So, in the civil war, the 'mag' capacity of a rifle was one and more American soldiers were kill than all our other wars put together.
In WWI the capacity was from 5 bullets on a stripper clip. 6 total in the bandoleer. Horrible war. Look at the casualty list for the Somme. But the US didn't lose so many in that war, but only because we were a bit late to the party.
In WWII and Korea the US infantry used a rifle with an 8 round capacity. A few hundred thousand deaths,
Viet Nam, 20 round mags, 50,000 deaths.
War on Terror, 30 round mags, a coupla thousand deaths...
See the more rounds in a rifle, the less soldiers get kilt.
So, if we issue 100 round mags in the next war we might not lose a man in battle. I wonder why that is? It's not that they are overwhelming the enemy with capacity, as in each case the 'other side' has comparables.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Well, you know that also works in Nuclear Weapons. I mean, we went from Kilotons to Megatons and how much has the Death Rate climbed?
I was thinking more in terms of what the late, great, Colonel Jeff Cooper wrote once: "May all your enemies be on full auto."
The closer we get to everything firing at full auto, the fewer actual casualties we get.
.
Post a Comment