FM> Within the treatise "The Assault Weapon Panic," Morgan and
FM> Kopel make a very good case for this assertion.  Col. Martin
FM> Fackler certainly agrees that if killing the enemy is the
FM> objective, then one of the least effective tools for the
FM> job is a modern FMJ rifle bullet fired from a medium velocity
FM> "assault" weapon.
        I think we have to take a look at the overall scheme involved
with military development of weapons in general.  A weapons, namely
rifles, ability to kill or wound really does not fall at the top of
the list of considerations.  I have some background information on
military firearms development from discussing it with several friends
that work on the teams that do this very development.  I do not have
actual military documents in hand that state every single requirement
for a particular round, but I do have the words from those that do work
in this field.  Cost is a major consideration.  Availability is another
that ranks at the top of the list.  Useability is another.  I suspect
that a .300 magnum is probably a little higher on the ladder of "kill
you outright in one" shot cartridges, but I don't know many people that
could go out and shoot hundreds of these rounds in a day without hurting
themselves.  But then again, the "one shot stop" is and has been a raging
arguement in the ballistics community for a number of years and thus it
remains.  Is a 30-'06 really better at killing in one shot than a .308??
Who can say?  But one thing is for sure, the .308 Winchester/7.62 NATO
is by no means a slouch when it comes to power.  Even the .223 is a force
to be reckoned with, I certainly wouldn't want to be shot with it.
  Either way, the development of firearms cartridges for the military
is as much a political endeavor as it is one of science.
--- GEcho 1.00
---------------