Well still more supposedly pro ownership posters that believe they are supporting their case by denying the ballistic capabilities of the cartridge in question and then posting inflamatory and paranoid claims dependent on those capabilities.
So what if people in this country own 50BMG rifles! What I'd object to is our own government sending armored personnel, helicopters, vehicles, tanks, or any other implement of war against US! That's the main reason we have a right to those 50BMG rifles and any other arm out there. Governments have been known to send armored personnel, helicopters, vehicles, tanks, and other implement of war against their own people - INCLUDING US, as in New Orleans, LA.; Ruby Ridge, ID; Waco, TX; and who can forget "Poor Little Elian!"
Woody
now this
My claim, the US Army's claim, and the Command Sergeant Major's claim.
You don't even recognize the US Military definition of Small arms as being anything that fires a projectile of less than 20mm in Diameter and you've ignored all the evidence that has proven that the .30/06, which is a round designed for use against living targets including game animals and humans, was adopted for use against aircraft because no better round and platform was available and shown to be severly lacking in capability against modern aircraft long before the end of WW2.
Your quote about Standard rifle cartridges is obscure as well since they are at the lowest end of projectiles which endanger low flying aircraft and since AP or mild steel cores are the common bullet construction in use by our enemies it has nothing to do with sporting cartridges. In Iraq the vast majority of Standard Rifle Cartridges are 7.62X54 being fired from Crew served weapons or Dragonov Sniper Rifles, since the 7.62X39 is not a Standard Rifle Cartridge, its an Assault Rifle Cartridge.
When someone hits a modern chopper with .30 or smaller the Chopper lands unharmed the vast majority of the time, because .30 doen't carry the energy to damage vital mechanical components unless a very skilled or very lucky operator hammers the same vulnerable spot with multiple hits.
Of course if half the town were out there pumping .30 into a chopper the danger factor would go up.
While as Shootdown records have shown 12.7 can reach and damage or destroy any component in an unarmored or lightly armored Helicopter when fired from any angle.
Thats why its a very good thing that our Military Helicopters even cargo and light recon are being uparmored against the 12.7 and the Jihadis are now going to the much more powerful 14.5MM.
What's the difference between one .50BMG hole in a wing compared to three .308 diameter holes?
Ever hear of self sealing fuel tanks?
The main difference is that three .30 holes might seal up in fractions of a second, one .50 hole doesn't seal up at all.
There are much more significant differences as well.
Impact generates heat energy, this is something I've seen many times when bullets penetrate metal objects. The greater the energy delivered the greater the heat generated and the greater likelyhood of ignition of fuel.
Cowboy apparently believes that posting his claim that he needs a powerful weapon with anti-aircraft and anti-armor capability because he wants to be able to whack a few National Guardsmen if he personally deems it necessary is the absolutely poorest defense of Gun Ownership I've heard yet, and one he'd have best kept to himself.
Siglite apparently believes that denying the ballistic capabilities of the .50BMG is going to demonstrate that he has the maturity and responsibility to be trusted to own one.
He also seems to believe that exagerating the capabilities of the .30/06 will somehow make people believe that the .50 BMG is not an effective weapon against aircraft.
I Don't remember a .50 Ban even being mentioned in the Thread starter. Fear of Fact is going to sink you guys at the polls sooner or later.
Learn to accept the facts and work with them instead of denying them.