outlived its usefullness.

Is there something that the .308 battle rifles do better than the M4 style carbines?

I.G.B.

[Gunboat1]

Is there something that .30 caliber "battle rifles" do better tnan M4-type 5.56's? YES!

-shoot through things (an absolute requirement for a combat rifle to be effective)
-stop people who are shot with them (the point of the whole exercise)
-actually hit things at longer ranges with stock rifles and ammo (why fight up close if you don't have to?)

Pretty much everything, except be lighter and easier to tote around, and give the shooter less recoil.

You are well-armed, and will remain so for the foreseeable future of rifle development. ;a

[brownie]

"Is there something that the .308 battle rifles do better than the M4 style carbines?"

Yes there is. Look to the units who are being issued 308 m14's in Iraq and Affie to replace their .223's [ not all of course but enough to make it viably mentioned ]. The mil types are finding that the 308 drops em pretty quick and the 223 is somwhat lacking where distance and stopping power are needed in combination.

223's are good for punching paper [ nice little tiny groups out to 400 yds ] and for up close and personal kinds of problems. The ammo is lighter and more can be carried [ then again, more needs to be used to do the same thing the 308 can do so where's the benefit? ].

The military is discovering the 223 is not the cure all be all round they would like it to be and have taken many 308's in the guise of 14's out of the wharehouses and reissued them to the troops for a reason.

Even without the above happening, I'll take my 14 or G3 type weapon over any 223 platform for reliability, long distance touching with authority and overall comfort knowing when and if I have to touch someone with that platform, they probably are not going to need follow up shots.

Just because the blue berets haven't gone door to door here in the US yet does not negate the fact the liberal dems would have that take place as soon as possible. One day you may appreciate being able to hold em off, hit em behind cover from a distance. Thats alone is worth having one or two tucked away for the kids who may find they need it after you have departed.

Robin Brown

[Steve Moses]

For the average cop or motivated defensive shooter situated in the continental United States, I think the "need" for a semi-automatic .308 battle rifle is minimal, with the exception of deputies that might work rural areas. If I truly thought I needed a battle rifle, I would have one. A 5.56 should meet 99% (I am making up that number)of our forseeable needs if one is selective about his or her ammunition.

Having said that, a DSA FAL-type carbine would look darn good in my gun safe.

Steve Moses

[Yeager]

.308s are great. CTMEs are JUNK. There are NO bargain battlerifles (and an SKS is not a battle rifle).

[Stanze]

Originally posted by Yeager
.308s are great. CTMEs are JUNK. There are NO bargain battlerifles (and an SKS is not a battle rifle).

The VC used rifles in battle, the SKS among them in Vietnam.

The SKS is a bonifide battle used rifle: RELIABLE, easy to field strip, packs a punch, built in cleaning kit and bayonet among other things.

I'll submit that the SKS is not a battle rifle in "big brother to an assualt rifle" terms. But, pretty freaking deadly still as history has shown.

[David Armstrong]

Steve Moses is right. The 5.56 will do just about anything needed in the typical defensive rifle scenario. While the .30 caliber guns are nice, outside of long-range shooting and shooting through objects the 5.56 is just as good for most, and with proper ammo selection can be better in some situations.

[brownie]

I'm not enamored with having to worry about obtaining a certain type of ammo to make the rifle do my bidding properly.

I'd rather use good old 308 nato surplus in 147 gr fmj available about everywhere and not give that part of the equation another thought, especially in a worst case "get out of town" scenario.

Steve Moses: People in Az, Montana, Idaho, NM, etc may disagree when it comes to rifles that can reach out and touch you with authority at the distances they could encounter. In those locals, the further I can touch you with an effective round when it gets there, the better I like it.

For urban warfare, I'll still take the 308 over the 223. Of course I have an M4 stock on my M1a bush [ custom made ] with a recoil compensator on it. In that guise it's 1.5 inches longer than the M4 itself but packs the punch of the 308. Can be used for urban warfare as well as the M4 matty mattels, will run dirty unlike the mattys, will, with some field maintenance last as long as the mattys and only requires one rd per BG before moving on, can shoot through cinder blocks, solid walls, etc, etc.

The G-3 wil do the same thing and in standard guise isn't that much longer than the Matty as well.

When it's my arse on the line for real, give me a real battle rifle for battle please. The lessons learned in combat have not gone unnoticed in Iraq and Affy this time around for a reason.

Robin Brown

[V Creed]

The one thing a .223 rifle will do better than a .308 is put more bullets on target faster due to less recoil, especially in multi-target assault type situations under 300 yards.

The heavy .308 rifles have a long-range advantage and penetrate far better. But for civillians in typical close range self-defense situations, a lightweight, easy to handle .223 is the better all-around defense rifle/caliber, IMO.

The .30 Russian SKS/AK's however, are as fast shooting/handling out to 300 yards as .223's, and perhaps a mite better penetrating. Which makes them at least equal to .223's.

I'm in the mountains, and still don't see any need for heavy, full-size .308 battle rifles. All my high-power rifles are lightweight bolt action deer/elk guns. ;f

[itgoesboom]

Originally posted by Yeager
.308s are great. CTMEs are JUNK. There are NO bargain battlerifles (and an SKS is not a battle rifle).

Yeager,

You are probably one of the people on this forum I respect the most, so your opinion actually does mean quite a bit to me.

When I refrenced the SKS, I was thinking more "combat style" rather than true battle rifle definition.

I can see why you have the opinion of the CETME that you do. Century really has done a wonderful job of butchering a great rifle design. Quite honestly, you are probably right about most of them being junk.

Fortunatly for me, I have one that runs like a champ. It took some work to get the magwell and magcatch right, but that was easy to fix. It has no groundbolt, has boltgap in the .019 range, and has been 100% reliable.

Infact, the rifle shipped with a broken extractor spring (now fixed), and it still fired and extracted everytime I pulled the trigger.

As for accuracy, my particular one seems capable of 1 1/2" groups with ADI surplus at about 90 yards.

I do keep hearing the horror stories that others have posted about the CETMEs that they have had, and I am very thankfull that I actually got a good one.

I.G.B.

[itgoesboom]

Thanks to everyone for responding.

I guess I have just started, for some reason, question the need for me to have a .308 rifle.

When I decided on my CETME, just a few short months ago, the fact that it was a .308 was a major reason why I went the direction I did. Ofcourse, price, ergonomics, reliability and the availability of parts weighed heavily as well. But I don't think I would have gone the direction I did if the rifle had been 5.56.

But now I look around to where I live, and where I am buying a house (the reason why I could only afford a CETME ;f ), and I can't imagine a shot longer than 300-400 yards.

So thanks again to everyone for reassuring me of the fact that .308 is not an obsolete cartridge for civilian "battle rifles".

I.G.B.

[MrMurphy]

The 5.56mm with softpoints will certainly do very well (which is why cops like it), most of the "problem" in not stopping appears to be with FMJ rounds.

Personally for the longer distances, I'd take .308, but for my situation at the moment (suburban) every shot I can imagine taking is under 200-300 yards, and the 5.56 would do well. I have a bolt action .303 if I really need to reach out and touch things with a vengeance, but as is being proven in Iraq and Afghanistan, the .308 is not dead for armored targets and long range, or one shot stops. :)

[degoodman]

The need for a .308 in "domestic combat" is greatly overblown. At reasonable ranges, say under 250 yards, the .223 does just fine. Sure, at 500 yards a .308 is better, but the odds of you being able to lay lead on a moving target at that range are pretty low with semi-auto toys. I can make nice pretty 4" groups in paper that's not moving at a known range of 600 yards with a minute to take each shot. I have no expectation that against moving bad guys who have their own automatic weapons that I have any chance of holding them at bay for any longet than it takes to identify where I am.

You get alot more bangs without reloading in a .223, and you can carry alot more ammo too. Standard combat loadout for the m14 was 100 rounds, for the .223 its 300...that's alot more rounds on target, and if you have to lay down your own cover, that's what you need.

Against most urban cover, the ss109/m855 ammo that is available all day long does everything you need it to. 2x4 walls are no match, and anything short of armored vehicles ain't stopping them. Normal cars, suburban walls, and picket fences ain't stopping them. And in truth, against light armor, the .223 has much better penetraion than .308 ball. You do know that's the primary reason that you aren't allowed to use .22's in silhouette competetion, the rounds crater the plates, when 6mm plus doesn't.

I wouldn't go throwing my .308 toys away, but for most purposes the .223 is just fine. In terms of firepower (rounds on target fast) and ammo capcaity, it wins hands down. In terms of reach out and touch someone distance and raw power, it loses, hands down. In "realistic" far fetched blue hat invasion type scenarios, I think the .223 is more useful.

YMMV...

[CarlosDJackal]

When all you have is a hammer, all of the world's problem might look like a nail. There is a time and place for every tool.

I would never use a .30 rifle (not a .30 Carbine) to defend my home. There is also a reason I have my CAR-15 as my SHTF rifle. The chances of a shoot through if I have to use it in a public place is also less.

If I was a military or SWAT Sniper, I would probably prefer something in .308. But for everyday life and such, I feel that the cons outweight the pros of a .30 "Battle Rifle". JM2CW.

[brownie]

Thats if you can keep one of those Mattys up and running long enough to do all that. :cool: ;P ;Q

I've never been able to get one to run right since 1969-70, nor do I want to become an armorer to make sure it stands the chance of doing so.

Given them plenty of chances, they all failed to perform box stock. No G-3 type has ever let me down, new, used or otherwise. Pretty much the same goes for the m14 but that platform does require it to be field maintained which is no big deal.

The 14 isn't made for suppresive fire in semi, of course, you do lose that capability granted. There are trade offs in each platform but like the big knife that can perform little jobs but not vice versa, the big guns can make due where the little Mattels don't stand a chance.

In harsh environs, the Mattys fail miserably, needing to be cleaned much more often and babied more than the g-3 and 14 types. In a shtf scenario, I'll take the 308 anyday and do just fine when it can't be cleaned when it should.

All that extra ammo won't do you any good when it won't go bang from my own experineces with that platform over 30+ years now. My 14's, g-3's have always performed with the minimal of effort and maintenance.

Yes, the 223 Mattys can and do have advantages, but only if they are kept ultra clean and can stay up and running in battle. As Battles ocurr in non sterile environs, the battlerifles have a better track record of dependability. Thats first and foremost in any running and gunning that needs to be done for real.

Robin Brown

[pjb829]

brownie,

Perhaps you should give a Fulton Armory AR a try. Believe it or not, improvements have been made to the platform in the last 30+ years.

Granted I'm not dragging my AR through the mud and jungles of SE Asia, but I have no problems abusing the hell out of it. Even with filthy Wolf it still goes bang every time after several hundred rounds between cleanings, something my Bushmaster doesn't like.

The .308 definitely wins the distance competition, but my AR will most certainly do its job inside 250 yards if I do mine.

Pete.

[7677]

I like the 5.56 and everyone I hit with my matty was DRT. I think it goes back to the fact the military has always looked for that jack of all trades weapon. Also with the 5.56, everytime the military has refined 5.56 weapon system and bullet weight down to effective combo they go and change the bullet weight or barrel length and/or both and the failure to stop problem comes back. Both the 5.56 and the 308 has it place in combat. The 5.56 is an effective stopper out to 250m range and I agree with V creed that the .223 rifle will do better than a .308 is put more bullets on target faster due to less recoil, especially in multi-target assault type situations under 300 yards. However, the .308 starts to show its advantage at around the 300m mark and out. The question is what is the environment that you intend to use your rifle in and then go from there.

[MrMurphy]

As to car penetration, a friend who saw service in Somalia remarked that the 5.56 didn't always do the trick on thick walls and "technicals "(Guntrucks), whereas the M60, and his personal Mossberg full of slugs, generally did the trick with a few shots. However the 5.56 apparently did fine on the Somalis with good center hits.

[Yeager]

Sub machine gun - Fires a pistol caliber round (9mm, 10mm, 45acp)

Assault rifle - Fires and intermediate round (5.56, 5.45, 7.62x39)

Battle rifle - Fires a full power cartridge (30.06, .308, 7.62x54)

Caliber alone does not determine which catagory these rounds fall into.

[Steve Moses]

Okay, Brownie, I will bite. Please cite one instance where GGs in the continential US used a battle rifle at 200 yards plus to deal with a BG. Repeat, a battle rifle, not a sniper rifle used by a police sniper.
I will settle for one.
If you are unable to cite one instance, please provide me with a plausible "it could happen" scenario. I am prepared to learn something new.

Steve Moses

[VWTim]

FWIW,
I used my AK this afternoon to disbatch of a mole that's been tearing up our yard for months. 2 rounds of Wolf HP, and it tore some holes in the ground and got him. So in this case I think my rifle was very usefull. :cool:

[brownie]

Steve,

That may be a tall order as not many gg's are isued 308 battle rifles for their cruisers in this country [ if you meant PO's by gg's ].

Because they haven't been used in the continental US doesn't mean we can't take whats happening in the cities inside Iraq and Affy by our mil types.

Yes, they are using both the M4's and the M14's inside cities in those countries. There apparently is a need for them [ both ] in such environs as they are being issued and used by the troops there.

Granted, the m14's may be relegated to roof tops or for longer target aquisition, as they should, yet the 14's serve well in urban environs as well as we are seeing.

If the M4/m16 types were all that was needed/necessary, the 14's would not have been brought back into the equations in those war zones.

It comes down to personal preference and what one feels comfortable with in the end. I've never been comfortable with the 16 platform, having poor results with several variations/makes over the years.

Never had any problems with the 14's I've had and have today. I'd rather hump the extra ammo weight and know I can put em down from 0-500 yrds at will if necessary, one round per.

For strictly urban house to house and neighborhood problems, I'd want an mp-5, not an m4 if for no other reason that my choice [ the mp-5 ] for that environ is dependable, fast and even more ammo can be carried if weight has to be brought to the equation as to why one is better than the other.

Of course ommv, and as I've stated in other posts over time, one needs to have the confidence that his choice will perform under all kinds of nasty environs, run effectively when dirty for extended periods of time if necessary, etc. The 16 platform has never shown me that in 30 years.

I have no confidence in that weapons system. I do realize others are vehemently for it and do not have the same experiences as others with that platform. I wish them well in their choices and continue to carry my chosen battlerifle with confidence.

With the M4 custom made stock I have on one of the m1a's and recoil compensator, I can carry twenty rounds of 308, get them off almost as fast [ the felt recoil with the comp makes it almost as easy as the 223's ]have more knockdown available to me and the length of the weapon has been reduced to within a few inches of the M4's. Thsi one actually has been altered so the stock has the retractable M4 on it.

Using a full auto mp in 308 at 50 yrds, it is very easy to keep all 20 rds of 308 inside a cars side window. Can everyone do it? Probably not from what I've seen. But it is very realistic with some time on the weapons and everyone of them is 308.

Back to your question though--most admins are not going to issue a 308 to their troops due to it's over penetrative abilities and liabilities that follow in an urban environ, never mind the troops need more trigger time on them to be as effective which won't be happening en masse either. That in no way negates the effectiveness of 308 battlerifles in an urban setting where liabilities will be the least of ones problems.

I understand the 223 M4/m16 has advantages in the urban setting for all the reasons stated. It also has weaknesses which I'm personally not willing to potentially deal with when it's go time.

Robin Brown

[Steve Moses]

Brownie,

My reference to GGs did not exclude non-LE, as you might recall that I said in my first post that deputies in rural areas might benefit from having access to .308s. (my thoughts there were much more geared to penetration rather than range.

I am impressed that you can put people down at will at 500 yards, but I don't understand what benefit that is to folks here in the states, LE or not.I think that I am an okay shot, but I have to bear down to consistently hit an 8" plate at 200 yards in the field (not a range) using an Aimpoint. And I think an 8" plate is more representative of the target area that that I might be presented with by a hostile and armed adversary, not a B-27 target.

My point is that the greater range afforded by the .308 is somewhat handicapped by the ability of the shooter to make those kind of shots under field situations, plus laws regarding use of force.

Furthermore, the CURRENT AR-15 system seems to run just fine when reasonably maintained. If people don't want to maintain them and treat them like garden tools, they may very be better off with something else.


Steve Moses

[brownie]

"My point is that the greater range afforded by the .308 is somewhat handicapped by the ability of the shooter to make those kind of shots under field situations, plus laws regarding use of force."

If I'm using any rifle in a possible scenario here in the states as a civilian, I'm not sure I'll be worried about use of force laws at the time.

I said out to 500 yds the 308 would be effective, but yes, I have been able to prone 500yd shots since Marine boot even with the old eyes. Like anything else, it only takes some practice to do so as you probably know. Lots of people can take 500 yd shots and do so regularly, I'm not saying I have some great skill by referencing that distance.

"Furthermore, the CURRENT AR-15 system seems to run just fine when reasonably maintained."

I'll concede that I have not had an ar platform for 5-6 years now. That probably isn't current as you mention in this context. Then again, all reports were that several of the major manu's had corrected all the bad things about that platform and I bought into it back then only to be disappointed again with the less than stellar reliability.

One of the buds and I are out 2 years ago shooting the 14 platforms for the day. After lunch, he drags out his AR flattop, duked out to the max with all the bells and whistles and sets up a fresh target at 200 yds. Bang, bang, click, bang, click, bang, click until he gets frustrated and puts it away. We go back to the m14 platform for the remainder of the day. I'd seen enough of the current offerings at that point, not mine mind you, but I'd say that was as pretty current as one can get.

Lots of dough layed out for it and unreliable. He wasn't laughing much after that experience either, though I did chuckle at the idea the 14's were running and his fairly new AR was not.

A gun thats harder to shoot due to recoil seems to beat a gun that has no recoil but goes click instead of bang every other round or so.
He did get it figured out eventually, something about the trigger as I remember.

The point is if we were at 200 yds and had to be "ready", the AR would have got him killed, his batllerifle would be keeping serving him well. He still likes his AR shooter but relies heavily on his battlerifle when we want to shoot all day.

Just another experience through my friends eyes [ and money ] this time instead of mine.

Thsoe who like the AR's and rely on them are okay in my book, but you won't catch me carrying one for the stated reasons.

Robin Brown

[Steve Moses]

Brownie-

I hear you. Almost all stock Armalites, Bushmasters, Rock River and Colt AR-15s of modern vintage function great and shoot every time. Once folks start "improving" them or putting together kit guns, reliability can go to Hades. If I can't rely on a weapon, I get rid of it.

It sounds to me like you have had some issues with the small-caliber rat gun, and don't trust it anymore. Understood and appreciated.

I will get my hands on a DSA FAL someday, as my Colt needs a big brother it can look up to.

Steve Moses

[coastalcop]

Brownie - Can you post a pic of your M-4 moded m-14 please, im interested in seeing that mod.

Steve- Another lucky one here, My urban gun is the olyarms .45 subgun in my avatar (the other is my g-17, due to be replaced by the agency g-18 when it arrives, Glock tells me mid November now , changed from late October) BUT I happen to have a RELIABLE Cetme in the truck too for armored or longer range shots 75-100m. I am partial to the .308 to have the option of equalizing force against some of the folks in these parts with 30-06 and an attitude ;) . Have I employed it yet? Held it on an armed guy not too long ago, believed he was armored (concealable body armor) and the backstop was a brick walled, evaced building. Would an ar have been ok too? Yep probably would have, but I didnt have an AR, I DID have a CETME , either of which would make me feel better about the situation. Range was under 50 meters and no shot was needed (negotiator, who took risks I never would have , it was in another smaller jurisdiction within my own, ultimately negotiated his surrender)

.223 or .308 would have served in this situation so it isnt a case of where the .308 had an advantage, hell if all i had was a lever 30-30 i would have used that. Guess it depends on whatyou have access to when the SHTF.

[V Creed]

With regard to the AR family and malfunctions: I've owned 5 of them, all Colts, over the years. The only malfunction I ever had was right in the middle of a state championship match. It turned out I hadn't disassembled the bolt/firing pin during cleaning and carbon had built up inside the bolt causing the firing pin to stick. One spray with WD40 and the rifle was functioning fine again.

Bottom line: AR's function 100% if properly maintained.

Never had an AK or SKS malfunction either, except once due to a defective round of ammo.

Even my semi-custom Mini-14 functions 100%, now that I have good mags and a forward scout-mount AimPoint that doesn't cause ejecting brass to bounce back into the action.

[Shady]

Originally posted by Steve Moses
Brownie,

I think that I am an okay shot, but...
Steve Moses

He's being modest... I've seen him shoot.

[brownie]

coastalcop: I just got this together last weekend. Let me get some digital photos of it and send them to you, then if you know how, you can post them here for everyone if you like.

Robin Brown

[coastalcop]

thanks brownie

[clubsoda22]

Originally posted by MrMurphy
The 5.56mm with softpoints will certainly do very well (which is why cops like it), most of the "problem" in not stopping appears to be with FMJ rounds.

From what i've heared, it's the SS109 that lacks stopping power. It's a penetrator. It cuts clean 22 caliber holes. The older 55gr FMJ ammo tended to tumble and fragment. The softpoints that are popular with LE do the same.

[Steve Moses]

Not to get too technical, but I don't think softpoints and hollowpoints tumble, and some softpoints don't fragment, but mushroom and largely hold together.

[Trebor]

As a civilian in a suburban area, I can't think of any situation that I can't solve with either my M-1 Carbine or my M-1 Garand. I have a FAL and a CETME, but I'd grab the carbine before either of them in most situations and I'd grab the Garand for anything were penetration was required. Granted, part of that is that I am more familiar with the Garand then the other two rifles and thus I'm more confident in my ability to use it. I don't feel undergunned with only 8 rounds on tap though. I'm NOT in Baghad, after all.

[David Armstrong]

....M-1 Carbine....
One of the most under-appreciated close combat weapons around, IMO. If I was a city-dweller again it would be my first choice.

[big grip]

Originally posted by Steve Moses
For the average cop or motivated defensive shooter situated in the continental United States, I think the "need" for a semi-automatic .308 battle rifle is minimal, with the exception of deputies that might work rural areas. If I truly thought I needed a battle rifle, I would have one. A 5.56 should meet 99% (I am making up that number)of our forseeable needs if one is selective about his or her ammunition.

Having said that, a DSA FAL-type carbine would look darn good in my gun safe.

Steve Moses
I'll just jump in on this one since is directly addressed the "need" for a semi auto rifle.

Simple, an insurance policy. No more complicated than that.

Do you have fire/home owners insurance on your house? If so, do you intend on setting it on fire? How about a fire exstinquisher, same thing.
When you buckle your seatbelts do you plan on ramming into other cars?

Remember hurican Andrew and the LA Riots? Regular folks needed arms because the police were overwelmed. It does not happen often but when it does happen I want a rifle that has been certified by the US government. As in a general issue infantry rifle in semi auto. 3 rd burst would be nice but semi auto will do.

There's you "NEED" answer for anti gunners BTW.

[metallic]

It's not really a "need" but I would love a Springy M1A. Sadly, it's in the "keep dreaming" price range for me.

[Steve Moses]

Big Grip-

Please re-read your post and clarify.

Do you mean "need" for a semi-auto rifle, or "need" for a sem-auto battle rifle?

If you mean the former, I agree. If you mean the latter, I think the 5.56mm/AR-15 platform is better for most folks. I further think that the .308s advantages lie in penetration and not effective range for defensive purposes.

Furthermore, I think it is a stretch for John Kerry to say that he used to be a law enforcement officer.

I was just practicing Democratic debate tactics, and chose to answer a question that was not posed.

[big grip]

Originally posted by Steve Moses
Big Grip-

Please re-read your post and clarify.

Do you mean "need" for a semi-auto rifle, or "need" for a sem-auto battle rifle?

If you mean the former, I agree. If you mean the latter, I think the 5.56mm/AR-15 platform is better for most folks. I further think that the .308s advantages lie in penetration and not effective range for defensive purposes.

Furthermore, I think it is a stretch for John Kerry to say that he used to be a law enforcement officer.

I was just practicing Democratic debate tactics, and chose to answer a question that was not posed.
I did mean the general issue infantry weapon for the US military or other. So, M16/AR15.

Since you are working on debating a dem, how about that "need" for an evil military style rifle? I have yet to not shut down a lib-dem on that one. ;f

[brownie]

coastalcop:

I have those pics of the M4 moded preban M1a for you.

email me at bladesrus@comcast.net

I'll respond with the pics for your enjoyment. It runs sweet, with only slightly more recoil than a CAR15 utilizing the comp and is only 2 inches longer than a CAR but bangs 308 downrange.

If you get this today, I'll send them out before this evening, otherwise, they'll arrive tomorrow.

Robin Brown

[Phil306]

I almost hate to get involved in this debates/arguments, however, since I am bored...

Do I NEED a battle rifle? No.

Do I WANT one? Yes (I have em).

Last time I checked, I lived in The United States; albeit the Peoples Republik of Kalifornia. I believe I should be able to buy just about anything I want. If I can buy a Glock, 1911, etc, why not be able to buy a "battle rifle?" If not, ban handguns to "Saturday Night Specials." Shotguns to single shots, etc. Just like driving an SUV. I drive a Hummer. Do I NEED it? Nope. But I LOVE IT. I go to work, everyday, and make money. So I believe I should be able to purchase anything I want, as long as I don't go bankrupt.

The .223 debate and the .308 debate, is like debating 9mm and .45. It will go on and on and on...

http://www.crimelibrary.com/serial/bryant/

This shooting in Port Arthur. If you read the coroner's report, the WoRST wounds, and the most dead, were caused by the .223 rounds, not the .308. What does that mean? Hell if I know...I know this, I've shot and killed people with an M16, simple old 55 grain ball ammo. It worked just fine.

I really don't get too worked up about what ever caliber this, what brand that. The best gun for me is the one in my hands. The best ammo for me is the one in the gun... My brain will hopefully take care of the rest.I don't stay up at night worrying about this stuff.

Thin The Herd

[brownie]

I just read the link provided, didn't see anything from the coroners report in that piece.

Can you provide the link to the report for us?

Thanks

Robin Brown

[itgoesboom]

Phil,

I think you misunderstood the point of this thread.

As I mentioned originally, I was not advocating the banning of battle rifles. In fact, quite the opposite is true.

What I was questioning, was when it comes to a civilian choosing to purchase ONE rifle, for practical purposes, is there still a place for .308.

The reason I had asked this was that it is obvious where Police and Military use .308, and where they use 5.56.

Forums are packed full of threads of people arguing .308 vs 5.56, but they are usually including Police and Military needs. As a civilian, my needs are different.

I am just trying to justify the decision that I had made to go with .308.

I.G.B.

[brownie]

coastalcop:

Received your pm, pics sent your way last night.

Robin Brown

[coastalcop]

Very Very cool, That is a package that makes sense.

[brownie]

Glad you liked the pics sir.

It's light and short enough, with enough punch using the 308 without having the recoil of that caliber.

Stay sharp

Robin

[G-Raptor]

Originally posted by itgoesboom
Phil,
What I was questioning, was when it comes to a civilian choosing to purchase ONE rifle, for practical purposes, is there still a place for .308.


I think the question that being overlooked is what "battle" conditions you could realistically expect.

The battle rifle was designed with the expectation of long-range (300-500 yards), open field engagements by massed troops. The "assault" rifle, OTOH, was designed with the expectation of close engagements (under 300) by small, mobile units. Obviously there is (must be) some overlap between the two concepts, but the intended purpose is quite different.

Assuming we are talking about a rifle for "militia" use beyond basic home/personal defense - yes, there is an obvious place for the 308. It offers better penetration on semi-hard targets - so it's easier to shoot through things. I think it provides a better option for the long range engagements it was intended for.

But, assuming some type of internal conflict, I think the likelihood of close range urban combat far outweighs that of "open field" firefights. So the light assault rifle has the advantage. Remember, you would have to fight with what you can carry, and more bullets is better.

So, if I was only going to have ONE rifle, it would be the AR (.223) - but that has to be weighed against your own environment. If YOU had to fight on your own, where would you likely be? If you live out on the range, where you can see damn near to the horizon, then a full battle rifle is probably a better choice. But if your line of sight ends at 300 yards, I'd prefer the smaller round.

Personally, I think you should cover the triad - shotgun, assault rifle, battle rifel. Each one has it's place. :cool:

[fastbolt]

Is there still a place in the civilian world for "battle rifles"??

Popular politics and PC-speak to the contrary ... I certainly hope so.

These are a part of our heritage and culture, as well as the heritage & cultures of other countries. It may be a PC thing to remove the musket from the hands of a Minute Man, and remove them from Disney Land ... but our country's creation and very existence involved the citizen/civilian ownership of a rifle.

Not to mention that there are just so many "battle rifles & carbines" still available which reflect the historical events and struggles of both ourselves, and other countries & peoples ... and which remind us of a sense of historical events, personal & national struggles, heroism, and all the other emotions, as well as personal & national character attributes, that are evoked when adversity and the struggle for freedom ... and survival ... occurs.

They're also enjoyable to own and shoot.

I can't hold a rifle or carbine from the past, or even a modern one, without wondering about when that weapon was "modern", state-of-the-art for the users of whatever time and location was involved ... and wondering how the men that used them lived their lives, defended their families against the depredations of wild & feral animals & bandits, and their countries against foreign aggressors.

They aren't simply steel and wood, you know ... nor even steel, aluminum & plastic ... It's in the blood, I tell you ...

[pjb829]

They aren't simply steel and wood, you know ... nor even steel, aluminum & plastic ... It's in the blood, I tell you ... Profound. It is truly sad that the majority of Americans will never get it. Hell, I bet most gun owners don't get it either.

Pete.

[mattburkett]

I want to get this out of the way first:
In harsh environs, the Mattys fail miserably

Now I am going to take a comment like that personally! ;a ;f ;a

People hit with a .308 tend to stay hit.
My guys over in the sandbox shot one guy 9 times with a 5.56 and the BG turned and ran away - he was then dumped with a .308

That really hasn't happened since they swapped to 77 BTHP Matchking.

The greentip issue ammo sucks for shooting people. Hence the extensive orders of 77 grain JHPBT Black Hills ammo. That stuff works btw out to 600! http://www.thegunzone.com/hague.html

The 5.56 is a great round if you use the right ammo. My preference is the 60 grain ballistic tip stuff from BlackHills. I have had it cook through 1/2" plate. (Makes it a pain in the ass to practice with though.)

Just fyi:
5.56
55 grain at 500 = 343 Footpounds
77 grain at 500 = 463
.308
175 grain .308 at 500 = 1150

Either way make sure to educate yourself on the difference between 5.56 and .223. Same with .308 Winchester and 7.62 Nato.

Wow, I can't wait to get this Ar-15 video finished and shipped off to replication this week. My head is full of this stuff right now!

Take care,
Matt

[Morris]

Good question, good responses and good thread!