Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!rutgers!att!cbnews!military
From: bnr-di!borynec@watmath.waterloo.edu (James Borynec)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: posting on small arms development
Summary: I want stopping power...
Message-ID: <11699@cbnews.ATT.COM>
Date: 24 Nov 89 06:02:02 GMT
References: <11597@cbnews.ATT.COM>
Sender: military@cbnews.ATT.COM
Organization: DI, Bell-Northern Research, Ottawa, Ont.
Lines: 23
Approved: military@att.att.com



From: bnr-di!borynec@watmath.waterloo.edu (James Borynec)

In article <11597@cbnews.ATT.COM>, climber@sol.UVic.CA writes:
> Has anyone discussed this with those that would actually be involved
> (like some soldiers)?  How do they feel?  

Personally, I like to carry a weapon with stopping power.  The
army has lots of weapons with long range and lots of stopping power.
They are tanks, guns, airplanes, helicopters, etc ...
The infantry has their machine guns for long range stuff.  
You should not deploy the infantry in places where they need to 
shoot their weapons more than about 200 meters.   Therefore 
I would argue that stopping power is more important than long
range.
j.b.



-- 
UUCP : utzoo!bnr-vpa!bnr-di!borynec  James Borynec, Bell Northern Research
Bitnet: borynec@bnr.CA        Box 3511, Stn C, Ottawa, Ontario K1Y 4H7