Why does the 5.56 get a bad rap?
I have read reports of Japanese soldiers taking 8 hits from a Garand and Phillipine moro tribesmen who kept coming after being hit by a 30-40 Krag.
It got me thinking.
I had always thought that eventhough the 7.62 Nato and similar rounds are heavier and the guns that use them are heavier, they were "better" because they are more powerful.
This makes me wonder though. If someone keeps coming after taking multiple hits from a 30'06, what else could you really do to stop them short of decapitation?
What I am saying is if they take several hits from an AR, how is that really any "worse" than the failures to stop in the past from Garands and Krags?
Were those incidents less common with the older, more powerful rounds?
Has this been something that has plagued us since the days of the Brown Bess and the Charleville?
I have read reports of Japanese soldiers taking 8 hits from a Garand and Phillipine moro tribesmen who kept coming after being hit by a 30-40 Krag.
It got me thinking.
I had always thought that eventhough the 7.62 Nato and similar rounds are heavier and the guns that use them are heavier, they were "better" because they are more powerful.
This makes me wonder though. If someone keeps coming after taking multiple hits from a 30'06, what else could you really do to stop them short of decapitation?
What I am saying is if they take several hits from an AR, how is that really any "worse" than the failures to stop in the past from Garands and Krags?
Were those incidents less common with the older, more powerful rounds?
Has this been something that has plagued us since the days of the Brown Bess and the Charleville?