Primary weapon of the United Military still not replaced.

[Suicidesoldier#1]

It doesn't really matter.

Caseless rounds are the future.


No brass so they're uber cheap, and they are at least half the weight in the 5.56mm and 7.62mm rounds (6.5 and 12.5 grams respectively, compared to about 12.5 and 25.5).

You could use 7.62mm at the same weight of a 5.56mm- with a recoil buffer and a muzzle break, recoil is a non-issue, not that we fire in full auto or plan to any time soon.


The only design failure with a vertical bolt weapon is the occasional failure to eject a case due to the complicated mechanism- without a case, this is a non-issue.

You only need about a 4 inch backing in one of these weapons with an Ak-47 round (which is was originally tested with) so I imagine it's only going to be an inch longer at most with a 7.62mm.


That means a 24 inch long weapon (same as a micro tavor, or a little longer than a P90, both ideal for maneuvering through hallways and tight spaces that a normal human could fit through) could have a 20 inch barrel. Redesigning the bullet shape, the base could be shaped like an Ak-47 round for proper feeding. In a typical Ak-47 magazine, you could fit 45 of the same rounds in regards to weight, or 60 with a 40 round Ak-47 magazine.


Then we will be using airburst explosive ammunition which will only be about 35 dollars compared to 50-60 for a typical 40mm grenade using a sulfuric acid detonated system, which is far more difficult to implement.

We could in theory make it like the 3GL, which looks promising enough.


But that wasn't the point.

The point is that business and political corruption got so far as to the main weapon used by the military, which sucks.

[Skyburn]

Suicidesoldier#1

Skyburn

I'm not saying we don't need new rifles. The M16's would be good to phase out. But just that, phase them. People these days jump on bandwagons and want everything changed instantaneously. Pick a good rifle, not one that's pretty like the XM8, but one that speaks for itself. Start it off in a few test groups. Pick a Ranger battalion or two, maybe an MEU, right before they deploy so they can train stateside with the weapon's makers, then get to combat test it, and see how they like it. Get genuine feedback. If it's all good, start issuing them out to groups Stateside and monitor how best to train soldiers to get proficiency and do it rapidly, and then start issuing to groups overseas.

Well clearly we need to slowly replace them it's the only logical thing to do.

I'm just saying that if we WERE to replace them all at once it really wouldn't cost us that much.

The rifles alone, yes. But any servicemember can tell you nothing is that simple when you're dealing with hundreds of thousands of people across the globe.

[Machine_Gun_Blues]

Suicidesoldier#1

Machine_Gun_Blues

Suicidesoldier#1

Machine_Gun_Blues

Suicidesoldier#1

...the m16 was touted as a "self cleaning rifle" and no training on how to clean the weapon was given. A weapon, even the best weapon in the world in the hands of the best soldier, can still jam at any moment. To claim that you can control the future without a doubt is absurd.



Again, what if we were wielding machetes? Oh that's right, it would be superbly difficult to fight an individual WITH A ******** GUN. In theory, my fists are weapons- does that mean we shouldn't issue weapons at all? After all, it's the soldiers fault for not being able to kill someone 500 yards away with "strategy mind" powers.


For Christ's sake man. Why have tanks and planes and machine guns and sniper rifles? A weapon is everything. "Without me, my rifle is useless. Without my rifle, I am useless."


Second of all you never know when a bad guy is going to come around the corner. The last thing you want is for your weapon to be in multiple pieces instead of pointing at the bad guy- it would be foolish, and stupid, to take your weapon apart IN COMBAT.

Besides, who gives a ********? We'd just tell them it was s**t and that it wouldn't work unless you took good care of it, even though that wasn't the case in the first place. ._.

As far as I know and with being in the Army and knowing its history - the Army actually did issue out cleaning kits for the M16 in 1965 - since alot of the SEALS and Green Berets were essentially the first to go in with them.

It was a public notion that the M16 was self cleaning and it became military-wide, and the people who believed it were the dumb asses. I've spoken to many Vietnam war Veterans, both Infantry and SF.

And again with the melee weapons - I'm talking about what we have right now. You are undermining and ignoring my point. Ideally a soldier should be trained up to the point of being able to make tactical choices with he is given. Guns or not - it all applies and what you are saying is very unrealistic.

If a weapon jams during a room clearing, you kneel down to the side and stay down away from the point man's direction and tend to your rifle while the squad moves in and someone covers you're sector of fire. The squad moves fluently and has the ability to compensate for such a situation - however a jam SHOULD NOT happen in the first place because it is the soldiers responsibility to keep up with cleaning it.

Ever heard of modern tactics? I didn't think so. Again, theres a reason why we are trained.

"Without me, my rifle is useless. Without my rifle, I am useless."

No... more like without discipline you are accountable and a threat to your own life and the ones around you.

Training does not make the outcome to a future - what Im saying is that soldiers are trained to adapt to a situation and execute.

I'm just going to go out on a limb here.

Which tactics and strategies are you referring to?


Also a gun can jam at any moment.

Again, you are a moron.


That's like saying it's a cancer patients fault for getting cancer becuase they should have taken care of themselves more.

It just doesn't worth that way, the very fact they are doing anything at all makes them liable for cancer, and the same thing for any problem a person might run in to, it's just ******** life.

Infantry Squad Tactics - FM 3-06.11 Chapter 3 basic stuff that you can just google too.

If you have ever been to combat or have actually sat down and shot 3000+ rounds through a rifle in one sitting at a range - you would know that it only jams because of how you reload or manage the weapon. A rifle or gun is nothing more than a tool - how you manipulate it determines the outcome of whats going to happen to it and what it does.

My personal best, I've shot 1250 rounds through a 1911 pistol - only had one jam and with my issued M4 - I've put roughly about 5000 rounds through it at a range and its never jammed - except for a double feed that was my fault.

Im going off alot of personal first hand experience and common sense - and I'm still alive, so calling me a moron? Stop being childish. Your making yourself look like some CoD fanboy who reads too much online about guns and thinks he knows everything firsthand.

The day a cancer patient picks up a gun is the day I'll take your comparison seriously.

Judging by your past antics as to how you think tactics are operated - I really will go out and say that you know nothing of war.

So in other words you have no idea what you are talking about?

Figured as much.


As everyone knows, anything can happen to anyone.

Target shooting is not the same as being in combat.


Yes, if you stay in a perfectly clean room and never got shot at or are expected to roll around in the dirt, it will be easy not to have a jam.

Idk, it's poor maintenance to go into a war at all with a gun. rolleyes


Perhaps we should get tools serving man, instead of man serving tools?

Yeah, that would be nice.

What do you mean by I have no idea what I'm talking about? I just gave you a reference to an Field Manual used by the Army for room clearing tactics.

I wasnt shooting at targets - if thats what your implying. And all the ranges I go to are outdoors.

Well even in my experience with close quarters and room clearing operations - my M4 has never jammed on me. Simply because I cleaned it every chance I had like a meth addict.

I've actually put sand and dirt into the bolt feed of my rifle before on purpose and it shot fine, so I really don't know what your trying to say or prove.

Bottom line - your weapon is only going to work for you if you keep it maintained. Like a car - you gotta take care of it if you want it to keep working. Common sense.

Judging by how you are giving reluctant statements and half-cocked points about how much of an idiot I am apparently?

How about you get your a** in the Army, get deployed, play with all the guns you want and even experiment, be put into some real situations - then come back and talk to me?

[Suicidesoldier#1]

Machine_Gun_Blues

Suicidesoldier#1

Machine_Gun_Blues

Suicidesoldier#1

Machine_Gun_Blues

Suicidesoldier#1

...the m16 was touted as a "self cleaning rifle" and no training on how to clean the weapon was given. A weapon, even the best weapon in the world in the hands of the best soldier, can still jam at any moment. To claim that you can control the future without a doubt is absurd.



Again, what if we were wielding machetes? Oh that's right, it would be superbly difficult to fight an individual WITH A ******** GUN. In theory, my fists are weapons- does that mean we shouldn't issue weapons at all? After all, it's the soldiers fault for not being able to kill someone 500 yards away with "strategy mind" powers.


For Christ's sake man. Why have tanks and planes and machine guns and sniper rifles? A weapon is everything. "Without me, my rifle is useless. Without my rifle, I am useless."


Second of all you never know when a bad guy is going to come around the corner. The last thing you want is for your weapon to be in multiple pieces instead of pointing at the bad guy- it would be foolish, and stupid, to take your weapon apart IN COMBAT.

Besides, who gives a ********? We'd just tell them it was s**t and that it wouldn't work unless you took good care of it, even though that wasn't the case in the first place. ._.

As far as I know and with being in the Army and knowing its history - the Army actually did issue out cleaning kits for the M16 in 1965 - since alot of the SEALS and Green Berets were essentially the first to go in with them.

It was a public notion that the M16 was self cleaning and it became military-wide, and the people who believed it were the dumb asses. I've spoken to many Vietnam war Veterans, both Infantry and SF.

And again with the melee weapons - I'm talking about what we have right now. You are undermining and ignoring my point. Ideally a soldier should be trained up to the point of being able to make tactical choices with he is given. Guns or not - it all applies and what you are saying is very unrealistic.

If a weapon jams during a room clearing, you kneel down to the side and stay down away from the point man's direction and tend to your rifle while the squad moves in and someone covers you're sector of fire. The squad moves fluently and has the ability to compensate for such a situation - however a jam SHOULD NOT happen in the first place because it is the soldiers responsibility to keep up with cleaning it.

Ever heard of modern tactics? I didn't think so. Again, theres a reason why we are trained.

"Without me, my rifle is useless. Without my rifle, I am useless."

No... more like without discipline you are accountable and a threat to your own life and the ones around you.

Training does not make the outcome to a future - what Im saying is that soldiers are trained to adapt to a situation and execute.

I'm just going to go out on a limb here.

Which tactics and strategies are you referring to?


Also a gun can jam at any moment.

Again, you are a moron.


That's like saying it's a cancer patients fault for getting cancer becuase they should have taken care of themselves more.

It just doesn't worth that way, the very fact they are doing anything at all makes them liable for cancer, and the same thing for any problem a person might run in to, it's just ******** life.

Infantry Squad Tactics - FM 3-06.11 Chapter 3 basic stuff that you can just google too.

If you have ever been to combat or have actually sat down and shot 3000+ rounds through a rifle in one sitting at a range - you would know that it only jams because of how you reload or manage the weapon. A rifle or gun is nothing more than a tool - how you manipulate it determines the outcome of whats going to happen to it and what it does.

My personal best, I've shot 1250 rounds through a 1911 pistol - only had one jam and with my issued M4 - I've put roughly about 5000 rounds through it at a range and its never jammed - except for a double feed that was my fault.

Im going off alot of personal first hand experience and common sense - and I'm still alive, so calling me a moron? Stop being childish. Your making yourself look like some CoD fanboy who reads too much online about guns and thinks he knows everything firsthand.

The day a cancer patient picks up a gun is the day I'll take your comparison seriously.

Judging by your past antics as to how you think tactics are operated - I really will go out and say that you know nothing of war.

So in other words you have no idea what you are talking about?

Figured as much.


As everyone knows, anything can happen to anyone.

Target shooting is not the same as being in combat.


Yes, if you stay in a perfectly clean room and never got shot at or are expected to roll around in the dirt, it will be easy not to have a jam.

Idk, it's poor maintenance to go into a war at all with a gun. rolleyes


Perhaps we should get tools serving man, instead of man serving tools?

Yeah, that would be nice.

What do you mean by I have no idea what I'm talking about? I just gave you a reference to an Field Manual used by the Army for room clearing tactics.

I wasnt shooting at targets - if thats what your implying. And all the ranges I go to are outdoors.

Well even in my experience with close quarters and room clearing operations - my M4 has never jammed on me. Simply because I cleaned it every chance I had like a meth addict.

I've actually put sand and dirt into the bolt feed of my rifle before on purpose and it shot fine, so I really don't know what your trying to say or prove.

Bottom line - your weapon is only going to work for you if you keep it maintained. Like a car - you gotta take care of it if you want it to keep working. Common sense.

Judging by how you are giving reluctant statements and half-cocked points about how much of an idiot I am apparently?

How about you get your a** in the Army, get deployed, play with all the guns you want and even experiment, be put into some real situations - then come back and talk to me?

Right, it's all the soldier's fault if his weapon jams.

The gun had nothing to do with it, like actually existing.


It's also his fault if he gets shot or a meteorite comes down and wipes earth out- should have just, idk, trained for it.

How could I have been so stupid.

[Suicidesoldier#1]

Skyburn

Suicidesoldier#1

Skyburn

I'm not saying we don't need new rifles. The M16's would be good to phase out. But just that, phase them. People these days jump on bandwagons and want everything changed instantaneously. Pick a good rifle, not one that's pretty like the XM8, but one that speaks for itself. Start it off in a few test groups. Pick a Ranger battalion or two, maybe an MEU, right before they deploy so they can train stateside with the weapon's makers, then get to combat test it, and see how they like it. Get genuine feedback. If it's all good, start issuing them out to groups Stateside and monitor how best to train soldiers to get proficiency and do it rapidly, and then start issuing to groups overseas.

Well clearly we need to slowly replace them it's the only logical thing to do.

I'm just saying that if we WERE to replace them all at once it really wouldn't cost us that much.

The rifles alone, yes. But any servicemember can tell you nothing is that simple when you're dealing with hundreds of thousands of people across the globe.

Clearly it would take a while to implement.

But the only perceived issue is the cost of the gun.


In theory it would be a cheaper gun, sense shipping replacement barrels isn't an option, really.

My point is that the cost of the guns, in comparison to the M4, even though it's technically more, would not really be an issue.

[God Emperor Akhenaton]

I wouldn't say the M-16 i9s a bad gun. Old yes, but far from outdated in my opinion.

[Machine_Gun_Blues]

Suicidesoldier#1

Machine_Gun_Blues

Suicidesoldier#1

Machine_Gun_Blues

Suicidesoldier#1

I'm just going to go out on a limb here.

Which tactics and strategies are you referring to?


Also a gun can jam at any moment.

Again, you are a moron.


That's like saying it's a cancer patients fault for getting cancer becuase they should have taken care of themselves more.

It just doesn't worth that way, the very fact they are doing anything at all makes them liable for cancer, and the same thing for any problem a person might run in to, it's just ******** life.

Infantry Squad Tactics - FM 3-06.11 Chapter 3 basic stuff that you can just google too.

If you have ever been to combat or have actually sat down and shot 3000+ rounds through a rifle in one sitting at a range - you would know that it only jams because of how you reload or manage the weapon. A rifle or gun is nothing more than a tool - how you manipulate it determines the outcome of whats going to happen to it and what it does.

My personal best, I've shot 1250 rounds through a 1911 pistol - only had one jam and with my issued M4 - I've put roughly about 5000 rounds through it at a range and its never jammed - except for a double feed that was my fault.

Im going off alot of personal first hand experience and common sense - and I'm still alive, so calling me a moron? Stop being childish. Your making yourself look like some CoD fanboy who reads too much online about guns and thinks he knows everything firsthand.

The day a cancer patient picks up a gun is the day I'll take your comparison seriously.

Judging by your past antics as to how you think tactics are operated - I really will go out and say that you know nothing of war.

So in other words you have no idea what you are talking about?

Figured as much.


As everyone knows, anything can happen to anyone.

Target shooting is not the same as being in combat.


Yes, if you stay in a perfectly clean room and never got shot at or are expected to roll around in the dirt, it will be easy not to have a jam.

Idk, it's poor maintenance to go into a war at all with a gun. rolleyes


Perhaps we should get tools serving man, instead of man serving tools?

Yeah, that would be nice.

What do you mean by I have no idea what I'm talking about? I just gave you a reference to an Field Manual used by the Army for room clearing tactics.

I wasnt shooting at targets - if thats what your implying. And all the ranges I go to are outdoors.

Well even in my experience with close quarters and room clearing operations - my M4 has never jammed on me. Simply because I cleaned it every chance I had like a meth addict.

I've actually put sand and dirt into the bolt feed of my rifle before on purpose and it shot fine, so I really don't know what your trying to say or prove.

Bottom line - your weapon is only going to work for you if you keep it maintained. Like a car - you gotta take care of it if you want it to keep working. Common sense.

Judging by how you are giving reluctant statements and half-cocked points about how much of an idiot I am apparently?

How about you get your a** in the Army, get deployed, play with all the guns you want and even experiment, be put into some real situations - then come back and talk to me?

Right, it's all the soldier's fault if his weapon jams.

The gun had nothing to do with it, like actually existing.


It's also his fault if he gets shot or a meteorite comes down and wipes earth out- should have just, idk, trained for it.

How could I have been so stupid.

What are you not understanding?

A weapon only jams if the carrier either does not maintain it or if somehow the individual damaged it - which in all direction, becomes their fault.

Since the modern M4 and M16s are vastly superior to their early models - it is a liability for a soldier to keep it maintained - its the first thing they teach you in basic. How to clean and maintain your rifle. To keep your rifle in arms reach at all times - that way to prevent if someone else happened to tamper with it.

s**t just does not break or jam randomly by itself, guy. A firearm is a personal tool accustomed to the individual wielding it. You get used to your own rifle's quirks and the feel of it.

If you get a good shot group with your own rifle - then picked up somebody else's, you would need to sight it according to your own specs - otherwise your aim will be off. Simply because it is to their specs and not yours.

Every rifle is different - as every person is as well. As the wielder - you should know the insides and outs of your own rifle in case a situation occurs.

Its not like CoD where you can just go pick up some random weapons and be like "HERP DERP M16 SUCKS, THE _____ IS THE BEST GUN EVAR".

Ive said this already - your weapon is only as good as you are.

[Suicidesoldier#1]

Machine_Gun_Blues

Suicidesoldier#1

Machine_Gun_Blues

Suicidesoldier#1

Machine_Gun_Blues

Suicidesoldier#1

I'm just going to go out on a limb here.

Which tactics and strategies are you referring to?


Also a gun can jam at any moment.

Again, you are a moron.


That's like saying it's a cancer patients fault for getting cancer becuase they should have taken care of themselves more.

It just doesn't worth that way, the very fact they are doing anything at all makes them liable for cancer, and the same thing for any problem a person might run in to, it's just ******** life.

Infantry Squad Tactics - FM 3-06.11 Chapter 3 basic stuff that you can just google too.

If you have ever been to combat or have actually sat down and shot 3000+ rounds through a rifle in one sitting at a range - you would know that it only jams because of how you reload or manage the weapon. A rifle or gun is nothing more than a tool - how you manipulate it determines the outcome of whats going to happen to it and what it does.

My personal best, I've shot 1250 rounds through a 1911 pistol - only had one jam and with my issued M4 - I've put roughly about 5000 rounds through it at a range and its never jammed - except for a double feed that was my fault.

Im going off alot of personal first hand experience and common sense - and I'm still alive, so calling me a moron? Stop being childish. Your making yourself look like some CoD fanboy who reads too much online about guns and thinks he knows everything firsthand.

The day a cancer patient picks up a gun is the day I'll take your comparison seriously.

Judging by your past antics as to how you think tactics are operated - I really will go out and say that you know nothing of war.

So in other words you have no idea what you are talking about?

Figured as much.


As everyone knows, anything can happen to anyone.

Target shooting is not the same as being in combat.


Yes, if you stay in a perfectly clean room and never got shot at or are expected to roll around in the dirt, it will be easy not to have a jam.

Idk, it's poor maintenance to go into a war at all with a gun. rolleyes


Perhaps we should get tools serving man, instead of man serving tools?

Yeah, that would be nice.

What do you mean by I have no idea what I'm talking about? I just gave you a reference to an Field Manual used by the Army for room clearing tactics.

I wasnt shooting at targets - if thats what your implying. And all the ranges I go to are outdoors.

Well even in my experience with close quarters and room clearing operations - my M4 has never jammed on me. Simply because I cleaned it every chance I had like a meth addict.

I've actually put sand and dirt into the bolt feed of my rifle before on purpose and it shot fine, so I really don't know what your trying to say or prove.

Bottom line - your weapon is only going to work for you if you keep it maintained. Like a car - you gotta take care of it if you want it to keep working. Common sense.

Judging by how you are giving reluctant statements and half-cocked points about how much of an idiot I am apparently?

How about you get your a** in the Army, get deployed, play with all the guns you want and even experiment, be put into some real situations - then come back and talk to me?

Right, it's all the soldier's fault if his weapon jams.

The gun had nothing to do with it, like actually existing.


It's also his fault if he gets shot or a meteorite comes down and wipes earth out- should have just, idk, trained for it.

How could I have been so stupid.

What are you not understanding?

A weapon only jams if the carrier either does not maintain it or if somehow the individual damaged it - which in all direction, becomes their fault.

Since the modern M4 and M16s are vastly superior to their early models - it is a liability for a soldier to keep it maintained - its the first thing they teach you in basic. How to clean and maintain your rifle. To keep your rifle in arms reach at all times - that way to prevent if someone else happened to tamper with it.

s**t just does not break or jam randomly by itself, guy. A firearm is a personal tool accustomed to the individual wielding it. You get used to your own rifle's quirks and the feel of it.

If you get a good shot group with your own rifle - then picked up somebody else's, you would need to sight it according to your own specs - otherwise your aim will be off. Simply because it is to their specs and not yours.

Every rifle is different - as every person is as well. As the wielder - you should know the insides and outs of your own rifle in case a situation occurs.

Its not like CoD where you can just go pick up some random weapons and be like "HERP DERP M16 SUCKS, THE _____ IS THE BEST GUN EVAR".

Ive said this already - your weapon is only as good as you are.

All you keep saying is that it's the person's fault, but then I go on to list examples of say, using a machete being a bad idea, or how a crappier weapon would be harder to use etc.

That doesn't make any sense.


On principle your ideology is flawed.

Even pretending what you had to say was applicable to the M4 carbine by itself the principle of your idea is wrong; weapons fail to do what we want all the time regardless of user error, primarily becuase the weapon is not applicable within that department.


Should a weapon be a jam machine that's what it will do, instead of fire.

M16's and M4's are notorious for failing even under ideal conditions, and especially under poor conditions.


You can claim a human being isn't perfect, that's fine, that's dandy.

But at the end of the day, it's out of the soldier's control- in that way it's only his fault so far as him not having powers over all of the universe. Otherwise it's the weapon's fault. You cannot blame the victim for the failure of life to work out for them. With many weapons, it would be possible to not have to clean your weapon as much- in comparison, the M4 Carbine would be a worse weapon in this criteria, and should a soldier put an M4 carbine through the same conditions as an XM8, the M4 carbine would be more likely to fail, if not be almost certain to fail (such as firing underwater), which would make it a far worse weapon in that application when an XM8 would not be, meaning that if a soldier did not have an M4 and instead had an XM8, it would function, making it the weapon's fault. It doesn't get simpler than that.

[Machine_Gun_Blues]

Suicidesoldier#1

Machine_Gun_Blues

Suicidesoldier#1

Machine_Gun_Blues

Suicidesoldier#1

So in other words you have no idea what you are talking about?

Figured as much.


As everyone knows, anything can happen to anyone.

Target shooting is not the same as being in combat.


Yes, if you stay in a perfectly clean room and never got shot at or are expected to roll around in the dirt, it will be easy not to have a jam.

Idk, it's poor maintenance to go into a war at all with a gun. rolleyes


Perhaps we should get tools serving man, instead of man serving tools?

Yeah, that would be nice.

What do you mean by I have no idea what I'm talking about? I just gave you a reference to an Field Manual used by the Army for room clearing tactics.

I wasnt shooting at targets - if thats what your implying. And all the ranges I go to are outdoors.

Well even in my experience with close quarters and room clearing operations - my M4 has never jammed on me. Simply because I cleaned it every chance I had like a meth addict.

I've actually put sand and dirt into the bolt feed of my rifle before on purpose and it shot fine, so I really don't know what your trying to say or prove.

Bottom line - your weapon is only going to work for you if you keep it maintained. Like a car - you gotta take care of it if you want it to keep working. Common sense.

Judging by how you are giving reluctant statements and half-cocked points about how much of an idiot I am apparently?

How about you get your a** in the Army, get deployed, play with all the guns you want and even experiment, be put into some real situations - then come back and talk to me?

Right, it's all the soldier's fault if his weapon jams.

The gun had nothing to do with it, like actually existing.


It's also his fault if he gets shot or a meteorite comes down and wipes earth out- should have just, idk, trained for it.

How could I have been so stupid.

What are you not understanding?

A weapon only jams if the carrier either does not maintain it or if somehow the individual damaged it - which in all direction, becomes their fault.

Since the modern M4 and M16s are vastly superior to their early models - it is a liability for a soldier to keep it maintained - its the first thing they teach you in basic. How to clean and maintain your rifle. To keep your rifle in arms reach at all times - that way to prevent if someone else happened to tamper with it.

s**t just does not break or jam randomly by itself, guy. A firearm is a personal tool accustomed to the individual wielding it. You get used to your own rifle's quirks and the feel of it.

If you get a good shot group with your own rifle - then picked up somebody else's, you would need to sight it according to your own specs - otherwise your aim will be off. Simply because it is to their specs and not yours.

Every rifle is different - as every person is as well. As the wielder - you should know the insides and outs of your own rifle in case a situation occurs.

Its not like CoD where you can just go pick up some random weapons and be like "HERP DERP M16 SUCKS, THE _____ IS THE BEST GUN EVAR".

Ive said this already - your weapon is only as good as you are.

All you keep saying is that it's the person's fault, but then I go on to list examples of say, using a machete being a bad idea, or how a crappier weapon would be harder to use etc.

That doesn't make any sense.


On principle your ideology is flawed.

Even pretending what you had to say was applicable to the M4 carbine by itself the principle of your idea is wrong; weapons fail to do what we want all the time regardless of user error, primarily becuase the weapon is not applicable within that department.


Should a weapon be a jam machine that's what it will do, instead of fire.

M16's and M4's are notorious for failing even under ideal conditions, and especially under poor conditions.


You can claim a human being isn't perfect, that's fine, that's dandy.

But at the end of the day, it's out of the soldier's control- in that way it's only his fault so far as him not having powers over all of the universe. Otherwise it's the weapon's fault. You cannot blame the victim for the failure of life to work out for them. With many weapons, it would be possible to not have to clean your weapon as much- in comparison, the M4 Carbine would be a worse weapon in this criteria, and should a soldier put an M4 carbine through the same conditions as an XM8, the M4 carbine would be more likely to fail, if not be almost certain to fail (such as firing underwater), which would make it a far worse weapon in that application when an XM8 would not be, meaning that if a soldier did not have an M4 and instead had an XM8, it would function, making it the weapon's fault. It doesn't get simpler than that.

All I am saying is a weapon tends to jam or fail to operate only if its not maintained or damaged BY THE USER. I dont give a s**t on your theory of principle- its fact and I know it from both personal experience and having been around M4s and M16s ALOT.

Soldiers fault? Tell that to the Army.

They will degrade your rank and even issue Article-15s and other punishments if your weapon fails - because it costs lives when a situation occurs. The only time its avoidable is if your rifle gets ******** up beyond reason and you take it to an Arms room to have the soldiers there fix it or issue you a new one.

Faulty issued rifles are taken away quickly in the first place anyway so it cancels itself out.

I personally would trust myself more with an M4 than an XM8 simply because I know the M4 better and more than likely am a better marksman with it.

Until the day an XM8 gets put through a Ranger Batt. or is combat proven over a course of years in all terrain and is actually issued - the M4 and M16 are sill going to be in use regardless.

Also... theres already M4's out there that can shoot underwater and withstand some pretty harsh conditions.

Also - I'm sure there is cleaning kits and required things about the XM8 itself where it would needed to be maintained. Its unrealistic to have a rifle that doesnt jam with human error or one that just jams out of the blue without knowing it.

Also pretend? Next time I go to a range I can happily take video and put another 3000 rounds through my M4 just to show - including the dirt and sand.

[Suicidesoldier#1]

Machine_Gun_Blues

Suicidesoldier#1

Machine_Gun_Blues

Suicidesoldier#1

Machine_Gun_Blues

Suicidesoldier#1

So in other words you have no idea what you are talking about?

Figured as much.


As everyone knows, anything can happen to anyone.

Target shooting is not the same as being in combat.


Yes, if you stay in a perfectly clean room and never got shot at or are expected to roll around in the dirt, it will be easy not to have a jam.

Idk, it's poor maintenance to go into a war at all with a gun. rolleyes


Perhaps we should get tools serving man, instead of man serving tools?

Yeah, that would be nice.

What do you mean by I have no idea what I'm talking about? I just gave you a reference to an Field Manual used by the Army for room clearing tactics.

I wasnt shooting at targets - if thats what your implying. And all the ranges I go to are outdoors.

Well even in my experience with close quarters and room clearing operations - my M4 has never jammed on me. Simply because I cleaned it every chance I had like a meth addict.

I've actually put sand and dirt into the bolt feed of my rifle before on purpose and it shot fine, so I really don't know what your trying to say or prove.

Bottom line - your weapon is only going to work for you if you keep it maintained. Like a car - you gotta take care of it if you want it to keep working. Common sense.

Judging by how you are giving reluctant statements and half-cocked points about how much of an idiot I am apparently?

How about you get your a** in the Army, get deployed, play with all the guns you want and even experiment, be put into some real situations - then come back and talk to me?

Right, it's all the soldier's fault if his weapon jams.

The gun had nothing to do with it, like actually existing.


It's also his fault if he gets shot or a meteorite comes down and wipes earth out- should have just, idk, trained for it.

How could I have been so stupid.

What are you not understanding?

A weapon only jams if the carrier either does not maintain it or if somehow the individual damaged it - which in all direction, becomes their fault.

Since the modern M4 and M16s are vastly superior to their early models - it is a liability for a soldier to keep it maintained - its the first thing they teach you in basic. How to clean and maintain your rifle. To keep your rifle in arms reach at all times - that way to prevent if someone else happened to tamper with it.

s**t just does not break or jam randomly by itself, guy. A firearm is a personal tool accustomed to the individual wielding it. You get used to your own rifle's quirks and the feel of it.

If you get a good shot group with your own rifle - then picked up somebody else's, you would need to sight it according to your own specs - otherwise your aim will be off. Simply because it is to their specs and not yours.

Every rifle is different - as every person is as well. As the wielder - you should know the insides and outs of your own rifle in case a situation occurs.

Its not like CoD where you can just go pick up some random weapons and be like "HERP DERP M16 SUCKS, THE _____ IS THE BEST GUN EVAR".

Ive said this already - your weapon is only as good as you are.

All you keep saying is that it's the person's fault, but then I go on to list examples of say, using a machete being a bad idea, or how a crappier weapon would be harder to use etc.

That doesn't make any sense.


On principle your ideology is flawed.

Even pretending what you had to say was applicable to the M4 carbine by itself the principle of your idea is wrong; weapons fail to do what we want all the time regardless of user error, primarily becuase the weapon is not applicable within that department.


Should a weapon be a jam machine that's what it will do, instead of fire.

M16's and M4's are notorious for failing even under ideal conditions, and especially under poor conditions.


You can claim a human being isn't perfect, that's fine, that's dandy.

But at the end of the day, it's out of the soldier's control- in that way it's only his fault so far as him not having powers over all of the universe. Otherwise it's the weapon's fault. You cannot blame the victim for the failure of life to work out for them. With many weapons, it would be possible to not have to clean your weapon as much- in comparison, the M4 Carbine would be a worse weapon in this criteria, and should a soldier put an M4 carbine through the same conditions as an XM8, the M4 carbine would be more likely to fail, if not be almost certain to fail (such as firing underwater), which would make it a far worse weapon in that application when an XM8 would not be, meaning that if a soldier did not have an M4 and instead had an XM8, it would function, making it the weapon's fault. It doesn't get simpler than that.

All I am saying is a weapon tends to jam or fail to operate only if its not maintained or damaged BY THE USER. I dont give a s**t on your theory of principle- its fact and I know it from both personal experience and having been around M4s and M16s ALOT.

Soldiers fault? Tell that to the Army.

They will degrade your rank and even issue Article-15s and other punishments if your weapon fails - because it costs lives when a situation occurs. The only time its avoidable is if your rifle gets ******** up beyond reason and you take it to an Arms room to have the soldiers there fix it or issue you a new one.

Faulty issued rifles are taken away quickly in the first place anyway so it cancels itself out.

I personally would trust myself more with an M4 than an XM8 simply because I know the M4 better and more than likely am a better marksman with it.

Until the day an XM8 gets put through a Ranger Batt. or is combat proven over a course of years in all terrain and is actually issued - the M4 and M16 are sill going to be in use regardless.

Also... theres already M4's out there that can shoot underwater and withstand some pretty harsh conditions.

Also - I'm sure there is cleaning kits and required things about the XM8 itself where it would needed to be maintained. Its unrealistic to have a rifle that doesnt jam with human error or one that just jams out of the blue without knowing it.

Also pretend? Next time I go to a range I can happily take video and put another 3000 rounds through my M4 just to show - including the dirt and sand.

Key word- at the range.

[Machine_Gun_Blues]

Suicidesoldier#1

Machine_Gun_Blues

Suicidesoldier#1

Machine_Gun_Blues

Suicidesoldier#1

Right, it's all the soldier's fault if his weapon jams.

The gun had nothing to do with it, like actually existing.


It's also his fault if he gets shot or a meteorite comes down and wipes earth out- should have just, idk, trained for it.

How could I have been so stupid.

What are you not understanding?

A weapon only jams if the carrier either does not maintain it or if somehow the individual damaged it - which in all direction, becomes their fault.

Since the modern M4 and M16s are vastly superior to their early models - it is a liability for a soldier to keep it maintained - its the first thing they teach you in basic. How to clean and maintain your rifle. To keep your rifle in arms reach at all times - that way to prevent if someone else happened to tamper with it.

s**t just does not break or jam randomly by itself, guy. A firearm is a personal tool accustomed to the individual wielding it. You get used to your own rifle's quirks and the feel of it.

If you get a good shot group with your own rifle - then picked up somebody else's, you would need to sight it according to your own specs - otherwise your aim will be off. Simply because it is to their specs and not yours.

Every rifle is different - as every person is as well. As the wielder - you should know the insides and outs of your own rifle in case a situation occurs.

Its not like CoD where you can just go pick up some random weapons and be like "HERP DERP M16 SUCKS, THE _____ IS THE BEST GUN EVAR".

Ive said this already - your weapon is only as good as you are.

All you keep saying is that it's the person's fault, but then I go on to list examples of say, using a machete being a bad idea, or how a crappier weapon would be harder to use etc.

That doesn't make any sense.


On principle your ideology is flawed.

Even pretending what you had to say was applicable to the M4 carbine by itself the principle of your idea is wrong; weapons fail to do what we want all the time regardless of user error, primarily becuase the weapon is not applicable within that department.


Should a weapon be a jam machine that's what it will do, instead of fire.

M16's and M4's are notorious for failing even under ideal conditions, and especially under poor conditions.


You can claim a human being isn't perfect, that's fine, that's dandy.

But at the end of the day, it's out of the soldier's control- in that way it's only his fault so far as him not having powers over all of the universe. Otherwise it's the weapon's fault. You cannot blame the victim for the failure of life to work out for them. With many weapons, it would be possible to not have to clean your weapon as much- in comparison, the M4 Carbine would be a worse weapon in this criteria, and should a soldier put an M4 carbine through the same conditions as an XM8, the M4 carbine would be more likely to fail, if not be almost certain to fail (such as firing underwater), which would make it a far worse weapon in that application when an XM8 would not be, meaning that if a soldier did not have an M4 and instead had an XM8, it would function, making it the weapon's fault. It doesn't get simpler than that.

All I am saying is a weapon tends to jam or fail to operate only if its not maintained or damaged BY THE USER. I dont give a s**t on your theory of principle- its fact and I know it from both personal experience and having been around M4s and M16s ALOT.

Soldiers fault? Tell that to the Army.

They will degrade your rank and even issue Article-15s and other punishments if your weapon fails - because it costs lives when a situation occurs. The only time its avoidable is if your rifle gets ******** up beyond reason and you take it to an Arms room to have the soldiers there fix it or issue you a new one.

Faulty issued rifles are taken away quickly in the first place anyway so it cancels itself out.

I personally would trust myself more with an M4 than an XM8 simply because I know the M4 better and more than likely am a better marksman with it.

Until the day an XM8 gets put through a Ranger Batt. or is combat proven over a course of years in all terrain and is actually issued - the M4 and M16 are sill going to be in use regardless.

Also... theres already M4's out there that can shoot underwater and withstand some pretty harsh conditions.

Also - I'm sure there is cleaning kits and required things about the XM8 itself where it would needed to be maintained. Its unrealistic to have a rifle that doesnt jam with human error or one that just jams out of the blue without knowing it.

Also pretend? Next time I go to a range I can happily take video and put another 3000 rounds through my M4 just to show - including the dirt and sand.

Key word- at the range.

The fact that I'm still alive and well and replying to you I would assume can speak for itself that the M4 is not the best rifle but a decent one at best.

However I could put it through a stress test and even simulate real life situations in the room clearing ranges as well - dirt, sand, all the s**t you can think of will go right into the bolt too.

[Suicidesoldier#1]

The XM8 isn't that amazing though, it's just an example.

The FN SCAR or Hk416 both have the same level of reliability, in theory.


Half as bad BUT that was mainly due to the magazines.

If they used the XM8 style magazine, it would solve a lot of issues, virtually halving the reliability issues.


Put in 6.8mm remington?

Awesomesz reliability, more power etc.

[Suicidesoldier#1]

Machine_Gun_Blues

Suicidesoldier#1

Machine_Gun_Blues

Suicidesoldier#1

Machine_Gun_Blues

Suicidesoldier#1

Right, it's all the soldier's fault if his weapon jams.

The gun had nothing to do with it, like actually existing.


It's also his fault if he gets shot or a meteorite comes down and wipes earth out- should have just, idk, trained for it.

How could I have been so stupid.

What are you not understanding?

A weapon only jams if the carrier either does not maintain it or if somehow the individual damaged it - which in all direction, becomes their fault.

Since the modern M4 and M16s are vastly superior to their early models - it is a liability for a soldier to keep it maintained - its the first thing they teach you in basic. How to clean and maintain your rifle. To keep your rifle in arms reach at all times - that way to prevent if someone else happened to tamper with it.

s**t just does not break or jam randomly by itself, guy. A firearm is a personal tool accustomed to the individual wielding it. You get used to your own rifle's quirks and the feel of it.

If you get a good shot group with your own rifle - then picked up somebody else's, you would need to sight it according to your own specs - otherwise your aim will be off. Simply because it is to their specs and not yours.

Every rifle is different - as every person is as well. As the wielder - you should know the insides and outs of your own rifle in case a situation occurs.

Its not like CoD where you can just go pick up some random weapons and be like "HERP DERP M16 SUCKS, THE _____ IS THE BEST GUN EVAR".

Ive said this already - your weapon is only as good as you are.

All you keep saying is that it's the person's fault, but then I go on to list examples of say, using a machete being a bad idea, or how a crappier weapon would be harder to use etc.

That doesn't make any sense.


On principle your ideology is flawed.

Even pretending what you had to say was applicable to the M4 carbine by itself the principle of your idea is wrong; weapons fail to do what we want all the time regardless of user error, primarily becuase the weapon is not applicable within that department.


Should a weapon be a jam machine that's what it will do, instead of fire.

M16's and M4's are notorious for failing even under ideal conditions, and especially under poor conditions.


You can claim a human being isn't perfect, that's fine, that's dandy.

But at the end of the day, it's out of the soldier's control- in that way it's only his fault so far as him not having powers over all of the universe. Otherwise it's the weapon's fault. You cannot blame the victim for the failure of life to work out for them. With many weapons, it would be possible to not have to clean your weapon as much- in comparison, the M4 Carbine would be a worse weapon in this criteria, and should a soldier put an M4 carbine through the same conditions as an XM8, the M4 carbine would be more likely to fail, if not be almost certain to fail (such as firing underwater), which would make it a far worse weapon in that application when an XM8 would not be, meaning that if a soldier did not have an M4 and instead had an XM8, it would function, making it the weapon's fault. It doesn't get simpler than that.

All I am saying is a weapon tends to jam or fail to operate only if its not maintained or damaged BY THE USER. I dont give a s**t on your theory of principle- its fact and I know it from both personal experience and having been around M4s and M16s ALOT.

Soldiers fault? Tell that to the Army.

They will degrade your rank and even issue Article-15s and other punishments if your weapon fails - because it costs lives when a situation occurs. The only time its avoidable is if your rifle gets ******** up beyond reason and you take it to an Arms room to have the soldiers there fix it or issue you a new one.

Faulty issued rifles are taken away quickly in the first place anyway so it cancels itself out.

I personally would trust myself more with an M4 than an XM8 simply because I know the M4 better and more than likely am a better marksman with it.

Until the day an XM8 gets put through a Ranger Batt. or is combat proven over a course of years in all terrain and is actually issued - the M4 and M16 are sill going to be in use regardless.

Also... theres already M4's out there that can shoot underwater and withstand some pretty harsh conditions.

Also - I'm sure there is cleaning kits and required things about the XM8 itself where it would needed to be maintained. Its unrealistic to have a rifle that doesnt jam with human error or one that just jams out of the blue without knowing it.

Also pretend? Next time I go to a range I can happily take video and put another 3000 rounds through my M4 just to show - including the dirt and sand.

Key word- at the range.

The fact that I'm still alive and well and replying to you I would assume can speak for itself that the M4 is not the best rifle but a decent one at best.

However I could put it through a stress test and even simulate real life situations in the room clearing ranges as well - dirt, sand, all the s**t you can think of will go right into the bolt too.

And that's your ideology, which is evident and clear.

"I survived- ergo, I must be good."


My ideology is "I survived, I'm lucky as hell nothing stupid happened".

At the end of the day if someone pointed a gun at your head and pulled the trigger there'd be nothing YOU could do.


Surviving is luck, inbetween that you have small chances but otherwise, not really.

Surviving on D-Day just meant you were one of the lucky ones to not step on a landmine or get shot by a gun, it was arbitrary, nothing you planned to do, not like you magically knew where all the landmines were, it just happened.


And while the M4 Carbine can work it jams approximately once every 70 rounds.

That's about 3 times per load, instead of less than half of one per combat load.

[Machine_Gun_Blues]

Suicidesoldier#1

Machine_Gun_Blues

Suicidesoldier#1

Machine_Gun_Blues

Suicidesoldier#1

All you keep saying is that it's the person's fault, but then I go on to list examples of say, using a machete being a bad idea, or how a crappier weapon would be harder to use etc.

That doesn't make any sense.


On principle your ideology is flawed.

Even pretending what you had to say was applicable to the M4 carbine by itself the principle of your idea is wrong; weapons fail to do what we want all the time regardless of user error, primarily becuase the weapon is not applicable within that department.


Should a weapon be a jam machine that's what it will do, instead of fire.

M16's and M4's are notorious for failing even under ideal conditions, and especially under poor conditions.


You can claim a human being isn't perfect, that's fine, that's dandy.

But at the end of the day, it's out of the soldier's control- in that way it's only his fault so far as him not having powers over all of the universe. Otherwise it's the weapon's fault. You cannot blame the victim for the failure of life to work out for them. With many weapons, it would be possible to not have to clean your weapon as much- in comparison, the M4 Carbine would be a worse weapon in this criteria, and should a soldier put an M4 carbine through the same conditions as an XM8, the M4 carbine would be more likely to fail, if not be almost certain to fail (such as firing underwater), which would make it a far worse weapon in that application when an XM8 would not be, meaning that if a soldier did not have an M4 and instead had an XM8, it would function, making it the weapon's fault. It doesn't get simpler than that.

All I am saying is a weapon tends to jam or fail to operate only if its not maintained or damaged BY THE USER. I dont give a s**t on your theory of principle- its fact and I know it from both personal experience and having been around M4s and M16s ALOT.

Soldiers fault? Tell that to the Army.

They will degrade your rank and even issue Article-15s and other punishments if your weapon fails - because it costs lives when a situation occurs. The only time its avoidable is if your rifle gets ******** up beyond reason and you take it to an Arms room to have the soldiers there fix it or issue you a new one.

Faulty issued rifles are taken away quickly in the first place anyway so it cancels itself out.

I personally would trust myself more with an M4 than an XM8 simply because I know the M4 better and more than likely am a better marksman with it.

Until the day an XM8 gets put through a Ranger Batt. or is combat proven over a course of years in all terrain and is actually issued - the M4 and M16 are sill going to be in use regardless.

Also... theres already M4's out there that can shoot underwater and withstand some pretty harsh conditions.

Also - I'm sure there is cleaning kits and required things about the XM8 itself where it would needed to be maintained. Its unrealistic to have a rifle that doesnt jam with human error or one that just jams out of the blue without knowing it.

Also pretend? Next time I go to a range I can happily take video and put another 3000 rounds through my M4 just to show - including the dirt and sand.

Key word- at the range.

The fact that I'm still alive and well and replying to you I would assume can speak for itself that the M4 is not the best rifle but a decent one at best.

However I could put it through a stress test and even simulate real life situations in the room clearing ranges as well - dirt, sand, all the s**t you can think of will go right into the bolt too.

And that's your ideology, which is evident and clear.

"I survived- ergo, I must be good."


My ideology is "I survived, I'm lucky as hell nothing stupid happened".

At the end of the day if someone pointed a gun at your head and pulled the trigger there'd be nothing YOU could do.


Surviving is luck, inbetween that you have small chances but otherwise, not really.

Surviving on D-Day just meant you were one of the lucky ones to not step on a landmine or get shot by a gun, it was arbitrary, nothing you planned to do, not like you magically knew where all the landmines were, it just happened.


And while the M4 Carbine can work it jams approximately once every 70 rounds.

That's about 3 times per load, instead of less than half of one per combat load.

Luck or chance - just knowing tactics and maintaining a weapon in the field all in all is still not a bad idea.

Honestly I think the same way - I don't think I'm good, its just that I applied what I was trained for so it give me a higher chance of survival.

Ehh,,, depends again. I think the reason why mine does not jam so easily is because I had the feed replaced and I strictly use custom magazines - the clunky magazines that the Army issues tend to cause feeding errors.

It could also be that Im lucky since a soldier friend of mine has an M4 that is totally not user friendly and has issues all around.

I tend to be a little bit of a perfectionist when it comes to firearms so I clean them very well.

What would help the M4 all around is if the Army came up with another lube/bore cleaner instead of using the Vietnam era CLP which was designed more for tropical/jungle use.

CLP attracts dirt like crazy.

[Suicidesoldier#1]

Machine_Gun_Blues

Suicidesoldier#1

Machine_Gun_Blues

Suicidesoldier#1

Machine_Gun_Blues

Suicidesoldier#1

All you keep saying is that it's the person's fault, but then I go on to list examples of say, using a machete being a bad idea, or how a crappier weapon would be harder to use etc.

That doesn't make any sense.


On principle your ideology is flawed.

Even pretending what you had to say was applicable to the M4 carbine by itself the principle of your idea is wrong; weapons fail to do what we want all the time regardless of user error, primarily becuase the weapon is not applicable within that department.


Should a weapon be a jam machine that's what it will do, instead of fire.

M16's and M4's are notorious for failing even under ideal conditions, and especially under poor conditions.


You can claim a human being isn't perfect, that's fine, that's dandy.

But at the end of the day, it's out of the soldier's control- in that way it's only his fault so far as him not having powers over all of the universe. Otherwise it's the weapon's fault. You cannot blame the victim for the failure of life to work out for them. With many weapons, it would be possible to not have to clean your weapon as much- in comparison, the M4 Carbine would be a worse weapon in this criteria, and should a soldier put an M4 carbine through the same conditions as an XM8, the M4 carbine would be more likely to fail, if not be almost certain to fail (such as firing underwater), which would make it a far worse weapon in that application when an XM8 would not be, meaning that if a soldier did not have an M4 and instead had an XM8, it would function, making it the weapon's fault. It doesn't get simpler than that.

All I am saying is a weapon tends to jam or fail to operate only if its not maintained or damaged BY THE USER. I dont give a s**t on your theory of principle- its fact and I know it from both personal experience and having been around M4s and M16s ALOT.

Soldiers fault? Tell that to the Army.

They will degrade your rank and even issue Article-15s and other punishments if your weapon fails - because it costs lives when a situation occurs. The only time its avoidable is if your rifle gets ******** up beyond reason and you take it to an Arms room to have the soldiers there fix it or issue you a new one.

Faulty issued rifles are taken away quickly in the first place anyway so it cancels itself out.

I personally would trust myself more with an M4 than an XM8 simply because I know the M4 better and more than likely am a better marksman with it.

Until the day an XM8 gets put through a Ranger Batt. or is combat proven over a course of years in all terrain and is actually issued - the M4 and M16 are sill going to be in use regardless.

Also... theres already M4's out there that can shoot underwater and withstand some pretty harsh conditions.

Also - I'm sure there is cleaning kits and required things about the XM8 itself where it would needed to be maintained. Its unrealistic to have a rifle that doesnt jam with human error or one that just jams out of the blue without knowing it.

Also pretend? Next time I go to a range I can happily take video and put another 3000 rounds through my M4 just to show - including the dirt and sand.

Key word- at the range.

The fact that I'm still alive and well and replying to you I would assume can speak for itself that the M4 is not the best rifle but a decent one at best.

However I could put it through a stress test and even simulate real life situations in the room clearing ranges as well - dirt, sand, all the s**t you can think of will go right into the bolt too.

And that's your ideology, which is evident and clear.

"I survived- ergo, I must be good."


My ideology is "I survived, I'm lucky as hell nothing stupid happened".

At the end of the day if someone pointed a gun at your head and pulled the trigger there'd be nothing YOU could do.


Surviving is luck, inbetween that you have small chances but otherwise, not really.

Surviving on D-Day just meant you were one of the lucky ones to not step on a landmine or get shot by a gun, it was arbitrary, nothing you planned to do, not like you magically knew where all the landmines were, it just happened.


And while the M4 Carbine can work it jams approximately once every 70 rounds.

That's about 3 times per load, instead of less than half of one per combat load.

Luck or chance - just knowing tactics and maintaining a weapon in the field all in all is still not a bad idea.

Honestly I think the same way - I don't think I'm good, its just that I applied what I was trained for so it give me a higher chance of survival.

Ehh,,, depends again. I think the reason why mine does not jam so easily is because I had the feed replaced and I strictly use custom magazines - the clunky magazines that the Army issues tend to cause feeding errors.

It could also be that Im lucky since a soldier friend of mine has an M4 that is totally not user friendly and has issues all around.

I tend to be a little bit of a perfectionist when it comes to firearms so I clean them very well.

What would help the M4 all around is if the Army came up with another lube/bore cleaner instead of using the Vietnam era CLP which was designed more for tropical/jungle use.

CLP attracts dirt like crazy.

Yes it does. ._.

It would be awesome if this little things were kinked out.


I mean Jesus, when it comes down to lube?

Just buy the stuff that's 3 times the price if you have to, what's the cost after a 1500 dollar rifle? O_o


I heard in the military test they used better lube and it jammed half the amount, but it was commercial lube so the it wasn't applicable.

There's all these tiny things that could be changed to make the guns so much better, it's like not having a steering wheel on a car, what's the point?


As far as training goes it won't necessarily mean that you will survive.

But under certain conditions you will be more likely to make certain decisions that you otherwise might not have, which could lead to achieving your objective or being more likely to survive.