wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, June 20, 2017 at 1:09:45 AM UTC-4, PaxPerPoten wrote:
On 6/19/2017 10:31 AM, rbowman wrote:
On 06/19/2017 05:15 AM, Jim Wilkins wrote:
There have been good arguments for infantry rifle calibers from
.223
(5.56mm) to .45. (11mm). 6mm through 8mm were the most common
choices.
The preference has varied with who and where we were fighting,
with
lighter, handier weapons in smaller calibers which allow larger
numbers of shots carried per man better within villages and
heavier
long-range cartridges better in the open fields between them.

Horses for courses. Unfortunately the military tends to be
fighting the
last war and will send troops armed with M4's up against Afghans
armed
with old battle rifles that can reach out and touch someone.

I agree. Nothing beats a close charging enemy down better then a
1911A1
.45 caliber...

sob And just a few months ago, you called the .45 ACP a "wimp."

, Or maybe a 12 gauge trench sweeper. For Range and stopping
power the tried and true 30-06 does well. .303 and .308 aren't too
bad
either. I do have a soft spot for the .50 Barrette/Stoner/whatever.

You're not supposed to hold it against the top of your head, fer
chrissake...

But
to haul that big ******* around can't be fun. I had a .475
Weatherbee
that was the cats meow, but it was a bolt and was not gentle. If it
didn't hit them, the sound, scared them to death. ;-p

OH, shades of the .410 goose gun! This is going to be good. Tell us
about your ".475 Weatherbee" sic Pox. Did you handload for it, or
did you shoot Weatherbee sic factory loads? d8-)

--
Ed Huntress


More proof he's just a poser.