Would American troops be better off with semi autos?

[StarDust1]

I agree with NavyLT. The military had problems with "ammo dumping" in full-auto during Vietnam, and most of the service rifles were converted to have a "Safe-Semi-3-Rnd Burst" fire control. The switch is supposed to aid in aiming and not wasting ammo. Many of the people that I personally know in the military prefer semi-auto, and train to do double taps.

I believe the reasons for shifting to 3-round burst had more to do with heated barrels then anything else...

 

[Corporal K]

This thread is interesting but completely useless as NONE of us have any influence over the various branches' decisions on what selector switch to allow.

It's like debating whether or not the M9 is a good sidearm. It doesn't matter if you love it or hate it, it is literally an act of Congress to change it (in most cases).

 

[divemedic]

No. For my reply, simply refer to the Battle of the Somme. The Germans had Maxim Machine guns. The Brits, who had rejected Maxim and his invention for many of the very reasons you have given here, suffered 60,000 casualties on the first day of the battle. Overall, the first day on the Somme was a failure for the Allied forces. The British had suffered 19,240 dead, 35,493 wounded, 2,152 missing and 585 prisoners for a total loss of 57,470.

Some Allied regiments were wiped out to a man in less than an hour.

 

[FIVETWOSEVEN]

i talked with someone that graduated from my school and is now in the army said that 3-rd-burst is useless because the gun jumps off target after the first round. Me personally would want the full auto setting as a JIC but stick with semi. i don't like the idea of being limited in fire power and i should be able to fire in bursts on my own.

 

[amprecon]

"3-Round Burst" Sound like useless lawyer lingo and restrictions to me. They can sit around a Starbucks and decide what is best for everyone else whilst they can't balance a checkbook.
It's the dudes in the dirt that know what they need.....ask them....they will tell you........you provide it to them......we win. Next problem please.

I can't for the life of me understand why we listen to the advise of people on issues they have no experience/expertise in then sit around and wonder what we did wrong when the "expert" advise doesn't work out for us.

Rather perplexing to me........where's my drugs.....oh wait........where's my drugs?

I remember when the Brits captured all those Argentinians on the Falklands and their full-auto FAL's, of which they readily traded in their semi-auto FAL's out for.

 

[gdcpony]

We have SAW's for supressive fire. I don't ever expect to see my weapon on burst.
Being said though, I don't want the option gone. Better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it (within reason).

 

[miamiboy]

I say no for many of the same reasons that others have stated. If there was no need for automatic weapons or select-fire, and if they were not desirable, they would not have been invented. They have their purpose, and in some possible scenarios the objective may not even be to hit a precise target, but to inflict destruction on objects or create psychological dismay.

 

[gdcpony]

"3-Round Burst" Sound like useless lawyer lingo and restrictions to me. They can sit around a Starbucks and decide what is best for everyone else whilst they can't balance a checkbook.
It's the dudes in the dirt that know what they need.....ask them....they will tell you........you provide it to them......we win. Next problem please.

I can't for the life of me understand why we listen to the advise of people on issues they have no experience/expertise in then sit around and wonder what we did wrong when the "expert" advise doesn't work out for us.

Rather perplexing to me........where's my drugs.....oh wait........where's my drugs?

I remember when the Brits captured all those Argentinians on the Falklands and their full-auto FAL's, of which they readily traded in their semi-auto FAL's out for.

Give us the freedom to act without having to die first. Give us freedom from a CNN news jerk in our face judging how we stay alive. Give us the ability to fight a war and win the way we need to without fear of future reprisals. Give us a way to defend without being criticized by those we are doing it for. Give me the ability to come home to a family that is not constantly watching the media tell them how hopeless the fight is when it is THE MEDIA MAKING IT SO!!!

The weapons become redundant after that.

You asked.

 

[Robert]

After 4 years in the Army the only thing my brother fired on full auto was his 240B. When using his M4 he said they never used burst for anything. He has told me that in his 4 years he only fired burst maybe 3 time and only in training.

 

[mordechaianiliewicz]

With three round burst, there is no huge problem. And, most troops I've talked to have told me they almost always use the semi- mode. That being said, I think auto should be an option for those that need to clear rooms. It's that, or a shotgun (which they also use)

 

[TeamPrecisionIT]

Wow, aside from the low road racism in that post, you are presupposing that EVERYONE in such a room is a bad guy. Wow. So much for the rules of proper firearms use (knowing your target). There seems to be a lot of support here for blind firing, A.K.A. spray 'n pray. I submit that this may make some people feel tough, but it is not a good tactic, and could result in some bad consequences (stray bullets hitting kids in the room, or the NEXT room, for starters).

Have you done any fighting in your life with a firearm? Have you been to war? Have you been in theater lately? Just these simple questions can be answered and then I will respond to the obscure remarks you made there.

Damian

 

[Comanche180]

Here's my challenge: You poke your head up and take carefully aimed shots a me every couple of seconds while I pour a steady stream of lead pills in your direction. Who will be suppressed? I would want to be on the side of substantial advantage. That's real world.

 

[Mandolin]

No. For my reply, simply refer to the Battle of the Somme. The Germans had Maxim Machine guns. The Brits, who had rejected Maxim and his invention for many of the very reasons you have given here, suffered 60,000 casualties on the first day of the battle. Overall, the first day on the Somme was a failure for the Allied forces. The British had suffered 19,240 dead, 35,493 wounded, 2,152 missing and 585 prisoners for a total loss of 57,470.

Some Allied regiments were wiped out to a man in less than an hour.

That's true. On the other hand, did you expect anything else when you tell a few thousand men to go walk 1000 yards of shell-cratered and barb-wire infested ground? The issue is not full-auto(the Maxim guns weighted about 100lb with the mount and were water-cooled) but stupid tactics. Even without the Maxims German rifle fire would have turned the atack into a bloody disaster.

 

[WestEnd65]

I answered no because I believe that our soldiers should have every option available to them. They may leave the selector swich on semi their whole careers, but it is the one time that they need full auto that could decide wheather they come home or not.

On a side note . . .
No MidEast nation is even remotely capable of launching a war of conquest against the US. That idea is so counter to reality that it is just bizarre.

They may not have taken over, but if we had done nothing, we would have had at least a couple more incidents like 9/11. I believe that removing the Taliban and Al-Queda from existance is something to fight for.

 

[C-grunt]

Neither the Army or Marine Corp teach the use of burst on the rifles. Auto fire comes from the belt feds and crew served weapons. I have two tours in Iraq and I dont think I ever saw anyone use anything but semi.

As a matter of fact if my old 1Sgt ever found a rifle on burst he might actually murder you. And that is a guy who was with the 10th Mountain and rescued the guys from Mogadishu (sp?). If you ever wanted an auto switch on your rifle, its when you are outnumbered 100 to 1.

The point is that the switch being there doesnt hinder the shooting ability of our guys over seas. But if they were ever in a situation that warranted it, I would want them to have it.

 

[mrnkc130]

Neither the Army or Marine Corp teach the use of burst on the rifles. Auto fire comes from the belt feds and crew served weapons. I have two tours in Iraq and I dont think I ever saw anyone use anything but semi.

I was taught in MCT in 2002 to put my weapon on burst for room clearing, i must be the one exception

 

[Va Shooter]

NO, give me a choice if I'm going into combat.:banghead:

 

[Madcap_Magician]

Here's my challenge: You poke your head up and take carefully aimed shots a me every couple of seconds while I pour a steady stream of lead pills in your direction. Who will be suppressed? I would want to be on the side of substantial advantage. That's real world.

If I wait about fifteen seconds for you to run through your 30-round magazine, while my magazine still has 20 rounds left, you will be. I would be suppressed for a relatively short period of time, but your rate of fire would be unsustainable. Which is why belt-fed automatic weapons are used for suppressing fire, and doctrine dictates that they be used in pairs.

 

[leadaddict]

The more options our guys have the better off they'll be. Assuming of course they are taught how to properly use each option.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

The effects of automatic fire against semi-automatic/bolt action fire were well demonstrated in WWI where during the first half of the war, Germany had significantly more field machine guns than the allies, and often the allies were cut to bits.

This is an apples-and-oranges comparison. The full automatic fire of WWI was mostly delivered from tripod-mounted machineguns, not hand-held rifles.

I also think your evaluation of suppressive fire is inaccurate, it's highly effective in many theaters of operation not just jungle

Suppressive fire, to be effective, must be killing fire. If it isn't killing anyone, it's just noise.

When I was a company commander in Viet Nam, I trained my troops to use semi-automatic fire effectively. Firing full auto (except for leaders marking targets for machineguns' attention) was an automatic Article 15 and a $50 fine.

 

[straitnate14]

When I was in AIT we had M16A1's that were full auto and I have to say it was worthless but fun, we all got M4's before our unit went to afghanistan and did a bunch of shooting with them before we went and I think if **** realy hit the fan and you had to dump some rounds down range you would be very happy you had 3 round burst, I got to shoot a lot of mags thru with 3rd burst and I think it's not any harder to keep on target than doing double taps. I naver had to use my rifle being a helicopter mechanic but we got do do lots of shooting at ranges and out of the heli's

 

[roo_ster]

I voted "No."

I used the M16A2, M4A1, M249, M240B, M203, M9, & a few others when I was taking Uncle Sam's pay check. M4A1 was what I used the most.

I came to the conclusion that 3RB is a solution in search of a problem. I much preferred FA when the circumstances called for something other than semi. This is due to the mechanical implementation of 3RB in the M16A2 & I assume it is similar in the M16A4. I can execute a short burst from a FA weapon, thanks, I don;t need additional mechanical complexity to keep from dumping my mag.

As for the M249 & M240B, to turn them into semi-auto is so foolish as to not be worth discussing.

 

[essayons21]

I was trained by the Army in the use of burst for both suppressive fire and for building entry. Contrary to what many have stated here, I find burst in a M4 very controllable. Everyone preaches "double tap" or "controlled pair" so why is 3 shots to nearly the same POI a bad thing in close combat?

A large percentage of combat in the current theater of operations takes place while mounted in vehicles, and the automatic weapons are mounted to those vehicles. In urban or steep terrain, the vehicle mounted weapons don't always have the elevation or depression needed to engage targets. My primary weapon was a mounted M2, my M4 was secondary, and I used burst in combat, and was glad to have it.

 

[wishin]

I'd like our troops to have weapons capable of being switched from semi to 3-5 round burst to full auto. It needs to be their decision based on the mission or battle conditions at that specific moment in time.

 

[hiho]

errm they have semi auto and full auto why limit them