I can understand the portability issue over the 7.62, but the tighter group statement is hard to back up.
Disagree all you want, I’m still active duty with over 18 years in sf and smu’s. I’m jacked up on a lot of things but not this. You may get the occasional loner who may smuggle something in but as for a “group”, you still need validations, safety certifications and a legal review.
Anyone saying anything different simply does not know. Enjoy, I’m done.
I served in Special Forces units, Special Mission Units, and commanded the Army Marksmanship Unit.
There are stories of some folks who took the 6.8 overseas. As far as I can gather they did it secretly and/or did not formally notify chains of command. My own command audit showed some commercial Remington 6.8 ammunition shipped to the USAMU was improperly diverted and disappeared after delivery by commercial carrier and before log-in by supply and ammo folks.
When I asked an individual about the ammunition I was told it was for a project that was classified and I had “No need to know.”
I have some of the highest security clearances within the United States Government, Department of Defense, and the Intelligence Community. No civilian employee can tell his commander (who, by law, is responsible for what his unit does and fails to do) that the commander has no business knowing what his unit (or a member of his unit) is doing or supporting – ain’t and didn’t happen in this lifetime, and I bet it doesn’t happen in the future, either. If you’re not read-on you’ll be formally told by your chain of command, otherwise if you’re the one spinning a story you’d better remember what you said – because the next action is usually the commander contacting the Criminal Investigation Division (and FBI counterpart), Staff Judge Advocate, the US Attorney and/or magistrate, and preparing a charges sheet followed by the infamous Miranda reading (formally and off the card). Especially if the topic is arms, ammunition, and explosives sent to the commander (the commercial source wants to make sure it’s in compliance with federal laws so they don’t lose their license and ability to do business).
There is non-standard materiel within DOD (following regs, guidelines, and policies), but taking your pet rock project overseas and into combat (where someone besides your stupid ass unknowingly risks getting killed) is not normal military procedure. Commanders can always assume (mitigated) risk, and if they want to take M14s (or leased M24s, AR-10s, M1s, Mausers, or crossbows, or let guys run around with commercial suppressors) then that stuff is normally brought on to the unit books for property accountability, and chains of command grant either tacit or formal approval.
Just because a Joe has a pet rock doesn’t mean the rest of the Big Green Army approves or has a sense of humor.
Thank you! Well said.
Tacti-square, don’t let posts like this bother you. Although most members of this forum who have real world experience are willing to share their knowledge with others, there are some “operators” who get annoyed at the thought of having to address questions from those they view as amatures. I wonder why they can’t simply skip the thread and instead feel the need to throw out childish personal insults.
BTW, I think your question is a good one. Since many of the improvements to the AR15/M16/M4 rilfe series have come from the civilian side, it’s certainly within reason to wonder if someone in the military is evaluating a new component or type of ammunition.
I’m in agreement. I was not referring to the guy who tossed his personally owned upper in kit bag, although I do know of this happening on the mil, PMC, and govt. side.
I’m sorry if I was not clear on this.
For OPSEC reasons, all I can say is that we have lots of options on weapons, but not calibers. There is about zero chance of us getting guns in 6.8/6.5/etc. We wouldn’t want them anyway, it’s hard enough to get spare parts from HK.
I can’t find 6.5 or 6.8 locally in the middle of the US - I imagine it is even harder in Afghanistan.
That being said - I see advantages in all the points you made.
Thanks Bret!
I agree as well. I am sure that we have seen our share of who and what the fuck is that.
If you really want to know what bothers me. It’s crap like this, stuff ultra-liberals are about because they don’t know and want feel good stuff out of everything. I like how things are twisted and misquoted, love the liberal education system for this and the media too. As I said before, people need the truth and if it hurts or you can’t bear the words, keep your blinders on and space out into whatever video game you happen to be playing. These are soldiers you are talking about, the glorification of this so-called “operator” stuff was invented by hollyweird and the video game industry for nothing more than glorification and romancification of a very ugly and hard job that few really wish to not only endure, but fulfill because no one else will.
This is not about an Amendment 1 discussion, this is about Operational Security (OPSEC), National Security, and the like. If I had said NO! It still wouldn’t be the end of it because people will then ask someone else who doesn’t know and that person will say SURE, just to feed garbage.
If you don’t like what I said or how I responded, you could’ve skipped over that as well instead of responding how you did. I also never said the person was stupid or dumb (apparently you don’t like to read between the lines). I said it was a goofy question because, again, hollyweird and video games have put this in peoples heads and it is the “norm”.
Also, as I have said, if you really want to find out. Raise your right hand and join the military to find what you can and can’t do according to military law.
Your posts make no sense at all hockeynick, none, just angry, disjointed rants. If this thread bothers you you need to go elsewhere. M4C is about people learning, we have lots of experts and lots of noobs. The noobs ask noob questions and the experts give them expert answers. And the trolls troll and they get run off.
Another thing, there are a good number of BTDT types on this forum, other forums too, I have read extensively of their writings, I know the jargon. I know the BTDT style, fact based, information dense and authoritative but not sneering. You allude being a BTDT but you don’t sound like one, in fact you sound quite the opposite, sneering, insulting, loudly spouting opinions and insults but no facts. To be specific, neither the question nor any of the answers have anything to do with national security, operational security or military law and it is a mystery to me why anyone who knows their butt from a hole in the ground would invoke those concepts in this discussion.
Jesus Christ. Stay. In. Lane.
Because of individuals like you, that’s why. Speaking of insulting and loudly spouting opinions vs. facts, re-read your own stuff. Thank you for showing your true colors. Noobs do ask noob questions, no denying it and it does have evering thing to do with OPSEC and National Security when people are talking about weapons or suspected weapons use in a combat zone that could have detrimental affects on the individuals using them. I love it, how all of the individuals that are “in the know” are the ones crying about this. Thanks for playing, come again.
I trashed this.
Went stupid, and further discussion proving some posters wrong is only going to make shit worse.
Typos brought to you via Tapatalk and autocorrect.